tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post2067561277239182740..comments2024-03-18T17:29:17.205-07:00Comments on B/X BLACKRAZOR: Stars Without Number (No…Really!)JBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-85523915829061007742012-09-10T05:05:58.234-07:002012-09-10T05:05:58.234-07:00What about using the really old-school X-Plorers w...What about using the really old-school X-Plorers with the Stars Without Number sandbox guide?Andy Bartletthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06683770320671028815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-69037193954367947372011-10-24T12:47:25.828-07:002011-10-24T12:47:25.828-07:00@ Aeromer: Haven't found one yet...at this poi...@ Aeromer: Haven't found one yet...at this point, I've resigned myself to writing my own. It's just tough finding the time with everything else going on in my life. It's not like I get paid for this stuff!<br />; )JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-33345354700081581092011-10-23T07:39:23.070-07:002011-10-23T07:39:23.070-07:00So I am wondering, what WOULD you use for a star w...So I am wondering, what WOULD you use for a star wars esque game?Aeromer the Awesomehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203865730138814670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-41160260988418020432011-01-08T22:33:28.732-08:002011-01-08T22:33:28.732-08:00@ BTS: No worries. Hope you're enjoying it!@ BTS: No worries. Hope you're enjoying it!JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-48111330956765483502011-01-08T22:26:42.266-08:002011-01-08T22:26:42.266-08:00JB, I deleted my post because I misspelled your in...JB, I deleted my post because I misspelled your initials. <br /><br />It was your review that led me to this game after all.By The Swordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16799389743529116360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-62579233356864420572011-01-07T14:23:17.459-08:002011-01-07T14:23:17.459-08:00@ By the Sword: Hey, I think it's a good game....@ By the Sword: Hey, I think it's a good game. I was just down at Gary's today asking if they had a hard cover copy. No dice I'm afraid.JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-13970755208573098712011-01-07T11:06:17.801-08:002011-01-07T11:06:17.801-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.By The Swordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16799389743529116360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-3392777268654609372011-01-05T10:23:04.847-08:002011-01-05T10:23:04.847-08:00As for the group building a trading power in Hydra...As for the group building a trading power in Hydra, I'm not sure what the GM used to build specific adventures. I believe she simply looked at the list of friends/enemies/complications/things/places for a given world and cooked something up out of the raw parts, depending on where the players decided to go and why they decided to go there.<br /><br />I believe it's in the adventure creation section that I discuss how the first adventure a GM runs for a given group might not map well to their goals because it's assumed that PCs will be created in the first ten minutes of the first play session. Character creation takes all of ten minutes if you dawdle over it- roll 3d6 six times in order, pick a class, swap a prime attribute for a score of 14, pick a background, pick a training package, and roll hit points. Buying gear is the lengthiest part of the process, and that's if you have the credits for more than essentials. Because the GM doesn't know what the characters are interested in, I advise him or her to make it an adventure based on fairly universal ambitions, such as making money or getting passage off-planet. At the end of the adventure, the party then tells the GM where they plan to go and what they want to accomplish there, and the GM uses that information to make the next session's adventure.Sine Nominehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335794366582322514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-33030357936445762212011-01-05T06:10:36.385-08:002011-01-05T06:10:36.385-08:00@ Antonio: I was pretty excited when DH came out.....@ Antonio: I was pretty excited when DH came out...until I flipped through the rules. Never bought it.<br /><br />@ C'nor: Nope. I just read a lot of Heavy Metal magazines as a kid. But thanks for the link!<br /><br />@ Infornic: No problem. I'm not sure there's a "better" approach, so much as different approaches. I'm interested in discussing those.<br /><br />To me, "class-based" systems would feel "right"...but then I look at something like Trinity and say, no-no, this does NOT work for me.<br /><br />Everything else is negotiable.<br /><br />@ Sine:<br /><br />(regarding the players building a trading power in Hydra)<br /><br />...and did you use the random adventure seeds for developing scenarios? Did you shape these to match the players' ambitions...or were the players given free reign to ignore them in pursuit of other goals?