Tell me about Earthdawn 3E!

[Jhaelen]

I also got it but haven't found the time to do a lot of reading yet.

It would be easier for me to digest if it clearly indicated where rules have changed. As it is I find myself skimming over sections a lot because they seem identical to what I already know from ED 1E. Unfortunately, what happens is that I later realize I must have missed some of the changes and have to scan the previous pages again. Not fun.

From what I've read on the RedBrick forums I definitely approve of the changes. Many things I disliked have been changed. I'll know more once I get to read the power and spell sections.

 

[DayTripper]

You might be interested to know that Redbrick are (slowly) working on a 4e version of the Earthdawn rules, called Age of Legend.

I played ED in the 90s and I have to say fluff & flavour wise its (still) one of the best fantasy RPGs I've come across. Crunch-wise, the system is good in parts but tends to break down at the fringes, particularly if you've players too used to optimisation from playing too much D&D...

If you do play ED, you might notice an number of similarities from FASA's original game that also emerged in D&D v3.5 & 4e. In fact, you might say the talent powers employed by ED characters are very, very similar in concept to the powers now currently used by 4e characters. Then there are the weapons of legend, group items etc, etc.

All this 4e homage to ED should make it very easy to use the current ED fluff for the basis of a 4e game.

 

[Obryn]

As it is I find myself skimming over sections a lot because they seem identical to what I already know from ED 1E. Unfortunately, what happens is that I later realize I must have missed some of the changes and have to scan the previous pages again. Not fun.

Ditto. It's tough because even though I haven't played ED since 1998 or 1999, I read the hell out of the rulebooks. It was my game of choice from its release up until D&D 3e came out.

From what I've read on the RedBrick forums I definitely approve of the changes. Many things I disliked have been changed. I'll know more once I get to read the power and spell sections.

Also ditto. Karma was the biggest deal for me - high karma dice were far more valuable (IMO) than good stats. And windlings - which seriously didn't need the help - were kings of that.

The game also got broken-ish by mid-circles. I have no idea if that will continue. I know that my entire party got wiped out during Infected from a single Bone Shatter spell.

You might be interested to know that Redbrick are (slowly) working on a 4e version of the Earthdawn rules, called Age of Legend.

Yep, and I've been looking forward to it since its announcement!

And yeah, when I saw the mechanics for 4e, I could see a clear connection between Earthdawn and it. The similarities are rather huge, and I think it will work very well should it ever see the light of day.

-O

 

[Obryn]

So I figured I'd update here, real quick!

I'm very much enjoying this new edition, and have ordered the Gamemaster's Guide, alongside it. It looks like it was done with a better eye towards math and balance, but not to the same degree as, say, 4e is.

There's a much bigger emphasis on skills, and the advancement system more or less requires Adepts to advance skills which mostly got ignored before. As I mentioned before, Karma has (IMO) been fixed, and Willforce was also significantly powered-down. (Now, it can't improve with Karma, and it takes Strain.)

I'll need to see the Gamemaster's Guide to be sure, but mechanically I'm pretty happy with it so far. I get the sense that everything other than extra Disciplines are 95% compatible.

-O

 

[Jhaelen]

I've also finally finished reading the Player's Guide and will definitely get the Gamemaster's Guide, as well.

My overall impression is very good indeed, now I need to convince my old Earthdawn group that we need to switch!

The only part of the game that could still use some improvement is spell magic:
+ It's nice that paying for spells in coin and legend points is now an optional rule.

+ Overpowered spells have been identified and nerfed.

- Casting combat spells often isn't worth it because weaving threads takes too long for the expected damage (compared to your typical thread weapon damage).

- There's tons of spells but most of them suck. They're either too restricted to be of any use (duration, area, or range too short), only interesting as a roleplaying device or have odd requirements that make them impossible to use (e.g. to create a wall of bones you need to be at a burial site).

- Too many spells have very similar effects or overlap.

- The circle of a spell often doesn't properly reflect a spell's power. I've noticed several instances where a lower level spell was effectively better than a higher level one in all but the most rare circumstances if at all.

- No integrated rules. With a single exception (Leaps and Bounds) I haven't noticed a spell effect that actually reuses the rules from similar powers. Why?

- Spell descriptions are listed alphabetically without any indication of discipline or circle. Is this really better than listing them per discipline and circle? I would understand this decision if there was a lot of overlap between disciplines and spells became available at different levels (but that doesn't seem to be the case).


Anyway, this is mostly nitpicking about some pet-peeves of mine. I think the system's very playable and a worthy update to a great game.

 

[Obryn]

I have the Gamemaster Guide now, myself, and am working my way through it.

I'm still overall positive about it, but it seems more ... complex ... than I remember it being. I'd put it at a little crunchier than 3e, but with lots of miscellaneous sub-systems. Granted, they all use the same step die rolling and success tables, but the results required can be pretty random.

Talents are also extremely varied, but in a lot of cases - just like with Earthdawn 1e - a lot of them do almost exactly the same thing... The social talents are especially egregious here because there are about a half-dozen ways to improve someone's attitude 1 step.

Power - especially the most broken spells - has, indeed, been scaled back. And yes, weapon-users are probably doing a lot more damage, but just like the 4e striker/controller divide, spells do a lot more special effects and "debuffs." (Also, a whole lot more area effects.) I appreciate that Willforce is no longer a Discipline talent (so no more Karma on those area effect damage rolls!) and that it actually costs Strain.

Monsters are quite a bit more complex than I remember, and the list of abilities - each of which is almost a sub-system in its own - is lengthy. Still, I'm very glad that they just have a straight-up number of actions now, rather than the former #Attacks/#Spells division. I'd put it on a level - or a level above - 3e.


Jhaelen - the GM's guide will mostly be familiar to you. As near as I can tell, it contains the capsule history from the original book, plus the entirety of the text of the Barsaive box set. It has the fluffy intro sections from the Monsters, Horrors, and Dragons books - but doesn't contain detailed fluff on individual entities, like those books had. I wonder if that's in the GM's companion? Regardless, I especially miss the short story Horror intros, and am glad I still have my precious ED 1e Horrors book.

-O

 

[Jhaelen]

I'm still overall positive about it, but it seems more ... complex ... than I remember it being. I'd put it at a little crunchier than 3e, but with lots of miscellaneous sub-systems. Granted, they all use the same step die rolling and success tables, but the results required can be pretty random.

I guess this might partly be because they've collected the rules from all of the old source books. I remember there were lots of rules being added to the game with each new supplement.

Talents are also extremely varied, but in a lot of cases - just like with Earthdawn 1e - a lot of them do almost exactly the same thing... The social talents are especially egregious here because there are about a half-dozen ways to improve someone's attitude 1 step.

True enough. With spells it's similar, probably since they wanted to make some effects available for every magician discipline. Thus you get four variations on a theme.

Monsters are quite a bit more complex than I remember, and the list of abilities - each of which is almost a sub-system in its own - is lengthy. Still, I'm very glad that they just have a straight-up number of actions now, rather than the former #Attacks/#Spells division. I'd put it on a level - or a level above - 3e.

That's probably the thing I'm most interested in: The changes they've made to the monsters.

Thanks for the overview!