Inevitable Fallout Or Revitalised Interest?

Star Wars Armada, a game I will go on record as saying is more grown up and deeper than X Wing (there I said it), is going into hibernation.

Recycled image, showing black painted bases (but clear stems)

This hibernation is simply a manufacturers cessation of development, not supply, but it may be the start of a steady decline or even panic dumping or buying. It will not kill the die-hard communitie’s interest and like many things taken away before their time, may even re-kindle some interest (I believe if I had read this news before I dabbled, I may well have leapt in just in case).

My own interest has stalled lately as well. I totally underestimated how deep my flagging interest was in painting figures, usually a malaise that arrives with the winter cold, but it has bitten pretty deeply this time. With fleets assembled, the fighters have been sitting and staring at me since undercoating. Ironic really as it was the fighters that got me into the game. Personally, I believe if FFG had made more effort to make the fighters either semi painted or even coloured in a such a way they could go without, the game would have been more popular.

Thinking on my future with the game, I revisited my fleet lists with the loaded question of “so if it stops here, am I ready to settle?”. The answer is confusing and far from clear. Yes I have two well balanced and flavoursome fleets that fit perfectly with the Rim campaign setting, plus two smaller, balanced fleets of Clone Wars factions. I decided to gently flesh them out. No plan, just a desire to chase some of the ships I could not get a few months ago.

More Corvettes for the Rebels? Hammerheads work better in 3’s or more and CR-90’S are so common in the universe that more always feel right.

The odd looking Imperial Interdictor with it’s high tech tricks? Hard to find and maybe too odd for a small fleet with an Onager already.

Maybe a great big battleship for the Reb’s? Hmmmm, not sure it fits my vision.

Another Gladiator, just to balance points and because I really like them? The Imperials don’t feel right with a strong medium ship spine. That’s the Rebel thing. Bigs and fighters are the Imperials style, with the odd support ship.

Hold out for another Raider? Scarce as and likely to get even more so.

More fighters? Hell no, I have plenty to paint now! On a more practical level, they are plentiful enough now for my fleets.

If the super rare Aquitens comes up, maybe one or two.

For the Clone Wars, maybe another pair of starters.

……………..

I always think, if a choice is too hard to make, then don’t make it, but time may not be on my side here.

In the end, the Chimaera ISD with the Gauntlet fighters and the Profundity MC75 Cruiser for the Rebels. The Chimaera was one that eluded my when I started out, but the MC75 on the other hand is good value and easily found.

These two add more big ship depth to both fleets (read some big ship representation for the Rebels), give the Empire a slight points boost, which they need* and both offer several build types. The MC75 also allows the Rebel player to play more conservatively if wanted, fighting head to head with big ships, rather than being consigned automatically to the role of the Shark vs the Whale.

I struggle with the other big Rebels ships, because, well, they are not big enough and I don’t take to them cosmetically. It’s a game, I know, but Home One is about half the size it should be even at the bigger ships compressed/smaller ships embiggened scales of Armada. The MC75 feels and looks right, especially next to the Assault Frigate, which I also struggle to accept as the flagship of the Rebel fleet.

In the Imperials, I have pretty much all I like for them, so a different take on the ISD and the ability to field two versions (there are 4, all very different), just feels “Imperial”. I also feel each sub-fleet should have one full sized SD as flag (2 ISD’s and the Onager). I also lack a dedicated carrier, so the ISD’s act as fighter control.

*On the table, my rebel flea-circus fleet looks pathetic against the supported ISD and Onager, but points wise, they are actually ahead.

Armada Dead?

So, I jump into Armada and they kill it.

Well, not kill, more like cryogenically freeze it, but you know how these things go.

I think they owe us at least another fighter pack for each Clone Wars faction, but that is by the by.

Where to now?

I picked up a nicely balanced fleet for all four factions and called it done. If I want to expand these, there are ships around and they have stated that reprints will be continued, just not new product developed. I had technically stopped, but with an uncertain future, mild panic has set in.

Should I grab those large Rebel ships I did not want? Nadiri Starhawk anyone? How about the weirder and uglier Imperials I skipped? Maybe another pair of Clone Wars starters, just for depth?

Suddenly my clearly laid out plan of a few monster Imperials vs a rag-tag Rebel fleet of nothing bigger than a frigate seems a little short sighted.

I hope there is time to sit back and see what happens, but that’s what they said about toilet paper. No rush, no need to panic….no F%@&Ing toilet paper!

The last ship added, an Imperial Raider. I think I will be chasing down another of these if I can.

There are of course, other games.

Obsession Or Release?

My fixation with 1e X Wing as a gaming distraction should be obvious to anyone who reads this blog.

I have a long and patchy connection to gaming, through my high school years, then a long break to a rekindling after a trip overseas and a chance meeting with a local gamer. Mostly historical (most periods), there has been plenty of non-historical also. X Wing, one of the many “outguess your opponent” games is my strongest crush, but it has not always been so.

The reality is, I missed the emergence of the game, watching bemused from the side lines, distracting myself with Attack Wing, Fed Commander, Wing of Glory, Canvas Eagles etc, clearly in denial. I had played it, but must admit, even in the early days, I did not take to it.

Part of this I think stems from my lack of interest in Star Wars as an industry/universe. A genuine lover of the early movies, I was there on their release, then through the toys and specials, but I strayed and with the release of the prequels, I released my hold (just not compelling enough sci fi) and had little to no interest in the spin-off cartoons etc. The new movies have me back in and I now own a Blue-ray set of all nine movies (and have even watched the prequels a couple of times).

When I did come into X Wing, as a gamer, not a Star Wars nut, I grabbed some 1e clearances (5x TFA sets for $100au) with little intention of going further.

It got me.

I became obsessed at the expense of all similar games, becoming a walking encyclopaedia of the Fandom page and a dozen or so blogs dedicated to 1e.

The most obvious thing about the game’s current meta (wave 14 had just been released), was the disconnect between the competitive tournament circuit and the “other” players, the players who just wanted to play Star Wars casually or to a scenario (much as they would play most games). It seemed that some time around wave 6-7 things started to get out of control.

Ships were introduced that were drawn from the lesser known parts of the Extended Universe. Upgrades became stronger with uber powerful combo’s and the game, although healthy, started to be discussed “from a point of view”, without the previous unity.

There was lots of love for the game, but also a thread of dissatisfaction and retrospection.

The tournament circuit has to be given credit for keeping the game at the top tier of the hobby, but the other and possibly sharper edge to that sword, was the semi obsessive power creep it promoted. Each wave bought more exciting combinations for tournament players, often resulting in a window of “one true way” to play the game at a given time until FFG nerfed it or replaced it with something even stronger.

There were exceptions, but the games core ideals were getting more and more diluted. It is safe to say, to be competitive on the later circuit meant embracing some of the real outliers of the Star Wars universe in unnaturally formed squads and “historically” incompatible combinations.

Bare Bones is one way for me (with friends) to play a more authentic, early days version of X Wing 1e and as importantly, to play casually.

Bare Bones (BB)

Bare Bones is our main squeeze, although lately Barest Bare Bones (below) is getting more play.

• Only original movie or extended universe ships and upgrades that tie directly to those (10 Imperial, 12 Rebel, 13 Scum).

• No EPT, Title or Mod upgrades, as these have been identified as the main culprits when it comes to increased action economy for competition resulting in flavour stealing changes. Action economy has become the catch cry for “competitive” play and story line flavour is obvious to those that want it and lost on those that don’t. Most EPT’s are still represented, just as unique pilot’s rather than being available to most.

• Squads are built to a theme or for a scenario. With fewer influences, the purity of intended pilot/Droid or Crew combo’s is easier to adhere to. Legendary ships are limited to one, rarely two of each, depending on the ship and it’s role.

• Only ships with the 5 core actions are included.

• Some upgrades are limited to specific factions as appropriate. This improves flavour and reduces the instances of near identical squads lining up against each other. On rare occasions it has also made less loved ships more relevant.

• No “Mod” like Ordnance upgrades (Chardaan, Extra Munitions), being seen as similarly applied by FFG as Mods and Titles, as tournament game balance fixers.

• Primary turrets are nerfed to R1-2 only, with no R1 bonus, forcing the player to fly more aggressively or risk being picked off from afar. No more standing off and sniping.

• More complicated options are removed like Tractor Beams, Cloaking etc. Bombs and Ion effects are as complicated as it gets.

• The “Once we were Heroes” roster system is employed where no pilot may be used after being “killed” on the battlefield until the whole thing has played through.This adds tension and avoids the same old stars being rolled out. AAR’s are kept so pilots build up “Legends”, with their demise included.

This works for us for the reasons covered in far too many posts before, but there are a few others.

Skeleton Crew (SC)

Taking Bare Bones and further reducing the ships to 7 Iconic, role filling ships per faction. This again reduces upgrade choices naturally, but still gives each player plenty to work with and covers most bases. Apply the above with the following changes. This is straight forward enough for a beginner to pick their own squad after only a familiarisation game.

• The Rebels get the X/A/B/Y Wings, HWK 290 and both YT’s.

• Scum get The KIhraxz, Viper, Z95, Scurrg, YV-666, Firespray and JM 5000.

• The Empire get the Tie Fighter/Interceptor/Bomber/Aggressor/Advanced, Lambda and Decimator.

• Crew are limited to those connected to above.

• No Ion effects weapons are used to further simplify play (and simulation).

Missing are the “super” fighters and many filler ships, but each faction’s core feel is represented. One of the big advantages of SC and to a lesser extend BB, is the ability to field a squad of basic ships that are not totally outclassed by a couple of untouchable super ships.

Bare Bones Expanded (BB-E)

In the wings for later is BB-Expanded. This adds back in named Titles for those ships that need them, ships that sport actions outside the core 5 (Cloak, Reload, SLAM, Jam, Coordinate, Reinforce, Rotate and Regenerate) and all connected upgrades. This adds in some early period ships from Rogue One or the EU like the Tie Phantom, Kimogila, Reaper, U Wing, Sheathipede, Auzituck, Sabine’s Tie, K Wing, Shadow Caster and the three single card Epic ships, but no Tech slot ships (Quadjumper).

It is all but full bore X Wing 1e, still having EPT’s and Mods removed as well as generic class titles.

