I don't feel up to doing a full on review, so you all get a meh gloss of a review in general discussion instead. Suck it.
I've always felt like Robin Laws got a lot more gloss on his rep than he ever earned in gaming circles. There, I said it. I've always been underwhelmed by stuff with his name on it, and that includes the original Feng Shui.
Don't get me wrong: of the late nineties era games about recreating Hong Kong Action (including, according to my dim memory of the era, a game called Hong Kong Action (theater?)), it was probably the best... and definitely the most successful. It was fairly light, breezy... the sort of game you don't take too seriously. Since I like me some HK action flicks, though clearly not a much as some folks, I enjoyed the game for what it was, played around with it a bit... but I never really fell in love with it.
Oddly, though, I sorta did fall in love with the setting, and over the years I did a credible job collecting a chunk of the books for it, though nothing like a full set. Some books have slipped through my fingers along the way, leaving me mostly with hazy memories and the original book.
A few things did bother me about FS's rules. One was a personal quibble in that I like to have some significant control over 'my guy'... archetypes are cool as starting points, but eventually I'm gonna want to build my own character, and Feng Shui never supported that... not even to the crap-sack limit set by the original incarnation of Shadowrun. You simply aren't going to be your own character, at least not mechanically. *
The rules that bugged me were just misguided rules, something beyond mere personal gaming tastes... though I can easily find people that enjoy these sorts of rules so its hardly universal.
The randomizer for Feng Shui (something I would note crops up in a lot of Robin Laws projects) is as minimal as possible. A d6 minus another d6, making the 'average' roll a flat 0. This, I find, puts way too much emphasis on the fixed numbers, and in fact makes the range of numbers in FS rather odd. I notice that Robin seems to dislike randomizers in his games... which is a fine philosophy, but until you've got a decent replacement in mind eliminating them (or minimizing them to the extent that Feng Shui did) is a bit... presumptuous.
The second problem I noted was the way characters came to be collections of special minor rules, Feats if you will. Martial arts had complex trees that the gaming den would say were full of 'Tax' feats, forcing you to take useless crap to get to the cool stuff, and gun-fu stuff was more freeform except for stacking necessities. A presumably old and experienced character would have potentially dozens of powers on his sheet, but the original numbers would have hardly budged.
But, for a light, fast pick-up sort of game, which Feng Shui most definitely was, all of these issues were pretty damn minor. You started with a reasonably competent character that you arguably personalized with a few elements of back-story and you played out your own version of HK cinema, complete with mix and match elements and cyborg apes (really? Do those feature heavily in asian cinema? I've never seen 'em, and I'm usually ON the sci-fi jam. Also, monkeys.)
So I got, against my better judgement, Feng Shui 2, mostly because it was there and the local game store in my new locale literally stocks a dozen books total, so you take what you can get.
So the very first thing I notice, before ANYTHING else, is that this is a beast of a book, filled to the brim with words. Lots and lots of words. Mind you, I sorta like words. But when I pick up a game book I really want the meat of the game. I don't want seven hundred and eleventy pages of filler. This book is literally three times the size of the first edition. THREE FUCKING TIMES, people. Mind you, it doesn't SEEM like its any more complex a game, but frankly... as I stare at page after glossy page full of empty filler words telling me nothing about the game or the rules, and often damn little about the setting, I can't find it in myself to care how complex it is.
Now, as of right now my first edition book is half a continent away from me, so I can't really compare the rules that directly, but at a glance not only does it seem like the rules haven't really changed, your already notional characters of Feats have, if anything, appeared to have gotten simpler!
That's right: Famed auteur of modern gaming, Robin D. Laws, has managed to triple the page count while actually gutting an already simple set of rules. Now, some of that gutting may be good... the Martial Arts trees are gone, reducing the number of filler (tax) feats necessary to get to the cool signature powers. On the other hand, I think the archetypes have gotten even MORE inflexible, as most of your discretionary design powers (picking cool feats) has been given back to the designer/writer, rather than the player. I think most archetypes get one starting discretionary pick, rather than the (memory here... so I'm guessing rather than re-reading) the five or six you got in the first edition.
