TheRPGSite

I know that it has lizard people and rock people. I know that there's some magical radiation made by dwarves that made every build dungeons. I know somehow circles are involved instead of levels. I know that FASA published it a decade and a half ago. Otherwise, the thing is a complete mystery to me.

How does it differ from a fantasy heartbreaker (or is it one)? What makes it an interesting setting? How differently from say, D&D does it feel in play?

How different from which "D&D"? There are like seven of them.

Anyway the bulk of my personal experiance with D&D is AD&D 1e. It felt very different. It had talents, which are quite a bit like feats actually. At the time D&D didn't have any of that. It had a mad funky dice system that brought all the crazy polyhedrons into play- and was just plain fun to use. Combat was a blast. It had more races than 1e. It had well thought out reasons for the existance of dungeons. Everyone in my group loved it. I'm looking at my 1st edition ED hardcover right now- We used the fuck out of it; today, it is held together by packing tape across the spine.

Definitely not a fantasy heartbreaker.  It's post-Cthulhu-pocalypse D&D.  A well written setting meshed to a well designed, if intimidating, system.

The setting is weird though.  I like how it's presented in the core book and in a small handful of the supplements.  But somewhere along the line I felt that it really "lost the plot" as it devolved into a struggle of plucky Rebels vs. evil Empire, rather than concentrate on the more horrific elements and smaller scale survival in a ravaged land.  I suppose I might've been in the minority.

Its system is somewhat complex, mechanically.  Lots of numbers and those numbers must first be converted to a handful of dice before you can attempt to accomplish anything. The conversion was simple, but most people had to refer to this intimidatingly large chart showing what "step" value = what dice to roll.  Each die can also "explode", so consistent probabilities weren't exactly easy to determine.  It was a roll over mechanic, btw.

It is a class and level based system, but levels don't work like D&D levels. PCs advance skills and talents individually, during the course of play.  When a PC has a certain number of Talents and Skills at a certain rank, then the PC is promoted to the next circle of their discipline (compare to D&D where you get experience points but don't see any improvement until you "level up").  This is still my favourite class/level system.

The magic system is excellent; crunchy and yet somewhat flexible.  However the (1e) book makes the system seem far more complex than it actually is.    There's an entire chapter dedicated to magical theory that reads like the TimeCube web site.  It hurts just thinking about it.  I refused to play anything but warrior types for a long time simply because I didn't realize you could just ignore that chapter and learn the game mechanics separately.  I'm not sure if that same amount of "fun" is to be had in the new editions of the game. :)

I really used to love this game, but there are other things in the current generation that are superior so I'm unlikely to dust it off and give it a whirl.  IMHO, it was the best example of D&D Done Right, until 3.0 came along.

ED was one version revision away from being fantastic.  Not a heartbreaker though by any means.  It was essentially (not mechanically) the fantasy version of Shadowrun.   If Fasa hadn't tanked it'd still be going.  

I still maintain that the Book of Horrors is still one of the finest Monster Manuals from any system.

Which version of the game would people suggest seeking out for someone looking to get into it?

I've only played the first edition- which is great, and as far as I know has the best art of the three versions. You can get a used copy of the hardcover off amazon for under 20$ (US). I would also pick up the companion. In my opinion the other books are best left alone, except for "Creature's of Barsaive" which is  an okay monster book, just a little heavy on fluff and a bit light on the actual number of monsters (there are like 50 total). The regional and racial suppliments did nothing for me. I have never looked at the "Book of Horrors" though, and it may well be as excellent as Kryyst says.

Also you need a GM screen for this game. The combat and stuff comes pretty easy after a few sessions, but the stuff on the gm screen is really necessary. I don't know if you can find one of those these days though.

I originally got away from the game because, although I liked it a lot, I felt that the setting was too pervasive. As I've said before, you could easily make your own setting, but the book is all Barsaive, Barsaive, Barsaive on like every page, which gets a bit old, really. I ended my Three year ED campaign by dropping a moon onto Barsaive. Felt good.

Quote from: WarthurWhich version of the game would people suggest seeking out for someone looking to get into it?

I suggest the Classic edition by RedBrick (http://stores.lulu.com/redbrick). Trust me, the two core books are enough to keep you gaming forever. They also fixed what needed to be fixed: No more Step calculation in mid-combat! :)

EDIT: Don't forget to check the official website. (http://www.earthdawn.com) You'll find good downloads in there.

