Anyone have this? Try it out yet? First impressions? How is the whole "cooperative world building" thing working? Do you like it in play? Does it have potential for portability to other games?
I'll get mine soon (ordering Friday when I get paid...). But until then, inquiring minds want to know.
Quote from: Caesar SlaadAnyone have this? Try it out yet? First impressions? How is the whole "cooperative world building" thing working? Do you like it in play? Does it have potential for portability to other games?
I'll get mine soon (ordering Friday when I get paid...). But until then, inquiring minds want to know.
I will speak of Buring Empires first, since I have read some of it. I have not played it yet.
So far I like it, though I'm not sure I will ever actually play it.
Some things that are cool:
- World Burner: basically you go through and pick one item from each section of the world burner and by the end you have a most finished world. You select everything from economy,geography, government, and all sorts of other things. With some minor mods you could port the world burner into any Sci-Fi or Fantasy game. Easily the coolest idea so far in the book.
- Tech Burner: works somewhat like the world burner, but instead you are burning weapons and gear instead. Each element added to the weapon or gear raises the Resource check needed to aquired it. A resource check can be made @ any time in the game, ANY TIME. If you make it you just so happen to have that item handy. There are two types of tech you can burn "color" and "hard". Color tech is gear that you come up with that has no mechanical impact on the game, it just there to add to the setting. Color tech can be converted to mechanical tech @ which point it will have a mechanical impact on the game. Items generally start as color (a discription), but once you want to get an effect from the tech it becomes hard tech.
- Setting:At first it will remind you of warhammer 40k, but once you read on you realize that besides power armor an such it is quite different. Humanity is on a down swing and the Vaylen(sp?) are invading human space. The Vaylen start life as worms which are then implanted into other beings skulls and then the take control of their bodies. So you really never know who is human and who is Vaylen.
I'll post more later.
The tech burner and world burner parts sound very cool. The setting sounds kinda blah, but I think I could fix that right up.
The setting is very much hardwired into the game. The game was built with direct input from the author of the graphic novels Shadow/Iron Empires novels.
http://www.darkhorse.com/profile/profile.php?sku=45-076
I've read a good deal of it. You are in for a lot of work, and occationally some disappointment, if you want to try extract that. Even the basic structure of the plots of those books are encoded deep into the rules. It is so structured a game that it borders on a hybrid of an RPG and wargame or boardgame. It is still very much a creative endevour like RPGs, it is just that you end up writing a new story very much in the style of those two graphic novels.
P.S. A lot of the extensive artwork found in the book is right out of the stories, and the rest is previously unpublished sketches and paintings from the artist/author of those two books. In fact the author, Chris Moeller, is hand-drawing the sketches in the limited edition books. There is some very nice art in it indeed.
Huh. Well that kinda sucks. I'd much rather use D20 Future , do my own setting and maybe steal the subsystem of technology and 'world burning'.
Quote from: Abyssal MawHuh. Well that kinda sucks. I'd much rather use D20 Future , do my own setting and maybe steal the subsystem of technology and 'world burning'.
yeah the books is nearly worthless to extract setting info from. You would have to read the entire book from cover to cover to get it.
:rant: Of course by time you have done that you will have learned all the rules you will never use.
I have heard this game involves some sort of conflict between the players and the GM. Is this true? How does that work?
Quote from: Abyssal MawHuh. Well that kinda sucks. I'd much rather use D20 Future , do my own setting and maybe steal the subsystem of technology and 'world burning'.
What kind of setting are you looking to do? I have considered this possibility somewhat.
Because stealing the subsystem technology is, well, it would be odd if you were doing it for a Burning Wheel game. By the time you try bring it into D20 Future all you are likely to have left is an idea. Especially considering that you'd be leaving behind all that good Firefight combat stuff that is built to handle a modern and near-future battlefield rather than trying to superimpose a modern battlefield on top of a grid mapped medieval mentality.
QuoteOf course by time you have done that you will have learned all the rules you will never use.
I've become entirely convinced that gaming tables would be a lot happier if people would just play the rules that someone has already invested numerous man-years in tuning and cleaning up. Even if just for one campaign before they try pull stuff apart.
