Ladies and Gentlemen, the 2009 winner for Best Role Playing Game is... The tabletop adaptation of David Petersen's comic, Mouse Guard.
Stemming from an adaptation of the Burning Wheel system, Mouse Guard is very story and RP-heavy in its design, going so far as to even make individual agendas and character development a core mechanic. Its rules don't take any sacrifices for such design, though. The system is quite robust, and offers a feel that is unique and true to the beautiful, mousey universe from whence it came.
The setting is, of course, the Territories of Petersen's Mouse Guard setting, a world where humans (and through them, domesticated animals and plants) do not exist, and the major sentient species are rodents. As one could guess, the primary species (and the one the players control) are mice who have a fairly medieval level of technology. The players take control of members of the titular Mouse Guard, an organization somewhat akin to the Knights Templar. The Mouse Guard are a sacred and traditional organization that patrols the countryside, performing missions and helping out the townsfolk with whatever particularly outstanding matters need to be taken care of. This can range from finding and questioning spies, escorting convoys, driving off wild animals from towns, delivering mail, and the like. Players can pick any rank of mouse right off the bat, from the rookie Tenderpaws up to the esteemed Guard Captains (though it is recommended that the GM seriously think about the latter before allowing it).
The setting does not have a class or level system of any sort, though such a thing is understandable: The setting has an entirely martial focus, without the barest hint of a magical tome or divine prophecy. Instead, the player decides what their character is good at through a series of skills and traits. For example, a character with ranks in fighter and hunter will be adept at targeting the weak points of more wild enemies (giant enemy crabs, for example), whereas those with ranks in pathfinder and cartographer with the natural direction trait are incredibly useful at keeping the party from wandering all the way to Bat Country when you originally meant to go from Lockhaven to Elmoss. There is even a skill that allows you to change the weather (aptly-named weather watcher), in case things get too ugly.
One has to understand, though, that the RP focus of the game shows itself in its system of conflicts. Not every conflict involves smashing in doors and slicing up baddies, though indeed some still will. The game relies heavily on intrigue, social, and environmental obstacles, and entire sessions can pass without a sword drawn or arrow nocked. Tension and excitement are still prevalent in such conflicts, however. After all, weather and environment becomes much more important when you consider that even small hailstones are now bigger than your fist.
Don't get me wrong, though. I may be a stalwart Mouse Guard fan, and my opinions of both the comic and the RPG border on the bibliophilic, but I am not trying to convert anyone to the system, nor am I trying to diss Wizards. It isn't for everyone, and those it isn't for aren't any lower than we are for not liking it. I will, however, say that this is a world which I will stay in, long after my days on Eberron and Azeroth are done.
For more information, visit Petersen's official site. If you're interested in the game, you may want to consider looking here.*
-----------
Huh. This post wasn't originally intended as a review. Suppose I got carried away. Hope you folks find something to discuss here.
And please, try to keep it civil. I don't want my thread locked because a couple of folks decided they wanted to start up a flame war. "Narrativism vs. gamism" is a good topic for debate, but I'd prefer it keep from getting out of hand. Even if I have a side that I clearly support.
Cheers!
*-No, that review isn't mine. It was written by Martin Ralya. Just thought it'd be nice to point that out.
Wizards won't have any complaints, I suspect; were the category "most financially successful RPG of 2009" or "best miniature-based RPG experience of 2009" it's a clear winner, and while design awards are nice, high sales and a strong brand identity are nicer.
No surprises there; D&D 4E is fantastically innovative compared to 3.5, but in the larger context of the RPG world the rest of the industry is shaking its hand and welcoming it to 1991.
Sadly, this observation seems terribly apt. I love 4E to little pieces, but it seems some of this stuff they should have thought about a long time ago.
Sadly, this observation seems terribly apt. I love 4E to little pieces, but it seems some of this stuff they should have thought about a long time ago.
They were very likely constrained by the legacy of the original rules.
They were very likely constrained by the legacy of the original rules.
Indeed - I remember reading an interview with some of the developers where they said as much. They wanted to go much farther with 3.0, but were afraid of alienating the D&D fan base too much, of changing the game into something D&D players wouldn't want to pick up.
I wish I could remember where I read that; it's come up in conversations a number of times ...
Sadly, this observation seems terribly apt. I love 4E to little pieces, but it seems some of this stuff they should have thought about a long time ago.