Mind you, I do think you have a few more archetypes that didn't exist before. Post apocalyptic super-mutants being one definite new one, and I think it's easier to get access to sorcery than the old 'eunuchs only' that never really was truly eunuchs only. (actually... I think eunuch sorcerers are automatic bad guys in both editions...).
So what is the bulk of this book, aside from good old Robin loving the sound of his own voice?**
Well.
Metaplot. Oh, I understand first edition had it some metaplot, though god only knows why since the entire premise of the setting (once you got away from recreating Hard Boiled) was that you could, and probably would simply out of brazen stupidity, change the past, present and future, wiping out all that shit involving the future setting anyway (which, ironically, is where the Metaplot seems to have gone down hardest... maybe because if it went down in present day/past settings the players would have been very, very confused by the game?). See, FS2 isn't quite cross compatible with the previous setting books because they pretty much wiped out one of the four time junctions, moved another one seven hundred years for no real reason other than they could, and updated to 2017 Hong Kong from the original's 1996 Hong Kong (despite a vague promise not to do that in the original?), and covering all of those changes for new and old audiences takes up a lot of words. Too many words, really. There's probably a good chapter's worth of information on the personal campaign characters of the original Feng Shui that is meaningless to me, and irrellevant to any player not treating the world of Feng Shui like some RPG version of Game of Thrones. I literally cannot care who Robin Laws's players had as Dragons (the notional Contemporary faction for Player Characters) back in 1996 or how they all were wiped out over the years. I have no fucks to spare for the game designers personal campaign notes. Even those drunk scottish bastards who made SLA Industries had enough sense to restrict the tales of the Kilneck to 'They did a bunch of shit beyond Black Stump' in their backstory, which honestly... given that the Kilneck play literally no part in the setting beyond that sentence... is still a bit much.***
Not only did the future junction change, somehow they wiped out all remanants of the future junction (you know, in case you have the books for the Architects of the Flesh and want to use anything out of them), except for the stupid (yet oddly compelling) cyborg apes... so you get a much less interesting Post-Apoc setting that still somehow has cyborg apes...
Actually... its pretty odd. The original FS may have had a metaplot, but it wasn't really in the main book and to my eyes fairly easy to ignore if you didn't buy adventures. Having the results of twenty years of that metaplot development in FS2 I learn that, nope, it really didn't change anything. Its the least exciting metaplot ever, which is a great thing if, like me, you hate metaplots. I'll be honest, the original future junction wasn't really all that exciting. A bit of 1984 mixed with demonic magi-tech and, well, cyborg apes. I mean: Its not bad, per se... and the demonic magitech and cyborg apes at least should spice things up, but... 1984? Really? That's all you got for a future full of cyborg apes wielding tormented demons turned into rocket launchers? I'm... strangely bored by that, actually. Seriously the best thing about the future setting was they had a handgun called the Godhammer (or maybe Godkiller). What did it do? Well, it was a big handgun with a really cool name.
And that is gone. Why is it gone? Um. Reasons. No more future guns, they all disappeared from all junctions when the future junction sorta changed (but still left the Cyborg Apes). Sigh. Sure, whatever.
For all of that, Mr Laws can't quite restrain himself from waxing on about the now utterly destroyed (in defiance of the rules of the setting, actually) Architects of the Flesh and what they were like from time to time. I was actually quite surprised at how often they showed up in the setting text, seeing as they, and all their works (except... sigh... the cyborg apes) turned to ash across all junctions and in the tran-temporal Netherworld... despite that, you know, not quite being how the setting works when you lose your home junction. Whatever: C-bomb, yo.
Eh. This feels a bit like a review even though I really didn't break down the rules at all. Damnit, now I'm in teh wrong forum... how am I gonna fix this mess? I know: Open pointless discussion questions!
