A Detailed Review of Mysteries of Magic

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Ok so l like many other Palladium gamers have been eagerly awaiting the new book. After my local game shop took an extra week to get the book to me. (CURSE YOU DAMN DISTRIBUTORS FOR BEING SO SLOW!) I finally get it.. So after giving it a quick read I figured I would share some thoughts and what not for those who were also thinking about picking this book up..

First the cover art. Very cool! Even if the book didn't have the work MAGIC in big letters across the top it's pretty clear on what the book's focus is. So full credit to David Martin for the good cover. It's far better then the cover for the Wolfen Empire book. OH and speaking of the word Magic across the top.. Doesn't that look a bit similar to some of the fonts for Magic the Gathering?

Unfortunately the high expectations and hopes I had for this book ended right there. In the section A New Beginning we are told we can expect new OCCs, spells, and practices of magic that have yet to appear in any previous Palladium book. This is good, just what we as fans have been waiting for. Unfortunately that is followed up by stating this book is all about Wizardry and Warlocky. (Is Warlocky even a word? I mean are there any GMs or players out there who use the term warlocky when refering to Elemental Magics?) It then goes on to state that there hasn't been a lot of new material for PFRPG and this is the beginning of a new era where with any luck we'll see more books.

OK so if this is the first in a new era you would think they would wanna get it right. Hit the players and GMs with things that will keep them happy and inspire new things. Maybe a bunch of new spells like what appeared in Library of Bletherad. Lets see how they did..

The next section is a bit of flavor text. Essentially it's a mage giving advice to an apprentice on moving forward in his mystical pursuit. But for some reason Arius Symmelene thinks that the Library of Bletherad has magic. An easy error that should have been caught by the editor. The Library makes a point to not keep spell books on hand. The ones listed are kept in secret and not shown/shared with anyone. So I'm not sure why Arius here is letting his apprentice know that spending 25 years at the library studying won't even enable him to learn 1/4 of the mystical knowledge thats out there.. Is he just being a jerk to his apprentice? The Library won't teach anyone any spells. It's against their policy..I mean he could have just said "Ya know you could spend 50 years at the most expensive taverns and brothels in the Western Empire and you still won't know 1/4 of the magic that is out there." So that needed to not be put in there..

Mistake count : 1

The Classifying Magic section is OK. The benefit is that it will reenforce that spell magic isn't the same as a priest's prayers. But again these could have easily been denoted in the various OCCs and most players already know that Priests and Wizards can't learn spells from one another. The Name Game section is pretty much all semantics and could have been shortened a bit. I mean it's farily obvious that Priestess and Sorceress is the feminine versions of Priest and Sorcerer.

The next part reflects on History of Magic in the Palladium world. Most of it is really just a long winded version of what appears in the main book on page 277-280. Some interesting notes are that they give credit to Thoth for leading the forces of Light to victory over the Old Ones. Now it's given that Thoth had a big role in the whole saga. But errr. What about the others? I mean if Thoth was such a big player in everything then why isn't his name a power word? Why would Thoth not be the head of his Pantheon instead of Osiris? (This being prior to the betrayal of Set.) Just doesn't make sense and is contradictory to what is already in the books and more specifically in the magic sections. You would think Diabolists would be using Thoth's name in making wards. Yet he's not mentioned anywhere. (OK I know the whole Thoth is really Xy thing is part of the story but give me a break!) If Tao-bo, Lo-Kum a couple of Angles and some lowly mage Lictalon get power words then surely Thoth's name should be in there as well. Heck even Kyn-nark-mar has got one and Thoth is WAY more powerful then him.

It also goes on to say that in the Age of Light the first ever religous war was fought.. Umm excuse me.. Didn't the Old Ones have worshipers? Minotaurs anyone? Lizardmages? I'm fairly certain if I crack open the Old Ones book to page 14 it will have the Chaos Priest in there. Thoth being a god, and thus by definition must have worshipers would mean that the war in the Age of Light would have been the second religous war.

Mistake count: 2

Now it is good that they mentioned Chantico in here. Especially since it provides a bit of back ground as to how things came about for him to be in such a state. But one issue I have. OK if Chantico was once a god of Light why the hell would he look to ANUBIS & SET FOR ADVICE!!!! What could Ra not pencil him in for a 10:00 AM Brunch meeting next Tuesday? We're talking about an above average intelligence here (IQ 16 for Chantico!) Not some gullible dolt off the street. I'm not gonna call this an actual mistake.. Just a dumb plot point. Maybe with more details it wouldn't seem so dumb. Now the plus side of this section is the views of both the elves and dwarves. But again a lot of it is expanded cannon material.

