2 out of 5 rating for Fantasy AGE Core Rulebook
Well I really wanted to love this game. I VERY rarely buy books anymore, but I grabbed this one after skimming through it in the shop. The thing is, the core of the rules, which I checked, is very nice; the snag is with all the rest.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
While advertised as "an entry-point into tabletop RPG" (read: our own 5th edition), it's really a repurposed half-finished ruleset, tacked on a nice GM tips section, but nothing else. Mind you, the core rules ARE nice. But if you're the target, that is a beginner GM, I'm sorry but turn away and run for D&D.
Only if you're absolutely looking for an alternative to D&D/Apocalypse/Cypher, and you're willing to make up rules, could you consider this neat core ruleset - but plan on house-ruling pretty much everything. Considering this a setting-agnostic system, well you're paying for not much.
CORE RULES
That's where the game shines. It's a typical level-stat-skills system, but with neat twists over its well-known siblings:
* Using 3d6 instead of a d20 allows for low, controlled stat numbers, and makes a clear difference between skilled and non-skilled PCs (but see the Stunt die success issue below...)
* New abilities alleviate classic issues. The old blurry Wisdom gives way to Perception and Willpower. Charisma-which-is-not-physical-beauty is replaced with useful Communication (and Intimidate is a Strength skill). "Accuracy" is basically the part of Dex that's involved with hitting thing; same for Fighting in regard to Strength: this prevents "mono-stats" builds and allows for strong, but clumsy fighters or deft duellist (except, it doesn't work, see below...).
* The three broad classes is a nice way to encompass various sub-roles simply (except it doesn't really work)
* Nice, semi-random creation system
* The Stunt system is a flexible way to enrich gameplay. When you roll any doubles, you get Stunt points equal to your Stunt die (one of the three dice you roll) to spend on tricks, which you purchase on-the-spot from a list. This works on non-combat encounters as well. (except, it quickly becomes unwieldy).
OTHER COOL STUFF
* The book contains a few monsters in a clear, concise format, most of which have cool powers (good luck with balancing encounters, though)
* A nice introductory scenario (which is the oddest introductory scenario ever written, though)
* Lots of advice, lots of gear in a slim book.
* Nice presentation, illustrations, and layout
Now on to the issues. They start springing up when you're done with character creation.
* ADVICE FOR BEGINNER GMs: GET MORE EXPERIENCE
That's both the strong point and a serious let-down.
The thin book is crammed with to-the-point gaming advice, from prep time to miniature issues, player style and expectations, and using inspiration.
This would make it a great game for beginner GMs... if it gave them any help with the rules... And that's where it all breaks down. At every page, the prospective GM is left with classic excuses such as "make it up", "use common sense", "rules cannot be provided for the various situations", but mostly plain nothing.
The worst example are the skills. There's a single page devoted to the 80+ skills, with one sentence each. E.g. "JUMPING: Springing and leaping". That's it. No rules, no target numbers. This is typical for a cheap 90s ruleset, not a 2015 Green Ronin mainstream product targeted at beginners. I pity the fresh GM who has to come up with rules for jumping, disarming traps, fixing stuff, hiding or finding loot (you know, stuff they will do within the first hour of play?). That's absolutely inexcusable.
Another example, in the "add insult to injury" category, is the Hazards rules which go on describing the various parameters (danger, triggers, avoiding, effects) in good detail while carefully eschewing any stats or numbers. A beginner GM would be absolutely lost with deciding on damage values or TNs. A seasoned GM could do it - but what's the point with all the text then?
Another example is the Threat level for the provided monsters: basically there's a whole paragraph dedicated to telling you you're on your own for adjudicating proper combat challenge levels. Thanks for nothing.
Is it a ruleset for beginners? Then pack it with MORE rules, not LESS. RPGs are complex affairs: help the beginners, don't abandon them. Is it a light ruleset for experienced players? Then do away with the classic advice and empty rules.
* BEGINNER'S LUCK IS ONLY FUN WHEN YOU BEGIN
Degree of success is to be measured using the Stunt Die. That's an obvious bad idea.
First, players hate it when their high skill does not correlate with greater success. With this system, any novice can pull off as great success as you (rolling high on the Stunt die).
Second, it prevents "multiple difficulty" checks. i.e. define several increasing TNs correspondong to increasing amounts of information gathered. To represent this in F.AGE, you have to define a single TN and let the Stunt die represent the amount of infomation. This compounds the first issue. If a player has invested e.g. in a Lore skill, and rolls high, but low on the Stunt die, he gets little info. This is made even worse by the fact that the TN has to be low (because it's the level at which you get *any* information), enabling the complete ignoramus to get the full information with a lucky Stunt die. Talk about rewarding character choices.
Third, it plays poorly with the Stunt Effects (what you get when rolling doubles), because they are already forms of improved success. So you can't correlate high success (Stunt die result) with anything that's already covered by actual Stunts (rolling doubles). How do you describe a very successful roll (i.e. 5 or 6 on the Stunt die) if you can't e.g. have it be performed in a shorter time (that's a Stunt), or devastating an opponent during a debate (that's a Stunt). That's kind of lame considering Stunts are a core element of the system, and also because it's easily fixed (use margin of success, and restrict Stunt strictly to secondary effects).
