A game built specifically for just two participants, <i>Beast Hunters</i> takes you and a friend on a journey through the life of a tribal defender striving to protect her people from fantastic monsters.
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Nice review. I have been eyeballing Beast Hunters for a while and your review has helped make up my mind. It sounds like a great game my wife and I will enjoy playing. Thanks!
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwman
Nice review. I have been eyeballing Beast Hunters for a while and your review has helped make up my mind. It sounds like a great game my wife and I will enjoy playing. Thanks!
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Thanks for the review, Chris! I'm glad that you found so much to like about it.
I especially enjoyed that you made your own character and used it in the examples.
The lack of beast creation rules is duly noted. Amnesiack said the same thing in his review. I'll work on that and post it for free on the web site when it's done.
Now, interestingly I didn't see mentioned in your review what I consider the heart of the conflict resolution system: the AP offering system. That is, whenever the Hunter takes an action, she describes it and makes it as effective and cool as possible. The Challenger then offers a certain level of success (APs). The Hunter can accept or roll the dice instead. This promotes engaging narration and is also the place where you bring in your drives, beliefs, and other traits that you can't numerically use in a roll (see page 64: "You can utilize not only your character's abilities, but also his motivations and passions"). Because those are going to prompt the Challenger to a higher offer if you use them well.
That aspect is also important because if you always just roll the dice, conflicts take a lot longer and tend to drag. The whole game was built for people who want to go beyond just rolling the dice every round. If people are going to play with their spouses, therefore, make sure they're into stepping up to the challenge of providing that narration
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by xenopulse
Now, interestingly I didn't see mentioned in your review what I consider the heart of the conflict resolution system: the AP offering system. That is, whenever the Hunter takes an action, she describes it and makes it as effective and cool as possible. The Challenger then offers a certain level of success (APs). The Hunter can accept or roll the dice instead. This promotes engaging narration and is also the place where you bring in your drives, beliefs, and other traits that you can't numerically use in a roll (see page 64: "You can utilize not only your character's abilities, but also his motivations and passions"). Because those are going to prompt the Challenger to a higher offer if you use them well.
That aspect is also important because if you always just roll the dice, conflicts take a lot longer and tend to drag. The whole game was built for people who want to go beyond just rolling the dice every round. If people are going to play with their spouses, therefore, make sure they're into stepping up to the challenge of providing that narration
Absolutely, I see that mechanic as being very useful to drive forward good description and clever ideas. There's also a strategic element to it by calculating the average and knowing whether the other player is risk adverse. It's not unlike Stunting in its various forms in other games, but with the option to avoid dice rolling altogether if the player accepts the AP offer.
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Nice review.
One thing I noticed when looking through the preview of the book is that, although it is only digest sized to begin with, the font seems quite large and the lines are practically double-spaced, making it seem like there is very little information in the book. It's the one thing that's really put be off buying the game. Could you provide a little insight into this?
Secondly, while I like small groups for my games, I like more than one player or there's no inter-party chemistry. In your opinion, could the game be adapted to accommodate more than two people?
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Destriarch
One thing I noticed when looking through the preview of the book is that, although it is only digest sized to begin with, the font seems quite large and the lines are practically double-spaced, making it seem like there is very little information in the book. It's the one thing that's really put be off buying the game. Could you provide a little insight into this?
*goes and compares text*
You're right, there is some extra space between lines. I'd say the text density is on a level with Dictionary of Mu, it's certainly less dense than Zorcerer of Zo and some other games. That said, when I read this book I didn't think "wow, there's not much content here." Rather, I thought "the author sure is doing a good job to communicate lots of big ideas in a small amount of space." I even had to think hard about the Substance rating because of how much stuff the book manages to pack in - all the Beasts on top of a system is pretty nice.
So, yeah, the text is less dense here but I don't think it harms the product in the least.
Quote:
Secondly, while I like small groups for my games, I like more than one player or there's no inter-party chemistry. In your opinion, could the game be adapted to accommodate more than two people?
Yes and no. Yes in that the game has optional multiplayer rules. These rules, however, emphasize that everyone is doing their own individual hunts (with the exception of one Beast so powerful it takes a group to kill it). So if you're ok with waiting a bit between individual player turns sometimes then this will work fine. Most standard conflicts should be able to incorporate all the characters at least some of the time. However, most of the Beast hunts are just going to star one hunter.
No, because I really don't find the game suited to multiplayer. It was clearly designed with two people in mind, and while it can be modified I think you would be better off taking a different game and using it for whatever you want to do.
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Hi Ash,
There's actually an AP report in the RPG.net forums here from when I ran the game for four players. There's another one from when I ran it for two players. Both games went very well.