So, like I said at the beginning: I've never quite agreed with people waxing romantic about Robin Laws's gaming products, but he has had a proven history of putting out quality product... short punchy little games and the like, and the original Feng Shui exemplified that.
So, what happened? Why is FS2, which is just about as unnecessary a piece of work as I can imagine****, such a fat bloated monsterousity of a game book? Is it Kickstarter? Did KS money make Mr Laws feel like he was being paid by the word, so he started churning out of some sort of catholic level guilt trip? I mean, new color art is nice and all (though of admittedly mixed quality), and it certainly gives a lot more detail on the greater setting of Feng Shui than the original... but why not just dress up the original and republish it? Why rewrite all that text and so... so... pointlessly? How do you go from being a guy who can, and does, get to teh point with his writing to being... well... me?
Id love to just cry Hack and let loose the critics of war, but honestly... this seems more like a case of a guy trying to earn his bread. There's a lot of KS backers listed in the back of the book, so I'm guessing the KS made some serious money. Maybe Laws felt he owed it to them to actually recreate the original, to finally explain his grand arc for his metaplot... maybe he thought if he just polished the original a little bit the backers would have felt cheated. It feels wrong to excoriate a man for trying to do the right thing, no matter how misguided.
* I don't recall exactly why I was going to footnote that paragraph, but I'm too lazy to delete the asterick. I vaguely recall planning to make a depreciating meta comment about Mr Laws along the way? Whatever.
** I know, I know... casting stones in glass houses. I don't get half of the online commentariate sucking my e-peen because I once wrote a arguably good book about GM advice.
*** For those not up on SLA Industries lore, the inspiration for the game/setting came from an Amber campaign set in a twisted Sci-Fi universe, with the Kilneck being a party of adventurers in the campaign (allegedly. I wasn't there). For those not familiar with the game/setting, all of that happens in the pre-history of the setting (no, seriously) with only the presumptive GMPC character of the Kilneck wandering around as a cross between David Bowie and The Guyver, all demigod like and glam-rock sexy, and completely a bitch to the main God-NPC of the setting... which works in a weird way.
**** this footnote doesn't really need to exist as I pretty much lay out the case for it being unnecessary in the paragraph the footnote was contained in. I'll rehash it here for good measure: There isn't enough changed in the rules to justify a new edition. Palladium's been proving for years that evergreen gaming products is a viable business model. This is literally a bloated rewrite of the original when it would have simply been much simpler to republish... or at worst make a minor update (say: changing the dates to 2017 dates for contemporary, updating the insipirational film list, etc...maybe adding some of that fancy new artwork) and republishing. Does slapping a 2 on it actually work as marketing? I mean: Sure, I bought it because it said 2... because I still have my original book, but I would seriously have bought reprints of a number of the suppliments to fill in my collection.
***** don't look for a five asterick footnote, as there is none. I'm just saying that this isn't a proper review because while it is up to my usual high standards for word count (The more the better, I say!), it doesn't remotely stack up to the rigorousness of my research and detail methodology. No number crunching (well... almost no number crunching), little if any discussion of how the rules work at the table, no page number citations... Actually, now that I think about it, its probably only half the length of a proper Me review... Yes, this meta comment deserves to be a footnote because, Reasons.
Quote from: Spike;972491So, what happened? Why is FS2, which is just about as unnecessary a piece of work as I can imagine****, such a fat bloated monsterousity of a game book? Is it Kickstarter? Did KS money make Mr Laws feel like he was being paid by the word, so he started churning out of some sort of catholic level guilt trip?
The simple answer is Kickstarter stretch goals. This had a very successful Kickstarter, which meant it went through a lot of stretch goals, which meant it had to be a big, fat book for an edition where Laws' stated goal was to really strip the game down and simplify it even further.
My AP experience:
I think it's a good game, but too limited in scope. The game started feeling very "samey" after a bit.
Also, the vehicle rules are way more confusing and difficult to use than the basic combat system they are layered on top of.
