[RPG]: World Book of Khaas: The Legendary Lands of Arduin, reviewed by jdrakeh (3/5)

[RPGnet Reviews]

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11928.phtml

James D. Hargrove's Summary:

The biggest fantasy campaign setting ever published and, arguably, one of the best.

Go to the full review (http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11928.phtml) for more information.

[Thunder_God]

This is a true book review. A book review tells us about the book, whereas a game book review tells us if things work or not, systems and content.
We need to strike a medium, because now I know what makes the book unique, but not what makes Arduin interesting and worth playing in.

[Simple Man]

I agree. While an interesting enough settingbook, the book simply isn't a RPG.

[Thunder_God]

Well, my point is more that the reviewer didn't write an RPG Review. I don't know what happens in the setting, how low or high the magic and technology is, what's the deal that I heard about sunken space-ships. The Review tells me nothing.

[mortmere]

We need to strike a medium, because now I know what makes the book unique, but not what makes Arduin interesting and worth playing in.oh come now! we know that there's a matriarchal culture, and that there are wolflings, and... that's it really.

and the reviewer doesn't know the words plausible, convincing, coherent, immersive or credible. he sure knows "verisimiltude" though.

[Calithena]

Guys,

Did you miss the part where the review says "no mechanics"? There are no mechanics in this book, or almost none except a few flavor tables in the appendices - it's a unique RPG product, 99% fluff. So James couldn't really give you what you were asking for. Maybe he could have made it clearer that this is a big book about a fantasy world, but still.

I'd give the book 4/5 - it's awesome. The extra point over James' rating is because I love Mrs. St. John's maps, even if they're a little nonstandard they're really darn cool.

Is it not an RPG book? It's a book about a fantasy world which has (a) been featured in at least 3 published RPGs and (b) which is presented, even system-less, as a world for RPGing. So that seems sort of like an RPG book to me.

James, you probably should have given Dave Hargrave co-author credit in the byline at least. I think your review was really good in general, though - thanks!

Thunder God, it's a kitchen sink setting which somehow gets turned up to 11 without being lame. You can have your party with the bug man and the wolf man and the paladin and the samurai and the dreamweaver and the vampire witch-doctor and the halfling barbarian, just like a lot of other fantasy settings, but the world supports it somewhat better than most.

[WillyPete]

Well, my point is more that the reviewer didn't write an RPG Review. I don't know what happens in the setting, how low or high the magic and technology is, what's the deal that I heard about sunken space-ships. The Review tells me nothing.

Okay, there are some things you would have liked to see, that the author didn't include in his review...
but I certainly wouldn't call it 'nothing'!
This product is 821 pages, for goodness' sake! How much of it do you want one review to cover?

Now, the reviewer seems to be assuming that you're familiar with the old 'Arduin Grimoire', at least (I am, anyways...), and that may have been a mistake.
I'm not sure how close this product is to that one, but Dave Hargrave's introduction to that one included a dedication to a Player Character Bolo Mark XXXI, crediting it with being the 'near destroyer of a Dungeon'... :eek:

So, I wouldn't expect this to be too terribly grim 'n gritty, or real low-magic.
Please remember, this is a review for the Setting book, and not for the Rule book, which might tell you a lot more of what you want to know!

[Borogove]

Please remember, this is a review for the Setting book, and not for the Rule book, which might tell you a lot more of what you want to know!I think the problem here is that, given this is a review of a setting book, maybe it would be nice if it ACTUALLY MENTIONED THE BLOODY SETTING!?! Sorry, but, well, this has got to be possibly the least useful review I've ever read. I now know lots and lots about the layout of the book, but nothing about what makes the setting interesting. Other than it "not being a bog-standard fantasy setting".

[Walter S Ciechanowski]

- it's a unique RPG product, 99% fluff.

Just to be nitpicky, I'd say "rare," not "unique." The Power & Privilege sourcebook for CJ Carella's Witchcraft/Armageddon is also almost totally devoid of mechanics, save for a single box that didn't fill half a page.

