Coyote Trail is an RPG by Brett Bernstein and Peter Spahn, published by Politically Incorrect Games.  The copy I'm reviewing is the print copy, which is 138 pages long plus character sheets and sample characters at the back.  The physical state of the book is good, a softcover that seems well bound, with a decent (but perhaps slightly scant) selection of well-done black and white images.

So Coyote Trail is a wild western RPG.  These days, you cannot say that this genre isn't supported. There were years and years where the only thing for the setting was Boot Hill. But since then Deadlands came out, and after that there've been quite a few other RPGs that cover the genre (Spellslinger, Dust Devils, Aces & Eights,  and others).  Many of these games choose to rely on the presence of some kind of supernatural or alternate-historical twist to spice up the setting a bit.  Personally, I don't mind that. But I also know that the real story, what happened in the "wild west" itself, is more than fascinating enough material to allow for a campaign without having to resort to that kind of stuff either.

Coyote Trail is a good RPG if you want the latter; if you want a game that captures the possibilities and vastness of the historical wild west, this game delivers.

The book itself is divided into four sections, called "Journals".  The first is dedicated to the rules of the game, the second to a sample town setting ("Shady Gulch"), the third to all sorts of information about the native americans ("Indian Trails"), and the last one contains four sample adventures.

The basic system of Coyote Trail is based on 2D6 rolls, a system relatively reminiscent to me of Traveller.  Speaking of Traveller, one thing I think this game could have desperately used was a set of "prior history" tables in the style of Traveller, where you can already determine by some random rolls some of your cowboy's backstory.

In any case, the character creation process involves choosing an archetype (from such example as Cowboy, gambler, lawman, homesteader, doctor, etc).  Your archetype gives you the lists of skills you'll be allowed to put ranks into, and some of them come with required "gimmicks" (more on "gimmicks" later).

Afterwards, you choose a background, which reflects your upbringing. You could be a foreigner, a son of immigrants, a clergy family, woodsmen, from the upper classes, or even an ex-slave.

Then its time to spread around the points. There are five attributes (standard stuff) that get ten points to be divided  among each, or, you roll one die for each ability ignoring sixes.  Now, you might see an issue here.  The ranges of this game's attributes go from 0 to 5, with 2 being human average. If you go with the point allocation method, at best you can end up with two points in each attribute.  If you want to be above average in absolutely anything, you will need to be below average in at least one attribute, and probably more. The die-rolling method is always a better choice. The odds that you will make a WORSE character with the die-roll method instead than you'd have by allocating points is pretty infinitesimal.
Skills are bought by spreading 30 points around your skills. Skill from your vocational list are bought one-for-one, you can buy any other skill at two for one.
Then, gimmicks are taken.  Any vocational gimmicks are free and obligatory. But beyond that you can buy a gimmick of your choice by reducing 1 point from any attribute or 3 from any skill. You better REALLY want that gimmick.

The skill lists are pretty standard, and rolls are done by rolling 2D6 under the value of your relevant attribute+skill.
Now back to Gimmicks: these are special traits that modify a character in a flavourful way, essentially similar to feats. Gimmicks are grouped by "cultural gimmicks" (which include such things as "criminal", "famous", "town authority" or "tribal authority"), Inherent Gimmicks (which include things like Musclebound, Natural Rider, or Peripheral Vision), Virtuous Gimmicks ("gentlemanly", "Lawful", "loyal"), detrimental gimmicks (Enemies, poor vision, Tenderfoot -- Note that detrimental gimmicks do not seem, by my reading of the book, to work any different from regular gimmicks; that is to say, you have to pay if you want to receive them, and they give you no special benefit), and Corruptive Gimmicks (intolerant, lecherous, opium addict -- note that the same applies to these as to detrimental gimmicks; with the added note that you can choose to subsitute any obligatory virtuous gimmick for a corruptive gimmick instead). I mean, its a laudable idea that detrimental and laudable gimmicks should NOT give you any other kind of bonus, I really hate it when games do that as it inevitably leads to the worst kind of min-maxing, but at the same time I think it'd be a more realistic option (if one wants any hope of a player choosing these gimmicks) to just plain make them free. You get nothing from them, but you're not wasting a shitload of precious points in order to get something that will just fuck you up.

