The Gaming Den

(again)

The quickstart rules
http://ulisses-us.com/thedarkeye/
The facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/thedarkeyegame

I don't know what to say about this....

Any indication whether this is a just a translation, or a new edition? I didn't see either, but I only skimmed.

From my experience DSA (designers and gamers) has always been full of grognards. And it has to be, otherwise everybody would realize that DSA is like DnD when it comes to "wizards are better than you".

Prak wrote:Any indication whether this is a just a translation, or a new edition? I didn't see either, but I only skimmed.

Both. It is a translation to coincide with the new 5th edition.

zugschef wrote:From my experience DSA (designers and gamers) has always been full of grognards. And it has to be, otherwise everybody would realize that DSA is like DnD when it comes to "wizards are better than you".

With D&D 5e, it might even have an chance to succeed...

zugschef wrote:From my experience DSA (designers and gamers) has always been full of grognards. And it has to be, otherwise everybody would realize that DSA is like DnD when it comes to "wizards are better than you".

I think that DSA 5 (I've participated in the open Beta playtest) is way to complicated for what it does. The adventure design has always been as railroady as White Wolf at her worst. The game has not much to offer to the discerning American gamer. And it also has not much to offer to the un-discerning American gamer.

But...

I think the balance between wizards and folks without magic is better than in DnD. Simply because magic in DSA is weaker across the board.

Ah, interesting.

So, looking at the Quickstart... 8 attribute system... skills are... interesting. The "d20, roll under, three times" bit is, well, amazingly stupid, but the "spend skill rating to decrease a roll, points are spent for length of test" bit is intriguing. Not workable, in that exact manner, but intriguing. I also like how the remaining skill rating determines success quality. The overall resolution method is cool enough that I wish "roll three times for every skill" wasn't incredibly tedious. Also, Fate Points really should not be abbreviated FaPs.

You know, when I first heard the name, "The Black Eye", I pictured this:



But then I heard more about it, and now I picture this:

You can't know Das Schwarze Auge until you played it with germans.


But anyway, it's like someone thought 3.5 was too simple, but didn't make casters quite powerful enough. So they went out to fix this. And at least in those two goals, succeeded.

malak wrote:You can't know Das Schwarze Auge until you played it with germans.


But anyway, it's like someone thought 3.5 was too simple, but didn't make casters quite powerful enough. So they went out to fix this. And at least in those two goals, succeeded.

I have played DSA of and on since 1984. Usually of, 'cause OMG. So I know it has massive issues.
But you are the second guy on this short thread to claim that casters are very powerful. Comparable to, or even more powerful than D&D casters.
Clearly I have missed something big, because I've never noticed that.

So. What makes them so powerful?

Daniel wrote:

malak wrote:You can't know Das Schwarze Auge until you played it with germans.


But anyway, it's like someone thought 3.5 was too simple, but didn't make casters quite powerful enough. So they went out to fix this. And at least in those two goals, succeeded.

I have played DSA of and on since 1984. Usually of, 'cause OMG. So I know it has massive issues.
But you are the second guy on this short thread to claim that casters are very powerful. Comparable to, or even more powerful than D&D casters.
Clearly I have missed something big, because I've never noticed that.

So. What makes them so powerful?

Well in DSA 4 you could create at char gen an wizard who could summon an Djinn (or one who creates an Magic lamp/ring/whatever, which would summon an Djinn).
If it's an Earth Djinn you could (in 4.0 was fixed in 4.1) turn an gold coin into an diamant, sell it for gold and repeat (this would work better with an once per day item summon).

P.S.: Dwarfs are the best wizards.

Korwin

That is a problematic loophole, but isn't exactly Pun-Pun level rules abuse.
http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Pun-Pun_(3 ... ter_Build)
Or even, my well build druid is a better fighter, than even the most optimized fighter build without spellcasting, or psi imaginable, that you see in D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder.

But why would you even need to fight anymore, if you can just WISH-ECONOMY for it?

Stahlseele wrote:But why would you even need to fight anymore, if you can just WISH-ECONOMY for it?

Because you are fighting/adventuring for something that you can't buy with money?

Which is actually the case in most of the adventures ever published for DSA.

Yes, but Wish-Economy is way beyond Money as far as i understood that argument.
Wish-Economy is things starting at and going above something like true Immortality for egg sample.

And if you can wish yourself truly immortal, you can probably wish for whatever problem you are trying to solve to be a SEP . . .