Spike, I love your reviews and commentaries. They're generally informative and entertaining and explain perspectives on game systems in ways I can relate to. And they tend to make me feel very happy that I ignored and avoided the games in question.
I'm only familiar with the 1996 first edition, but I was ga-ga over it at the time and I think I picked up the whole line. I really dug the setting, which managed the delicate balancing act of being gonzo and smart simultaneously. It was a blast of fresh air in the World of Darkness-dominated 90's. I remember some of the sourcebooks being really good, particularly Seed of the New Flesh and the Guiding Hand one.
My big problem was the mechanics: For a fast-moving game of crazy movie action players sure spent a lot of time rolling and re-rolling exploding dice, adding or subtracting them, then subtracting that number from another roll, etc. Lots of people sitting around counting on their fingers. A traditional D&D-ish system literally would have moved three times faster.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972504I'm only familiar with the 1996 first edition, but I was ga-ga over it at the time and I think I picked up the whole line. I really dug the setting, which managed the delicate balancing act of being gonzo and smart simultaneously. It was a blast of fresh air in the World of Darkness-dominated 90's. I remember some of the sourcebooks being really good, particularly Seed of the New Flesh and the Guiding Hand one.
My big problem was the mechanics: For a fast-moving game of crazy movie action players sure spent a lot of time rolling and re-rolling exploding dice, adding or subtracting them, then subtracting that number from another roll, etc. Lots of people sitting around counting on their fingers. A traditional D&D-ish system literally would have moved three times faster.
I have found my biggest takeaways from Laws' games have been the approach to GMing that I pick up from them. I came of age as a GM over the course of the '80s. Most games I played had finicky combat maneuvers and vehicle rules involved car chase scenes that took at least an hour to run. I'd played more cinematic stuff like d6, but my brain still defaulted to thinking about games in a crunchy way.
While the system in Feng Shui did the job it was supposed to, it was the advice on running combats that finally got me to properly loosen up. Once I had internalized the lessons of Feng Shui, I could use them in any moderately loose system.
I've had similar experiences with GUMSHOE and DramaSystem. One some level, they are all useful advice books with a system attached.
Quote from: Skarg;972501And they tend to make me feel very happy that I ignored and avoided the games in question.
Feng Shui is a great game, it is flawed like a lot of games but works quite well at the table and is terrific fun. To use this review as an excuse to ignore and avoid unfamiliar games is rather smug and self-defeating but it's your table, have at it if that's your approach.
I liked the original FS. I've not checked out the second edition yet.
QuoteThis book is literally three times the size of the first edition. THREE FUCKING TIMES, people.
Feng Shui (1st edition) was 256 pages long. Feng Shui 2 is 356 pages long. How is that 'literally three times the size'?
The game is developed more in setting - and better realised in my view in the post-apocalyptic/planet of the apes future junction - along with lots of pop-up junctures and a few other details that weren't in the original. These were expansions on from the kickstarter stretch goals. It ought to be noted that there aren't that many supplements to be found for FS2, so far, so having a fairly complete and self contained rulebook will be appreciated by many fans, I feel.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;972559It ought to be noted that there aren't that many supplements to be found for FS2, so far, so having a fairly complete and self contained rulebook will be appreciated by many fans, I feel.
That's a good point. Atlas' recent kickstarters for Feng Shui and Unknown Armies have been intended to effectively provide an entire, complete edition all at once. Neither of the have open licenses, and it is iffy if there will be more from Atlas for them.
Arc Dream did that even more literally with its Kickstarter including a whole line of supplement included in Kickstarter to be rolled out one by one.
Quote from: Voros;972536Feng Shui is a great game, it is flawed like a lot of games but works quite well at the table and is terrific fun. To use this review as an excuse to ignore and avoid unfamiliar games is rather smug and self-defeating but it's your table, have at it if that's your approach.
It is weird to use this review to base a purchase on as it doesn't seem Spike even really looked much the mechanics let along actually used them.
