Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
daddystabz

Thoughts about the system

Recommended Posts

What are your thoughts about the system overall? How do you feel about the game?

 

How do you think it compares to All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Outbreak Undead, The Shotgun Diaries, etc and will it replace any of those games for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for my copy. My local group is ready to give it a shot. So these are my opnions of zombie apocalypse, before the first playtrough. AFMBE has a lot more variation both in zombies and setting. Playing as yourself seems intresting enough. The system with its 6 core stats seems at first a bit simplistic, but that could very well turn out to be a good thing. I just found the lack of a Strenght stat a bit odd. (testing against dexterity to lift a large object seems a bit odd.) The dice system seems nice (reminds me, along with the stats devided in 3 groups of old world of darkness)

Edited by Robin Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

daddystabz, I haven't played any of those other games before, so I have nothing to compare this game to. So far, however, I like how simple it is. In regards to the dice, I wish the Star Wars system was similar using numbers rather than symbols (or a combination of the two).

 

I can see the need for an even larger list of example tasks as well as more examples of positive and negative features to choose from. Maybe a huge random table of features for each characteristic can be developed so that players who are creating a fictional PC can simply roll for them. Each feature can include an explanation of how it can be used.

 

Also, I will need to play first to determine whether or not the movement guidelines are any good. If not, I may create range bands similar to Star Wars if needed.

 

It seems determining initiative is primarily controlled by the GM. Optionally, groups or individuals could perform a Dexterity test. Is that already in the rules? I can't remember. The most successes goes first. Ties mean simultaneous actions.

 

I sure hope they make a Gamemaster's Screen for The End of the World with all the pertinent charts. Otherwise, I can re-type them onto cheat sheets easy enough so that I won't need to flip through the book during the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto on a GM screen - I'd love to see a four panel, hard-cover style (like FFG has been producing). I think having each panel show the cover artwork would be hip (so, all four games shown).

 

RE: System. I have mixed feelings. I think the system proper is pretty nifty - very light, which means accessible. I'm glad they went with d6 and not custom dice (out of preference, or certainly utility for me). Having only 3 pages of chargen, and not much more for the rest of the system works for me. Likewise, I like that the bulk of the book (and presumably the series) is devoted to the various scenarios - which raises the usability for other rpg systems as well.

 

I think AFMBE offers deeper support for a GM interested in creating their own materials and worlds - both out of the core book, and given the wide range of source material already available. I'm ok on the Unisystem rules - I just wrapped up a Conspiracy X (2nd ed) game using them, and they are perfectly functional. I might have preferred using a customized ruleset from TEOTW: ZA (note: awful acronym. AFMBE wins here.). I think AFMBE offers a typical GM more typical gamer stuffs - to put it crudely.

 

That's probably the biggest gap is that PCs - even if not fictionalized versions of the player groups - aren't going to have much to draw on. Your "top tier" PC is going to be military, LEO, or hardcore EDC / prep'er ... no one's sporting super powers, psychics, etc. Which is perfectly in-genre, but is going to feel limiting to some folks. As a result, there's minimal support in the rules for adding that sort of crunch - one can add positive dice as advantages / equipment, of course.

 

I personally think playing fictionalized versions of players is an awful default, and have some experience over 35 years to reach that preference. I'm quite glad there's alternate paragraphs covering it in a few places. The brevity of the chargen system works to its advantage here.

 

I think the game's clear and stylish presentation, light-weight rules system, and multiple starting and late-game scenarios are its strongest features. 

 

In full disclosure, I have writing credits in the AFMBE supplement, One of the Living (which covers extended campaigning) ... and as a first professional (i.e., paying) gig. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my response mirrors that of Bisikoff.

 

* The rules seem pretty light overall (I haven't actually played yet, but I bought the game yesterday and read it last night) and easy enough to play.

 

* I'm glad they used standard d6 dice instead of the symbolic ones from Star Wars.

