|
Post by Kit on Dec 16, 2009 21:09:04 GMT
It has arrived!! Let the adventures commence! Allen Excellent news, sir!
|
|
|
Post by JohnK on Dec 16, 2009 21:42:39 GMT
Hullo, Kaemaril, Perhaps C7 could consider making dice like that available as a separate product? perhaps in a pack with yet more Story Point markers and some other nifty useful items (like say, cardboard heroes-style miniatures...) Allen Personally, I'm a big fan of the Hollow Earth Expedition style chips (proper poker chips with HEX piccies on them). I know you'd not get as many (174, btw, in the main set) but I could cheerfully pay a tenner or so for some poker chips, let's say 12, with Who pics on them I'm also a huge fan of the HOLLOW EARTH EXPEDTION rpg Style Chips, and would love to see something similar for DW: AiTaS. All sorts of ways of handling the physical look of Story Points, and I may well start using poker chips in my games for this. My 11-year-old goddaughter loves Style Chips, so she would appreciate using poker chips for this purpose in DW: AiTaS.
|
|
|
Post by Kit on Dec 16, 2009 21:46:09 GMT
Hullo, Kaemaril, Personally, I'm a big fan of the Hollow Earth Expedition style chips (proper poker chips with HEX piccies on them). I know you'd not get as many (174, btw, in the main set) but I could cheerfully pay a tenner or so for some poker chips, let's say 12, with Who pics on them I'm also a huge fan of the HOLLOW EARTH EXPEDTION rpg Style Chips, and would love to see something similar for DW: AiTaS. All sorts of ways of handling the physical look of Story Points, and I may well start using poker chips in my games for this. My 11-year-old goddaughter loves Style Chips, so she would appreciate using poker chips for this purpose in DW: AiTaS. Each of the players in my BUFFY game has been given their own colored poker chips and we use these for Drama Points. I expect we'll do something similar for DW:AiTaS
|
|
|
Post by gabrielchase on Dec 17, 2009 8:20:17 GMT
very happy that one option in regeneration is... Ginger! also wondering how many people will bring back the time lords in their first game..lol
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Dec 17, 2009 11:12:00 GMT
My games will be set well pre-Time War, possibly around the time of the 5th Doctor's Gallifrey.
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Dec 17, 2009 11:41:49 GMT
very happy that one option in regeneration is... Ginger! also wondering how many people will bring back the time lords in their first game..lol Mine will be post Time War, with only the Doctor around. At least for now. The Name of the first adventure, and probably the Campaign, will be 'The New Lords of Time'. They will, of course, be the PCs.
|
|
|
Post by gabrielchase on Dec 17, 2009 12:40:20 GMT
ill let my players think they are Timelords with pocket watches and are really.... time agents with wiped memories. No need for Tardises... though that centient tardis living as a public library... she will turn up at some point too
|
|
|
Post by JohnK on Dec 17, 2009 15:36:49 GMT
Hullo, Eryx, My games will be set well pre-Time War, possibly around the time of the 5th Doctor's Gallifrey. Like you, my game of DW: AiTaS will be set pre-Time War. I haven't decided during which Doctor's period yet, but am leaning to late Hartnell or even Troughton, since that way the Time Lord can be inspired by the Doctor's renegade nature and all. My Friday night group will be playing a game in which they are UNIT folks assigned to investigate strange things, ever since the 2nd Doctor's first dealings with them. Looking forward to both games.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Johnston on Dec 17, 2009 16:49:02 GMT
My copy just arrived from Leisuregames. I have for the last 20 minutes resisted opening it. I'm almost afraid to break the seal.
UPDATE: OK...90 minutes later and I've still not opened it. ...Weird...
|
|
THE \/ince
2nd Incarnation
THE OTHER
Cloister this!
Posts: 66
|
Post by THE \/ince on Dec 17, 2009 22:03:36 GMT
Do it, open it... Break the seal... You know you want to!
THE \/ince
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Dec 18, 2009 23:13:00 GMT
Got mine! First impressions... the box is pretty sturdy and may well hold up better than previous boxes. Nicely, there is not a lot empty space in the box. I like the little niche for the dice. The dice by the way, are much nicer than I expected. As for the books... I was disappointed they were not real hardcovers. Its pretty standard softcovers on the books, but they feel like the binding will hold up better than some. I love the cover of the Gamemaster's Guide. Its signature character free, in a lovely blue with a nice picture of the TARDIS in flight. The layout is nice, and the books FEEL good in your hands. The Gadget Cards and the Story Point tokens are annoyingly loose in their punch frames. I'm not much of one for using those types of things, and the idea of loose ones bothers me. Anyway, the text is clear, the images are lovely. I like the fact that the Table of Contents is on the back cover... it makes life easier! All in all, very very nice.
