Giant Robot RPG recommendations?

[False God]

Looking for any suggestions on a good giant robot RPG. I recently got back into Gundam and I'm curious if there's anything that scales well and allows you to play both the human and the mech side of things as well. I'd prefer something fairly gritty and little to no magic (moderate psychic powers ala OG Newtypes are fine). I'm not terribly concerned about the base visuals of the game but if it's not explicitly Gundam-styled, I'd appreciate if I didn't have to do a ton of work to reskin.

I would generally prefer to stay away from anything based around D&D and the d20, but I'm open to it if it's just darn good.

I've come up with a fairly good list of games I've never heard of via Google, but while I read through various internet reviews, I'd love to hear some thoughts on systems you folks particularly liked or maybe didn't like but worked really well for the subject matter!

[The Glyphstone]

Battletech is the original game of stompy giant robot combat and has the Time of War RPG spinoff. That comes to mind first off. It's very much the walking tank Real Robots style though, so very poorly suited for Super Robot mecha combat like Gundam.

Edit: I missed that this is for Gundam specifically.

[catagent101]

Lancer's pretty cool. Pilot-side it's a relatively free-form while mech side is 4e-esque tactical combat and the art is really pretty. The player side stuff of the core rulebook is also free.

It's pretty heavily tied to it's setting though so idk how useful it is for a Gundam game.

[False God]

Lancer's pretty cool. Pilot-side it's a relatively free-form while mech side is 4e-esque tactical combat and the art is really pretty. The player side stuff of the core rulebook is also free.

It's pretty heavily tied to it's setting though so idk how useful it is for a Gundam game.

Well, can't argue with a free core book!

[SpyOne]

I had a great deal of fun with Mekton from R.Talsorian Games. It uses the same rules system as Cyberpunk, but predates it.

[solidork]

If I wanted to play a really crunch tactical game in the milieu that you describe I'd play Lancer, if I want something more cinematic I'd play Beam Saber.

[Lord Torath]

In addition to those listed above, I've heard good things about Mutants and Masterminds 3E for this sort of thing. I think it might have a "mecha" supplement?

I don't have much personal experience in the Giant Robot genre, so I can really only pass on other recommendations I've seen.

[Beelzebub1111]

Mekton Zeta is probably THE Gundam RPG. I would recommend there as a starting point.

Another place to look is at Heavy Gear if you want something more tactical and terrestrial.

Mekton fits the space opera feel of Wing and Witch from Mercury. Heavy Gear has the planetary war style of 0080 or 08th MS team.

[False God]

Mekton Zeta is probably THE Gundam RPG. I would recommend there as a starting point.

Another place to look is at Heavy Gear if you want something more tactical and terrestrial.

Mekton fits the space opera feel of Wing and Witch from Mercury. Heavy Gear has the planetary war style of 0080 or 08th MS team.

Oh sweet, I appreciate the clarification! I'd seen both recommended as "good for gundam-like mecha games" but hadn't seen much explanation on what styles they fit better.

[Easy e]

I am looking for similar, but lean more towards the Narrative approach to it, as ultimately all Mecha Anime is character driven; rather than tactically driven IMHO. Therefore, games like Lancer and Mechwarrior leave me a bit cold. Robotech is closer but still a bit crunchier and tech driven for my tastes.

I saw Beam Sabre get mentioned, any others.

[Telok]

Have the Lancer core book and ended up being quite disappointed after a couple trial runs. Extremely hand wavey outside mecha combat, very thematically limited, yet very number crunchy options with traps, difficult to jailbreak the game from it's setting. If you dislike a universal "sufficently advanced tech" handwave internet that doesn't let you use tech you don't own a license for (to the point that "kill them and take their stuff" just doesn't work at all anywhere forever), then you'll have issues with it. Also, biggest arty has a 300' max range and mecha movement speeds are "d&d characters on foot".

[Beelzebub1111]

Have the Lancer core book and ended up being quite disappointed after a couple trial runs. Extremely hand wavey outside mecha combat, very thematically limited, yet very number crunchy options with traps, difficult to jailbreak the game from it's setting. If you dislike a universal "sufficently advanced tech" handwave internet that doesn't let you use tech you don't own a license for (to the point that "kill them and take their stuff" just doesn't work at all anywhere forever), then you'll have issues with it. Also, biggest arty has a 300' max range and mecha movement speeds are "d&d characters on foot".

One thing that was suggested for our group was to use mongoose traveller 2nd ed for everything that doesn't involve a mech and lancer for everything that does. You can untie the setting and just do space truckin' traveller style with mechs. make your own subsector in the Foreven Sector and get to it.

[Segev]

I had a great deal of fun with Mekton from R.Talsorian Games. It uses the same rules system as Cyberpunk, but predates it.

