I never see anyone on /tg/ talk about Ubiquity RPGs. I've been playing Hollow Earth Expedition for years but recently I've thought about running fantasy games in Desolation.

Anyone else on the board ever played any of the Ubiquity games? I'm surprised its not more popular, I guess the lack of PR and licensing issues for new material are a killer. I'd love to talk shop with fellow enjoyers though.

What's your favorite Ubiquity setting?

>>96070792 (OP)
It seems like All For One (the muskateer themed setting) is the most popular still played, which is a strange reality, but hey, no judgement

tough crowd

>>96070792 (OP)
>I never see anyone on /tg/ talk about Ubiquity RPGs.
Hello ultra-newfag.

>Desolation
Easily the worst of Ubiquity games.
It takes HEX, half-asses fantasy races into it (doing it worse than HEX its own ab-humans), does fuck-all to improve magic (Leages of Adventure) or melee (All for One) and is just really clunky game to play in its given premise, since it's supposed to be "apocalypse happened five minutes ago, you are now withhin the still smoldering ruins" premise, but it's "you are a superhuman pulp here and face zero challenges". The less is said about the heart-breaker setting, the better - if you have a hate-boner for elves, maybe don't try to write elf-centric game, you weird fetishist.

>Anyone else on the board ever played any of the Ubiquity games
Does "played it so much, I translated HEX and All for One into my native and made a deal with local dice producer to make off-brand Ubiquity dice via fundriser" counts?
>I'm surprised its not more popular
Came out 19 years ago (fuck) and Jeff Combos (I hope he dies alone and in loads of pain) is a greedy retard that fucked this system not once, twice, but three fucking times.
>What's your favorite Ubiquity setting?
Surface world of HEX. Fuck the whole Hollow Earth shit being the "default", that's just a flavour of pulp.

>>96070943
That's because AFO does bunch of things really well and makes a good alternative to H+I

>>96071805
>Hello ultra-newfag.
I been on /tg/ since 2010, and I also ran an archive search. My statement was objectively true, and backed up by the rarity of threads about it. Unless you mean it gets occasionally mentioned in tangential threads about historical wargaming etc, then sure, but I don't enter those threads.

>Easily the worst of Ubiquity games.
Good info though.

>Came out 19 years ago (fuck) and Jeff Combos (I hope he dies alone and in loads of pain) is a greedy retard that fucked this system not once, twice, but three fucking times.
Ok I know about the license debacle, whats the tea about his other fuckings?

>>96071829
>H+I
what's that?

>>96071805
Can you elaborate more on your HEX experience?
If you where into it as you said, you should have many insight into the goods and bads.
I've never run the game because I've never had a group interested in the system but on paper it looked promising for crunchy pulp system
I still have the main books and screen in my shelf and even a set of original Ubiquity dice!
Did the Perils of Mars adventure supplement ever came out?

>>96072007
Honor + Intrigue

>>96072007
>I been on /tg/ since 2010, and I also ran an archive search. My statement was objectively true
Yeah, no, so suck a dick. Every time there is pulp or adjecant talked, those games op-up. Not to mention there was some sperg who kept remaking "redpill me on the best pulp system" between 2022 and 2023, so you would have to be really fucking new to miss even that.

>I'm an oldfag hurr
>But I don't know what Honor + Intrigue is, nor can I figure it out from the context alone
Just drink a tall glass of bleach at this point

>>96072161
>I've never run the game because I've never had a group interested in the system
It does, unfortunately, require the right kind of group to get to it and then also enjoy it. I realised for example last summer, when doing a Pulp Summer in the local gaming club that zoomers are quite literally too young to "get" adventure flicks in any other context than "I played Uncharted, I guess". And it's not a diss toward zoomers, but the adjecant genres have been half-dead for past 20 years. HEX pretty much came on the tail end of the adventure wave.
>the goods and bads.
Give me a moment, because it's a longer write-up
>Did the Perils of Mars adventure supplement ever came out?
Don't test me, mate.

>>96072455
Oh wow, you seem like a really horrible person to interact with. Sucks that people like you exist within the same spaces as people who want to discuss a shared hobby. Good luck with your shitty, bitter ESL life though.

>>96072161
>>96072478
> insight into the goods and bads.
Here, I don't feel like putting it into god knows how many posts:
https://notes.io/wYZVh

>>96072522
Good luck with being a poser on an anonymous Tibetan tanka weaving forum, cunt.
All you had to do was not trying to pas yourself as an oldfag. Now you've got all you deserve

>>96072728
I also like to compare HEX with Broken Compass/Outgunned. There is somewhere a perfect game in the middle ground between those two (and leaning more to HEX structure while using BC/O approach to action set pieces and genre conventions), but instead, we have two flawed gems, with neither being able to scratch that pulp game gonzo itch

>>96072728
I see
I was curious about the "continous combat" from the screen booklet.
It looks like a hassle to manage for all players but also more strategic.
Not sure if it slows down the combat to the point of making it less pulpy.
I'll try to check All for One to read the melee combat differences.
The power bloat is absolute true just from reading the books. If I ever run a game I'll use only the core and the appropiate setting one (Surface, Hollow Earth or Mars) but not mix all of them at once.

