Advertisement

Suvudu

For Ages “Dragon” and Up


Dragon_Age_Cover.jpg Having said before that up-and-coming fantasy writers, and people interested in fantasy in general, should consider getting into role-playing games, I’d be remiss in not offering suggestions of where to start, wouldn’t I? (Actually, it doesn’t matter if I would, because I’m gonna.)
Anyone who’s read my prior columns, or knows anything about my history, knows that I’m a big fan of Dungeons & Dragons. It’s a great game, and I enjoy it a lot–but I’m not certain I’d recommend it to people who are new to RPGs in general. The rules can be complex, and even a little intimidating to people new to the hobby. Wizards of the Coast is putting out a rules set called Dungeons & Dragons Essentials, specifically designed to be newbie-friendly, later this year. I have very high hopes for that set, given what I’ve heard–but obviously, I can neither review it yet nor recommend it yet, what with it not being out yet.
Funny how that works.
But there is a fantasy RPG out there right now that was geared for beginners, and I’d like to offer a brief review of that here. I’m speaking of the Dragon Age RPG from Green Ronin Publishing.


Before I get into it, two caveats. (I seem to always have two caveats, don’t I?) First, I’m not a computer gamer, so I’ve never played the Dragon Age online game on which this tabletop RPG is based. (Correction: The computer game on which this RPG is based is not an online game, but a single-player game. Mea culpa.) As such, I cannot and will not be reviewing the game in terms of how well it captures the feel of the online game. I’m reviewing it solely as a tabletop RPG and, specifically, one that serves as a starting point for beginners.
Second, while I had nothing to do with the Dragon Age RPG, I do need to note that I’ve done freelance work for Green Ronin in the past–once for their D&D-compatible Egyptian-inspired setting Hamunaptra, and again on Buccaneers of Freeport. I don’t believe this prior relationship has influenced my view (or review) of Dragon Age in any way, but there it is.
On first look, and indeed on reading through it, Dragon Age–or DA, from here on out–appears to be classic fantasy in overall feel. You have your dark ages/middle ages cultures, your mighty warriors, sneaky rogues, mysterious mages, and fearsome monsters. The presence of these classic tropes is, in my view, a benefit, not a hindrance. While there are those who deride the prevalence of these common themes, they offer the game a wide appeal and, more importantly for my specific purposes, offer a comfortable starting point for newcomers to the game. Similarly, the presence of familiar fantasy races–not just humans, but elves and dwarves–makes the setting readily accessible, yet their presentation–the elves are a former slave race currently in the midst of a cultural diaspora–presents them in an altered and interesting light.
Despite the presence of those races, which I tend to associate more with epic fantasy, DA is a darker, more sword & sorcery-style fantasy, as compared to the more high magic/epic fantasy of D&D. I present this as neither a good nor a bad thing–I’m a fan of both types of fantasy, in their place–but simply as a part of the feel. Magic is rarer and less accepted than in many fantasies, and while the combat system of the game isn’t horrifically lethal, it is more so than many other RPGs.
Although this is only the first set of four, and covers only levels 1 through 5 of 20 (”level” being a measure of character power and experience), it’s playable as a complete game unto itself. You can sit down with just this one boxed set and play multiple game sessions of many hours each. On that score alone, DA rates higher than many other “beginner” games, which seem designed to allow for only a few hours of play. The boxed set even comes with the dice you’ll need, a nice throwback to many of the older RPGs of days gone by. Honestly, all you’ll need that doesn’t come in the box is a pencil and some paper.
The first book in the boxed set, intended for players, does a wonderful job of conveying the feel of the assumed setting with a chapter that provides enough cultural background and history to satisfy, without overwhelming the reader with more detail than is necessary. The rules for choosing and creating characters are quick, easy to understand, and easy to follow. They have enough options to require interesting choices, without offering so many as to confuse newcomers.
I do have one small complaint about the character creation system: Specifically, it uses random rolls to determine a character’s starting attributes (willpower, strength, cunning, etc.). While a random system of this sort is easier to learn and faster to play than a more methodical system of point allocation–and in that respect, it was a good choice for beginners–I cannot help but feel that people who are newcomers to role-playing should not be put in a position where their own character might be substantially less effective than their fellow players’, or where their own character doesn’t quite meet their expectations, purely because of bad luck during character creation. I tend to think that a point allocation system, even if more complex, would provide results that would make the actual play experience more satisfying for newcomers.
But honestly, that’s a fairly minor complaint, and one based as much on personal taste as any “objective” problem. So while it’s a mark against the system in my eye, it’s a small one vastly outweighed by the positives.
The actual system of game play is equally simple and elegant, where success or failure in a given task is determined by a simple roll of three dice. In combat, if any of those two dice come up doubles, the character can perform a stunt–knocking an enemy prone, doing extra damage, making an extra move–allowing for both tactical and cinematic variety. And yet, because you don’t choose in advance when you’re going to use a stunt, it also keeps the unpredictable nature of actual battle. While it’s not a system that I’d want to see in every fantasy RPG, I think it’s a rather brilliant notion that I’d love to see further explored.
So where players are concerned, the game gets definite high marks. What about for the Game Master (or GM); that is, the person running the game and coming up with the stories/adventures?
Well, still overall positive, though I have a few more objections.
The GM’s book is, for the most part, very good about providing rules and advice for the GM. It talks about how to set the difficulty for various tasks, how to adjudicate hazards and dangers, how to put together and design a campaign (series of adventures), and–vitally–how to combine role-playing and die-rolling when it comes to issues like social encounters. The book even talks about how to deal with problem players, or what to do if a game’s not going well. And it provides a sample adventure that’s both straightforward and educational.
So why do I feel a little more ambivalent about the GM book than the player book? First, there’s an issue of presentation. The GM book puts all the problem-solving information, and all the talk about the GM’s various duties, responsibilities, and extra effort, in the very first chapter. I think this was a mistake; it should have come later in the book, when the reader already has a grasp on the actual rules and mechanics of GMing. Putting all that stuff first was a little overwhelming to me, and I’m a very experienced role-player and GM; I think it might actually scare away a few newcomers.
The other issue is that there’s no guidance given–none at all–about which monsters, or how many of them, to use in order to create an easy, average, or hard encounter. I don’t want every fantasy RPG to have a system as rigid as D&D’s hierarchy of monster levels, but there must be some guidance. A beginning DM can see that a black bear is a tougher opponent than, say, a genlock (more or less the orcs of this setting), but what does that mean? Does that mean that a black bear is a better challenge for a 4th-level party of three characters than a 2nd-level party of five? Or does it just mean the GM should use more genlocks to create the same sense of danger? There’s nothing, and a beginning GM simply cannot be expected to eyeball this sort of thing with any degree of accuracy. Few things are as frustrating in an RPG as a combat that’s horribly unfair, and a single really bad experience of that sort could potentially sour a newcomer on the entire game. It’s an unfortunate omission in what is otherwise a very well constructed game.
In terms of overall appearance and presentation, the game is beautiful. The art is fantastic, the production values are top notch, and while I caught a decent-sized handful of typos, none of them were especially distracting or damaging to rules understanding.
So, final verdict? While the objections I called out above mean I can’t unconditionally recommend Dragon Age, I can honestly say that the first set, at least, is well worth the price of admission. It looks like a wonderfully fun game to play, and–despite a few missteps–appears to be one of the best options for a “gateway” game on the market today. I’m definitely a fan, and I’m looking forward to seeing what else Green Ronin puts out for the line.
(I’ll also take a quick aside, specifically because I was asked a related question in a recent interview, to say that if I had to model The Conqueror’s Shadow in an RPG, DA would be my choice–at least in terms of mechanics, if not the actual setting itself. It’s not a perfect fit by any means, but at least within the scope of these first five levels, it’s closer than any other I’ve yet seen. I’ll certainly be investigating further, as the more advanced sets come out, to see if that continues to be the case.)


