Mechwarrior RPG Version

Pages: 1
Ironnerd
04/19/14 06:23 PM
96.32.185.76

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
So what is everyone's preferred version of the Mechwarrior RPG?

I own 1, 2, 3, and ClassicBT (which is MW3 with a new cover).

I honestly prefer MW1, just because it's simple, even if it is poorly assembled.
MW2 is also nice, and is a clear successor to MW1
I've never liked MW3... just never clicked with me. The Lifepath was a nice try, but the Lifepath system in Mekton was superior (and more fun than the rest of the game...)

So, I curious - what do y'all think?
Preferred Mechwarrior RPG version
Users may choose only one (2 total votes)
Mechwarrior
-
1 50%
Mechwarrior 2
-
1 50%
Mechwarrior 3/CBT
-
0 0%
CrayModerator
04/20/14 06:50 PM
71.47.91.0

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Ironnerd writes:

So what is everyone's preferred version of the Mechwarrior RPG?

I own 1, 2, 3, and ClassicBT (which is MW3 with a new cover).

I honestly prefer MW1, just because it's simple, even if it is poorly assembled.
MW2 is also nice, and is a clear successor to MW1
I've never liked MW3... just never clicked with me. The Lifepath was a nice try, but the Lifepath system in Mekton was superior (and more fun than the rest of the game...)

So, I curious - what do y'all think?



MW2 or A Time of War (MW4, if you like).

I liked MW2. MW2 was direct derivative of Shadowrun 2nd edition, which I had a lot of experience with by the time MW2 was released.

When MW3 was released, I gave it a try and then I alternated between using MW2 and Shadowrun 3rd edition for Battletech roleplaying. I really disliked the lifepaths (in any game system) and even the introduction of point-based character generation in a supplement didn't eliminate the clunkiness of the combat system and character generation.

A Time of War was a clean start for all aspects of the game and got me back to using a BT RPG for BT RPGs. Its character generation was simplified back to MW2 and other point-buy systems; you could skip its supplemental lifepath system (thank God) and do a complete point buy. The combat rules are even a touch simpler than MW2 because the damage application is streamlined.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer

Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
Mekslayer
10/30/14 10:20 AM
108.205.201.188

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Definitely MW2 or more commonly known as Mechwarrior 2nd Edition to distinguish it from MW2 the computer game.

The basic rules were simple yet awesome, but combat needed to be augmented so that hit locations were done the way battlemech hit locations were done.

-Mek
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
11/02/14 08:43 AM
76.185.205.40

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
MW2 no question about it.

MW1 was just to simple

MW3 was complicated to be complicated and just slowed everything down. If someone was going to cheat they where going to cheat no matter how you revised the game.

I have played lots of different RPG game systems and I would rate even MW2 low on the list. There is just no way to convert the BT board game into a role playing game all that well. The best way to rewrite MW into a good RPG is to not connect BT to MW in any way. Have MW as a stand alone game system.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
11/03/14 03:29 PM
67.49.78.45

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I will disagree with part of that.
You can make a good rpg from battletech, the problem is starting out. You can NOT allow a brand new character the ability to have elite status in areas like mech gunnery, and such. Even clan warriors do not star out with those stats, and they are genetically superior for combat stats.
Dealing with mech/vehicle combat, you should use the stats for battletech, not some forced set of rules in the mechwarrior books. That is unless you can get them to mesh. The whole range issue screws and slows down gameplay too much. Shoulder mounted srms have a range of x (too lazy to look up right now) in mechwarrior, but only 6 when srm infantry use it, but yet those same missiles are normal 9 when mounted on powered armor. To my knowledge they are the same missiles used in vehicle/mech launchers. Have not seen anywhere that they are not.
Now srm infantry do not run out in combat, but yet the weight should suggest otherwise.

This is just an example.
And if they insist on putting in all the hand weapons that can be used against mech, like the gyrorifles, then they should include it under the infantry heading in the core rules. Last I knew, one rifle footman could not damage a mech, but in the mech warrior section, they can. They need to get all the rules on the same page.

Now I will agree it may be easier to just remove the battle tech rules from mech warrior and write the combat tables to conform with mechwarrior.

As a side note, the spell check on this forums should recognize the normally used words like mech.
BobTheZombieModerator
11/03/14 06:30 PM
184.63.115.89

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

As a side note, the spell check on this forums should recognize the normally used words like mech.



You can right click the word and click "add to dictionary", and your computer's spellcheck will remember it... If you change computers or (I think) clear your cache, it will go away though.

It's also like this on the wiki, which sometimes looks really funny when the whole page is "misspelled".
Report Sarna.net issues/inaccuracies here or you can simply PM me the details
Akirapryde2006
07/21/15 02:15 PM
71.100.132.249

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Personally I enjoyed MW2.

I found the over all system simple to bring new players in to and easy to set up as a role playing game. It only got complicated once Maps and Mechs were tossed in to the mix. Sure I know that is what the game is all about but if you ever read the books, there is a lot more to the universe than just battling in a Mech.

MW3 was just way too complicated.In fact, I too have been role playing under so many different games. I can't even begin to count them all. However I have found that when you are working with new role players, simple is always better.

But these changes not only made the game over complicated, but when they took the entire universe and turned it on its head through Dark Ages, that really reshaped everything about the way the game.

In short, I really miss the simplicity of the game.
ristin
06/25/17 10:03 PM
27.33.2.11

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I have not tried MW1. Never been able to get access to a copy.

I think MW2 is best of the lot. Simple to use, and the system is easily adaptable to all the unusual situations player characters might get into. Fast, fair and easy...perfect to roll-out any out-of-cockpit situations as they happen. There was also more of a sense of "players will use the gear that suits their style-statement not just the power-gamer choice.

