Fantasy AGE by Green Ronin: Anyone read/Dm'd or Played it?

[R_J_K75]

I recently bought Green Ronins Modern Age and have been reading it, albeit slowly. We are taking the summer off and Im going to start a Modern Age game come this fall. The 2 other DMs in our group are going to run ShadowDark too concurrent with my game. I really like that Modern AGE is a "classless" system and Im assuming that Fantasy AGE is probably the same but I'd like to ask people who have played it if that is the case. Id also like to know peoples overall impression of Fantasy AGE and their experiences playing it, i.e. the system is too complicated, not complicated enough, character creation takes a long time but there are lots of options to make truly unique characters, things you'd change, things that need to be added or modified. I do like that there is only 5 or 6 official products so the system seems pretty finite.

 

[mamba]

Fantasy Age is not classless. It has Mage, Rogue and Warrior (and in the new release also Envoy). The Core Rulebook replaces the Basic Rulebook and the Companion book. So do not count them double in your list of official products

 

[R_J_K75]

Fantasy Age is not classless.

Thats disappointing. Even though it was a little rough around the edges I really liked the 2E AD&D Players Options Skills and Powers which Modern AGE reminded me off so I was hoping Fantasy AGE was the same.

 

[Jasca87]

I dm'ed Dragon Age and Fantasy Age 1st couple of times, FA 2nd once. It's okay system, but pretty bland in the terms of rules. Amount of hit points and armor as a DR result fights dragging. Some people like the stunt system, I don't really care for it.

 

[R_J_K75]

Some people like the stunt system, I don't really care for it.

I havent played Modern AGE yet but what I've read I liked. It reminded me of Alternity. Who knows how it will play out in game or if my group will like it. Im getting the impression that perhaps the AGE systems is better suited for a modern game than a fantasy game, but Im just guessing so I suppose the true test will be when we actually play a game. I'll probably pass on Fantasy AGE.

 

[amethal]

I played in a Dragon Age campaign for a while. It was fun (even though most of us knew nothing about the setting, having never played the computer game) and a nice change of pace from the much more rules-intensive Pathfinder we usually play. I think the (comparative) lack of character options would have paled after a while, but we only did the one campaign so that wasn't an issue.

I've only read Fantasy AGE, never played it, but it seems to improve the rules a bit (adding a Fighting skill, for instance) and expand the Stunt system.

I'm pretty much neutral on the stunts question. They added a bit of interest at first, but eventually we defaulted to using the same ones all the time. The monster stunts took a bit of getting used to. As a long-time D&D player, when the giant spider successfully bites my character I expect to get a saving throw against poison. It doesn't feel right to get bitten repeatedly and not have to worry about poison, and then (because the monster finally rolled some stunt points) to get poisoned "automatically" with nothing I can do about it.

 

[R_J_K75]

Thanks for the Feedback folks its really helping me decide if I want to invest in this game or not

 

[Thomas Shey]

Thats disappointing. Even though it was a little rough around the edges I really liked the 2E AD&D Players Options Skills and Powers which Modern AGE reminded me off so I was hoping Fantasy AGE was the same.

You might be able to kitbash it with Modern Age, which I believe is technically classless.

(I should note two things:
1. I ran a Dragon Age game at one time and we all concluded it started to breakdown for various reasons about level 6-8. There are things about the publication history that suggest why the design might have that particular failure point.
2. That said, while I own and have read both Fantasy Age I and Modern Age, I have not run them, and by my count Fantasy Age 2 is, effectively the 4th evolutionary iteration of the base system since DA. Its possible that the issues we had may have been hosed down some in fashions that are not obvious from a casual read).

 

[aramis erak]

I've read Dragon Age, and skimmed Fantasy Age 1e. Neither was compelling to me as a game. DA was a good read, tho'. Lots of good setting detail. (Never played the DA videogames, either.) The mechanics are close enough to d20 that it didn't appeal at the time.