>>96072871
>It looks like a hassle to manage
>Not sure if it slows down the combat to the point of making it less pulpy.
It's the reverse: it's easier to manage than standard turn order, makes the turns of random enemies much more fluid and also adds a bit of everything for everyone:
- min-maxers can max-out their character for continuous combat
- tacticool fags get their balls tinkled by the amount of shit that still goes into the combat despite it quite literally flowing second to second
- casual fags can treat it as pure theatre of the mind, because all the boring math is done for them by the charsheet
- newfags have something new and unique to try out
Since '19 I don't even bother teaching people "normal" rules when I'm running for a new group or event-related one-shots. I tell them continuous combat is the "normal" way the game works.

Let me put it this way:
HEX came with (for its era) completely new spin on how and who your characters are, came up with unique and new game system that works with the concept and also invented a new, interesting structure of both combat and even non-combat tasks on a timer...
... and then they've completely squandered it on "hey kids, wanna have adventurers inside Hollow Earth?", which just confused people rather than get them into the game. Compare Savage Worlds, Dicey Tales or Broken Compass, where the selling point were crazy pulp adventures and crunch that supports it, rather than the fucking setting.
it's like a revolution that nobody noticed, including its creators.

>>96072728
Different anon, but adding to this
>Good
This game is that weird golden mean between build autism and complete free-form, being able to please both camps at the same time.
>Bad
It has surprisingly obtuse char-gen for something so simple to play. Good luck reading the rules and figuring out how to do specialization
>Weird
It takes some time getting used to the fact bits of the game play themselves. Once you get into it, it's great time saver, but getting there is really awkward, since so many other games require you to handle it manually.

>>96073081
other than taking averages and packaged attack with damage, what else?

>>96073081
>>96073362
oops, was quoting
>the fact bits of the game play themselves

>>96070792 (OP)
>Hollow Earth Expedition
>took the money and ran
Combos confirmed beyond based

>>96073574
I dont give a shit about that, but let other people use the license to keep the system alive, that the fucked up part

>>96073574
bro has neanderthal DNA

>>96073574
Man that interview he did with Runeslinger is wild.
You can see from his ticks he already knew what he was gonna do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XloSLws0xv8

>>96073362
>>96073386
It takes genuinely getting used to the fact you just say "automatic success", especially since the game looks like a standard skill-based stuff, so you are openly expecting buttload of rolls. And instead, mid-reach for dice, you realize you don't have to.
It gets even weirder in combat, when the GM doesn't roll for non-important NPCs (or not at all) and just declares stuff, but this is not his fiat, but the actual outcome from the dice pool those NPCs have.
Once the initial culture shock wears off, it's great time saver and also often guarantees actions you need, since you get an automatic pass and don't have to risk it. But it takes 2-3 sessions to get there.

>>96078157
There is also the matter of following that relate to automation
>Various talents automate things, turning regular actions to reflex ones (so automated)
>Other talents become automated if you rise them/use style points on them, so it can shift mid-session
>Your allies and followers both have their actions automated by default (so no standard "roll for familiar/hireling" bullshit)
>Allies and followers also count as automatic bonus to your stats, so you can gain automatic success via their presence in their field of expertise (like having as followers a pair of history post-grads, so you get +4 to your History and Archaeology checks, thus making them automatic success by default)
>Your allies can have their followers (eg. ship captain [your ally] and his crew [his followers]) that act both on full automation to each other, so there is a rather large mass of NPCs you kinda-sorta control, but never have to roll for them and you've been conditioned by other games you have to
And all of this also means your GM needs to get used to the fact how many things do themselves, which, again, is a great time saver, but requires to switch to a completely different way of organizing encounters and similar. So for example when the situation with those post-grads comes to play, your GM must understand to play this as a classic exposition scene in style of, dunno, Relic Hunter, than doing the standard research rolls, since that research already did itself and you know the outcome.
Plus of course this is the kind of game where you can (and even should be) pulling stuff from Cannon movies and film serials, so going with a party of 4 against a garrison of an entire company is perfectly acceptable, both in terms "we can take it", but also, and more importantly, "we won't spend a week rolling for all of this separately", but more in tune "it's going to be an insane ride to take" (you won't kill them all, but disrupt their camp plus gain access to whatever made you attack at all)

>>96078241
I agree with all this and it has been my experience too except
>so going with a party of 4 against a garrison of an entire company is perfectly acceptable, both in terms "we can take it", but also, and more importantly, "we won't spend a week rolling for all of this separately"

Other than style points, the PCs are not nearly as HP and action bloated as the enemies in comparison to many modern games. I absolutely have had PCs get fucking raped by one NPC with a machine gun. So while PCs adjusting expectations to the game type is necessary, I wouldn't go so far as to say it encourages them them to undertake seemingly overwhelming odds at all.