Once you've done all that (which I imagine does not take very long in practice), you are done. The GM assigns you whatever gear sounds appropriate.

This being a Wild West game, horses are pretty important, so they get their own chapter, with their own rules for health, and even their own special gimmicks. Even wagons can have their own special "design gimmicks" like "luxury seating" or "reinforced frame".

The "Task Resolution" chapter, coming up next, includes both basic and advanced rules for combat.  The basic rules strike me, frankly, as useless. They're too simplistic. Fortunately, the advanced rules are actually not that advanced (the basic are too basic).  The advanced rules start out by making up for the relatively limited range of 2D6 roll-under by introducing the concept of difficulties, which don't actually affect your roll itself, but affect how much you need to make a roll by in order to be successful. Advanced combat is sufficiently complex to be usable; I really couldn't see myself playing a western game where every single six shooter did the same damage, all the time. At least the advanced rules present some variety.
I should note that the game is pretty freaking deadly.  Players get 5 damage boxes, and one hit from a .45 revolver does 5 points of damage.  So basically, you're fucked if you get in a shootout. There are some optional rules for a more cinematic game where you are allowed to reduce damage from any by rolling a number of dice equal to your fitness rating and eliminating one hit for each die that was equal or lower than your fitness to reduce the damage; but I could see that becoming the opposite problem.  As it stands in the regular game, you get to make 1 such die rolled if you have a leather coat, and more dice if you are behind cover. So it might not be as fatal as it looks at first glance on the paper; one would have to see. It'd certainly be fatal for anyone who stood on the middle of the street like an idiot firing away, though.
Unfortunately, there was one bit of armor that was added, and I understand why the authors did it, but I think it was a critical, emulation-shattering mistake in the game.  That is, you get 3 armor dice if you have an "armor plate" strapped to your chest.  Of course, players being what they are, this means that if this rule is played unchanged in this way, then every PC in the world will constantly go everywhere with an armor plate strapped to his chest.  Its just natural for players (I mean fuck, if in a fantasy game I can't convince some players that no, it makes no fucking sense for them to be sleeping in their hotel bed in leather armour), in a game this deadly, there'd be no way, without houseruling or eliminating that rule, that you could avoid having PCs running around doing this far more than it was ever done either in history or in western movies.  Giving an equivalent -3 diff penalty to all checks for anyone wearing one of these would, for example, probably enough to make sure that most people will decide not to bother.

After a few good fluffy parts about some good sample sites for adventures in the game, and suggestions about how to organize your PC group along different lines depending on what type of campaign you want to play (whether you want to be lawmen, or cattle rustlers, or homesteaders, etc etc.), and some other basic stuff on adventure ideas, and a rather short price list of common goods (I'd suggest that anyone who does plan to pick up coyote trail also consider getting GURPS Western, which is a great compliment to this book); after all that, you get some rules on advancement.
And here's where we get into another problem. First, PCs win XP on an individual basis (ie. they don't all gain the same amount each session); this is a personal choice, and while I frankly think it can create too much dissent, I don't think its inherently bad.  But some of the ways you can gain xp strike me as very odd for the genre.  If you "forgo violence" and find nonviolent solutions to your problems in the game you gain 2xp, while defeating enemies or stopping villains does not, in and of itself, give you any XP.

I mean, what the fuck is that? Most westerns I know of, as in films or books, are ALL about the shootout at the end, and the white hat bringing in the crook dead or alive (but usually dead) or the gunslinger avenging his brother/mother/best friend/whatever. And never mind the REAL wild west, which was just a grotesque bloodbath, like the movies but gorier and with the good guys winning far less often (and indeed, with far less unquestionably "good" guys to begin with). So I really don't get why the fuck the guy who actually plays the way the genre would indicate should be penalized for doing so, while the fuckhead PC-hippie who tries to talk down the criminals should gain more XP?! I mean, shit, it makes me want to put on my best John Wayne accent and say "Well shure, pilgrim.. I'm not gonna hit ya...I'm not gonna hit ya... like HELL I'm not gonna hit ya!"

