A Retro Review of the PFRPG

[URLeader Hobbes]

Ok so the goal here is to give a sort of look back at the PFRPG and critique it a bit. I’ll be going over the writing, artwork, the rules as they are presented and several other aspects as they come up. There will be items in this about missing rules, my home brewed fixes and a good healthy dose of humor/sarcasm.

Before I get started let me just state that I have enjoyed this game for many years and still play it to this day. That being said over the years I and those I game with have notices some inconsistencies in the rules. But like the publishers/writers say if you don’t like a rule, change it.. So without any further ado…

Let’s start off with the cover. We got some elf king who seems to be gazing or transfixed to a glowing orb/crystal ball. There is also a menacing looking green dragon in the back ground.. I get the feeling this scene is somewhat familiar…

http://static.wix.com/media/99d900b57401d44ad3bcba4dad02db79.wix_mp

Ahhh really similar to the Dragonlance cover art. I wonder which one was done first. OK moving on..

Ok I like the sleeping dragon on the initial page. Then on the next page is the Defilers. I realize Palladium is a Megaversal system but the first time I looked through this book I was a bit put off by the picture. When going for a fantasy setting book I expect swords and sorcery. Yet the defilers apparently had a commando (Far left in the front) and some futuristic solider guy (on the shoulder of the giant) as well. The only other weird thing I noticed right away was the elf on the left wearing a pair of Ray bans.

Skipping past the table of contents and a good picture of a Hydra we get to the intro page where Kev explains why he did a 2nd edition. Here he mentions books that will be revised from 1st edition as well as new books to keep on the lookout for such as Dragons & Gods (To be reviewed later!) and Wolfen Wars, and The Old Kingdom… Wait a sec… *Flips to the page with the edition printed on it. PUBLISHED IN 1997! Over 13 years of procrastination on The Old Kingdom book!

Oh well maybe when I bust open Palladium Fantasy 3rd Edition that will be in there.. I think most disturbing is at the end he admits he’s pulling a “George Lucas” (Greedo never fired!) and goes on about how it is going to be updated and better.. I think this revision is a far better result than the revised Star Wars.

Going forward we get to the basics section. This is the area for people who have never played before. One thing that is funny is that they mention if you don’t have any dice to look in Dragon or Shadis magazines. (Both of which aren’t in print any longer. LOL) There is also a plug for Adventures on the High Seas having character sheets.

Moving on to the Creating a Character section: It goes into the bonuses for humans and then nonhumans. Then on to descriptions of the attributes. It then goes on to explain HP and SDC, how they are determined. One area that could be removed is the area going into the building SDC for characters with specific OCCs. Why not just print in each man at arms OCC add 3d6, or add 1d6 on every other OCC. This would save some guesswork. Personally I’ve never liked the idea that thieves fall in the section of Man at Arms OCCs. I think they are more of a rogue or swashbuckler but not a man at arms. I can see knights and paladins being Men at arms but a guy who wears leather and really is more focused on picking locks, sneaking about, and picking pockets to me just isn’t a man at arms.

Also the Warrior Monk doesn’t get the 3d6 for being a man at arms. He falls under the Clergy OCCs. Also what about the Squire OCC? These guys are the ones training to be knights. They fall in the Other OCC’s but start with a suit of chain mail. Thieves, assassins, longbow man and rangers only get leather. If anyone should be in the man at arms OCC section it’s the squires. Toss the Thieves and assassins in the Other OCC section.

It then goes into the recovery of HP and SDC. This is very handy info, but I think it would be better after the combat section. After all right after an encounter is usually when you’re going to need to look up this info. So that might make it a bit handier.

One thing I like is the blood loss rule in this section. It’s important to keep in mind that blood loss is HP damage and not SDC. In my games I have the blood loss at a rate of 1 HP per minute per wound that inflicted damage to HP. It makes the players think about how much of a beating they are taking and less likely to take foolish risks.

After the coma section It goes into optional damage rules which again should also be in the combat section. After all getting hit will inflict the injury right off the bat and not after the fight is over. So that should be moved.

