I've decided not to do any more reviews, firstly because I don't really enjoy doing them, and secondly because, well, what do I know, really?
It's a shame really - I've been reading Frostburn, which is really good.
Saturday, 30 October 2004
Wednesday, 27 October 2004
Review: Trojan War
The Mythic Vistas series started really well, with Testament. The only problem with that book was that I would never actually use it, as I felt the material was just a bit too controversial. It continued well, with Skull & Bones, which was slightly less stunning, but was more useful. Since then, the books have been getting gradually worse.
Trojan War is a marvellous return to form. It is set during the war of the same name, of course, and is closer to Testament than any of the other books.
There are only three weaknesses I can see:
1) Out of a sense of completeness, I should point out that the editing here is less good than other Green Ronin books. This is a small complaint, and doesn't really detract from the book as a whole, but since I've complained about editting in Mongoose books, I should do the same here.
2) The book doesn't have stats for the deities. Normally, this would be a good thing, but in the Trojan War, the gods often took human form to fight. Without the stats, this becomes difficult to recreate, and is something of an oversight. It should also be noted that the 'official' stats for the gods (from Deities & Demigods) are of little use here - if Achillies is the most powerful warrior on the field, and is CR 22, there's no way he can stand against a deity with 40 class levels. What is needed is stats of about CR 25-30.
3) Military campaigns can be quite dry. This can make the book a bit limited in use, although there's no real reason you can't use it as a general Bronze Age game.
These flaws detract only slightly from the book as a whole. The high-points are many and powerful: the writing is very good, the mechanics are spot-on, and the expanded mass-battle and piety systems are very well done. These latter two systems are developed from the core in Testament, but have been improved here. The mass battle system, in particular, is perhaps the most useful rules of their type in the book.
This book is highly recommended for those DMs with a use for it. Naturally, it's less useful for DMs who aren't running this sort of a game, although several of the subsystems are useful on their own. Additionally, I should point out that the book is still not quite as good as Testament, but it's probably on a par with Skull & Bones, and is certainly more likely to be used (by me) than Testament.
Trojan War is a marvellous return to form. It is set during the war of the same name, of course, and is closer to Testament than any of the other books.
There are only three weaknesses I can see:
1) Out of a sense of completeness, I should point out that the editing here is less good than other Green Ronin books. This is a small complaint, and doesn't really detract from the book as a whole, but since I've complained about editting in Mongoose books, I should do the same here.
2) The book doesn't have stats for the deities. Normally, this would be a good thing, but in the Trojan War, the gods often took human form to fight. Without the stats, this becomes difficult to recreate, and is something of an oversight. It should also be noted that the 'official' stats for the gods (from Deities & Demigods) are of little use here - if Achillies is the most powerful warrior on the field, and is CR 22, there's no way he can stand against a deity with 40 class levels. What is needed is stats of about CR 25-30.
3) Military campaigns can be quite dry. This can make the book a bit limited in use, although there's no real reason you can't use it as a general Bronze Age game.
These flaws detract only slightly from the book as a whole. The high-points are many and powerful: the writing is very good, the mechanics are spot-on, and the expanded mass-battle and piety systems are very well done. These latter two systems are developed from the core in Testament, but have been improved here. The mass battle system, in particular, is perhaps the most useful rules of their type in the book.
This book is highly recommended for those DMs with a use for it. Naturally, it's less useful for DMs who aren't running this sort of a game, although several of the subsystems are useful on their own. Additionally, I should point out that the book is still not quite as good as Testament, but it's probably on a par with Skull & Bones, and is certainly more likely to be used (by me) than Testament.
Sunday, 24 October 2004
Vampire: the Requiem
Well, I've finished the new Vampire. Interesting read. Here are my thoughts (I'm not going to bother with a chapter-by-chapter breakdown. It's Vampire, but new and shiny).