For me, the lack of a cleric class was a major flaw. Magic-using priests are a common trope in fantasy (tho' them being combat effectives isn't as universal); it's my big complaint about T&T/M&M and TFT, as well.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I've read Dragon Age, and skimmed Fantasy Age 1e. Neither was compelling to me as a game. DA was a good read, tho'. Lots of good setting detail. (Never played the DA videogames, either.) The mechanics are close enough to d20 that it didn't appeal at the time.

For me, the lack of a cleric class was a major flaw. Magic-using priests are a common trope in fantasy (tho' them being combat effectives isn't as universal); it's my big complaint about T&T/M&M and TFT, as well.

Depends on your fantasy palette. Frankly, in most of the ones I'm aware of that are not clearly D&D influenced, they're either not common, or simply appear to be priests where part of the job description was also being sorcerers.

 

[Aldarc]

I recently bought Green Ronins Modern Age and have been reading it, albeit slowly. We are taking the summer off and Im going to start a Modern Age game come this fall. The 2 other DMs in our group are going to run ShadowDark too concurrent with my game. I really like that Modern AGE is a "classless" system and Im assuming that Fantasy AGE is probably the same but I'd like to ask people who have played it if that is the case. Id also like to know peoples overall impression of Fantasy AGE and their experiences playing it, i.e. the system is too complicated, not complicated enough, character creation takes a long time but there are lots of options to make truly unique characters, things you'd change, things that need to be added or modified. I do like that there is only 5 or 6 official products so the system seems pretty finite.

There is a new edition of Fantasy Age released a few months ago. It includes some of the mods and options from the various AGE system games, including Modern Age, Expanse, and the upcoming Cthulhu one. But yeah, Fantasy AGE is not classless. The designers felt that fantasy archetypes and class-based designed are easier for people coming into Fantasy AGE. There have been a number of classless hacks of the game. But as Thomas Shey says, it would probably be easier to start with Modern AGE or Threefold.

Edit: FYI, I like the game as I find that it's easier to teach, play, and run for tabletop newbies, like my partner, who enjoyed playing Fantasy AGE. They disliked playing a mage in D&D but loved it in AGE. Obviously YMMV.

You might be able to kitbash it with Modern Age, which I believe is technically classless.

From what I can tell, Green Ronin's Threefold is a loose fantasy hack of Modern AGE. That might be a better starting point.

 

[Thomas Shey]

From what I can tell, Green Ronin's Threefold is a loose fantasy hack of Modern AGE. That might be a better starting point.

Its actually a modern/fantasy version with a multiverse premise. My feeling on reading it was that the system might not entirely be up to what they were trying to do there (I think it'd probably work better with a universal system without some of the mechanical limitations inherent in AGE, whether you wanted to go the Cortex/Fate way at one end or the Hero/GURPS way at the other).

 

[Aldarc]

Its actually a modern/fantasy version with a multiverse premise. My feeling on reading it was that the system might not entirely be up to what they were trying to do there (I think it'd probably work better with a universal system without some of the mechanical limitations inherent in AGE, whether you wanted to go the Cortex/Fate way at one end or the Hero/GURPS way at the other).

Oh I know but it has fantasy elements, including off-brand elves and dwarves, which would be a good template for applying fantasy to the base Modern AGE game.

 

[aramis erak]

Depends on your fantasy palette. Frankly, in most of the ones I'm aware of that are not clearly D&D influenced, they're either not common, or simply appear to be priests where part of the job description was also being sorcerers.

Given that the only post-D&D fantasy novels I've read fall into...

• McCaffrey, who was not D&D-familiar
• Dragonlance
• Warhammer Old World based - with it's own variance and non-combat caster clerics (but not axiomatically turning undead nor healing)
• post 1800 earth settings.... the Castle Falkenstein and Deadlands
• The Trigan Empire¹ (which lacks any D&Dism and any magic.)