[WillyPete]

Bystander, while I agree it's not the most useful review ever written, if this is the LEAST useful review you've ever read, count yourself lucky!
I've seen some very, very bad ones on RPG.Net...
Reviews that were obviously by a close personal friend of the author, reviews that were little more than a repeat of the Table of Contents, fanboy raves that amounted to little more than "It's great, buy it!"...

We can hope that the author of the review will see this part of the Forum, and enlighten us further...
Let's just say, though, if you're the sort who's wondering what a crashed starship or two are doing in a 'Fantasy' setting, you're probably not going to care very much for anything with Arduin in the title!
If you're familiar with the 'Known World'/Mystara setting presented in the old 'Gazeteer' series for D&D, and how that could sometimes be a little... eccentric (Flameno Elves, Highlander Liches, Monsters that are actually escaped specimens from an Interstellar Zoo, et cetera), that should give you an idea of the 'kind' of setting Mr. Hargrave originally produced!

[Borogove]

Bystander, while I agree it's not the most useful review ever written, if this is the LEAST useful review you've ever read, count yourself lucky!
I've seen some very, very bad ones on RPG.Net...
Reviews that were obviously by a close personal friend of the author, reviews that were little more than a repeat of the Table of Contents, fanboy raves that amounted to little more than "It's great, buy it!"...No, you're right. I was being a tad hyperbolic there. Although, I really do dislike this sort of review.We can hope that the author of the review will see this part of the Forum, and enlighten us further...
Let's just say, though, if you're the sort who's wondering what a crashed starship or two are doing in a 'Fantasy' setting, you're probably not going to care very much for anything with Arduin in the title!
If you're familiar with the 'Known World'/Mystara setting presented in the old 'Gazeteer' series for D&D, and how that could sometimes be a little... eccentric (Flameno Elves, Highlander Liches, Monsters that are actually escaped specimens from an Interstellar Zoo, et cetera), that should give you an idea of the 'kind' of setting Mr. Hargrave originally produced!I went into the review not knowing anything about the setting, and, well, I still don't. So I can't comment on this bit.

[Thunder_God]

So what if it isn't rules? The comment about the kitchen-sink helps me some, previously I didn't know what goes in the setting, its mood, its "location flavours", nothing. This is a review of the book, not of the setting.

JDRakeh won't reply to this, he retired his account on the forum.

[WillyPete]

That is both unfortunate, and a tad suspicious...
What kind of 'reviewer' retires his account after posting his review?
Well, he did say he was 'comped' for the review...
Honestly, if I were the company, I'd be asking for my product back, at that point!
Answering a few questions on the Forum shouldn't be too much to ask, and usually does far more to generate 'buzz' about the product than the review, itself...

[jamesh]

JDRakeh won't reply to this, he retired his account on the forum.

Between this and an openly defamatory thread on ENWorld, I decided to make an exception.

[Thunder_God]

What thread on ENWorld?

Also, JDRakeh retired his account couple of months ago.

[jamesh]

I retired my forum account well over five months ago, not after the review in question was written. Some of the things said in this thread have prompted me to open a new account. To answer some of the criticisms so far leveled...

1. There were links embedded in the review to several topics that detractors here have criticized the review for not covering. Apparently they were corrupted during the automatic submission process, as they don't open in my browser. That is unfortunate, but it is also out of my hands. You have my assurances that the links worked in the preview screen.

2. The book is 821 pages long. My initial review was well over eleven pages long. As a rule, people don't read eleven page long reviews. I clipped a lot of stuff until I got it down to six pages, as that is generally the longest review that people tend to read. The review did lose a lot of substance in the revision process, but it still covers the product very thoroughly - and that is what I was supposed to review. While I lament the loss of detail, I do not lament the decision to cut it.