Other BB considerations, like Turret limits are kept.

Triple Threat (TT)

This one switches from upgrade choice reduction to ship choice reduction.

Three very standard ships are used, each being a representative of their faction’s strengths and weaknesses. All have Titles and all other later game equalisers, making them quite different to their original versions.

• The Rebels have the X Wing with the S-Foil Mod as standard, much like a 2e configuration.

• The Empire gets the Advanced, X1 version (cheap Systems)

• The Scum get the Vaksai Kihraxz (3 mods and cheaper upgrades)

Between these three ships, most Illicit, Torpedo, Missile, Droid, System, Mods and EPT’s can be represented, often used in a 60 point “duel” squad configuration with an Ace and wingman, but sometimes three bare ships.

Fight Club (FC)

Fight club is like an extension of Triple Threat, focussing on fighters only.

• The Empire get the Tie Fighter/Advanced/Interceptor and Defender.

• The Scum have the Z95/Kihraxz/Viper and Fang.

• The Rebels get the X/B/A and E Wings.

The factions get their signature ships, worts and all and there is a support/standard/wildcard and advanced option for each. This one just lets you play with all the cool fighter Aces, full bore.

Relevant upgrades are available, again except for generic Titles, Mods and obviously Bombs, Turrets and Crew are irrelevant, leaving the core ships, EPT’s, the odd Cannon, System, Illicit and Droid slot and most Ordnance options.

EPT’s and pilot abilities now become the most important synergies, so this is probably more “flight college” than “fight club”.

Pick a 60pt squad, which is usually a synergy between an Ace and Wingman or occasionally three or even four ships like above and away you go.

*

All these offer a deliberately limited version of X Wing 1e and all play well,. Each attempts on one level or another to reduce the “full noise” X Wing issues common in the later game.

Second Edition?

This is healthy enough with us in theory. I have a huge collection of First Order and Resistance (both factions were properly segregated and supported in 2e). I also have the conversion packs for the other three factions, plus Epic and Huge ships (not looking at the prequel ones at this point) and intend to continue, at least with the TFA period as available.

2e to me seems better suited to the newer movie factions both mechanically and cosmetically and sporting the Tech upgrade slot, theses two factions cover the bulk of the upgrades available, unless they are faction limited. They are also probably the safest two factions for casual play, being less “opinionated” than most other factions and lack in both dangerously weak or over-powered options.

The Scum factions is the cross-over point and the original series conversions is sitting there patiently, but who knows.

As far as gaming goes, I have the print-outs of the official points, and quick play tables and a simplified 1:5 scale point system for pickup games.

I do respect this version of the game for it’s own place in the table top world, but still feel drawn to the core simplicity of the original, which ever form is adopted.

Triple Threat

Letting my mind wander, some other ideas are coming to the surface, with the intention of diluting the core ides of X Wing 1e down into more fun and balanced forms.

This one is called Triple Threat, referring to the limited number of ships available (1 per faction), each representing in the most basic form, the ethos and feel of each faction. Although the ships are limited, the upgrades are not. Every possible upgrade is available.

The three ships (Tie Advanced, X Wing and Kihraxz), all started as solid enough ships, but fell away quickly on the competitive circuit. FFG fixed them using the tricks available and by the end of wave 14, each was competitive again, just in time to be pushed aside by the announcement of second edition.

Lets look at the ships in more detail, assuming a 60 point squad as standard.

T65 X Wing

The namesake ship of the game and rightly so, being the ride of the stories hero and the ship that bought down the Death Star (pretty good cost to effect ratio). The X Wing fell away pretty quickly in competition, which then rolled into casual play. They were just not really much fun to fly. Good pilots, Astro mechs and EPT’s aside, the humble X Wing was the solid ox vs the nimble foxes (Tie Fighters) in the core set. Then it became the perfect opponent for the Tie Advanced (also soon to run out of legs), but fell away with each wave of releases.

What the X Wing pilots dreams of!

The fixes were many and varied, from Droids, to Refits, to the first “Configuration” style upgrade, by the end of first edition the X Wing had gained much, just a little too late to matter. Ironically with second edition, the reinvented X Wing sporting a more effective form, much of it modelled off these changes, is unsurprisingly more popular.

The biggest obstacle for the X Wing (and Kihraxz) pilots are run of the mill manoeuvre dials. S-Foils gives the X Wing a whole new look. Barrel Roll and Boost are effectively 6 points of free Mod upgrades with a Talon Roll thrown in for good measure. Sure there is the caveat that they cannot be used from the same condition and one reduces fire power, but this single upgrade adds sorely lacking manoeuvre options. This is not the only option, with Droids adding more. The Ox is now maybe a mountain goat.

There has never been anything wrong with the pilot choice for the X Wing, with relatively large stocks, but there are only four pilots with natural Elite Pilot Talents and Droids are not really as powerful or unpredictable on balance as cheap Illicit or System slots.

So, if we only look at Rebels, not Saw’s Renegade pilots we would have;

Pilots; 12, 4 with native EPT’s and a Droid option for a fifth.

Manoeuvre options; Outside of EPT’s they have S-Foils (house ruled as an automatic configuration upgrade in lieu of a Title) giving conditional Roll, Boost and Talon Roll, with several pilot and Astro-mech combos. Engine Upgrade and Vectored Thrusters are not available as S-Foils provide them in a natural form and Auto-thrusters are also off limits as Boost is conditional, not automatic.

Offence; A solid three primary is augmented by exclusive Torpedoes unless Renegade Refit is taken as a kind of “light brawler weight” option (2x Mods and discounted EPT’s). Refit can make them fly better, but lose that alpha strike ability. Refit also potentially allows the Rebel player three ships inside 60 points, previously only possible to the Kihraxz and these are not all Rookies.

Defence; The X Wing has probably the best damage absorbing defensive options with several repair capable or damage mitigating Droids and and a support your friend vibe running through the faction. Sacrifice is a common theme allowing you to build a damage magnet brick (Biggs, Selfless, Wingman, Decoy, R2-D2/F2 etc) to support a primary striker.

Now a solid re-positioner with a wealth of pilots and droids, but limited other upgrade options. It is either a dual Mod, stripped down jousting fighter or ordnance packing ship with a single mod. The X Wing lacks a surprise factor, but is strong on durability and plays well with others. Ordinance assistance (Chips, Droid or Failsafe), makes the Torpedo option powerful, and with the Talon Roll, Boost and Barrel Roll offered by it’s S-Foils, with the help of a suitable Droid/Pilot/EPT, they can be little unpredictable and fly well.

Tie Advanced (X1)

The Tie Advanced has had a similar run to the other ships in this trio. It came out with the much anticipated Vader, and he is still a force, but hit a points efficiency wall, so the other decent enough pilot’s were overlooked. With the Raider expansion came the upgrades needed to make the ship competitive again (and potentially the most expensive upgrade cards on the market).

Rather than a Title that reduces the ship’s cost, FFG went with an added System upgrade slot and a heavy discount to those upgrades, effectively giving the Advanced a free technology edge. Fits with the “Advanced” idea.

The usual wingman here, but multiple Tie Advanced squads should be elusive and brutal.

Each ship in this simplified environment needs to bring the strengths, weaknesses and most importantly the feel of it’s faction and the Advanced does this as a solid, but high speed arc dodger and missile/tech platform. The pilots are good, which in this format is important, crucial even, so it’s nice to see them getting a chance to shine.

Pilots; 8, half with EPT’s. Vader is arguably the strongest of any with 2 Actions, but there are other stars.

Manoeuvre options; Twin Ion Engines Mk2, giving the Advanced an almost all green dial, with the best action bar with the only inherent Barrel Roll. EPT’s (PTL), Pilots (Vader, Juno) and an effectively free Systems upgrade (Advanced Sensors) give them plenty of re-positioning options making them by far the most naturally agile, potentially out of the league of the others.

Offence; The lowest primary attack value is weighed against their defence advantage and repositioning (more shots, but weaker ones). They have all Missile options except (house ruled) Harpoons available, with System and Mod options to boost their effect. The Advanced is unfortunately the only one that cannot field 3 ships in any form, but that needs to be weighed up against the best natural defensive capability and the limited value a third ship would add to fire power without enough points for some Ordnance.

Defence; The Advanced is the only ship with an Evade action and three agility dice meaning they can effortlessly double the other ship’s base defensive capabilities. This is a huge advantage and the core difference between the Imperials and the other two factions. There are of course more factors to consider. EPT’s, combined with some Pilot abilities and Mods can boost this to near untouchable heights, but these should probably be kept for offensive buffs or you may find yourself flying around near untouchable, but punching like a butterfly.

The Advanced is a good example of the Imperial design ethos, agile and fast at the expense of punch, but unlike most Imperials, it does not lack durability. The cut price System slot gives the ship several good options, none allowed to it’s opponents making it the action economy king of the three, so if flown well, it is as slippery and fun. Unlike the multi faceted Kihraxz or solid X Wing, the Advanced is only ever going to be an agile Missile platform, but is strong in that role.

Kihraxz (Vaksai)

The Kihraxz is often thought of as the Scum X Wing, for good reason. The reality is, it is actually the “anti” X Wing. Where the Advanced is a different beast all together, the Kihraxz is very similar in role and even on paper, but the build-out’s are so very different. Instead of helpful Droids, we have unpredictable Illicit upgrades. Instead of Torpedoes, we have Missiles and the pilots are less about team synergy and more about predation, even suicidal aggression.

Travelling in hunting packs, not supportive teams, is the scum ethos.

The mundane looking Kihraxz, sporting its very powerful Vaksai Title, is a real bag of tricks, especially against the relatively predictable pair it is pitted against. It can be a manoeuvre king, nasty damage dealer or tanky hit soaker, or more likely, a little of each, but most importantly, never the same ship two games running.

Even the lowly and cheap PS 5 Black Sun Ace can sport an EPT, 3 Mods, Illicit and Missile all with a 1 point discount. It is possible to max out their slots for only a few points. Compared to the similarly priced Red Squadron PS 4 X Wing Pilot, with only Torps, a Mod and a Droid, all at full price, this is a massive advantage.

Pilots; only 6 total, but 4 with EPT’s including a generic Ace you can have multiple times.