I have not tried MW3 but it looks more complex than needed for a messy infantry fight (as opposed to a detailed and exact 'mech fight). I also don't like that it is D10 not D6...it's a D6 based setting to me. Also one of my players flat out refused to use or consider MW3 after reading a bad review online. I could be tempted to look into it in more detail, but it'd have to beat MW2, and MW2 has the strenghs of being fast, fair and easy...so unless MW3 has its own equivalent strengths it'll be a hard sell.

I tried MW4 (ATOW) and using it was terrible. Over-complex, and the players gunnery and piloting quickly dropped through the floor cheaply. I needed to put in over ten house rules to tweak the system and stop the system being overly lethal to my player characters. And then they all picked weapons for power-game reasons (bypassing enemy armor) not "what is in-character" at all.

Also the character generation was very complicated and required spreadsheets to keep track of the numbers and EXP spending. So it was impossible to do anything on-the-fly, you had to pre-generate the NPCs and it could take an entire evening. This made "chance encounters" a huge problem, and any time my players wanted to go 'off the rails' and ignore the core plot I as the game-master was on the back foot struggling to keep up. And the reward for all this detailed character design just was not worth the time and effort.


Edited by ristin (06/25/17 10:05 PM)
Rajaat99
12/15/17 07:38 AM
76.27.89.112

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
You can NOT allow a brand new character the ability to have elite status in areas like mech gunnery, and such.



I've heard this argument against MW2 a lot and I've never understood why it's such a bad thing to be good at something starting out. Why do you have to suck at the beginning of a game?
Also, if your players have over specialized into being an elite mech pilot, you should remind them that not all of the scenarios will be in a mech. Most of the players I have, at best, been 3+ gunnery/ 3+ piloting. That's not crazy unreasonable.
If the GM doesn't like that for some reason, then they can just have all starting characters have skills no higher than level 2, easy fix.
"You are not alone among strangers, a way has been chosen."
ghostrider
12/15/17 04:02 PM
66.74.61.223

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Most of the time, the mechwarrior campaigns, or at least the ones I've played in, start out with you being fresh out of training. Starting off with good skills is one thing, but having the outrageous skills sounds counter to even bothering to adventure.
To my knowledge, very few people come out of school equal to, or exceeding the skills of those that have been doing the same thing for years. This is not saying it is impossible, but unlikely.

Now if you start out as warriors from other units that get together over some drinks to start your own unit, then that is a bit different. You should be older then the 15-19 year old out of the academy.
And from what I have seen, most players seem to avoid any sort of encounter that isn't in their mechs, like waking up in bed, only to have an attack on the base. They immediately claim to be in their mech, or will not play the scenario. Which leads to their deaths and they stop playing.
Yeah. Had a bunch of babies at times.

Now sucking with 8/8 skills is not right. I would think trainees would have that, and anyone that has been doing any real training should be 6/6 at the worse.

And the ones that suggested they stole their units, yet not a single one could pick a lock or change the codes in the mech really annoy the hell out of me with the elite status. But that is personal, not something to be expected of others.
Rajaat99
12/30/17 02:09 PM
76.27.89.112

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Any game can suck when you have terrible players, but it's not the systems fault.
If the GM lets their players know that they are going to be running a plethora of scenarios, not all involving mechs, the players should be smart enough to make well rounded characters.
Now, I have had players make elite mechwarriors, who are terrible at everything else, and I warn them that they're going to be bored outside of mech combat. Sometimes they accept it and play the character has is, but most of the time, they'll change it.
"You are not alone among strangers, a way has been chosen."
ATN082268
05/01/18 09:40 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Quote:
You can NOT allow a brand new character the ability to have elite status in areas like mech gunnery, and such.



I've heard this argument against MW2 a lot and I've never understood why it's such a bad thing to be good at something starting out. Why do you have to suck at the beginning of a game?
Also, if your players have over specialized into being an elite mech pilot, you should remind them that not all of the scenarios will be in a mech. Most of the players I have, at best, been 3+ gunnery/ 3+ piloting. That's not crazy unreasonable.
If the GM doesn't like that for some reason, then they can just have all starting characters have skills no higher than level 2, easy fix.



That's pretty much the way I and others handled the MW2 RPG. For me, the MW2 RPG was simple and versatile. The MW3 RPG seemed to make the system overly complex and, above all else, tried to ensure player characters started off as average and to remain that way.
zamosc
01/05/21 05:33 PM
69.137.35.15

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
MW1 for me. Long ago I purchased MW3, but coming from MW1 - I was "what is this 1d10 stuff". I like how they made the career or character building like Classic Traveller, however, I feel as if it lost all the simplicity of MW1.

Simplicity is key and for me - I do not need rules for every little thing. I will just wing-it on the fly to keep the tempo of play. With that being said, playing or generating a character for MW3 was as bad as playing GURPS. 'Bad' not in a bad way, but in a way that was not 2d6 simplicity of MW1 or similar to Classic Traveller. You can see a lot of inspiration of Classic Traveller in FASA's MW1 and Battletech in the dice mechanics. I think they even made some material for Classic Traveller in very early 80s (could be wrong).

I never played MW2 or had the books, so I cannot say. But having a very experienced or elite character at the start is sort of defeating the purpose of an RPG, since it is all about the ride to get to elite status.

I will have to dig out my MW3 book, but I think MW3 gave you different times in the character's age to start the adventure. So, it was not unheard of starting at 40 years old and being a salty mercenary. The same idea/mechanic was seen in Traveller, but MW3 was way over complicated. Yet, I did like the energy cells, and some of the weapons, but I do not remember figuring out how combat worked, since no one wanted to play MW3 at the time.
Pages: 1
Extra information
0 registered and 5 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 2


Contact Admins Sarna.net