Firstly, I like the game. A lot. The mechanics (those that are here, rather than the new WoD rulebook) are well handled, consistent, and balanced. The rules also serve the needs of the mood of the game, which is nice. Things like having the Nosferatu clan weakness described in terms of specific effect rather than "Nosferatu are hideously ugly", is nice. When specific rules are needed, they're given (unlike the previous Toreador weakness, which stated that they could be fascinated by beauty, but didn't define what that meant, what actions they could take, and just how it affected them). My biggest griefs with the previous systems (Generation was the be-all and end-all of char-gen for most characters, and could really screw the Dominate-user) have both been fixed.
I really like the division of the clans (only 5: Gangrel, Nosferatu and Ventrue which we know, plus the Daeva, generic sensualist vampires, and Mekhet, the keepers of secrets). I like the use of covenants as "Vampire nations", and the fact that the wacky Tzimisce notions of transcendence are now features of a covenant, where they better belong. I like the notion of the city as a "gilded prison", and like the fact that there's not really any Kindred society above city-level (so, no Camarilla or Sabbat). I really like the fact that the silliness associated with the Sabbat is gone - the game is much more Camarilla in style than the old version. And I like the perceived re-emphasis on playing the game the group wants to play, rather than defining the world and filling it with Metaplot.
There are things I don't like, however. I dislike bloodlines, for the same reasons I did previously (although they're a bit better here, since they seem to be more confined to appropriate niches, and not just excuses for really cool disciplines). I really dislike the use of Brujah (sorry, Bruja), Malkavians (sorry, Malkovians) and Toreador as bloodlines. One of the things I liked about the notion of starting again was that the game could, well, start again.
The other problem I have with the game, which is specific to experienced groups, is that it will probably be quite hard to get a game going. Most of the concepts are most easily explained by saying, "well, it's quite like the old XX", where XX is a clan, sect, or whatever. However, if you do that, you'll just end up playing the same game in the same way, which rather defeats the purpose of a new version. Plus, if an experienced player is creating a Gangrel, you know what you'll be getting, despite the fact that a game with only 5 clans requires each to be a lot wider in scope than one with 13.
On balance, this is probably the best version of Vampire to date. It's certainly better than Revised, but probably on a par with the 2nd Edition in terms of setting. The mechanics are a lot better, however, which gives it the edge. I just don't know how easy it would be to get a good play experience out of it with the current group. And that's the real test, isn't it?
Anyway, next on my list is Green Ronin's "Trojan War", which should make for a fairly effective change of topic.
Firstly, I like the game. A lot. The mechanics (those that are here, rather than the new WoD rulebook) are well handled, consistent, and balanced. The rules also serve the needs of the mood of the game, which is nice. Things like having the Nosferatu clan weakness described in terms of specific effect rather than "Nosferatu are hideously ugly", is nice. When specific rules are needed, they're given (unlike the previous Toreador weakness, which stated that they could be fascinated by beauty, but didn't define what that meant, what actions they could take, and just how it affected them). My biggest griefs with the previous systems (Generation was the be-all and end-all of char-gen for most characters, and could really screw the Dominate-user) have both been fixed.
I really like the division of the clans (only 5: Gangrel, Nosferatu and Ventrue which we know, plus the Daeva, generic sensualist vampires, and Mekhet, the keepers of secrets). I like the use of covenants as "Vampire nations", and the fact that the wacky Tzimisce notions of transcendence are now features of a covenant, where they better belong. I like the notion of the city as a "gilded prison", and like the fact that there's not really any Kindred society above city-level (so, no Camarilla or Sabbat). I really like the fact that the silliness associated with the Sabbat is gone - the game is much more Camarilla in style than the old version. And I like the perceived re-emphasis on playing the game the group wants to play, rather than defining the world and filling it with Metaplot.
There are things I don't like, however. I dislike bloodlines, for the same reasons I did previously (although they're a bit better here, since they seem to be more confined to appropriate niches, and not just excuses for really cool disciplines). I really dislike the use of Brujah (sorry, Bruja), Malkavians (sorry, Malkovians) and Toreador as bloodlines. One of the things I liked about the notion of starting again was that the game could, well, start again.
