In another thread, I asked what game is usually a standard starter for gamers in Germany. I was told The Dark Eye RPG. Now I vaguely remember seeing and english translation of this game when I worked for Gameboard Distributing and I think it was made by Studio 2 Publishing, but I never got the chance to either read it or play it.

What I'd like is some impressions of the game and how it plays from people on this board who have played it. I'm curious and would like to hear more.

You're in luck as regards timing - yesterday, January 6, was the first time I've played Das Schwarze Auge (DSA) since.... 1996. I gamed with my two best friends back from school who were also in my DSA group back then, we were joined by the wife of one of them. I GMed, we played 3rd edition (don't bother with 4th), and I had prepped a 1985 module called "Beneath the Northern lights" (here shown in its - unaltered - 1995 reprint):



It's basically a journey into the lands up north to retrieve an all powerful diamond able to kill whole armies. As written, it's a red herring because the PCs will fall foul of yetis (who strangely take all their gear) and then have to help a sorcerer outwit an Ice Queen. As it turns out, the sorcerer is the actual BBEG who keeps the Ice Queen's village in terror. PCs are expected to rescue the Ice Queen, and be absolutely fine that there IS no artic diamond. Well, I rewrote all that, and 8 hours later the PCs had both found the diamond, and one of them (the wife, who chose to play a witch) had recrowned herself queen of the Icy North.
It was easily possible to run this whole module in one day, replete with added stuff, such as an exploration into the dwarven kingdoms to pick up a treasure map before heading north, and some border clashes before the PCs managed to obtain winter gear for travel and survival. (I may hit my scanner tomorrow to give you my hand drawn map for the adventure. It adds nicely to the atmosphere of the adventure.) The game moves really fast because there's not much positioning going on in combats, and allows for a variety of pacing. This makes it very attractive.

I'll keep this post (comparatively) short and subjective, because you'll find some informative, general threads on the subject on this site.

I've never played BECMI D&D but it seems rather close to it. This is no coincidence as DSA's maker had translated Red Box D&D for a german toy producer, Schmidt Games. The deal didn't work with TSR for licensing reasons. So the guy wrote a fantasy heart breaker, and wedded it to a setting of his own, which is roughly Greyhawk except with German nomenclature. Again, this is a superficial comparison, but it's important to stress right away how derivative this game is - it's a heartbreaker through and through.

Now for the subjective bit. I hadn't played this system in 15 years, here's what struck me as a D&D 3.x player... notable differences in the rules.

1. Magic is all over the place, it's whacky, funny, and evocative. The guy's wife played a witch, and one of her spells (Hexenknoten, Witch's Knot) has her rip a hair from her head and throw it behind her shoulder... that creates an invisible barrier of 90 square meters (so, e.g., 2 meters tall and 45 wide) which will only stop intelligent creatures who don't dare to trespass this invisible boundary of bad luck. This very effectively stopped three sledges filled to the brim with blood lusty barbarians who had started to pursue the PCs (also on a sledge). Impressive. And it cost her four points of arcane energy (called Astral Energy).... she had 70 of them.... Another guy played a black magician, and he could cast 30 spells... similar price range of AE points. So the magic is incredibly versatile once PCs hit levels 7 and above... and get insane at levels 15 and above... can conjure demon lords at will and have them do their will. In the game, the witch conjured demons left and right, but these were mostly to terrify the population (they could only deal one measly point of damage per round - N/PCs have 30 upwards)... useful, still, as the whole world consists of 90% superstitious peasants ruled by a partially enlightened aristocracy.

2. Initiative... very strange. So above the 6 D&D stats there's one called "Courage" (Mut). There's no initiative roll. Guys with highest courage go first. Animals got courage too. This counts for every new pairing of combatants. Our viking ran from one sledge hound to a barbarian (because, yep, after witch's knot they started to pick off the remaining combatants one by one), and managed to get in several attacks in one round because his courage score trumped that of both of his combatants.