Quote from: VellorianI have heard this game involves some sort of conflict between the players and the GM. Is this true? How does that work?
There is no Rule 0. The GM doesn't unilaterally change, bend, or break the rules. The campaign senario is drafted up cooperatively by all the players including the GM. World Burning and Tech Burning is all part of that as is creating the characters, NPCs and PCs. Also part of this is is allocating a set number of resources for each 'team', the player and 'team' and GM 'team'. The GM is limited to drawing from that, just like the players. Although there is some dicing involved in procuring items, as mentioned before, and you can aquire resources during play as well.
The scoring is a bit like tennis match scoring, with one team or the other being awarded a win/lose for each Scene/Conflict. See the
Flow of the Game section on page 10 of the PDF 'The Face of Collapse' excert on this download page. (http://www.burningempires.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page)
Please pardon my ignorance: is "rule 0" the ability of a GM to "dominate" a game and overrule the rules?
Quote from: VellorianPlease pardon my ignorance: is "rule 0" the ability of a GM to "dominate" a game and overrule the rules?
Yes. I don't remember which version, but I believe that was the specific name assigned to it in one or another edition of (A)D&D. So it is closer to boardgames or war games where there isn't a DM/GM. The rules hold the balance of power in arbitration, although since there more rule grey areas than normally found in those games there are some nifty mechanics used to help keep the GM on a more even standing with the players.
Note also that the written rule mechanics are far more encompassing of the action in the game than say, for example, D&D. This is an important part of the objectivity.
Largely though it is the whole premise of the GM team vs. the player team permiates the whole of the rules, thus allowing the rules to take preventative measures to avoid a lot of the problems you typically run into when trying to run a game like that with an RPG.
EDIT: Note that it also does things to curb the munchkinism, rules lawyering, and general brow beating and other assorted anti-social behaviour that players often engage in to counteract/balance that GM power. So discouraging thngs that are actually
encouraged in games like D&D. If you have ever played Burning Wheel, which is the basis for the game and shares a lot of these same properties, Burning Empires is an evolution of that system.
I was involved in the playtesting of the game and it is a fun ride.
Yes, it is absolutely GM vs. players. During the first session, one of the PC's ended up in jail and one of the prison guards was going to try to shiv the PC and then put an alien in the PC's skull. The player said something like, "You aren't going to kill my PC the first game."
"Watch your ass, damn right I will."
He spent tons of artha and rolled well and got through it without me putting an alien in his skull. Good stuff. Nice to see the player sweat.
It is crunchy-fun stuff and I just received the book in the mail and its damned purty.
Rule 0 in D&D only applies to character creation. It's about "check with the DM. There may be house rules about character creation"
QuoteYes. I don't remember which version, but I believe that was the specific name assigned to it in one or another edition of (A)D&D. So it is closer to boardgames or war games where there isn't a DM/GM. The rules hold the balance of power in arbitration, although since there more rule grey areas than normally found in those games there are some nifty mechanics used to help keep the GM on a more even standing with the players.
Note also that the written rule mechanics are far more encompassing of the action in the game than say, for example, D&D. This is an important part of the objectivity.
EDIT: Note that it also does things to curb the munchkinism, rules lawyering, and general brow beating and other assorted anti-social behaviour that players often engage in to counteract/balance that GM power. So discouraging thngs that are actually encouraged in games like D&D.
I hate to flame you, but this is utter BS. Burning Empires is an amateur-designed game that I might be willing to support based on a few ideas about world and tech generation. But if this is really just saying "support our game because we're so superior to D&D playing munchkins.." then no sale. I don't buy from swine.
Quote from: Abyssal MawRule 0 in D&D only applies to character creation. It's about "check with the DM. There may be house rules about character creation"
I hate to flame you, but this is utter BS. Burning Empires is an amateur-designed game that I might be willing to support based on a few ideas about world and tech generation. But if this is really just saying "support our game because we're so superior to D&D playing munchkins.." then no sale. I don't buy from swine.
well, that seems to be a turn-off for some people with Forge games. Whether it is intentional or they are just misunderstod certain people over there seem to come off as some sort of RPG Messiahs.