Manoeuvre; The Kihraxz starts off as the weakest to fly, lacking S-Foils or a naturally good action bar or dial, but it does have potential. Three mods allows it to take Vectored Thrusters and Engine upgrade, giving it more actions than the other two with no strings attached. Illicit then offers Inertial Dampeners for that real surprise move. If all these are taken, there is still a Mod and often an EPT slot open for other priorities.

Offence; Three primary with most Missile options (Harpoons are especially nasty), several Illicit tricks, some semi or even fully suicidal, enough mods to make ordnance nearly fail proof and cheap EPT’s can make this ship either an offensive brute or less optimally, still no slouch while allowing for other builds.

The final, but by no means least option is to simply take 3 Cartel Marauders. This may seen boring and less effective, you get 9d attack, coming from three directions with no fuss.

Defence; The Kihraxz is the only ship capable of taking Auto-thrusters (with Engine Upgrade). Added to that, it can have shield recovery, can cloak, take Stealth Device still without sacrificing all other possibilities. Optionally you can tank it up with cheap shield and hull upgrades, making it the toughest ship with potential base stats of 3/3(5)/5/2 with cloaking, stealth and hull/shield upgrades.

Keeping in mind that any direction this fighter goes in, does not necessarily negate all the others, which makes it hard for an opponent to guess what’s coming. As above, not the worst option is three ships, with 15 combined health over three targets (can’t hit them all with Ordnance).

It is fairly safe to say, the Kihraxz rewards a healthy imagination and risk taking attitude. What can your opponent expect? Two or three ships, an infinite variety of EPT, Illicit, Mod and Missile combinations and the ability to max out any type of build or simply bringing to you what you have packed. In other words, they need to expect anything.

A Response To "Whiffy" D100 Dice Mechanics

Having committed to d100 games for the bulk of my (occasional) role playing, I have started a process of research, designed to weed out the best ways of handling various games and themes.

A trend has developed, or at least I have re-discovered it, and it comes with some bemusement and mild frustration. Mostly I find it interesting how an idea takes hold.

The term most often associated with d100 mechanics is “whiffy”. Whiffy refers to the even (linear) chance of any single result occurring and the often hard pass or fail effect applied to the roll. This has the effect of making a seemingly more random or unpredictable game than a “bell curve” style game mechanic (one that uses multiple dice added together, or used in a pool, forming a natural seeming average).

This is on one hand interesting and for the most part irrelevant. It seems to me, it is all in how you (a) perceive it and (b) how the mechanics themselves are executed.

Lets first look at D&D, the oldest and most popular of RPG’s. D&D uses 3d6 curve for characteristic generation (as do most d100 games), but a single dice, usually a d20 for tests and combat rolls. The main difference is the nature of the d20 roll. The roll is a “roll high against a target with all mods applied”. This means that you increase your chance of success in direct proportion to the number of positive dice mods you can apply. Another blogger once called this “Optimistic” or open ended rolling and I get that it feels that way. You are trying to overcome a hill resistance and every little “+” helps. D100 games are often a roll under a set value, but sometimes roll as high as you can under it, a bit like that game where you skate a disc as close to an edge as possible without it going over. Brinkmanship vs throw as hard as you can.

The roll is still linear, but weighted heavily towards one end or the other by flat mods. This brings it’s own problems. With some forms of the game effectively making unlikely results plain impossible, there have been soft fixes in late editions, limiting the possible range of the mods, curbing higher level blowout (called “bounded accuracy”).

The very nature of a +/- mod, roll high system makes a key difference to the effect of modifiers. Add +10 to your roll (a huge amount of advantage) and you still only have little over a 50% chance of beating 20+ as a target, but you automatically beat 10+. This is fairly robust and gives the illusion of powerfully leaning one way or the other, but it is still linear and has it’s limits.

The average character with a +3-5 mod on favoured tests has a 15-25% greater chance of passing them than an average +0 mod character (but often an identical chance of a critical pass/fail).

Of greater effect is the new advantage/disadvantage dice system, rolling 2d20 and taking the best or worst by circumstance. This doubles your chance of a better or worse result without changing the range. We will look at this idea some more.

*

The next example is Traveller, the oldest Sci Fi RPG, using 2d6 for a simple mechanic with a mild bell curve. The curve gives a sense of a broad middle (6 out of 36 chances of rolling 7, 16 out of 36 of hitting the middle three numbers) and 1 relatively unlikely chance each of rolling unlikely extremes (2 or 12). Mods have a much stronger effect, literally shifting the average. They are actually moving a curve in a non linear fashion.

The biggest issue comes from these mods, which can blow out the range quite quickly. MT2e has also adopted an advantage/disadvantage dice system, combined with the curve. This gives the player the curve for comfort and the best/worst pair for difficulty. It does not increase the range of possible rolls, only the chance of a favoured/slighted result.Using 2 of 3 dice is less clean than the 2d20 version from above, but it squeezes into the small range of 2d6 well enough.

The reality is, bell curve or dice pool games also have fixed percentages of pass and fail. Needing to roll 7+ with a 2d6 mechanic is a 21/36ths or 58% chance. It looks gentler with it’s middle curve producing the most common results, but it is still a fixed 58% chance. Add a single +1 mod (target now 6+) and that jumps very quickly to 72%, or a -1 mod (8+) and you have roughly 42% of passing. These single value mods have a very strong effect especially at low levels, with less effect as increased, due to the curve shortening. If the above mechanic is applied with the same pass/fail logic then you have a d% system with vastly fewer increments and a “lump” in the middle.

I feel it is not the range or the curve that we rect to, but the application. Again the climb the mountain vs the push to the edge thinking.

*

D100 games usually use roll-under mechanics. The character has a skill/chance level expressed in % points, rolled against with 2d10 (1 as 10’s and the other as 1’s) with a critical pass/fail chance, which differs greatly by game, but may for example be half or 10% of the pass chance, or the lower/higher 5%. The later iterations of these games have been taking advantage of doubles as fumble/critical pass values.

This is where the problems come from. Apart from often weighty maths, a real issue with massed combats etc, the flat pass/fail is seen as too twitchy. Have a 55% skill in driving, that means you fail/crash 45% of the time you are put to the test which is unrealistic, but tends to be the way the system is perceived. Add mods for difficulty and the base shifts proportionately, but depending on system, brings inherent imbalance. Why would a skill 10% character get a 300% increase in skill chance with a +20 mod, when a 80% near master only gets the same +20, which often tops out at an “automatic fail” level of 95%, netting a lower proportionate bonus and a lower flat benefit.

How to fix?

Option 1 (assuming a pass/fail dynamic) is to make most average test rolls an “arrange to taste” mechanic, which is to still roll 2d10, but arrange the two die in the desired order (71 becomes 17 if you want or the opposite if desired). This gives you two things. The first is a heavy weight towards the pass (lower) end with a roughly 70% chance of rolling 50% or lower and the ability, depending on the system used, to push the roll higher for more success “height”.

If this is the base test, then more threatening or volatile tests (like combat without advantage) should still then use the less predictable and most common “take them as you roll them” system. This system works well with a fixed limit of 99% for all skills. World masters always have a 1% chance of failing, combined with an embarrassing, but not life threatening fumble (see below) and 50% skills have a better than 50% chance of passing standard tests.

Option 2 is to soften the pass/fail slug. If the 10-20% points above and below the skill level (or half way points between the skill and the extremes) are used as “soft” pass/fail levels, this gives the GM room to allow a pass with complications or a “fail forward” soft landing. If the half over/under system is used, reference numbers can be kept on a handy chart or just eye balled (math is often sighted as the “problem” with d100 games).

It seems illogical to have 100 possible results and dilute them down to a drastic pass-fail mechanic.

Handling Critical pass/fail levels is also something that seems to change across D100 games. The best I have seen is the “doubles” critical pass/fail version, which elegantly bypasses the messy math thing. D00 lite games, OpenQuest 3, D100 Revolution, Warhammer 4e all use or suggest this system and it is neat and clean. Regardless of other factors, doubles are fixed and offer a 10% chance of something extraordinary happening, be it good or bad. This reduces the 10% broad crit chance to a 1-3%, specific crit result range.

To add more control to this, a simple table of the ten crit pass or fail result levels is a way of curbing the automatic severity of these results, or, with point 2 in mind, crits that fall within the “soft” zone are not too aggressive, but ones outside of that zone are more catastrophic or amazing. A “00” auto fail is a soft crit fail to the 99% master, but a “33” critical is a real stuff-up by the low skilled apprentice. GM pay-in is also allowed of course, but a good guide is invaluable.

Difficulty can also be handled within the 99% maximum range. For difficult tests, take the worst combo, for greater difficulty, add another dice, still taking the worst two, then another etc. For easy tasks, add another dice and choose the best result of two etc. This is equally harsh and fair (less so than a +1 mod on a 2d6 curve!). You always have a chance of extremes, ever increasing/decreasing, but no added math.

We use blue and red dice for easier/harder tests. State your aim and the GM hands you 2+ dice. If they are 1 red and 1 blue, then roll and arrange as pre-determined (red as 10’s). Get two blues and you can take them as you want, three blues, take the best 2, 2 reds are always read the worst way, three reds you still take the worst 2 etc. Imagine the look on a players face when they describe the crazy antics their character is attempting and you nod and hand them 4 reds!

Experience. To improve D% skills, which to the games using this system replace abstract levels, offers another place to add “curve” to the game. the character is usually rewarded with chances to improve after success, or even sometimes failure. If this improvement requires a test, say one related directly to the characters actual skill (roll over?) then improvement becomes slower and less likely. The difficulty (above) can also help determine the chance of an improvement roll.

One system, designed to go with the 99% limit, is to roll an experience test, by rolling over your current skill, each time a critical success or failure (called a learning point) is rolled on anything but a mundane or easier task. This may be for a +1% bonus (maybe a -1 if the crit was a fail and so was the roll) but these could also be automatic +1% gains if you want a more dynamic environment. This can be limited to crits that fall outside of the “soft” zone, meaning you learn from really successful or really unsuccessful results only.

Levels can be used also. 20 levels with 5/3/2/1% gains per level in batches of 5 of each (55% max), added to 2 characteristics (40% max). These diminishing levels are on one hand a realistic representation of a flattening skill curve and on the other, a lowering of player desire to max out a skill.