Agreed. Over the years I took to calling D&D the Slow Kid. Basically it takes D&D 30 years to learn what rpgs have learned in 15-20. Or what took videogames 7.
Meaning, it is the most common RPG, that while it may be good, it is not overly spectacular.
D&D is the Bourgeoisie of the RPG world.
D&D is at least Chipotle. It's food, and you can tell it has real ingredients in it, and it actually tastes like something other than MSG, but it can't satisfy that need for something special.
D&D is the Chili's of tabletop gaming. It's good, it's fun, but it doesn't beat that one mom and pop place down the road with the absolutely amazing cherry pie.
Comparing D&D to fast food... that's pretty rude. I'm pretty biased against that vile stuff though.
D&D is at least Chipotle. It's food, and you can tell it has real ingredients in it, and it actually tastes like something other than MSG, but it can't satisfy that need for something special.
Heresy! I've gone and driven 45 minutes across state lines just to satisfy my craving for Chipotle.
I'd compare D&D more to a decent well-known chain restaurant.
D&D is the Chili's of tabletop gaming. It's good, it's fun, but it doesn't beat that one mom and pop place down the road with the absolutely amazing cherry pie.
I wish I had some Chili's right about now.
I wish I had some Chili's right about now.
That's nothing. That mom and pop place is all the way in Tennessee, and I'm in Florida.
It's hard to judge DND, because each game varies so much. Different DMs, different players, different campaigns, different adventures. An entire campaign can be far more or less fun then any other RPG.
That's true of almost any RPG out there, though.
That's true of almost any RPG out there, though.
Yeah, I know. My point was that it's hard to judge the best RPG, I just shouldn't have singled out DND,
On BGG they call it "The Cult of the New".
Basically, anything that is novel draws attention, and gets a boost in general rating based on the fact that it is different at least on the surface from what we are used to.
Now, D&D 4e is still fairly new, but on the other hand, it's still D&D. People have been playing it for over 30 years in one form or another, and as a result, even New D&D isn't really "New" to our sensabilities.
In otherwords, if a completely orignal game comes out and it isn't absolutely aweful, there's a good chance it will place ahead of D&D in awards that year.
Mousegaurd especially had this right now, since it came out less than two months ago, IIRC.
And there's another effect to consider.
On BGG they call it "The Cult of the New".
Basically, anything that is novel draws attention, and gets a boost in general rating based on the fact that it is different at least on the surface from what we are used to.
Now, D&D 4e is still fairly new, but on the other hand, it's still D&D. People have been playing it for over 30 years in one form or another, and as a result, even New D&D isn't really "New" to our sensabilities.
In otherwords, if a completely orignal game comes out and it isn't absolutely aweful, there's a good chance it will place ahead of D&D in awards that year.
Mousegaurd especially had this right now, since it came out less than two months ago, IIRC.
True, but it does help things when the game is truly great as well. Not every new game is just average and overhyped by the bandwagon cult. Sometimes the masses create a truly beautiful and well-oiled machine, and I'm quite prepared to say that this is the case Mouse Guard.
Oh, and it came out in late 2008. So more like half a year ago.
And there's another effect to consider.
On BGG they call it "The Cult of the New".
On the other hand, I think if awards intended to celebrate innovation more often go to new games than old games they're probably working as intended.
Combined, their powers *must* be mighty! :D
(Mouse Guard may come off as cutesy at first, but I think the main character fights off a snake in the first issue by stabbing it through the roof of its mouth with a sword. Kinda badass for a mouse!
)Burning Wheel seems like a pretty fun system, what little I played of it. And Mouse Guard is a cool comic that more people should read.
Combined, their powers *must* be mighty! :D
(Mouse Guard may come off as cutesy at first, but I think the main character fights off a snake in the first issue by stabbing it through the roof of its mouth with a sword. Kinda badass for a mouse!
It's one of those awesome titles that everyone disregards as kid-friendly drivel until they actually read it*. See also Warrior Cats and Watership Down. They even unleash a swarm of bees on an army, for god's sake. Not too awesome in and of itself, but when you remember that they're large enough to count as sentient arrows to mice... Ouch.
*WARNING: This is a TvTropes article. Don't look at it if you have something else to do for the next five hours.