 

* I'm hoping for a GM screen, but may end up typing up the tables on my own,

 

* I like the fact that players are "regular" and not superheroic, whether they be fictiionalized versions of themselves or totally other. I'm not sure how the "be yourself" thing will work for my group because I GM for a mix of adults and kids, and I'm pretty sure the kids won't like kid limitations. Overall, however, the notion of the "regular guy" is one that draws me to shows like WALKING DEAD and so I'm hoping that this game gives a similar feel.

 

* I also like the "play in your hometown" approach, and it would have been great for my group when we were growing up, but my current group is spread out a lot and don't all come from the same neighborhood.

 

Overall, I'm liking what I see in this rulebook and can't wait to run a game! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't have the book yet... But if it is as simple as I read here it seems like an excellent "let's play a game this Saturday night" type of game! I need that since fiasco proved way too intense for my friends and wife.

I do find the "gladly not the SW dice" remarks to be completely of the mark, since that is the best RPG system (by far) I have played in my 28 years of actively playing RPG's. It took a party of 5 newbies 10 minutes to come to grips with it last weekend and not just "I miss" or "I hit" but full blown narrative suggestions and active storytelling from NEW players. Give it a shot, a dice pack is about as expensive as two beers in a bar, and since us nerds don't get laid from buying ladies drinks anyway, it is not that big an investment.

Edited by DanteRotterdam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to agree that the sw dice system is great. So easy to get into. I too had players who have never played a rpg before and within a few minutes they had the dice system down. I don't think the price is that bad either. I got beginners box and then ended up getting a second set as well. More then enough for whole group. There's also the app which is even cheaper then pack of dice...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the Star Wars dice, I haven't played much but they just seem confusing to me.

 

I bought the SW starter set and a couple extra sets of dice, so having enough dice wouldn't be a problem. The problem I have is that when we roll it seems a lot like reading tea leaves. I just don't really know what the symbols are supposed to bring to the story.

 

I suppose I ought to take this to the SW forum, however, rather than cluttering up this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I'm not meaning to make that much of a judgement on the dice system. I have the Star Wars system and plenty of the dice, and I don't disagree that it's catchy and not a big deal.

 

But I do find a / the plain d6 pool is simpler and more accessible. Regular d6's are cheaper and generally already in most gamers kits, and the Star Wars custom dice do take a little getting used to. Not years, months or whatever ... but I do think the d6 system is a little easier by comparison vs. the custom dice.

 

I do think the custom dice gives options for a richer results, special options, and stuff - hands down. I think it's nifty that they can produce such dice so easily these days.

 

I'd love to see an article for the new game perhaps talking about importing Star Wars dice as an "advanced option", etc.

 

I do find the "gladly not the SW dice" remarks to be completely of the mark, since that is the best RPG system (by far) I have played in my 28 years of actively playing RPG's. It took a party of 5 newbies 10 minutes to come to grips with it last weekend and not just "I miss" or "I hit" but full blown narrative suggestions and active storytelling from NEW players. Give it a shot, a dice pack is about as expensive as two beers in a bar, and since us nerds don't get laid from buying ladies drinks anyway, it is not that big an investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not a bad idea Bisikoff, having basic rules for those who are vehemently against using specialised dice and then having additional rules for those who enjoy the narrative feel of special dice so everyone wins.

 

I do get quite sick of the whole normal dice verses Star Wars dice arguments that seem to pop up all over the non Star Wars forums and have a tendency to derail a lot of what would otherwise be interesting threads.

 

Edit: Actually Bisikoff maybe you could pitch your idea directly to FFG. Don't know what the chances are of them adding it to future supplements but if they are feeling in a giving mood maybe the alternate dice rules would be something they might add to the support section.

Edited by Amroth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I like the simplicity of the d6 system. Makes the game fairly portable. The narrative dice of Star Wars are awesome, but the game would need some overhaul as to the benefit of stats, levels of difficulty, and adding narrative effects of advantages. I also like that your rolls are generally about 2-3 positive and a couple of negative, depending on the circumstances. If you start incorporating a dice mechanic like Star Wars has you will have six different dice and your dice pool will increase. All right if you like that I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the Star Wars dice, I haven't played much but they just seem confusing to me.

It is a system to be played in order to "get" it. At least, that is what I found.