<br /><br />It just seems like two different things are going on here...in one sense, we have text that discusses creating "conflicts that the PCs can help resolve" (i.e. adventures), which is very "old school" (players show up, scenario is presented, players "do their thing"). But on the other hand players are told "every character should have a goal from the very start" and it is emphasized that this goal is the driving force of the character. What happens when the goal and the adventure scenario don't jibe? Has this been a non-issue in your games? Or am I perhaps missing some part of the text that joins these ideas?<br /><br />Thanks for your thoughts!JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-32196783478751764882011-01-05T02:22:12.350-08:002011-01-05T02:22:12.350-08:00Dark Heresy...I did the same: bought the book, rea...Dark Heresy...I did the same: bought the book, read it, sold it back. Nice setting, HORRID rules. It's really, really rules heavy; skills, talents, traits, combat. I thought it was as streamlined as WFRP2e. Instead, they went a completely different route, and for the worse, IMO.Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-46457781632595975972011-01-05T01:26:57.585-08:002011-01-05T01:26:57.585-08:00"Heavy Metal-inspired mutant mash up"
..."Heavy Metal-inspired mutant mash up" <br /><br />That wouldn't have anything to do with this (http://cyclopeatron.blogspot.com/2010/08/heavy-metalpocalypse-in-gamma-world.html) post on Cyclopeatron, would it?C'nor (Outermost_Toe)https://www.blogger.com/profile/01580315916281876117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-3530679025524921692011-01-04T23:34:27.773-08:002011-01-04T23:34:27.773-08:00The game has worked quite smoothly thus far, which...The game has worked quite smoothly thus far, which is unsurprising to me, since so much of the basic mechanical framework is just a restatement of a model that's worked handsomely for near forty years. None of the activities it addresses specifically require the game's mechanical support- GMs have been building sandbox sci-fi worlds for decades, and have been handling player domains and creating alien races and strange beasts for just as long. In my experience, the rules have been helpful for GMs who are trying to do such things, and have let them do more, more easily than they could otherwise.<br /><br />The game makes no attempt to emulate any particular book, film, or series. Bits and pieces of such things make excellent grist, but the fundamental, underlying structure of a sandbox game world has always seemed to me to be utterly incommensurate with a book or TV series. It is something very, very different on a fundamental level, and trying to replicate those shows or books with a sandbox game is a doomed effort. You can take the parts and profit by them, but the sandbox gaming model I used for SWN operates by its own militantly anti-predestinarian rules.<br /><br />Because of this, I have a very difficult time imagining how any SWN player could be so devoid of imagination and drive as to be unable to come up with his or her own motivation for a PC, unable even to establish something as simple as the default "accumulate wealth and power". It's the GM's responsibility to make the world, but it's the players' responsibilities to have a reason to interact with it. In one game, players started out with a "Rogue Trader" premise in a Star Wars backwater region. The goal was to build a trading power in Hydra Sector, and that motivation was plenty to provide the characters with all reasons they needed. Players in a sandbox game have to be willing to act upon the world or they're failing the game as badly as a GM who doesn't bother to prepare the game world.Sine Nominehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335794366582322514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-89654591751390597472011-01-04T22:05:50.513-08:002011-01-04T22:05:50.513-08:00Really sorry about the double post. Blogger was be...Really sorry about the double post. Blogger was being unfriendly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-91576139205851465602011-01-04T22:04:37.934-08:002011-01-04T22:04:37.934-08:00If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few th...If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few thoughts on what might be a "better" approach. <br /><br />("Better" not in an objective sense, but in what JB is looking for.)