The other problem I have with the game, which is specific to experienced groups, is that it will probably be quite hard to get a game going. Most of the concepts are most easily explained by saying, "well, it's quite like the old XX", where XX is a clan, sect, or whatever. However, if you do that, you'll just end up playing the same game in the same way, which rather defeats the purpose of a new version. Plus, if an experienced player is creating a Gangrel, you know what you'll be getting, despite the fact that a game with only 5 clans requires each to be a lot wider in scope than one with 13.
On balance, this is probably the best version of Vampire to date. It's certainly better than Revised, but probably on a par with the 2nd Edition in terms of setting. The mechanics are a lot better, however, which gives it the edge. I just don't know how easy it would be to get a good play experience out of it with the current group. And that's the real test, isn't it?
Anyway, next on my list is Green Ronin's "Trojan War", which should make for a fairly effective change of topic.
Sunday, 17 October 2004
Quality of DMs
I was talking with Martin earlier, who was busy recounting some more of his horror stories from games across the Atlantic. Needless to say, this got me to thinking about the quality of DMs generally, and the qualities that make for a good DM. I'm going to suggest three.
It should be noted that being prepared is not an inherent quality in a good DM. Some DMs work best with full notes, some with minimal preparation. It all depends on the DM*.
I think the three qualities of a good DM are: rules mastery, story mastery, and table mastery.
Rules mastery is pretty obvious. A bad DM will have a hazy knowledge of the rules, or worse will apply the rules in an unbalanced manner (balance between players, of course; there's little harm in changing the PC/monster balance, as long as you know what you're doing). A good DM will know the rules well, and be able to find anything he doesn't know quickly. A great DM will know both the rules, and also when not to apply the rules, which is a key, and much overlooked, skill. The best DMs will make it all look seamless, of course.
Story mastery is the knowledge of mood, theme, plotting, structure, and also the needs for things to seem realistic (they don't need to actually be realistic - but the world needs to make as much sense as the players expect). A bad DM will structure his campaign as a never-ending series of combats (yes, I've done that), or make rulings that make no sense for the story (rules that one group of PCs desecrate the bodies of their foes while another is discussing a truce with the survivors of that group - when the players state "we'll make sure they're dead", rather than specifying how they do this.) A good DM will include opportunities for role-playing and character development, provide some sort of impetus for PC actions, and ensure that things keep running. A great DM will have a plot structure mapped out, but will be ready to take the game in an entirely different direction if and when the PCs do something unexpected. The best DMs will be ready to put away the dice to just let the story flow when needed.
Table mastery is to do with the control of everything outside the game. This includes making sure players know when and if he's going to miss a game, make sure that group actually gels (and we don't have a player so disruptive that others are walking away from the game), and sets the policy for what happens when a player can't make it. This is a delicate process - the DM must ensure that he's working with the players to keep things flowing, and he must always make sure he's on the same wavelength as the host of the game as far as such things are concerned (after all, the host can always trump the DM on the issue of who is and is not invited to the game).
A bad DM will be oblivious to problems at the table, refuse to take action if a player is out of action, or be overly quick to action where there actually is not a problem. A good DM will make sure everyone knows what's happening, and will pro-actively deal with problems (and yes, I know "pro-active" is now a dirty word. It's also the right word for this situation. Sorry). A great DM just won't have these sorts of problems - he's so on top of matters that any problem will be flagged up long before it becomes an issue, and dealt with. (Of course, that could also be the result of having a great group of players. The difference will be obvious in the rest of the game.)
Sadly, I think the standard of DMing is probably very low in general. I base this on the fact that most people in the world are fairly incompetent. Sad, but true, and not limited to gaming.
