From: v124jw4y@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Benjamin R Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp,rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Let's talk REAL sci-Fi systems
Keywords: The best
Date: 10 Sep 92 19:50:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Okay...this is getting out of hand.  Battlelords is, in my admittedly biased
opinion, a very good game, but I'll freely admit that it's not the be-all and
end-all of role-playing systems, nor is it the only system (or even the only
science-fiction system) I will ever play.  However, I feel that the system has 
some very real strengths to it; this is why I got involved with the design
aspects in the first place (if I was after big paychecks, I could be doing a 
lot better).

Among the things I view as strengths of the Battlelords system are:

1. Rules which are easy to learn, but still fairly realistic.  This makes the
   game accessible in a way in which Spacemaster, for example, is not, but
   still provides for reasonable and realistic resolution of situations (a
   feature which I feel many systems, such as Shadowrun, lack).

2. An original universe with enough background provided in the core rulebook
   to allow you to adapt it to almost any type of campaign you desire.  With
   only minor modifications, Battlelords could work as straight space opera,
   cyberpunk, grim and gritty "Aliens"-type combat (this is the genre which
   large numbers of players seem to prefer; I'm not one of them, but that's
   beside the point.)  Someone earlier ridiculed the game for providing 
   information on alcoholic beverages and favorite pets; I see this as a plus,
   and would much rather see such background detail than another mega-kill 
   weapons system.  Again, this may put me in the minority; so be it.

3. Races which provide a great deal of opportunity for new role-playing 
   experiences, if used correctly.  If one is capable of looking beyond the
   combat plusses, there are hooks for very interesting character interaction
   and development.

4. A design staff which is more than willing to listen to people who say,
   "This is wrong".  One of the major strengths of both the game and the
   company (IMHO) is a willingness to correct things which don't work.



My primary beefs with the system (yes, believe it or not, I am quite willing
to criticize Battlelords...)

1. The game has evolved in such a way as to be perceived as a purely combat-
   oriented game, and thus attracts heavy combat gamers who proceed to demand
   more combat information, and so on; a cycle which was reinforced by making 
   the first Battlelords supplement a weapons manual.  I have no problem with
   combat gaming in moderation, but it seems to have reached the point in most
   Battlelords campaigns where it drowns out other styles.

2. Lock-N-Load, the second book, should have received much more playtesting
   than it did; some of the items are buggy, poorly worded, or just plain
   poorly thought out.  Lock-N-Load had the potential to be a very good product;
   as it is, it is (IMHO) only fair.

In the above critique, I have tried to be as impartial as possible; as one of 
the editors and playtesters of the game, however, my opinion is admittedly 
biased.  Therefore, I leave it to others to judge the merit of the system.
ODS maintains a 30-day money-back guarantee on its products; all I can suggest
is that you try the system for yourself and make your own judgements.  I hope
you find it as enjoyable as I have; if not, you lose nothing other than perhaps
the cost of postage.


                                              --Ben
Xref: sparky rec.games.frp.advocacy:2180 rec.games.frp:25131 rec.games.frp.misc:5300