Quote from: JongWKI suggest the Classic edition by RedBrick (http://stores.lulu.com/redbrick). Trust me, the two core books are enough to keep you gaming forever. They also fixed what needed to be fixed: No more Step calculation in mid-combat! :)

EDIT: Don't forget to check the official website. (http://www.earthdawn.com) You'll find good downloads in there.

Wow, those look really nice but they are kind of expensive.

Quote from: AosWow, those look really nice but they are kind of expensive.

They are 524 pages each. You can also get them as softcovers for $10 less. If you want them even cheaper, DriveThruRPG.com has the PDF.

Well, IIRC, there are several games that combine somre or all of the concepts D&D 4E is going with. So, I don't think that Earthdawn is the only influence.

Quote from: JongWKThey are 524 pages each. You can also get them as softcovers for $10 less. If you want them even cheaper, DriveThruRPG.com has the PDF.

Oh, I'm not disputing their value. Like I said, they look really nice. I just can't afford a $100.00 layout- or even a 60$ layout for any game right now, much less on one I already own.

Quote from: McrowWell, IIRC, there are several games that combine somre or all of the concepts D&D 4E is going with. So, I don't think that Earthdawn is the only influence.

This is he ED:WTF? thread, you want the other one.:D

Earthdawn Classic actually sounds like a very good revision (http://www.earthdawn.com/index.php?categoryid=25&p2005_articleid=6).  I should've payed attention back when it was released.  I'm now re-intrigued about the game.

Does anyone here have printed copies from Lulu?  I've never bought Lulu products and I'm curious about their quality.  I have a lot of fear about the biding on a 524 page book that costs $50.

Quote from: architect.zeroEarthdawn Classic actually sounds like a very good revision (http://www.earthdawn.com/index.php?categoryid=25&p2005_articleid=6).  I should've payed attention back when it was released.  I'm now re-intrigued about the game.

Does anyone here have printed copies from Lulu?  I've never bought Lulu products and I'm curious about their quality.  I have a lot of fear about the biding on a 524 page book that costs $50.

I have the Redbrick editions of the Players and GMs books. They're nice, solid, sturdy books. I haven't done more than read them and put them back on the shelf, but no signs of weak bindings.

Now, the content is another matter. This was my introduction to the Earthdawn system, after reading lots of stuff on the net about it being D&D done right, rules-medium game, really no harder than D&D, etc. Rules-wise, it's way more complex than its peer 2E D&D. The core mechanics aren't so bad, and I don't find the unique value-generation system difficult at all. It's all the sub-systems grafted onto the core that take it into the realm of rules-heavy. Your players are going to have to read a couple hundred pages to run their PCs.

Then there's the setting material. I bought the Nations of Barsaive book along with the core books, and it's hundreds of pages of background and political fluff. None of the content is written at the level of a boots-on-the-ground encounter. And most of the background and setting detail is political - which is weird considering how geared the PCs are to combat and outdoor survival. All you hear about is how cool Kaers are as dungeons, and yet they don't have a single one in a 300 page setting book. Instead, you get 70 pages on the political wranglings of lizard-man merchant houses.

So after dropping over $150 on Earthdawn books, I have a system that I'd have to dramatically revise and pare down in order to teach my players, and impractical setting material that I cannot use in actual play. Too much work for me.

QuoteDoes anyone here have printed copies from Lulu?  I've never bought Lulu products and I'm curious about their quality.  I have a lot of fear about the biding on a 524 page book that costs $50.

The binding is excellent. I've had the two core books for about six months, and they still look like new. The paper used for the hardcovers is slighty thinner than the one used for the softcovers, but it's still of good quality and the book doesn't look so thick as I feared.

Haffrung, did you buy the GM's Compendium? It has a full kaer in it, and there's another one available for free.

Quote from: HaffrungSo after dropping over $150 on Earthdawn books, I have a system that I'd have to dramatically revise and pare down in order to teach my players, and impractical setting material that I cannot use in actual play. Too much work for me.

As you know, I'm right there with you on the fluff, and I can't really speak to the later iterations of the game, but my players read very little and did just fine with the first edition, and we are by no means a crunch loving crowd. That said, I can't imagine playing ED again, because I would have to relearn the whole thing and I'm not up to it, really.