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Dec 18, 2009 23:32:31 GMT
As for the books... I was disappointed they were not real hardcovers. Have there ever been any box sets with hardcover books inside? I ask because I've probably not seen as many rpgs as some of the chaps on the forum here, so I'd be interested ... Yeah, I thought this was really nice too. On the train back from Dragonmeet I was flipping through the books and the first thing I thought was 'Oh my god, these books have no index OR a table of contents! What the hell were they thinking ...?' Felt pretty dumb when I got home and actually looked on the back ... ;D Even better than the TOC on the back though, is the paper ... my god, I love the paper. It's just so slick and funky and functional. I don't think I've seen any other RPG use this paper ... Mind you, I'm guessing it wouldn't work on the 250+ page monsters some RPGs come out with, but on these books it's a revelation.
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Dec 18, 2009 23:46:00 GMT
As for the books... I was disappointed they were not real hardcovers. Have there ever been any box sets with hardcover books inside? I ask because I've probably not seen as many rpgs as some of the chaps on the forum here, so I'd be interested ... The closest I know of was some slipcased editions of a couple different games, but never an actual boxed set. I just saw descriptions of this game originally as being 'hardcover' and expected something different. I was thinking that the hardcover explained some of the cost, but I imagine now its because of all the pictures and the cost of the high quality paper. I don't mind so much, but it was a *little* disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Dec 18, 2009 23:53:13 GMT
I just saw descriptions of this game originally as being 'hardcover' and expected something different. The only place I ever saw the game described as being a hardcover or hardback was amazon, tbh. And then only because, when it comes to rpgs, amazon are frickin' idiots
|
|
|
Post by thebrokenone on Dec 19, 2009 0:01:17 GMT
Just got the email saying my copy has been posted by play.com so hopefully i should get it around midweek all being well.
|
|
|
Post by Null and Void on Dec 19, 2009 0:05:17 GMT
I just saw descriptions of this game originally as being 'hardcover' and expected something different. The only place I ever saw the game described as being a hardcover or hardback was amazon, tbh. And then only because, when it comes to rpgs, amazon are frickin' idiots It may well be where I saw it... I don't recall because I have the memory of goldfish.
|
|
|
Post by JohnK on Dec 19, 2009 16:03:54 GMT
Hullo, Null and Void, It may well be where I saw it... I don't recall because I have the memory of goldfish. LOL! In my case, it's Mind Like A Sieve (MLAS(tm)).
|
|
|
Post by thebrokenone on Dec 22, 2009 19:56:36 GMT
Mine came this morning, so far im loving the way everything has been put together and the way the npc character sheets cover alot of the characters i would have considered as needed in a tennant era boxset(no master sheet but he's a badguy so will be covered in the monster boxset no doubt) the only slight issue i found was my boxset didnt contain any story tokens which must be a one off packing glitch since everything else was in there though not in the order i would have chosen(the how to play was at the bottom under the cards when it should have been the first booklet you find upon opening it). Gonna start reading it inna few minutes coz its sat there just at the periphery of my vision pleading to be read
|
|
rsaintjohn
2nd Incarnation
The Threefold Man
Posts: 77
|
Post by rsaintjohn on Dec 24, 2009 5:22:25 GMT
The dice by the way, are much nicer than I expected. As much as I like them, I just had to pick myself up a set of these: ;D
|
|
|
Post by BadCatMan on Dec 24, 2009 7:43:08 GMT
First post.
So, I've gotten a hold of this game and read through the rules. Having only known the d20 system through Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 and 4.0, Star Wars Saga Edition and d20 Modern, and skimmed Time Lord, the basic simplicity of this really threw me, I think. On one level, I think "this looks really easy" and on another, I wonder "what do we do when X and Y happen with Z".
It seems very easy to make different types of PC and different types of alien, quite easily. I'd been considering running a DW game using d20 Modern, and making creatures and items seemed the most difficult aspect.
It does very vague on a lot of matters, like specifically what to roll for certain actions. Often times, it feels like the system is incomplete and unfinished, or like a lazy GM who can't be bothered working it out.
Balance issues also concern me. There's no actual penalty to the Adversary or Amnesia traits and others, only story opportunities that GMs and players ought to work out independent of the rules, I feel. So here, essentially, are free character points. (Am I just too used to power-building in D&D?)