<br /><br />Skills - In the source material JB cites - Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, etc - characters typically have broad areas of competence. Princess Leia can fire a blaster, bluff Darth Vader, fly a hovercycle, plan and participate in a commando raid, rig an explosive and probably fly a ship if needed. Kirk has basic competence at engineering, navigation, etc. So going by a standard skill system would produce characters with long and mostly overlapping skill lists. Instead, handle most skill checks with ability checks, modified by level and possibly class. Everyone is assumed to have a broad level of adventuring competence. To distinguish exceptional talent, allow characters to take Specializations that represent particular expertise. A specialization a. gives bonuses to ability checks and b. may allow the character to perform tasks otherwise not allowed. So a Medicine specialization gives bonuses to ability checks for medical tasks and allows the character to diagnose diseases and do surgery. The idea is characters start with only one or two specializations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-59557685741625911722011-01-04T22:02:42.990-08:002011-01-04T22:02:42.990-08:00If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few th...If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few thoughts on what might be a "better" approach. <br /><br />("Better" not in an objective sense, but in what JB is looking for.)<br /><br />Skills - In the source material JB cites - Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, etc - characters typically have broad areas of competence. Princess Leia can fire a blaster, bluff Darth Vader, fly a hovercycle, plan and participate in a commando raid, rig an explosive and probably fly a ship if needed. Kirk has basic competence at engineering, navigation, etc. So going by a standard skill system would produce characters with long and mostly overlapping skill lists. Instead, handle most skill checks with ability checks, modified by level and possibly class. Everyone is assumed to have a broad level of adventuring competence. To distinguish exceptional talent, allow characters to take Specializations that represent particular expertise. A specialization a. gives bonuses to ability checks and b. may allow the character to perform tasks otherwise not allowed. So a Medicine specialization gives bonuses to ability checks for medical tasks and allows the character to diagnose diseases and do surgery. The idea is characters start with only one or two specializations. <br /><br />Classes - d20 Modern (which I do not have) had classes linked to abilities, which might fit what JB likes - Agile Hero, Strong Hero, Tough Hero, etc. Presumably such classes Alternately, go with Warrior (good at combat and best hit points) and Expert (gets more specializations) classes, and add specialized classes depending on specific material. So psi abilities might fit a SWN style Mystic class. Aliens might get their own classes - think of Vulcans as working like the SF version of red box elves. <br /><br />What I'm trying for is something that lets you quickly define characters from fiction in game terms. Examples:<br /><br />James T. Kirk: High level Warrior, high Charisma, specializations in Leadership and Dilpomacy<br /><br />Spock - high level Vulcan<br /><br />McCoy and Scotty - high level Experts with specializations in Medicine and Engineering, respectively. McCoy has high Wisdom, Scotty has high Intelligence.<br /><br />Luke Skywalker (as of Star Wars) - mid level Warrior with high Dex and Pilot specialization.<br /><br />Princess Leia - mid level Expert with Diplomacy and Spy type specializations.<br /><br />Mal Reynolds - mid level Warrior with Leadership specialization.<br /><br />Etc. <br /><br />Hope this isn't disrupting the conversation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-31995276457067916972011-01-04T21:57:14.974-08:002011-01-04T21:57:14.974-08:00If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few th...If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few thoughts on what might be a "better" approach. <br /><br />("Better" not in an objective sense, but in what JB is looking for.)<br /><br />Skills - In the source material JB cites - Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, etc - characters typically have broad areas of competence. Princess Leia can fire a blaster, bluff Darth Vader, fly a hovercycle, plan and participate in a commando raid, rig an explosive and probably fly a ship if needed. Kirk has basic competence at engineering, navigation, etc. So going by a standard skill system would produce characters with long and mostly overlapping skill lists. Instead, handle most skill checks with ability checks, modified by level and possibly class. Everyone is assumed to have a broad level of adventuring competence. To distinguish exceptional talent, allow characters to take Specializations that represent particular expertise. A specialization a. gives bonuses to ability checks and b. may allow the character to perform tasks otherwise not allowed. So a Medicine specialization gives bonuses to ability checks for medical tasks and allows the character to diagnose diseases and do surgery. The idea is characters start with only one or two specializations. <br /><br />Classes - d20 Modern (which I do not have) had classes linked to