New at GMing Dead Reign

[Cybermancer]

Forget the zombies. They're not what the story is about. It's about a group of survivors (the PC's) pitted against a hostile world. Scrounging for resources and dealing with other groups of survivors (who may or may not be hostile).

For additional ideas, look at movies such as Mad Max, Terminator and others in the post-apocalpytic genre. You could also check out Palladium's own "After the Bomb", "Systems Failure" and similar.

Look at most zombie movies. The good ones aren't about the zombies. It just so happens that zombies are now an issue and usually the MacGuffin cause of the end of the world. The real story is about the heroes and survival. Do the characters (who are the real focus of the story) try and rebuild civilization or do they live day to day, feeding off the carcass of the old?

Seriously, you can replace the zombies with mutants, commies, machines, human raiders or any similar generic enemy and it won't have an appreciable effect on the game.

Hope that helps.

[Cybermancer]

Not really.

There is only one, published Dead Reign game. No previous editions.

The controversy arises from the fact that the game as published does not match the game as originally concieved and written by the freelance authors who submitted the original manuscript.

Information on the 'original' can be found in various Rifters. I don't know off hand which ones and I can't reference them directly at the moment. The number 45 comes to mind though.

Personally, I would look at both the published game and the Rifter articles and then cherry pick the parts from each that you like and want to incorporate into your game. Frankly, I found both 'versions' to be lacking. Cherry picking what you like, ignoring what you don't and then house ruling the rest is the way I would go. Your milage may vary.

[Cybermancer]

Frankly, I found both 'versions' to be lacking.

Well frankly you could never have read more than 30% of the original even if you have read every scrap that has been published for Dead Reign.

So?

Seriously. So what? Would reading the remaining 70% (or whatever fraction) make what I did read better? More to my tastes? Less lacking? No. It would not. Even if the remainder was pure gold, that wouldn't change that there is a definable portion that was not and therefore lacking.

This is not a criticism of you nor of Mr. Siembieda (if you'll note, I did say both versions). It is a criticism of the published material. You may choose to get offended and take it personally if you so wish. Alternatively you can seek clarification and/or constructive criticism. But when making a criticism of published material, I am not prepared to consider material that was not published because it is not relevant to that critique.

[Cybermancer]

I stopped being offended by Dead Reign awhile ago. I am merely pointing out a fact, you may choose to get offended and take it personally if you so wish.

The fact was irrelevant, which is what I pointed out. I'm not offended, I don't have a pony in this race.

And the context of the chopped material can always change things.

Always? Untrue. Especially since the only context that matters is what is published. Which is what I was referring to in the rest of that paragraph. The published material which is all I can see and all that the OP can see and is all that is relevant to this discussion.

And I did not see a whole lot of "Constructive" in your criticism.

Did I say it was?

Nope. Each time I refer to what I said I called it what it was, criticism. What I said about constructive criticism was that if you wanted clarification or constructive criticism you could seek it.

But like I said I was just adding more information for clarification. It's no skin off my teeth if you didn't like it. It's not like I got paid by unit's sold.

And like I've said, that information doesn't clarify or change anything.

[Cybermancer]

Ok, I am so not the point by point reply guy.

Lets just say that I read what you wrote VERY differently than how you apparently meant it and leave it at that.

I spent way to much time messing with this "situation" two years ago for me to spend any more time on it ... especially here of all places.

Fair enough.

And between you and me and the internets, my sympathies were with you at that time.

[Tearstone]

I'd still like to see the original material in its entirety, but we all know Palladium Books are Diabolic when it comes to submitted materials.