**Come here and talk about anything!**

This post will stay stickied for (at least) the week-end. Please enjoy this space where you can talk about anything: your last game, your current project, your patreon, etc. You can even talk about video games, ask for a group, or post a survey or share a new meme you've just found. This is the place for small talk on r/rpg.

The off-topic rules may not apply here, but the other rules still do. This is less the Wild West and more the Mild West. Don't be a jerk.

----------

This submission is generated automatically each Saturday at 00:00 UTC.

I've heard good things about the game but haven't played it myself. This seems like a steal.

I just wrapped up a 12 session campaign of Mythic Bastionland and I want to start off by saying we really enjoyed it. I agree with all of the positives that have been laid out in other reviews: the fantastic art (to my taste, the best of any RPG book I have seen), the concise and elegant ruleset, the strange and evocative knights and myths, and the combat system that manages to make fights even faster than bare-bones OSR games, while offering more tactical depth.

That said, by the end of the campaign I was struggling. I felt like I was fighting against the very systems that so impressed me at the start of the game. The rest of this review is going to sound very critical, because my issues with the system are what I wanted to talk about, but I want to reiterate that we enjoyed our time with Mythic Bastionland and I would encourage anyone curious to check it out for themselves.

A part of me worries that this review pulls back the curtain a bit too much, and it might spoil some of the magic for new players. If you intend to play (not GM) a game of MB, I would probably encourage you not to read further.

The core system

At its heart, Mythic Bastionland is a hexcrawl. Hexcrawls have several big issues that can make them difficult or awkward to run. One, which MB handles excellently, is resource management. Quinns covered this well in his review, so I won’t repeat him. But another issue, arguably the biggest issue, is that hexcrawls just have a lot of hexes! If the choice of which hex to travel through is going to be a meaningful one, those hexes need to be different, which means either a ton of preparation (the majority of which will never be used), using a premade hexcrawl (which won’t be to everyone’s taste), or using randomly generated content (which can feel, well… random, and isn’t the most conductive to storytelling).

MB’s solution to this issue is its Myths, which provide six short events each (called Omens), along with a couple of stat blocks, a random table, and a gorgeous illustration. While travelling, the party has a chance to encounter the next Omen from one of the six Myths active in the realm. Myths and Omens vary wildly, from unexpected weather, to an undead tyrant subjugating the entire realm, but they all have a coherent narrative, which will be experienced in order. Of course the PCs will usually steer the course of events, but the GM will always have an Omen ready to go, no matter where the PCs decide to go. This provides interesting content that tells stories without needing much prep and still giving the GM wide latitude to create a world.

Though this system can be slow to get going (early Omens are often quite vague and lack the hooks I would want to inspire my players to action), a few sessions in I really started appreciating it. The amount of prep it would have taken to balance six competing stories in parallel would have been significant, and my players started getting invested in the narratives. I liked how varied the Myths felt, in tone, content, and pacing. But as time went on I started to have more and more problems with the system.

First off, is it really a meaningful choice which hex to travel through if what happens is mostly random? Are Myths just “quantum ogres” that randomly pop out, independent of player agency? The book suggests using its spark tables to generate content while travelling, which can provide flavor, but does it make the players’ decisions meaningful? Also, as more Myths are introduced the number of bread crumb trails started to overwhelm my players and they began to lose track of the various threads. The narrative felt scattered and random.

This is probably where I should reveal what I meant by running the game “wrong”. At my core, I am a “trad” GM. If one of my players has a long-lost father or an obsession with ancient tomes, I want to reveal the villain is the PC’s father or tantalize them with a hidden library. The Myths in the book are fascinating, varied, and great at sparking the GM’s imagination, but I found myself desiring a unified narrative, woven to draw in and interact with the PCs specifically. MB tends towards the OSR end of the RPG spectrum: random generation is core to play (the majority of the book is in fact, a giant random table of knights, myths, creatures, moods, dwellings, etc) and the core motivation of the players gets one sentence that provides a pretty unambiguous direction: knights want glory, glory comes from Myths. More and more I started tweaking Myths, changing the results on the exploration table, and trying to come up with ways to steer the ship. By the end I wasn’t even rolling the die. I was using an OSR-style system to run a trad-style game and I felt it.

Balance

MB doesn’t provide any tools for balancing encounters, or even hints at how dangerous its various foes will be when taking on PCs. Quinns brought this up in his review and a pretty common response I saw was that Quinns is just a trad GM looking for balance and fairness in an OSR system that is mostly unconcerned with those factors. “Combat as war” means that the world isn’t balanced around the players, and they need to learn how to deal with it. With the admission that I am another trad GM experimenting in the world of OSR, I have to say that I just don’t buy it.

The desire to understand how threatening a creature is doesn't mean everything in the world must be fair and balanced. If I want a big horrible monster to be terrorizing the realm, but a junior knight PC kills it handily, not only is that unsatisfying gameplay, it's a narrative issue. If the monster was that much of a pushover, how was he such a threat?

If this sounds like an extreme case, know that throughout my campaign I never once felt like a group combat challenged my players. They went toe to toe with some of the biggest threats in the book (with some additional buffs improvised to make them more dangerous) and always came out victorious and often with 0 vigor damage. My read was always that the combats were balanced around 2-3 PCs and my group of 5 was simply too powerful to be threatened.