Quote from: JongWKHaffrung, did you buy the GM's Compendium? It has a full kaer in it, and there's another one available for free.

Sure, there's a sample kaer. But it's not a kaer in the sense of a dungeon - as in a place where you can drop the PCs in their first ED adventure and start playing.

Quote from: HaffrungSure, there's a sample kaer. But it's not a kaer in the sense of a dungeon - as in a place where you can drop the PCs in their first ED adventure and start playing.

:raise:

Kaer Tardim is what you are looking for: It's the one available for free... and it has been so since the game was first released in the '90s. It even comes with pregen characters, etc.

Quote from: HaffrungAnd most of the background and setting detail is political - which is weird considering how geared the PCs are to combat and outdoor survival. All you hear about is how cool Kaers are as dungeons, and yet they don't have a single one in a 300 page setting book. Instead, you get 70 pages on the political wranglings of lizard-man merchant houses.

That perfectly sums up my complaints with the 1e product line.  I'm a bit saddened that they didn't smarten up and focus on the heroic ass-kicking, post-apoc survivalism, and lovecraftian horror elements.  I suppose that one could run a game like that, but it would require conciously ignoring 70% of the background material, if not more.

Still, I might get the players book just to see what's what.  I'm impressed by classic's mechanical clean-up.  It seems much smarter than Earthdawn 2e (which seemed so ill-conceived).

Mechanically speaking my biggest problem with the game is that it seems to have oddball systems for no reason at all.  2nd ed D&D and continuing on into D20, the system has some different rules but at it's heart it's generally roll a D20, +/- a modifier against a target number.  The modifiers are all rather obvious and generally speaking the mechanics do flow rather smoothly.

ED on the other hand you have Abilities that aren't really your stats they are just the stats used to figure out what your step number is, but that step number really isn't your stat it tells you what dice to roll, and it acts more like a saving throw for any ability check.  Then you have several different trackers, to use, for different things and some take points off one tracker, others off another, some off more then one, depending on if it's a skill or an ability, then there is this oddity as to why some things are skills and others are abilities and some are both if you have a magical affinity for it.  It makes some sense in context to the setting, but as a mechanic isolated if you try to rationalize it, it doesn't make sense at all.

I remember when ED was fairly popular at the time, as was Shadowrun the biggest complaint I had, as well as any players I ever played with was why didn't they just use the core Shadowrun rules in ED.   It would have made everything so much simpler.  They could have still kept certain ED like qualities intact, like magic for example.  But just use the Shadowrun Dice Pool system for the default rules and build off of it.

What they did instead is just wonky, with no benefit to it's wonkiness.

Quote from: kryystWhat they did instead is just wonky, with no benefit to it's wonkiness.

I disagree. The wonkiness of the system is what we liked about it. the crazy handfuls of dice brought drama to the table. There is just something cool about rolling crazy assortments like 1d20+1d12+1d4 for damage, especially when you know if you max out on any of the dice you get to re-roll them. There was just this feeling that anything could happen. I can honestly say that the combat encounters were the most fun I ever had with any game as a player or a GM. YMMV, of course.

Quote from: kryystI remember when ED was fairly popular at the time, as was Shadowrun the biggest complaint I had, as well as any players I ever played with was why didn't they just use the core Shadowrun rules in ED.   It would have made everything so much simpler.  They could have still kept certain ED like qualities intact, like magic for example.  But just use the Shadowrun Dice Pool system for the default rules and build off of it.

What they did instead is just wonky, with no benefit to it's wonkiness.

I asked myself the same question back then, as I found it pretty stupid for a game that was touted as being the mythic past of Shadowrun to use a non-compatible ruleset.

But then, FASA was going to enter TSR territory. It is clear that they wanted to present a new rule system while at the same time making D&D players feel "at home".

They wanted to show a more rational, more logical, more "realistic" approach to D&D-like fantasy. So they made a game that offered a reason for dungeons (kaers) and a monster-infested wilderness (horrors), and they even found ways to hard wire D&D staples like classes (disciplines), levels (circles), and spell memorization (matrices) into the setting.
I am pretty sure that the decision to ignore their own dice pool system (SR) in favour of a system that used the standard polyhedrons stems from a wish to make D&D players feel at ease. And of course they needed six abilities with the familiar numerical range of 3-18 - even if that number was essentially useless as it was translated into a corresponding step number, which in turn was translated into a die size...