After that, we get some expanded/optional rules.  First, there's cliches. Cliches are basically gimmicks that make more sense in a cinematic campaign than an historical one. I think it was a good idea for the authors to separate these the way they did, while keeping in mind at the same time that a lot of these cliches came from somewhere. After that you get some rules on mooks ("extras"), and the aforementioned optional rules to make combat a bit less deadly for PCs in more "cinematic" games.
After that you get a "conversion guide" for weapons from something called the Knuckledusters Firearm Shop.  This is apparently a book all about western firearms, one that the authors consider really top-notch. I bet it is, but I really wish they hadn't just teased me with it here, in the middle of the book.  If they had to include it, they should have put it in the very back.  As it is, it feels like we get a mid-book Ad for the KFS, a book I will probably never be getting.You also get some rules for animals, explosives, and conversions for playing the game diceless or with a game called "Shady Gulch", which we are told was the predecessor (earlier edition) of Coyote Trail.

That's it for the rules part of the game, and we're on page 52.  The rules, as such, are good. There are a couple of sticky points, but there's nothing that's either terrible about them or anything to write home about.

The part that makes this game totally worth getting if you're a western buff or planning on running a western game, even if you already have the rules system you want to run it with, is the whole second half of the book.
The next three sections, the setting material, are some of the best setting material I've seen for a western game.

The second "journal", called "Shady Gulch", is a town supplement designed to give GMs a default "wild west town" to set their adventures. I don't know if its coincidence or intentional, but Shady Gulch is basically a faux version of Deadwood (as in, a town in the Black Hills around the time of the massacre at little big horn), so if you wanted to run a HBO's Deadwood-style game but for whatever reason would rather not set it in the actual town of Deadwood, you've got everything you need here. To be fair, Shady Gulch seems slightly less filthy and degenerate than Deadwood, except its Chinatown. Shady Gulch's chinatown is seriously fucked up, and one of the best parts of this Journal.

It is Journal Three, "indian trails" that REALLY shines, however. It is a complete sourcebook on Native Americans in the wild west, including details on the various settler trails, the treaties that were made (and almost universally broken) by the US Govt., the bureau of Indian Affairs, the various tribes; and some VERY detailed sections on the Indian Wars, detailing each  conflict with a timeline of events and information about the nature of the conflicts.
After that you get some very thorough details about the plains Indians, general information about the customs, beliefs and society of the tribes; and detailed outlines and timelines for the Arapaho, Blackfoot, Cheyenne, Comanche, Crow, Kowa, Pawnee, Sioux, and Apache tribes. Finally you get details about character vocations for indian PCs, and some material about Spirit Medicines (nothing that need be taken as anything other than placebo effect).
This journal is what would utterly make it for me as to choosing whether to buy or not to buy the game. If the game only included Journals 1 and 3, I'd still consider the game well worth buying.  The information is very complete and well researched, by the looks of things. If I had to guess, I'd say it was  someone's very personal labour of love.

The final journal contains four sample adventures, all of which are pretty good. You get one adventure where the PCs are Bushwacked, one that involves a showdown in Shady Gulch, one that is a western murder-mystery requiring a bit of investigative work, and finally a very wild adventure about a quest for confederate gold.

The back pages of the book contain an index and handy reference tables for the rules.

Here comes RPGPundit's resumen:

The Good: The rules are simple and fast for play. They're very good for highly realistic historical play (especially when it comes to being deadly enough).  Also, the Journal on native american tribes is the best RPG resource I've ever seen on the subject.

The Bad: There's a couple of rules blips, but those can be resolved really easily with houserules.  The only thing I can think of as really "bad" was the omission of historical NPCs and locales (ie Deadwood instead of Shady Gulch, and not giving stats for any of the legends of the wild west).

The Ugly: Nothing. There's nothing irreparably bad in this game.

In short, if you're interesting in "Wild west" RPG play, be it historical or cinematic, especially if you want a game that doesn't feel obliged to mix the genre with fantasy or horror or magic elements, or if you've got an interest in the history and culture of the plains Indians for other roleplaying purposes, any one of those reasons would be enough to pick up Coyote Trail.

Again, one last note to the authors: If you make a revised edition, you abso-fucking-lutely must put in traveller-style prior history tables for character creation. It would be the final little touch that would make this game go from a good solid game into a game that absolutely rocks.

Meanwhile, everyone else, check out the game, so that they'll have a reason to make a revised and expanded edition in the future with even more wild western goodness.