3. Combat itself - very elementary. You got an attack and a defense score based on your ability scores, to which your add your skill rank in a weapon skill matching whatever you hold in your hands. I kid you not, there's 15 weapon groups - think of D&D weapon expertise feats here and you get the picture. Per round and combat pairing you're entitled to one defense roll, alternatively you can roll on a separate skill called Evade.
And now comes the niggling detail which makes the game somewhat unique. Weapon-cross-comparison-tables. Any weapon comes with a "Weapon Comparison Value", and these impact the attack and defense rolls of your opponents, and mutually so. The viking's war axe had 10/2, suppose he's fighting a small guy with a dagger which got 2/7. That means the small guy suffers a penalty of -8 on his attack rolls (because the viking's 10 outmatches his 2 by ; however, the Barbarian also has a penalty of 5 on his defense rolls (because, again, the small guy's dagger's 7 outranks his axe by 5). I like this, because it differentiates weapons beyond damage rolls... which are mostly superficially identical in this game... a sword does 1d6 plus 4, an axe does 2d6 plus 4, a dagger does 1d6 plus 1. As you can see, not that vast differences for a game where 9th level PCs have 60 or more hitpoints. But here's the catch(es):
- While fights would drag out forever, whenever you land an attack that scores more than 15 damage (that is, roll damage and detract opponent AC, usually between 1 and 4) then the opponent has to roll on Self-Control. If he fails, he's either unconscious or suffers a morale penalty which keeps him out of the fight for 5 rounds. A guy with a weapon dealing 3d6 will be very mighty indeed here, so magic gear is super precious in the game.
- To score damage at all, you gotta hit. To hit you've got to roll fairly well, and no matter how well you rolled, the guy still has to roll his defense roll. If he passes, you don't land a hit. That's where stuff like power attack comes in, which works the same as in D&D 3.x, except your penalty on the attack roll translates to a penalty of your opponent's defense roll. Basically, you take a risk to minimalize the odds of your opponent making his defense roll.
- But this is also why Weapon Comparison Values are so important. You can't just pick the most damage dealing weapons... because if your choice is ill matched for a small, nimble opponent with a great Evade value, you won't score a hit. So it pays off to be skilled in several weapon categories. I love this mechanic, I wish D&D had something like it. The closest I could think of were tables matching weapons with armor types... but does D&D have tables matching weapons with weapons?
- And now comes the final detail, which I love best. The best weapon type in the game is the two handed sword. It's Comparison Value is 7/7. It's way above average on both attack and defense, and deals decent damage. But here's the catch. Only warriors trained in the emperor's army are entitled to bear that weapon. Think of mage guilds and thieves' guilds, except for warriors. Unless you bear a document that says you graduated from an imperial warriors' academy, you'll get into legal trouble whereever in the Empire of Man you travel if you get caught bearing a Warrior's greatsword.

I mention this last thing because I like how the mechanics and the setting support each other. It's not profound (to be honest, it sounds like a GM fiat, doesn't it?) but I like that kind of stuff.

Anyway, that's what stuck out from that one day of gaming my first ever system after all that time. I wouldn't give up D&D for this, not by a wide shot. I still love the setting, and some of the modules published for it (as I said, I ran one of them), but it's basically Germany's Golarion (Paizo). Expect massive railroads and pages upon pages of setting infomation only a fraction of which will be relevant for actual gaming, and both of which will demand hours upon hours you pour into them to make them anything else than complete railroads. If you love reading background information, and are reasonably fluent in German, I'd say have a go at it, it's probably one of the best fantasy settings in existence, rich in mythology and a faked political history. If not, however, and you are just on the lookout for another fantasy heart breaker ruleset than I'd say stear clear. Keep to BECMI, or try something like Dragon Warriors, I think you'll be happier.

Quote from: Windjammer;501590I GMed, we played 3rd edition (don't bother with 4th), and I had prepped a 1985 module called "Beneath the Northern lights" (here shown in its - unaltered - 1995 reprint):

Sadly, the only English version (I know of) published was 4th edition. What you describe here sounds much more interesting than what I remember of that English edition.

QuoteMagic is all over the place(...)

Funny, I have seen fans describe it as a low-fantasy setting when what they were describing didn't sound low-fantasy to me at all. :teehee:

Quote(...)PCs are expected to rescue the Ice Queen, and be absolutely fine that there IS no artic diamond.(...)

QuoteExpect massive railroads and pages upon pages of setting infomation only  a fraction of which will be relevant for actual gaming, and both of  which will demand hours upon hours you pour into them to make them  anything else than complete railroads.

I have read complaints about the railroadiness of published adventures for DSA from both fans and non-fans.

QuoteSo the guy wrote a fantasy heart breaker, and wedded it to a setting of  his own, which is roughly Greyhawk except with German nomenclature.  Again, this is a superficial comparison, but it's important to stress  right away how derivative this game is - it's a heartbreaker through and  through.

Again, I have seen fans wax lyrical about how fantastically original the DSA setting is when it really doesn't appear as such, not to me anyway.

Quote(...)it's probably one of the best fantasy settings in existence, rich in mythology and a faked political history.