I guess my main beef with this section is how badly it’s laid out. It really is
1) Roll dice and get attributes
2) Figure out HP and SDC
3) Psychic powers?
4) Pick the race and OCC you want to play.

It really should be as follows

1) Pick a race
2) Roll the Attributes and pick an OCC
3) See if it’s psychic
4) Tally up HP & SDC after picking skills.

To me it just seems the more logical progression for rolling up a character. Additionally it tosses in before the end a blurb about how multi classing characters isn’t an option, but it tells you a future supplement may make it an option. Gotta say I’m not a fan of this. This is the main CORE book. It should have all of the rules needed.

The alignment section I’m happy with and I think is well done. I like the variants in alignment options but I think they should also include the equivalent of the Taoist alignment in Mystic China. There has to be some warrior monk out there who came to a sort of similar conclusions or life view.

Next section is the insanity section.. This section is pretty detailed but for some reason everything is determined by random. So let’s say a character nearly drowned to death, ended up being rescued but was in a coma. They make the roll and survive and wake up. By random roll he lands a psychosis. Rolling again he gets the superman syndrome..

Just doesn’t make sense. A fear of water or deep water might be more fitting. Encountering water elementals would most likely be terrifying.

One thing I like is that insanities can be cured by priests and healers who are willing to counsel and provide therapy. This bit of info should be mentioned in the OCC as it’s an optional cure. Additionally this info should be mentioned in the section for the mind mage as well. As is they are skills/abilities that can be done that most likely 99% of the players are unaware of.

I’ll skip the addiction section for now and get right to the experience section.. I really like this section. The EXP table is very well thought out and makes a lot of sense with one exception. 150-300 points for killing or subduing a great menace? When I think great menaces I think DRAGONS! I think Demons and the truly horrible things that are more on the epic scale than anything else.

This means that stopping the plot of, or slaying a god (Which is another argument) lands you just as much as putting down any other greater demon. Just doesn’t make sense. Especially as the characters gain levels and abilities as time progresses in game. There should be an epic level rewards added to the table as it would be a rare thing to garner such rewards. 1,000 – 3,000 at least should be in there. In addition to the epic threat experience table there should be an additional one Killing or subduing Luke Javelle 80,000-100,000 absolutely needs to be added in as well.

A few pages later we come to some notes on storytelling and also a blurb about “rules lawyers”. Here Kev says the GM should explain to the player they have modified the rule if they have made a mistake.. I disagree with this and I think every GM should be upfront with the players about any changes to the rules they are making prior to the session beginning.
Doubtless situations will come up that can’t be addressed simply by what is in the book, but that should be figured out at the time using the GMs best judgment and listening to the arguments of the players as well.
I also feel that there is nothing wrong admitting you got a rule wrong. Just keep in mind that it goes both ways. The same dirty underhanded tricks the GM uses on the players the players can use on the GM. I always find it to be a refreshing challenge as a GM when a player finds a clever rule and applies it in game brilliantly. That sort of thing should be rewarded not punished.

The next few sections go on about storytelling and provide some hints and suggestions on making the game more fun/entertaining. One odd section is the “Mercy in Combat” section. Seriously how many players ever spare those goblin raiders or show mercy to the leader of the bandit gang? I think most players rarely show mercy and have little compassion for their foes in battle. I mean seriously how many people here actually show some sort of mercy to a foe you don’t actually have to take alive?
But anyway on to COMBAT!

Yes the rules for combat. How we resolve battle situations. Also one area that desperately I think needs an overhaul or in the least some clarification.

Under the initiative step it states that someone who is Sneak attacking or attacking from Long Range goes first. So imagining a battle on a field, this means that archers, mages and anyone else making a long range attack goes first.. Fair enough… Just one problem.. The book doesn’t state how far away you have to be in order to be making a long range attack.. 50 feet? 100 feet? Out of any potential melee attacks altogether? It doesn’t say.

This vital tidbit of info being left out is cause for some great concern as it seriously empowers longbowmen and any mage who might be casting a spell. With the rules in the Mysteries of Magic book 1st and 2nd level spells only take one action to cast. Let’s say we go with 90 ft being a long range attack, this means a mage who opts to cast a spell this round goes first. So Increase Weight, Befuddle, Cloud of Slumber, and Fear can all be cast as a long range attack before anyone else has a shot of taking an action.