Right, now tell me which areas of DM skill I've forgotten, tell me I'm an arse, or something. I'm getting lonely here :-)
* There's a caveat to that. Some systems, notably rules-heavy systems that really reward preparation. d20 simply requires more preparation that Storyteller, for instance. (That said, if using pregenerated adventures, even that rule is flexible - but extensive use of pre-gens is only an option for D&D and a very few other games.)
It should be noted that being prepared is not an inherent quality in a good DM. Some DMs work best with full notes, some with minimal preparation. It all depends on the DM*.
I think the three qualities of a good DM are: rules mastery, story mastery, and table mastery.
Rules mastery is pretty obvious. A bad DM will have a hazy knowledge of the rules, or worse will apply the rules in an unbalanced manner (balance between players, of course; there's little harm in changing the PC/monster balance, as long as you know what you're doing). A good DM will know the rules well, and be able to find anything he doesn't know quickly. A great DM will know both the rules, and also when not to apply the rules, which is a key, and much overlooked, skill. The best DMs will make it all look seamless, of course.
Story mastery is the knowledge of mood, theme, plotting, structure, and also the needs for things to seem realistic (they don't need to actually be realistic - but the world needs to make as much sense as the players expect). A bad DM will structure his campaign as a never-ending series of combats (yes, I've done that), or make rulings that make no sense for the story (rules that one group of PCs desecrate the bodies of their foes while another is discussing a truce with the survivors of that group - when the players state "we'll make sure they're dead", rather than specifying how they do this.) A good DM will include opportunities for role-playing and character development, provide some sort of impetus for PC actions, and ensure that things keep running. A great DM will have a plot structure mapped out, but will be ready to take the game in an entirely different direction if and when the PCs do something unexpected. The best DMs will be ready to put away the dice to just let the story flow when needed.
Table mastery is to do with the control of everything outside the game. This includes making sure players know when and if he's going to miss a game, make sure that group actually gels (and we don't have a player so disruptive that others are walking away from the game), and sets the policy for what happens when a player can't make it. This is a delicate process - the DM must ensure that he's working with the players to keep things flowing, and he must always make sure he's on the same wavelength as the host of the game as far as such things are concerned (after all, the host can always trump the DM on the issue of who is and is not invited to the game).
A bad DM will be oblivious to problems at the table, refuse to take action if a player is out of action, or be overly quick to action where there actually is not a problem. A good DM will make sure everyone knows what's happening, and will pro-actively deal with problems (and yes, I know "pro-active" is now a dirty word. It's also the right word for this situation. Sorry). A great DM just won't have these sorts of problems - he's so on top of matters that any problem will be flagged up long before it becomes an issue, and dealt with. (Of course, that could also be the result of having a great group of players. The difference will be obvious in the rest of the game.)
Sadly, I think the standard of DMing is probably very low in general. I base this on the fact that most people in the world are fairly incompetent. Sad, but true, and not limited to gaming.
Right, now tell me which areas of DM skill I've forgotten, tell me I'm an arse, or something. I'm getting lonely here :-)
* There's a caveat to that. Some systems, notably rules-heavy systems that really reward preparation. d20 simply requires more preparation that Storyteller, for instance. (That said, if using pregenerated adventures, even that rule is flexible - but extensive use of pre-gens is only an option for D&D and a very few other games.)
Wednesday, 6 October 2004
Victory! (I mean "Review: d20 Future")
An age ago, I thought to myslef "I'll just quickly read d20 Future, then tackle the new Vampire". How silly - I should have known d20 Future would take ages to get through.
This is a 224-page hardback book from Wizards of the Coast, done in glorious full-colour. It's a companion piece to d20 Modern, discussing the future, in all its many guises. This includes realistic, near-realistic, and fantastic visions of the future. It tries to do a great deal, and this loose focus is both a great strength and a great weakness.
There are thirteen chapters and an Introduction. The Intor presents the key feature of the book, that allows it to cover all possible futures - the Progress Level, which is a simple measure of the advancement of a society. According to the book, we are currently either late in the Industrial Age (PL4) or early in the Information Age (PL5). The highest PL is 9, at which point much of the technology described is essentially magic, which seems fitting.