abilities, which might fit what JB likes - Agile Hero, Strong Hero, Tough Hero, etc. Presumably such classes Alternately, go with Warrior (good at combat and best hit points) and Expert (gets more specializations) classes, and add specialized classes depending on specific material. So psi abilities might fit a SWN style Mystic class. Aliens might get their own classes - think of Vulcans as working like the SF version of red box elves. <br /><br />What I'm trying for is something that lets you quickly define characters from fiction in game terms. Examples:<br /><br />James T. Kirk: High level Warrior, high Charisma, specializations in Leadership and Dilpomacy<br /><br />Spock - high level Vulcan<br /><br />McCoy and Scotty - high level Experts with specializations in Medicine and Engineering, respectively. McCoy has high Wisdom, Scotty has high Intelligence.<br /><br />Luke Skywalker (as of Star Wars) - mid level Warrior with high Dex and Pilot specialization.<br /><br />Princess Leia - mid level Expert with Diplomacy and Spy type specializations.<br /><br />Mal Reynolds - mid level Warrior with Leadership specialization.<br /><br />Etc. <br /><br />Hope this isn't disrupting the conversation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-67662573063226200952011-01-04T21:54:46.065-08:002011-01-04T21:54:46.065-08:00If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few th...If you'll pardon an intrusion, I have a few thoughts on what might be a "better" approach. <br /><br />("Better" not in an objective sense, but in what JB is looking for.)<br /><br />Skills - In the source material JB cites - Star Wars, Star Trek, Firefly, etc - characters typically have broad areas of competence. Princess Leia can fire a blaster, bluff Darth Vader, fly a hovercycle, plan and participate in a commando raid, rig an explosive and probably fly a ship if needed. Kirk has basic competence at engineering, navigation, etc. So going by a standard skill system would produce characters with long and mostly overlapping skill lists. Instead, handle most skill checks with ability checks, modified by level and possibly class. Everyone is assumed to have a broad level of adventuring competence. To distinguish exceptional talent, allow characters to take Specializations that represent particular expertise. A specialization a. gives bonuses to ability checks and b. may allow the character to perform tasks otherwise not allowed. So a Medicine specialization gives bonuses to ability checks for medical tasks and allows the character to diagnose diseases and do surgery. The idea is characters start with only one or two specializations. <br /><br />Classes - d20 Modern (which I do not have) had classes linked to abilities, which might fit what JB likes - Agile Hero, Strong Hero, Tough Hero, etc. Presumably such classes Alternately, go with Warrior (good at combat and best hit points) and Expert (gets more specializations) classes, and add specialized classes depending on specific material. So psi abilities might fit a SWN style Mystic class. Aliens might get their own classes - think of Vulcans as working like the SF version of red box elves. <br /><br />What I'm trying for is something that lets you quickly define characters from fiction in game terms. Examples:<br /><br />James T. Kirk: High level Warrior, high Charisma, specializations in Leadership and Dilpomacy<br /><br />Spock - high level Vulcan<br /><br />McCoy and Scotty - high level Experts with specializations in Medicine and Engineering, respectively. McCoy has high Wisdom, Scotty has high Intelligence.<br /><br />Luke Skywalker (as of Star Wars) - mid level Warrior with high Dex and Pilot specialization.<br /><br />Princess Leia - mid level Expert with Diplomacy and Spy type specializations.<br /><br />Mal Reynolds - mid level Warrior with Leadership specialization.<br /><br />Etc. <br /><br />Hope this isn't disrupting the conversation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-52142057450861624582011-01-04T21:03:48.163-08:002011-01-04T21:03:48.163-08:00@ Sine:
I see where you're coming from and I...@ Sine: <br /><br />I see where you're coming from and I wasn't really wanting to debate. I'm more interested in knowing how the game works in practice. Was there a particular book, movie, style, etc. that you were hoping the game would model? How has it worked out for you?