So I think a bit of clarification needs to be done on what constitutes “Long Range Attacks” Unfortunately this is never brought to light in the game as far as I can tell.

So this may effectively throw initiative out the window if ranged attacks are far enough away. So ranged attacks get to volley first. Then anyone left standing gets to make a move.

Going a bit further it goes into rules for melee combat. One thing that is never mentioned when rolling to strike is if you add in bonuses to get past AR. The way it reads it is the natural roll for defeating the AR of foes. Bonuses aren’t even discussed until it goes into options for parrying an attack and then once again when assessing damage.

So why isn’t the bonus to strike mentioned? It’s assumed that it is added to the roll from the way the parry was described, but it isn’t used to determine if an attack beats the AR. The whole section isn’t very clear on this..

Another big thing missing from the section is the rules on ROF. (Rate of Fire) It’s not even mentioned in the combat terms and moves section, you don’t even hear about it until you get to the WP Archery section.
Moving on to page 45 we come to the damage section. For some reason the kick attacks are redundantly listed here and again listed under “Kick Attack & Flying Jump Kicks”. So I’m gonna assume this was a bit of bad editing. Strangely enough power kicks can inflict double damage. So a power round house kick does 3d6x2 damage. This actually has a greater damage capacity than any of the weapons listed in the books. This would almost imply that a power strike with a weapon can be done but there aren’t any rules in the book for it.

Another issue in this section is with holds. According to the book holds don’t do damage, they just immobilize a foe. That holds do no damage is really inaccurate. The purpose of many holds is to inflict pain, cause someone to get KOed or to break limbs. I liked the article in one of the early Rifters which addressed this issue.

A bit further down we come to the Magic Attacks section. This is nice in that it somewhat explains that mages/priests can’t concentrate when struck. 90% chance of failing to cast the spell/prayer. But it doesn’t state how much damage. It just says if they are struck a painful blow. So do they get a chance to save vs. pain in order to keep focusing on the magic? But on the next page nothing is mentioned so apparently even inflicting one point of damage is enough to disrupt a spell.
AI like the long list of SDC values for items. It’s nice and handy that it’s all in one spot.

Next section is the Hand to Hand Combat section!

This I feel is where all of the various punch attacks and moves should be defined along with the types of hand to hand fighting styles. One poorly worded section I did notice is on Pg 47 where it states that the dodge is automatic along with a bunch of other moves with hand to hand training. I’m not a fan of this wording as it may lead to confusion with “auto dodge” just too much potential for misunderstanding in my mind.
I honestly like how the HTH styles are done. While they aren’t too different to start off, as time progresses the differences are noticeable.

[URLeader Hobbes]

I'll post more later.. This is gonna be a multiple part review.

[URLeader Hobbes]

We now move on to SKILLS!

First is the list of skills by category… Nice but it would have been very helpful to put the base % and the amount they go up per level next to the actual skill. We also have a silhouette of some monster which I don’t think is actually in any of the books.. Gargoyle? Demon? Not sure..

I’m not gonna break this down skill by skill but I will make a few comments on some prime skills.

Cooking: This skill should be renamed easy exp. Let’s say your average party stops three times a day to rest and eat. 75 Exp per day. That is 525 in a week of adventuring. 2100 after a month. After a year that’s a total of 9,125 exp. Just for being the cook. That’s levels 1-4 for most all of the basic OCCs.

Now GMs consider this… Ya know how lots of players like to start trouble in taverns and inns. Those cocky players that just love to start bar fights. Let’s just say it’s run by a peasant who has been there for the last 15 years. If he only cooked 3 meals per day that would be 136,875 exp. making him a 11th level peasant. Peasants automatically start with HTH basic and 2 WPs.

So before any attribute bonuses the cook has for combat stats: 5 Actions; +2 Strike; +3 Parry; +3 Dodge and +2 Damage. Not too shabby.. But wait.. He has two WPs as well.. So let’s say said cook picks up a walking stick which can double as a staff. He is gonna get an additional +4 to strike bringing the total to +6 and +4 to parry giving him a total of +7.