*

D% games have always been under the shadow of this “twitchy” or “whiffy” cloud, which I feel is unfair. The actual mechanics are linear and granular, both desirable characteristics, but often the application of these is the problem. Look to the core mechanic, the answers are there.

The beauty of most d100 games is, one “fix” can often be applied to all of them or as needed. The core ideas are intact, just the application changes slightly and the reality is, most experienced games have probably applied one or more of these in their games at some time.

My games use most of the above, only requiring a single sheet to apply them to the terms and conditions of the master game. Difficulty levels need wording accurately, advantage mechanics taken into account and some basic choices made. The very versatility and robustness of d% games is your friend here.

What, For Me, Makes A Good RPG

What makes an RPG good….for me?

This is a very subjective post, a retrospective analysis really, but if one person’s opinion is as relevant as anyone else’s, then why not.

There are a lot out there and lots of “generations” of games, so picking one style or period alone is tough, let alone choosing a single game. Through the years I have developed a reasonably clear idea of what works for me (though not clear enough it seems to steer clear of the same old traps).

Theme is obviously important. My tastes tend to run to hard, realistic, sometimes darker themed games, of historical or low magic fantasy (Dark Age and Asian especially), Sci Fi, Pulp (Victorian to WW2 including fanciful Sci Fi), urban supernatural, street level supers, Renaissance-late medieval including steam punk all with the possibility of alternate anthropomorphic animal options in the mix.

Examples of these are Warhammer, Warmachine/Hordes, most of the Legend/Mythras series, Tolkien, Call of Cthulhu - especially WW2 period, selected other BRP, Traveller, Mouse Guard, TMNT.

Mechanics are also important and often are directly related to the above. Mechanics should be rational, light, reasonably invisible, but leaning towards hard (dangerous-decisive) and flexible. Complicated and bespoke or massive pools of dice don’t appeal. Clever is good, too clever and game dominating is not.

Favourite mechanics include, D100 (most, but no single one gets it totally right) or 2d or 3d6. The overall consistency of these makes gaming a simple, minimally mechanical process and most systems tied to these two mechanics are well tried and not systemically “chained” to any odd or inflexible processes. The exception is the dice pool in Mouse Guard which is a good example of balanced perfection.

A game that has decent (not perfect) mechanics in theory, but then forces a lot of specific processes on the GM and players is The One Ring. I actually like the D&D 5e version Adventure In Middle Earth better, because it leaves more up to the players. This to me is an example of a game unwilling to let players decide on their level of immersion and story fidelity, not forcing strict processes on the players.

Feel. Again related to the above, I like my games to have a smooth feel when played, but most importantly actions must have consequences. The “squishy” D&D style game holds little appeal. Character death or incapacitation should always be a possibility, resurrection a myth or the reward for a dangerous quest, healing slow and a punishment for poor choices. No character at any point should feel invulnerable to anything.

Most d100 games are known for their “realistic” or “deadly” combat. Ever been in a gunfight? Scary stuff I assume (I have been under live fire in an exercise, but not in combat). How many times, if ever, have you struggled to take a TV show, book or movie seriously if the fighting scenes quickly take on a “mock” feel with few if any real consequences. Hit points (without specific critical hits), periodic recoveries, fast healing and resurrection be damned, I want genuine fear of consequences. There is no heroism without fear and I would argue, less gaming satisfaction if a result is achieved against little real threat.

Presentation. This one has been an interesting evolution. Drawn as most of us are to the later generation “big glossies”, I have parted with much bullion, usually resulting in a feeling of detachment, even occasional loathing. Sure they are often a good read and luxurious eye candy, but that very approachable, very tactile feel of simple books with black and white line drawings, printed on plain paper (often with notes pencilled in the borders) is missing. The book is a work of often brilliant art, but a bit like a collectors level miniature, it does not invite (me) to get it on the table, use it, even treat it rough and most importantly, use it like a tool box, not a bible of immutable truths.

Examples; Mongoose Traveller 1e vs 2e, WHFRP 1e vs 4e, Legend and other d100 games vs most other fantasy offerings. A big glossy book is a huge commitment all around. Every poorly worded paragraph, vague or needing of amendment rule, edition change or glaring typo bites deeper if the preciousness of the book is maximised. Perfection is hard to achieve, nearly impossible I would say, so buying a $100 au book, just to “see if it floats your boat’” can be a fraught and frustrating experience. I have started to get PDF versions more often, so I can print them myself or get a local office supplier to do them for me. This also allows me to replace or duplicate specific pages as needed, or just move on with minimum fuss.

Art, like all the above topics works best for me when it is simple, evocative and consistent. I prefer black line drawings to high gloss colour, simply because one allows me to get the “feel” of the game, while the other tells me explicitly what the game world looks like. There are some games that have the right to impose their will on us, because they are so specific and fully developed (Warmachine, Mouse Guard), but I rarely find satisfaction in opinionated art for more generic works.

The first example that comes to mind is Mongoose Traveller 1e, with the sort of art that takes me back to my first encounter with the game (which coincided with my introduction to 2000AD comics-had the very first one, then“home brewed” high school drawings and discovering the classic sci fi art of John Berkey, Frank Frazetta or John Harris among others), while the 2e book just left me cold with their clean, uninspired art. A case of their opinion and mine differing. Contrast this also with the minimalist but highly evocative art in M Space, (see above).

My first and most memorable games and the art within were mostly BRP based, slim volumes with sparse but on point art like Stormbringer, Hawkmoon, Call of Cthulhu, Elf Quest, original GDW Traveller (no art), Champions 3-4e. Sure I own lots of these glossy monsters, but few artistic triggers stuck with me like these older ones. Less is sometimes actually more.

Content. How much is too much? I need a spring board for my imagination, not a painstaking guide to every detail of how I should be presenting a given world. Again, there must be exceptions. Warmachine, Warhammer, and Mouse Guard for example, all have deep and fleshed out visual histories, but I do not need my hand held down to a micro level with most.

Give me inspiration, give me freedom and give me reasonable support (of the right type), but don’t railroad me. I do not have the will anymore (or ever did) to drudge through hundreds of pages of content, just to get some friends around a table to exercise our imaginations for a few hours. If a book can offer a complete game in one volume and still stay under the size of a phone book, then I am happy.

The main offenders here are of course the big glossies. A set of 400+ page Warmachine books, all decked out with spectacular art, consistent history and cohesive mechanics is a real stretch these days. Eye candy aside, I just find myself drawn to the 100 odd pages of MT1e or Legend. I think I burned out on D&D/Pathfinder 3.5e. For some time it seemed like a new book came out every month, always with inconsistencies and changes, but still with that insatiable “must have” trigger.

All you need in one volume. Books like this put the bulk of the creative burden on the GM (and players), but isn’t that the core of the hobby?

Given the above, this is how things stand currently;

Fantasy (Classic to gritty, low magic and sometimes historical).

In; Anything d100 based, AIME (with just the free 5e core rules chapter for “playing the game”), Mouse Guard, Bare Bones Fantasy and Wuxia, Warhammer 1e (possibly 4e).

Out; All d20 including 13th Age (except AIME, which I may convert to d100), Warmachine, The One Ring (again, see AIME).

Supers and Supernatural (street level and gritty, not 4 colour or cosmic)

In; BRP/Super World, After the Vampire Wars, Destined (when released), Luther Arkwright, Maybe a little Hero System 4e for old time’s sake, Supers RED and BASH are also in the mix, but unlikely to be used over a more mainstream and flexible system.

Out; All of the rest. So many!

Pulp Horror and Adventure (Victorian to Modern).

In; CoC/BRP (includes Western, Gaslight, Deta Green, The Laundry, Achtung Cthulhu) and Mythras/Legend (includes Historica Rodentia, Worlds United), Covert Ops.

Out; Savage Worlds.

Sci Fi/Sci Fantasy/Far future fantasy.

In: M-Space, Mongoose Traveller 1e, Frontier Space, BRP Future Earth.

Out; MT 2e.

My “Desert Island” collection. Genuine Sci FI, Horror/pulp, dark and classic fantasy and a generic system for supers etc.

D100 RPG's 5; The Warhammer Family

Warhammer is not strictly part of the recognised, Chaosium based D100 family, but it does share a basic d100, roll under to succeed mechanic. There is little separating the core ideas of these games, but the character generation systems, combat, character characteristics etc. are very different.

1st and 4th editions both have their upsides, but neither is perfect.

WHRPG 1e is a favourite and a good solid, dark themed game. Switching to the more up to date Zweihander clone is always a temptation, but at 700 odd pages with several other massive tomes, it for me is too much of an ask. The 1e game is a full experience loaded with all of the classic feel of the original, (actual) warts and all.

WHRPG 4e is a vexing beast. I have had my enthusiasm for the game tempered by both my own experiences and the opinions of others. I should know better (and do), but still, the new comer is a little way from perfect. It has the right feel, the right goals, but needs some taming and clarifying. This is a prime example of a “perfect” glossy work of art that is not perfect after all, but defies the “fix on the run” feel of less ambitious systems.

I intend to use 4e as my “Dark and Gritty” game, hopefully putting together a group of players for the Enemy Within campaign when I have it all, but some things will have to change. I am dropping the advantage mechanic from combat, intend to use the simple SL system (or my own) and make some house rule sheets for things that will complicate life, such as shields etc.

It would not be a work of ages to convert the specific feel and themes of Warhammer into a standard d100 game like Legend or BRP, but the opposite is probably not true.

D100 RPG's 4; Rune Quest and Friends

Rune Quest, the original “Anti” D & D alternative, has had a turbulent road till now. It has changed hands several times, been modified, honed, stripped and bloated, but it’s core has stayed pure enough to be currently available in no less than 3 effectively current versions.

The new Rune Quest 6e (from Chaosium, the originator), older RQ6 now Mythras (The Design Mechanism) and Legend (franchise free version from Mongoose by the Mythras writers) are all direct descendants of the original Rune Quest, sharing the same, slightly different to BRP, game system. The differences are few and nothing that cannot be easily enough converted, but they are clearly defined and on divergent paths.

