I just got it, along with "Rogue Mistress", and can't find more than one  nigh-useless review of the game.

As a quick-n-gritty adaptation of the BRP, yeah, I think it's very good.  It almost plays like RQIII-lite, and that's a good thing, saying nothing bad about RQIII or Stormbringer.

Wait...I just realised that you're talking about Stormbringer, while I'm referring to Elric!, both of which are essentially the same game under different titles.

Now, comparing Stormbringer 4th (or Elric!) to Stormbringer 1st ed...that's a different sort of comparison.  There are many who feel that 1st ed got the feel of Moorcock's stories down better than later editions, and I tend to agree.  There was a lot of filling in the blanks in an attempt to flesh out the Young Kingdoms and to make a more player-friendly magic system.  Fact of the matter is, in Moorcock's stories, personal magic was limited essentially to summoning -- you summon a being much more powerful than yourself, make a bargain you'll almost certainly regret later, and let summoned being do your dirty work for you.  1st ed got that down right; later editions not so much.

!i!

(P.S. Hey, Rotwang!  Did you see the monkeys I posted for you?)

How different is 1st edition from 2nd and 3rd? Negligibly?

Honestly, I don't know.  As with most Chaosium products, I was quite pleased with the early editions for years and skipped most of the intervening releases until the games had become significantly different or refined.  Pendragon and Call of Cthulhu for instance -- I had first and second editions, respectively, and didn't upgrade until 4th and 5.5th editions, respectively.

!i!

From what I remember in some very good RPGnet discussions, 1st-3rd are all pretty much the same mechanically, though they may have more supplementary material in the later couple editions. I believe 4th added some innovations, followed by Elric! which simplified things, altered the magic, and moved toward a "balanced characters" approach. SB5 is Elric! renamed with slight changes.

Thanks, in that case I think I'll go with d20 Melnibone.

:rimshot:

Elric!!1ones was quite alright, but even the basic rules heavily recommended having one weapon skill over 100%... Not exactly a game where you rose from humble beginnings to great power -- just in time to be killed by Elric.

Is 4th edition the hardcover one printed up in Europe? I've got that one and 5 and another. I'll have to dig them out and look at them.

The GW hardcover is 3rd edition.

Thanks Elliot! I'll dig them out tomorrow when I'm more awake. I need to find out which box I keep them in.

Quote from: SosthenesElric!!1ones was quite alright, but even the basic rules heavily recommended having one weapon skill over 100%... Not exactly a game where you rose from humble beginnings to great power -- just in time to be killed by Elric.

But wasn't pretty much part of the point of the Elric books?  

To quote Wikipedia:

QuoteElric presents an excellent example of a counterstereotype, because he was written specifically as the polar opposite of Robert E. Howard's Conan and similar fantasy heroes. Instead of a mighty-thewed barbarian warrior who fights his way from obscurity to achieve fame and power, Elric is a frail, sickly albino, a highly-educated and cultured (often downright decadent) emperor who abandons his throne. Whereas the conventional fantasy hero rescues fair maidens from evil wizards and monsters and defends his country from invaders, Elric (inadvertently) slays his true love, is himself a powerful wizard in league with the Chaos lord Arioch, summons monsters to aid himself in battle, and leads a successful invasion against his homeland of Melniboné. Finally, while fantasy heroes often begin as novices and gradually become more skilled and powerful over time, Elric steadily loses his throne, his homeland, his family and friends, and his magical resources.

Quote from: J ArcaneBut wasn't pretty much part of the point of the Elric books?  

Surely, as is Conan's superiority over anyone else.
Will this premise work as well in a role-playing game? Not that sure...
(Especially considering the fact that you didn't exactly enter the game as a god in all aspects. In a BRP-derived game, advancement is still pretty important. So the superiority of the characters would be a little bit one-sided.)

Quote from: SosthenesSurely, as is Conan's superiority over anyone else.
Will this premise work as well in a role-playing game? Not that sure...
(Especially considering the fact that you didn't exactly enter the game as a god in all aspects. In a BRP-derived game, advancement is still pretty important. So the superiority of the characters would be a little bit one-sided.)

While I'm not really a fan of the game, Exalted seems to be built very much on the premise of starting high, if not ending low.  

And games like CoC seem to have the ending low part down, but don't really have the starting high.

UA from what I understand of it offers some element of this, but I can't say for certain, having not played it personally.  But the impression I got was from some of the bits I have been able to read, is that it's very much "OK, you know cool magic and shit, but it also pretty much is destined to lead you to utter ruin."

So I think it's possible, it just hasn't necessarily been married to a roleplaying game yet.

A colleague of mine has been running a fantasy game over the last 10-15 where there's no advancement per se. The only thing you gain is a few magic items and titles (that might help you in certain situations).

I think even Exalted allows you to increase your power by quite a bit during play.

Some sci-fi games qualify, e.g. Traveller, fantasy games are rather particular about gaining abilities, hero's journey etc.

1st Ed differed from 5th Stormbringer quite radically.

1. 1st Ed. had no character balance. You randomly determined your class. You could end up being a Melnibonean Warrior-Sorcerer-Assassin or a Nadasakor Begger with d4+1 (?) afflictions. 5th Ed Bringer has what appears the standard character creation system (250 points or so to distribute to your skills).

2. The magic system was one of summoning demons (or elementals) and then binding them to armor or weapons. Your flaming sword was either a bound fire elemental or a demon.

3. The skill system is different. The skills in 1st Ed were slightly different than RQ. It has Ambush as a skill for instance. Also, the the attributes gave slight bonuses to the skills. For example, perception skills (Taste, smell, sight(?)) were affected by POW, Int and another attribute. Every point over 12 is a +1% where as every point below 9 is a -1%.  In 5th Ed SB, the attributes did not affect skills. Also, the 5th Ed SB skill list seems very similar to the later CoC skill list.

1st Ed SB was co-written by Ken St. Andre and, in my opinion, seems a lot more  "fun" to  read than 5th Ed SB. I got the feeling Ken St. Andre was saying, "It's only a game. Roll some dice and have fun."

Regardless, I think either system is fun and very playable. It's going to be great fun to see what DBRP will be like...