I got Monte Cook's World of Darkness

[TerraDave]

Grothmag

I think thats the point: WoD style + D20 mechanics + D&Desque play.

 

[Gothmog]

Grothmag

I think thats the point: WoD style + D20 mechanics + D&Desque play.

I understand that, and from a marketing point of view, its a good move on White Wolf's part. Hopefully they can get more D20 only players to take an interest in the nWoD. The nWoD isn't much like the old angsty-gothy WoD, and the nWoD has a lot more subtlety and intrigue.

What was disappointing to me personally about this product was a lack of logic and internal consistency, as well as the fact that it was yet again another D&D hack-n-slash when it could have been a lot more. It also lacks the WoD style- if anything its somewhat of a dumbed-down WoD (understandable since its in one book and MUCH more combat oriented that normal WoD), and nowhere near as subtle, dark, or thought-provoking. If I ever use this book, I'll redesign the world to be more subtle and dark, and less over-the-top.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

If I ever use this book, I'll redesign the world to be more subtle and dark, and less over-the-top.

Moving away from the intrusion area will accomplish that.

But yes, I suspect many people will do the same thing.

 

[Alisair Longreach]

The Component system is a lot like the epic spell system but it is easier to make the Spellcraft checks because a Mage can also spend his Component points to add a +1 bonus per point spent in addition to the spell cost.

Multiclassing is not possible. The types are more like the monster classes from Savage Species than the PHB character classes. The types are something that you are rather than something you can become.

There are no Prestige Classes cluttering up the book either.

 

[Relique du Madde]

What was disappointing to me personally about this product was a lack of logic and internal consistency, as well as the fact that it was yet again another D&D hack-n-slash when it could have been a lot more. It also lacks the WoD style- if anything its somewhat of a dumbed-down WoD (understandable since its in one book and MUCH more combat oriented that normal WoD), and nowhere near as subtle, dark, or thought-provoking. If I ever use this book, I'll redesign the world to be more subtle and dark, and less over-the-top.

I think the main problem with MCWoD is that it basically is Monte Cook's solution to D20 Modern: Urban Arcana. It's sad, since thats how I will treat it; but unfortunately. Then again, after reading the book's credits, I'm not surprised considering that none of the authors wrote anything related to the WoD prior to this book. If WW actually wanted to an accurate portrayal of the WoD I'm pretty sure Rich Thomas (WW's creative director) would have assigned some of his people to help out with the setting. However, were he to do so, I'm pretty sure WW's ulterior motive of converting d20 players to storyteller system would have failed.

Unfortunately, no matter what, I think this product is doomed.

 

[Jadasc]

I don't really know how closely the McWoD spell system resembles oWoD or nWoD spell systems but I think it is more granular and less freeform than the original systems.

I'd disagree with that last part.

One of the things that I'd noticed about the McWoD magic system is that mages actually have more options available to them. In Storytell* Mage, the effects you can produce are proscribed by the Spheres/Arcana you know. In Monte's version, all mages can produce any effect for which they can afford the Components; your Tradition just makes you even more awesome at the things that you specialize in.

(That seems to be a pervasive trend in the game, actually. In McWoD, it's presumed that being part of a sub-type makes you better at things rather than simply allowing entry. Vampire disciplines, for example: an "in-clan discipline" functions better when wielded by someone of the appropriate line.)

Oh -- just to reinforce it: Rote spells in this book are just codified improvised effects that everyone knows, and therefore are +5 to cast. They allow mages to be all... mage-y.

 

[Horacio]

I'm buying it only for the magic system.

I love OGL

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Oh, and is there chance for multiclassing (Samuel Haight)?

Oh, HandofVecna.
You did NOT just bring up the "S-Word".

Seriously, though?
I'm torn about this product.

While I kinda like the premise, it sounds like a mixed bag, execution-wise.

Not sure if I want to spend the SRP on this one....
Maybe I'll see if my FLGS has a copy to flip through.

 

[Jadasc]

It also lacks the WoD style- if anything its somewhat of a dumbed-down WoD (understandable since its in one book and MUCH more combat oriented that normal WoD), and nowhere near as subtle, dark, or thought-provoking. If I ever use this book, I'll redesign the world to be more subtle and dark, and less over-the-top.

*nod* It depends where you're coming from.

I've been playing World of Darkness games since the 1991 softback version of Vampire (ooh, a grognard in eyeliner). Around the same time, I poked around with a small-press game called NightLife, which was a different monsters-in-the-modern-world game: more Poppy Z. Brite than Anne Rice, and with a similar over-the-top, glitz-and-wahoo aesthetic as what we're seeing in McWoD. It billed itself as "splatterpunk," and although it didn't always hit the mark, it was fun enough to keep playing even as I dived into the personal-horror heavy games being run by my friends.

I don't know if I'd call McWoD "dumbed down" -- goodness knows I've seen enough WoD games, old and new, that have had big battles and crossover teams and struggles against the big Lovecraftean menace. What I'd call it is active. Although there's plenty of opportunities to show off one's roleplaying prowess and engage in moral questions, the proper course of an evening is to go and do, rather than to contemplate and opine. Monte's game is adventure-centered, and the d20 system remix he's made fits that well.

 

[Jadasc]

Are their any rules listed on how you could create other species of were-creature besides for Werewolves?

The short answer is "no."

The long answer is "The werewolves in this game place most of their emphasis on being 'spirits of rage and destruction thrust into human bodies.' Any resemblance with earthly wolves is strictly coincidental. In fact, there's a Rite feat called "Anybeast" that lets you choose what animal you look like in your bestial form. Given that, there's not much stopping you from declaring yourself a were-hyena, were-jaguar, or were-grizzly."