This is just disaster waiting for low level players. Imagine the shock on their faces when some fat cook from the kitchen comes out and cleans their clocks for starting trouble in his establishment..

Also keep in mind that is just if he cooks 3 meals per day. (Meaning his inn would be struggling.) Most likely he’s cooking quite a few per day. If he’s been cooking 25 meals per day for the last 15 years he’s well over 2 million exp!

Bottom line is players should learn to respect the signs that say “Be Good or Be Gone” when they go into inns and taverns. Enough about cooking..

Another oddity is the Horsemanship skill. It also includes the ability to breed horses. To me it seems unlikely that a knight who has trained to fight from horseback would have skill in raising, breaking and giving birth of horses. Sure he might have a good idea as to what one is a fine steed or if one looks sickly but this entire skill should be listed under Animal Husbandry.

Even worse in the Animal Husbandry skill it states the skill includes the ability to breed horses and in the same sentence it says to see horsemanship for breeding horses. So this aspect of the skill makes no sense what so ever. So there is a mistake there.

Mistake Count: 2 (Not listing the distance that constitutes a long rage attack was the first.)

Pick Locks: One thing about this skill that I like is that you get penalties if you fail to pick the same lock twice. But I wonder why this isn’t a more prevalent factor in the game. Fail to locate a secret door twice your less likely to find it in a spot you looked. Shouldn’t that incur some penalty? Can’t climb a certain wall? Maybe it’s just too difficult for the character. I like the idea that some obstacles can defeat a player or at the least the difficulty of the situations gets inside the characters head.

Skipping ahead to the science skills it states most science and some technical skills have a prerequisite of literacy before they can be selected. It even tells you what ones you don’t need to be able to read in the science category. But it doesn’t indicate what technical skills have that prerequisite. I’m thinking History, the various Lores and Writing should all have the literacy prerequisite.

The WP section is pretty strait forward until you get to WP Modern Weapons. This is an inconsistency in the megaversal rule system. Normally modern weapons don’t get the bonus to strike from Physical Prowess. But this skill grants that strangely enough. All the other modern WPs in the various systems don’t grant this. Given the skill should allow a character to recognize what a gun is and maybe give a bonus to strike, but it should still fall in line with the rest of the rules system to make it compatible and consistent.

Mistake Count: 3

Another issue is that the stats for shields are listed under WP Shield instead of being in the armor section of the book. This just is weird. It’s not consistent and for those who aren’t familiar with the layout of the book makes finding the SDC of a shield a real pain. The section even looks like it was edited in from a previous edition. There is a line above and below the section where it appears. No real reason unless it was omitted entirely from an earlier edition.

On the next page is WP Targeting/Missile Weapons. This skill is a general knowledge skill in the areas of weapons that are shot or flung at a foe. But for some reason it provides bonuses if you also select WP Spear, or archery as well.

Why not make archery and the spear skills have a tier to it or make them selectable twice like domestic skills to grant a onetime bonus?

That’s it for now.. The next post will focus on the OCCs.

[Wōdwulf Seaxaning]

Nice ..I can't wait for your next posts on this topic.

[URLeader Hobbes]

On to the OCCs!

As I’m going over the special prayers section something struck me as kind of odd. The blessing of water doesn’t really grant an amount that they can convert.. So is it limitless? Can a priest just bless an ocean and be done with it?

Now it states they can’t enter a circle drawn in holy water.. Well suppose it’s not a circle, what happens then? Let’s say some priest hauls a bucket of water from a well and blesses it.. He then steps away for whatever reason intending to return to the bucket of holy water later. Then some intern comes along and thinks the floor could use a good cleaning. So he breaks out a mop and does the floor.. What happens then? Is the temple sanctified ground? Suppose the temple is rectangle shape.. Can a vampire cross into it?

PRIEST OF LIGHT

Looking over the Priest of Light abilities it seems a bit overpowered. Right off the bat they get the Healing Touch which has no limitation. Doesn’t draw upon any sort of PPE nor have any limitation on the number of times per day it can be performed. So it’s free and unlimited..