In neither cases did they have separate hunts. It's true that only one Hunter can get on a hunt at one time (with the exception of the qhurym, the ultimate beast). But! You can play plenty of adventures with the game that are not hunts and do not end with confronting a beast. Instead, the adventure has some other goal, such as making peace between two tribes, rescuing a kidnapped tribemember, and so on. The characters can all go on these adventures together in the typical party style.
In multiplayer games, players actually have additional options, such as having their characters assist each other's actions or transferring advantage points from one character to another. Also, the Challenger gets to create more than one threat for conflict resolution that includes multiple Hunters if she so chooses.
So, in short, I've had good experiences running it for several players, even though I initially designed it as a two-player game.
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Thanks for the kind words about the layout, Chris! I'm blushing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Destriarch
One thing I noticed when looking through the preview of the book is that, although it is only digest sized to begin with, the font seems quite large and the lines are practically double-spaced, making it seem like there is very little information in the book. It's the one thing that's really put be off buying the game. Could you provide a little insight into this?
I made those layout choices, so I'd like to comment on them...
First, a nitpick: this is a 6"x9" game, not 5.5"x8.5" (believe it or not, that half inch per side actually makes a difference), so it's not *quite* digest formatted.
The font I'm using is DW Fell Pica, at 10pt size. Yeah, the leading's reasonably close to double-spaced, save for things like some example blocks, stats for the monsters, etc. I chose the font -- which is several centuries old -- because I liked its rough-hewn readability, leaving it feeling a little "archaic", fitting well with the primitive vibe I was getting from the tribal setting. I'm not sure I'd call this "quite large", but you're right that the lines are spaced out a bit.
I made the spacing choice in part because of that aesthetic vibe. With a bit more space, it felt more like something from out in the wilderness; get the text tighter, and it starts to feel more urban. But beyond that, I find a lot of the text in most RPGs to be far too densely packed. By giving the text more room to breathe, it ends up a lot easier on the eyes.
I could have made the spacing tighter, but while that would have reduced the page count of the product, I think it still would have been fairly priced at $20. If anything, my layout choice eats a bit more into Christian and Lisa's profit margin here, because they're paying for the higher page count. But we all agreed that this look and feel was friendlier to the reader and easier on the eyes. The space also gives you a chance to better perceive the trick we're doing to help identify each chapter with a different tattoo embedded into the background.
In the end, regardless of whether you agree with my layout decision here, I'm still going to tell you that the book -- at 150 pages, the way I did it -- definitely delivers the $20 value it's priced at. It would've done delivered $20 of value at 100 pages with tighter spacing, too, but I think your opthamologist will thank me for the way we went with it.
Re: [RPG]: Beast Hunters, reviewed by C.W.Richeson (5/3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by iago
First, a nitpick: this is a 6"x9" game, not 5.5"x8.5" (believe it or not, that half inch per side actually makes a difference), so it's not *quite* digest formatted.
Hm, how odd, I could have sworn I'd seen it advertised as digest size. No worries though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iago
I'm not sure I'd call this "quite large", but you're right that the lines are spaced out a bit.
Possibly an optical illusion caused by the bulkiness of the font, the wide spacing and the smaller-than-average size of the page is causing the impression of large writing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iago
By giving the text more room to breathe, it ends up a lot easier on the eyes.
To an extent I believe you're right, but I also think that there has to be a limit to how widely spaced the text is or it begins to feel sparse and, rather than making it easier on the eye, starts to give the impression that the lines are not related to one another. Additionally, low word-count-per-page also means that you have to flick more pages to get the same amount of information. Any layout work is going to be a case of balancing the two. On the other hand, without printing off a page, which naturally I can't do with the preview copy on Lulu, I can't tell if this is the case but from the screen preview it seems like it goes just a little bit beyond my own tolerance levels. Still, purely a subjective view on my part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iago
I could have made the spacing tighter, but while that would have reduced the page count of the product, I think it still would have been fairly priced at $20.
That's something I really couldn't comment on without looking at the product. I've yet to buy a POD book from Lulu that I thought was an absolute bargain though, and this could also be affecting my own judgement. Unfair, I know, but it's extremely difficult to think about how you think. Argh! And now I'm thinking about how I think about how I think! Head... explodey... death approaching... need... distraction!
Oooh a bunny!
Ok I'm better now. Back to the subject at hand. $20 is certainly comparable to other similar products from the same source, which is commendable. It's not so much the price that I have a problem with, just that having a book that feels so empty makes me feel a little cheated by the page count. Even if I only paid $5 for it, I'd still feel just a little misled by the advertising. I had similar feelings about Deliria (remember that one? good game, but big, glaring layout issues). I get the feeling that I'd probably pick up a copy of beast Hunters if it appeared in my local game store, but I am loathe to order it sight unseen from an online store, especially since Lulu's postage costs aren't exactly the cheapest for someone in the UK either.
Thanks to everyone else for their comments too. A bit of an inconclusive response but thanks anyway!
Linear Mode
