Time for measuring 2nd edition

[MGBM]

Ok, a good deal of time since 2nd edition has been published I believe it's time for a small discussion about what you all think of the quality of all the books published so far, by their own and/or compared to the quality of 1st edition.

Give away your opinions on how you feel about all published material for 2nd edition to this day, what is good, what could change, what must change.

Having all the books published so far, my opinion is that Mongoose has done a lot of stuff right but done a lot more wrong.

Having campaigns was a great decision, Trial Of Blood is a great campaign. Maps, however, keep on being a problem, everyone remembers the problems that rose up when Vincent saw the final maps that would appear in Return to Road Of Kings. In fact, taking away Vincent from the project may have been Mongoose's worst mistake. Though Cimmeria was a really pleasant surprise, considering the material there is to write about it, Khitai was not so good, to say the least. Cities of Hyboria came across more as a generic fantasy city-building sourcebook rather than a Hyborian city-building sourcebook.

In fact, I think that I'm missing more and more that Howard atmosphere that was prevalent in the 1st edition, which I believe can attribute to the absence of Vincent. That, for me, is what makes me think 2nd edition is failing compared to 1st, not enough Howard atmosphere, it feels Conan RPG is heading more into generic fantasy land rather than the peculiar Hyborian style of Conan's world.

The book's prices are quite welcome, though. Since I never really cared for color or black and white pages, it is quite welcome to see the main book, huge as it is, for sale for only $40, and most of the sourcebooks being in the $30 region. That is a tendency I hope never fades away. I do wish there were more hardbacks though.

So, in short, though the campaigns are a great idea and the price decrease more than welcome, I think Conan is losing what made it special in the first place, being a RPG in Conan's world, in the Hyborian Age.

What are your opinions on 2nd edition so far?

 

[Spectator]

Speaking of VINCENT, does he still contribute toMGP?
Does he still read/ frequent this site?

 

[Dark Mistress]

To be fair I only have some of the 2nd edition books so far, but I have yet to be disappointed. There is a few things I would change or dislike but mostly that is more a matter of taste than problems. But then I don't have the location books so maps haven't been a issue yet.

 

[LucaCherstich]

post deleted

 

[LucaCherstich]

If we compare new core rules with old core rules there is not so much to discuss, Conan 2e has few differences (and I prefered the old reputation method and the Fate points foreshadowing method is simply stupid), nevertheless the few changes thy did (other than the reputation and fate points) are OK, for example the new damage for greatwords....but these are definitely small things... I have more appreciated the changes with sorcery, free "power attack" for power points and the different defensive blasts for different styles....

Regarding the new 2e sourcebooks my favourite are the Black Kingdoms sections in Return to the Road of the Kings.
There is definitely not too much REH material on Black Kingoms but Vincent has the wonderful talent of exploiting all the precedently published material, both REH and non-REH (Novels, Comics, etc..) and adding to it new material coming from real history cultures...but so well integrated in the whole Hyborian setting that you do not feel the difference.
Furthermore that book is soo tremendously useful even if you have the old Road of the Kings!
Player guide to the Hyborian Age was useful but it definitevely deserved proofreading.

In any case, my major concern regarding conan sourcebooks is: where is now Vincent Darlage?
MGBM is right and so: where is the old, good Hyborian feeling we get used to in 1st edition?

Cities of Hyboria which is supposed to be a counterpart to Ruins is definitely not of the same quality and, to me, it's sounded like the kind of book I would like for a Forgotten Realms campaign, not a Conan one.
The rules part is good...but the examples of cities are too few and many of them seem to lack an "Hyborian" touch...

And regarding Khitai and Cimmeria, they are not bad books in general terms....but it is clear that Loz does not have the same familiarity that Vincent has with the Conan world (including even less horthodox sources as the old Marvel comics...).
I know that both regions are not described by REH but I feel that Return to Road of the Kings has much more Conan material that both Khitai and Cimmeria together in terms of reference to Conan & Conantics literature (& comics!).
I' m not speaking of a lack of new ideas, which in themselves are not bad.....however finding in a sourcebook a reference to a Conan Comic or a minor Novel you read years before is always a pleasure (and this happened to me reading Darlage's books as Shem, Stygia, etc..) but when you do not find anything like that is not exactly the same thing...
I mean Khitai is not bad in itself as a Chinese-like setting....but it definitely uses only a few of the Conan sources existing thus far (and he defintively does not use the Marvel comics as much as Vincent).
Furthermore the d20 rules part in Khitai is so full of things which sound as errors or misunderstandings of the d20 system.....
For example in the sorcety part...however I'm wondering whether this happened more because of a lack of decent proofreading (or too many abrupt, last-minute cuts) by Mongoose rather than because of any real error by Loz...
I'm happy this happened on minor stuff as Khitai and Cimmeria, but I must confess that since I read of these two books on this forum I though that it was a stupid idea to concentrate efforts on these two border areas before treating "core material" like Turan.
And Cimmeria is a border area with the only merit of being Conan's birthplace...

