For starters, its a ridiculously twee and pretentious game written in an intentionally obtuse style which cares more about sounding sophisticated than being either practical or playable.

Second, it has a boring-as-all-fuck beancounter system where "randomization" is based not on competition but on use of miracle points.

This is surrounded by stupid side-rules and GM advice, in a world that is far too unbearably twee for its own good.

It was a bad attempt to create a pretentious pseudo-artsy Swine response to Amber.  It has already lost a lot of its popularity compared to the latter; ironically, its probably more talked about here at the moment than anywhere else because my recent reposts of old entries was used as an excuse by certain people to charge in here and lead a Swine assault against me.

RPGPundit

note: feel free to add other things you dislike about Nobilis here. But if you want to sing its praises, go do that on the other thread. Be grateful that I am a just and merciful man who allows that thread to exist on here. But know that if the swine continue to try to disrupt the workings of this site, I will be painting the RPGsite with their blood. Two coats.

Couldn't stand to let people talk when it didn't involve you, eh?

So much so that he's interupting his vacation to first crap in a thread, and then start up a new thread. :melodramatic: Wow, Nobilis must be damn good for him to obsess about it like this. Maybe I should check it out.....:heh:

Ooh! I just had a brilliant idea! This thread seems tailor made for you to point out all the horrible things (or even one) that makes the game unworkable. You know, the ones you talked about and completely refused to actually mention, hiding behind the fact that you didn't read the game, don't own the game, and can't remember enough of the supposedly horrifying experience you had with the game.

C'mon. give us a laugh, guvna.

Quote from: blakkieSo much so that he's interupting his vacation. :melodramatic: Wow, Nobilis must be damn good for him to obsess about it like this. Maybe I should check it out.....:heh:

Definitely. If I can find a pdf of it I plan on lining Borgstrom's pockets.

Quote from: RPGPunditSecond, it has a boring-as-all-fuck beancounter system where "randomization" is based not on competition but on use of miracle points.

I can see how you might view the system as boring, but how exactly isn't it competitive? Anyone involved may use MPs, after all, and you can only determine through experience what it would take to overcome the opposition.

Nothing at all that can't easily be cured by not playing it.

Quote from: GrimGentI can see how you might view the system as boring, but how exactly isn't it competitive? Anyone involved may use MPs, after all, and you can only determine through experience what it would take to overcome the opposition.

That doesn't make any sense. The game is eeeeeevil and a primary weapon in The War. Obviously it doesn't work that way and must be some sort of twee attempt at removing the struggle from RPGs by letting the players do everything that they want whenever they want. RPGPundit said it, and when you reach that level of lunacy you're never wrong, so how can you doubt it?

The only (and significant) problem I had with the game is that it either requires players who are very mature and cooperative, or a GM with balls of high grade steel to keep IC tensions from spilling OOC and causing stuff to blow up.

I lacked the first and second, so...

Well, I certainly don't get to the extent of hating the game ... I mean ... wow.  I reserve my hate for things that I can't (as Balbinus points out) effortlessly avoid.

But I will say that I don't think the Auctoritas mechanic fits in well with the rest of the game.  The idea that you know everything about ... well ... everything in terms of game mechanics, except for one number that your opposition keeps secret (but that you can easily deduce in two or three actions) just seems a little tacked on.

It doesn't add real tactical depth or mystery (as pointed out, you can deduce the number easily).  In fact, if you're playing tactically it's a pretty boring speed-bump.

Contrariwise, it doesn't add much to the feel of the game:  if you're having a metaphoric confrontation about whether Guns are more powerful than Love, hearing "Oh ... yeah, that miracle to cause a young national guardsman to panic in the face of the peaceful protestors is really cool, but you didn't put enough Penetration on it, so the whole thing whiffs against your opponenet's Auctoritas" seems really random ... there's no in-game element corresponding to Penetration, so the presence of absence of "enough" penetration is 100% metagame, which can lead to some very unintuitive outcomes.

So there's a rule I dislike, at least as I've interpreted it.  As usual, if someone knows a better way to interpret it then I'm completely open to the possibility that I could turn out to enjoy Auctoritas and Penetration, once you've shared your insight on how they work.

Quote from: James McMurrayCouldn't stand to let people talk when it didn't involve you, eh?

It's tough being the vanguard of a counter-insurgency, valiantly defending against an imaginary enemy.  Boo-hoo.

!i!

Quote from: TonyLBThe idea that you know everything about ... well ... everything in terms of game mechanics, except for one number that your opposition keeps secret (but that you can easily deduce in two or three actions) just seems a little tacked on.

What on Earth gave you that idea? You always know your own characteristics, and how much power it would take to perform a given miracle. You don't know the abilities of anyone else unless they have been revealed in some way.

Quote...there's no in-game element corresponding to Penetration, so the presence of absence of "enough" penetration is 100% metagame, which can lead to some very unintuitive outcomes.

Penetration represents drawing on the miraculous energies coursing through your subtle body (the MPs, mechanically) in order to gather enough force to pierce the enemy's sphere of authority. It's really no different from pouring more power into a miracle under any other circumstances.

It's really awkward to hold and read, plus the production values make it difficult to find a cheap copy. Anything that generates this much energy in discussion must at least be interesting.

The thing I hate about it is when I'm waxing philisophically about the statements the game makes about the human condition, some of my swooning elitist RPG fans get a little too exhuberant and make me spill my half-caf soy milk Macchiato.  Then I have to get my manservant to beat them and toss them in the gutter with the d20 players and the other trash, and he gets so whiny when he has to work overtime.

But those are the trials one must endure when participating in a War Against Gaming.  When the revolution comes the grognards will be the first ones up against the wall, and it'll all be worth it.

Quote from: Christmas ApeIt's really awkward to hold and read, plus the production values make it difficult to find a cheap copy. Anything that generates this much energy in discussion must at least be interesting.

There is much truth to this, though I'm at pains to describe it as a personal "hate" of the GWB.  It is damned awkward to handle, which is in great part why I still have a certain preference to the LPB (Little Pink Book, the 1st edition).  Neither of the books are comfortably geared toward game-table reference, which is frustrating, but it's also part of the inherent concept of the game.

Also, while the GWB went to some great pains to remedy this issue, the rules are deeply embedded in the prose, a fault it shares with a great many other games of the last decade.  It attempted to strike a balance between concept and functionality, and only partially succeeded.

Finally, I'm not entirely pleased with all of the art in the GWB.  Mike Kaluta's work has always struck me as incredibly static, and the altered photo work does little for my sense of the imagination.

!i!