Moving down to the penance and sacrifice section it states that while the priest can shrug off the effects of dehydration and starvation they still take damage. Yet again nothing is listed.. So no idea how much it will be.
One idea I like is the actual requirements for a specific OCC. One nice thing for priests is that the only requirement is that they have faith. But I find this kinda weird.. I mean what god or goddess is gonna send Timmy with an IQ of 3 as their messenger? While they aren’t spell learners (As all is gained from faith) there should at least have an IQ of 9. After all they have all of those lore skills they have to study up on…

One issue I do have with this priest is that every single one of them starts with the exact same equipment. This includes a large silver cross, wooden spikes and a mallet. So basically some vampire killing gear. What gets me is the large cross. I bet priests of Vald Tegor love that one! Just kind of funny that they toss in a cross (A symbol of a religion not even on the Palladium world) for every priest of every religion when they already get two symbols of their faith which do the same thing.. So why a giant silver cross?

Maybe the guy who looks like a medieval version of Baxter Stockman on page 66 can tell us.

OK moving on to….

Priest of Darkness

The description is pretty strait foreword, priests of darkness are bad. While this is fairly obvious I just can’t get past the big time fan of the Oakland Raiders on page 69!

The write up follows the same formula as the Priest of Light. One difference is the curses and under penance and sacrifice it simply says priests of darkness don’t really do this, but they engage in blood sacrifices and rituals.. Why not just entitle the section “Sacrifices” and provide a bit of info on the benefits of the sacrifices. Nothing really needs to be mentioned about them not starving themselves.

One slight drawback is the limited spell selection they are given. This list should probably be updated or at least revised per pantheon. This limitation is made up for by the ability to animate the dead and also to have a demon familiar. (Note: I’ll go over the Demon Familiar when I get to the Witch)

It is interesting to note that the dark priest gets an extra OCC and secondary skill over the priest of light at the beginning. I guess all that time not spent not fasting is spent learning something useful.

Even more interesting is that the dark priest starts off with more money and only have to give up 25% to the Church as opposed to 50% that the priests of light are expected to give up.

More later.

[URLeader Hobbes]

One thing of note that is a bit of a disappointment in regards to priests of light and darkness is that they are pretty generic for all of the big religions of the Palladium world. Most of them don’t get any special benefits beyond what the main OCC lists.

A lot is lost on the religious aspects of the characters without the addition of the Dragons & Gods book. Even still the most that the various priests get are a few additional prayers. I personally feel that the priests and the religions they practice are really shortchanged. There is nothing in the books about religious rituals, holidays, holy sites or any real history or aspects of the religion. While it leave it open for the players to carve out a bit of this it also leaves a gaping void for role playing opportunities. Heck even the city of Sketi Abu mentioned in the Dragons and Gods book isn’t shown or listed anywhere on any of the maps.

While I realize the core book can’t contain everything it would have been nice to get some more detailed info on what the religions entail. Sure I can look up online the religious celebrations of the Egyptians, but for the other pantheons that are entirely made up by the writers this isn’t an option.

Next OCC is the Warrior Monk
Not a whole lot I have to say on this, but one issue I have with this is that the Warrior Monk is technically a man at arms OCC. They are essentially martial artists who are devoted to a religious order. So why aren’t they tossed in with the man at arms OCCs?

Overall the monks don’t really fit into the aspect of the clergy and are essentially the marital artists of the palladium world. Parrying arrows, spirit strikes similar to that of the Paladins’ Demon Death Blow and starts off with Martial Arts! Yeah that doesn’t seem too much like a clergy member.

On to the Druid OCC:
The Druid is a really complete and fleshed out OCC in this book. Far more than others they go into a lot of detail in regards to their faith and the symbolism involved in druidism.. One thing I thought was hilarious is that druids use GEESE to guard sanctuaries from intruders.

I can’t wait to drop this on the player characters..
Check out the Druid chick on page 74.. Funny she doesn’t look druish.