However, I'm happy that no wrong author and bad proofreading has damaged more important regions!

So, please, make Vincent come back and make him write something great as a Turan sourcebook!!!

Regarding more "crunch" sourcebooks I'm eager to have a look on the Warrior's Companion.
Regarding "Secrets of Skelos" i find it very good....but I'm only wondering what's the opinion of somebody who owns also its previous incarnation as the book of skelos...

Regarding the published campaigns and adventures I have nothing to say since I have not played any of them.
I do not play so often (real life rules...) but when I do it I like to create something. Nevertheless the general concept in "Betreayer of Asgard" sounds interesting but I have not tried it thus far.

 

[The King]

I'm not particularly impressed by the layout and in the frame Conan and the girl are really ugly compared to 1st edition.

 

[rabindranath72]

I have skimmed the 2e the books for contents at the local bookstore, and I was not impressed overall, so I bought none of them; I am staying with my core Atlantean Edition for the "core" stuff (mostly flavor, I am migrating my game to BRP), plus Scrolls of Skelos and Ruins of Hyboria.

 

[ryhopewood]

I've voted mediocre.

While I have never been that bothered by the crunch, it is the fluff that has gone down hill. I don't like the switch to B&W. Mongoose continues to have major problems with maps of every kind.

There are many times recently when I wish that Mongoose would give up the licence and let another company have a go such as Green Ronin.

 

[seanbickford]

I voted "Good", based on a comparison of the Conan line with other systems and/or publishers. When I first found Conan RPG by Mongoose, I was shocked at how faithful to Howard they were and at how geniunely good the material was for the supplements. Second Edition is not a good for a number of reasons, but it still better than most of the crap that still gets published out there. If I were to vote as a comparison to First Edition I would vote "Mediocre".

 

[Krushnak]

It's good but definately needs more Vincent.

 

[Jeffreywns]

I voted for good. Mostly for having a genre specific system that wasnt D&D with adult themes. My first edition holdovers are also the old reputation modifiers and not using foreshadowing.
Miss the color layout but thats a very minor point with me. My biggest reason for the "good" was the no power creep.

 

[Azgulor]

It's good but definately needs more Vincent.

Agreed on both counts.

 

[The King]

At least there are gaming material for those who don't have the time to make their own, i.e. 2 campaigns and a scenario book so far.

 

[Troll66]

mediocre - rules changes not significant (tho better organised)in the great scheme of things - switch to B&W with 'uglier' border art really galls me compared to the full colour loveliness of Atlantean edition. Full colour must return...

 

[decker423]

While I voted "Excellent", I'll throw in my observations:

1. I did prefer the color artwork (1st ed.) over the black and white (2nd ed.). I recognize that it's probably an economic factor for the company and I would rather have B&W Conan books to no Conan books at all.

2. The Return to the Road of Kings. It's better for the content and new places but not for the maps.

3. People write about the "Conan feel" that has changed from 1st to 2nd edition. Maybe and maybe not this is not true. I'm a nerd and I took my 1st and 2nd edition books out side by side and read over them page by page. For the most part, the 2nd edition book is a "copy and paste" version of the 1st edition. I think and feel that player character creation was tweaked for the better.

4. I've heard in the past about a "compilation book" of feats in the past, I don't know if this is a rumor or not. If it's true, the same should be held for magick. It seems like every book that came out had X number of feats, skills and spells. In order to have access to ALL of that knowledge, you HAVE to have all of the books and even then, get the "Signs & Portents".

5. The Temptress was incorporated into 2nd edition core book in character creation. Good decision.

6. Lack of maps in 2nd edition (with the caveat that the city map of Shadizar sucked). I would like more national/regional maps and some maps with more "detail". I don't need city maps, let the GM make that up, it's more fun and gives a more "Conan flavor" IMHO.