Mythras is considered by many to be the most modern “evolution” of the original game. The main changes are the basic dice mechanics for determining ranges of critical success/failure, combat initiative and hit locations (specific or generalised) as well opposed rolls rather than the resistance table. Other differences are specific to each game system, like the handling of different types of magic etc. None of these are wholly incompatible with each other.

Arguably the most vibrant and currently consistent of the “big” D100 manufacturers, The Design Mechanism are quickly making a comprehensive universe of games, each adding to the utility of the last.

Personally I have a bit of a complicated relationship with this line of products.

Legend is a favourite, because it is a lighter weight tool kit game ripe for modifying and tweaking. Effectively RQ2 reprinted under a generic banner, many of the well respected expansions for RQ2 have been reprinted word for word (even typo for typo) and are generally excellent. The Samurai, Gladiator, Pirate and Viking books are deep and comprehensive, making legend an excellent historical foundation. Deus Vult is one of my favourite historical monster hunting games (I am playing with the idea of a brotherhood spanning all periods of history sworn to exterminate monsters, effectively bringing all of these books together).

Even the anthropomorphic animal themed Historia Rodentia is a very cool take on alternative Victorian era Europe. Nothing about Legend is overly offensive or opinionated. It is a good “old school” feel with a new mechanical platform.

Mythras on the other hand is more polished, making it less robust to change. This makes the Mythras games are problematic for me. I am not in love with all aspects of their system for all genres of gaming. They shine in high detail, one on one epic legend campaigns (Greek Myths, gritty dungeon crawls etc), but for me are a bit unwieldy for group combats heavy or pulpy games. Mythras Imperative is closer to ideal, being a little like a different version of Legend, or as intended, a lite Mythras.

M-Space is the best exception here. Using Imperative as a base with some expanded mechanics, M-Space is a strong contender for the sci-fi game mantle. Frontier Space has for me a Star Wars, Stainless Steel Rat or Firefly space opera feel, M-Space is more Star Trek, Oblivion or Blade Runner. A hard core sci fi tool box.

The Mythras/Mythras Imperative/Legend series will be my choice for one on one, high peril, maximum crunch games, especially if smooth integration of several deeply covered exotic systems are needed (more depth in polished systems than BRP, for better or worse). The pending Destined supers game, After the Vampire Wars, hard sci-fi M-Space, Mythic/Britain/Rome/Japan/Norse legends, the trans dimensional Luther Arkright etc are all good for an intrigue, or social interaction heavy game with decisive and detailed combat. I feel like I am writing an epic novel from a first person perspective with these.

This is where Mythras and Legend shine.

Classic Fantasy also offers an old school D&D meets old school Runequest in one volume.

RPG Down Sizing

Well, the die is cast. I have just posted 3 adds for some of the “Big Guns” of my RPG collection (Warmachine, Savage Worlds, 13th Age), all bargains (for the buyers), if a bit of a wrench to part with, but the reality is, if I play any RPG’s any time soon, it will be limited and need to fall inside my “happiness zone”.

What is my RPG “happiness zone”?

D100 games in their various forms, represent for me low preciousness, highly flexible and easy to learn/teach systems all running off one core idea, all with largely transferrable mechanics. They are also some of my favourite legacy games and capture the right feel for me (which is not high gloss, mechanically restrictive systems).

I have decided to stick with this single family of systems because they can handle either directly or indirectly any period I have an interest in, or can be applied to others through easy to employ generic rules, cherry picking from any other sympathetic game as needed. Hear a great idea. Do I need to buy a game to suit or do I use my veritable mine of information to sift through to do my own?

This has been coming for some time.

With little time to invest in a variety of games, the only real course of action that is left to me is to adopt one, the one I feel does RPG’s the way I like, allowing me to spend my time designing, writing, playing with that core rules mechanic, modified as needed. I believe all I need from any system is a consistent and realistic foundation to build my gaming on, so lets put that to the test*.

The beauty of this course of action is that I can very easily increase or decrease the difficulty, depth and crunch factor simply by switching which versions of the same I use**. If I want to introduce new players to a lite fantasy game, then Bare Bones Fantasy is ideal. Want more a little later, move on to Magic World, bringing any liked ideas from BBF. If later you want a high detail, deeply immersive, more serious heroic game with maximum crunch, then use the Legend or Mythras systems.

The players can become part of an escalating RPG experience without ever having to learn a totally different gaming system. It is even possible to take dice rolling conventions from one for another.

Wuxia is to me a perfect balance of an immersive world and game mechanics at an introductory level while the soon to be released Destined for Mythras is hopefully going to be a good example of crunch applied to the right genre.

Fear of system boredom comes to mind, but to be honest, if just the mechanics define the game, then you are probably not doing it right. I have been down the other road, where clever mechanics become the game over good role playing and it is a worse road to take. Invisible, logical, simple mechanics are the key.

Within these umbrella systems are a plethora of periods and themes to explore, with more to dig up and new stuff coming. The reality is, anything added to any one of these is a boost to all, which is good as I have succumbed and ordered the Lyonesse, Worlds United and After The Vampire Wars books for Mythras and Frontier Space and Wuxia from DwD. Lyonesse in particular is interesting because it is the original source of the (Jack) Vancian magic system that D&D uses and is credited with being one of the main inspirations for the original RPG fantasy games and The Game of Thrones books.

My only two real “ringers” are the Mouse Guard RPG, which I will not part with for a variety of reasons and the two Warhammer editions, which while D100, are not strictly compatible with the larger family. There are a few other bits hanging around that I cannot be bothered parting with, or have little real value.

So, in summation, is it possible to just game and ignore the mechanical variety on offer? Do a variety of game mechanics keep things fresh, or do they simply distract bored gamers from otherwise bad game structure? Do you only need to concentrate on story and companionship for a good game with the simplest mechanics to do the heavy haulage?

We will see.

*Possible periods of interest, all directly catered for are;

Early 20thc to WW2. Pulp adventure/horror, Renaissance-Pirate horror/weird science, high magic fantasy, low magic historical/fantasy, dark ages historical/fantasy/horror, dark and gritty fantasy, Samurai historical/fantasy, western historical/supernatural, victorian era alternative/horror, modern spec ops/supernatural, supers (street level), hard sci fi, space opera sci fi, far future sci fi/fantasy. Added to this are periods I had not even considered like Worlds United, that add mechanisms and thematic options.

**The single most used line when describing these is “if you have played “X”, then you will be familiar with “Y”.

D100 RPG's 3; Bare Bones

DwD have published a small but highly respected set of d% games under the “Bare Bones” or D100 lite banner. They do not have a huge range, but reviewers are universally in agreement, their basic engine is solid and clean, their ideas strong and their value immense.

Their games are light hearted, but not light weight offerings, packing an enormous amount into each slim volume. These are not filler games, but neither are they a hard entry point.

I have only these two at the moment, with Covert Ops GM manual and the two Frontier Space books in my DTRPG cart.

Probably the easiest “modernised” mechanics. The d00 lite system has plenty of neat ideas to fix other games, as well as each being a good option in their own right.

My main interest here is the Frontier Space game as a more Space Opera option to M-Space (which feels more inclined towards hard sci fi) and I would love to do a Spec Ops takes on a Fae dimension intruders Dresden Files style (basically a mirror world with cross over points, kind of Men In Black for fantasy), but I will wait to see how the more detailed and made to measure Mythras “After the Vampire Wars” expansion goes.

A new gem is the Art of Wuxia. Not really on my radar, because I am not into modern Wuxia games (which I assumed it was about), I have been converted. This is the ideal tool to do any fantasy-historical game like Monkey or any of the better Manga. It can be historical with some or no supernatural or high fantasy.

Another really cool element to these systems is that, aside from Frontier Space, which uses a slightly different characteristic spread, they are all compatible to a high degree. Want to do the above mentioned Men in Black vs fantasy creatures? Just combine Fantasy and Covert Ops. Want a more Big trouble in little China feel, then Wuxia + C.O.. They even give you options in the books for good cross-over points.

Honorable Mention Mini-Review #5 Hero System

If any game deserves a mention, but missed the top 4 because I have neglected it for a very long time, it is the Hero System, otherwise known as Champions.

A meagre offering, but enough to bring back those halcyon days of number crunching and fist of dice gaming. My friend Mark was the true advocate, my interest was only in playing and I must admit to being put off too much by the up front math, that so many others in our circle were better at milking (more of a writer than a mathematician). Shame, because it is actually quite easy and worth the effort. The Hero System book had I think one more power than Champions and a little cleaning up, making it the “smart” buy, but the Big Blue Book was iconic (at least I have the GM screen). I even re-discovered my uncut flats.

Hero system/Champions 4e is the one. The second and third editions were where I started, but 4e became the main stay and rightly so, before the massive, over written 5e and more streamlined 6e, then the cut to the bone Champions Complete (still 6e) have both come and gone from my collection, but 4e (only the basic Hero System book, not unfortunately the “Big Blue Book”) has been kept.

It has some mild issues, but most agree, 4e was the pinnacle of the Hero systems path, especially in universe development and support materiel. After this edition, like so many games in the early 2000’s (GURPS and D & D also comes to mind), it grew to monstrous proportions, but lost much of it’s character and clarity (perspective).

This game is one of the few that really can stand on it’s own two feet. The system is solid, character generation immensely flexible and comprehensive and the feel, a little bit old school and generous.

Once you have made a character (an afternoons work with a super hero, twenty minutes for a basic human), the game runs smoothly and comprehensively.

If you want to seriously commit to a single system, able to link any genre seamlessly, then this can do it as well as any, especially if high powered characters are the norm. As a bonus it also only uses d6 and has a 3d6 bell curve task resolution.

D100 RPG's 2; Open Quest

The Open Quest D101 thread.

Open Quest uses a simplified set of mechanics, much like a bare bones BRP-RQ hybrid.

The basic Open Quest game is a solid, simple fantasy system. A little too simple for my tastes (Bare Bones Fantasy does this better).

The best use of the system to mind is the Cakebread and Walton “Clockwork” series. These delve into the “weird” side of Renaissance history, specifically the English Civil War complete with witches and clockwork horrors with optional Cthulhu just for fun. There is even a Pirate and Dragon option.

Nothing in these games is totally alien to the BRP line making it an option for ideas either way.

