|
Post by mephisto on Mar 15, 2008 13:40:00 GMT -5
Hi Everybody! Does anyone have expierience with Earthdawn? Although my prefered no1 ist the OAD&D, I think ED gives the Player more opportunities/variations to influence the situations. The talents allow IMO to "play more aktively" (sorry for my bad english), and I like the ED-Talents much more than "feats" from 3e.
How do you think about Earthdawn?- Rules, Setting? Is it a system with some special kind of "esprit" like O/AD&D (of course not the same esprit ) or only one more RPG without soul?
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Mar 15, 2008 14:20:26 GMT -5
Honestly? Its hard to say having never gave it a hard look so I can't really say if it has some redeeming quality.
However, aesthetically (i.e. "look" & "feel") and superficially ?
GAAAAHHH!!!!
I recall looking at that like it was a nuclear warhead when it came out.
Most games that came out during that era were trying to replicate the D&D formula to some degree. Unfortunately during that era D&D was real stylizd mediocrity as well (FR, DL, DS, RL, etc.). With the emergence of pervasive and all emcompassing skill rules, (which were seemingly created to empower the player but really slowed down the imagination making things robotic and thoughtless) the 2e of AD&D was built upon that and cast a dark shadow on other rpgs. Making them more singular in vision sometimes unapproachable and awkward in style. I firmly believe EARTHDAWN is/was a good example of something that I'd never want to play.
|
|
|
Post by mephisto on Mar 16, 2008 10:04:28 GMT -5
Yes, I think the Skill-orientated RPG from the 90ies slowed down an adventure, but I have made the experience, that this must nor slow down immagination. Some of my players decribe their (talent)-action very well.(BTW, I think talents in ED are not like skills, more some kind of spells, or similar to psionics or something) I have played with some guys in OAD&D which also slowed down immagination like this: Player:" Am I hitting with a 3 ?" DM : " Yes!" Player: " OK, I do 12 hit points of damage!" - ok, not a system's problem Don't misunderstood, I love the OAD&D more than any other RPG. Earthdawn I think deals with some good aspects, which I think don't want to replicate some D&D-Mechanics (but on the other hand why not include something, that's allrady good, standards like some kind of AC ?).
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Mar 16, 2008 19:37:58 GMT -5
Sorry, I'm so adamant sometimes I'm my own worst enemy.
|
|
|
Post by mephisto on Mar 22, 2008 14:30:10 GMT -5
No problem,
in fact I share your point of view. There are systems which mutated to "skill-adventure-games", where it seems that it is a greater challenge to make a cooking-test than to fight a troll ;D
What I like about ED is, although i prefere the vance-spell-system, the theory about magic-use, and how magic interact with almost everything. If I get a magical sword, it's a far cry that i can use it. I have to weave a magical thread to the magic-item to use it. I also like the idea, that you have to get some information (name of the smith for example) about the magic item before you can weave a thread to it. Another Element of the system I like very well ist that you can invest your Legendpoints to raise your talents, and only if certain talents were at a determined rank/level you may level-up your character. So IMO they do a good mixture of class- and skillbased system.
What i realy don't like is the length of combat. Some kind of drawback of the talentsystem. Although I like the talents in ED muc more than the feats in 3e, sometimes they complicate and delay combat in a similar way. Another drawback of the talaent-based-possibilities of the characters I think, is that the DM loose some kind of "might" about situations. Any similar experiences ?
|
|