I'm already itching to house-rule in a proper initiative system. I can see so many potential action scenes drag into tedium because talkers go first, or fighting-based players miss out because fighters go last. Plus, it would add an element of chance to how encounters turn out ("You see a Dalek turn the corner, too late, it turns and shoots.")
The overall bias against combat would seem to erode action, and appears hypocritical in the context of the series itself, where the Doctor himself isn't afraid to break out the Venusian Aikido.
I was concerned about the heavy new series focus, but the hidden references to classic things, and the fun Screamer trait were quite welcome. The upcoming UNIT book really helped me make a decision.
So, I've started my first game, though it's an online play-by-post one. I just need players now. (Maybe starting in the days before Christmas wasn't such a good idea?)
|
|
|
Post by CharlieBananas on Dec 24, 2009 9:03:33 GMT
Hi BadCatMan, if all you've played before is D20, then this will be very alien to you, the D20 rules are based on an exception type design principle, were you have lots of different sub rules to handle every little eventuality, nothing wrong with that by the way (love 4E myself), but DWAITAS is based on a unified mechanic, this means one basic rule for everything, so once you grasp stat+skill+2d6 you basicly know all you need to know. I would play the game RAW befor you tinker, especially with the iniative system as it is the most genre defining rule in the box.
Hope that helps Mike ;D
|
|
|
Post by BadCatMan on Dec 24, 2009 9:31:14 GMT
Well, everything in d20 is essentially d20 + stat + bonus versus a set difficult, so the only really difference here is the spread of random variation (1-20 vs 2-12 with a curve peaking at 7). Different aspects are just structured differently (attacks, saves, skill checks, and so).
I think I'm just used to d20 attempting to simulate a world, than, say, a plot.
Yeah, I'll keep the current initiative rules until we've tried them a bit, and discussed them with my players.
PS: Another criticism. The overly chatty style gets a bit annoying to me, and feels like it wastes a lot of space, and it stresses a lot of basic concepts I'm already well-used. I understand of course that this system needs to introduce the whole idea or RPing to newbies. Plus, there's a lot of repetition of the rules between the PG and the GMG. I feel one small book could cover the whole thing for a much cheaper price.
I find I prefer to look up character creation rules in the GMG itself, it's short and to-the-point.
A good thing: Attributes are rated and described at every value, so for example you know what Strength 4 actually means. Meanwhile, D&D tells me that Strength 14 is equivalent to a gnoll, a baboon or a manta ray... That doesn't help so much.
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Dec 24, 2009 10:37:04 GMT
Balance issues also concern me. There's no actual penalty to the Adversary or Amnesia traits and others, only story opportunities that GMs and players ought to work out independent of the rules, I feel. So here, essentially, are free character points. (Am I just too used to power-building in D&D?) DW does not work like the majority of RPG's out there. Forget all those other games on your self when running this one. The DW system is truly geared towards playing a story driven game. In that regards it puts the White Wolf storytelling system to shame (and their games are meant to be story/plot/player driven games). In DW it is all story opportunities. At first I pondered this, but what you are thinking of is your typical roleplaying system. This isn't it. If you are playing a game in line with the show, you shouldn't have any combat characters among the party. Even when faced by a dalek or cyberman determined to exterminate/delete him, the Doctor or a companion can always talk them out of doing it, and being captured instead. Consider the game in that fashion. Ah, yes, but the Doctor used it in self defence and never seriously hurt or killed anyone by it. The only times we've seen the Doctor do/attempt something out of character (pulling the big gun out in Dalek) he was under great stress. My advice is to forget the combat heavy nature of other roleplaying games, and embrace the roleplaying nature of this one. If you and your players can do that, you will have a fantastic time. Good luck.
|
|
|
Post by BadCatMan on Dec 24, 2009 11:32:33 GMT
At first I pondered this, but what you are thinking of is your typical roleplaying system. This isn't it. If you are playing a game in line with the show, you shouldn't have any combat characters among the party. On the other hand... Ian (became a gladiator and a knight), Steven (space fight pilot), Ben (sailor), Jamie, all of UNIT, Leela, Frobisher in the right shape, Ace, older Ace, Roz Forrester, Chris Cwej, Destrii, and Captain Jack could all be considered combat-oriented characters. Oh, and Abslom Daak. (That's about half on tv, half in the EU.) Not all the time, of course, but I'd say good RPing is knowing when not to fight (that's an important rule in martial arts training). Having the ability to fight is an excellent last resort (no, I don't mean the way the initiative system works). The series might preach pacifism, but it knows when it needs to be defended. Anyway, roleplaying is definitely not a problem in play-by-post, where you might have a conversation for a month or two. Finding ways to curtail it to keep things interesting over a yearly time-scale becomes an important factor.
|
|
|
Post by radiophonic on Dec 24, 2009 12:12:08 GMT
Hi BadCatMan and welcome.
