Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wofano Wotanto" data-source="post: 9265907" data-attributes="member: 7044704">I remember reading Avalon Hill's Lords of Creation and just boggling at it.&nbsp; Everything from the layout to the art to the overall tone left me wondering what they were thinking.&nbsp; It felt like it was a design from at least half a decade before its actual 1983 release date, and not a particularly good one at that.&nbsp; Certainly far below the production quality I'd come to expect from AvHill's wargames or the James Bond RPG, much less their edition of Runequest.Then I got to play the game with a GM who really knew how to embrace the gonzo aspects of the game and realized it could actually be pretty fun with the right table and an &quot;it's just a game, relax&quot; attitude.&nbsp; The mechanics were still as meh as meh can be, but they stayed out of the way enough to let you marvel at the rest of the nonsense going on.&nbsp; Still has the craziest &quot;monster manual&quot; of any game I've owned, makes Rifts look tame.Compare that to Powers &amp; Perils, which released simultaneously, was even more off-putting on first (and second, and subsequent) reading, and turned out to be even more awkward and unmanageable in the handful of sessions I played in.&nbsp; I know it's got its fans to this day, but for me it's a night-and-day contrast with LoC in terms of play value.Both of them were total flops sales-wise though, and wound up in discount bins for years afterward.&nbsp; The cover from the last issue of The Fantasy Gamer was cruel, but fairly prophetic about AvHill's experiences with the RPG market.&nbsp; 1991's Tales From the Floating Vagabond didn't exactly light the world on fire either.&nbsp; RQ3 and Bond were more successful, but I'd be surprised if they were ever as profitable as their board game range was.<img src="https://www.sjgames.com/fantasygamer/fgimg/fg6_lg.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wofano Wotanto, post: 9265907, member: 7044704"] I remember reading Avalon Hill's Lords of Creation and just boggling at it. Everything from the layout to the art to the overall tone left me wondering what they were thinking. It felt like it was a design from at least half a decade before its actual 1983 release date, and not a particularly good one at that. Certainly far below the production quality I'd come to expect from AvHill's wargames or the James Bond RPG, much less their edition of Runequest. Then I got to play the game with a GM who really knew how to embrace the gonzo aspects of the game and realized it could actually be pretty fun with the right table and an "it's just a game, relax" attitude. The mechanics were still as meh as meh can be, but they stayed out of the way enough to let you marvel at the rest of the nonsense going on. Still has the craziest "monster manual" of any game I've owned, makes Rifts look tame. Compare that to Powers & Perils, which released simultaneously, was even more off-putting on first (and second, and subsequent) reading, and turned out to be even more awkward and unmanageable in the handful of sessions I played in. I know it's got its fans to this day, but for me it's a night-and-day contrast with LoC in terms of play value. Both of them were total flops sales-wise though, and wound up in discount bins for years afterward. The cover from the last issue of The Fantasy Gamer was cruel, but fairly prophetic about AvHill's experiences with the RPG market. 1991's Tales From the Floating Vagabond didn't exactly light the world on fire either. RQ3 and Bond were more successful, but I'd be surprised if they were ever as profitable as their board game range was. [IMG]https://www.sjgames.com/fantasygamer/fgimg/fg6_lg.jpg[/IMG] [/QUOTE]

Verification