The 2d6 makes a lot more sense if you know that that’s the same dice pool as the miniatures game. it’s meant to make it easier for players to switch between ATOW for Personal Combat and Classic Battletech for Mech-scale combat. (You could also play with Alpha Strike, but while it’s much faster AS synergizes better with Mechwarrior Destiny - which is the rules-light version of ATOW.)
That makes a lot of sense, and I really like that it makes the games far more interchangable so you can leap into mechs and take the game to that level without having to juggle rules. Cheers for letting me know.
The more gaming experience I gain the less I enjoy very simulationist combat games. Very basic things like cover is fine, but armor vs armor piercing, different kinds of damage tracking, modifiers for every situation are just tedious to me. Thanks for reviewing these games so I don't have to waste my time on them!
I appreciate what they were trying to do, and can see that it could add a lot to a combat, as every player describes their actions based on trying to get the most positive modifiers. But my preference is to never open a rulebook during play if possible, and the tables of modifiers in this means that I really don't think that would be possible and would slow play down.
I liked this ruleset the best. I also like your overall review on it. Mechwarrior 1st edition was only decent if you were an aero pilot, Mechwarrior, or tech. Anything past that and good luck, you couldn't do anything. Mechwarrior 2nd edition took from Shadowrun a lot in terms of a priority list on your points and although was better than 1st, it could be cheezed out horribly. Mechwarrior 3rd edition, Classic Battletech RPG, was a BIG departure. It used D10s and though had a lot of skills, it felt strange. A Time of War feels like they improved on 2nd and kept some of the skills from 3rd, which I don't mind. Is it a lot of math? Yes, but also so is Battletech overall. I guess since I grew up with it, this isn't the hurdle for me. Ironically its the more "narrative" kind of games where rolling dice is seen as an afterthought that I can't enjoy. Also another strong point for ATOW is how tactical combat is more or less Battletroops 2.0 Battletroops was a battle armor simulator fight where you took on Mechs, swarming them and the like. When people asked for a 2.0 of that, the creators basically said "You got Tactical combat ATOW, go nuts." For folks that want a more abstract RPG experience, Mechwarrior Destiny might be up their alley. I personally can't seem to click with it, but it's good to know that the adventures and items from ATOW are useable with Destiny via small conversions here and there.
While it might sound like I was really being down on the game, please don't take it that way. I can really see what they were trying to do, and can see how it would make combat far more interesting, as rather than players just saying that they attack an enemy, they'd be far more descriptive to pack in as many bonuses to their skill roll as possible. So you'd end up with far more detailed combats. It's just a personal preference, as I prefer games I don't have to crack open the book when I'm running them, as it slows play (while I'm looking up a chart or table, I'm not thinking about what I'm doing next), and I don't see how it would be possible with the fairly large charts of modifiers, as you might memorise the more common ones, but not all. I do think this is a lot better than the old Mechwarrior games I've seen in the past, and as I said love what they were doing.
@@RPGGamer Oh I didn't take it that way, I didn't think you were being down to the game. I also agree that some in the RPG sphere of gaming might not like the "crunch" of it all. To be quite honest a lot of the various attempts to Battletech RPG always feel like "So it's the wargame, just in personal scale"; because a lot of the modifiers you saw? They're also in the "A Game of Armored Combat" Mech scaled regular wargame. That's a good and detriment at the same time. You allow someone to literally hop out of their 'Mech and get into the action, like the taglines say. However with all those modifiers, a typical RPG experience does slow down when compared to more abstract systems out there that the RPG folks tend to play. I was just providing history in my earlier post because I get so excited seeing people review the setting I have loved for decades.
I understand your position regarding the different versions of the RPG. personally, I still prefer 2nd ed Mechwarrior. while you can definitely min/max the character creation process, there are several distinct benefits. 1st - Fasa produced a lot of support materials. 2nd - out of the 5 versions of RPGs, only 2nd ed Mechwarrior transferred directly between standard battletech and the RPG. each of the other versions require a 'conversion' to make the character playable in each setting. 3rd - character creation itself is very easy and quick. 4th - advancing character capability is a simple process based on mission rewards. again, this is just an opinion from a person that owns each version and has both played and run games using each of the different rule sets.