The rest were written before D&D or at least started before D&D
Conan the Barbarian
Kull the Conquerer
John Carter of Mars¹
Flash Gordon¹
Buck Rogers Comics¹
Stormbringer series (only two, not early in the series)
Arthuriana (Once and Future King, Le Morte d' Artur, The Mabinogwion, excerpts from Nennius' Kings of Britain, Prince Valiant²)
Hägar the Horrible
Græco-Roman and Egyptian mythology (yes, these were every bit as much a part of my bedtime reading as...)
Christian biblical and hagiographical works.³

so, yeah, most of them, caster priests are inherently evil, but the term "sorcerer" is too generic to be meaningful - as it axiomatically includes all supernatural ability wielders - outside the D&D redefinition.

---

¹: Actually in the Planetary Romance genre, which is often hybrid SF/Fantasy
²: I found the PV comic exceedingly boring. Beautiful, but for 8-10 YO me, just too damned slow in the sunday comics.
³: Hagiography is the literature of the lives of the saints (or when applied outside the Christian context, various religious leaders and martyrs). Only a handful of Christian hagiographical works include clerical casting... but those include Genesis, Exodus, Acts, and even some of the histories.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Given that the only post-D&D fantasy novels I've read fall into...

• McCaffrey, who was not D&D-familiar
• Dragonlance
• Warhammer Old World based - with it's own variance and non-combat caster clerics (but not axiomatically turning undead nor healing)
• post 1800 earth settings.... the Castle Falkenstein and Deadlands
• The Trigan Empire¹ (which lacks any D&Dism and any magic.)

The rest were written before D&D or at least started before D&D
Conan the Barbarian
Kull the Conquerer

I consider these examples of "They're not using magic because they're priests; priests just also often learn magic as part of the gig." There's little or no visible distinction between various dark priests and evil sorcerers.

John Carter of Mars¹

Assuming you're counting the psychic abilities as magic here (because otherwise I'd have to claim there's no magic in those books), ditto.

Flash Gordon¹
Buck Rogers Comics¹

I won't speak of those because I only know them by reputation.

Stormbringer series (only two, not early in the series)

Same here. The magic using priests are just priests who use magic.

Arthuriana (Once and Future King, Le Morte d' Artur, The Mabinogwion, excerpts from Nennius' Kings of Britain, Prince Valiant²)

Unless you're counting Morgan as a priestess, I'm not even familiar with any of the earlier ones of these that have anything resembling priests who use magic.

Hägar the Horrible
Græco-Roman and Egyptian mythology (yes, these were every bit as much a part of my bedtime reading as...)

Christian biblical and hagiographical works.³

so, yeah, most of them, caster priests are inherently evil, but the term "sorcerer" is too generic to be meaningful - as it axiomatically includes all supernatural ability wielders - outside the D&D redefinition.

My point is there's nothing distinct about priestly mages in most of those that suggests they're different from other mages. Its just a set of skills often learned by some kinds of priests.

---

¹: Actually in the Planetary Romance genre, which is often hybrid SF/Fantasy
²: I found the PV comic exceedingly boring. Beautiful, but for 8-10 YO me, just too damned slow in the sunday comics.
³: Hagiography is the literature of the lives of the saints (or when applied outside the Christian context, various religious leaders and martyrs). Only a handful of Christian hagiographical works include clerical casting... but those include Genesis, Exodus, Acts, and even some of the histories.

Christian miracles are absolutely a thing--but you only rarely saw it in fantasy fiction before D&D.

 

[aramis erak]

I consider these examples of "They're not using magic because they're priests; priests just also often learn magic as part of the gig." There's little or no visible distinction between various dark priests and evil sorcerers.

The D&D ones, while mechanically so similar to wizards, do have some dfferences. Some of those do invoke deities.

Assuming you're counting the psychic abilities as magic here (because otherwise I'd have to claim there's no magic in those books), ditto.

Psionics is magic.

