Why does ENWorld hate Burning Wheel?

[pemerton]

my major point is to not downplay how difficult some of the subsystems can be for the uninitiated in The Burning Wheel.

the Burning Wheel scripted combat idea puts the whole system on its head - you literally write a script for how the fight will go for each character (including NPCs) and then try to play it out against each other.

I agree it takes some learning.

That said, having run a few session of BW with my 4e group (some of whom are ex-Rolemaster, others ex-3E), I found that on the second exchange of our first ever Fight, the player who was fighting my zombies, and had a higher Reflex and hence more actions, took a gamble on action allocation and it paid off. Which is exciting (if you get into that kind of thing - not everyone is into simutaneous, blind-folded declaration). It's a bit like allocating OB vs DB in Rolemaster, but with more intricate options available.

In our second or third ever Duel of Wits, the player (with relatively poor skills on his PC) out-argued my elven sea captain (with relatively better skills) by clever scripting (the player had been working through a variety of possible scripts in his spare time, recognising that he would have to make do with relatively poor skills).

I'm not 100% sure what my point is, but it's probably something like this: there are at least some RPG players (and my group are among them) who are prepared to put in the effort to learn these relatively intricate systems, because it gives them a payoff that you don't get just from gambling (which is what Runequest gives you, in the end - once combat is joined it's just down to dice rolls).

Moreover, this is just one option of three different combat systems in the book

Yes, but that's essential, because doing everything with Fight would be a nightmare! Bloody versus is relatively intuitive and quick to resolve.

It’s not spontaneous at all

That hasn't really been my experience (though maybe I'm not properly following your use of "spontaneous"). I certainly haven't found there to be "what do we do now" moments, because the players get cues pretty solidly off their PCs, plus the system supports building connections to NPCs that also keep things moving.

 

[Razjah]

I own Burning Wheel Revised, Magic Burner, Monster Burner, Adventure Burner, and two copies of BW Gold. It is my most favorite system. I also get warm tingly feelings with Mouse Guard.

The best campaign I ever ran was Burning Wheel, almost all of my best role playing moments come from Burning Wheel or Mouse Guard games (a few from FATE). I love the grim setting, I love the "regular people in extraordinary circumstances", I love that a GM can show up with almost no prep because the game is dictated in play, I love that the meta-mechanics help the group reinforce what is most important about their game, I love thinking up characters and that even making a character reflects the hard choices BW offers, I love the shade shifting mechanic, and I really enjoy the conversational tone of the books- to me it feels like Luke Crane is setting there explaining the game.

I love that balance isn't needed or sought because you can run an amazing game about a master swordsman and his best friend who is an elf warrior and how the elf will be eternally better. That the human trying to match and elf can be the focus of the game or his coming to grips with human limits, or something else. Or that a noble is going to be better than a peasant farmer in nearly everything, and that is okay and can make really interesting scenarios as the peasant rapidly expands her skill base compared the the noble she is with.

I really really like the game.

 

[pemerton]

I really enjoy the conversational tone of the books- to me it feels like Luke Crane is setting there explaining the game.

They're the best-written RPG books I own. The only other book I can think of that talks even half-as-frankly about how the game is meant to be played, and to work in play, is Over the Edge.

 

[Razjah]

I think FATE books do a good job of this. At least Dresden Files does a nice job, FATE Core is pretty solid.

But yeah, most rpg books assume you already know how to play. They are rule books, not instruction manuals. Burning Wheel has like 74 page of rules, then "okay, next up is character creation. Follow the guide we give you and go play the hell out of this. Don't go to the big stuff in the back. Stay small, add a little each time and not mistakes. Check the rules after to fix it for next time."

D&D books are basically a rules checklist in comparison. They also assume you are familiar with RPGs and their system. I'd cringe being a new player trying to understand how to make a character or even how to play a character using the Pathfinder book. Mouse Guard does this amazingly well. It builds all the rules smoothly with character creation at the end- why at the end? Because you need to understand the game to make a competent character!

 

[SteveC]

Burning Wheel is one of the games I recommend to people who've only played D&D. All too often I hear discussions about what RPGs are that really come down to "I play D&D." In that context, I'd say Burning Wheel makes great reading.

Of the people I've recommended it to, some have really liked it, some have absolutely hated it, but no one has said it was boring.

I happen to really enjoy the conversational writing style too, so reading the game was a real pleasure for me.

Would I play or run it? Likely no, but I feel I learned a lot about what I like and don't like in RPGs from reading it.

 

[Ebon Shar]

For me, Burning Wheel offers a system by which we create a story with the characters being the central protagonists. Each roll does not just resolve a problem or situation, but steers the direction of the story. Every. Single. Roll.

I love how the game is about the characters and what is important to them. Those beliefs not only define the character but drive the game. It's...liberating, coming from a background of D&D and Pathfinder.

 

[Razjah]

My one critique of Burning Wheel is that it does not work with larger groups. I am currently in a group with 6 players and a GM, we could not run a Burning Wheel game. Even Luke Crane says on the BW forums running a game that size is not playing BW, it's something else.

 

[Ebon Shar]

My one critique of Burning Wheel is that it does not work with larger groups. I am currently in a group with 6 players and a GM, we could not run a Burning Wheel game. Even Luke Crane says on the BW forums running a game that size is not playing BW, it's something else.

True. Our first attempt was with 5 players and it was too much for the poor, frazzled DM. Three players is the sweet spot. I'm currently playing one on one with the DM and, while it's fun, it feels like there are not enough beliefs to help build the story.

 

[Razjah]

One on one doesn't have enough beliefs? Wow. The GM can constantly challenge you, and every roll you make is important to just your character. With more players the spotlight passes more, so you need to work a little bit more as a group (although BW doesn't seem to handle a traditional "party" as well as other games; but does a pvp or neutral group much better). Have you checked out the Si Juk actual play on the BW forums? Great example for one on one play.

If BW is about the story and the situation, just keep pushing. Keep talking, making declarations and pursuing the PC's beliefs. Even better if they are partially opposing, people are inconsistent, the PCs can be too.

 

[Ebon Shar]

One on one doesn't have enough beliefs? Wow. The GM can constantly challenge you, and every roll you make is important to just your character. With more players the spotlight passes more, so you need to work a little bit more as a group (although BW doesn't seem to handle a traditional "party" as well as other games; but does a pvp or neutral group much better). Have you checked out the Si Juk actual play on the BW forums? Great example for one on one play.

If BW is about the story and the situation, just keep pushing. Keep talking, making declarations and pursuing the PC's beliefs. Even better if they are partially opposing, people are inconsistent, the PCs can be too.

Advice well received, Razjah. Thank you.