I have not had any problems myself with any of the Forgites.:shrug:
Quote from: PakaYes, it is absolutely GM vs. players. During the first session, one of the PC's ended up in jail and one of the prison guards was going to try to shiv the PC and then put an alien in the PC's skull. The player said something like, "You aren't going to kill my PC the first game."
"Watch your ass, damn right I will."
He spent tons of artha and rolled well and got through it without me putting an alien in his skull. Good stuff. Nice to see the player sweat.
I'm not sure that would go over very well with the players I have and the style of play they enjoy. "Crunch" is a "bad thing" with them. And we have enough player conflict with the interesting personalities as it is. Injecting further conflict and competition would be, if you'll pardon the use of a very old simile, "like throwing gasoline on a fire."
It sounds interesting. I'd love to read through it. I'd love to try it with another group of people. It just wouldn't fit with my group. :(
Quote from: Abyssal MawI hate to flame you, but this is utter BS. Burning Empires is an amateur-designed game that I might be willing to support based on a few ideas about world and tech generation. But if this is really just saying "support our game because we're so superior to D&D playing munchkins.." then no sale. I don't buy from swine.
This seems a bit harsh. I think that you can design a game that has mechanics that emphasize different aspects of the roleplaying experience without being an affront to other games. Frankly I think that you are falling into the same us vs. them trap that you are decrying. Hey, you can set whatever standards you'd like for the spending of your money, which is the beauty of a free market, but please don't get righteous about it.
For my purposes, the ideas that I have seen in the Burning Empires PDF that I downloaded are intriguing enough that I am considering buying the game. I am also probably going to check out the graphic novels that it is based on for good measure. If the setting is cool, the game mechanics are a good way to tell similar stories, and I can find a group of people who are game then I will give it a shot.
TGA
Quotewell, that seems to be a turn-off for some people with Forge games. Whether it is intentional or they are just misunderstod certain people over there seem to come off as some sort of RPG Messiahs.
I guess I just have a hard time accepting people who don't know what the fuck they are talking about as authority figures. I know! It's crazy. I have a similar problem spending my money on assholes who go out of their way to insult me. It's like a character flaw with me!
Okay, but seriously. I'm not looking for a game about characters that "have to spend artha" (whatever the hell that is) or work out their moral issues or anything like that. I want to play a game about characters that work together in a team oriented situation where we have sort of created the campaign world and everything on our own... and the whole point is to have futuristic adventures. D20 Future is great like that. Having an option to come up with world and tech details is cool. But in general, I don't like other people's settings. The details in the first post sparked my initial interst in Burning Empires. Subsequent posts on the matter doused that interest and replaced it with contempt. Thats all that happened.
Quote from: The Good AssyrianThis seems a bit harsh. I think that you can design a game that has mechanics that emphasize different aspects of the roleplaying experience without being an affront to other games. Frankly I think that you are falling into the same us vs. them trap that you are decrying. Hey, you can set whatever standards you'd like for the spending of your money, which is the beauty of a free market, but please don't get a righteous about it.
It is a bit harsh, but in general, I agree with you. Someone *can* design a game that has mechanics that emphasize different aspects of the roleplaying experience without being an affront to other games. I'm all for it. Design away and I wish that person all the best. Seriously. And heck, I may even support it! I bought Faery's Tale this year. It's brilliant.
And yes, I absolutely am falling in to the "us vs. them" situation. But when I say "us" I am speaking as a happy go lucky civilian, non-game designer, consumer, guy that plays RPGS, and potential customer. If someone- say some designer or representative fan-- chooses to put themselves in opposition to me, can they expect my support or customership or advocacy?
Quote from: Abyssal MawRule 0 in D&D only applies to character creation. It's about "check with the DM. There may be house rules about character creation"
Really? What is the exact reference and text for it? Because D&D/AD&D certainly does and since at least 1e has had the text and the tone that explicitly gives DMs, among other things, the authority to just up and change things, rules be damned.