I'm also not particularly bothered by the lack of fiddly customization on character generation. I feel that archetypes like Drifter, Ex-Special Forces, Karate Cop and Scrappy Kid are loose enough that I can find my own way personalize them through roleplaying without needing to browse and pick my own exception-based powers. It's an action movie game. I can deal with stereotypical classes.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;972559Feng Shui (1st edition) was 256 pages long. Feng Shui 2 is 356 pages long. How is that 'literally three times the size'?
The game is developed more in setting - and better realised in my view in the post-apocalyptic/planet of the apes future junction - along with lots of pop-up junctures and a few other details that weren't in the original. These were expansions on from the kickstarter stretch goals. It ought to be noted that there aren't that many supplements to be found for FS2, so far, so having a fairly complete and self contained rulebook will be appreciated by many fans, I feel.
Reply:
Quote from: OP***** don't look for a five asterick footnote, as there is none. I'm just saying that this isn't a proper review because while it is up to my usual high standards for word count (The more the better, I say!), it doesn't remotely stack up to the rigorousness of my research and detail methodology. No number crunching (well... almost no number crunching), little if any discussion of how the rules work at the table, no page number citations... Actually, now that I think about it, its probably only half the length of a proper Me review... Yes, this meta comment deserves to be a footnote because, Reasons.
Bolded for Emphasis.
Also, the book looks three times as thick, once you account for the covers. Thicker glossy pages, yo. Did I mention my original book is HALF A CONTINENT AWAY? Hard to check page counts from (counts on fingers...) four states, three (Two? no, I'm pretty sure it's three...) mountain ranges and at least one significant body of salt water away.
I thought feng shui was paying exorbitant fees to hipsters to move chairs and desks around for you.
Quote from: Spike;972572Reply:
Bolded for Emphasis.
Also, the book looks three times as thick, once you account for the covers. Thicker glossy pages, yo. Did I mention my original book is HALF A CONTINENT AWAY? Hard to check page counts from (counts on fingers...) four states, three (Two? no, I'm pretty sure it's three...) mountain ranges and at least one significant body of salt water away.
So, in short, you're just full of shit?
First edition did allow you to pick up shticks from outside your archetype, so your Kung Fu Cop, for example, could learn to chuck a fireball from the party's Old Master, and drive like the Get Away Driver.
Second did away with that, sadly (imo), to only allowing you to pick up advances from within a set path for your archetype.
Part of the reason the book is larger, is that they included a lot of the crunch that was in the supplements, Vehicle and Chase rules from Golden Comeback for example
Quote from: TrippyHippy;972643So, in short, you're just full of shit?
Absolutely, but I eat a lot of fiber, so that's to be expected. What can I say? I love my Grape Nuts.
Quote from: Skarg;972501Spike, I love your reviews and commentaries. They're generally informative and entertaining and explain perspectives on game systems in ways I can relate to. And they tend to make me feel very happy that I ignored and avoided the games in question.
I do aim to explain the why's behind why I like and dislike things... its a sort of personal quirk of mine. I'm never happy just hating x or liking y... I gotta know exactly what it is that makes it so.
Funny enough I had a chat with a roommate about just that the other day. Apparently this puts me into a 'You People' catagory of film goers... he wanted to know what sort of movies 'You People' liked.
Which, amusingly, is mostly the same shit ALL Those Other People like too. I just talk about it more.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;972559Feng Shui (1st edition) was 256 pages long. Feng Shui 2 is 356 pages long. How is that 'literally three times the size'?
Its the new math.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;972643So, in short, you're just full of shit?
Yep, you can easily find the page counts for either edition by looking up reviews on line. Its not rigorous number crunching to compare simple numbers. And if you're not even going to be that rigorous don't use terms like "literally".
Quote from: TrippyHippy;972643So, in short, you're just full of shit?
Yep, you can easily find the page counts for either edition by looking up reviews on line. Its not rigorous number crunching to compare to simple numbers. And if you're not even going to be that rigorous don't use terms like "literally".