8 Responses to “For Ages “Dragon” and Up”

  1. David says:

    One small note, the computer game “Dragon Age: Origins” is not an online game. It is a stand-alone, single person RPG, more like games such as Oblivion, Baldur’s Gate, Ultima, etc. There is no online interaction with any other users, just a single adventure one plays on their own.

  2. Ari Marmell says:

    Yikes! Thanks for the correction, David.
    Guess it just goes to prove what I was saying, about not being a computer gamer. :-}

  3. Machpants says:

    I totally agree with your review:
    They should have included another method of char gen. Doesn’t have to be point buy, I think a DnD style Elite Array would be good for beginners (experts can do what they want!).
    As to the monsters and challenge, well we have discussed that on ENW!
    One thing I reckon you missed was the limited char start options, now I know that could be off-putting for newbies but only ONE type of Dwarf? I think a bit more would have been good.
    The other thing I think they could have done is sorted out the ranges, they use yard ranges (like 2 yards) but talk about 5 Foot squares… they don’t go well together. I would have liked a system more like WFRP3, abstract combat with ‘how to do it with miniatures/maps’ in the GM guide as advanced options.
    Good review

  4. sword says:

    I’d say, overall, a good review. I agree with much of what you said.
    I don’t take anything away from this game not having a point-buy or array system of character generation. Those methods produce some very cookie-cutter results, in my opinion. To each their own, though. Honestly, A point-buy system can easily extrapolated from the attribute system used that even newbies, if they really wanted to, could handle it.
    Also, I like the fact all the adjudication in right there in the front of the GM Book. Remember, Ari, they are making this for new GM’s and having it spread throughout the book or at a later point means page-turing, not fast resolution.
    As for as challenge building, I do agree that some method should have been addressed. I’m glad CR wasn’t used, and I’m also glas the 4e system wasn’t used, either. Both are lacking.
    In the end, as I said, I do agree with much of what you said. Decent review from a 4e apologist – not too many comparisons to D&D and not too many back-handed compliments (well, there were a decent number, but hey). :)

  5. Steve says:

    “Decent review from a 4e apologist – not too many comparisons to D&D and not too many back-handed compliments”
    You sir are a troll, that statement had nothing to do with the the review or its subject matter, next time just STFU.
    I liked the review and I liked it was upfront about the authors relationship with Green Ronin, and while my opinion on placing the GM adjudication up front is a good thing since your target audience is people who have played Dragon Age as a console or computer game and its going to be the newest thing, since they have a grasp of the game mechanics of the computer and console games already.
    Keep up the good work Ari.

  6. sword says:

    Truth hurts, does it not Steve? Freedom of speech can be a sonofabitch sometimes.
    Fact is, 90% of my comments was concerning the review, so you can spout around “troll” as your defense mechanism all you want, but that doesn’t make it so. And if comments were open to only those who were in 100% agreement with Ari, his review, and his review style, why have comments in the first place?
    Try harder next time, tool.

  7. budalic says:

    The game already features point-buy stat system, so it’s really wierd that there isn’t one in the game, considering that the buyers should be people who played cRPG.

  8. Zapp says:

    Yet another call for a challenge level type of mechanism. As I see it, it boils down to “D&D got it, so why not Game XYZ?”.
    Where in fact most other fantasy games does not contain anything of the sort, just like DA. Still, people managed.
    In my opinion, this is good, because it tells the GM he must think for himself, and that the game isn’t simply a combat generator.
    Only if you’re deep into D&D will encounter-generating rules feel like a given, and its omission a mistake.

Leave a Comment


Ad

Our Most Popular Titles


Twitter