QuoteI hate to flame you, but this is utter BS. Burning Empires is an amateur-designed game that I might be willing to support based on a few ideas about world and tech generation. But if this is really just saying "support our game because we're so superior to D&D playing munchkins.." then no sale. I don't buy from swine.
Have you read it, or even leafed through it? I can't speak for everyone at The Forge, not in the least because I don't read or post there, nor can I speak about every game built by everyone there. But that is a gross mischaracterization of both the general quality of the Burning Wheel and Burning Empire books and Luke Crane's general attitude. By gross mischaracterization I mean opposite to actuality. Perhaps you are lumping it and him in with other things that better fit you views? It wouldn't suprise me that within the loose collective of The Forge you have some real turkeys.
Rule 0 is an actual Rule in the 3.0 and 3.5 PHB. I don't have the exact wording, but it's right at the beginning. It 's under a heading that says "Rule 0".
I'll admit that I have neither read Burning (wheel or empires), nor leafed through it. I will further admit that I am prejudiced against anything associated with the Forge.
I like to think my prejudices can be overcome. Although probably not by saying things like "D&D players do things like (totally inaccurate and insulting description), and we are totally different and superior!"
I could give a crap about Luke Crane or anyone else. I'm a customer, not a fan.
Quote from: Abyssal MawRule 0 is an actual Rule in the 3.0 and 3.5 PHB. I don't have the exact wording, but it's right at the beginning. It 's under a heading that says "Rule 0".
That text is located in the character creation section, but it isn't talking about only character creation. It is just giving a heads up warning about it. I'm pretty sure there is an older reference too, as that isn't actually a "rule" there. Or, and I don't think this is it, that might actually be the source for "rule 0" the shorthand of a number of different entries in the rules. Unfortunately my older AD&D books are packed away in boxes unknown right now so I'm not going to go find it.
In core of 3e the text about arbitrarily changing things around and the general authoritarian powers of the DM are more in the DMG. Just
having a separate book for DMs-only being an aspect of it.
I'll admit that I have neither read Burning (wheel or empires), nor leafed through it. I will further admit that I am prejudiced against anything associated with the Forge. As one consumer civilian to another, I recommend it. At 25$ BWR and the Character Burner bundle is dirt cheap. While it does come at things from a different angle than you are probably use to, it certainly has a lot of merit. Even if you don't actually play the game Burning Wheel has a lot of very good things in it. The dice mechanics alone are probably the best use of dice pools I've ever seen, and even the hardest core 1e AD&D guy that read it thought the dice mechanics superior to D&D's.
Note that it isn't like Burning Empires in that it is a far more general rule use set. On their web site they even have a freebie setting extension Serpent Sun that is sort of a Mad Max setting with a touch of mystic pychic powers.
In fact Burning Wheel is highly encouraging of all the players coming together and building the campaign setting. Burning Empires is just a different game that is geared towards a particular product license, and as such is very much tuned to that purpose.
QuoteI like to think my prejudices can be overcome. Although probably not by saying things like "D&D players do things like (totally inaccurate and insulting description), and we are totally different and superior!"
I don't see that being said in this thread? It sounds to me a bit like the prejudice prepetuating the prejudice.
QuoteI could give a crap about Luke Crane or anyone else. I'm a customer, not a fan.
You certainly seemed to care about what you claimed to be his attitude. Which you were decidedly off on.
Quote from: Abyssal MawRule 0 is an actual Rule in the 3.0 and 3.5 PHB. I don't have the exact wording, but it's right at the beginning. It 's under a heading that says "Rule 0".
Actually it's "step 0". "Rule 0" sort of evolved from that as a terminology to refer to the general carte blanche of traditional GMing. (Which is touched on in other places throughout the books, particularly the DMG.)
It's odd that we are getting pro/anti-"forgeite" or "traditional" judgements getting thrown back and forth here, considering that Burning Empires takes the "player empowering" and "rules strict" stance that D&D 3.x gets derided for to a new level. It's sort of the opposite of the traditional trend of indepentant games.
At any rate, could we keep a little decorum folks? Can we accept that the BE approach may or may not be for all of us and still discuss it? Not having it yet, I am intrigued on how this whole "rules scripted" GM/player relationship plays out and if there is anything worth taking from it from a game design standpoint DESPITE the fact that I am a big "rule 0" advocate.