>>96078498
Oh, I'm not questioning or even talking about the lethality - the system despite being most definitely pulp and most definitely having "standard enemy soldier" dropping with a single hit/punch (usually also send flying back by it - and this is part of the mechanics for push/knock down, which has its own uses). I'm just talking about the fact combat with a company-sized garrison is viable in terms of time needed to handle it, not that you will survive it - at least not by blindly charging forward. This is when this game shines with its crunch, given you can use cover, concentrated fire, ambushes and what not, all handles on auto. For example, I played with a group where we did a whole scenario ripped off from "Guns of Navarone" and we had to storm the fort in the end and pulled it off without dying, while the blimp we were there to steal survived. GM had 72 soldiers on the 5 of us. Took us slightly above 1.5 hour, and it wasn't just constant fighting, either.
The lethality is also nicely handled crunch-wise. Rather than everyone just mass-shooting and hoping for the best, each consecutive attack on a single target has increased chance of hitting you. So sure, a generic sentry with a bolt-action rifle will miss you time and again, but a squad of six soldiers firing at you will hit you and maybe even kill you, all on automated basis, because they all keep snowballing bonus to the hit chance. This also works with players, so when facing a charging dino or similar, all you need to do is have a proper order of battle. So hunters, soldiers and similar go first, then support, then non-combatants, but this way everyone can reliably hit a single large and dangerous target, even when using a puny pocket revolver.

>>96078605
man its been a while since ive seen a forumslide this hard
ayylmao

>>96078605
Plus, come to think about it, nothing beats in terms of speed mentioned already Broken Compass. There, the garrison would be probably handled as 5-6 squads, each rated as Critical danger (so 3 on 2-5 scale) plus important NPCs as also Critical, but representing single person. It would be handled by pure theatre of mind, and in style of "True Lies", but it would work out and take... dunno, 10 minutes? Maybe even less. And would be nowhere near as lethal as Hollow Earth Expedition.
But it wouldn't be faster because it has some speed-up mechanics. It would be faster, because you would be handling the whole thing differently, and just grouping NPCs into single HP/attack blocks

>>96078614
>forumslide this hard
? ? ?

>>96078631
yeah i don't understand what he meant either

Between HEX and AfO I see there's a difference in how the defense maneuvres affect the defense roll
.- In HEX, you roll the skill rating (for Parry, Block, Dodge) + modifiers INSTEAD of the Defense Roll (losing your Passive Defense (Body+armor?))
.- In AfO, you replace the Active Defense (Dex) with the skill rating (for Parry, Block, Dodge) but keep the Passive Defense
Also you can't do the Parry, Block, Dodge maneuvers is you can't use your Active Defense (Dex) for defense at some point

-> Is that a clarification on the whole Ubiquity system or just a change for the setting flavor on AfO?

>The system was not designed with melee in mind and it shows; it wasn't until All for One that they unfucked and expended on this, otherwise it's pretty underwhelming
Barring the better defense ratings ni AfO, I don't see any particular difference for now.
The changes should affect all types of attacks, not just melee, and only when you're doing defense maneuvers instead of attacking.

Bump

>>96081879
>s that a clarification on the whole Ubiquity system or just a change for the setting flavor on AfO?
Yes.
But predominately, it's a fix of Ubiquity as such, rather than a flavour, since all following Ubiquity-based games retained those features.
Please understand, the original game, when it was simply just HEX, was single-mindedly focused on a single possible character archetype: Lord John Roxton, specifically the late 90s TV show version. If you are not playing as a clone of that character, you are playing HEX wrong, or at least that was the initial design assumption - which means non-rifle combat was just ignored to "dunno, punch?". Hence virtually zero focus on melee in any form and then just only adding it either as fan demand or third-party licensed games

>>96081879
>>96087942
And to give proper context:
When I said melee wasn't part of the design, I mean ANY kind of melee combat. The default game didn't even have martial arts, it had brawl and brawl was doing only one thing: punching things. Not even kicking, just punching. Melee weapons? They ALL 2 of either lethal or non-lethal damage, no exception. Machete? 2 damage. Sap? 2 damage. Ancient katana, folded over 5000 times? 2 damage. Magical artifact from Atlantean forges? You've guessed it, 2 damage.