The OQ stream of games will be used for the Clockwork series only, something it does very well. I may incorporate ideas from other BRP/Cthulhu games, but likely they will be able to stand on their own feet.

D100 RPG's 1; Basic Role Playing

The first stream of d100ness we will look at, as it was the first of the d% games is Basic Role Playing.

Basic Role Playing or the in it’s generic form, the “Big Gold Book”, offers a universal RPG core system, based retrospectively on the games from Chaosium that came before it. Storm Bringer/Elric, Call of Cthulhu, Rune Quest, Elf Quest and the “Worlds” games all contributed to the BGB, making it a consistent, but flexible tool kit for any RPG format or subject. It could be a realistic one book option, but why stop there with so many expansions available?

BRP is effectively two sets of games for me. The generic game, with specific off-chutes and the big, all on it’s lonesome, Cthulhu branch. The Cthulhu games are the most consistent series, effectively holding the line (and company) together over the many years of it’s evolution.

The generic game has dozens of expansions covering anything from high fantasy to noir pulp. The mechanics used in most threads are consistent, but not identical so the BGB was produced to both unify and help disseminate these mechanics through the D100 world. I have an early edition and there are many. If you are looking, try to get the later ones, as there is more content, although most is available through the parent games.

Blood Tides, Future Earth, Aces High, Devil’s Gulch, Magic World, Super World etc. all share the same original core mechanics more or less and the BGB allows for expansion or streamlining of these with little effort.

The BGB allows the GM to add or subtract combat and spot rules, allow super powers, psionic’s, magic (various) or supernatural themes, or mix any combination desired.

Combat in particular gets a lot of options. As BRP is less overtly combat oriented than D&D style games, there is room to simplify or even soften combat, pushing the game in a more investigative direction or make it deadly and decisive.

This is where Cthulhu comes in under both umbrellas. With several monsters effectively immune to weaponry, investigation, both to procure secrets about and edges against the Old One’s becomes standard play, with combat a last, desperate resort. It is simplified in CoC, but deadly.

Call of Cthulhu has spawned many games through countless manufacturers, but it started here. Technically Delta Green should be in the above grouping, but who better to be the “Big Bad” in that universe than Cthulhu? Achtung Cthulhu adds pulpy action, WW Cthulhu is ultra dark and there are plenty of other options covering Rome through to Sci Fi including Victorian, Western, Dark Age and Renaissance. Sharing the BRP mechanics more or less, lets you play with the feel and period of interest you want.

Where does it sit?

The BRP/BGB series are my sentimental favourites, especially CoC, but lately they have also become my systemic favourites also. The only thing I dislike (a bit, not terminally) is the core dice pass/fail/crit spread mechanic and the resistance table, both of which are easily fixed 9something for a later post). Hit points with critical hit effects, rather than individual body locations are so much more practical for group combats and seem cleaner overall. I also prefer the initiative order rather than action point system. It is even possible to simplify CoC combat down to a d10 version, so it plays group combats like Savage Worlds.

What is it best at?

BRP is a good generic, low grit, low combat foundation. This may sound odd, seeing as all D100 games are considered gritty, but BRP has a lot of flexibility, starting at a semi lite core. Playing at the pulpy end suits it. If you want to start a game and see where it goes, this one is ideal. The players may start out as post WW1 adventurers and end up facing off against Cthulhu nasties, future Nazi’s in waiting, pulp villains toting weird science, regular monsters of legend or alien invaders. Alternatively, they may face nothing more exotic than a deranged lunatic or two.

I will use the BRP for Cthulhu and historical games at the pulpy end. Magic world is also likely my choice for a standard fantasy system.

One Basket To Hold All My Eggs?

As I hinted at previously, my intention at this point is to sell off all of my unused RPG resources. Most have been flicked through a few times over the last few years and I have to admit to a relentless collectors impulse with some of them, so the collection is always, pretty much pointlessly up to date.

I culled most recently a few years ago, looking up an old friend and off loading on him pretty much anything he wanted (lots of Hero System) and some things I said her might as well find a home for if he can. This was fitting, as he was the guy, way back in year 7 high school, who got me started on this journey.

What I kept was telling. All my d% games, some favourite Savage Worlds books, the Warmachine RPG (and miniatures game), 13th Age, Adventures in Middle Earth (for 5e), The One Ring, Mongoose Traveller 1 & 2e some light end supers games and The Mouse Guard RPG. This might seem like a lot, but if I had kept everything over the years, another 200+ D & D, Pathfinder, Traveller, Hero system or Cthulhu books would be added to my book shelves, some as old as 1980’s .

Two years later, or more accurately, 30 years later, where am I?

I have until recently been keeping up with 13th Age, but that has slowed and become less compelling. I also have to face the fact that I truly dislike level and class based games, even in their most palatable incarnation.

AIME and TOR would have been compulsively collected, but they were canned by Cubicle 7, with a new publisher about to pick up the baton using very different art.

MT 2e has been hanging there, feeling incomplete, but M-Space (with Frontier Space also) seems a much more practical way to scratch that itch and MT 1e still has it’s appeal.

Savage Worlds has frustrated with it’s new edition getting basically no solid support for the new edition.

The Warmachine RPG seems dead, as is the wargame locally.

Mouse Guard is safe. I doubt i would ever part with that game or the novels.

Most d% games are in a similar boat, with old systems dropped, only to be revived or replaced but their consistent mechanics always allow for a life line of some sort.

Time to look at what I need in my world to scratch that occasional itch.

My needs are simple.

I would like a foot in most genre camps, mechanics that can be explained to new or occasional players easily and preferably only one system with mechanics that I find logical, realistic. I also lean towards the heavier end of theming, better for deep story telling without the wizz-bang, who’s who of expected to smite monsters. I was once torn between Savage Worlds and d% games for my “one system” backbone role, but Savage Worlds has fallen away. I just do not like the system, nor it’s handling of some genres.

So, apart from some older or well loved games (MT 1e, DC Heroes, Champions 4e, Mouse Guard) that are really not worth selling or do offer a decent alternative occasionally, the only system(s) that fit the bill are the d% series of games.

Percentile (D100) systems cover most genres I am interested in and in the forms I generally like.

• They have games ranging from 40,000 bc to any period Sci Fi.

• They can go hard or soft, pulpy or super gritty.

• They are always bedded in a mechanically realistic system, with rare, but controlled forays into more “abstract” mechanics.

• They are the most hackable of systems, allowing me to do basically any other game with the core d% rules as is. Want Star Wars or Tolkien ported over, no problem.

There are several “threads” to d% games, many, but not all of which, I have at least a sampling of. In the following posts, I will explore the various sub-genres of d% gaming and their most likely uses.

Retro Mini-Review #4 Legend

The last game I want to touch on in my little list of old fave’s is Legend, another game by Mongoose publishing.

Legend is the Generic re-print of the defunct to Mongoose Runequest game, before it became on one hand the equally non-Runequest Mythras (from the writers of Legend and Rune Quest 6e) or “the other” Runequest 6e (the new one from Chaosium the original publisher, now in possession of the name again).

Confused? It matters not. The are all pretty much compatible anyway.

Little coat-pocket sized books, that will not win any awards for cover art, but are eye catching enough to get me on board impulsively while travelling to Melbourne a few years ago.

So, why Legend? I have no love of Mongoose as a company, except they keep re-publishing old games from my past. This game is not considered to be as evolved as Mythras (being the more streamlined version of the game that came after the game the writers wanted to make originally when they did Legend, being RQ 6e, but further refined). Regardless, I just like it for many of the same reasons cited previously.

It has an approachable, loosy-goosy feel with plain as you like presentation and little to no preciousness. A theme I have noticed in my gaming is a love for good (or even not) black and white pencil or line drawn illustrations. They maybe make me feel like the game is within my realm of expertise and pay-in? Or they may just remind me of good experiences from my past, before everything got too polished? Don’t know, they do however feel tactile, practical, familiar and not overly opinionated.

Mythras heroes and perfects the core ideas in Legend. Legend though offers a solid 95% foundation, with room to grow it your way. I have no issue with fiddling with Legend (or MT 1e, CoC 5e or WHFRP 1e). Mythras sits more in an “our way or the highway because we got it right” camp. Another small thematic niggle for me is Mythras has a Bronze Age theme, Legend is more traditional Dark Age-early Medieval.

Combat is one of the main reasons people try Mythras. it has a gritty, detailed and dramatic style, perfect for legendary battles. Legend has the basis for this with fewer options, but it has the ones you will want and room for the Gm to make up what is needed, even making it part of the “Combat style” skill grouping. The reality is, once a character has achieved a critical hit, they can put forward (or pre nominate if you play that way) any reasonable idea as their “special action”, even drawing from Mythras.

Mythras Imperative, the core of M-Space and other Mythras based systems also has an abridged version of the combat rules which I prefer, so Legend really is not any different.

Is it a complete Game?

Like the other games on this list, Legend can almost stand alone for the same reasons. The book is comprehensive enough to provide a decent standard fantasy, horror or historical Medieval to Dark ages game, with dangerous combat, magic and other systems to master and unlike most d20 games, nothing is a push over. It does lack some details though making it the only one of the four I have looked at that needs expanding. There is no Bestiary and no race outside of Human is represented in the core book.

Unlike the other games reviewed here though, the support materiel is cheap and to be honest hard to resist, so filling the gaps with Monsters of Legend, adding detail with Arms of Legend or Mythras Spear and Sail etc is no big deal. The best way to expand the game is to explore the background books available.

Unlike the other systems we have looked at, Legend really shines with more books. Samurai, Vikings and Pirates are handled in system with Legend format reprints of well respected older RQ2 books. Crusader monster hunters in Deus Vult and anthropomorphic animals from Historica Rodentia can be found in closely related expansions. Other periods can also be used with Legend like any of the RQ6/Mythras Arthurian Britain/Rome books etc. and most other BRP d% books can be used with only a little fiddling.

On the plus side, three or four Legend books only fill a coat pocket and cost about as much as a normal core book.

Is it relevant?

For some reasons d% games are seen by many as inherently “retro”, like a game mechanic can go stale or be bettered by something else over time. Dice are dice. The system written around them is the real key. The RQ and Warhammer renaissance we are in now is as valid as any other gaming process, probably more so, but I have to admit, I do wish they would move on with some older ideas (the RQ 6e Resistance table still, really?).