Blakkie- I'm not taking offense with Luke Crane (whoever this is) so much as I am rejecting it on the basis of you being a representative advocate. I know thats totally unfair of me, and yet there I am. Also, I refuse to accept any dice pool mechanics as "superior" to anything. I can't stand dice pools. Personal quirk.
(Although once again, here's where I prove that I can overcome my prejudices sometimes.. Faery's Tale has dice pools! And I can't help but really like that game).
Hey Slaad:
Ok, ok. I'll have some decorum. I honestly showed up in this discussion to hear about BE and I got treated to a pointless discussion of how D&D players are all about the brow-beating and the GM arbitrarily yanking the rules carpet out from under the players.
Quote from: Caesar SlaadCan we accept that the BE approach may or may not be for all of us and still discuss it?
I doubt that it would be for everyone. It is targetted very specifically at people that would like to play the genre of a space empire in slow decline, and are cool with having the general tone of the graphic novels that it is based around.
The precision of the rules might also feel really wierd for people used to just making rules up.
Plus you definately have to be of the mind of the GM sharing power more like card games or boardgames. As a friend of my , the 1e AD&D fan and self-described 'grognard', noted after reading the first few chapters of Burning Wheel. "D&D has the premise that players will munchkin and rules lawyer as much as they can until the point the DM puts his foot down. Burning Wheel on the otherhand has the basic premise that players will be reasonable people."
While this second premise may or may not be true all of the time, working from that assumption the rules have defused a big source of conflict between players and GMs (as opposed to between characters played by these) by players having more control within the rules. Because people naturally tend to try control their destiny to one extent or another. So providing tools for players to do that in socially constructive manner tends to discourage the use of the socially pathologic methods.
Quote from: Abyssal MawHey Slaad:
Ok, ok. I'll have some decorum. I honestly showed up in this discussion to hear about BE and I got treated to a pointless discussion of how D&D players are all about the brow-beating and the GM arbitrarily yanking the rules carpet out from under the players.
Rest assured, my comment wasn't just directed at you. I'm usually the first person to cop an Al Pachino "are you talkin' to me" attitude when confronted with typical D&D derisions. But I am also more interested in actually hearing about BE in this thread than a debate over GM fiat or D&D's place in it. Though that could make for another interesting discussion...
I'll also cop that when I first heard about the conventions of BE, I thought it sounded a bit "McKrakenish"*. I would like to analyze the game to see if there's something worthwhile in its approach, or if it gets to join Synnibar in the 50% off bin.
* - For those not familiar, Raven CS McKraken was the author of Synnibar, a game that demanded the GM run adventures as scripted and explicitly provided the players with a "reset" plus bonuses and bennies if the GM failed to follow the rules. It is commonly ridiculed for this.
Quote from: Abyssal MawBlakkie- I'm not taking offense with Luke Crane (whoever this is) so much as I am rejecting it on the basis of you being a representative advocate.
Can I help it if you put yourself in direct opposition to my experience as a civilian customer? ;)
QuoteOk, ok. I'll have some decorum. I honestly showed up in this discussion to hear about BE and I got treated to a pointless discussion of how D&D players are all about the brow-beating and the GM arbitrarily yanking the rules carpet out from under the players.
Not everyone that plays D&D falls into that, but sadly the D&D rules directly and indirectly encourage that. :(
Wow, your'e really selling Burning Empires to me now.
Listen, if you really want to talk about D&D, why not just open a thread up about it?
Quote from: Abyssal MawWow, your'e really selling Burning Empires to me now.
I'm not trying to
sell it to you. Never was. :( In fact I entered this thread
warning about expectations from the game.
Quote from: Abyssal MawListen, if you really want to talk about D&D, why not just open a thread up about it?
This all is coming from me using the DM and player role, as perscribed by the D&D rules, as a reference point to explain how it acts more like a wargame to reduce DM conflict of interest so that the GM and the players can play against each other on a roughly level playingfield.
Okay.
