|
Hi,
I have started playing (as in yet to have our first session) in a group using Google+ Circles. The person running the game is going to be using The Burning Wheel Gold, I brought a copy ($25 for 600 pages...), that has yet to arrive.
Has anyone played this game? Anything I should know about the game before playing? We had a one-off called Lady Blackbird, a steampunk sort of affair that got us using the dice mechanics, but other than that I'm new to this system. 600 pages will be a lot to take in before we start making characters...
Any thoughts, including a character idea that would work for a Renaissance Italy era fantasy (low magic) game would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Stefan.
One of the hardest things about Burning Wheel is the Beliefs. Once you learn to write good ones though, things will really click. Basically, you're responsible for writing plot hooks for your character, but they have to be plot hooks you're going to be interested in, fit the story and keep you involved with other players.
I played the original version, and my impression is that it is pretty horrible.
Not only that the beliefs mentioned in the post above are broken in a way that warranted a complete rewrite, contradicting the text in the original book, even before the gold version was out...
No, the system actually incorporates mechanics that
- focus each scene on one or two characters, while the rest have to sit around and wait
- reward sucking up to the DM and the other players, and include a popularity contest that determines the XP equivalent
- The system contains a magic system that does not work without DM fiat. That is, you might be a mage, but if your spells actually do something is the almost completely the DMs decision. As D&D player, I like to have some basic rules for that.
- Character building is horrible because you are forced through a few narrow paths when building a character, because you need the appropriate lifepaths, but you are quite restricted to which ones you can take. This means that many characters look alike.
- The rules are actually making it harder to properly play out your character. You should act out beliefs at all times, yet even when acting out a belief, the DM might actually decide that you are not, and you have to convince the DM that you are actually acting out a belief. Horrible.
- Fights take a long time to resolve, but are not tactically interesting.
All in all, it's one of the worst RPG systems that I know. I cannot recommend it to anyone. There are so many great smaller systems out there - try those instead. I actually had a serious discussion with the other players if the Burning Wheel rules are just a giant attempt at trolling role-players. The system is bad for people who like 'role-playing' and bad for people who like 'roll-playing.' It's needlessy complicated, which is made worse by a very bad presentation. I hope that they at least cleaned up that part in the gold version, but .. I doubt the system can be salvaged.
Its not too bad a system ONCE you get past their tendacy to call a spade a tibllenookerywhipple, and claim they invented it.
I DO think the rulebook (and other games in the system) have a very arrogant tone, in that the author seems to think they invented Everything...however, that doesnt make it a bad system, in fact, there are several nice ideas in it.
it does have a different approach to combat than you might be used to - its far more "indy" in its that respect. Its certainly based on a more "narrative" rpg approach, so gamers looking for tight tactical maneuvering will not appreciate it. Gamers more inclined towards story and narrative may prefer it. That said, its a usable combat system - just different , and might take getting used to if you dont have a wide experience of game systems.
I'm personally not a fan of the combat system, but I do know others who are.
The beliefs system is very nice if you've the type of group that are into games that are truly about characters, and imo is more realistic/useful than alignment (which is a crude tool at best, and also subjective in a morally grey world).
Also, as a more narrative game than d&d/pathfinder you to trust each other to be reasonable more. The maturity (or otherwise) of your players will certainly affect your experience.
The benefits are you can tell stories that are more individual to your chqracters, - trust me as an old experienced gamer, it can be IMMENSELY freeing to have less rather than more structure....but the disadantages are rules are less hard and fast. Malaclypses comments about magic are true, but
in a game with a GM that understands narrative cooperation with his players , its not an issue, and actually creates BETTER games.
I'd note at this stage this is NOT a unique advantage to burning wheel, although i have seen many tout it as such. IT IS, RATHER,, AN APPROACH TO GAMING THAT CAN BE USED WITH ANY SYSTEM. It is however more necessary in burning wheel than, say, pathfinder.
If your gm or other players arent on board with the "joint storytelling" though , it can be difficult, Rules lawyers or people keen on RAW arguments wont enjoy this sort of narrative freedom....or will attempt to abuse it to the detriment of the game.