Mekton Zeta, in particular (not sure if that's distinct from "Mekton"), has very detailed robot-building rules, and a somewhat more light rule set for the pilots. The system works best with (and almost requires) a spreadsheet to track points for building mechs, if you're trying to stay in a budget, but if you're willing to work with that, it gets pretty fun trying to put things together.

I managed to build a super-heavy mech with a low-tech harpoon-and-chain whose primary tactic was dragging enemies into reach and pulling the smaller robots' limbs off, in the same game as a hyper-stealthy sniper who crumpled if anybody spotted her and could get a shot off, and a third pilot who piloted a mid-sized gun with a mech built around it that could rip through armor like it was tissue paper.

[False God]

Have the Lancer core book and ended up being quite disappointed after a couple trial runs. Extremely hand wavey outside mecha combat, very thematically limited, yet very number crunchy options with traps, difficult to jailbreak the game from it's setting. If you dislike a universal "sufficently advanced tech" handwave internet that doesn't let you use tech you don't own a license for (to the point that "kill them and take their stuff" just doesn't work at all anywhere forever), then you'll have issues with it. Also, biggest arty has a 300' max range and mecha movement speeds are "d&d characters on foot".

Ooof, thats a bit rough. I don't mind a bit of handwavey technobabble, but I'd like to at least keep it Star Trek-esque where if you toss out enough science words and treat it seriously it comes across as believable.

One thing that was suggested for our group was to use mongoose traveller 2nd ed for everything that doesn't involve a mech and lancer for everything that does. You can untie the setting and just do space truckin' traveller style with mechs. make your own subsector in the Foreven Sector and get to it.

I considered this, but my big sticking point is I'd like to have one system cover everything where if there are similar rules (say, movement) they function in comparable ways, IE: a giant robot walking overland and a human walking overland should be little more than an issue of scale and not require two different systems. I'd prefer my players to not have to essentially play two systems, especially if both they and I are leaning them.

Mekton Zeta, in particular (not sure if that's distinct from "Mekton"), has very detailed robot-building rules, and a somewhat more light rule set for the pilots. The system works best with (and almost requires) a spreadsheet to track points for building mechs, if you're trying to stay in a budget, but if you're willing to work with that, it gets pretty fun trying to put things together.

I managed to build a super-heavy mech with a low-tech harpoon-and-chain whose primary tactic was dragging enemies into reach and pulling the smaller robots' limbs off, in the same game as a hyper-stealthy sniper who crumpled if anybody spotted her and could get a shot off, and a third pilot who piloted a mid-sized gun with a mech built around it that could rip through armor like it was tissue paper.

I notice a lot of systems seem to emphasize "mech customization" as a big element. I'd be curious to know how well the game works if players were given mechs(I'd like to establish a stylistic baseline similar to Gundam where you're more likely to get a pre-built mech than take an Armored Core approach) and not provided much room to customize them?

[Beelzebub1111]

I notice a lot of systems seem to emphasize "mech customization" as a big element. I'd be curious to know how well the game works if players were given mechs(I'd like to establish a stylistic baseline similar to Gundam where you're more likely to get a pre-built mech than take an Armored Core approach) and not provided much room to customize them?

You could always pre-build mech "classes" for your players to choose from when they get in the robot. After they get a feel for they system they can open up more customization options. Like give more options for parts and weapons as they advance and work on their colony assigned mech to make it their own.

[Telok]

Ooof, thats a bit rough. I don't mind a bit of handwavey technobabble, but I'd like to at least keep it Star Trek-esque where if you toss out enough science words and treat it seriously it comes across as believable.

I have the maps & type ups of the trials I ran on google docs. I'll link to if you'd like. But outside the actual mech combat (which is all I tested since its all there is to test) the system barely has any mechanical existance. And there's definite trap options. The book presents close combat, hacking, sniper, and arty as viable play styles, but until late game (maybe level 7+ out of 12 levels? I tested levels 1 &... 3 or 4) I don't think you have the options to make it work at all. Even then there's werdness around license levels, cover, sensors, & movement that I'm not... I personally find them irritating and bordering on non-functional.

[False God]

I have the maps & type ups of the trials I ran on google docs. I'll link to if you'd like. But outside the actual mech combat (which is all I tested since its all there is to test) the system barely has any mechanical existance. And there's definite trap options. The book presents close combat, hacking, sniper, and arty as viable play styles, but until late game (maybe level 7+ out of 12 levels? I tested levels 1 &... 3 or 4) I don't think you have the options to make it work at all. Even then there's werdness around license levels, cover, sensors, & movement that I'm not... I personally find them irritating and bordering on non-functional.

Sure, I'd be interested to check that out! Feel free to shoot me a PM.

[gbaji]

Let me caveat this by saying that I'm not a huge fan of the genre to begin with, and only played a few games way back in the day (early Battletech, which was "questionable at best" ruleswise). Have also spoken with a number of folks who did play a lot of games in this genre though.