RPGPundit

Great review, Pundit.  Coyote Trail is an excellent game!

Thanks for the great review!  I wrote Shady Gulch, Indian Trails, and the sample adventures for Coyote Trail so I especially appreciate the kind words on the setting stuff.  SG was definitely inspired by HBO's Deadwood. I love the show (so I'm not surprised it got canceled).     I did a lot of research for IT (and I still have the nagging feeling that I got something wrong), but I'm still extremely pleased with the way it turned out.  I'm planning to run a Plains Indians game in the not-too-distant future, so I was really helping myself and making a little extra money at the same time.  

I think a PC history generator would be awesome, perhaps even one tied to the different vocations.  

Pete

Thanks for the review. I have had "history tables" in the back of my mind for some time, but haven't gotten a chance to play with them.

You misunderstood the detrimental gimmicks. You don't pay for them, you get extra points for them - extra point for an ability or 3 extra points for skills. It's quite clearly explained - spending too much time at the opium den?

"every PC in the world will constantly go everywhere with an armor plate strapped to his chest."  -- I don't understand your reasoning behind this. Where do they find the plate? Can they actually wear it and walk or shoot? Does it fall on their foot, preventing them from doing anything? Does it keep slamming against their chest, knocking the wind out of them? The GM has to maintain a little control. This is true of any game. Any players that can get away with a stunt like this in one of my games are going to run into problems along the way - they may be able to stop a bullet from killing them, but the town whores probably won't go near them

Anyway, glad you liked it. Thanks again.

Giving an equivalent -3 diff penalty to all checks for anyone wearing one of these would, for example, probably enough to make sure that most people will decide not to bother.

I think that would eliminate any potential problems of player abuse.  I personally like the heroic optional rule of using fitness as armor.  I'm planning to run three sessions of a WWII game using gDi---sort of a Call of Duty/Medal of Honor-type shoot'em up with missions---and I don't think it would last long without that rule.  

Pete

Quote from: pigames.netThanks for the review. I have had "history tables" in the back of my mind for some time, but haven't gotten a chance to play with them.

You misunderstood the detrimental gimmicks. You don't pay for them, you get extra points for them - extra point for an ability or 3 extra points for skills. It's quite clearly explained - spending too much time at the opium den?

Ok, somehow (despite looking for it) I didn't find that anywhere. It must have been a mental slip.

In a way, I'm disappointed with that. I think it'd have been cooler if the detriments were free.  As it is, anytime you get those kinds of "flaws for points" you end up minmaxing up the wazoo.

Quote"every PC in the world will constantly go everywhere with an armor plate strapped to his chest."  -- I don't understand your reasoning behind this. Where do they find the plate? Can they actually wear it and walk or shoot? Does it fall on their foot, preventing them from doing anything? Does it keep slamming against their chest, knocking the wind out of them? The GM has to maintain a little control. This is true of any game. Any players that can get away with a stunt like this in one of my games are going to run into problems along the way - they may be able to stop a bullet from killing them, but the town whores probably won't go near them

Right, I agree with what you're saying, but you didn't actually put any of that in the book, and I know how some players will do anything they can to get that kind of advantage.. like a certain player of mine who insists that in any fantasy game his PC would sleep in leather armour everywhere he goes.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditOk, somehow (despite looking for it) I didn't find that anywhere. It must have been a mental slip.

In a way, I'm disappointed with that. I think it'd have been cooler if the detriments were free.  As it is, anytime you get those kinds of "flaws for points" you end up minmaxing up the wazoo.
RPGPundit

Agreed. When I run PIG's games I generally give a couple extra points and detriments are free.

-clash

Quote from: RPGPunditRight, I agree with what you're saying, but you didn't actually put any of that in the book, and I know how some players will do anything they can to get that kind of advantage.. like a certain player of mine who insists that in any fantasy game his PC would sleep in leather armour everywhere he goes.

I hear you, but despite being something that can easily be played by beginners, I still recommend an experienced GM. Perhaps I'll refocus that aspect in future games.

Re: detrimental gimmicks. When a player chooses one and gets extra points, you bet your shirt that I'm going to make sure he works for it. Again, falls in the trap you described above.

I take a lot of things for granted these days. My bad.