"We are sooo different from D&D, but look, we've got Vancian magic, too..."

I found that quite pathetic. To me Earthdawn looked like a product from a company that seemed to be far too occupied (even intimidated) by their competition.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke...And of course they needed six abilities with the familiar numerical range of 3-18 - even if that number was essentially useless as it was translated into a corresponding step number, which in turn was translated into a die size...

Hmm... now where have we seen this before?  Let me think...

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke"We are sooo different from D&D, but look, we've got Vancian magic, too..."

I found that quite pathetic. To me Earthdawn looked like a product from a company that seemed to be far too occupied (even intimidated) by their competition.

I never had the impression that ED was trying to be different from D&D; quite the opposite, in fact. I never felt that they were intimidated by D&D either. I think that they perceived a certain amount of disatisfaction among some of the people who played D&D and thought that they could capitalize on it. The game was definitely about trying to make D&D players feel comfortable. Hence the vancian magic, the crazy dice, the combat tables and all that stuff. It was a strategy that worked really well on my group- we were all burned out on 1e and had no interest in 2e, but we still wanted to play a fantasy game. ED was just enough like D&D and just different enough to hook us in. We played it for years and had a really good time with it, nothing pathetic about that at all.

What was the Barsaive setting like? The big selling point seems to be its in-game justifications for RPG staples like dungeons. Was there anything particularly interesting about it other than that feature?

Quote from: AosED was just enough like D&D and just different enough to hook us in. We played it for years and had a really good time with it, nothing pathetic about that at all.

No, I didn't want to rein/rain in/on the parade of anyone who had (or is still having) fun with Earthdawn!

From a publishing/marketing view I found it "pathetic" to create a D&D heartbreaker when they already had their own, functional system - even more so as the setting of their functional system was deeply intertwined to Earthdawn's.

I'd rather have seen a Fantasy Shadowrun. (And I still wonder if that would have been more successful than the Earthdawn that was.)

Quote from: AosI disagree. The wonkiness of the system is what we liked about it. the crazy handfuls of dice brought drama to the table. There is just something cool about rolling crazy assortments like 1d20+1d12+1d4 for damage, especially when you know if you max out on any of the dice you get to re-roll them. There was just this feeling that anything could happen. I can honestly say that the combat encounters were the most fun I ever had with any game as a player or a GM. YMMV, of course.

It's not the combination of dice that are wonky.  It's all the steps you had to go through to figure out what you actually had to roll, and what the target number was.  Also it had the weirdest side effect ever.  The more skilled you got the higher your target number became, yes you were rolling more dice to beat that target number but still it's all just very wonky.

Quote from: kryystIt's not the combination of dice that are wonky.  It's all the steps you had to go through to figure out what you actually had to roll, and what the target number was.

This has been fixed in Classic Edition, by making modifiers a bonus to the dice roll's result, rather than a Step bonus.

Quote from: Dirk RemmeckeNo, I didn't want to rein/rain in/on the parade of anyone who had (or is still having) fun with Earthdawn!

From a publishing/marketing view I found it "pathetic" to create a D&D heartbreaker when they already had their own, functional system - even more so as the setting of their functional system was deeply intertwined to Earthdawn's.

I'd rather have seen a Fantasy Shadowrun. (And I still wonder if that would have been more successful than the Earthdawn that was.)

I see your point, I guess I just don't think in terms of a game company's marketing strategies.

Quote from: kryystIt's not the combination of dice that are wonky.  It's all the steps you had to go through to figure out what you actually had to roll, and what the target number was.  Also it had the weirdest side effect ever.  The more skilled you got the higher your target number became, yes you were rolling more dice to beat that target number but still it's all just very wonky.

Your memory of how it worked is waaaaay better than mine, so I'll have to take your word for it at this point. I just remember that with the GM screen a lot of the number crunching was pretty easy (but ever present), but we may have been doing it wrong.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineWhat was the Barsaive setting like? The big selling point seems to be its in-game justifications for RPG staples like dungeons. Was there anything particularly interesting about it other than that feature?

I think that you'll have to search online for a setting summary because that answer is equal parts complex and dependent on one's taste.

What I found semi-interesting was the blend of lovecraftian style "horror" elements.  Completely alien menaces lurked in the dark corners working their schemes in the background.  Of course, this being a heroic game, the PCs could even (eventually) square off against the horrors directly, and expect to kick their butts, which is something I liked too.