Also, I understand how a simple game might be better served by a simpler mechanic. Hopefully my FLGS will have the game today....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The system looks like a merger between FATE & WOD some what, using d6 instead of d10's.  Seems simple enough but I get why they did it, considering it's gotta be simple enough that they can add three more EotW systems to this book, seems pretty standard for a slim down system.   Heck the worlds included for the Apocalypse alone could be run with AFMBE or FATE but I'm gonna give it a go before I judge completely, looks ok so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto on a GM screen - I'd love to see a four panel, hard-cover style (like FFG has been producing). I think having each panel show the cover artwork would be hip (so, all four games shown).

 

RE: System. I have mixed feelings. I think the system proper is pretty nifty - very light, which means accessible. I'm glad they went with d6 and not custom dice (out of preference, or certainly utility for me). Having only 3 pages of chargen, and not much more for the rest of the system works for me. Likewise, I like that the bulk of the book (and presumably the series) is devoted to the various scenarios - which raises the usability for other rpg systems as well.

 

I think AFMBE offers deeper support for a GM interested in creating their own materials and worlds - both out of the core book, and given the wide range of source material already available. I'm ok on the Unisystem rules - I just wrapped up a Conspiracy X (2nd ed) game using them, and they are perfectly functional. I might have preferred using a customized ruleset from TEOTW: ZA (note: awful acronym. AFMBE wins here.). I think AFMBE offers a typical GM more typical gamer stuffs - to put it crudely.

 

That's probably the biggest gap is that PCs - even if not fictionalized versions of the player groups - aren't going to have much to draw on. Your "top tier" PC is going to be military, LEO, or hardcore EDC / prep'er ... no one's sporting super powers, psychics, etc. Which is perfectly in-genre, but is going to feel limiting to some folks. As a result, there's minimal support in the rules for adding that sort of crunch - one can add positive dice as advantages / equipment, of course.

 

I personally think playing fictionalized versions of players is an awful default, and have some experience over 35 years to reach that preference. I'm quite glad there's alternate paragraphs covering it in a few places. The brevity of the chargen system works to its advantage here.

 

I think the game's clear and stylish presentation, light-weight rules system, and multiple starting and late-game scenarios are its strongest features. 

 

In full disclosure, I have writing credits in the AFMBE supplement, One of the Living (which covers extended campaigning) ... and as a first professional (i.e., paying) gig. 

 

 

I agree that playing yourself is an awful default and does not interest me at all.  Unfortunately my local GM wants to run it for us doing exactly that, which is very disappointing to me.  I am going to run a game at Roll 20 with it where the players make their own fictional characters using the epic zombie campaign War of the Dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given all the unique gaming systems that FFG has published recently (i.e. Star Wars), I was really looking forward to another robust game system from them.  This is a d6 dice pool game, and I have never been a big fan of d6 dice pool games.

 

Combat and more specifically firearms rules should be robust and detailed in a modern / zombie setting. There are also no skills in this game, which is also a pet peeve of mine -- but I guess you could probably work a few "skills" in as features on your character sheet.  Still, I will have to fully reserve my final judgement on this game until I have played a game -- but I am currently feeling a little pessimistic about it.  I'm also surprised at how little promoting FFG has done on this game.

 

This game feels a lot more like a "beer & pretzels" type of roleplaying game.  Its rules light and you make up a lot of stuff on the fly.  There are already so many other rule light zombie games out there, that I'm not really sure this game differs much from them.  Perhaps I'm also being jaded by my own desires to find a fun zombie rpg, with a solid set of firearms rules and tactical combat rules.  The search continues on that front, but I'm still going to give this game a try despite it being a little too rules light for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got my copy yesterday, and I am pretty happy. First of all, it is a FFG product, solid print and good art. I particularly love the introductory art.

I haven't gotten into the scenarios yet but the system is very light and highly narrative. FFG, with WFRP, EotE and now EotW seems to have definitely gotten the narratively concept of RPGs without bogging down the GMs and players with rules after rules of too much details.

This game can easily be brought to a party, and be run within a few minutes. Personnally, I love it, but I expects lots of players more used to traditional RPGs will de disappointed.