These issues would be blatantly obvious after the first playtest sessions. Why is it in print? My belief is that no-one, not even the designer, plays it that way, and instead uses classic margin-of-success.
* STUNTS THE IMAGINATION
I like Stunts. But do they work? F.AGE shares the same issue as the new SW or WFRPG 3rd. You get cool special effects on rolls, but it quickly becomes a pain to use. First, you are encouraged to pick from the Stunt tables, which have issues:
* They're longish. Hand the table to the player when they stunt and the game comes to a dead stop while he reads every paragraph, understands it, and choose. Exciting and dynamic combat? Forget it.
* Some involve even more rolls, to make everything slower.
* This discourages improvised effects. In fact, some rules assume you use the provided stunts.
Also, you roll Stunts in about 45% of the successful rolls. While it's cool to get effects, that's a lot to handle. In combat, it constantly breaks the pace. Outside of combat, you better keep the number of rolls under control. The rules helpfully state that you must disallow excessive rolling. Yeah, but how? As an experienced GM, I know how to do that. But not only the book doesn't give actual tips, it also encourages rolling too much, by using opposed rolls and quick checks (e.g. during Stunt resolution).
Also, non-combat Stunts, a great idea, peters out as well. I would guess it could work if broken into a dozen Stunt tables, one for each kind of activity (there isn't that many in a adventurous FRPG setting), a bit like the old Rolemaster maneuver tables: exploration, looting, pursuit, investigation, convincing, interrogation, etc.
Here, with two generic tables, which are not generic at all (the first chiefly involves looting, the second diplomacy) you find yourself at loss to make the Stunt vaguely relevant and exciting. And remember! You cannot use them as a degree of success! They must be side-effect. Cool, relevant, exciting side-effects, every other time someone rolls a Perception check...
I like Stunts. But they need a lot more polishing to work well in actual play.
* THE WEIGHT OF A LOINCLOTH
Eight pages of gear. Cool, eh? Except most of it is the most disturbingly useless stuff: piecewise clothing, everyday items, various tools. Each, described in more details that the skills. Yet, as you can imagine, no rules, and stupefyingly, no weight or encumbrance.
This would be alright and possibly welcome in a larger book: here it just leaves you with the impression that the space would have been much more useful for more rules. Want to know the cost of a hinge, an upholstered chair, a frying pan or a hood? No problemo. You can also have a description of said pan, hinge and hood. E.g. there's an entry for every piece of clothing. "Shoes", I learn, are "sturdy soles attached to upper pieces of leather that cover and protect the foot". Capital information! In case your 4 year-old or Spanish-speaking friend picks up the book.
But you won't get a TN for climbing the ladder ("Nearly anyone can make an easy, stable climb"), bursting the manacles, not even picking the lock ("They are vulnerable to thieves skilled in using lockpicks". Well, thanks.).
Ah, but you can make this all up. Also, you can probably figure out that fantasy shop stock pans and hoods for a few coppers, and rip those pages from the book.
Better: use the space to actually describe the skills.
* STAB WITH THE POINTY END. OR NOT.
That's a recurring issue in FRPGs, which D&D4 and 5e arguably share, but it's especially jarring here. The axe, longsword and mace all deal 2d6 damage, with nothing else to differentiate them. Same for other similar weapon sizes. It's just a matter of having the corresponding proficiency.
It's jarring, because the game has Stunts, a very flexible way of adding details. How arduous and onerous is it to add e.g. a discount on certain appropriate Stunts (rapier - dual strike; mace - pierce armor...)? Or give each one a custom Stunt? That's a one-line rule! Delete the description for "Bottle (clay)" or "Sawdust (1 cu. foot)" and you have it! Not even the Main Gauche has special defense rules! Spending all my exclamation points budget!
*...AND YOU KILLED MY FATHER, PREPARE TO KILL ME.
So there's this Accuracy stat. You can build a low-str, high-hitting Duelist! How cool is that?
Well, useless. You can hit frequently, but you deal 1D6+4 with your rapier. Problem is, armor reduces damage. An Orc's medium armor shrugs off 5 damage per hit, and he has 30 hit points. Meanwhile, he'll clobber you, your leather armor (3 armor) and 35 hp for 2d6+3. You have about 8 rounds to realize your poor judgement in fighting styles.
But wait! Surely you are nimble and able to evade blows? Tough luck, that's Dexterity, and because it's not Accuracy, you probably don't have high scores in both. Neither does the Orc, but he has no disadvantage here either.
But wait! Surely you can perform nifty duelist tricks? Oh yes. You can bypass half of the armor with a Stunt, or deal increased damage, or sidestep. But that's the generic Stunts: so can the Orc, with absolutely no disadvantage compared to you.
Mind you, the Rapier is a fine weapon. It deals 1D6+3 to the axe's 2D6. But the thing is, you always add Strength to the damage, so your duelist-type has no less reasons to have high Str than the barbarian, who simply uses Fighting instead of Accuracy! There is no such thing as a precision strike.