The races were interesting.  Yeah, you've got your Humans, Elves, Dwarves, and Orks, and they're pretty standard.  But the T'Skrang, Obsidimen, and Windlings were each interesting variant races with their own flavour.  Our group thought the T'Skrang were especially cool as they're not your standard "talking alligator" lizardmen.

i remember there being sky corsairs or something too--flying ships as part of the theran empire, maybe?  

fond memories of playing earthdawn.  couldn't really get the magic system, and would never conceive of gm-ing it.   and i thought the rate of advancement was a tad slow.  but the setting overall was pretty unique, and the mechanics different enough.  

i also remember doing a :raise:  :what:  when i found out that it was supposed to be in SR's past.  then trying to figure out where dunkelzahn (is that it?) the dragon fit in barsaive

I loved Earthdawn.  It neatly filled the "Bored With 2e; What Do We Play Next" gap in the nineties for me and my group.  It felt like FASA had taken a D&D game, fixed some of the most annoying elements, and rolled it into an interesting and fun system.  (I know the Step system gets a lot of hate for slowing stuff down, but rolling handfuls of exploding dice is frankly pretty awesome fun sometimes.)

I eventually felt a little crushed under the weight of the setting and the relative fluff/crunch of most of the supplements.  I also thought a few of the rules were more than a bit quirky (e.g. Why can't my Warrior competently use a bow until 3rd circle without spending about a million legend points?)  I thought Karma dice ended up being far more important than they should have been; this in turn made Windlings, Orks, and Humans extremely powerful, while making Obsidimen and Trolls a sucker bet.

On the other hand, some of the stuff is just gorgeous.  The magic system was beautiful, though it ran into some gigantic balance problems past about 5th Circle.  I thought the Karma Rituals were a nice and flavorful way to incorporate both class flavor and the karma points themselves into the game.  I loved the magic items; there weren't any generic items laying around; most of them required personal expenditure of energy.  (Although needing to be 4th circle before using them was a bit rough...)

Finally, although the supplements are nice for flavor, they ended up only giving me about 6 pages of mechanics in a 128 page book (apart from the magic sourcebooks).  I felt like I was paying $20 for crappy fiction (and in some cases, that's exactly what I was doing.)  I was often left with a, "Well, this is nice, but I have no idea how to use it in a game..." feeling.

The metaplot was a little crushing, too, and since it was so tied in with the mechanics, it was kinda rough to divorce it from the system.

Still, I have much love for ED and keep the books on my bookshelf with the material I still use.

-O

Quote from: beeberi remember there being sky corsairs or something too--flying ships as part of the theran empire, maybe?  

Sky Raiders. There was a whole profession (or whatever they were called) for them, and the race most known for the practice were the trolls.

Quotei also remember doing a :raise:  :what:  when i found out that it was supposed to be in SR's past.  then trying to figure out where dunkelzahn (is that it?) the dragon fit in barsaive

I always thought that that was a bit silly, and that it made much more sense for Earthdawn to be in SR's future.

Quote from: RupertI always thought that that was a bit silly, and that it made much more sense for Earthdawn to be in SR's future.

yes!  much better!

i should propose that to the guy in my group who gm'ed ED.  maybe a simple twist like that will inspire him to ref it again.

Quote from: obrynI also thought a few of the rules were more than a bit quirky (e.g. Why can't my Warrior competently use a bow until 3rd circle without spending about a million legend points?)  

They fixed this in Red Brick's Classic Edition in two ways:

First, improving a Skill is easier. It still isn't as fast as a improving Talent, but you can have a character with competent skill ratings.

Second, an Adept can train in a Skill that he will later pick as a Talent, and then merge them. So, if your character won't learn how to use the Melee Weapons Talent until 10th Circle, he can still train in the Melee Weapons Skill, and when he reaches 10th Circle he can turn the Skill into a Talent (there is a table, and it is very possible that the resulting Talent rating is different than that of the Skill).

QuoteI thought Karma dice ended up being far more important than they should have been; this in turn made Windlings, Orks, and Humans extremely powerful, while making Obsidimen and Trolls a sucker bet.

Karma costs are now the same for all races (10 LPs), though the bonus is still different. Then again, I have no problem with the latter...