3. The review is far from worthless. It covers the high and low points of the product itself which is what a product review should do. Additionally, it does provide some setting detail pertaining to those points. I wanted to include more setting detail (and, in fact, did so via some of the now broken links), but much of that got clipped in the process of paring down the review from eleven pages that one or two people would read to six pages that a few hundred people would read.

4. To suggest that I should have ignored the actual product to focus entirely on the setting is unrealistic, although I do admit (as mentiond above) that there could have been more actual setting detail in the review. The rub was that including said detail and actually reviewing the product itself created a review that only a handful of people would have taken the time to read, thus defeating the point of a review. I had a tough choice to make.

That some people aren't happy with what I eventually chose doesn't surprise me. I realize that some folks really wanted me to talk about the setting itself as opposed to the product that I received for review and, as I said, I would have liked to do both. Ultimately, my obligation was to provide a product review. When I was presented with the choice between meeting that obligation and delivering a stunning essay about Arduin that had nothing to do with the product, I chose the former.

5. If you have questions about the Arduin setting itself, as opposed to the World Book of Khaas, I direct you to the Official Arduin Fansite (http://www.arduin.com) where you will find more information than you can shake a stick at. Additionally, I will be happy to answer any questions here that that you have about the Worldbook of Khaas, including things clipped from the review. To get you started:

Emperor's Choice Games (http://www.empcho.com)
World of Khaas (http://worldofkhaas.com)
Nexus Gates (http://www.worldofkhaas.com/WhatIsNexus.htm)
science and technology (http://www.worldofkhaas.com/TechItems.htm)

Those are the links that the submission system didn't parse correctly. At the World of Khaas site, you'll also find some PDF downloads from the Worldbook (including the chapter on potables that mention in the review and a page from the Life On Khaas chapter).

Sincerely,
James D. Hargrove
RPGNow Head Reviewer
reviews [at] rpgnow [dot] com

[jamesh]

What thread on ENWorld?

It's ironic, really. Here my review is being decried for failing to illuminate the setting better, while at ENWorld it has drawn cries of being too detailed (i.e., it has been decried as orchestrated ad copy). I think that this must simply be one of those days when life decides to kick me squarely in the nuts. ;)

[WillyPete]

Yeah, Life is like that some times...
While I don't consider it a reason to flame you, I do have to agree with the ENWorld concensus...
Your review really does read more like 'orchestrated ad copy', than like an 'honest review'.
Thank you for the links, I'll pursue them, presently.
As to what I would have done...
I would have ditched the idea of a 'Product Review' entirely, as most people don't really care about the quality of paper, or that kind of stuff...
They're intereseted in the ideas in the book, and what it can do for them!
Is it detailed enough that you can run it out of the box?
What kind of 'flavor' does it have?
That sort of thing...
I would have also chopped another two pages from it (Never easy, I know!), but expected that I would have to answer a lot of questions in the Forum.
Of course, you never can please everybody, no matter what you do, but the 'good' reviews I've read are less Catalogs of what the Product includes, and more descriptions of how useful it is, what it can be used for, and what shortcomings it might have...
Especially if you can find no flaws with the product, people tend to be suspicious of the Review!

All that being said, would you agree with me, that the Product is about a world where you could do a Bolo as a Player character, without raising too many eyebrows?
Is this still the same game world that gave us the Vorpal Bunny? :->

[jamesh]

Yeah, Life is like that some times...
While I don't consider it a reason to flame you, I do have to agree with the ENWorld concensus...

Well, I've done all that I can to set the record straight with the truth. If people would prefer to continue trafficking in baseless defamation, that's their choice and one that is out of my hands.

Is it detailed enough that you can run it out of the box?

It's not a game, but a systemless setting product as clearly indicated in the review, thus this question is moot. As for the level of detail, I think that the review was more than clear on that point.

I would have also chopped another two pages from it (Never easy, I know!), but expected that I would have to answer a lot of questions in the Forum.

Questions? The first question asked on this thread was when you wanted to know "What kind of 'reviewer' retires his account after posting his review?". That's not a very reasonable question, but it is pretty typical of the questions that actually get posted in the review follow-up forum here (i.e., questions generally not worth answering).

