Have yet to see or hear a firsthand account about of the this bad boy in action. Please fill tomes telling me what you have found playing it. What kind of games it does well. What you think it might not do so well. Learning curve. Pitfalls. Your favorite meatloaf recipe.
Thankyou in advance.
I'm curious about this as well, as I've heard about it a couple time online, but I have yet to hear anyone IRL talk about or even seen it for sale.
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=244292
The above thread has in it a bunch of actual play posts concerning the fantasy game my weekly group was playing before we started playtesting stuff this past month.
If any of the threads bring up a question or two, let me know here and I'd be happy to answer.
Sorry, blakkie, I didn't even notice that there were questions in your original post.
Here we go:
Quote from: blakkiePlease fill tomes telling me what you have found playing it. What kind of games it does well.
I have found it does intense fantasy well. The fantasy races included in the book, Orc, Dwarf and Elf are very influenced by Tolkien while the humans have more of a George R.R. Martin vibe to 'em.
Quote from: blakkieWhat you think it might not do so well. Learning curve. Pitfalls.
It is a crunchy game, no doubt and for some people the learning curve is just too intense and they drop it. But it felt like a breath of fresh air to me and the group I play with.
I'd take some time and go through combat with the group, maybe a Duel of Wits and then jump on a campaign with both feet.
Quote from: blakkieYour favorite meatloaf recipe.
Thankyou in advance.
The secret ingredient in the loaf...is love.
You are welcome. Hope that helped.
Looking through those threads it sounds very cool. Thanks Paka. It seems to do really well handling a full, balanced campaign environment (as in with a solid mix of combat, but not combat dominated).
Any idea if you could use firearms in the system, and how much work it would take someone to whip burn that up? That probably sounds like a wierd question. I know it is built fantasy orientated, and combat systems not designed for firearms tend to have problems making the jump. But any thoughts you have, and the background you have with firearms in games, would be appreciated.
http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/index.php?title=Downloads#Under_a_Serpent_Sun
The Under a Serpent Sun setting, downloadable for free above, is a post apocalyptic setting that has guns and gun rules in it.
There is no trouble making the jump, it works really well. I have played Under a Serpent Sun too and the guns work just fine.
Quote from: blakkieHave yet to see or hear a firsthand account about of the this bad boy in action. Please fill tomes telling me what you have found playing it. What kind of games it does well. What you think it might not do so well. Learning curve. Pitfalls. Your favorite meatloaf recipe.
Thankyou in advance.
I genuinely like BW. It has a fantastic lifepath system--the folks I've played with ended up "burning" (creating) a ton of different characters simply because the lifepath choices were so varied and entertaining, and character creation works very hard to help you have a well-defined character.
I agree that it handles Tolkien quite well, and could easily do Martin as well. I tend to stick with the Tolkienesque, however--it's not really my system of choice for really High Fantasy or Pulp Fantasy. There are few systems to compete with it for dealing with human-centric settings, IMO. It may be a bit more work than you want to deal with if you want 16 different races for players to pick from. Not impossible, mind, just not made-to-order.
New players might find pitfalls with the Duel of Wits and the scripted combat. Some folks swear it's intuitive, but it wasn't for me. With combat, I would start with the basic resolution, and as you get more comfortable, add in things like positioning. I find myself not using the Duel of Wits system much at all (and not just because I'm unarmed, har). Aside from these two items, both of which can be simplified, the game isn't too tough to pick up. Gameplay is speeded up and benefits from the philosophy of "let it ride", which cuts down on multiple dice rolls by rolling once for, say a skill like Tracking, and sticking with that roll through the entire scene, rather than re-roll at every point that skill comes up. I might also add the two books are two of the most attractive RPG books I've ever picked up, if you like that sort of thing.
Meatloaf...er...I don't want to give you a bogus recommendation on that one. Not quite my area of expertise. :imsorry:
I've got a question for y'all: what the FUCK are y'all talkin' about? I've never heard of this game at all, ever, before I clicked on this thread.
It is a fantasy RPG.
Here's the URL:
//www.burningwheel.org
Interesting. Doesn't look much like any game I've played before.
Do you know of any good reviews of it?
http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Awards_and_Reviews
Ah, thanks. Didn't see that on the site. :)
I just picked up a copy of Burning Wheel, and as a coincidence found a potential GM for it as well. We're a little bit intimidated by it all though - in some ways (Fight! and the Duel of Wits) it might be the most "crunchy" system I've seen, even if it doesn't have the tons of options in the form of charms or spells like Exalted or D&D. It looks hard to play...and at the same time so very very enticing...
I hope I'll get a chance to try it out soon. We're also arguing some other possible games - Artesia, Unknown Armies or Tri-stat Tekumel.
We gave it a few tries, but the combat engine starts to shake itself apart when fights become something other than pairing off one on one, and the three-phase-scripting tends to slow the flow of things to a stop. Even when we started using an oven timer to keep the slowdown to a minimum it felt like we were playing more of a rock-paper-scissors game, where what hand a player chooses to throw is all that really counts in the end, that character details were secondary to whether paper 1 threw rock, and the GM threw paper or scissors. It's a game lovingly written, that works for some, but it is not for everyone.
It has some excellent stuff, especially in terms of making the best use of a dice pool system. It is also poorly organized and full of malapropisms. It's worth getting if only to hack ideas to another system.