The next section goes into magic theory and how magic works. This is good, if you don't own the Palladium Fantasy RPG book with an entire section entitled "MAGIC" (PG 179 PFRPG) So it's really not necessary to include and is just a redundant reprint of information we already have. The helpful secion is the PPE beyond one's self section where it lets you know how much and how long characters can hold extra PPE. Aside from that it's just a redundant reprint of informtion we already have.

The next section goes into the various races and their views of magic. This is fairly handy but pretty obvious stuff with a common sense approach. While it gives a good ground for a GM to not allow players to play that Coyle Wizard or Summoner, it is mostly things that could have been covered by a simple revision of the writeup of the Coyle RCC. So not a ton of useful info. I did think I would go through this fairly strait forward section with out finding an error but just when I was thinking that mistake number 3 reared it's ugly head. Check out page 29. Under the Gnome section it says they don't often become Alchemists. Now it's not that Gnomes aren't smart enough with their IQ of 3d6. It's that they can't get the ME requirment of 14 with only a 1d6+6 for an ME attribute. So guess what genius they can NEVER be Alchemists since they don't have the mental endurance required for the practice of Alchemy. So if you ever come across a Gnome who claims to be an Alchemist don't trust him/her. It's most likely a Demon/Devil/Dragon or some other nasty wanting you to do it's dirty work for it. Did the authors even read the secion on Gnomes prior to writing that?

Mistake Count: 3

Now this was not the only error in this section. Unfortunately in regards to the Wolfen race it lists Rune Magic as being purged eons ago. Yet if you look in the Northern Hinterlands book on page 61 you'll find a neat little Rune Lantern called the Eye of Elemore. It was made by a Wolfen and it only took him 6 years to figure out while being alone in the Northern Hinterlands. He even had the whole resources of the Empire behind him. Sure he took the secret with him to the grave, but apparently the secret is out in the Northern Wilderness/Hinterlands somewhere.. So the secrets of rune magic wern't purged.. Just lost and awaiting to be found.

Mistake Count: 4

The careers in Magic section is kind of a waste. I mean seriously if your player can't figure out a way in which the ability to wield awesome powers of magic or to summon up beasts/monsters/demons can be used to make a gold coin here and there then your playing with either a really young player or an idiot. In the latter case give up and walk away from the table and save yourself the headache. The section on the Clergy is something that is OK. But this book was supposed to focus on Magic. When I think that I don't think priests. I think more along the lines of the Wizards, Summoners and actual practitioners of magic. Not priests and other religious OCCs. I honestly rather have seen some more material in the book regards to actual OCCs as opposed to just a blurb and a few add ons and detractors for the priest OCCs that already exist. I think a better approach would have been to do a supplement in a future book with a main focus on religion and the various types of priests each religion would have brought out. Kina like what the Palladin of Rurga did for her in the Eastern Territories book. Yeah it is still a variant of an OCC in the original book, but the OCC is written out, clearly defined and is really suited to the goddess and provides a greater opportunity for getting a player really into a character. Are the variants nice? Yes. Are they useful? Yes. But it kinda comes out as an opportunity for players to munchkin and take some bonuses. At the very least they will take the extra 1d8 to SDC and +1 to MA for essentially nothing.

Before I go on any further.. I do have to ask a question of the artist who drew the picture on page 43. Is that supposed to be Gandalf, Dumbeldore or Fizban on that page? Speaking of art I really like the picture on page 44! More art like that please! Really good stuff!

Moving on.. OK I do like how you went into some detail about bringing on an apprentice. This means that players who wanna multiclass are going to have to pay their dues if they wanna become a mage. Good news since it's gonna take a long time! So a minimal of 4-8 years means that character is going to be retired in game time for quite a while before he can start adventuring. (This is all provided that people have an ongoing weekly campaign that is linear.)

I think the write up on Auras is really good. Especially how it extends about you to the clothing and armor your wearing. This would imply that any sort of spell launched at your armor or psychic attack made against your armor also gets a saving throw. Good stuff. This will help limit things like TK being abused. I also like the expanded role and powers for familiars.. Good stuff.. You should have however taken a different approach to the building of a magic guild/society. I think it was Rifter 8 which had some pretty decent rules about building guilds. Also I don't really think that religons should fall under guild construction rules. That just seems like trying to streamline an element that is best left to role playing.