I'm getting a sort of Redwall vibe from Mouse Guard, which is cool, because back in Grade School, NOTHING was more badass than Redwall. I even tried writing a Redwall book at one point. Of course, being in third grade, it was utterly horrible, and I've destroyed all the evidence (though I wish I'd kept some of it now).
It is fairly Redwall, but it's different enough to be unique and awesome. I'm outlining the plot for a three-part story involving a few OCs I drew up a while ago, myself. I'm likely to post it on fanfic or devart, one. It'll likely take a bit, though.
And, of course, there is also the simple matter that the Origins Awards, like the Oscars, are not always a representation of quality but are really just a matter of personal opinion. Some of the movies that have won Best Oscar I have simply not enjoyed. I do not judge games (or movies) by the awards that they do or do not win. I judge them based on the only standard that matters, whether or not I enjoy it.
Agreed. Over the years I took to calling D&D the Slow Kid. Basically it takes D&D 30 years to learn what rpgs have learned in 15-20. Or what took videogames 7.
I imagine this is often true of those who are "first on the block." D&D was, for all intents and purposes, the first roleplaying game and it took off in a big way. They were successful and were not about to rock the boat with drastically altering the game. But, smaller companies had nothing to lose and everything to gain by experimenting with new ideas and concepts. It was inevitable that one (or more) of these smaller companies would come up with something better than D&D. And even if they did there was no guarantee that they would or even could supplant D&D as king of the hill. Being king of the hill does have certain advantages, such as a sizeable lock on a percentage of the market share.
Sadly, this observation seems terribly apt. I love 4E to little pieces, but it seems some of this stuff they should have thought about a long time ago.
They were very likely constrained by the legacy of the original rules.
This is something that has been a problem with D&D in the past. That was part of the problem with the designers with 4e. They were given the task to "fix" the problems that people have been complaining about (some of which go back to the first few editions of the game) but at the same time try to keep the game similar enough as to not scare away too many customers. Some of the more simple ones were a sort of "why didn't we do this sooner" moment and they have admitted such. For instance how come it took them so long to make holy symbols an enchantable item that can be used in combat and such. They have no clue. It's been a key feature for clerics but it's just been dead weight until now. Another was the giving the spell caster an ability that they could use all day long. Now the group doesn't have to rest every time the caster use up all their spells or in other words ever few encounters. Or giving the cleric the ability to do something in combat other than waiting until someone is inches from death so that they can be healed.
Basically there were quite a few things that were standard D&D convention that either didn't make much sense or didn't really serve any purpose and yet for no reason other than it being part of D&D's legacy nobody ever thought to break away from it. Well until 4e cuz that's when a lot of the changes happened.
It's interesting to hear from some of those that worked on both 3e and 4e basically say that they have no clue why they didn't make some of the changes in 3e.
I'm not surprised that D&D didn't win. I've always thought that D&D is like fast food, millions of people eat it everyday, but it's nowhere near as good as a home cooked meal.
Meaning, it is the most common RPG, that while it may be good, it is not overly spectacular.
D&D is the Bourgeoisie of the RPG world.
You have to admit- D&D is the most addictive RPG in the world! ;)
You have to admit- D&D is the most addictive RPG in the world! ;)
Uh.. how about no. Honestly, I've become a bit bored with D&D. Don't get me wrong, 4e is a great improvement in my opinion, but it simply doesn't draw me in anymore. Perhaps it was overplayed by my group, or maybe the fact that the game that was being run had no story, and I could care less about the character I played - to the point where I changed characters almost every week, just to try something new.
Eberron's release was decent, but since I'm the one traveling to the game, often by foot or bike, I don't want to have to lug around a whole bunch of books. I'm disappointed by the lack of pdf's, and I feel I may not support WotC until they start supporting that format again. Not to mention, the miniature quality has gone rapidly downhill to the point that I refuse to buy them.
D&D is a mass market intro RPG system that is a gateway to other, I feel better, RPG systems. At this, it does a phenomenal job.
Perhaps I will go back to play D&D, but not till someone else in my group gets off their ass and runs a game where the main focus is the story, not what level we get to.
I find it amazing that this ruleset was created by mainly one person, compared to 4E. I also appreciate how complete the rules are. I don't have to buy a dozen books to play. I know some would say I only need 3 books to play 4e, but really, as soon as someone buys PH2 and starts whipping out characters that are unbalanced (my opinion) compared to PH1, we start the arms race. Anyway, if you play with just the basic set of books, that's still 3 books plus a 4th for campaign setting to equal what is in the MG rules. That's some serious value.