Overall, i'd say its neither good nor bad, but somewhere in the average range. Like most other rpgs, the experience will be down more to your gm and the players around your table, than the rules system.
It DOES require a different mindset though - if youve not played narrative indy games it can be a bit confusing - so be warned.
I'll agree with the sometimes arrogant tone of the author, both in the book and real life. The game is very much his interpretation of how a game should be. Some of his concepts aren't unique, but they have been innovative at one point or another.
My major complaint about the game is its rigidity, if you pull a piece out, several others will suffer without you realizing it. Second, te skill list is too exhaustive for my taste. Ditch digging is its own skill, which sounds funny until you realize that it is its own skill.
I like life paths, they are one of my favorite character creation techniques. They aren't perfect, but a starting character feels real and fully realized to me.
...it does have a different approach to combat than you might be used to - its far more "indy" in its that respect. Its certainly based on a more "narrative" rpg approach, so gamers looking for tight tactical maneuvering will not appreciate it. Gamers more inclined towards story and narrative may prefer it.
Also, as a more narrative game than d&d/pathfinder you to trust each other to be reasonable more. The maturity (or otherwise) of your players will certainly affect your experience.
I agree, Timmy the Power Gamer will have a tough time playing under this system, unless he can shift his outlook a little. Because of the focus on narration, I think it also rewards a certain level of cooperation amongst the group (trusting each player will get his/her moment to shine).
In my observation, the system also lends itself more to low-power games, though the rules exist to shoot for the moon if you want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its my dream to play a Burning Empires campaign some day. The meta-mechanics for fighting the invasion just tickles my epic strategy bone.
|
|
Thanks for the replies. Something narrative sounds the pace I am after, but I have been playing D&D/PF so long it sounds like I may need to wash my brain before each BW session.
I will be the 'newbie' in a group of 2 brothers and their 2 friends - so I am a little concerned about the Malaclypse made regards the XP system and how sucking up seems to be the way to advance. Being the new kid on the block (and not the band) I could be at a disadvantage here - DM dependant I guess and time will tell.
I'm the wrong side of 40 and been playing RPG for 27 years - I was hoping this system would get me away from the new fangled method of D&D/PF play, i.e. moving little bits of pre-painted plastic about a 2D grid with painted iso-metric terrain...
I think once the book arrives and I have a read I'll have a better idea if this game is for me. Ideally I would like something a little like Warhammer Fantasy RP 2e, but beggers can't be choosers in a RP group desert I call home.
Cheers again,
S.
I first got interested in Burning Wheel because the author also wrote the Mouse Guard RPG & I loved the comic books that is based off of. I have a copy of Second edition Burning Wheel not Gold so I am not sure what the differences are, I also have not done more than theorycraft with the rules.
That said, as Tigger_mk4 said, design philosophy-wise it comes from a completely different direction than D&D/Pathfinder.
I would consider Malaclypse comments an indication of not being familiar with different RPG design philosophies from D&D/Pathfinder and possibly a bad experience with other players/GM's using Burning Wheel. Unfortunately, that happens in any system.
It has a rather steep learning curve & I would recommend hitting www.burningwheel.org & checking out their wiki for more of an idea about the game & the philosophy behind it.
I too am on the wrong side of 40 so I know how you feel. I would say it falls into the category of love it or hate it
There are two parts to the "experience" system.
Skill ranks advance with usage. It you want your Sword skill to go from a 2 to a 3, you need a certain number of tests (success and failure both count) against certain difficulties and bam! you get better. You can even get better in the middle of a scene/session, which can be nice. It's faster to advance lower rank skills than higher ones. Most attributes essentially work the same way, but there are a couple of minor exceptions.
The politics of a group gets into what is called Artha. Artha is is a category of things kind of like Action Points. There are 3 types, and you can spend them to get benefits during a current roll of the dice. If you spend enough Artha on a specific skill, it can upgrade in a different, but very major way, than above. This is usually something that happens a long ways into a campaign.
