u/DivineSmythe98

First of all, thanks to all of the people on the forum for giving me tips and answering questions. You'll be glad to know I finally corralled three people to run Deadlands for last night, and it went pretty well!

We used the Thieving Magpies one-sheet for Deadlands, as well as the archetype cards as pre-gens. I also threw in a quick battle at the beginning where they took out some bandits to bring in for the bounty (the marshal not having the cash on hand due to it being stolen led into the one-shot).

I found that everything worked pretty well. Once we got used to it rolling to hit and trait rolls were the easiest part. Initiative was a bit tricky and we stuck to just dealing cards once at the start of a fight. Bennies worked exactly as I expected, with one player spending around four on one roll in an attempt to win at poker. I did notice our resident powergamer kept a hold onto his, which probably wasn't helped by only three of us being there, so once I take into account a potentially larger group that should be easier.

Overall for what was essentially a casual beer & chips game things worked quite well. I particularly enjoyed the mixture of tactical combat and more narrative skill and roleplaying rolls. I'm certainly relieved because I've gotten really into a game on the reading level and found it got out of control in practice!

Hello all!

Another (probably) silly question. But I think I may be having a bit of a Mandela effect moment. At some point I remember reading in the rules that firearms ignored medieval/archaic armour, and I'd assumed as much for a long while. But after taking another look it seems that's not the case (aside from certain firearms having AP and whatnot).

As far as I knew, firearms would bypass 'regular' medieval armour, which was why kevlar vests offered a flat -4 penalty to bullets.

Has this ever been a thing? I know it's been used as a house rule but can't find an official setting rule for it.

Hello all!

This is a relatively tricky question, and one I haven't necessarily seen answered in a straightforward manner on the subreddit.

When it comes to difficulty modifiers, do they always go from -1 to -4 and no higher? I ask because the only information I could find on my readthrough was regarding modifiers themselves and the 'comprehensive modifiers' sidebar which specifically mentions not stacking modifiers.

I ask this mainly because I've been looking at some of the higher-level stuff I've grabbed (specifically Rifts, which I've also posted about) which is where die-types and numbers go up pretty quickly. Obviously there's an element of GM decision-making about when a roll is actually feasible, but a D12+2 (or even +7 for something like a Walker) seems as though any fails even at a maximum of -4 would be negligible in terms of probability.

Is there any official stance or further information regarding difficulty modifiers? I'm loathe to adjust the difficulty number itself as I've gotten the impression this is a bit of a core element, and modifiers are preferable. Would you stack on more for higher-powered characters if they're trying something particularly difficult even for their ability level, or only go as high as a -4?