WoW Rpg...any good?

[Ibram]

The new WoW book and the old Warcraft RPG work together very well. the first book provided a great deal of fluff for the world, while the new book provides a great deal of crunch (with the exception of the Pali as a core class instead of as a PrC). The caster classes are quite well done, and are currently being used as models for my own games.

The art in the new book is about equal with the old book, but thats not realy a good thing (the old book had some wonderful pieces intermixed with utter crap; while the new book just uses concept art from WoW as well as ingame graphics).

 

[Pants]

I've flipped through the book in the store a few times, but the inclusion of computery 'WoW' graphics with the sweet, sweet illustrations and the somewhat errr... craptastic looking layout made me put down the book fairly quick. Not that I'm saying it sucks or anything, but the 'feats' chapter is simply awful looking.

Hopefully this is just an ignorant, knee-jerk reaction since I want to get the book at some point.

 

[Nightfall]

I have the PDF so it's lighter for me. But in essence I do feel that if you've invested in the old "1st edition" Warcraft, WoW updates it to a more...concrete feel along with, as stated by many, a better spellcasting paths, great ideas for racial ELC, and of course, good stuff about various races. I will agree there should have been a paragon orc class, but other than that, I'm happy with it.

 

[Gundark]

I picked up the PDF from drivethrurpg.com. Expensive pdf. Then I found out that I could have bougth the hardcover off of amazon for the same price...D'oh!!! Impessa you still interested in playing Warcraft?

 

[Impeesa]

I picked up the PDF from drivethrurpg.com. Expensive pdf. Then I found out that I could have bougth the hardcover off of amazon for the same price...D'oh!!! Impessa you still interested in playing Warcraft?

Heh. In theory, yes, but I think I've got enough on the table with my regular group already. Thanks for the offer, though.

--Impeesa--

 

[Gundark]

Heh. In theory, yes, but I think I've got enough on the table with my regular group already. Thanks for the offer, though.

--Impeesa--

I hear you. We play on a crappy night (tuesday) of the week anyways. It's weird how peoples schedules go

 

[Nightfall]

*thinks he needs to invite friends that live up north to come live with him so they can game at less crappy times of various days.*

 

[KenM]

I have not had time to look at the WoWO RPG yet. I do like the computer game. Is the table top game d20? Do they do a good job of translating the stuff from the computer game over well?

 

[DragonLancer]

I'm not a fan of the Warcraft games but I have been roped into playing a single game so far. I wasn't too impressed to be honest. I preferred D&D over the WoW rules set but that might have been the D&D snob in me. I will continue to play the game if and when we play it so I may change my mind later.

 

[Gundark]

I have not had time to look at the WoW RPG yet. I do like the computer game. Is the table top game d20? Do they do a good job of translating the stuff from the computer game over well?

The game is d20. They have the standard WoW races, plus goblins. They have all the classes from WoW, plus a few from "1ed" warcraft rpg. Some of the classes are pretty much straight out of the PHB (figher which is renamed warrior). They change some of the wording ie. Sneak attack is called backstab. The attributes are renamed after WoW stats (agility instead of dexterity, stanima instead of constitution). Some of my gripes about the classes is that some of the classes are too much like their PHB counterparts, Hunter for example are similiar to rangers. I would have like to see some differences. Also if they are going to rename some things to sound more WoWish then go all the way...for example they could have renamed the two weapon fighting feat dual wield.