Part of earning Artha involves convincing the other people at the table that you did the appropriate actions necessary to earn it. If one of your Beliefs helped advance the plot, you get a point. If one of your Instincts got you into trouble, you get a point. If you're voted the MVP of a session, you get a point. This is where having good/bad relationships at the table can impact mechanical aspects of your character.
Edit: For general reference, BW:Gold isn't majorly different from previous editions. Range and Cover is adjusted some, a few minor changes in other places. There are some formatting changes to the book though, for example the life path section is now easier to read and use. He used to have tons of footnote sections about requirements, but now those are printed in the life paths themselves, making it much easier to make a character.
I would consider Malaclypse comments an indication of not being familiar with different RPG design philosophies from D&D/Pathfinder
That's not true. The system is bad, it's not that I lack experience or knowledge. But thanks for the insinuation.
bad experience with other players/GM's using Burning Wheel. Unfortunately, that happens in any system.
Actually, the opposite is true. The sessions I played were with a good DM and cool people, it's just that the system got in the way again and again.
I just think a system that leads to an mechanically optimal strategy that includes failing as often as possible is bad. A system that is so messy that e.g the text about beliefs in the three editions contradicts each other - this important part of the system has been rewritten completely, multiple times. Now which version should you use? The printed one? The wiki one? And lets not get to the duel of wits or the combat.. yuck.
Burning Wheel is a fiat dependant narrative system by design. That sort of thing is going to ruffle some people's feathers right out of the gate. It doesn't mean it's a s--- game. It's going to appeal to some, not bother others and offend the rest. It comes down to personal taste.
I actually like Burning Wheel and have had some ripping good times with it. It certainly has it's shortcomings like all game systems do. And group dynamics play a big part. I think "sucking up to the GM" is reaching toward hyperbole, but to each their own opinion/experience/syntax.
I'd recommend people give it a fair shake if the opportunity presents itself. The Gold Edition costs less than a night out at the movies. So even if you end up paying for the game you aren't getting fisted.
In the end you might have a good time, or it might cause you to transform into the Bloody Nine at the mere mention of the game. Just like any foray into any new game. Like me with GURPS (hulk smash!).
I had some brief experience with Burning Wheels a few years back, bi-weekly for six months or so. I didn't actively hate the system or anything, but it did leave me fairly unimpressed.
It's been a while, so I don't remember the details, but vaguely speaking I disliked how the rules seemed to actively discourage actual roleplay (The GM told us repeatedly that discussing our next step in-character was 'doing it wrong'), and how the individual player Beliefs tended to breed prima donna players who were only interested in their own stories. It didn't feel like it was trying to promote group play.
This was the GM's favourite system and he has, apparently, played it a lot, so I trusted he knew what he was doing. I can't know if he was off his rockers though. :)
Slaunyeh: I haven't played a lot of BW, but those definitely sound like some of the pitfalls I've seen. I've seen good roleplaying happen, while engaging the crunchy bits of the game, players who normally speak with an "in character voice" and tend to be verbose stay that way. The few times I've run it a Duel of Wits, I always ask for at least a taste of dialogue each action.
The dynamic of Beliefs on the story is highly dependent on the groups style and how they engage them. If everyone writes completely independent Beliefs, they end up splitting off and doing their own thing. I tend to like more cooperative play though, so I like writing 1-2 Beliefs in a way where I have to help, or get help, from other players.
Stefan: It's my favorite part of the game and the second most fun character creation process.
|
|
@fuseboy.
Thanks for that. We have played two session and I have purchased the book. In my advancing years I will admit this sort of an RPG is a welcome haven from the XP grind of D&D type games. I have always been a fan of lifepath character gen. (Cyberpunk, Mechwarrior, etc, etc). We have a BW experienced GM and 2 players - then there are two people (including myself) new to the game.
I do see what you mean about DoW and even the levels of combat to suit the story (Vs, Bloody Vs, and Fight!).
I appreciate you taking the time to give me your thoughts on the game. For me so far I'm have a great time.
Cheers,
S.