I found the lifepaths kind of meh, because I have three different games that already have them.
What malapropisms are you thinking of? "Exponent"? Because while a bit striking and not on the beaten path of labels i wouldn't catagorize it as absurd. Yes overall the offical lexicon is at first quirky. But for the most part it appears to me he has chosen the naming of things purposefully to evoke a certain mindset. Afterall it is just a name, and not a full description. I would submit that using more common names that are just one of many words in a description actually becomes more misleading because people limit their scope of thought and understanding to the common usage of that word.
Quote from: blakkieWhat malapropisms are you thinking of? "Exponent"? Because while a bit striking and not on the beaten path of labels i wouldn't catagorize it as absurd. Yes overall the offical lexicon is at first quirky. But for the most part it appears to me he has chosen the naming of things purposefully to evoke a certain mindset. Afterall it is just a name, and not a full description. I would submit that using more common names that are just one of many words in a description actually becomes more misleading because people limit their scope of thought and understanding to the common usage of that word.
Exponent has a specific methamatical meaning in the real world that bears no relationship to the mathematical meaning it has in the game. If Exponent was not a numerical value in BW, then that would be OK. As it stands, though, the term is a really, really stupid blunder, to the extent that the reader (based on the 5 people I've given the book to skim, myself, and a handful of others) has to contantly edit the term in his head because, if he thinks it's the normal definition, he can actually make errors in learning and using the system.
The term was a stupid, stupid idea. I mean, would you think it was stylishly acceptable for me to call my version of environmental penalties to die rolls "multipliers," because that sounds extra fancy? No -- because it would be stupid for exactly the same reason "exponent" is stupid.
Anyway, this doesn't change the fact that the game is still worth getting. Malapropisms (intentional and otherwise) are actually the smallest problems. BW is hideously organized and its format is horrible for ease of use at the table. Parts of the game are bloated without any return, and the advice about when to roll dice is hideously misplaced. The fact that I *still* recommend this game is indicative of the gems to be found in it, from combat and social ties to its take on fantasy species. Great stuff.
Ah, it is a dictionary/vocabulary problem then. ;) There was a meaning before mathematics coopted it, and it certainly still exists. Besides in the vein of the mathematical meaning it isn't particularly wrong at all. It is actually quite insightful.
I'm curious about these multiple combatant problems? Did you look through the threads on the support forum? I haven't played yet, likely not for a couple weeks yet. But so far i've found the biggest thing to wrap your head around is that you aren't certain about your exact position relative to a given opponent (from a combat perspective) until you try act against them or them against you. That is a huge paradigm shift from the highly ordered 5' grid and precisely measured movement rates of D&D. BW seems have more of an air of chaos of battle, sort of capturing the feeling of fog of war as it were while still having crunchy rules to follow.
And the rules do seem quite cruchie in that they provide extensive coverage. They just seem to do so in an aiding instead of imposing way. I don't know, maybe my opinion will change once i play it. *shrug*
Quote from: blakkieAh, it is a dictionary/vocabulary problem then. ;) There was a meaning before mathematics coopted it, and it certainly still exists. Besides in the vein of the mathematical meaning it isn't particularly wrong at all. It is actually quite insightful.
It's wrong both ways. A BW exponent is not a person advocating anything. And the game trait is not a mathematical exponent.
QuoteI'm curious about these multiple combatant problems? Did you look through the threads on the support forum? I haven't played yet, likely not for a couple weeks yet.
That's not my issue. The game is pretty clear about using bloody contests for large combats. I think ranged combat is a bit awkward, but it serves.
QuoteBut so far i've found the biggest thing to wrap your head around is that you aren't certain about your exact position relative to a given opponent (from a combat perspective) until you try act against them or them against you. That is a huge paradigm shift from the highly ordered 5' grid and precisely measured movement rates of D&D. BW seems have more of an air of chaos of battle, sort of capturing the feeling of fog of war as it were while still having crunchy rules to follow.
It's pretty good for that, yeah. You come in with a plan and see how it survives contact with the actual situation.
QuoteAnd the rules do seem quite cruchie in that they provide extensive coverage. They just seem to do so in an aiding instead of imposing way. I don't know, maybe my opinion will change once i play it. *shrug*
As I said, I don't think the ranged combat systems are that hot. The systems for using successes over the threshold are quite good.
Quote from: shooting_diceIt's wrong both ways. A BW exponent is not a person advocating anything. And the game trait is not a mathematical exponent.
Of course it isn't a person, so doesn't it then become obvious to you that it is a personification? Which then fits if you follow to the root word expound. The book is pretty explicit that it isn't intended to be the traditional mathematical definition of exponent, and even gives this too you. Well it doesn't say PERSONIFICATION in big freaking 2" lettering, but really.
As for the mathematical part, when you look at it you see that the power of each additional die is not actually a linear progression. In that way i think it is a better evoking of it's power. That might have been incidental though, couldn't say because I've not asked nor seen anything on it.
All in all it would seem you are taking it far too literally for a label. In that sense that is the point, if you take it too literally you've missed the meaning. But it still has symbolic meaning in that the Exponent is the detail of the rating.
P.S. Sorry, the combat question shouldn't have been for you. It was ment for Scale, and i mixed up the post there. :( I was just curious what he was finding because the combat example I saw on the message board with a 3 vs. 4 didn't seem too bad.