[RPG]: Conspiracy of Shadows, reviewed by unterhund (3/3)

[RPGnet Reviews]

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10526.phtml

Patrick Clark's Summary:

A flawed but entertaining mix of medieval style and demonic conspiracy, coupled with a thorough background and a fast and easy system.

Go to the full review (http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10526.phtml) for more information.

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by unterhund at 2004-08-02 07:53:49
Converted from Phorums BB System

Figures. Right after I submitted this review, I got confirmation from Bob Goat Press that the PDF is indeed the same as the book. So the errata statements apply to the printed book as well.

And one thing I didn't mention in the review because it wasn't germane. On my very first read-through, I though about stealing the "Seed of Destruction" plotline from Hellboy. After several reads, I thought about how easy it would be to adjust slightly to fit.

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by Ralph Mazza at 2004-08-02 08:03:10
Converted from Phorums BB System

Your review seemed to be far more positive then negative. Principal complaints seemed to be character sheet layout and editing which would seem to me to be style issues.

What made you rate it a 3 substance instead of a 4?

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by unterhund at 2004-08-02 09:27:23
Converted from Phorums BB System

The over-detailed combat system, and the minimal GM help.

Basically, there's very little to the actual system outside character creation, cell creation and combat. The amount of detail put into combat suggests a combat-heavy game, when the background can clearly support a nearly no-combat game.

And as noted in the review, the lack of any perception-related skill or attribute was a particular problem, glaringly so in our playtest.

For the conspiracy section, a lack of detail is a plus. You need to keep the players guessing in a game like this. But the rest of the GM section would benefit greatly from expansion. IMHO doubling that section in size from 16 to 32 pages would go a long way.

Hm. In any future reviews I'll need to be more clear. I thought I was, but the only person I had read over this to catch errors, etc., was one of my playtest group. We both understood what I meant, but obviously it didn't come through as clearly as I intended. Thanks.

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by Bob Goat at 2004-08-02 11:23:53
Converted from Phorums BB System

Thanks for the review. i just wanted to point out one thing about the Perception remark. The Reflex Attribute covers a character's "general perceptions."

Thanks again for the review and I appreciate the contructive criticism.

Keith Senkowski
Bob Goat Press

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by Bob Goat at 2004-08-02 13:41:40
Converted from Phorums BB System

doh!

Constructive not contructive!

Keith

Bob Goat wrote:
-------------------------------

Thanks again for the review and I appreciate the contructive criticism.

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by unterhund at 2004-08-02 14:31:48
Converted from Phorums BB System

Gah! Multiple read-throughs, both on-screen and paper, and I still missed that! I'm sorry.

[RPGnet Reviews]

Post originally by tetsujin28 at 2004-08-02 16:45:49
Converted from Phorums BB System

This sounds like a great game to steal stuff from for my Paladin game :)