The rules for MG are very tight. It's clear that they were put together with a single vision. It's also clear that they were meant to stand on their own.
The structure of the game is very interesting. What is called "railroading" by some is portrayed as design by MG. What I mean by that is that the GM's turn presents some definite obstacles to be overcome with some predetermined skills. The players have some input, but mainly they figure out how they will combine their efforts (story competes with powergaming here) to best overcome the obstacles. The freedom to choose is presented in the Player's turn. As a GM, this is kind of nice. It is easy to prepare the session. I find most DM's have to prepare a ton of stuff that never is experienced in an effort to not "railroad." The thing is, if you've prepped it, you will steer your players toward it because you don't want your time wasted. Mouse Guard gets rid of this hypocrisy.
I think, too, what happened here was that the folks at Origins are predisposed toward story rather than tactical miniatures. I can't fault them; the category of this award is RPG where the R stands for role, not roll. 4E is a dice fest. MG requires roleplay as part of its structure. If you can't describe what your char is doing to help, for instance, you can't add your help to a die roll.
I like both systems, as noted before, for different reasons. I think MG got the nod because it is efficient, not money-grubbing, inspires role-playing, and is complete.
I have to give 4E a nod for its clean gameplay as a tactical miniatures game. It also has a fantastic role playing guide in the DM's guide. Where it lets you down in the role-playing is not providing mechanics specifically for role-playing. It also is a clear money hog. Buy this book, buy that book. Look at the compendium as well. I bought into this early because I like the concept of the online tools. I paid full price despite the suite not being completely ready (no game table yet). Now I'm getting emails saying that I have to pay more money because the online tools have grown. Excuse me? They still haven't grown to the size they were promised. MG doesn't try to extort more money from me. The system was complete upon delivery to my door.
I'm getting a sort of Redwall vibe from Mouse Guard, which is cool, because back in Grade School, NOTHING was more badass than Redwall. I even tried writing a Redwall book at one point. Of course, being in third grade, it was utterly horrible, and I've destroyed all the evidence (though I wish I'd kept some of it now). In fifth grade my interests shifted more towards D&D and Warhammer 40k, but Redwall has always had a special, abby-shaped place in my heart. I should probably go pick up Mouse Guard. Arrg! So many RPGs, so little money. Is it so much to ask that I be able to purchase every RPG system ever published, along with all the D&D and Savage Worlds supplements? Is it, huh?
I enjoyed Redwall as light reading and always wondered why I never saw an RPG or family movie made off of it.
I enjoyed Redwall as light reading and always wondered why I never saw an RPG or family movie made off of it.
IIRC, it was the author of Redwall who said that people playing RPGs set in his fictional universe is comparable to people breaking into his house.
IIRC, it was the author of Redwall who said that people playing RPGs set in his fictional universe is comparable to people breaking into his house.
What an ass.
That 4e didn't get it doesn't surprise me.
That Mouse Guard won does surprise me...
Remember that part about not flaming?
No, no surprises here.
The D&D = Fast food comparisation is imo quite fitting.
An interesting setting with a wide-ranging rpg rules system vs. a tactical miniature game.
No, no surprises here.
The D&D = Fast food comparisation is imo quite fitting.
You mean like 3e was? Because it required a board as well? Yeah.
You mean like 3e was? Because it required a board as well? Yeah.
Jeez Calm down man. He posted D&D= Fast food, he din't posted 4E= Fast food. Is a game anyways, is not like they talking about your mom.
Jeez Calm down man. He posted D&D= Fast food, he din't posted 4E= Fast food. Is a game anyways, is not like they talking about your mom.
MY MUM INVENTED FAST FOOD! AND SHE DID NOT MEAN FOR IT TO BE LIKE D&D! (jk, obviously ;)).
That 4e didn't get it doesn't surprise me.
That Mouse Guard won does surprise me...
Same here
I'd compare D&D more to a decent well-known chain restaurant.
D&D is the Chili's of tabletop gaming. It's good, it's fun, but it doesn't beat that one mom and pop place down the road with the absolutely amazing cherry pie.
I'd say it's more like McDonald's. I'll eat there if my friends want to stop there, and a lot of people love it; occasionally I might even want it, but I usually want to eat somewhere else.