Just because it’s ancestors came out 40+ years ago, does not make it out of date which for gaming is a largely irrelevant measure anyway (what about the even older d20 systems, or even Chess?). Legend is streets ahead of many older d% games, but it does not make these redundant, nor do they force it to wear the “new guy” crown. It sits in the middle ground between solid older retro and the sometimes over polished new, without too much of either.

One of the really great things about d% games is their inherent versatility. Don’t like the core dice mechanic? use one from another game or make one up. There are many options.

Other stuff.

So who wins the award for most approachable? Legend is $1 for the core pdf and often $9.99 for the paper version. Warhammer 1e is tough to find now and MT 1e and CoC 5e are getting harder (but 6e is easily had). Most are available as pdf’s, the irony of which I do see, but the old school presentation lends itself to home printing (often much the same quality).

The award for support goes to the d% games as most things from most games can be used and none can ever be considered to be truly out of date.

So what makes an ideal “retro” RPG system for me?

1) An unassuming, un-precious presentation that invites pencil notes in the margins and hand drawn illustrations. The odd coffee stain should add character, not evoke tears.

2) A solid and realistic system that is flexible enough to handle most things, but does not feel the need to control everything.

3) A full game in a book if possible, with extras available, but no real urgency to get them.

4) An intangible something that transports me to a gaming table far far away in a time long forgotten (the ‘80’s), with pencils, dice, paper, coffee and friends on a rainy afternoon.

This has been therapeutic and has helped me to reach a decision that is as practical as it is scary. Die to seriously limited opportunity to play and even less desire to force the issue, I am going to seriously look at selling off all systems I have that are not d% based, with a few exceptions like Traveller 1e, which is not worth much to anyone here anyway. I have resource pdf’s of many (I don’t count these as real), so potentially they are accessible, but otherwise, out they go.

Retro Mini-Review #3 Call Of Cthulhu 5th Edition

Call of Cthulhu was my second love after Traveller.

It had many of the same draws as Traveller, with realistic systems, no classes, levels or mechanical abstractions and it had one major play style difference.

You were not meant to win, just surviving was an achievement.

I never really made the connection CoC had with many other d% games like Rune Quest until years later. CoC to me was an ideal game in itself and so very far away from D & D.

Lots of lovely stuff, more consistent and cross-compatible than the D & D monster has proven over the years (D & D the only game in the hobby large enough to survive 5 complete re-makes). The Orient Express adventure has recently been reprinted, but my (internally) near mint copy is yet to be played. Try playing a 30 year old adventure with current D & D.

D100 games always seem to be in the realism over game abstractions camp, some more than others. CoC straddles the middle ground.

It does not have the gritty granularity of the Runequest/Mythras camp (but could easily have this added), but is more hard core than many other BRP games thematically.

Editions 1 through 6 of CoC are effectively the same. Some rules came and went, some became more complex, a few less, but the mechanical base has stayed the same. Even 7e is basically the same and fairly compatible. Starting at 2e & 3e, 5e is now my poison of choice. Interchangeable with all the others with close ties to 6e, but with some simpler rules like Sanity, 5e was basically state of the art until 7e updated/changed the rules (literally), making all characteristics d% based, instead of d% generating (does not work for me). I have a massive collection of original adventures and period books, even the original Horror on the Orient Express expansion, and a pretty comprehensive Achtung Cthulhu (pulpy) and World War Cthulhu (dark) collections as well, all 5/6e compatible.

Is it a full game?

The basic book is enough. Extra books always add more content, but rarely rules. The several slim Companions are the only real exceptions and they are nice but not needed.

Like WHFRP, there is a lot to fear and plenty for the Gm to work with. A good story teller, someone who has read a few of the Lovecraft or Derleth books, should be able to get years out of it. The entire world in the 1920’s is significantly different to our world, harder and simpler with added monsters, so exploration and adventure are core principals as so much is unknown.

The book does not need to cover every eventuality as again the mechanics are a simple d% system with plenty of flexibility and to help for what is systemically possible. The characters skill set is your best guide. If something is not covered, there is likely a fix somewhere, because the system is in a shared ecosphere, with hundreds of contributors over dozens of games. Unlike D & D, there is an emphasis on non combat skills and story telling.

Monsters are many and often so powerful that your characters may have several encounters with them before they have even a small win. If Cthulhu is not your cup of tea, there are “regular” monsters also, so you could run an entirely conventional 1920’s “Supernatural” style campaign.

Is it relevant?

The game is current, just evolved and regularly comes up in “10 games you must play” lists (editions vary). The support material available is often still current also, such as Achtung Cthulhu, making it a solid choice from new.

Which ever edition you go with, the basic principles are the same. Discover secrets without losing your life or your mind.

Other stuff.

CoC is part of a large, semi cohesive family of games. The BRP (Basic Role Playing) family is deep flexible and almost fully compatible. CoC can be the gateway game or just one form of many. My own personal collection includes many of the old favourites, variations and derivatives although I regret selling off some like Elf Quest and some early Cthulhu books.

Percentage style games are not everyone’s cup of tea, but CoC is a very good fit for this system, so if you want to give a d% game a go, this is probably the most logical place to start, Cthulhu optional.

Retro Mini-Review #2 Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 1e

In the second of my retro wanderings, I want to look at Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 1st Edition (mostly the soft cover reprint).

With it’s roots clearly immersed in the Warhammer war game (not interested) and the Old World that comes with it, the 1st edition is still regarded as the “true” WHFRP game both mechanically and thematically.

There have been excellent clones (Zweihander) and re-boots (2e and 4e, but not the totally different 3e), but none have truly captured the feel of the early game and the typo corrected soft cover reprint book is a complete game in one volume.

I am lucky to be able boast even this meagre collection. I have more on pdf thanks to C7’s re-release of the adventures etc.

I have the very first hard cover book, that looks pleasantly aged, but sports a few small typos to go with it’s coffee stains. The near mint soft cover re-print was a lucky purchase a few years ago, before the 4e “revival”, bought through Noble Knight for reasonable money.

Apocrypha Now and The Restless Dead are nice to have, but not necessary. AN adds more character options, minor rules revisions and some useful “fluff” like travel locations and background items with some tied in adventures (taken from The Restless Dead) and TRD combines the same adventures into a longer campaign with several more, then fleshes out magic/magic items and the combat rules.

Is it a complete game?

Comprehensive is an understatement with this 360 + page book.

The character generation system is massive, replacing artificial, mechanical and limited D & D style classes (something I have learned to loath to a nearly unhealthy level) with actual medieval careers. The sky is the limit, but usually the filth of late medieval society is the launching point.

If you generate your character randomly as recommended, get used to a low born, grubby, possibly weak and usually poor human with a basic trade (Rat Catcher, Grave Robber, Scribe) not a higher calling. No Elven lords here (unless you are amazingly lucky). I read the WH Konrad books about the same time as this edition came out and that rags to riches story is a perfect fit.

From there you have a slightly confusing magic system, which to me, a low magic adherent, feels right. Why should magic be easy and mundane. It should be hard to understand, harder to master and perform and it should reserve the right to end you, the wielder in the blink of an eye. Many feel the 2e magic system is better from a players perspective, but I much prefer the elusive, dangerous and mysterious form it takes in 1e. There may be a Wizard in waiting in your group, but be warned, they make 1e D & D cannon fodder Wizards look buff.

Unlike the 4e version, the game is clearly and logically laid out (yes, you can find the shield rules). You have to give it to the writers of this period, they had little to draw from, often writing the first of their kind, but still managed to kick goals regularly. Most modern games are direct descendants of these earlier games and not all are obviously better.

Even though the game does try to address almost any possible situation your players may find themselves in from Insanity to drowning, the mechanics always use a simple roll under d% mechanic, with plenty of “hand wavey” vibe. As I stated last post, I do not like a comprehensive (strict) set of rules, preferring a simple system with plenty of guide lines and freedom to choose. Play it by ear or by the rules, what ever. It can take it.

Combat, like careers is realistic (read lethal). Just like reality it can kill you quick, maim you or in other ways, often hilariously mess you up, not like a D & D fantasy world of physical damage meaning an abstract nothing until death (why is it d% games tend towards realistically lethal and d20 games are fancifully abstract and soft?). There is no resurrection magic and little magical healing. Try not to die. Try not to get maimed. Try.

So, fight if you need, but avoid it if you can. Anyone and I mean anyone can end you at any time. Coming away from several fights unscathed is unlikely and likely speaks to a blessed, cowardly or lucky character. Add to this the reality that you beginning characters are often ill equipped to easily deal with even an average ruffian or bandit and you see very quickly that violence, especially unprepared violence is likely an opportunity to roll up another character. This game is the philosophical opposite of D & D 4e or 13th Age.

The bestiary is effectively the same size as a full D & D monster manual but adds (1) world relevance and (2) more re-use value because every small encounter in WHFRP is a test, not a level based speed hump. The GM of this game will not be constantly scouring the web or old splat books for more new monsters for your party to smear. Every entry of this bestiary potentially has a story in it, maybe even a campaign.

It is also true that even though any creature could lay you low, the opposite is also true. You may slay a Dragon (probably not), but not because you have more hit points and do more damage, making it an auto kill. It will be the result of a clever plan, a village of help and some dumb luck.

Is it still relevant?

Like Traveller, it will not die, coming back in ever more re-makes, but none making the original redundant. Want your game a little more complicated, tight and “modern”, then try Zweihander or 4e, but before you do, remember what you are losing.

WHFRP 1e has a unique feel. It lacks balance, but so does life. It lacks inherent fairness, get over it. It is something so alluring that it will not go away, so before committing, maybe look at the original, before the pretenders.

At the end of the day, role playing needs a solid system to (as invisibly as possible) determine semi-random outcomes, a setting to pay into and a way of measuring achievements for full satisfaction.

In D & D it is levels, treasure/XP, and a catalogue of monsters slain, in WHFRP it’s as simple as making something of yourself in a cruel and unforgiving world.

Retro Mini-Review: Mongoose Traveller

I posted a ranty thing the other day and after having a civilised conversation with a local BAM store owner, rion take me to a bad place and removed it.

