Mouse Guard, Anyone?

[Wik]

I am loving this thread. I really, REALLY want to get into a game like this. I remember reading through the back of the book, that there are non-mice critters that are also intelligent. Are any of them available as PC choices?

I would love to play a mouse with a longing to fly, and a desire to somehow train a hawk or something.

 

[Novem5er]

I am loving this thread. I really, REALLY want to get into a game like this. I remember reading through the back of the book, that there are non-mice critters that are also intelligent. Are any of them available as PC choices?

I would love to play a mouse with a longing to fly, and a desire to somehow train a hawk or something.

I'm glad you're enjoying the thread! I've enjoyed contributing to it!

To answer your questions, we can only play Mice in the game. I think it would be neat to expand to other critters, but thematically it only makes sense to play mice.

In the comics that the game is based on only mice and weasels are civilized. All other critters, while perhaps possessing intelligence and speech, still live as animals do. The comics, and the game, center on the mice and their struggle for survival in a hostile world. The weasels are evil, seeking to conquer and enslave the mice as a source of food!

For talking animals, in the comics we see these examples:

• talking bats (creepy!)
• an owl and mouse that communicate through "hoots"
• friendly hares that have allied with the Mouse Guard to serve as cross-country steeds (pure awesome!)

Regarding your desire to play a mouse that flies... well, I don't know about a hawk, but an upcoming series for the comic has THIS cover art:

 

[yesnomu]

I like the Mouse Guard system, although it's not devoid of problems. The Instructor skill, for example, can be used to essentially double player checks, by attempting to teach other PCs skills. Similarly, since using skills improves them (an idea I like a lot, incidentally, both in Elder Scrolls games and here), I would get pestered all the time for permission to use skills during the GM's turn. You have to have a firm hand against powergamers, which is a shame, since that's what several of my friends are (and me too, come to that).

Traits are not especially well-balanced, either, level 2 traits are pretty much the hax. Expect players to attempt to apply them to roughly everything they attempt, since that +1 die is really nice. Upgrading to level 3 is often detrimental.

Most unfortunately, the conflict system is a bit unbalanced. Attack really has no bad matchups, and when winning really counts, AAA is often the best turn possible. A crushes Feints, Defense just stalls against A and has quite a large threshold even unopposed, and Maneuver is frequently less useful than another A (although disabling a weapon can be useful). Our group needs to come up with some kind of houserule that works to our satisfaction.

Anyway, with that in mind, it's definitely a great system. With a group that really gets into it, it's tremendous fun. And the conflict system, while not perfect, beats the pants handily off of any other "social combat" system I've seen--one player and I had an amazing (IC) argument that played out beautifully. I heavily recommend checking it out.

 

[kaomera]

I like the Mouse Guard system, although it's not devoid of problems. The Instructor skill, for example, can be used to essentially double player checks, by attempting to teach other PCs skills. Similarly, since using skills improves them (an idea I like a lot, incidentally, both in Elder Scrolls games and here), I would get pestered all the time for permission to use skills during the GM's turn. You have to have a firm hand against powergamers, which is a shame, since that's what several of my friends are (and me too, come to that).

The rules are very specific about when and what checks you can make, and yes I think the GM has to be very firm about it. This is why earning checks from your traits is so crucial - not only do you get a check in the player turn, but also increase the chance of earning a failure (you need a number of both failed and successful checks to raise a skill) and a twist will mean more checks to make...

Traits are not especially well-balanced, either, level 2 traits are pretty much the hax. Expect players to attempt to apply them to roughly everything they attempt, since that +1 die is really nice. Upgrading to level 3 is often detrimental.

Well, if your Guardsmice only ever succeed they're not going to advance much, but Obs can get really high, especially in conflicts with animals or nature... In my game, the Guardsmice have often needed to milk their traits a bit to have even a slim chance at success. I agree that for overall usefulness +1 die is hard to beat, but re-rolling all failed dice on a critical test when you're otherwise maxing the number of dice you throw is going to make a huge difference. So I think if you're advancing a trait to level 3 you want to make sure it's one that's really central to the character so that it will apply when you really want to succeed.