7. The "stand alone" published adventures/modules. Most seem to be set for starting levels of 5 +. Perhaps there should be some "starting" modules "1st lvl". Also, not much has been worked on (IMHO) how to start out campaigns, there's stuff on campaigns and "how to put in the Conan feel" stuff and a "Mercenary campaign" but not the same "starter" stuff that old school D&D had.

8. More detailed books on other nations (Nemedia, Turan, Hyperborea, Hyrkania, the Ophir/Corinthia set) would be NICE. The 1st edition Shadizar supplement was LACKING for the entire nation of Zamora IMHO. More could have been done for Stygia and Shem. A rework of some of those books would be in order and artwork isn't my priority- it's location, details, history.

9. The Players Guide book. the best part of the book was the brief description of society classes and name generation. Rules on half-breeds were cool too. Everything else made me regret buying the book.

Enough of my rant, I gave my 2 cents.

 

[LucaCherstich]

3. People write about the "Conan feel" that has changed from 1st to 2nd edition. Maybe and maybe not this is not true. I'm a nerd and I took my 1st and 2nd edition books out side by side and read over them page by page. For the most part, the 2nd edition book is a "copy and paste" version of the 1st edition. I think and feel that player character creation was tweaked for the better.

Yes, but we were skeaping also of Conan 2e sourcebooks, not of the core rules.
The old 1st E core rulesbook does not have more "Conan feel" than the new 2E one.
On the other hand, the new sourcebooks (especially Khitai, Cities of Hyboria, etc..) do not have the same level of "Conan Feel" shown by some sourcebooks by Vincent (and even by some by other authors, as in Pirate Isles).

And regarding the 2e Core Rules: you are true, about 80% of the Conan 2e core rules are "copy and paste" and thre are a few improvemenets (temptress is a core class, defensive blasts, etc..) but I think there are also some bad parts (e.g. the Foreshadowing system for Fate Points and, to some extent, the new reputation system which does not exactly explain many things, even if it add the further level of complexity of recording where and when you get those reputation points).

 

[MGBM]

3. People write about the "Conan feel" that has changed from 1st to 2nd edition. Maybe and maybe not this is not true. I'm a nerd and I took my 1st and 2nd edition books out side by side and read over them page by page. For the most part, the 2nd edition book is a "copy and paste" version of the 1st edition. I think and feel that player character creation was tweaked for the better.

Yes, but we were skeaping also of Conan 2e sourcebooks, not of the core rules.
The old 1st E core rulesbook does not have more "Conan feel" than the new 2E one.
On the other hand, the new sourcebooks (especially Khitai, Cities of Hyboria, etc..) do not have the same level of "Conan Feel" shown by some sourcebooks by Vincent (and even by some by other authors, as in Pirate Isles).

Yes, have to agree. For me, the Conan feel is only applicable to the fluff, not the crunch, where it is more important. And the fluff of 2ed, beside Return to the Road of Kings,has been severely lacking, I'm afraid.

 

[cbrunish]

I just recently switched over to 2nd edition. I was using Atlantean edition which I loved. I have to agree with some points (regarding reputation) that was not as good. But over all I was happy with the 2nd edition. I really like the new rules on Tempress. But I would have been fine with just the Atlantean edition.

But the Secrets of Skelos, I was slightly disappointed about. Especially the Ice and Fire magic. This seems too D&Dish. I trully love the magic system in Conan. I feel that it really gives the feel that REH wrote about. But saying that, the Secrets of Skelos was a good update.

The Return to the Road of Kings was very good. I liked the updated material on the Black Kingdoms. But I was severly disappointed in the lack of NPC's. I would really like a book with just NPCs from Conan!!!!!

 

[Lord Jolly the Scribe]

I found it to be good, especially for the price of the book and I like some of the added extras:

-new Fate point uses

-expanded Reputation

-temptress addition

-clarification and corrections

-addition of Knowledge (Rumors) to assist stumped players (which I get a lot)

-updates and additions to kingdoms with a master list in the Player's Guide of all the feats, skill uses, and multiclass/dual class options

 

[Hervé]

The 2nd Ed is a very good and complete book, but I voted average anyways for it's not truly a 2nd Edition for me. I mean the things that needed the most corrections weren't updated (Especially the infamous two handed weapons/Power Attack/MD problem). I miss the color and and old layout too...