From what I read the setting has grown huge over the years and so has the official timeline. That must make it terrible to run this for purist players.

I started game mastering with DSA (started playing before that with First Ed AD&D), L'Oeil Noir in French, and then transited to Mentzer D&D, AD&D, then Hawkmoon, Stormbringer, etc. The main parts of the game came with two boxes. Initiation au Jeu d'Aventure, which allowed you to create characters for a few classes and take them up a few levels, and Extension au Jeu d'Aventure, which added classes to the game, as well as a skills system, a gazetteer of Aventuria including a bestiary, and so on.



The first boxed set was absolutely awesome. I have extremely good memories running the game. The second boxed set added a lot to the complexity of the game without much benefits, IMO. If I was to run l'Oeil Noir today, which I totally would, by the way, I would just use the Initiation rules with the Extension's Gazetteer and forget about the rest (Règles avancées Maîtres d'Armes I and II, Accessoires du Maître... all crap), maybe broadening the scope of the classes available after a while, and/or building some house rules (AG must have seizure or something right now) as needed.

The real gem at the time was the Havena boxed set, a full city described for the game block per block which was absolutely fabulous, inspired, well organized, easy to use... I sadly don't have it with me anymore. I would love to hunt down a copy of it:



Some of the adventures for the game are really awesome. Others suck balls. Earlier adventures chronologically by their dates of publication are generally better.

The game translated in English a few years ago looks NOTHING like the game I just described. The system is nigh unrecognizable, a thousand times more complex, for little to no benefits for the game itself, IMO, though there were a few clever ideas in there (like the rolls of multiple d20 for skills for instance, if memory serves). Forget about it.

I'm interested, but I will heed the warning about the english translation version put out by Studio 2. Thanks!

Quote from: jeff37923;501575In another thread, I asked what game is usually a standard starter for gamers in Germany. I was told The Dark Eye RPG. Now I vaguely remember seeing and english translation of this game when I worked for Gameboard Distributing and I think it was made by Studio 2 Publishing, but I never got the chance to either read it or play it.

What I'd like is some impressions of the game and how it plays from people on this board who have played it. I'm curious and would like to hear more.

The FLGS here used to have a couple copies of the English version in the discount pile.  If you're interested I can see if they still have it.

EDIT: Whoops, everyone says that version is shit, so nevermind.

Quote from: Windjammer;501590Initiative... very strange. So above the 6 D&D stats there's one called "Courage" (Mut). There's no initiative roll. Guys with highest courage go first. Animals got courage too. This counts for every new pairing of combatants. Our viking ran from one sledge hound to a barbarian (because, yep, after witch's knot they started to pick off the remaining combatants one by one), and managed to get in several attacks in one round because his courage score trumped that of both of his combatants.

This caught my eye.  How does this work in practice?  If some guy with high courage is in multiple fights in a round (say he is surrounded) then he strikes first in each of the interactions?  It is interesting, but I am curious if I am reading that right.

-TGA

I have the Darkworld boardgame which is the HeroQuest for DSA. Its not as good as HQ or WHQ, but interesting for an hour. Only during a recent search about The Dark Eye setting did I find out that the boardgame was even part of the DSA setting.

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;502084This caught my eye.  How does this work in practice?  If some guy with high courage is in multiple fights in a round (say he is surrounded) then he strikes first in each of the interactions?  It is interesting, but I am curious if I am reading that right.

-TGA

Not quite. Combat isn't strictly cyclical. You handle paired combatants one by one, order doesn't matter much (though as GM I seek out those featuring combatants with high Courage first). You gotta contrast:
1) A fighter starting a new round already surrounded by multiple foes. He still only gets one attack roll per round, and only one defense action per turn (his choice whether he rolls on Parry or Evade, the former is calculated in part on his weapon skill, the latter on Dexterity - there's no AC, rather IF he suffers a hit you detract his armor score from the damage).
2) Different situation: new combatants start to engage that same fighter this round or he runs up to new combatants (he gets 1 move action per turn). In this case he nets additional attack actions (still only 1 per turn per combatant, if applicable).

At least, that's how we handled it, and I was going on my friends' authority here. In theory, 2) could end you in all sorts of contrived situations. Suppose 12 wolves swarm a viking in 1 round, and that his courage is higher than theirs. He could get 12 attacks that turn, though still only 1 defense action.

--------

And, as promised, my hand drawn map for the module. The thin line towards the lake in the right top side is the PCs' progress with their sledge. As you can see, they didn't botch one Orientation/Wilderness Survival roll as regards their journey.