Post originally by camazotz at 2004-06-06 05:50:36
Converted from Phorums BB System

Hey, I liked the review. I would be curious about whether you'd prefer to use this D20 version or the BESM version to run an Uresia campaign, though.

I'm one of those people who has the original, and was going to pass on the D20 version, assuming it to be "fluff" (and I do, indeed, play both D20 and BESM). However, it's nice to get a review which concisely addresses the differences, even if some readers like to play games with semantics.

I should also state that I really liked the length of your review; too many people on RPG.net seem to favor reviews which are sometimes close to the length of the book; who has time for that?!?! I wan't clear, concise overviews which tell me what the reviewer got out of the experience and why, and in a short enough period that I do not feel like I lost precious minutes of my life reading droll point-by-point summaries of the table of contents in a book. Your review was spot on! Thanks man.

Jian wrote:
-------------------------------
>First, a tip to the reviewer: Please, PLEASE at least look up the author's names (GoO's website lists two). It's not hard to do. Not only this, but do you actually own the book? Just pick it up and open it... Anyway, it makes the review look a bit silly and insults (or lets off) all the authors. <

I'm sorry to say that the authors' names weren't presented particularly obviously in the book itself, so I had to go with what I knew. Obviously most of the fluff was written by S John Ross, and therefore he should get a significant proportion of the credit, at least.

I must say that I find these technical critiques of reviews rather tedious, but as Aka-chan has shown, it's a free internet.