Chapter 1 deals with Characters, presenting the usual raft of Advanced Classes, Occupations and Feats for a future game. These are okay, but nothing special. The highlights are the feats, of course. The chapter runs to 28 pages, 20 of which are Advanced Classes.
Chapter 2 describes Campaigns, and in many ways is the meat of the book. There are eight campaign models here: Bughunters (Aliens), Dimension X (Sliders), From the Dark Heart of Space (eh, X-Files meets Resident Evil meets Event Horizon?), Genetech (Dark Angel; this first appeared in Dungeon magazine), Mecha Crusade (the Singularity Campaign, this first appeared in Dungeon), Star*Drive (a revival of an old TSR campaign setting), Star Law (um, there was a Gerry Anderson TV series that was just like this, but I can't think what it was called. Cops in space is what it is) and The Wasteland (Mad Max).
The campaign models are good, giving a flavour of each aspect of the book, and providing lots of good motivations for campaigns. I like this a lot. The chapter runs to 22 pages, 6 of which are filled with material reprinted from other sources.
Chapter 3 deals with gear, and seems mostly plausible. One neat idea is the "item template", which is a feature or set of features that can be added to otherwise notmal gear to make it better, or to adapt it to the appropriate PL for the game. This expands the utility both of the equipment here, and also elsewhere, at the cost of very little space. This chapter is also 22 pages. I like it, but as with all other visions of the future, it will look really silly in 5 years, when much of this either exists, or has no chance of ever existing.
Chapter 4 deals with Environments, detailing such hazards as radiations sickness, gravitation, atmospheric effects, and star systems. The only problem I have with this is that, at 6 pages, it's too short.
Chapter 5 discusses Scientific Engineering, and is the point at which the book starts to drag. In 12 pages, it discusses genetics, cloning, nanotech and matter replication. Some of this stuff is okay, some of it is really far fetched (sorry, I just don't believe in Star Trek replicators, and won't until I own one), and I'm pretty sure I spotted a couple of glaring scientific errors. Still, it's not too bad. The biggest weakness here, and one that's carried on in the rest of the book, is that they don't call out what is reasonable expectations based on current science, what is wild conjecture, and what's pure fantasy made up to make a better game. If this book is to be used for all sorts of games, that should have been done.
Chapter 6 is Traveller Science, and covers all means of getting about. It described realistic and fantastic space travel, both between planets and stars, dimensional travel (a la Ace Rimmer) and time travel. One thing it does not cover, and really should, is realistic interstellar travel in the absence of faster-than-light drives. Whether through the use of stasis, cold-sleep or generational ships, mankind will eventually reach the stars, unless we're wiped out first. There are several good games that can be based on such a setting (mostly one-offs, I'll grant), and it would have been nice to have seen those covered.
Chapter 7 deals with Starships (38 pages), chapter 9 with Mecha (22 pages), chapter 10 with Robotics (18 pages) and chapter 11 with Cybernetics (8 pages). Each discusses what is possible at each PL, the appropriate rules for each system, and then provides a bunch of samples, both in parts and completed units. Nice features include the starship templates (which work just like monster templates in D&D), and the entire robotics chapter. Oh, and the cybernetics rules are very nice, too, if rather more generous that I'd be around the whole issue of post-op care.
Weak areas are as follows: The startship combat rules are lifted from Star Wars revised, and while they don't entirely suck (and have been improved since that game, I think), they allow heroes far too little impact on the performance of their fighter craft, and far too much impact on the performance of larger ships. Basically, the pilot can apply his Defense bonus to the ship he's flying, but not his hit points. Which means that Luke died long before entering the Death Star trench, and that the Enterprise is impossible to hit with Sulu at the helm. Sorry, I don't like it.