In MB in particular, I think power scales very fast with party size because of how Feats and strong gambits work. While I think I was getting close to figuring out how to balance a combat by the end, I really wish there had been something in the book that saved me the time. The frustrating thing is that combat in MB is excellent, but at my table it only really shined in one on one duels where 5 knights weren't bullying some hapless monster. Once again, maybe this is not the OSR mindset, but to me being able to craft a threatening encounter without a ton of trial and error is important.

Conclusion

Mythic Bastionland pulled me in with its art and evocative Knights and Myths and impressed me with its tight systems and snappy combat. But I do think that the core of MB is OSR, while I prefer the trad style of GMing. I enjoyed my foray into a style of gaming I hadn't really experienced before, but for now, I will probably be returning to systems more aligned with my personal style.

I recently made the jump from running D&D 5e for a few years to trying out other systems, and I keep running into the same experience: the rules are fine, but my brain keeps defaulting to D&D assumptions in ways I don't even notice until something breaks.

For example, coming from 5e I kept expecting every system to have some equivalent of advantage/disadvantage, or assuming that higher numbers always mean better. Running something like Blades in the Dark or Call of Cthulhu felt genuinely disorienting at first, not because the rules were hard to learn, but because I had so many bakedin habits from years of D&D.

I'm curious what adjustments other people found hardest when moving away from D&D, or any system they'd played for a long time. Was it purely mechanical, like learning a different dice resolution system? Was it more about shifting your GM philosophy, like moving away from encounter balance as a concept? Or did the fictionfirst versus rulesfirst divide trip you up?

I ask because there's a real skill in unlearning a system, not just learning a new one, and I don't see that talked about much. Would love to hear specific examples from people who made a significant system switch.

We've been having a lot of discussion at our table about 5E's "bouncing characters off 0" with potions.. and then some discussion about 3.5/PF and negative hitpoints.

Has a game ever had a death mechanic that felt like the character's life was in the balance, and not just "you hit 0, you died"? It just feels a bit sudden.

I played on at Garycon, where dead characters became "ghosts" that could help or hinder other players, so they weren't completely out of the game.

what I mean by orthodox is that I don’t want anything diceless, gm-less or card based. those are all super cool frameworks but not for me.

I've had a lot of conversations with friends about "oh I can't wait for this game to come out" only to be the one to say, "it's already out".

Thought maybe some people could mention some games they've had that moment with.

I've had friends say "I wish there was a Fallout RPG" and I'd point to modiphius's game. Or if that's not their cup of tea lvl to xps' DnD homebrew version.

Hi, all. I'm considering buying Dungeon Inc by the Merry Mushmen, but reviews seem rather hard to come by. There is a quick start, but I'm curious if anyone has played it, or played with the full book and adventure booklet. I love the premise, and it seems like it might go over well with some prospective players (though I don't know how it will play solo, which also interests me), but I'd like to hear from any who have played it before investing time or money into it.

Have you played it? What did you think? Thanks!

In the current DnD game I'm playing in, I really prefer simple mini's or tokens. Of creatures and of player characters. Same goes for the battle mat. I prefer a blank one and drawing on it. It's like the less there is on the table to visualize it the easier it is to picture the scene in my head. Sometimes with very detailed minis I start to picture that instead of the scene.

For example, I'm playing a dark elf wizard. I picked a mini for her but never pained it, and have not used it. The dm just uses a spare random dark elf for me. Good enough for me. I never think of that image as my character. If I spent time and effort painting it, its like it seeps in from time to time.

I guess how I'm defining simple mini is a general one of about the same size.

Same thing goes for monster minis. I'd rather see a simple thing than something that was printed and painted just for the encounter.

We are playing a very heave role play DnD with combat about once every 10 or so sessions if not longer. So this really isn't much of an issue.

When I run games I tend to do CoC or Scum and Villainy and prefer theater of the mind so it probably makes sense I feel this way.

I'm just curious if anyone else feels this way.

As it says on the tin. Always loved the setting and the idea of being a team of reploids kicking butt, doing investigations, and having cool fighting robot powers sounds fun!

Offhand I would like something with a reasonable amount of mechanical debt so everyone's reploid feels unique, and preferably something with a map/grid. Given how important movement is in those old side scrollers it'd feel weird to do it all TOM and have movement not matter much.

Any thoughts?

This is both a self-promo and a crowdfunding post. Mods, if I need to change the flair, I'm happy to.

FORGOTTEN ODYSSEYS is the new tabletop RPG from Adam "Badeye" Bradford, a tabletop industry veteran, the founder of D&D Beyond, and the writer and designer of the Invincible Superhero Roleplaying Game. You play as soldiers traveling home from the Trojan War when Eris, the goddess of chaos and strife makes it her personal mission to stop you from getting home.

Inspired by Homer's The Odyssey and Greek mythology more generally, the game uses the Mork Borg system to create a perilous journey for the players to overcome. Will you survive the journey home?

Full disclosure: I own and operate the publishing company behind the project, Broken Door Entertainment.