Battletech RPG

longtime Battltech fan here, these are my thoughts on the RPGs...
<tons of great thoughts>
Thanks for sharing all that! MW 1e is the only one I haven't seen/read (played MW1 on the PC, but that's different :P) and it's neat to hear how it was so laser focused on the MW/Merc aspect.

Also neat what you said about MW Destiny -- I gave it a quick read through and I couldn't quite get what I was seeing and put it aside to come back to later. But if it is as you say a "hodgepodge" by those who don't quite understand narrative rule systems then that could be why it was so perplexing as I do like and know a number of good narrative rule systems.*

Putting aside the specific rules, what might really be worthwhile for any MW RPG is to have a section, up front, that talks about different campaign styles. Because even coming in as wanting to play a Mechwarrior, if you come in having read the novels it can easily be assumed you will be a MW of some import with IS-wide impact. So there's the WHFRP version of playing a MW, there's the deep "gritty" Mercenary version, and there's the "novels" version which could either be a merc company or nobles or something but the main idea is that you will be shakers of the sphere. That's for Mechwarriors (and support characters). Then there's playing non-Mechwarrior-centric games, such as espionage, operatives, and politics (perhaps with a side order of Mechwarrioring). A good explanation of each, the implications of each, the tone of each, and suggestions for how to run (including character builds and power level, types of adventures, how to link things together, what to focus on, and what (optional) modules in the rules to use (down to the last C-bill or just handwave expenses, etc), and so on. That could let the game be both precise and as accomodating at the same time. Also worthwhile to have a conversation about whether the campaign will take place mostly on one planet or will involve more planet hopping (and if so, again, what cost tracking will be done for that?).

And now, after having read your post, when I get home from my trip I want to re-read the Mercenary's Handbook 2e. :)


*And having read the quickstart for Voltron, for it too I would say it reads like an attempt at a narrative experience without a good rules framework to deliver on such. So much so that I immediately started musing on how I'd run it in Cortex Prime and having ideas pinball of the concepts that would deliver what Catalyst seemed to be intending. (Also, I think they really missed the boat on how to handle or at least advise handling multiple players controlling one combined robot, but that's a whole separate conversation.)
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

@StrollofTurtle excellent write up.

I’ll add that I ran Mechwarrior: Destiny as a traditional GM without using the narrative elements (my group wasn’t into that). The rules and character creation system were still pretty decent, definitely easier than any of the 3rd++ hyper-complex era, and felt more balanced than 2e’s easily broken system.

Mechwarrior Destiny has a “Battletech Lite” system for mech combat. A huge difference in its Mech combat engine is it has you using your piloting skill to determine your chance to be hit, which definitely leaned into the fantasy of having super pilots like Kai Allard-Liao who could wade into Clan Mechs with a Centurion and still come out on top. We tried it for a couple sessions, but ultimately switched back to regular BattleTech for most engagements.

However, I think Mechwarrior Destiny is a dead game walking. It got next to no support beyond its initial release and there’s only fan rules for the Clans if you want to include them. I imagine Catalyst has something new in the works to replace it.
 

Oh and someone earlier mentioned adopting Traveler as a Mechwarrior replacement. Our group actually were discussing trying that, but Mechwarrior D just came out and we went for that instead. I still think Traveler would be a solid stand-in for the rpg side.
 

Oh and someone earlier mentioned adopting Traveler as a Mechwarrior replacement. Our group actually were discussing trying that, but Mechwarrior D just came out and we went for that instead. I still think Traveler would be a solid stand-in for the rpg side.
Yeah, I think if folks want to try older MW RPGs or even adapt they should do so. Even if CGL is working on a new BT RPG, their schedule seems like its so far off int he distance its hard to get excited about things.
 

System-wise, all three editions of Mechwarrior are known for having complex, Traveller-inspired lifepath-base character creation rules paired with a relativelly simple task resolution during play (2d10 vs TN).
Wrong. Very very wrong.
1st ed is a 4-att point builder, and 1st uses only 2d6 throws for skill use, using a TN by attribute and skill. (MW 1e pp. 10-11)
2nd uses 2d6 or 3d6kh2 (MW 2e p11), and is a priority assignment for points in separate pools (p14)
Only 3rd has that travelleresque system, and it's no more travelleresque than was FASA's STRPG... that is, only conceptually.
 

Remove ads

Top