>>96088152
I'd need to run some numbers but
With the core open in front of me, pg143
Machete 2L, Sap 1N, Katana 3L
There are a lot of 3s in the table of melees 13 2s and 10 3s, I think
In Ranged only crossbow and longbow are 3, the rest are way lower
Pistols almost exclusively 2s
Longarms mostly 3s and 4s
Heavy weapons 3,4
Archaic firearms 3,4

Also there are skill specializations for brawl and melee that you can buy repeatedly to increse a single one or diversify
Brawl -> Dirty Tricks, Grappling, Kicking, Punching, Throws
Melee -> Axes, Clubs, Knives, Spears, Swords
Add to that some talents and combat maneuvers specific for Brawl as Grapple, Throw or Trip
That's only checking the core
In Secrets of the Surface World, it makes some tweaks to the skills and add some martial styles

>>96088494
>Also there are skill specializations for brawl and melee that you can buy repeatedly to increse a single one or diversify
>Brawl -> Dirty Tricks, Grappling, Kicking, Punching, Throws
Re-read it.
As in: the list you've made.
Then open SotSW section on martial arts, which other than exotics, also covers for boxing and savate.
Then tell me with a straight face that vanilla's Brawl is good, because you can waste points not only on the skill, but also specializations. This is probably the only skill where you want to get 1 rank in it and then exclusively spend the rest on single "specialization", to save points on semi-useful, incredibly underwhelming HtH combat.

>>96088588
Oh, I think I'm starting to see
Anyway, you need Brawl 4 to get access to the talents in the core
- Block (as a reflexive action)
- Knockout blow (bonus to overcome stun defense)
- Lethal Blow (2N -> 1L damage)
- Staggering Blow (improved knockback)
I don't think Martial Arts has access to these talents at all
I don't remember reading any line about being able to do so but I might be wrong
They have a shared set of talents with Brawl in SotSW but the core talents are out of reach for Martial Arts

>>96088782
>I don't think Martial Arts has access to these talents at all
That's because that's expansion changed how Brawl works (along with different specializations) and how Martial Arts operate, too, being a specialized skill. So by the SotSW logic, Brawl is the main skill with few extra tricks (and it is reworked on its own) plus there are martial arts for additional flavour. Meaning you can be anyone between Tom Cody to the Ip Man, whereas in the vanilla rules, you can only be Indiana Jones punching goons and moving on.

Vanilla Brawl is ironically useful only for one thing (that got patched in SotSW), and it's not even intended:
The kick-dodge in continuous combat
Because the game has knockback and knockdown rules, if you move faster than the person you needed to apply the dodge/defense for, you can quite literally kick them out of the harms way (more reliable than punching due to being 1 N, rather than 0 N from punch), and whatever was going in their direction is ignored, while they receive a non-lethal damage of the kick itself. When you are facing a choice between being machine-gunned to death or chewed by a T-Rex, taking 3-4 points of non-lethal damage is nothing

>>96088782
Also, per Combos himself:
Vanilla Brawl talents are accessible with identical Martial Arts level, per SotSW and later expansions examples.

>>96089004
Well, then it's a badly thought patch
Martial arts styles should have been written as specializations under the Brawl skill only accesible trough training
If you're untrained you can only buy Block/Grapple/Punch/Kick/Throw specializations
I don't get why it's written like this
You could then make Animal/Beastmen unable to learn/use martial arts with natural weapons. Although you could have a beastman know martial arts (a mutated human or learn trough a human teacher) and create a new style with natural weapons

>>96089157
You are not listening
Brawl originally, in vanilla, covered ALL kinds of HtH combat. All of it. You wanted to make a fighting monk? Brawl. Boxing champ? Brawl. Ninja McSneak? Brawl.
When Martial Arts got introduced, the idea was simple:
Brawl is for your average Joes whacking each other in a bar brawl (no pun intended), Martial Arts is for people who actually know what they are doing, rather than randomly beating your ass.
This also allows to have martial arts having their own specializatons, rather than already being a specialization of a poorly-through out skill in a vanilla.
>I don't get why it's written like this
The whole team admitted they kinda shit the bed with the baseline game. It talks about martial artists, but doesn't provide them tools. It talks about magic, but doesn't actually have it in any way. It talks about weird science, and again, it doesn't have any of it. Hell, it talks about continuous combat, and it doesn't cover it in reality. And the goal was to devlier universal, fully playable pulp system, so it failed rather big time.
If you want to see what HEX was intended to be, read Leagues of Adventure. That's what the goal was and they fucked it up HARD. The game then band-aided itself with copious amount of expansions that didn't really came out to rake in money, and more to unfuck the game itself (hence why SotSW covers so much shit in a single package)
>You could then make Animal/Beastmen unable to learn/use martial arts with natural weapons. Although you could have a beastman know martial arts (a mutated human or learn trough a human teacher) and create a new style with natural weapons
And you can pull that with post-SotSW game, as a specialization to Martial Arts. If martial arts were a specialization to Brawl, you would be shit out of luck.

