[AngusGM]

While this is a very good review, I had an utterly different take on the rules. Let me say from the outset that the players I have worked with over the past several years have no difficulty picking up a new set of rules, have no "system loyalty", and are quite willing to take on exotic locations and quest concepts.

First of all, the rules as written end up breaking one of the standard (and, for me, necessary) rpg conventions -- the Cooperative Party. Players end up, quite often, working against each other, even if they are on the "same side", due to the fact that they are more representatives of factions first and individuals second.

Another problem for me is the combat system -- in most instances, only one person per side will end up rolling, and thus being involved in, the combat. This means that the others may talk about what should take place, but have no real place in the combat itself. End result for many players: boredom and frustration.

The high social/political placement of most characters is also off-putting to many potential players. Players normally want to play a character, someone they can mold and understand; instead players in this game end up playing generals, bishops, presidents, dukes, people who are already highly placed, highly connected, and with lots of access to equipment, troops, and materiel. What is there to strive for? The abstract notion of saving the planet from an unknown and unknowable enemy.

Many terms are never defined in the rulebook -- coeptir, armiger, stentor, mandarin, duenna, ravilar, to name only a few from the lifepaths alone. How are we to know what these terms mean? We are supposed to find limited print-run, next-to-impossible to find graphic novels that came out several years ago. Lack of such definitions is lazy and unacceptable.

This book has some good concepts (I love the BITs notion, once I figured out how it worked), but it also has a large number of ragged edges, lack of definitions, and rules that simply do not attract players.