The Minerals & Magic section had promise.. But it seems a bit limited with nothing new aor even informative. I think a far better idea would have been to do an expanded alchemical section. Things Alchemists like to have on hand to work their magics. This would have lead to a lot of opportunities for plot hooks. Your local Alchemist is willing to cut you a really good deal on the magic items you want if you can go and get some of the components he'll need to make them. Another thing that would be a good addition would be a listing of herbs and items that would be useful in Holistic Medicine. I recall a bit in the Library and some stuff in Rifts England but thats about it.. More on that would be helpful since it's something mages know about and also something that other healers would be knowledgeable on as well.

I do like the revised spell casting times on page 54. Really clarifys things for the players. The optional Rapid Fire Magic can make for some exciting drama in a game. The mage has one action to toss that spell that may save the day or could spell certain doom for the party. Even then it's still kinda a long shot and very risky. It's the sort of thing that will either get cries of joy when it works or gripes and groans when it doesn't.

The learning new spells section is another redundant waste of ink and paper. The spell creation rules are fairly decent and it seems to be similar to what appeared in Nightbane's Through the Glass Darkly supplement. This will give the mages something to do while traveling on long ships voyages and/or for that character that has made his/her fortune and has opted to retire somthing to do to pass the time while enjoying life retired.

I like the expansion and clairty of the rules in the True Names section. Although I don't like how characters are able to change their true names. Given the rite of passage may kill the character and the spiritual awakening can take forever. The spiritual rebirth is another one that seems like a way for characters to switch to a new OCC and pickup a new name should the true name fall into a foes hands.

The Forsaken Mage is a bit interesting. And by interesting I mean confusing. So at level 1 this character who essentally got the boot from the magical community starts off with magics that none of the established and fully educated mages are able to begin with?? Doens't make a whole lot of sense to me.. How is some guy who was the laughing stock of the magic community supposed to puzzle out forgotten magics that even the most brilliant minds haven't been able to figure out with the backing of mystical societies behind them? Doesn't make a whole lotta sense to me.. Also the limitation of them to spells up to and including spells of the 8th level is kina lame. I mean if they have access to unknown magics over the rest of the Palladium spell tossers then not having higher level spells is moot. Especially since they can start off with knowledge in thoses forgotten areas of magic. Also if every spell tosser looks at these guys as the bottom of the food chain in magic societies then why are most to them good or selfish?

That being said I think that this might make for an interesting enemy for the players. Get rid of the whole social outcast thing and make him for of a Renegade Mage someone who has rejected the traditional ways of attaining spell knowledge and is more power hungry and willing to take greater risks and make deals that most mages wouldn't consider. (After all the writeup says they are willing to learn from just about anyone including Lizardmages!) They would make a great villain and provide a player running a Wizard a great opportunity to try to figure out where the renegades spells are coming from and to try to get them for himself as a nice reward for completing the adventure. So some good options for the Forsaken Mage as a key to expand the plot in a game.

The Half Wizard OCC is just a way for players to munchkin their characters out and get a few extras for nothing. They get all the OCC stuff and no real drawback other then that they aren't gonna learn any new spells. I'm thinking it's just a matter of time before the Asguardian Elf Half Wizard Solider Warrior of Valhalla shows up at my table. Oh and did you really need to give them an extra 1d6x10 gold to start with? I mean they get everything else from the chosen OCC for starting equipment. Why the extra pocket change? OH and where are the EXP Tables for these OCCs? I'm assuming the Half Wizard falls under the new OCC with the usual rules of multi class characters applying but what about the Forsaken Mage? What EXP table does he fall under?

The Expanded Gobblin Cobbler is pretty decent. Really fleshes them out a bit.. But the pic kinda looks like an overweight grease monkey in a wife beater with a leater vest.

But whats this?? NEW SKILLS!!! HUZZAH Maybe something good.

OK lets do the full review on these..

Appraise goods seems good.. But that should be tossed in with bartering. I mean why having them sepearte? Kinda related and go hand in hand. I like how the metaphysical level of Astrology was added in. Good stuff. Excavation seems like it should fall under Archeology. If anything Underground Sense of Direction should be the skill. I really don't see too many characters taking herding cattle as a skill but you never know. Horse Trade is a good skill. I think I just might start selling the players sick horses until one of em picks up the skill just for fun. Lore Undead is probably the best addition. This means Demon & Monster Lore is far less expansive and will reveal even less to players. So no more info on zombies, vampires, mummy immortals, shamblers or Yemma until they pick up this skill. Research has appeared in other Palladium games and while useful it's not anything new.