>>96089221
I'll check Leagues of Adventure then
I'm not sure if my post was misunderstood but I was just theorizing while on my armchair, not fixing a system I've never run in five minutes of reading across.
I like the system and the setting so I'll take your word and try to learn
I'd like to run some adventure in the future when I'm clear from other games. I'm just taking notes

>>96089221
>>96089356 (me)
Sooo...
The Brawl skill in Leagues of Adventure is exactly the same as the HEX core one
There are no Martial Styles either anywhere
Weapons are mostly the same but a tad more damage here and there. Archaic ranged (Bows, javelins) are clearly more damaging than in HEX core all around
What I'm not seeing? Just scratching the surface it looks the same system as the base HEX

>>96089670
Not him, and I'm happy that there is a thread going, but that anon clearly has extremely strong opinions based on facts that they are hyperbolic seemingly even in their own memory.

>>96088152
>brawl was doing only one thing: punching things. Not even kicking, just punching
picrel
> Melee weapons? They ALL 2 of either lethal or non-lethal damage, no exception
Clearly untrue, as already investigated.

Don't get me wrong, I think the newer systems have expanded on the formula greatly, but other anon is hallucinating worse than ChatGPT at this point, so don't overthink what he's saying too much.

>>96089772
>It has Kicking specialization listed
>This means it covers kicking
Anon...
Let me put it this way:
Human characters don't have actual Kick listed as weapon. It's taken from animals that have same Size as humans.
And since we are about how the game actual structured and written:
Do you see in the list of specializations Archaeology?
No?
Funny, because the game uses that for three different examples of mechanics.
And by the way - they use both spellings for it.

Welcome to HEX, the whole game is like this. People usually sugarcoat about how badly written and explained this game is, because the system itself is fantastic, it's just written in a really weird, spaced-out way.

>>96089772
>pic rel
Can someone explain me actual, practical application of stuff like:
Dirty Tricks vs. just Brawling
Bluff vs. Lies
Bluff vs. Fast Talk
Con vs. Tricks

I get it, it looks great on paper, but seems like someone was just trying to come up with things to list under each skill, rather than pondering what is even listed in the first place

>>96090332
>Human characters don't have actual Kick listed as weapon. It's taken from animals that have same Size as humans.
All human brawl attacks are 0N by default.
You add the specialization bonus to the ones you buy.
But you have the whole pack(Block/Grapple/Punch/Kick/Throw) at rating 0N even without spending points in them.
They're not listed in full on the character sheet for brevity

>>96090459
>They're not listed in full on the character sheet for brevity
Ah yes, brevity.
The same reason the game has neat, clean and easy to read equation for your dice pool, step by step, except there is no space for specialization to be written into it.
Or how the game for the sake of brevity repeats each explanation twice: first giving you a shorthand on how things work, then jerks you back to the start, and now over-elaborates on every tiny step (chargen is the most guilty of this, repeating everything twice)
If brevity was a goal for even five seconds, the core book would be good 50-70 pages shorter of useless clatter that just repeats the paragraph from few pages ago.

>>96090490
*pool on character sheets

>>96090377
It's just bonuses to specific uses of the skill
It's cheaper to buy a specialization than to increase the whole skill and you might want only a specific use for you character for flavor but not the whole thing

>>96090459
Nta, but
>All human brawl attacks are 0N by default.
Always annoyed me.
Due to the way the game is constructed, it means a person without a single rank in Brawl can't ever land a hit. Like ever, not just lucking out or whatever, because their maximum possible outcome is 0 when throwing the first punch unless they have strongman-tier STR.
But put a single rank in Brawl, and suddenly a 1 STR character can reliably beat people up, magically getting 3 extra ranks, rather than just one.
And there is no gear to account for (yes, I know there are brass knuckles and such, this is beyond the point), so the whole combat equation just gets extra wonky.

>>96090517
I know what specializations are doing.
I'm asking about practical application of things that overlap so hard yet are shoehorned as different.
So: what's the difference between Bluff and Fast Talk or Bluff and Lies? Or Lies and Fast Talk? Come on, if those things are covered by core book, someone did think this through... right?
... right?