[Edit: I'm sorry, the first question asked was, in fact, "So what if it isn't rules?". It's still a hypothetical that isn't worth answering.]

Especially if you can find no flaws with the product, people tend to be suspicious of the Review!

If people would actually take the time to read the review, they'd see that I did find flaws. I noted the single layout error that I stumbled across, the disparaging lack of non-weapon tech in the science and technology chapter, and the fact that the level of detail could be a double-edged sword. By and large the product didn't have any obvious editing flaws.

I cited the few flaws that I perceived, which is all that I could do short of inventing flaws from whole cloth, which is seriously what it sounds like some people are suggesting I should have done in order to be credible. That is incredibly sad on many, many, levels. I naievely thought that the truth would be credible enough, but I guess that the truth isn't good reading. :(

All that being said, would you agree with me, that the Product is about a world where you could do a Bolo as a Player character, without raising too many eyebrows? Is this still the same game world that gave us the Vorpal Bunny? :->

There are those brass tacks that I was looking for. Look, in the future, if you have pre-existing knowledge and a low opinion of a given product, just say so. It'll save everybody else a lot of time, and it will save me a headache.

[WillyPete]

Huh?
I actually happened to love the original Arduin Grimoire, so I'm not sure where you got the idea that I had a low opinion of the product!

Also, I thought I said I wasn't trying to flame you...
Perhaps I didn't make that clear enough, but I really don't think my comments constitute 'trafficking in baseless defamation'!
True, I thought your review read like ad copy, but that was meant as a stylistic comment, not as a call for your execution!
I don't know what the comments on EN World actually were...
I was just going by your description of them, which sounded reasonably fair!
Now, if they said things you didn't mention, I might not agree with those, but it sounds to me like you're being a tad too defensive!

Anything else I had to say was meant as 'constructive criticism', not the personal attack you seem to be responding to!

As to the 'Brass Tacks' comment, I really don't know what that has to do with my own comment, about the Vorpal Bunnies and Bolos...
What I've seen from the links you provided does, indeed, indicate that it is the kind of 'wide-open High Fantasy/ Science fiction/ General Weirdness' setting that I remember...

[jamesh]

Perhaps I didn't make that clear enough, but I really don't think my comments constitute 'trafficking in baseless defamation'!

Sorry for the confusion. I was referring to comments made on ENWorld, not your comment here.

Now, if they said things you didn't mention, I might not agree with those, but it sounds to me like you're being a tad too defensive!

It was very specifically suggested, with the express intention of impuning my reputation, that I was trading ad copy for comp copies of product. My attorney assures me that I'm being generous, as my livelyhood currently depends on that reputation remaining untarnished.

At any rate, I think that this thread has also run its course, since people are clearly more interested in ascribing fantastic motives to my behavior, rather than discussing the product. I think that the "constructive criticism" can carry on without me :rolleyes:

[Borogove]

Hmm. I think the main problem with the review is that it doesn't (or I don't recall it) mentioning that it isn't intended to discuss the setting. Which I, and presumably other readers, assumed it would. Which is where most of the complaints seem to be coming from.

Edit: So the problem is mainly with a lack of disclaimer, rather than with the actual contents of the review. Although a bit more mention of the setting might have helped anyway.

[WillyPete]

While I agree, Bystander, if you follow the linke he provided, and which were supposed to be in the original review, you will find out a LOT about the setting, and whether or nor it's for you!
It's a little bit like 'Rifts' or 'Witch World', a little like Mystara, and not at all like Tolkien...

[Thunder_God]

I did mention that the reviews are there to review the product as opposed to the game. Many people give scores to the ideas and not the form, while they're reviewing the form.

Same as I get annoyed by people who obviously give a score according to their Actual Play rather than the book quality itself, I get annoyed when we seem to get subjective shit without opinion, or in this case, what it's all about.

I just wanted more balance between what was presented, not either or.