The various construction systems are weak, too. A single character can theoretically put together a Death Star in his local mechanic's workshop. He can theoretically put it together without, in fact, and only takes a -4 penalty on the Craft roll!
Finally, the game needs more cyberware, and needs some thought put into the question of whether cyber eyes with built-in targetting and zoom and infra read count as one implant, four implants, of something in between. One seems too lenient and four way too harsh (that's the default number, by the way).
Chapter 8 deals with vehicles, in 6 pages, and covers hovercars and bike, and also the wonderful hoverboard. Very nicely, the hoverboard uses the Tumble skill in place of Drive. I like this.
Chapter 12 deals with Mutations, in 10 pages, and steals liberally from Dungeon's version of Gamma World. The rules are therefore a little wonky, although they seem to work not too badly. You can't build the Hulk with them, but if that's what you want, play Mutants & Masterminds.
Chapter 13 deals with Xenobiology, in 13 pages. It discussed using Monster Manual creatures as aliens, provides two "alien" templates, and then provides eight non-human PC races, probably from the Star*Drive setting. This chapter is alright, but nothing special.
The great strength of this book is its diversity. I can see running lots of games inspired by, or at least featuring, stuff from this book. However, the great weakness of this book is its diversity. By covering so much ground, the book fails to cover much of it satisfactorally. The Starship rules are pretty complete (and I don't think they need too many house rules). The Mecha and Robotics rules are really good, and the Traveller Science is probably just enough for what's needed. The rest is a very solid foundation, but probably not enough to run any game that's not directly taken from one of the settings in chapter 2.
Still, a good book, a good buy, and recommended for anyone interested in expanding d20 Modern to the future.
Next up: my long-awaited review of Vampire: the Requiem! (well, long-awaited by me, at least.)
This is a 224-page hardback book from Wizards of the Coast, done in glorious full-colour. It's a companion piece to d20 Modern, discussing the future, in all its many guises. This includes realistic, near-realistic, and fantastic visions of the future. It tries to do a great deal, and this loose focus is both a great strength and a great weakness.
There are thirteen chapters and an Introduction. The Intor presents the key feature of the book, that allows it to cover all possible futures - the Progress Level, which is a simple measure of the advancement of a society. According to the book, we are currently either late in the Industrial Age (PL4) or early in the Information Age (PL5). The highest PL is 9, at which point much of the technology described is essentially magic, which seems fitting.
Chapter 1 deals with Characters, presenting the usual raft of Advanced Classes, Occupations and Feats for a future game. These are okay, but nothing special. The highlights are the feats, of course. The chapter runs to 28 pages, 20 of which are Advanced Classes.
Chapter 2 describes Campaigns, and in many ways is the meat of the book. There are eight campaign models here: Bughunters (Aliens), Dimension X (Sliders), From the Dark Heart of Space (eh, X-Files meets Resident Evil meets Event Horizon?), Genetech (Dark Angel; this first appeared in Dungeon magazine), Mecha Crusade (the Singularity Campaign, this first appeared in Dungeon), Star*Drive (a revival of an old TSR campaign setting), Star Law (um, there was a Gerry Anderson TV series that was just like this, but I can't think what it was called. Cops in space is what it is) and The Wasteland (Mad Max).
The campaign models are good, giving a flavour of each aspect of the book, and providing lots of good motivations for campaigns. I like this a lot. The chapter runs to 22 pages, 6 of which are filled with material reprinted from other sources.
Chapter 3 deals with gear, and seems mostly plausible. One neat idea is the "item template", which is a feature or set of features that can be added to otherwise notmal gear to make it better, or to adapt it to the appropriate PL for the game. This expands the utility both of the equipment here, and also elsewhere, at the cost of very little space. This chapter is also 22 pages. I like it, but as with all other visions of the future, it will look really silly in 5 years, when much of this either exists, or has no chance of ever existing.
Chapter 4 deals with Environments, detailing such hazards as radiations sickness, gravitation, atmospheric effects, and star systems. The only problem I have with this is that, at 6 pages, it's too short.