I just wish they would release more material for the new edition. Releasing a new edition and nothing else justcserms like a waste to me at least. Befote anyone says it no I'm not goung to but the first edition books to convert them. I'm too lazy and quite frankly if I have to do that I mst just as well buy the first edition.
The only thing wrong with it are some of the abilities are rubbish (like Prodigal Leap which does nothing), and that getting rid of the Buro was a terrible idea. Having a future dystopia where the state plundered ancient china for demons to cyber-ize was very cool. Now it's just mad max with no real connection to the rest.
I have no problems with the size of the book. Make the naked comparisons all you want, the fact is this: the system is NOT COMPLICATED. I didn't go grab my old book to see what all had been added, but nothing strikes me as something that they were wrong to put it. It's has a good deal of setting material and sample opposition.
What did they replace the Architects with?
My two favorite bits in Seed of the New Flesh are how in AD 2056 Daniel (Lizard Music) Pinkwater is considered one of the great literary minds of the 20th Century and most buddy cop action films are also gay romances.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972710What did they replace the Architects with?
My two favorite bits in Seed of the New Flesh are how in AD 2056 Daniel (Lizard Music) Pinkwater is considered one of the great literary minds of the 20th Century and most buddy cop action films are also gay romances.
I liked the section on everything in the (then) modern day that people in the year 2056 would find incredibly offensive. If I recall, it was the section of the book that Stolze was proudest of.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972710What did they replace the Architects with?
A post apocalyptic wasteland that came about as a result of a "chi bomb", with a few dystopian settlements. So think Mad Max where you can make a pit stop in Escape from New York.
Quote from: Nexus;972684And if you're not even going to be that rigorous don't use terms like "literally".
I literally don't care.
Quote from: Spike;972788I literally don't care.
*shrug*
You were the one bitching about some one misunderstanding you and calling you out on an observably false and easily checked claim. Words mean things. Learn to use to them.
Quote from: Spike;972788I literally don't care.
;)
:rolleyes:
Quote from: Caesar Slaad;972715A post apocalyptic wasteland that came about as a result of a "chi bomb", with a few dystopian settlements. So think Mad Max where you can make a pit stop in Escape from New York.
Yeah, I just think it's out of sync with the martial arts vibe the game has, which is my preference. I've always preferred that aspect rather than just a generic action movie vibe. YMMV
Quote from: Biscuitician;972837Yeah, I just think it's out of sync with the martial arts vibe the game has, which is my preference. I've always preferred that aspect rather than just a generic action movie vibe. YMMV
It's... uh... a love letter to Heroic Trio 2?
As for Feng Shui 2.... It's not good. I mean, it took a simple system and streamlined it to the point of being mechanically dull. It tightens down Sorcery to make it harder to learn Shticks, without realizing that Movement Sorcery doesn't mean much when any PC can slide down a staircase by riding on an ancient Chinese shield as part of a Stunt. It offers up 2 Transformed Animal packages, suggests it may give more later, then gives the rules so players can make their own. It totally wipes out the Architects through the power of authorial fiat, which is all big and bad and scary... and also pretty dull and implausible (and I say this in regards to a game with kidnapped and weaponized demons from mythic china).
FS2 simplifies the system?
My curiosity is piqued.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972876FS2 simplifies the system?
My curiosity is piqued.
Well, I won't swear to it, but I recall the first edition having, you know, stats and junk. Not many and, like everything else in the game they were regimented into virtually nothing.
FS 2 got rid o' them, leaving only the 'shoot stuff', 'punch stuff' and toughness save numbers... or maybe it was just all reconfigured and it just LOOKS like you have even fewer fixed numbers.
On the other hand they added jargon. I'm pretty sure they never called the die roll a Swerve in the previous edition... now you'll never see 'roll the d6-d6' like it used to do, just 'check your swerve'... which is annoying and distracting.