The point of the post; Modern games are very polished and evolved, but maybe, just maybe they are blinkering newer (or timid) game masters into believing they are the “one true way”. The fall out of that can be the utter confusion, frustration and general unhappiness that comes from perceived imperfection falling short. In a nutshell, be careful which gods you worship as none are perfect.

The post got a little carried away and somewhat off track, so with something more constructive in mind, I would like to introduce new players and reacquaint older ones with my top 4 table top RPG’s and some reasoning behind them.

Mongoose Traveller (1st edition).

A common thread that will run through all of these (semi)reviews is a feeling of GM hackable, low preciousness, seat of your pants amending as you go, that I feel is not only ok, but to a large extent integral to role playing. Role playing by it’s very (ancient) nature is improvisation. This is a two way street in games, with players improvising responses to GM’s improvised obstacles. Nothing puts me off a game more than a “mechanic for everything” game with little or no wriggle room.

Comes with holes? More like comes with opportunities and flexibility.

Very plain, just like the original 3 books in a little box.

It should also be said up front, that MT1 1e is only recently out of print, but is the best “retro clone” of the original Traveller I have used, being more like a second edition of the original than a full remake. If it was published in 1985 it would have fit in well. I could access the original, but I prefer MT 1e for it’s completeness and it is basically the same game.

I will also say, that I have MT 2e and a modern wonder of fine printing and refined rules it is, but it lacks two things.

It does not contain star ship design rules (should that matter-see above?) and more importantly, it does not take me to the roots of my Sci Fi past thematically. It does offer some cool ideas that can be cherry picked to make 1e smoother mechanically, which brings us back to the point above.

MT 2e is neat and tidy, glossy and all too “perfect”. MT 1e is a hackers diary of cohesive, but not “written in stone-pull it apart at your peril” ideas, with lots of simple, but appropriate black and white illustrations on plain paper that invites pencil notes and sticky tabs. The illustrations in particular take me back to my days reading 2000AD comics and Stainless Steel Rat books and trying to portray them myself (my friend Mark who introduced me to the game was way better).

Old school.

More like this please.

Is it a one book solution?

Yes it is. The book has guidelines or actual mechanics to develop worlds, star ships, vehicles, trade goods, develop characters and one of the best mini-game character generation systems ever (including the very real chance of dying) and all the mechanics needed to game these. There are a few things that the 2e core book does better or expands upon, but these can be easily ported over and many stem from commonly known house rules anyway.

Is it relevant?

The original system (that I once owned) dates back to the ‘70’s with a ‘70’s perspective on the future. Technology has obviously moved on, but that all depends on how you look at it. Ever played a “Rocket Man'“ style or a Star Wars themed game? Who says that science (fiction) in a galaxy far far away has to be a continuation of our history. MT 1e has updated some older ideas, but thematically we are still talking people manning ship’s guns, driving vehicles and shooting lasers, not automated systems as is more likely the case in our future. It is a game, a simulation designed to involve, entertain, immerse.

Other stuff.

The system is a basic and very clean 2d6 with mods and a nice little bell-curve. The original game was a little sketchy with a simple 8+ to pass > input GM data here, which was probably taking things a little too far in the “hand wave” direction. MT 1e tightens this up considerably. The idea of Boon/Bane dice, lifted from D & D 5e is not a deal breaker either, as I prefer mods for this game.

The book itself pays homage to the original set of three little black books, but is a larger format hard cover and has some illustrations. The original books lacked any illustrations at all, with the exception of some map sets, adventures and magazine articles. Traveller was illustration free or as I like to say “Imagination maxed”. MT 1e keeps the ‘80’s feel with the art on offer.

There is much more out there (I have a dozen or so pdf’s but no physical books), but to be honest, they are not needed to run a complete and immersive campaign for a lite space opera format or even a hard core “Aliens” style game. Most of the books are just collections of star sectors, star ships, NPC’s and equipment, which are part of the fun of being a GM.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am more likely to play M-Space these days, as I prefer d100 games, and I see it as a positive evolution of the game (more so even than MT 2e). I find the systems cleaner and more flexible than either with the added benefit of compatibility with other d% games and easier character (NPC) generation. The feel of M-Space is also a little more to my liking, ironically down to the sparse art, but that is a personal thing. Something that is not as subjective though is support. M-Space is alive and well supported.

The Curse Of The Progress Tokens

Meg and I have come to a worrying point in our 7WD games.

She has (narrowly) lost 6 of the last 7 games. Of those losses, one was military, three science and the closest others, by points.

Why?

The only difference in our play styles are the Progress tokens.

I rarely play a game where where I ignore them completely and if the “perfect storm” of re-draw options (Hades/The Mausoleum), or wilds (Law Token/Ishtar), comes about then it is a given I will have a crack, at winning a science victory or at least grab a couple of tokens.

To be honest, they are more powerful than even I realised.

Get the Strategy token and warfare is much more effective. Adding one shield each attack usually results in 2-3 more, so if you have say, a 2 shield wonder or God after playing 1-2, 2 or 3 shield cards, then you have won from “0”.

The Engineering token can sometimes be a game breaker. 1 point for any linked cards, applying to all even science and warfare cards, means you have options even late in the game. Add Urbanism and you make money while pressuring your opponent. Almost too mean.

The Architecture and Masonry tokens make building a breeze, paying you back for the lack of resources you likely suffered chasing science tokens.

These are the stronger ones, but even the less appealing ones like Mysticism or Theology can be strong at the right time in the right game (I actually got 12 VP from Mysticism purely by chance one game).

Until Meg gets a handle on taking Tokens or denying them to me, I fear the game has swung in my favour.

Everdell First Game

Actually our second game, but after I poorly explained the not fully understood rules, we cannot count the first one.

View from the top. The board is busy, but clear and after just 2 games, we are feeling pretty comfy with it (except the tree might have to go).

Simple enough to learn, thanks to a very nice and clear rule book, Everdell is deeper than it looks. There is a lot to think about in this game. Comparing it to 7WD, our current staple, it is a bit like playing the third age over and over. This is because not many cards in Everdell are one shot play and forgets and there are a lot of cards. Even the ones that are one use can often be replaced or discarded. Mastering the combinations, synergies and play order is a life’s work and that is the secret.

You start as a any small animal in winter would, thin on resources and options. This does not last long. By the Spring season you will either have something built or be on the way to something pretty big.

I was dealt the Palace and the Queen (honest, I shuffled the decks really well). This is one of those times where you probably wish you knew more about the game, because I doubt I will be this lucky again for a good while. This meant that I did little in Winter except collect resources (poorly), so I could roll these out.

Meg on the other hand build the Storehouse, which turned out to be a real giver.

In Spring, Meg again became the hoarder, I built my Palace, a farm and was well on the way to some other good builds. Meg was ahead of me in both number of builds and resources, so I was hoping that the quality and synergy of mine would pay off.

Lesson learnt; many way to win.

In Summer, we both started to warm into the process. We both missed combinations, but at no point in the game did we feel either left behind or systemically lost. Meg cashed in a stack of stuff, build a bespoke combination of constructions and critters and I added a Carnival, Juggler, Wife and a few others.

In Autumn, I finished badly. I had drawn the Amilla Glistendew Legendary critter card, that I mistakenly played free because I had the Queen (instead of replacing her). My problem, other than unintentionally cheating, was that I had again (like the first game), built all 15 spaces of my city, and a Lookout, way too soon. I still had a three meeples to play and a few resources. I had simply jumped too soon.

The meeples were not a major issue. I had actually qualified for a couple of events and had a few useful cards to place meeples on (some wasted by not having space).

Note to self; “Self, stop filling your city before the middle of Autumn. You have time”.

Meg did not actually fill her city completely, but still played a more balanced game.

Final (adjusted for cheating - minus Queen) Meg 39, Me 42.

We agreed it should be a draw, because of other factors not played through.

Take aways after the game;

Unlike 7WD, this is not a linear game with set processes as much as a “make of it what you can” sandbox style game. Sure there are seasons, mimicking the three ages, but that is really where the comparison ends. In that respect it is closer to Wingspan.

Where it differs (for us) to Wingspan is in the focus. The feeling of connectedness between the various cards, the board and the seasons was much clearer. Wingspan can feel like a bird appreciation excursion mixed with some hard to remember/translate icons and processes, rather than a straight win/lose game. Often the score almost seems irrelevant in Wingspan compared to game play (nothing wrong with that), where 7WD is all about the result.

Everdell for us falls somewhere in the middle. It feels looser, less aggressive or overtly confrontational than 7WD, but much tighter and more focussed than Wingspan. As we play it more, we will get a better handle on where we are at different points in the game, which will likely help us play more decisively and formulate better plans. It is surprising how you feel relatively powerless in the Winter season, then how much you can extract with some thought then and later.

Adding the Legends pack was a calculated risk, that won me the game as it turns out, but it did not feel like it unbalanced anything (see score). If you take out my luck with the Palace/Queen/Glistendew combo, Meg actually won the bulk of the game on effectively her first try. The Extra Extra pack blended in seamlessly.

Our Wonders games are, with few exceptions, very close in points, usually under 10*, mixed in with a few last gasp science or military victories (still lop sided in both). Meg suffered an 80-27 loss recently that we put down to the worst run of luck we have seen.

Everdell controls this well, making it very unlikely your opponent can run away with the game. Even if you are well behind coming into Autumn, this last season can offer almost as many opportunities as the previous three combined. In this way, it reminds us of Catan, which always leaves the door open for a storming come back.

Other thoughts.

The twig icons tend to blend into the art occasionally, but the number is clear, so you don’t miss that there is something there.

The tree is lovely, but dominates the board. We push it off the board, placing the event cards on the “roots” and the meeples still on the tree (at least until we can remember the seasons better).

There is so much, to explore especially for two. In a game we do not tap even half of the deck and in the two games, we came across quite different feeling options. Add this to forest and special event cards and the game has a lot of re-playability as is. Adding the little expansions as I did only made it deeper.

The cards fit into the dispenser-tree and the game insert with sleeves on. Brilliant.

*I even recently won three games in a row with a total spread of less than 10 points and almost lost one to a military victory. When Meg got the initiative back, she thumped me with a decisive military victory.