If you are prefer a more combat-orientated game have you considered running a Torchwood or UNIT campaign? This may suit your style more.
|
|
|
Post by BadCatMan on Dec 24, 2009 12:28:55 GMT
I'm not running the Doctor and friends, I've banned them in fact, and encouraged potential players to play whatever they want (within reason). So, I'll run a game that's Doctor Who styled (bunch of different folk in a TARDIS), but the tone will be however they decide.
|
|
|
Post by allenshock on Dec 24, 2009 15:09:15 GMT
I would say the initiative sequence could be rearranged to account for different styles.
A UNIT game, for example might go:
Fighters Doers Movers Talkers
I should think that wouldn't change the game system overly much, just the emphasis it places on violence.
Allen
|
|
|
Post by allenshock on Dec 24, 2009 15:24:49 GMT
One of the things I like about the game is that the game system is in both the Players Guide and the Gamemaster's Guide (although with differences in information; GM stuff mainly in the GM's guide etc.. A lot of the time in my group, I am the only one with the rules, and when someone asks to see the book, I often don't have it when I need it. This will not happen with this game.
Allen
|
|
|
Post by allenshock on Dec 24, 2009 15:37:08 GMT
So, I've gotten a hold of this game and read through the rules. Having only known the d20 system through Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 and 4.0, Star Wars Saga Edition and d20 Modern, and skimmed Time Lord, the basic simplicity of this really threw me, I think. On one level, I think "this looks really easy" and on another, I wonder "what do we do when X and Y happen with Z". Speaking as one who mostly GM's, I really like the fact that the game leaves plenty of room for GM improvisation and input. I have run a lot of d20 and while I enjoy the system, the sometimes overly detailed "rule for everything" approach became a rules lawyer's dream and put me off of running it for awhile. There is a fair amount of advice on how to handle stuff like which attribute and skill to pair up for certain thing, but when I run this game, I can adapt that to the situation at hand. I like that. It does very vague on a lot of matters, like specifically what to roll for certain actions. Often times, it feels like the system is incomplete and unfinished, or like a lazy GM who can't be bothered working it out. Tying in with the above, I do feel that d20's approach was making me a lazy GM, falling back on some rule that someone else wrote rather than making rulings and doing what GMs do. I appreciate games like this that put me back in the GM's seat. Balance issues also concern me. There's no actual penalty to the Adversary or Amnesia traits and others, only story opportunities that GMs and players ought to work out independent of the rules, I feel. So here, essentially, are free character points. (Am I just too used to power-building in D&D?) In play, the PC Time Lord in my game, who has both of these, have seen them come up a lot. His Adversary (a rogue Time Agent) has appeared in a few adventures and caused him no end of grief, almost causing him to regenerate at one point. His Amnesia came in VERY handy when I ran a converted version of Jason Vey's "Saving The Forgotten" campaign; the true identity of the main antagonist came as a complete shock to him So yes, they are mainly story elements..and it is incumbent on the GM to USE those story elements to make sure the character "pays" for those points. Allen
|
|
THE \/ince
2nd Incarnation
THE OTHER
Cloister this!
Posts: 66
|
Post by THE \/ince on Dec 24, 2009 16:12:43 GMT
Balance issues also concern me. There's no actual penalty to the Adversary or Amnesia traits and others, only story opportunities that GMs and players ought to work out independent of the rules, I feel. So here, essentially, are free character points. (Am I just too used to power-building in D&D?) So yes, they are mainly story elements..and it is incumbent on the GM to USE those story elements to make sure the character "pays" for those points. Allen Well said Allen. If any of my players chose negative traits/whatever in other game systems, I make sure thay really pay for them to the point that they now give me a very detailed description of the adversary/enemy/[insert name here] and what they did to wrong then to try and cut down on the villainous enjoyment I usually exhibit in pitting them against them. They also think carefully before using throw away lines during character description (family members are always handy to get them involved in whatever plot I'm scheming up at the time). I truly believe it is the responsibility of every GM out there to make their players suffer. THE \/ince
|
|