>>96090547
Ah yes.
Zero Level Skills is a thing in SotSW
You can ignore the -2 for not having any level in Brawl but it wasn't a thing in the main book

>>96090574
>what's the difference between Bluff and Fast Talk or Bluff and Lies
It's in picrel
• Bluff: Your character’s ability to appear stronger or weaker than she really is
• Fast Talk: Your character’s ability to get what she wants by fast-talking someone
• Lying: The ability to lie convincingly and with sincerity
• Tricks: Your character’s ability to trick someone into doing what she wants
• Seduction: The ability to seduce someone with charm and wit

>>96090517
Also, keep in mind that Specialization is 3 exp per rank and covers related stuff, so it's a double-edged sword.
On one hand, you can get Brawl to 1 (per >>96090547 complain) and then raise Punching by 4 ranks, for a total of 2+12=14 experience, whereas rising Brawl to 5 would cost you 30 exp and there is no difference at all. On a flip side, we have Con, where any other investment than in the raw skill is just squandering exp, since their narrowness makes such specializations completely useless. Or, worse yet, still sticking it to, because 4 ranks of Lying makes any rank of Fast Talk, Tricks and potentially Bluff completely useless.
tl;dr Specializations mostly work on paper, not in practice.

>>96090629
Let's be very blunt now:
Do you play games?
And I'm not being snide here. I need to know if you have any real, actual player experience of any kind.
Because it's such an artificial division in something so god-damn fluid, it's just pointless splitting hair

>>96090638
Brawl to 4 let's you get talents
Specializations are for minute fiddling.
If you're really interested in some skill, it's better raise the main skill to get access to talents further ahead.
Many talents can be bought several times increasing effects and ratings for the whole skill
I wouldn't buy more than a +2 for a specialization just for flavor

>>96090663
I play games, yes
As I said here >>96090707
I wouldn't buy many specializations.
I prefer the whole skill because I won't remember the finer points on the character sheet

>>96090707
>Brawl to 4 let's you get talents
Each of them being utterly useless, but let's say you've got the point.
>Specializations are for minute fiddling.
Not really. Specializations are neat, but very poorly designed mechancis hat allows to get what you want for pocket change.
Some examples:
Acrobatics + Breakfall > raw Acrobatics
Con + Lying > raw Con
Firearms + your weapon of choice > raw Firearms
Intimidation + Treats > raw Intimidation
Melee + your weapon of choice > raw Firearms AND also making variety of related talents utterly useless (my favourite is the talent for dual wielding, where for 15 points you get what a single rank of specialization gives you, while giving you also standard benefits of having that specific sub-skill higher, rather than just not getting dual-wield penalty)
>Many talents can be bought several times
Or you can just spend 2 Style Points for a free rank, thus rendering almost all Talents with levels a monumental waste of 15 exp on something you can get for free. The only talents worth investing into past baseline are Jack of all Trades (assuming you set your stats just right) and anything offering strong permanent effects, like Skill Mastery (it doesn't rank-up, but it can be taken multiple times, making it very well-worth it) Attractive (being 3 free ranks of Charisma, assuming you started with 3 CHA), Diehard (you're Rasputin on 3rd rank), Robust (since it is only useful when always active), Dodge/Parry/Counterstrike (if you are a die-hard melee or play with Continuous Combat, otherwise it's better to just SP it), and maybe Swift (late-game priority under Continuous Combat).
Everything else is strictly "buy first rank, SP when needed more". And any Talent that merely decreases penalty in specific field means you could buy for the same pricetag 5 (so max) ranks of specialization in that field, thus overcoming the penalty, while having general bonus in that field

You should be buying Resources. That's where the real benefits are

>>96091166
*raw Melee AND

>>96091166
I was going to argue, but then I realized every single Talent I wanted to present is an unique, one-tier one.
Resources are meh, too, unless it's either Wealth-Ally loop and Ally-Follower hireling exploit. But Wealth-Ally-Follower combo is completely busted, I will give you that, especially if you crawl the Ally to tier 2

What good published adventures are there?
There's a bunch, but not a lot of, HEX originals so how about other games campaigns?
Can you just drop other Ubiquity adventures without problems?
Can you get some Pulp Cthulhu conversion without a lot of work there?

>>96095816
>What good published adventures are there?
None.
>Can you just drop other Ubiquity adventures without problems?
Fully interchangeable, because it's a generic system
>Can you get some Pulp Cthulhu conversion without a lot of work there?
<40% = Zero Level Skill, marked on the sheet, stats can't be below 1 anyway
40+% = 1/5
60+% = 2/5
80+% = 3/5
95+% = 4/5
Here, done, the whole conversion you will ever need.
Vast majority of standard fare Lovecraftian monsters are already covered by very similar creatures in HEX.

