Anyone familiar with both the Mongoose version (not the D20 version, the later game based on the actual gamebooks) and the Cubicle 7 version? From what I've seen, they aren't that different. It looks to me like Cubicle 7's version is pretty similar to Mongoose's, just in a prettier package.
How does the C7 game differ from Mongoose's?
Not familiar with this particular game, but IME if it's Mongoose vs. something else, something else is usually better (at least as far as layout, proofing, etc. go).
Quote from: Technomancer;883436Anyone familiar with both the Mongoose version (not the D20 version, the later game based on the actual gamebooks) and the Cubicle 7 version? From what I've seen, they aren't that different. It looks to me like Cubicle 7's version is pretty similar to Mongoose's, just in a prettier package.
How does the C7 game differ from Mongoose's?
Well the game systems are completely different and totally unrelated. The Mongoose version was D20 System-based, while the C7 version builds (very cleverly) on the mechanics used in the original Lone Wolf solo gamebooks. The two games are completely different in their approach; C7's adventure game being deliberately focused on playing Kai lords (but a lot of alternate character types are covered in the first supplement, Heroes of Magnamund).
The C7 game is actually two games in one - it has "basic" and "advanced" rules, so to speak. It's very well written and is lavishly illustrated, in a very good-looking and sturdy box which is full of stuff. But it's more than just a nostalgia trip - it's an excellent game in itself, IMHO the best iteration of the Lone Wolf universe in RPG form you could expect.
Was there actually another version from Mongoose than the d20 one?
I'm not overly familiar with Mongoose's Lone Wolf game but I backed the Kickstarter for Cubicle 7's version and so far the material did not disappoint.
Quote from: Minotaurians;883448Well the game systems are completely different and totally unrelated. The Mongoose version was D20 System-based, while the C7 version builds (very cleverly) on the mechanics used in the original Lone Wolf solo gamebooks. The two games are completely different in their approach; C7's adventure game being deliberately focused on playing Kai lords (but a lot of alternate character types are covered in the first supplement, Heroes of Magnamund).
The C7 game is actually two games in one - it has "basic" and "advanced" rules, so to speak. It's very well written and is lavishly illustrated, in a very good-looking and sturdy box which is full of stuff. But it's more than just a nostalgia trip - it's an excellent game in itself, IMHO the best iteration of the Lone Wolf universe in RPG form you could expect.
Thanks for replying, but I specifically said I wasn't asking about Mongoose's D20 version, but rather the version that Mongoose put out several years later (called the Lone Wolf Multiplayer Game), the rules of which were taken directly from the original gamebooks (with modifications and additions to facilitate group/tabletop play).
The basic game of the C7 game and the Mongoose version are similar, though there is a slight improvement in C7. The advanced C7 version is quite different and much like Advanced Fighting Fantasy is to Fighting Fantasy. It adds considerable additional material with layers of skills and special abilities that make it a more robust RPG.
I liked Fighting Fantasy better.
I'd compare the game authors rather than the game publishers.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;883972I'd compare the game authors rather than the game publishers.
How do you mean?
I just use Bushido when I want some Lone Wolf & Cub action. There's an official game for it now?
The OP is talking about the RPG based on Joe Dever's Lone Wolf, the solo gamebooks.
Quote from: RPGPundit;883968I liked Fighting Fantasy better.
But they aren't mutually exclusive. I find my enjoyment of both to be complimentary even.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;883972I'd compare the game authors rather than the game publishers.
The authors are much the same across all three iterations so far.
Quote from: Skywalker;884598The OP is talking about the RPG based on Joe Dever's Lone Wolf, the solo gamebooks.
Oh well. I'm sure that's nearly as good.
Quote from: Skywalker;884599But they aren't mutually exclusive. I find my enjoyment of both to be complimentary even.
Of course! I played a few of the Lone Wolf books.
If people want to try some Lone Wolf nostalgia then check out Project Aon (https://www.projectaon.org/en/Main/Books). They host all the books with Joe Dever's permission.
Quote from: RPGPundit;883968I liked Fighting Fantasy better.
Fighting Fantasy was quick and easy, but Lone Wolf (the stuff actually written by Dever, at least) had considerably more depth, not just in the system, but in the actual story itself. You can go quite a few pages at times without a decision, and he's actually a pretty decent writer and story-teller.
The very first book was pretty light and simple, but improved dramatically from there. Further, I frequently felt that I was actually making important moral decisions at times, weighing up the cost of my actions vs the cost of failure.
To the topic at hand, I've never even seen the C7 version, but I found the Mongoose D20 version did an excellent job. The lack of feats was also refreshing, although I didn't realise it until I started running Conan d20 and was puzzled why it suddenly felt like so much effort to stat up NPCs. Eventually, I realised how much work I'd been saved by the fact that Lone Wolf replaced all feats with class abilities.
The actual, original gamebooks are also
extremely gameable in a tabletop setting (with whatever rules you want to use), if you take the time to go through them and convert the plot. Unfortunately, it can take quite a bit of work if you want to adhere to the full storyline in each book rather than just adapting the broad strokes.
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;885352Fighting Fantasy was quick and easy, but Lone Wolf (the stuff actually written by Dever, at least) had considerably more depth, not just in the system, but in the actual story itself. You can go quite a few pages at times without a decision, and he's actually a pretty decent writer and story-teller.
The very first book was pretty light and simple, but improved dramatically from there. Further, I frequently felt that I was actually making important moral decisions at times, weighing up the cost of my actions vs the cost of failure.
Also, the fact that it was a continuous story and you played the same character from book to book added to my enjoyment (I actually liked the Grey Star books better, they seemed darker and scarier).
I enjoyed Lone Wolf for a while, but the later books put me off a little with the Darklords' submarines and trains.
Fighting Fantasy rocked too, though. I enjoyed the tabletop version of that as well.
Now if we could just get a Way of the Tiger tabletop RPG, all my childhood dreams would be fulfilled*.
*Well, not all
Well, there was also the "Sorcery!" books, which were set on Titan (same world as Fighting Fantasy) and were sort of halfway between the complexity of FF and Lone Wolf.
Quote from: RPGPundit;885706Well, there was also the "Sorcery!" books, which were set on Titan (same world as Fighting Fantasy) and were sort of halfway between the complexity of FF and Lone Wolf.
With a very nifty spellcasting system, as I recall.
Quote from: RPGPundit;885706Well, there was also the "Sorcery!" books, which were set on Titan (same world as Fighting Fantasy) and were sort of halfway between the complexity of FF and Lone Wolf.
True, those were good as well. I've use the Sorcery! spell book with the Fighting Fantasy Introductory Roleplaying Game (the earlier tabletop version (http://www.fightingfantasy.com/index.php?%20option=com_content&view=article&id=77&Itemid=37) that preceded AFF) to expand the spells available.
I came across this article recently which focussed on hand-held CRPGs and considered game books to be their progenitor: The history of handheld rpgs: part one (http://toucharcade.com/2015/09/03/rpg-reload-presents-the-history-of-handheld-rpgs-part-one/).
It's a real blast from the past!
Cool.
Quote from: Technomancer;885729True, those were good as well. I've use the Sorcery! spell book with the Fighting Fantasy Introductory Roleplaying Game (the earlier tabletop version (http://www.fightingfantasy.com/index.php?%20option=com_content&view=article&id=77&Itemid=37) that preceded AFF) to expand the spells available.
AFF2e has full rules for using Sorcery spells and has even reprinted that spellbook with the AFF stats contained therein.