While the original setting is to play yourself, FFG includes provisions on how to play fictional characters.

I am definitely looking forward to run it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WolfLord 22 wrote;
 
There are also no skills in this game, which is also a pet peeve of mine -- but I guess you could probably work a few "skills" in as features on your character sheet.

 

 

I am guessing with the idea of playing yourself they expect the GM could make a judgement call on what your character can and cannot do based on..... well what you can actually do in real life. I still haven't got my rules yet though so just a hunch.

 

Edit: Don't know why that quote didn't come out properly.

Edited by Amroth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is indeed as rules light as I believe it to be then I am looking forward to it even more!

I could use a "let's break out an RPG" on a Saturday night. I am set for rules-heavy, campaign style RPG's with my EotE, D&D en CoC groups and this seems to be a kind of game I could even get the Misses to sit down and play...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am guessing with the idea of playing yourself they expect the GM could make a judgement call on what your character can and cannot do based on..... well what you can actually do in real life. I still haven't got my rules yet though so just a hunch.

 

 

 

You actually make a good point about the lack of skills in the game.  I have no plan to ever run this as a "play yourself" type of scenario, so I would have liked to have seen more customization options like skills.  From my point of view, I think the "play yourself" concept is a little silly.  I play roleplaying games so I can escape my world of allergies and ailments.  I have no interest in roleplaying a character whose sole mission in life after the apocalypse is trying to gather all the antihistamines I can find.  I want to roleplay a character that can outrun a zombie without worrying about an asthma attack.  

 

In general, in a world full of zombies I want to play an arse-kicking, gritty survivalist type of character. That's not me -- heck I can't stand more than 1 night of camping in a tent.  I don't mind roleplaying a character with some drawbacks... but I want to select what drawbacks the character has and the level of impact they have on the character.  I don't want to play a character with the drawbacks I have in real life, because in real life the drawbacks I have suck every day!    I don't want to play me!  I won't last long in an apocalypse and I accept that -- and I have NO desire to roleplay out my quick demise :)

Edited by WolfLord22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha don't worry I wouldn't stand a chance in a real apocalypse either, but I don't mind the idea of playing as myself especially as it's an abstracted version so it wouldn't really be me but a more kick ass version of me anyway.

 

I certainly couldn't have played this game when I was younger though, I would be too down on myself and I was the same as you, I role-play to be someone more awesome. Still I think it would be a lark now to see how me and my friends might react when put into such a situation. If we die horribly or get bogged down with all our various ailments, well we'll have a good chuckle and then go back to playing mighty warriors trying to save the Imperium (or in many of our cases trying to destroy it).

 

As for skills for characters that aren't you, maybe pick a few generic skills you might want your characters to have with GM approval to give you bonus dice for those tasks. Again, still waiting for my rules to ship so this may not be practical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are your thoughts about the system overall? How do you feel about the game?

 

How do you think it compares to All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Outbreak Undead, The Shotgun Diaries, etc and will it replace any of those games for you?

 

I've only ever run All Flesh and a homebrew D20 Modern zombie game. All Flesh is fun but too tongue in cheek for my taste really. Now I've picked up Zombie Apocalypse it'll do the sort of game I want to run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we gave this game a try tonight to test it out. Made a few small mistakes but that's par for the course when learning a new system. Couple of things though...

 

1. Everyone hated the character creation system. We tried it out and then just decided that 16 points spent as the player wants and then agree with one another about accuracy. Same with features. I think everyone would have prefered a skills based system but it was ok.

 

2. Zombies seem to have a hell of a hard time hurting anyone. We are playing No More Room in Hell and and pretty much zombies rolled 2 dice and need 1's to do anything. It felt like you needed a horde of them to add more dice. I didn't feel, as GM, that zombies were threatening enough.

Edited by The_Big_Show

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it however right that a couple of slow shambling things in s normal situation should be no threat. The threat is their number, their appearing anytime (in the walking dead they almost always get the element of surprise), and tirelessly coming at you.

Did you add white dice fir their features and situational environment? I felt I was damaging my players. Not much but since I was giving them no time to rest, little by little it adds up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...