It's not a prejudice against duelists. Heavy hitter builds face the same issue: you can hardly avoid investing in Fighting (Hitting hard is fun! As long as you hit!). In fact it's even a design goal that fighters do not over-rely on Strength (or Dexterity for light weapons). But the real consequence, because of the armor system, is that you must have BOTH a high Strength and a high Fighting (or Accuracy).
I guess there's a reason for D&D using a single ability for both attack and damage after all.
* THAT'S WHAT LOINCLOTH STATS ARE FOR
So you've rolled your sword-wielding, spell-casting adventurer? Jump into the introductory scenario. It's quite nice! Oh, but you play a teenager stranded on an island. Remove your armor and weapons from your character sheet, as well as your adventurer gear (you can keep the cubic foot of sawdust and the hood). And that background you developped? It's kind of irrelevant.
Welcome to Fantasy AGE! The Troll and flaming sword on the cover? Our lawyers insisted.
(Yet again, that scenario is nice by and in itself. Just not as an intro scenario)
** HALF A DOZEN OTHER ISSUES
* Weapon group vs. Weapon focus is quite confusing, notably because you almost cannot learn weapon groups. Also, because it appears all monsters use a different rule, I would think because the rule got changed midway.
* No flails? No scimitars? Why? Also why is the Morning Star a spiked mace, except it uses a different stat and is a "Staff"? Oh wait, there's exactly three weapons per category, for some reason, so apparently sacrifices had to be made to fit everything into this pointless scheme which means that all F.AGE Mage are wielding Morning Stars. They also wields light shields, because why not?
* Mages are supposed to represent a broad array of spellcasters, like shamans or clerics. Why then do they all have Arcane Blast, Arcane Device, no armor and wield staves? Same goes for the Rogues.
* The Primary/Secondary stat thing is a good idea to prevent piling up upgrades on a single stat... but a consequence is that some builds have it much easier. At level 10, a heavy weapon fighter can only have +2 Str and +3 Fight, while the light wpn build can have +5 Str and +5 Acc, and can also choose to increase his all-important Dex. (remember that rapier-and-shield is just as good as longsword-and-shield). The Rogue has it even worse: he cannot increase both his Acc, Dex (vital for his sneak attack and defense) and Per (ranged dmg), and he cannot train in any new weapon.
Thing is, this rule would be nice for a classic 6-stat game. But a F.AGE PC requires *at least* two stats to be efficient. Therefore it is already constrained in that regard!
* Talents' power levels and usefulness is all over the place. Would you rather have Contacts (you can make rolls to influence NPCs. Wait. Can't you do that already?), Carousing (Add ONE point to your Stunt die during drinking contests - not gaming, not arm-wrestling, not singing -. Hope you're playing an Irish Dwarf Pirate adventure), or would you rather pick... say, Observation (reroll ALL visual perception tests...), or Chirurgy (heal for cheap during combat)?
* Same goes for spells. Let's see. Journeyman (PC level 3 minimum) Air spell Wind Blast: 8 Magic Points, small close blast that deals NO damage but knocks enemies prone with an easy save (and the enemy can simply forgo half his move and charge you). Novice Shadow spell Shadow Dagger: 3MP, ranged auto-hit 1D6+1 armor-bypass damage. Now check the Novice Earth spell 1 Rock Blast: 4MP, ranged auto-hit 1D6 armor-bypass , PLUS extra dmg and prone on a failed save (because it's ranged, the enemy probably cannot charge you).
* With 3d6+Dex initiative, everybody ends up bunched in the 10-14 range. Which makes tie-breaking important. Too bad it's handled by comparing Stunt Dice. So, GM, you DID write down every single Stunt Die you rolled for the NPCs, right? Another issue that pops up in the very first game. It's not even on the Initiative Cards.
* I defy you to understand the combat actions in the first session. Also, some actions which ought to be Stunts are actions, and vice-versa, adding to the confusion. Be sure to have counters ready to write down the various +1/-1 to atk/def, too.
CONCLUSION
So... you see my point? The game really feels like Green Ronin felt the urge to fight D&D5 with its own beginner product. What they did is whip something out of the ruleset pulled from Dragon Age (itself coerced into the video game franchise game), with copious advice inspired by various sources, but no time to develop a fully-fledged, well balanced and unique game. That's a shame because, again the core rules are interesting.
It's a game crying out for a second edition.
Oh wait, it is a second edition.
SUGGESTIONS
A lot has to be done, but here's the main fixes:
* Rules, rules, rules, for skills
* Task-specific Stunt lists
* Simplified combat Stunts
* Weapon-specific Stunts
* simplify combat actions (I used a minor action Stance system)
* give more flexibilty to the Rogue and Mage starting features. It's a design goal after all
* Rebalance spells and Talents
* allow precision strikes (using Acc or Dex for dmg)
* rules for aiding checks and passive checks. More advice on rolling checks.
* scrap the pointless gear. D&D4/5 a solid inspiration here
* some other intro scenario. Save this one as PDF?