The 2d6 makes a lot more sense if you know that that’s the same dice pool as the miniatures game. it’s meant to make it easier for players to switch between ATOW for Personal Combat and Classic Battletech for Mech-scale combat. (You could also play with Alpha Strike, but while it’s much faster AS synergizes better with Mechwarrior Destiny - which is the rules-light version of ATOW.)
That makes a lot of sense, and I really like that it makes the games far more interchangable so you can leap into mechs and take the game to that level without having to juggle rules. Cheers for letting me know.
I crack out my book I've never used and read along :D
Lol, you make it sound like I'm part of storytime. "Read along with Freddy".
@@RPGGamer can you add a chime sound so I know when to turn the pages too? :D
The more gaming experience I gain the less I enjoy very simulationist combat games. Very basic things like cover is fine, but armor vs armor piercing, different kinds of damage tracking, modifiers for every situation are just tedious to me. Thanks for reviewing these games so I don't have to waste my time on them!
I appreciate what they were trying to do, and can see that it could add a lot to a combat, as every player describes their actions based on trying to get the most positive modifiers. But my preference is to never open a rulebook during play if possible, and the tables of modifiers in this means that I really don't think that would be possible and would slow play down.
I liked this ruleset the best. I also like your overall review on it.
Mechwarrior 1st edition was only decent if you were an aero pilot, Mechwarrior, or tech. Anything past that and good luck, you couldn't do anything.
Mechwarrior 2nd edition took from Shadowrun a lot in terms of a priority list on your points and although was better than 1st, it could be cheezed out horribly.
Mechwarrior 3rd edition, Classic Battletech RPG, was a BIG departure. It used D10s and though had a lot of skills, it felt strange.
A Time of War feels like they improved on 2nd and kept some of the skills from 3rd, which I don't mind.
Is it a lot of math? Yes, but also so is Battletech overall. I guess since I grew up with it, this isn't the hurdle for me. Ironically its the more "narrative" kind of games where rolling dice is seen as an afterthought that I can't enjoy.
Also another strong point for ATOW is how tactical combat is more or less Battletroops 2.0
Battletroops was a battle armor simulator fight where you took on Mechs, swarming them and the like. When people asked for a 2.0 of that, the creators basically said "You got Tactical combat ATOW, go nuts."
For folks that want a more abstract RPG experience, Mechwarrior Destiny might be up their alley. I personally can't seem to click with it, but it's good to know that the adventures and items from ATOW are useable with Destiny via small conversions here and there.
While it might sound like I was really being down on the game, please don't take it that way. I can really see what they were trying to do, and can see how it would make combat far more interesting, as rather than players just saying that they attack an enemy, they'd be far more descriptive to pack in as many bonuses to their skill roll as possible. So you'd end up with far more detailed combats.
It's just a personal preference, as I prefer games I don't have to crack open the book when I'm running them, as it slows play (while I'm looking up a chart or table, I'm not thinking about what I'm doing next), and I don't see how it would be possible with the fairly large charts of modifiers, as you might memorise the more common ones, but not all.
I do think this is a lot better than the old Mechwarrior games I've seen in the past, and as I said love what they were doing.
@@RPGGamer Oh I didn't take it that way, I didn't think you were being down to the game. I also agree that some in the RPG sphere of gaming might not like the "crunch" of it all. To be quite honest a lot of the various attempts to Battletech RPG always feel like "So it's the wargame, just in personal scale"; because a lot of the modifiers you saw? They're also in the "A Game of Armored Combat" Mech scaled regular wargame.
That's a good and detriment at the same time. You allow someone to literally hop out of their 'Mech and get into the action, like the taglines say. However with all those modifiers, a typical RPG experience does slow down when compared to more abstract systems out there that the RPG folks tend to play.
I was just providing history in my earlier post because I get so excited seeing people review the setting I have loved for decades.
I understand your position regarding the different versions of the RPG. personally, I still prefer 2nd ed Mechwarrior. while you can definitely min/max the character creation process, there are several distinct benefits.
1st - Fasa produced a lot of support materials.
2nd - out of the 5 versions of RPGs, only 2nd ed Mechwarrior transferred directly between standard battletech and the RPG. each of the other versions require a 'conversion' to make the character playable in each setting.
3rd - character creation itself is very easy and quick.
4th - advancing character capability is a simple process based on mission rewards.
again, this is just an opinion from a person that owns each version and has both played and run games using each of the different rule sets.