The text then goes into what essentially amounts to a level based advancement system for skills and magic for the Druid OCC. This unique level based advancement seems kind of out of place when you look at all of the other OCCs in the book. The big drawback to the OCC is that they have to make a roll every time they attempt to control the magic they unleash.

Man at arms occs

This section begins with the mercenary. Just your basic guy who wants to kill stuff and get paid. One big thing I didn’t expect was that basic math wasn’t included in the list of OCC skills. Basic math does include the ability to count. So I would think that would be given as a skill right off the bat. As it is they already start with ten other related skills. I say give them 9 and the ability to count.. How embarrassing will it be for a player to roll up a character who kills things for money and not be able to count?

Player: OK I’ve killed the orcs and the troll who was leading them. I go back to town to collect the reward money.
GM: Ok you get to town and find the mayor. He thanks you and hands you the reward money.
Player: OK great I’ve got my 500 gold, Is it all there?
GM: Do you have basic math?
Player: Ummm no. I don’t have basic math.
GM: Then you don’t know. The Mayor hands you the gold and says thank you.
Player: Do I think he’s cheating me?
GM: You have no idea, he says if he hears anything else he’ll let you know.

Player: OK I’m gonna trust him.. I need to get some new armor and this money should cover it. I go to the blacksmith to buy a new set of chainmail.
GM: Ok you get there and it looks like the blacksmith is taking a break from the intense work of his profession. He’s resting on a bench drinking water from a wooden cup.
Player: I walk in and look about. Does he have any suits for sale?
GM: You notice a fine suit of chainmail that looks like it will fit you.
Player: I ask the smith how much it is.
GM: He tells you its 300 gold.
Player: OK I pay hm.
GM: You take out what you guess is the right amount and hand it over. The blacksmith says your short.
Player: Wait, what? I just got paid 500 gold I should easily have the 300 for the armor.
GM: Well you do still have money in your purse, you just don’t know how much.
Player: Ok, I had him some more coins..
GM: He shakes his head and says “Still not enough.”
Player: Not sure if this guy is cheating me but I need the armor so I’ll keep handing him coins until he says I’ve paid in full.
GM: OK he says you have enough after handing over quite a few more coins.
Player: I’m going to the inn and getting a beer.
GM: OK you get to the inn and make your order the Inn keeper says its 3 gold.
Player: I pay him.
GM: Martin the innkeeper’s eyes light up and a big smile comes across his face he says “Thank you very much sir, and if you need anything don’t forget to just call out my name.”
Player: Wait.. I’ve been here before with the others and Martin’s never acted that way.. Is he being sarcastic?
GM: No you get the impression that he genuinely was grateful.
Player: Ok I’m gonna wait until another player shows up and have them count the money.
GM: OK eventually the party wizard shows up and spots you. He joins you at your table with a mug of ale.
Player: I have him count the reward money.
GM: OK he counts it and comes up with a total of 43 gold.
Player: WHAT! But I should have 197 gold! Who cheated me?
GM: Sorry you have no idea, you just paid them whatever your character thought was right and that’s what the wizard is telling you is left. Truthfully your character has no idea if he got cheated or not, nor by whom.

The next OCC is the Soldier. I’m fairly happy with most everything in the OCC with the exception of the HTH style being Basic. This is supposed to be someone who is trained to fight in an actual army and go to war. This should at least be expert. The Mercenary starts off with expert. (And no the soldier doesn’t get basic math as an OCC skill either.)

So some greedy mercenary is a better fighter than a trained military soldier? Doesn’t make any sense. They should at least be on the same level. A state sponsored standing army vs a bunch of sell swords.. Why would the sell sword end up a better fighter? In modern times it’s like saying a gangbanger is better than a guy in the infantry using the same weapons.

Next up is the Long Bowman. The character is the master of the longest range weapon in the book (Not counting magical weapons and spells). Essentially this character is not only an accurate shot with a bow but also a trick shot artist and can do all sorts of special feats with the longbow. Yet any other bow they get penalties. (1/2 bonus and Rate of Fire) This makes no sense what so ever. If I’ve been able to master a more difficult weapon such as the longbow why give me a penalty for using a short bow? Then on the next page they get WP Archery (All bows) and WP Targeting.

