What's this about a plagiarized map in Conan: City of Shadizar?

[King_Stannis]

The mistakes are almost all typos. The game is VERY playable with the original printing. The Atlantean Edition is better organised, as well (for example, all the Corruption rules are gathered into one location instead of spread throughout the book as in the original printing). The map for the Atlantean edition is more accurate, also (it uses the Road of Kings map). The Atlantean edition clarifies a few rules, but I don't recall offhand any actual rule changes. The typos really did not affect playability in my games.

On a side note, the binding in the new edition seems to be better also. My original edition of the rules is essentially falling apart, but my Atlantean edition, which has seen much more use/abuse, is holding together nicely. I don't know if poor binding is common to the original printing, but this is an observation I have about the two versions I have.

Thanks for the input, man.

Yeah, despite no real use, I notice the binding pulling apart a bit. Now that would make me upset, as I quite literally have opened the book only a handful of times. We are shelving our fantasy games right now, but when we go back I aim to use Conan as it looks very, very cool.

 

[arkham618]

Shame you're not reading the same books as I am, B5 is really good, Conan looks well done (don't own any Conan, but I own most of B5) and I don't see merit in your statement. Give it SJG?? There's a quick death in RPG-land (and I own and use GURPS time-to-time).

That's fine. Not everybody has ... standards. *shrug* To educate the historically uninformed, Steve Jackson Games published a GURPS Conan in the early '90s. It was in one volume superior to all the books so far published by Mongoose for their Conan line. Not as graphically endowed, sure, but the content was sharp and concise, well-edited, and didn't require a stream of errata and apologies from the publisher to be digestible. There was also a prior attempt at Babylon 5: the Babylon Project RPG by the now defunct Chameleon Eclectic. Again, while not as visually impressive as the Mongoose production, it at least attempted to emulate the feel of the series, instead of shoehorning the setting into a clumsy derivative ruleset.

 

[InzeladunMaster]

It was in one volume superior to all the books so far published by Mongoose for their Conan line.

Can you give some examples of this being the case? I do not own any of the GURPs material so I cannot do my own comparison. I would like to see some evidence.

As for errors and "streams of apologies", most of the Conan line so far has been released without this.

 

[Odovacar's Ghost]

One quickie - I keep hearing about the absolute mess the original printing of Conan was. I bought it last year but we haven't played it yet. I have to ask - is it really that bad? I don't care about typos. they are annoying, but I can live with them. But are there mechanical rules mistakes that were made?

I still own the original Mongoose Conan book. It is indeed very playable. In fact, I no longer even notice the errors. Also, I will NEVER get rid of this book. Not after it was signed, by quite a few people. In fact all my Conan books are signed.

 

[Eosin the Red]

That's fine. Not everybody has ... standards. *shrug* To educate the historically uninformed, Steve Jackson Games published a GURPS Conan in the early '90s. It was in one volume superior to all the books so far published by Mongoose for their Conan line. Not as graphically endowed, sure, but the content was sharp and concise, well-edited, and didn't require a stream of errata and apologies from the publisher to be digestible. There was also a prior attempt at Babylon 5: the Babylon Project RPG by the now defunct Chameleon Eclectic. Again, while not as visually impressive as the Mongoose production, it at least attempted to emulate the feel of the series, instead of shoehorning the setting into a clumsy derivative ruleset.

Not to put words in your mouth but it appears that your problem has less to do with B5 & Conan and more to do with a dislike of the "clumsy derivative rulesset."

 

[arkham618]

No, no "humble" there...just IMO.

Well, all such assessments are of course subjective. In my opinion, these things are true.

 

[arkham618]

<PassiveAggressive>I'm a bit confused by that statement. See, if you'd said, "I bought the Babylon 5 main rulebook and it was such trash that I gave up on the entire line" then it would make sense as a comment, albeit one that was clearly an opinion. But your statement indicates that you've studied each and every book (of which I believe there are quite a few) which seems a curious thing for you to do - given the amount of time and money this would involve - if you really feel the material is that poor.</PassiveAggressive>

I bought the Babylon 5 core book, as well as Armageddon 2085 and Conan. I gave them away after reading through them thoroughly. I have also borrowed and read through most of the other books in those lines, just to be sure that my initial impressions weren't unfair. I've also perused many other Mongoose products in FLGSs. I am not one to write off entire companies lightly, but when I do, I do so completely.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I on the other hand rather like the current version of B5, not as much as the Wireframe Productions version, but it does the job. They changed the system to fit the setting a great deal more than changing the setting to fit the system. If you had tried out the syestem - which by the sound of it you did not, but made your judgement based on a reading of the rules - you would find that it works well in play, and even at higher levels combat remains lethal. So it is not nearly as bad as you are painting it.

The major exception is the vectorless space combat system, which I will admit quite loudly to hating with a passion. Sorry, B5 deserves a proper space combat system, not something taken from Dragonstar. As a result I avoid space combat completely when writing a scenario.

The Auld Grump

 

[Krieg]

That's fine. Not everybody has ... standards. *shrug*

A word of advice...

Being intentionally rude is the quickest way to get people to label your opinion as without merit.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Mongoose has had lax editing standards in the past, and their mechanics are sometimes inelegant. Nonetheless, I wouldn't hesitate to call them my favorite RPG publisher by a wide, wide margin, if only for the amount of interesting material they put out.

The Conan line alone is worth more than basically all the other d20/OGL/D&D material of this generation combined, editing errors in the quickly corrected first printing and all. Unlike, say, GURPS Conan, Mongoose has drawn directly from Howard whenever possible, without the interpretation of later, lesser lights.

Their single-book OGL offerings are absolutely the way I'd like to see the industry move forward - not enslaved to Tolkienesque high fantasy with an outrageously high magic gloss. Even settings like Midnight and Arcana Unearthed are essentially drawing from that same pool, while Wizards has relegated their d20 Past/Modern/Future line to the status of poor little cousin from the country.