Unless you're counting Morgan as a priestess, I'm not even familiar with any of the earlier ones of these that have anything resembling priests who use magic.

Morgan is definitely a priestess in most flavors, and an evil one at that, tho' magic is absent as a positive froce in Nennius, and the Mabinogwion isn't really arthurian, but a source of things Mallory and White stole from. Note also: Once and Future King is so anachronistic as to be hard to read for me.
Merlin is definitely as much a cleric as caster; all the druids in Mallory are. Welsh legend tends to have non-Christian clergy all using channeled power, not personal power. Which is largely the distinction.

My point is there's nothing distinct about priestly mages in most of those that suggests they're different from other mages. Its just a set of skills often learned by some kinds of priests.

Except that they are reliant upon their faith to use the magic, while magicians can be agnostic or even atheist. In some

Christian miracles are absolutely a thing--but you only rarely saw it in fantasy fiction before D&D.

Much hagiography is "pious frauds"... most of it is filled with miracles, most of which have Græco-roman analogues or even renames acts of minor deities within said tradition. Much of the miracle material in the Tanakh/OT is apparently borrowed from Phonecian, Sumerian, Akkadian, and Egyptian sources. And both the Gnostic Christian and Tanakh material is retained into the Quran. The Hagiographies of many of the now removed Brythonic and Norse Catholic saints are literally just the pre-christian myth tweaked. (Which is why Rome decanonized a bunch on the 00's. Ones that had been only locally canonized in the first millennium.) For example, it's noted that by a simple prayer followed by a command, St. Nicholas raised three boys who had been murdered then stuffed into one or more barrels of pickles...

Japanese Mythology has far more use of magic using priesthoods, and much anime and manga attributes supernatural power lent to the priests by the kami (translates as gods or spirits, but the term Kami lacks the inherent power/scope of the European god concept, at least until one gets to Amterasu and Tsukuyomi), while non-priest casters are binding spirits into service by coercion, not supplication nor contract.

Non-christian fantasy miracles from the early 20th C happen in both John Carter of Mars (his ability to tanslate between worlds, and, as a human, to sire a child on Deja, who laid the egg for said child) and Buck Rogers (In the novel and comics, he fell asleep in a cave for 500 years...). Plus some other adventure fiction. And no shortage of children's literature...

 

[R_J_K75]

There is a new edition of Fantasy Age released a few months ago. It includes some of the mods and options from the various AGE system games, including Modern Age, Expanse, and the upcoming Cthulhu one.

Looks like the physical book isnt available yet, only pre-order, at least on their website. But you can get the .pdf now if you pre-order the hard copy for an extra $5. That seems like a good deal. But I havent made a final decision whether to buy into this system or not. Expanse and Cthulhu and Blue Rose dont appeal to me.

Fantasy AGE Core Rulebook (Preorder)

Fantasy AGE Core Rulebook Design and Development Team: Steve Kenson, Ian Lemke, Chris Pramas, Malcolm Sheppard, Owen K.C. Stephens Adventure Game Engine (AGE) created by Chris Pramas Adventure Design: Crystal Frasier Editing: Carol Darnell, Michael Matheson, Evan Sass Art Direction: Hal Mangold...

greenroninstore.com

Its actually a modern/fantasy version with a multiverse premise. My feeling on reading it was that the system might not entirely be up to what they were trying to do there

I had some extra money last month so I picked up the rule books and settings for ModernAGE and browsed Threefold a bit. I dont think I'll run this as the primary setting for my game. leaning towards Lazarus unless I just make my own setting. It does seem like a strange premise for a modern setting. At that point I'd just adapt for a fantasy RPG most likely. But it may be fun to mine parts of it for an adventure or two.

Psionics is magic.