<br /><br />ALSO (on the subject of player drives): do your players have a difficult time investing in your particular high concept? Do they tend to play "scurrilous rogues in space?" Have any of them reached "faction" level?JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-91669088391264502112011-01-04T15:54:38.307-08:002011-01-04T15:54:38.307-08:00In truth, I don't feel that abandoning the XP ...In truth, I don't feel that abandoning the XP pretense is in any way noveau because the goal is not to do something new, but to do something old with less cumbering. Old-school editions had treasure types, yes, but everything the party encountered was there by GM fiat. If the GM decided that there were no dragons to slay, there were no hoards to plunder. Rather than go all the way round Robin Hood's barn to get to the point that the GM decides how much potential XP is to be had, I decided to skip to the end result. The crucial element is that there is nothing a player can do to invariably earn advancement. There's no mechanic to advance due solely to player resource expenditures or play choices. In both old D&D editions and SWN, the GM is the font of all advancement, and SWN just makes fewer bones about it.<br /><br />I know you don't much care for skills, either, but they're in the OSR tradition too as much as some people detest them. Right from the 1e DMG and its list of background professions, through RC BECMI skill lists, 1e OA/WSG/DSG nonweapon proficiencies, and 2e core nonweapon proficiencies. Since so much of the distinction between sci-fi heroes is often in their particular set of talents, I didn't feel much inclination to jettison skills from the heritage I included.<br /><br />As for the faction rules, a constant complaint I'm hearing from retroclone enthusiasts is that so few of them even nod toward "name level" PCs and the development of their holdings. Well, this is it, right down to the mention of 9th level as being a good time for PCs to start one. It takes up a few more pages than the domain rules in BECMI's Companion set, but not too many more.<br /><br />In all the above, I think that metagame considerations existed from the first time that somebody wrote in to Dragon complaining about Monty Haulism. Refusing to include them in a game simply means that the participants won't all necessarily know what those metagame considerations _are_.Sine Nominehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335794366582322514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-649855780035922502011-01-04T15:15:31.527-08:002011-01-04T15:15:31.527-08:00@ Robert:
SWN was good enough to prompt me to wri...@ Robert:<br /><br />SWN was good enough to prompt me to write a blog post specifically about it, and thought provoking enough to (along with certain other games) prompt me on a tangential discussion of new-old school SciFi in general. Certainly, I wasn’t trying to offend (I generally only TRY to offend when it comes to 4th and 2nd edition D&D). <br /><br />I AM in the process of developing my own “space game” and people kept mentioning SWN. Personally, I prefer to NOT duplicate work; for me, I don’t think it is “the best space opera game available” but one that is quite good at a few specifics. My discussion was less about tearing it down than about…mmm…”sharing my thoughts” on certain design choices. That way when people see MY design, they’ll understand a bit of my choices.<br /><br />In all seriousness, I was actually hoping to stir up a bit of discussion on other people’s view of SWN. I mean, I HAVE been known to change my mind/opinions with a little discussion.<br />; )<br /><br />[and no, you don’t offend. Thanks for bothering to read!]<br /><br /><br />@ Sine:<br /><br />Hey, man, I didn’t read the box…I was just told it was a fantastic space opera game! I’m not really sure WHAT I expected to find!<br /><br />Now, if I take you at your word…that the game is no more than an “OSR sandbox SciFi adventure” game…I’m not sure it meets your own description. By which I mean: it appears a little too sophisticated for that. Customizable skill packages, metagame mechanics, and the Faction rules are NOT things that I’d call “old school.” And the tone of the game (especially Design Notes) shows a lot of what I would consider “new school” (or, at least, “Old School Nouveau”) mentality.<br /><br />My own B/X-based space opera game is anything but Old School. Just having classes/levels/saving throws doesn’t make a game “old school” even if it’s being designed by ranking members of the OSR. My judgments/critique was based on 21st century design thoughts. Your game appears to juxtapose Old and New ideas, and not always successfully (in my opinion).<br /><br />For example, abandoning the pretense of “GM fiat” XP awards is definitely “new school iconoclasm” from my perspective. And not totally accurate, in my opinion. After all, monsters in old school D&D have assigned “Treasure Types” that each have an “average yield.” Of course, these are guidelines that can be tweaked by a DM, but (for example) players know that a dragon hoard will usually net a greater reward than a pack of gnolls…and can thus weigh risk/reward pros and cons. In a D&D “sandbox” this gives players an impetus to take on different challenges based on their degree of comfort with relative risk. In SWN, there is no such motivation (all missions yield the same reward) and so it is left to players to find their own motivation.