I hear the tone is quite dark. is this true?

Apparently so.

Quote from: Biscuitician;974534What bothers me enough to give it a pass is that everyone is a mutant.

I'm not sure that's the post apocalypse game I want.

Nothing wrong with that per se. Cup of tea innit.

I don't want to give away any spoilers or argue at all, but there IS a faction in Mutant Year Zero that is not mutated that you can use as pure strain humans, or the equivalent.

One of my hardcore Fantasy Only! players thumbed through my Mutant Year Zero and Gen Lab Alpha core books and was instantly wanting  to play. And the robot as character book is next in line.

Quote from: Biscuitician;975385I hear the tone is quite dark. is this true?

Yes! Pretty dark alright...

Quote from: bat;975953I don't want to give away any spoilers or argue at all, but there IS a faction in Mutant Year Zero that is not mutated that you can use as pure strain humans, or the equivalent.

I heard a sourcebook for pure humans would come out. Is that what you mean? If not, please, tell us more!

Quote from: Itachi;975972I heard a sourcebook for pure humans would come out. Is that what you mean? If not, please, tell us more!

I believe it is coming after the robot book which will be out in November (tentatively).

I really don't want to spoil the setting for any players. But there is a group detailed in the core book that are NPCs but are basically (although not revealed as) non-mutant humans. One could easily tailor them to be PSHs.

Quote from: bat;975984I believe it is coming after the robot book which will be out in November (tentatively).

I really don't want to spoil the setting for any players. But there is a group detailed in the core book that are NPCs but are basically (although not revealed as) non-mutant humans. One could easily tailor them to be PSHs.

Oh sure, now I got it. But then you basically lose the whole Ark premise and everything, which I consider half the fun of the game. A more straight tweak should be simply ignoring mutant powers and metaplot and stating everyone in the ark is human.

I think a sneaky thing to do would be to make this a low power Warhammer 40k type game. Take the faction with no mutants, convert them to a PC choice and make the mutants followers of either various or a single Ruinous Power. Run with the Ark, make it gritty, and make the Rot into Warpstone.

Maybe Nurgle wants to make a plague world and there are plenty of pure humans to corrupt...just don't tell the players that. Don't tell them there are 40k elements, but let them know the radiation is scary and warps things.

I thought the community building mechanics were brilliant. I really didn't like the idea of a playable Slave class.

Quote from: Tetsubo;976388I thought the community building mechanics were brilliant. I really didn't like the idea of a playable Slave class.

I take it no player is forced to play a Slave?

Quote from: Tetsubo;976388I thought the community building mechanics were brilliant. I really didn't like the idea of a playable Slave class.

What bothered you about this? It is also an optional career in Barbarians of Lemuria. All are optional.

I also didn't see the point of the slave class. I can't come up with reasonable reasons for a boss having his/her slave going out on an expedition. It feels tacked.

Quote from: bat;976458What bothered you about this? It is also an optional career in Barbarians of Lemuria. All are optional.

A slave implies an owner. Which can mean one of two things: 1) Another player owns the slave PC or 2) The party is making sure the slave doesn't escape on behalf of the owner back at the Ark. Both of these are morally repugnant situations. That slavery exists isn't the issue. That the player characters are complicit in it's continuation is.  But from a purely survival standpoint taking a slave into the field makes zero sense. You aren't going to arm a slave. An armed slave isn't a slave for very long. Why wouldn't you take a trained adventurer over a laborer? Makes no sense. So I find it morally repugnant that the player's settlement is engaging in the institution of slavery and from a mission standpoint it makes no sense. I would never use the class. And any GM that had slavery in the PC settlement wouldn't have me as a player.

Quote from: Tetsubo;976640...But from a purely survival standpoint taking a slave into the field makes zero sense. You aren't going to arm a slave. An armed slave isn't a slave for very long. Why wouldn't you take a trained adventurer over a laborer? Makes no sense...

Because some people prefer survival (even as a slave) versus death by starvation or at the hands of exile.  Isn't this the basis for slavery, at its heart?  If people do not want to be slaves, they won't be (granted, they may be dead, beaten, or exiled into worse conditions, or even worse). Armed slaves can be disarmed, or killed if necessary.  People are very clever at controlling those who would be controlled.

I'm not trying to sound like an ass, and I understand where you are coming from on a moral level, but people suck.  I also get that you don't want it in your game, but the situation makes perfect, if repugnant, sense to me.

Quote from: Itachi;976485I also didn't see the point of the slave class. I can't come up with reasonable reasons for a boss having his/her slave going out on an expedition. It feels tacked.

I think it's an interesting idea... But more for GM plots.

I think playing as a slave would be an interesting start to a game. The satisfaction of tearing your 'owner's' spine out like the predator would be brilliant. And a  good plot device to make the players out as heroes by trying to liberate an oppressive ark, etc.

But playing it as a constant character with just following orders from another player (without the possibility to ever be free) would be very dull.

Slavery, as a concept though, in a Post Apocalyptic setting makes a lot of sense even if it is very distasteful.