I'm really impressed with your collective knowledge of minutiae regarding a specific game mechanic. I apologize for redirecting the thread down this path of inquiry.
That was then, this is now: May we please return to a discussion of Burning Empires, since I'm very curious about it? :)
One of the key points of BE is that the players and GM create the world where the adventure takes place, then they Burn characters.
By time all of the characters and the World is burned, the adventure for the game basically falls right into the GM's Lab. The way the character creation works tells the GM " hey, this is what kind of game i want to play". So it is very important for the GM to know the PCs very well since much of the adventure is generate directly from the traits ans such of PC.
Quote from: McrowBy time all of the characters and the World is burned, the adventure for the game basically falls right into the GM's Lab. The way the character creation works tells the GM " hey, this is what kind of game i want to play". So it is very important for the GM to know the PCs very well since much of the adventure is generate directly from the traits ans such of PC.
See, now that sounds very promising. How does this work, in a nutshell? Anything ripe for plucking in use in other games?
Right now, for an upcoming Spycraft game, I am contemplating doing something like a little "pre game quiz", querrying players on things like how they like various genre shows and game to try to get a feel for what they like. Anything that can improve this process?
Quote from: VellorianOkay.
I'm really impressed with your collective knowledge of minutiae regarding a specific game mechanic. I apologize for redirecting the thread down this path of inquiry.
Hehe. :) Sorry, I let it get a bit off track.
QuoteThat was then, this is now: May we please return to a discussion of Burning Empires, since I'm very curious about it? :)
Well it isn't Synnibar. At the very least it isn't a particularly dry, boring read. :)
It is however fairly 'crunchy'. An obvious offshoot from the requirement of having more encompassing, objective rules than many RPGs. It also covers a fairly wide range of tech in 4 catagories of advancement ranging roughly from mid 20th century to late 20th century-21st century and then into quatum level computing and large space ships and then up into force fields and blackhole powerplants. The combat system also covers from personal through squad based ground battlefields up to space battleships. The personal combat is sort of the exception, and is covered by a rule literally called
I Corner Him and Stab Him in the Face.
A large balancing factor in multiple players against the one GM is that every character is built with self limiting relationships. Because of the Vaylen invasion the characters get put in a bind of likely choosing between their lifelong friends and family and winning a war. This isn't just an exersize in method acting though, it is supported and enforced by the underlying game mechanics.
Quote from: Caesar SlaadSee, now that sounds very promising. How does this work, in a nutshell? Anything ripe for plucking in use in other games?
Right now, for an upcoming Spycraft game, I am contemplating doing something like a little "pre game quiz", querrying players on things like how they like various genre shows and game to try to get a feel for what they like. Anything that can improve this process?
If you are just looking to lift that basic technique then Burning Wheel is not only cheaper but is a shorter read and gives it in more general terms. Burning Empire is more a specific instance of the general plus with the setting added in. And prettier pictures.
I recall reading something about a Dune version of Burning Wheel. Was that an official setting or fanservice? I rather liked Dune and would love to see a game developed in the universe (although I've heard there are licensing issues).
Quote from: VellorianI recall reading something about a Dune version of Burning Wheel. Was that an official setting or fanservice? I rather liked Dune and would love to see a game developed in the universe (although I've heard there are licensing issues).
Burning Sands: Jihad (http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/index.php?title=Downloads#Burning_Sands:_Jihad)
Quote from: blakkieIf you are just looking to lift that basic technique then Burning Wheel is not only cheaper but is a shorter read and gives it in more general terms. Burning Empire is more a specific instance of the general plus with the setting added in. And prettier pictures.
Well, I'm probably going to be buying BE Friday one way or the other. So I am not so much looking to be "sold" on it as details and potential impact in game design.
Quote from: VellorianI recall reading something about a Dune version of Burning Wheel. Was that an official setting or fanservice? I rather liked Dune and would love to see a game developed in the universe (although I've heard there are licensing issues).
I'm not sure about the Dune version, it would likely be a fan conversion.
could you be refering to the Burning Sands (http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/index.php?title=Downloads#Burning_Sands:_Jihad) setting for BW?