<br /><br />This is a criticism of the game, but it’s not enough to flush it…the fact of the matter is that SWN appears to be well suited for a number of SciFi styles (as I pointed out), and I think it is a good piece of work. As far as free games go? I don’t think I’ve seen a single work that is in the same class.JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-76566851441278798032011-01-04T13:27:12.371-08:002011-01-04T13:27:12.371-08:00I really appreciate the time and close reading you...I really appreciate the time and close reading you've done on SWN, and I think a lot of your criticisms are justified from the perspective you're bringing to the game. But as has been mentioned, I think that SWN is just fundamentally designed to do something you don't especially want done.<br /><br />For example, as you point out, 1st level SWN characters are extremely fragile. I discuss some ways to deal with that under the Death section of the GM guide, but honestly, that degree of fragility is exactly what old-school D&D gave 1st level PCs. For the first twenty-five years of the game, the novice magic-user got 1d4 hit points and AC 9, and that was what he lived with. One can argue that that's unplayably lethal and corrosive to character development, and the Death section discusses ways of getting around it, but that's the heritage the game is coming from. A 1st level fighter in 1981 kept his chain-mailed rear out of the line of fire unless he _had_ to fight, and there's a reason that module B1 has a couple pages full of cannon-fodder henchmen listed in back.<br /><br />I'd also agree that the game is simply not designed to mechanically define character motivations, or relate them explicitly to advancement. Systems that do that can be great systems, but they have absolutely nothing to do with OSR design in my mind. Old-school D&D had one motivation linked to advancement- getting cash, with trivial amounts also gained for killing stuff. The GM has always decided when characters would advance by determining how much loot there was for them to find; I just decided to abandon the pretense that it ever was anything but arbitrary GM fiat.<br /><br />I think your comments were useful and interesting, and there's a lot more I could say about them. But I think it important to underline that SWN was never intended to be the game you seem to be looking for, and trying to find something other than "OSR sandbox sci-fi adventure" in it isn't likely to work out well for anyone.<br /><br />@Robert, allow me to note that SWN's just gotten hardback and perfect-bound versions available at DriveThruRPG, if you're interested in either.Sine Nominehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335794366582322514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-75494674121349366142011-01-04T12:38:47.629-08:002011-01-04T12:38:47.629-08:00"Man, I hope he has players that appreciate i..."Man, I hope he has players that appreciate it."<br /><br />He does. Frankly, I think SWN is about the best space opera RPG available, and I can't wait to pay cash money to have it in hardcopy. And I guess what you see as weaknesses I see as either a) geared toward different playstyles and purposes; b) opportunities to expand the game to better fit a particular style or setting (because there will simply never be one RPG that fits all style of SF), or; c) a difference of opinion.<br /><br />Your criticisms are very well-qualified (moreso than others who have said "OSR SFRPG? This isn't the droid you're looking for."), but I have to say that 4 or 5 posts in on this subject, and I still don't think that you or others have made it clear what are better approaches. More than that, I keep seeing "Wait 'til you see *my* game".<br /><br />Still waiting.<br /><br />I guess the thing that gets me is that SWN is a really astounding work that came out of nowhere, is better written, designed and edited than so much "pro" work out there, and meets the challenge set forth by so many associated with the OSR who say "let's see something new". And I get it, you've acknowledged this and said many of the same things, but usually followed by "...but,". It just feels like I'm starting to see more negative words than positive directed at SWN, much of which seems to come down to a matter of taste (which is somewhat typical of the hobby itself, isn't it?). What especially grates is that SWN is *exactly* what it says on the box, and a lot of the criticism seems to be based on what SWN is not, and never said it was.<br /><br />I feel like you're on the cusp of saying something important and cool here -- "give me a reason to adventure", and mechanics that back it up -- but it's getting lost in the SWN crit.<br /><br />Apologies if I offend, it's your blog and offense is not intended. I just felt it was time for someone to step up and offer some positive reinforcement for one of the better things to come out of the OSR, and one of the better games to come out in 2010.Robert Saint Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16063044279947754807noreply@blogger.com