Chapter 5 discusses Scientific Engineering, and is the point at which the book starts to drag. In 12 pages, it discusses genetics, cloning, nanotech and matter replication. Some of this stuff is okay, some of it is really far fetched (sorry, I just don't believe in Star Trek replicators, and won't until I own one), and I'm pretty sure I spotted a couple of glaring scientific errors. Still, it's not too bad. The biggest weakness here, and one that's carried on in the rest of the book, is that they don't call out what is reasonable expectations based on current science, what is wild conjecture, and what's pure fantasy made up to make a better game. If this book is to be used for all sorts of games, that should have been done.
Chapter 6 is Traveller Science, and covers all means of getting about. It described realistic and fantastic space travel, both between planets and stars, dimensional travel (a la Ace Rimmer) and time travel. One thing it does not cover, and really should, is realistic interstellar travel in the absence of faster-than-light drives. Whether through the use of stasis, cold-sleep or generational ships, mankind will eventually reach the stars, unless we're wiped out first. There are several good games that can be based on such a setting (mostly one-offs, I'll grant), and it would have been nice to have seen those covered.
Chapter 7 deals with Starships (38 pages), chapter 9 with Mecha (22 pages), chapter 10 with Robotics (18 pages) and chapter 11 with Cybernetics (8 pages). Each discusses what is possible at each PL, the appropriate rules for each system, and then provides a bunch of samples, both in parts and completed units. Nice features include the starship templates (which work just like monster templates in D&D), and the entire robotics chapter. Oh, and the cybernetics rules are very nice, too, if rather more generous that I'd be around the whole issue of post-op care.
Weak areas are as follows: The startship combat rules are lifted from Star Wars revised, and while they don't entirely suck (and have been improved since that game, I think), they allow heroes far too little impact on the performance of their fighter craft, and far too much impact on the performance of larger ships. Basically, the pilot can apply his Defense bonus to the ship he's flying, but not his hit points. Which means that Luke died long before entering the Death Star trench, and that the Enterprise is impossible to hit with Sulu at the helm. Sorry, I don't like it.
The various construction systems are weak, too. A single character can theoretically put together a Death Star in his local mechanic's workshop. He can theoretically put it together without, in fact, and only takes a -4 penalty on the Craft roll!
Finally, the game needs more cyberware, and needs some thought put into the question of whether cyber eyes with built-in targetting and zoom and infra read count as one implant, four implants, of something in between. One seems too lenient and four way too harsh (that's the default number, by the way).
Chapter 8 deals with vehicles, in 6 pages, and covers hovercars and bike, and also the wonderful hoverboard. Very nicely, the hoverboard uses the Tumble skill in place of Drive. I like this.
Chapter 12 deals with Mutations, in 10 pages, and steals liberally from Dungeon's version of Gamma World. The rules are therefore a little wonky, although they seem to work not too badly. You can't build the Hulk with them, but if that's what you want, play Mutants & Masterminds.
Chapter 13 deals with Xenobiology, in 13 pages. It discussed using Monster Manual creatures as aliens, provides two "alien" templates, and then provides eight non-human PC races, probably from the Star*Drive setting. This chapter is alright, but nothing special.
The great strength of this book is its diversity. I can see running lots of games inspired by, or at least featuring, stuff from this book. However, the great weakness of this book is its diversity. By covering so much ground, the book fails to cover much of it satisfactorally. The Starship rules are pretty complete (and I don't think they need too many house rules). The Mecha and Robotics rules are really good, and the Traveller Science is probably just enough for what's needed. The rest is a very solid foundation, but probably not enough to run any game that's not directly taken from one of the settings in chapter 2.
Still, a good book, a good buy, and recommended for anyone interested in expanding d20 Modern to the future.
Next up: my long-awaited review of Vampire: the Requiem! (well, long-awaited by me, at least.)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)