Because of the obvious licensing issues it is called Burning Sands:Jihad. It is a shareware style 88 page offical download from the site. I haven't played it or even read it though since Dune isn't really my thing. It is also, I've been told, probably a good idea to have played some Burning Wheel first to learn those rules before layering that extension on top.
I also know that there are a number of fan created setting stuff, including some Star Wars things. But you have to go through their message board for that.
[L=http://QUOTE=Caesar Slaad]See, now that sounds very promising. How does this work, in a nutshell? Anything ripe for plucking in use in other games?
Right now, for an upcoming Spycraft game, I am contemplating doing something like a little "pre game quiz", querrying players on things like how they like various genre shows and game to try to get a feel for what they like. Anything that can improve this process?[/QUOTE]
in short:
each character has beliefs,Lifepaths,Circles,Reputation,and instincts.
Beliefs:basically a description of how the character views the world. It should include a goal.
Lifepaths: basically the life experiences of the character. somewhat like a career.
Circles: represents the influence the charcter has in his community or professions.
Affiliations:organizations or people you have a connections with.
Reputation: your standing with in your circles and Affilitations.
Instincts: this is basically a truism for your character. An instict is something like "when traveling alone, I always carry my gun". So no matter what the situation, if the character is alone they will always have access to there weapon.
Between this and the world burner the majority of what is needed to start playing is already there.
[URL="http://www.burningempires.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page]http://www.burningempires.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page[/URL]
It's sounding more and more like Burning Wheel is really more of a "collaborative game" than a "role-playing game." Would that be an accurate summation?
Players gather to collaborate in the creation of a gameworld, characters and minute details about the setting and interaction, then they work together to create the gameplay and determine success or failure against various obstacles.
I'm not getting a real "okay, you meet in a tavern..." feel from this at all. But, I'm also not getting an "ongoing campaign" feel, either.
Quote from: Caesar SlaadWell, I'm probably going to be buying BE Friday one way or the other. So I am not so much looking to be "sold" on it as details and potential impact in game design.
The impact I think depends a lot on how you currently GM. If you are already looking to do that sort of thing then it can probably help you avoid some pitfalls and give some pointers to help you get where you already want to go. Obviously though not using the rules in play is going require that you sift out and translate a lot of things.
So, and this is just a guess, I don't think the direct immediate impact is going to be huge for you. But I think you'll experience a lot of lightbulbs come on as you say "yah, that's kinda what I was shooting for". Although it might go further than were initially looking.
Quote from: VellorianIt's sounding more and more like Burning Wheel is really more of a "collaborative game" than a "role-playing game." Would that be an accurate summation?
Players gather to collaborate in the creation of a gameworld, characters and minute details about the setting and interaction, then they work together to create the gameplay and determine success or failure against various obstacles.
I'm not getting a real "okay, you meet in a tavern..." feel from this at all. But, I'm also not getting an "ongoing campaign" feel, either.
BW is made for an ongoign campaign, no doubt about it and its a very traditional RPG.
I am going to get together with some buddies this winter and go through the Slave Lords series with BW, if that's any indication. I won't be running the modules right out of the book but I wouldn't do that anyway.
Quote from: VellorianIt's sounding more and more like Burning Wheel is really more of a "collaborative game" than a "role-playing game." Would that be an accurate summation?
It is more collaborative than many role-playing games. But it is still squarely a role-playing game in any sense.
QuotePlayers gather to collaborate in the creation of a gameworld, characters and minute details about the setting and interaction, then they work together to create the gameplay and determine success or failure against various obstacles.
I'm not getting a real "okay, you meet in a tavern..." feel from this at all. But, I'm also not getting an "ongoing campaign" feel, either.
Likely because this is primarily the character and world burning parts that are being talked about. Plus Burning Empires, moreso than Burning Wheel, has a fixed termination to the campaign.
Indeed the idea is that you don't end up with an odd collection of characters whose single defining common shared goal and trait is that they happen to all "meet in a tavern". The campaign all ties into the characters, and to do this characters must each have some tie to the others. Otherwise you'd have a multiple-personality campaign.