[RPG]: Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition, reviewed by James Gillen (4/4)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/12/12090.phtml

James Gillen's Summary:

It's better than bad, it's good.

Go to the full review for more information.

[Mechante_Anemone]

Thank you for the review! It is exactly what I was looking for a couple of months ago, so it should be useful to other gamers trying to get a feel for the game before jumping in.

I have to say that I am profoundly uninterested in d20 in general, have not been impressed with it at all in past tries; however, I recently joined an M&M game (because of the cool group playing it and the fun setting of the campaign) and I have been quite interested by what Steve Kenson did with M&M. I enjoyed the book because it addresses the reader as a thinking, reasoning creature. I wouldn't say that I'm going to hurry to run my next game in d20, but I have been interested enough to buy the True20 PDF (though it lacks many of the interesting design discussions in M&M).

[BlackSheep]

I think the D20 bell curve has too much curve to it

Um..pardon?

[Nilus]

Originally Posted by BlackSheep

Um..pardon?

Must be talking about one of them there new Bell Curves. You know the straigh kind, with no curve at all.

D20 has no bell curve, at least not for its basic task resolution. There is a equal chance of rolling a 1 or a 20 or any number in between on a 20 sided die. Thus when its probability is graphed its a straight line.

You don't start seeing bell curves until you introduce multiple dice. Since then you start seeing the likelyhood of numbers near the middle range comming up more often and the chances of rolling an extremely low or high number become very unlikely.

[Lord Mhoram]

I'm just wondering if it were luck, or if someone was being funny that all three reviews all have "M&M" as an abbreviation.

[Simple Man]

Now, because I am a Hero fan, because M&M 2nd still doesn’t have enough “crunch” details for me, and because I think the D20 bell curve has too much curve to it, I am NOT going to tell you that Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition is a better game than HERO System 5th Edition Revised. It is, however, almost as good, which for the casual gamer may be good enough. Put more precisely, M&M 2 is good enough that one’s preference for HERO over M&M or vice versa ultimately comes down to a matter of aesthetic preferences.

We got the "d20 doesn't have a bell curve" outta the way, now what's with the "It's almost as good as HERO"?

I wouldn't think those kind of decisions should be made by reviewers. Perhaps it's just a matter of taste.

[James Gillen]

Originally Posted by Simple Man

We got the "d20 doesn't have a bell curve" outta the way, now what's with the "It's almost as good as HERO"?

I wouldn't think those kind of decisions should be made by reviewers. Perhaps it's just a matter of taste.

Yeah... that was kinda my point.

JG

[WillyPete]

Originally Posted by Simple Man

We got the "d20 doesn't have a bell curve" outta the way, now what's with the "It's almost as good as HERO"?

I wouldn't think those kind of decisions should be made by reviewers. Perhaps it's just a matter of taste.

Well, I think it was more of an attempt, by the reviewer, to plug HERO to those of us apostates who have lapsed from the true faith, and flocked to heretical works like "Mutants and Masterminds", instead...
Not that I think that the HERO fanboys take these things too seriously, or anything!

That said, I must say that I greatly preferred First Edition of M&M, warts and all (and there were a few!) over Second...
Getting rid of the "Elemental Control" aspect of the game really didn't help things all that much, and the 'Alternate Power' game mechanic seems, to me, to be hideously unbalanced!
Some of the other things they did (yes, I'm being picky, here!) are also quite dangerous to the 'sacred' Game Balance, such as Duplication now being able to produce completely unmanageable Hordes of minmaxed characters...
There were quite a few attempts to insert concepts that were clearly lifted from either HERO or SAS into the game, that I really don't think belong in there...
and, I'm sorry, but I kind of liked the alternate "Hit Die" damage system that was presented in 1st Edition...
The rule of1 and rule of 20 from d20 works very poorly, in my opinion, with a Damage Saving Throw!

[Simple Man]

Originally Posted by James Gillen

Yeah... that was kinda my point.

JG

restating:

Now, because I am a Hero fan, because M&M 2nd still doesn’t have enough “crunch” details for me, and because I think the D20 bell curve has too much curve to it, I am NOT going to tell you that Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition is a better game than HERO System 5th Edition Revised. It is, however, almost as good, which for the casual gamer may be good enough. Put more precisely, M&M 2 is good enough that one’s preference for HERO over M&M or vice versa ultimately comes down to a matter of aesthetic preferences

Emphasis mine.

I took the above quoted statement as basically "M&M2 isn't as good as HERO, but you won't notice unless you're l33t".

And I don't think, as a reviewer, you should make those kind of decisions.

I'm not trying to blast you for this, it's just my opinion on the matter.

Originally Posted by WillyPete

Well, I think it was more of an attempt, by the reviewer, to plug HERO to those of us apostates who have lapsed from the true faith, and flocked to heretical works like "Mutants and Masterminds", instead...

Emphasis again mine.

I'm not so sure that was going on, but it definately looked like a nod in that direction.

[BlackSheep]

Originally Posted by Simple Man

And I don't think, as a reviewer, you should make those kind of decisions.

Why not?

Reviews are subjective, because reviewers are people with opinions. They don't have to be factual analyses, and I really don't think they should try to be.

Now, opinion without context is pretty useless. If I say 'Plan Nine From Outer Space is a better movie than King Kong', that doesn't tell you much. If I say 'I enjoyed Plan Nine more than King Kong', that's still not much help, but is a little better because it's flagged as personal opinion rather than fact.

But if I say 'I enjoyed Plan Nine for its unintentional humour, its over-the-top melodrama, and its laughable dialogue; conversely, I found Kong to be too po-faced and altogether too long' then I'm not only telling you which one I prefer, but why. I'm giving you information about my tastes, and from that you can determine whether or not you agree with them.

If I want information about a board or card game, I'll go to its publisher's homepage. If I want to know whether I should buy it, I'll read Shannon's review because I know from experience that he has similar tastes to me.

Now, in this particular instance, sure, the reviewer did phrase it slightly poorly. But let's take the important sentence:

Now, because I am a Hero fan, because M&M 2nd still doesn’t have enough “crunch” details for me, and because I think the D20 bell curve has too much curve to it, I am NOT going to tell you that Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition is a better game than HERO System 5th Edition Revised.

Ignoring the weird bit about the bell curve, this (to me) is fine. It tells me which one the reviewer prefers, and it tells me why - the reviewer prefers crunchier games, and has had a more positive personal experience of Hero. I prefer lighter games, and have had a better experience with M&M1E than with Hero4; ergo, this sentence actually tells me that M&M2E is better for me than Hero5.