Most unfortunately, the conflict system is a bit unbalanced. Attack really has no bad matchups, and when winning really counts, AAA is often the best turn possible. A crushes Feints, Defense just stalls against A and has quite a large threshold even unopposed, and Maneuver is frequently less useful than another A (although disabling a weapon can be useful). Our group needs to come up with some kind of houserule that works to our satisfaction.

This does kind of assume that every Mouse is good in the appropriate skill for Attack. The way conflicts are set up everyone is an active participant, and it's better to throw in a successful Maneuver than a failed Attack. The one nice thing about Defense is that you can actually recoup any losses to your side's disposition, of course it just fails against Feint, but if your opponent only ever throws Attacks it can be very useful.

 

[theskyfullofdust]

I bought Mouse Guard the other day (and the comics too, read one, on to the next) and I like it so far. Even if I don't get a chance to run it fully, there are plenty of ideas in it that I intend to port over to my D&D games.

Not sure if my players would be up for this as much as D&D, but once the current game ends, I may well suggest it, as a one-off if nothing else.

And thanks for the game play notes. Helps a lot.

 

[Wombat]

As someone who is always willing to look into new systems, Burning Wheel (et alia) ends up annoying me. I am not a big combat person to begin with, but I really dislike the way combat works in this game -- it feels very strange, even restricted (which is not a word I usually use when complaning about a combat system). I love the notion of how character development is handled, for the most part, but some of the BITs take a long time to wrap the head around. So I keep wanting to like the game and somehow failing.

On top of that, much like Stephen O'Sullivan trying to convince me back in the early 80s that Bunnies & Burrows would be a lot of fun, I simply don't play animals. I think I was anti-Furry before there were Furries...

 

[Novem5er]

I'm glad to see people are still interested in the game!

We didn't get a chance to play this weekend, but the good news is that all my players are still excited about it and can't wait until our next game. If all things go right in life, then I should be running MG again next weekend. I will post another report, though one less mechanical, after we are done.

I'm still not 100% convinced about the whole structure of the "turns" (GM turn, then Player's Turn), but we'll see. My instinct tells me to loosen up on the turn structure some, but since player advancement is a result of them making checks... I can't allow too many checks in a session or else we'll have super mice too quick!

One thing I do like about the turn structure, though, is that we can play through a whole adventure in one sitting. In D&D, it might take us 3 weeks to get through one adventure because A) combats take too long, and B) the play is so free-form that players often got side-tracked.

In Mouse Guard, there are simply less dice rolls to make, but those rolls have more importance. It's an easy concept to think about, but harder to put into practice. I'll try again next week!

 

[buzz]

On top of that, much like Stephen O'Sullivan trying to convince me back in the early 80s that Bunnies & Burrows would be a lot of fun, I simply don't play animals. I think I was anti-Furry before there were Furries...

Folks, you don't play a mouse in Mouse Guard.

You play a team of ranger-knights sent on missions to aid your people against the threat of oblivion. You are part of an industrious race that is beset on all sides by overwhelming threats to their continued existence. If you fail, whole villages will perish.

That's what MG is about, not "being a mouse". 4e's "points of light" is downright cozy compared to what guardsmice have to face.

Novem5er, glad to see you are having so much fun with MG. It's easily one of the best RPGs released in the last decade.

 

[jdrakeh]

Folks, you don't play a mouse in Mouse Guard.

You're free to spin it however you want, of course, but at the end of the day you do play a mouse in Mouse Guard.

 

[buzz]

You're free to spin it however you want, of course, but at the end of the day you do play a mouse in Mouse Guard.

I'm just sayin', MG is neither furries nor Bunnies & Burrows. It's a medieval culture battling against nature, both the external and the inner. People really need to get past the "I don't wanna play a mouse" thing. It's not about being a mouse.