>>96095878
>stats can't be below 1 anyway
SotSW introduced bunch of Flaws that cover for this. Said that, as far as I remember, both CoC 6th and 7th ed outright tells you that you should have stats 40 or higher, with the "pre-roll" block having 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and single 80.
Either way - no point crippling yourself when playing HEX and it's generally unwise in Ubiquity games

>>96095816
>>96095878
>>96096287
NTA but I want to make a hack of the system (general 1880s-1920s era alt history)

I just read the whole thread. If I won't be using most of the meta mechanics of any specific system, which system is best to base the hack on? Seems AfO or League have some more updated rules? Any advice is helpful.

>>96096760
Hollow Earth is 1930s
Maybe Leagues of Adventure is more on point for you. Is defined as late Victorian era. So turn of the century should be fine for your needs

>>96097019
Sorry, maybe i was unclear. I don't care ultimately about minute era differences, as it will be weird alternate history anyway. Obviously I wouldnt use Desolation or Quantum black, as those are massively outside scope. I'm more asking what system to harvest the most core mechanical rules from so as to build on the most reasonable edit of the system as a whole.

>>96096760
>>96097653
HEX (obligatory SotSW) + AfO melee and companion rules (and if you need it - archaic weapons in general).
End result is a generic pulp system that can handle anything.
Highly suggest looking up Continuous rules (both combat and regular) but those are optional.
If you need stuff like fantasy races or similar, along with race-specific gear (like an axe that requires to have four arms to even use), pick Mysteries of the Hollow Earth and Revelations of Mars.
There is also Space 1889 hack that's build on Ubiquity, so you might want to check that, too, but I never read it myself, so can't vouch for it.

>>96097653
And to make myself clear:
Mashing HEX with AfO isn't about any specific era. It's about getting the best rules from Ubiquity-based games, that can handle pretty much anything. I run Traveller using HEX and it went fine. I run pirate campaign on AfO and it went fine. I run generic medievalesque fantasy using a mash-up of those two games and it was fine.
The biggest sin of Combos isn't the money scam. It's that he never released Ubiquity by itself, always bolted to a setting. It's still a generic and pretty universal system, but you need to nitpick things from a bunch of different expansions to two different games and then still supplement with your own stuff.

>>96098218
Super, thank you, I will brew basically all the rest, ubiquity is so nice for that aspect.

>>96098273
>It's that he never released Ubiquity by itself, always bolted to a setting
That has always been wild to me, even though I've only ever played HeX and quantum black. I actually only found out about AfO from this thread, so shows how out of touch I am. I can't believe no fans have put together a ubiquity generic PDF ever, seems like it wouldn't even be much work, as long as you don't want to publish, you could rip things directly from the books.

>>96098909
That's mostly because people either play HEX and ad-lib stuff it is missing, or they play AfO and ad-lib stuff it is missing. Everything outside of those two is effectively a statistical error in terms of players (even if Space's dice sets were for quite a while the only way to get industiral-grade dice sets). And it was like this even 15 years ago.
It's not helping that a whole lot of people who sticked to HEX for years moved to Broken Compass/Outgunned

>>96072728
So which books would you say are I need to get, to have the best experience? And are there sections in these books I should ignore/rewrite?
I'm more interested by League of Adventures, because I wanted to run a Vernian campaign, does it fix some of the flaws of HEX?

>>96102279
Nta, but:
>HEX
Core book for being the closest to universal edition of Ubiquity
SotSW for both expanding and fixing shit from baseline HEX
MotHE for the fantasy race creation stuff (and only that)
>AfO
Core book for the general concept and changes in melee combat, which helps with "low tech" settings a fuckload
Richelieu's Guide, which is the equivalent of SoTSW for AfO
>Optional
Addendum to HEX, (it's not present in the majority of troves, so grab some gofile.io/d/5mJQ8K) and where Continuous Rules is described. Not a big fan of it in combat, since I'm getting 3.X PTSD from the level of min-maxing it can unleash. But I understand why people love it, since it's legit good, just not everyone's cup of tea
>Side notes
This might sound weird, but I would suggest at least gleaning through Desolation. Not because it's worthwhile, but to know what to avoid and what mistakes not to make when using Ubiquity. Sort of "things not to do" list

>>96102279
Scattered through the books there are building kits for various subsystems
SotSW: Psychic Abilities, Magic and Weird Science
MotHE: Sorcery-Shamanism, Alchemy
RoM: More Psychic Abilities and Psychic Synergy

Martial arts skill in SotSW
Fencing Styles in AfO
And I guess many more little optional things here and there that might interest you

>>96102592
>>96102725
Ok, I'm taking notes.
But what about League of Adventures? From what I'm reading, it looks like the best of both world:
The default setting is the surface world and it seems to have martial arts as part of the base system.