I think that DSA is simply to low magic to make that sort of stuff work. In D&D lots of gold=almost any magic item=quasi-unlimited power if you picked up the right stuff.
In DSA you'll just crash the diamond part of the gem market. If you are the only person abusing that loophole in the setting, you will have made a lot of money before that happens.
So you'll be a minor baron with brand new castle (to be finished 5 years from now) fit for a duke.
That's peanuts compared to what similar tricks can buy you in D&D.

I don't think DSA does anything so exceptionally well that adopting it is worth the effort. There are a whole lot of existing systems, originally in English, that are designed to do or can be adapted to do everything it does.

Basically the game exists at all because of linguistic and cultural barriers, however permeable they are.

Occluded Sun wrote:I don't think DSA does anything so exceptionally well that adopting it is worth the effort. There are a whole lot of existing systems, originally in English, that are designed to do or can be adapted to do everything it does.

Basically the game exists at all because of linguistic and cultural barriers, however permeable they are.

Not really. DSA is a game with a substantial fanbase, and an almost consistent shit-ton of effort went into maintaining, expanding and developing the game world over the three decades of existence. (There's a bi-monthly in-game newspaper pushing the world forward, for Firbolgs sake). The rules were designed to fit that worldbuilding like a glove (with more or less success).

The fans that keep the game afloat are usually longtime players and they have invested a lot of effort into learning most or all aspects of world and rules. The sunk cost effect is strong with them.

Why was it first created, back in 1984? My impression - and I am certainly open to correction from those who know better - is that it was inspired by D&D and initially outcompeted it because DSE was a German product. Something like the RPG equivalent of Bollywood movies. I don't doubt that it's developed a characteristic style, and it may well be excellent at what it attempts to do - I lack the experience necessary to reach any judgment on the matter.

But it faces so much competition in the English-speaking world that it would have to be truly extraordinary to get much attention. The sunk cost effect would work against it, here.

Occluded Sun wrote:But it faces so much competition in the English-speaking world that it would have to be truly extraordinary to get much attention. The sunk cost effect would work against it, here.

I'm inclined to agree.

Weirdly enough it might have better chances to expand south, towards the (more progressive parts of the) middle east, because it has a rather appreciative view of medieval muslim society in its cultural bloom..with some gender-flipping, though.

Oddly enough my wife mentioned the pending American release of this the other week. Then asked if I knew anything about it... to which I replied "I think The Den reviewed it... and it wasn't good".

Occluded Sun wrote:I don't think DSA does anything so exceptionally well that adopting it is worth the effort. There are a whole lot of existing systems, originally in English, that are designed to do or can be adapted to do everything it does.

Basically the game exists at all because of linguistic and cultural barriers, however permeable they are.

I agree with your first point.

But you are wrong on the 2nd thing.
DSA exists because TSR tried to jerk around Schmidt Spiele in the early 80's thinking it was the German version of Flying Buffalo. Schmidt however was a serious mass market game company bigger than Avalon Hill at it's height.
So Schmidt had a chat with their 3 regular freelance translators and asked them to develop a rpg instead of buying the D&D translation these guys had been working on.

If everyone on the German side had been slightly smarter we may have lived in a world where in the non-english speaking rpg market DSA replaced D&D as the dominant rpg.

codeGlaze wrote:Oddly enough my wife mentioned the pending American release of this the other week. Then asked if I knew anything about it... to which I replied "I think The Den reviewed it... and it wasn't good".

I looked, can't find any review of it here on the Den.
Having recently read the DSA 5e Beta test document, I think you can kill hardliners on this board by forcing them to review this. It is aneurysm inducing to any serious rpg gearhead who gets offended by inelegant design.

Daniel wrote:

codeGlaze wrote:Oddly enough my wife mentioned the pending American release of this the other week. Then asked if I knew anything about it... to which I replied "I think The Den reviewed it... and it wasn't good".

I looked, can't find any review of it here on the Den.

Frank reviewed it: http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?p=152234

Having recently read the DSA 5e Beta test document, I think you can kill hardliners on this board by forcing them to review this. It is aneurysm inducing to any serious rpg gearhead who gets offended by inelegant design.

I've reviewed FATAL. We'll review anything here.

No what Frank reviewed is a Czech game that may have been influenced lightly by DSA.

The scary thing about DSA is, that you can always confidently (over a timespan of 30 years!) state about the designers, that they should have known better.

They were never isolated from the American rpg scene. They always worked for an at least respectably sized company in the rpg industry. There was always plenty of feedback from the fan community. There were always some serious professionals in related field (artists, computer game designers, traditional game designers) available for feedback.
And still...

The game has been doing pretty well for 3 decades, but except for the very early days, that is not on the strength of the rules set