But I'm sure Nexus and the other guy will tell me I'm utterly wrong and I should be a better human being or something.
I didn't find it any more or less complicated. There are improvements, and it's perhaps more streamlined - no character generation for instance. Not sure that's a good idea, but there's a variety of archetypes and they have fun abilities.
Quote from: Biscuitician;972995I didn't find it any more or less complicated. There are improvements, and it's perhaps more streamlined - no character generation for instance. Not sure that's a good idea, but there's a variety of archetypes and they have fun abilities.
No character generation?
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;972876FS2 simplifies the system?
My curiosity is piqued.
Yeah, there aren't a bunch of stats. Pretty much what you need in combat, with no derivations.
Quote from: Nexus;972996No character generation?
Yeah, it has a quick play aesthetic. You pretty much take one of the starter character sheets and add your own backstory/details/motivations. After you get a few XP under your belt, you can customize it with new moves and skills.
Quote from: Caesar Slaad;973002Yeah, it has a quick play aesthetic. You pretty much take one of the starter character sheets and add your own backstory/details/motivations. After you get a few XP under your belt, you can customize it with new moves and skills.
Oh, okay, I get ya. Yeah, not my cuppa but I know some folks that would like that.
Quote from: Caesar Slaad;973002Yeah, it has a quick play aesthetic. You pretty much take one of the starter character sheets and add your own backstory/details/motivations. After you get a few XP under your belt, you can customize it with new moves and skills.
Love this kind of "get on with the game already!" philosophy. My interest is piqued.
Could it do Big Trouble in Little China?
Quote from: Itachi;973042Love this kind of "get on with the game already!" philosophy. My interest is piqued.
Sure. Like I said earlier, this is the kind of game where fiddly character generation just gets away from the point, which is playing iconic action movie types. If one of the 35 templates doesn't fit your character idea, this isn't the right game for the kind of game you are playing.
If you want to design your own fighter with detailed picks, there are better games for that kind of thing like
Wandering Heroes of Ogre Gate.
QuoteCould it do Big Trouble in Little China?
Sure. The Everyday Hero template is basically Jack Burton and has skills like Classic Cars, Classic Rock and Beer. He's good with improvised weapons, and he also gets an extra die on his next attack after he misses.
I got the impression Big Trouble in Little China was one of the major inspirations for the game.
Quote from: Baulderstone;973056Sure. Like I said earlier, this is the kind of game where fiddly character generation just gets away from the point, which is playing iconic action movie types. If one of the 35 templates doesn't fit your character idea, this isn't the right game for the kind of game you are playing.
I guess I'm just contrary by nature. In this situation, I always want to change or nudge something or don't agree with assumptions the template builders made about archetype. I don't if that means character I want is not right for an action movie (it might be cribbed from such a movie) hero game necessarily just that it doesn't slot into the same assumptions the writers had for their particular vision of Action Movie Characters which isn't objectively correct or all encompassing.
Quote from: Nexus;973061I guess I'm just contrary by nature. In this situation, I always want to change or nudge something or don't agree with assumptions the template builders made about archetype. I don't if that means character I want is not right for an action movie (it might be cribbed from such a movie) hero game necessarily just that it doesn't slot into the same assumptions the writers had for their particular vision of Action Movie Characters which isn't objectively correct or all encompassing.
Sure. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with you not finding this to be the right game. I don't think you are being contrary at all. Your opinion here lines up pretty well with my impression of what you look for in a game. That's entirely reasonable.
Quote from: Nexus;973061I guess I'm just contrary by nature. In this situation, I always want to change or nudge something or don't agree with assumptions the template builders made about archetype. I don't if that means character I want is not right for an action movie (it might be cribbed from such a movie) hero game necessarily just that it doesn't slot into the same assumptions the writers had for their particular vision of Action Movie Characters which isn't objectively correct or all encompassing.
Yeah, for what I've heard, Everyday Hero =/= Jack Burton except in an extremely vanilla generic way.