>>96112075
I don't see martial arts in LoA, only in SotSW, but the experienced anon might clarify

>>96112129
>I don't see martial arts in LoA
Ah. I saw this Qing Dynasty dude on the cover, so I assumed they had. But maybe I presumed too much.

Im going to hack this system and use it to run a studio ghibli style game. Cause ironically ghibli adventure stories are basically pulp (castle in the sky, nausicaa , porco rosso)

Bump

>>96115696
>>96119089
>>96122872
Get a clue, mate

>>96125902
It's not like the board is short of space for a new wh40k thread

>system fucked over by creator
>no new games or supplements made because radio silence from creator
>somehow pony game is produced

>>96129219
The power of brony autism

>>96129219
Oh man, looks like serious business
There's a disappointed customer comment in Drivethru. The second half is gold
>I feel discriminated. In the "opening", or promotional animation video, there was not a single appearance of griffins... even one of those bat ponies appeared, which are super background extras compared to griffins, but a single griffin; even two zebra appeared. And in all the Roan stuff I see there isn't a single mention of griffins, not even in the trailer (where there's a story section, and a mention that there are several species... but are you making griffins the same as diamond dogs or that bipedal cat from the movie? The griffins were integrated with the ponies, they were part of Equestria as made explicit in the episode of the statue made with pieces from each province of Equestria, and there were many griffins living among the ponies). I understand you're not taking the lore from the series, especially in an official way, but it's clear what fandom this is made for and the artistic/aesthetic influence is clear; griffins even had an episode of lore dedicated to them. What is this invisibility? I am a griffin, and I feel ignored and my pride hurt. At the very least some griffins should have been seen in the promotional video, you created a threat of mutant rats... instead of taking advantage of the predator-prey dichotomy between griffins and ponies? There you had a better way to represent and treat the griffins by giving them their own nation and culture to put more politics into... instead of an amorphous threat of abstract and impersonal evil of monsters. Lame. Typical of ponies... you can't trust them, just as they never moved a single hair to help get our Idol back... with all the magic they have and all his cloying speeches about friendship and unity.

>>96129250
>but it's clear what fandom this is made for

>>96129250
>What is this invisibility? I am a griffin, and I feel ignored and my pride hurt.
Beautiful

>>96129116
Neither it is for bumping dead threads when I already extensively replied to your requests for more information.
Let it go, faggot.

>>96130356
Thanks for doing it again

Ok serious question though, do any of the books have decent rules for large vehicle combat? Specifically airships? I know there are chase rules in on of the HEX books but i didnt see anything like combat. Didnt the Mars expansion heavily feature airships? I haven't been able to get that book.

>>96134487
There isn't a lot of vehicle combat rules across HEX, LoA or AfO.
All are treated as regular combat with a special weaponry, armor and speed.
No specific rules for large vehicles
In SotSW there are rules for dogfights and dive bombing, and some maneuvers
All for 1930s, pre WW2, airships
In Revelations of Mars there are rules for airships with cannons shooting volleys of fire.
The stated crews are mostly between 4 and 8, depending on the airship, with a maximum of 16 in a "Ship of the Line".
It should be appropiate size for airships, tho.
Really large ships would be too easy to target from the ground
You can try to scale up weapons and crew

No specific rules for sea/naval combat, blimps or combat on a flying dino/dragon/whatever

>>96134487
>do any of the books have decent rules for large vehicle combat
SotSW
>Specifically airships?
SotSW
>Didnt the Mars expansion heavily feature airships
Yes and no. It simply adds rules for broadside cannonades, which happens to be how Martian ships are armed.

Either way, there is a reason why this thread keeps repeating that SotSW is the integral part of HEX and adds a whole bunch of stuff into the game.

>>96136514
>There isn't a lot of vehicle combat rules across HEX
>No specific rules for large vehicles
>No specific rules for sea/naval combat, blimps or combat on a flying dino/dragon/whatever
Wrong
They just aren't handled in a chapter titled "Vehicle Combat".

Which is a problem, because this is probably the most fragmented part of the rules, spread over 4 different books (there are also bits and pieces in MotHE) and getting a revision TWICE, without ever coming as a coherent, single, easy-to-follow set. You either just hand-wave this stuff when running the game/preparing a hand-out for your players with a cheat-sheet for a vehicle And it doesn't matter if it's an airship, a submarine or a drill tank, as long as it's moving and comes with its own Structure, it falls under the same set of rules, or you have to carefully sieve through all the rules, collect them together on your own, figure out which elements you actually want to use from them and if the revision of Structure points suits your goals, then cobble it together and use.
It's less of "the rules are bad/useless/too complex" (it's Ubiquity, it by design is simple as fuck) and more of "we never bothered to properly put this shit together, enjoy your hunt for the rules in the wild!"