The next revision this OCC should be renamed the archer, not have the penalties for not using the long bow. On the up side they do get to dodge arrows at -3 as opposed to -10. Still I think this could use a good revision.

Next up is the Knight. Right off the bat under special training and mastery it states they get the equivalent of WP Lance. Yet nowhere does it give any bonuses for the weapon in any spot in the book. Now per the rules anyone can pick up a weapon and use it without any bonuses. So not having a bonus to the WP lance is really lame. After all this is supposed to be a weapon that knights are very skilled with. What the hell is the point of all those jousting tournaments if some schmuck peasant with a rundown nag has the same shot at doing damage as a knight in armor?

Mistake Count: 4

The family background is nice and it adds a bit of variety to the character when rolling it up. Also opens up a few avenues for background story. Making the player think a bit about where the character comes from. Aside from that the character starts off with a superior weapon. I think a better way to do this would be to tie it into the characters family background. Especially if the character is from a long line of knights.

Following the knight is the Palladian. Basically, a knight who is slightly better in a couple of areas. One thing I did notice is that they forgot to include the starting PPE and the cost of the demon death blow attack.

Mistake Count: 5

The next OCC is the ranger which is done pretty well. Very useful character in the wild and gets to use the longbow, but unlike the Long Bowman they do get the penalties for riding, shooting at weird angles and whatnot..

This if followed up by two OCCs which really shouldn’t even be considered Men at Arms. They should be in with the Other OCCs section. The Thief and the Assassin. Why don’t they belong in the Men at arms group? When I think of a man at arms I think of someone who is gonna toss on some heavy armor, break out the two handed weapons and face their foes in a strait up fight. Not sneaky cutthroats and cutpurses.

It just doesn’t make sense that someone who has spent his/her life learning the finer points of stealth and evasion would also take the time to toss on full plate mail armor. Maybe the author is trying to lump all types of thieves from muggers to skilled cat burglars into the same occ. But this just seems unlikely when you consider the fact that the thief OCC doesn’t start off with Prowl as an OCC skill. Sorry but this has to be a HUGE mistake. What the hell is the point of having a thief who can’t sneak into a place? Given you get to pick a OCC Related skill at +10% but come on! That’s the same bonus that the Assassin starts off with who gets Prow as an OCC skill. Assassins also get the exact same bonus to picking locks as the thief does. The thief really is a waste of time compared to the assassin if you look at it. The assassin gets bonus to HF, initiative and attacks just for being the Assassin OCC. The thief gets nothing. The assassin gets double the WPs as OCC skills while the thief only gets two. The assassin also gets more OCC related skills as well.

The only real advantage the thief gets is that they need to get less exp to level up and start off with 50 extra gold… That’s it.. This is by far a character class in the book that needs to be fixed.

My suggestion is to have two OCCs for the thief instead of one. Make one the typical bandit who is more of a mugger and cutpurse OCC. These would be the sort of highwayman that would actually use the heavier armor and weapons. Then make the thief what everyone really expects them to be. Sneaks! Give them better bonuses to picking locks and prowling then the assassin. Give the thief advantages that would actually make them fun to play as infiltrators and burglars. Let people who want to play muggers and highwaymen play the bandit variant OCC.

Now for the assassin.. Nothing is wrong with him as he is. Better sneaking abilities as the thief, better fighter, more WPs for starts then the thief and gets bonuses just for being what he is. He’s also considered a man at arms so any type of armor can be worn, gets the extra dice when determining HPs and also doesn’t really have a drawback. The book even stats that assassins guilds won’t mess with a freelance assassin working in their turf, unlike thieves who get the snot beaten outta them for working in another guilds turf. To summarize right underneath the words Assassin OCC should be the following. (All the perks of a thief, with extra bonuses, none of the down sides.)

OK next post I’ll move on to the “Other OCCs”

[TechnoGothic]

This is al good and all, but this does not read as a "review" to me.
It reads as nitpick excerise. Where is the actual reviews ?

[Lord Malachdrim]

I saw the title and thought this would be a review of Palladium Fantasy RPG 1st edition not the current in-print edition. How can it be "retro" if it is the current version?