I disagree. I've always thought of psionics as psychic powers that come from within, arcane magic is harnessed from the environment through study or natural ability and divine or pact magic are granted from a deity or patron. True that depending how Psionics are portrayed at the table they can seem synonymous with other types of magic but if roleplayed differently this doesn't have to be the case. In part 3E and 4E D&D is to blame for this because they allowed saving throws for psionic effects and this ruined their flavor. Before then there was MAC (Mental Armor Class) and depending if you were a wild talent or Psionic you had mental defenses to defend against mental attacks. Otherwise other classes were pretty powerless against psionics which made them very feared and deadly which really made them feel different than magic. Of course just my opinion.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The D&D ones, while mechanically so similar to wizards, do have some dfferences. Some of those do invoke deities.

All kinds of mages in the Conan stories evoke outside powers. The result quality doesn't seem to matter whether you're technically a priest or not.

That's my point; there's nothing in the stories to suggest that being a priest is any special advantage here; most everyone is getting their power from inhuman sources.

Psionics is magic.

For certain purposes, yeah, but again, when it adds up to "Have I had the training to access the powers of my mind" its hard to see why being a priest or not is particularly relevant; it might give you access to the training, but that's not saying anything about being a priest per se is relevant.

Morgan is definitely a priestess in most flavors, and an evil one at that, tho' magic is absent as a positive froce in Nennius, and the Mabinogwion isn't really arthurian, but a source of things Mallory and White stole from. Note also: Once and Future King is so anachronistic as to be hard to read for me.
Merlin is definitely as much a cleric as caster; all the druids in Mallory are. Welsh legend tends to have non-Christian clergy all using channeled power, not personal power. Which is largely the distinction.

Fair enough there; Celtic myths definitely have priestly spellcasters to the degree they have any. However, I think you have to make some distinction between mythological/legendary cases and people who've done fiction from the ground up.

Except that they are reliant upon their faith to use the magic, while magicians can be agnostic or even atheist. In some

I don't buy the premise. As I said, in most of those its access to the proper training; the faith does not seem particularly relevant for most of them, and anyone who had access to the same training could do the same things. Its like saying warrior priests are fighting well because they're priests; they're priests who are also warriors, but there's no real connection except access to the necessary training.

Non-christian fantasy miracles from the early 20th C happen in both John Carter of Mars (his ability to tanslate between worlds, and, as a human, to sire a child on Deja, who laid the egg for said child) and Buck Rogers (In the novel and comics, he fell asleep in a cave for 500 years...). Plus some other adventure fiction. And no shortage of children's literature...

I think you're using magic too broadly in both those cases for me to follow you, honestly.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I disagree. I've always thought of psionics as psychic powers that come from within, arcane magic is harnessed from the environment through study or natural ability and divine or pact magic are granted from a deity or patron. True that depending how Psionics are portrayed at the table they can seem synonymous with other types of magic but if roleplayed differently this doesn't have to be the case. In part 3E and 4E D&D is to blame for this because they allowed saving throws for psionic effects and this ruined their flavor. Before then there was MAC (Mental Armor Class) and depending if you were a wild talent or Psionic you had mental defenses to defend against mental attacks. Otherwise other classes were pretty powerless against psionics which made them very feared and deadly which really made them feel different than magic. Of course just my opinion.

Its one of those things that turns on how important the sources appear to you. I suspect Aramis is using it in the sense of "suspends the laws of nature as we know them by actions of an individual" and to that view the rest of that is just color commentary.

 

[R_J_K75]

I suspect Aramis is using it in the sense of "suspends the laws of nature as we know them by actions of an individual"

OK gotcha.

and to that view the rest of that is just color commentary.

Its the color commentary for me that distinguishes the spell casting classes from psionicists. The ModernAGE Basic Rulebook defines magic as Arcana and Psychic Powers but it doesnt make much distinction between the two outside of (and I'm paraphrasing) Arcana is magic spells and Psychic Powers are powers of the mind and its left up to the GM and player to fill in the blanks. This has been the case for most RPGs Ive read and played, so in the long run I guess youre right that it doesnt really matter much and it gets harder and harder to come up with ways to make them different from magic.