I considered this, but my big sticking point is I'd like to have one system cover everything where if there are similar rules (say, movement) they function in comparable ways, IE: a giant robot walking overland and a human walking overland should be little more than an issue of scale and not require two different systems. I'd prefer my players to not have to essentially play two systems, especially if both they and I are leaning them.

This has been a sticking point with just about any mech game I've ever heard of. Even single game systems that attempt to do both tend to either overfocus on one or the other anyway. The core problem is that you just can't realistically have mech and non-mech "characters" interacting in any meaningful way. The scale is just so far off. So it makes a lot of sense to just play one game when you are walking around doing social stuff with the characters and something completely different (and very focused/customized) for when folks hop in their mechs and fight stuff.

Can't comment on the two systems mentioned specifically or how they might work in that configuration, but just from my (admittedly limited) personal experience and tons of second hand info, you're pretty much going to be playing two different games for the two different conditions anyway, so having two different game systems might actually work better. At the very least, each of them will be more "filled out" for the specific roles you are using them for versus trying to wedge rules for mechs and rules for normal humans into a single set.

[Easy e]

@False God-

I am working on an entry in this genre but post-production is really slowing me up. Specifically artwork and the time it is taking to make it.



PM me and I can send you a draft copy you can try out, critique, and tell me what an idiot I am. :) It might be more of what you are looking for.

[False God]

Let me caveat this by saying that I'm not a huge fan of the genre to begin with, and only played a few games way back in the day (early Battletech, which was "questionable at best" ruleswise). Have also spoken with a number of folks who did play a lot of games in this genre though.

This has been a sticking point with just about any mech game I've ever heard of. Even single game systems that attempt to do both tend to either overfocus on one or the other anyway. The core problem is that you just can't realistically have mech and non-mech "characters" interacting in any meaningful way. The scale is just so far off. So it makes a lot of sense to just play one game when you are walking around doing social stuff with the characters and something completely different (and very focused/customized) for when folks hop in their mechs and fight stuff.

Can't comment on the two systems mentioned specifically or how they might work in that configuration, but just from my (admittedly limited) personal experience and tons of second hand info, you're pretty much going to be playing two different games for the two different conditions anyway, so having two different game systems might actually work better. At the very least, each of them will be more "filled out" for the specific roles you are using them for versus trying to wedge rules for mechs and rules for normal humans into a single set.

I don't really intend to have any "humans vs mecs" combat anyway, the scale difference is IMO intentional and fundamental to the nature of the more gritty war genre that I'd like to play in. The insurmountable overwhelming power of frankly, even the most generic mobile suits in comparison to the humans they're used against is an element Gundam regularly reinforces. But that isn't to say a human can't shoot another human just fine.

I'm sure someone will want to shoot a giant mech with a handgun. I'd just like the system to be able to laugh at the futility, rather than me.

[Segev]

I notice a lot of systems seem to emphasize "mech customization" as a big element. I'd be curious to know how well the game works if players were given mechs(I'd like to establish a stylistic baseline similar to Gundam where you're more likely to get a pre-built mech than take an Armored Core approach) and not provided much room to customize them?

In theory, that is what Mekton Zeta is designed for. The flexibility is meant to be for the GM to design whatever mech he wants. In practice, the few games I have been in let the players customize the mechs.

So it is meant to support what you're asking about; I don't have experience with that, though.

[Telok]

The core problem is that you just can't realistically have mech and non-mech "characters" interacting in any meaningful way. The scale is just so far off.

Hogwash. You just need to use a system that handles the scaling in a useful manner. Now d&ds & assorted knockoffs just flat out don't handle size scaling without making up bunches of bolt-on extra rules to cover it up. But basically all supers games plus any half competent game with an actual 'size' stat used in a manner that adjusts the hit & damage calculations will come out fine. The difference between a human with a pistol vs. an armor wearing t-rex, a robot t-rex, and a mecha t-rex should be nearly nil from the game system mechanic's point of view.

[gbaji]

Hogwash. You just need to use a system that handles the scaling in a useful manner. Now d&ds & assorted knockoffs just flat out don't handle size scaling without making up bunches of bolt-on extra rules to cover it up. But basically all supers games plus any half competent game with an actual 'size' stat used in a manner that adjusts the hit & damage calculations will come out fine. The difference between a human with a pistol vs. an armor wearing t-rex, a robot t-rex, and a mecha t-rex should be nearly nil from the game system mechanic's point of view.

Yes. You "can" run in a game system that scales like that. But any game that "accurately" (for a highly fantastic genre to begin with) represents mech combat, requires a power level difference that can't really be bridged. Sure, several game systems can handle that range, but regardless, that system will result in "mech wins" every single time if anyone not in a mech is involved. And if you are playing with a filled in range of stuff in between, you kinda aren't playing a mech game. You're playing a super-hero/high-tech game, with lots of power levels, some of which may involve people in armored vehicles, which may actually be robot shaped (but don't have to be), fighting with other powerful people, things, weapons, vehicles, etc.

But that's not what most people want when they are playing a mech based game. Just my observation. It's not about what you *could* play. It's about what most people expect to play in that genre.

Again. It's not a preference of mine. And it's not specifically because of the sharp disconnect with "mech" being unmatchable except by other mechs, and everything else being in a completely different (much much lower) class. To me, that's actually what defines the genre. If you don't have that, you are playing a different genre. I love playing high power super hero games. I love having robots, and powered armor, and high tech vehicles in those games. I'd never call those part of the mech genre though. I'll fully acknowledge that I may be a bit narrow on the definition though.

[Spamotron]

Chris Perrin's Mecha generated a lot of buzz back in the day. I've read it and it's pretty well written. But I've never got to play it in practice. It's a lower investment than a lot of other games because it's only 10 bucks. There's also a bundle of all the supplements for less than 40.

[Beelzebub1111]

I feel like I should also bring up Crittertek. Rules-lite, but probably a bit cartoony for what you are looking for.

[Thane of Fife]

I am looking for similar, but lean more towards the Narrative approach to it, as ultimately all Mecha Anime is character driven; rather than tactically driven IMHO. Therefore, games like Lancer and Mechwarrior leave me a bit cold. Robotech is closer but still a bit crunchier and tech driven for my tastes.

I saw Beam Sabre get mentioned, any others.

You could look up Bliss Stage. It's very character and narrative focused, even tying that directly to the action by setting much of the game in an alien dreamworld, where your giant robot is basically a psychic manifestation of all your relationships (made possible by alien technology).

[The Glyphstone]

You could look up Bliss Stage. It's very character and narrative focused, even tying that directly to the action by setting much of the game in an alien dreamworld, where your giant robot is basically a psychic manifestation of all your relationships (made possible by alien technology).

That's the one where having the strongest robot means boinking all of your teammates in some sort of harem plot?

[Thane of Fife]

That's the one where having the strongest robot means boinking all of your teammates in some sort of harem plot?

In theory, having a lot of very intimate relationships (the game mandates that the most intimate relationships are either very strong family relationships or involve sex) would give you the strongest robot.

In practice, I think there are disadvantages and limitations on doing so, and Bliss Stage is a dark, narrative game, and I think it's going to read this as, "What would happen to a person who spent all their time pouring themself into intimate relationships with the goal of having a strong war machine and saving humanity?" And the answer probably won't be that they would live happily ever after.

[Segev]

In theory, having a lot of very intimate relationships (the game mandates that the most intimate relationships are either very strong family relationships or involve sex) would give you the strongest robot.

In practice, I think there are disadvantages and limitations on doing so, and Bliss Stage is a dark, narrative game, and I think it's going to read this as, "What would happen to a person who spent all their time pouring themself into intimate relationships with the goal of having a strong war machine and saving humanity?" And the answer probably won't be that they would live happily ever after.

That...sounds like a very Japanese way of looking at things, yeah. It sounds like they're confusing superficial signs of intimacy with actual intimacy, since normally, if you pour your effort into actually having solid relationships, the fact that that ALSO made your robot strong enough to save Earth would be a bonus. The story usually goes that you need to remember to have solid relationships to make saving the earth worth doing, because otherwise pouring yourself into saving it with no reason to be part of it would make victory personally hollow.

That said, if you do view relationships as game stats and don't, yourself, care about them, yeah, that's going to be a mess.

[Stonehead]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned about Lancer is the 'mission' structure. The game makes a lot of assumptions about the structure of a campaign. Namely that your higherups will give you a mission, which the party will then carry out, followed by a bit of downtime, and then another mission.

I personally really enjoyed lancer the times I've played it, but a lot of campaign styles are tough to fit into its rigid structure. Anything that's more open and/or player driven will need some homebrew to make things like level ups, repairs, and ammo work intuitively. If your game is about a military sending the party out on tactical missions, Lancer will work great. If your game is about exploring uncharted space, or surviving on a perilous planet, then I would consider other systems.

The setting is pretty dumb in a lot of ways, which others have mentioned, but my group didn't a hard time at all just ignoring the canon setting. License levels limiting the power of your mech is just as arbitrary as a point total limiting the power of your mech. If you don't like pilots being unable to pilot each others mechs, you can just ignore that. If you don't mind the mechanics, but don't like the fluff of licensing, it's pretty easy to explain away with dna scanners.

I agree with the sentiment that the cannon setting can be dumb, but I disagree with the sentiment that it's baked into the rules super hard. Personally, I think the mission structure, while not impossible, is harder to extract out of the game.