Finally the good stuff! New Magic Spells! What I'm fairly sure most of the players and GMs have been eagerly anticipating for quite sometime. So with out any further adu here is my spell by spell review..

OK well the spells Cleanse, Manipulate Objects, Mystic Fulcrum, Light Healing, is a reprint from both the Rifts Book of Magic and the Federation of Magic where it originally appeared. Cloud of Slumber is also a repeat, but since it wasn't in the PFRPG Book under Invocations thats fine that just fixes a typo. What I don't get about it is why it appears AGAIN as a level 7 spell a few pages later for more PPE? That is an obvious error

Mistake Count: 5

Cure Minor Disorders is a REPRINT FROM THE PFRPG Book!

Mistake Count: 6

The rest are a small collection of spells but unlike when the Library of Bletherad, or the Federation of Magic for Rifts there isn't a lot of new and overtly useful spells listed here. Most of the new spells are decent but nothing that jumps off the page as being impressive and/or must have spells for the game.

Ultimately this book is a big let down for me. The material it covers is mostly already covered in other books. Given there is some new materials but I think that Palladium would have been served better as a company, the players and GMs would have been served better off with less reprinted materials and more on new schools of magic. With that said I am really wary about future supplements for this line.

I really think this publication would have done far better if there was less reprinted material, less errors, and more new magic schools/OCCs. Several times throughout the book Enchanting, Serpent Magic, Shadow Magic, Sex Magic, and War Magic were mentioned. Unfortunately I'm not too confident in Kevin's statement at the beginning of the book.

I don't see this new era for this game line. I just see a reprint and a lot of wordy elaborations on things that didn't really need clarification as well as quite a few errors and mistakes in continuity. I gotta advise anyone who is thinking about picking this book up to give it a miss as it's a waste of $16.95. While it does have some good content this is the largest waste of money in the PFRPG line since the updated Wolfen Empire book and contributes less to the PFRPG world (mostly due to reprints) then what Shadows of Light did for the Nightbane line.

[gaby]

Well they can put what is missing in other MoM,s books?

Tell me what do you think is missing?

[J. Lionheart]

So, the mistakes you just wrote an essay to complain about consist of an innaccurate quote in context, whether an ancient war was the first or second of its kind, the use of the term "rare" to describe something you feel doesn't happen, the use of the word "purge" to describe the not-quite-total elimination of something, and a couple reprints?

Really?

My head is spinning on why almost any of those are worth writing up, but let's take a look



Regarding your mistake number 1 (innaccurate quote in context):

The Library of Bletherad is a legendary place, and it's perfectly conceivable that the speaker has never been there himself. It's a form of hyperbole - not literalism. Also, there is mystic knowledge other than spell forumlae, which the Library does have available. Theory is a field of study too, and the statement is accurate in that regard. This is a quote from one person in game, to another person in game. No mistake here.


Regarding your mistake number 2 (whether an ancient war was the first or second of its kind):

The fact that religious people were involved in a war doesn't make it a religious war. The specific cause of the war against the Old Ones was not religion - it was the fact that the Old Ones were horrifically evil, enslaving the world, and generally slaughtering people and making them miserable. Even if the members of the two (or more) sides are of different religions, it isn't a religious war unless the war is being fought over religion. No mistake here.


Regarding your mistake number 3 (the use of the term "rare" to describe something you feel doesn't happen):

So because a player character Gnome can't reach a 14 attribute on a natural roll, there has obviously never in the history of the world been an NPC that got there? Are you suggesting there has never been something in PF that raises an attribute above its original roll? Are you suggesting GM's haven't been known to adjust NPC stats, and historical figures don't sometimes have extraordinary characteristics? Never say never in a fantasy game. For somebody as intensely involved in magic as a person becoming an alchemist would be, there are options out there to bump attributes. They would be few and far between, "rare" as we call it, but they're out there. No mistake here.


Regarding your mistake number 4 (the use of the word "purge" to describe the not-quite-total elimination of something):

Rune magic was purged eons ago. The practitioners were killed, the use of it banned, and the examples of it seized and cached away with the intention of never finding or using them again. The fact that one particular mage tried to bring it back doesn't indicate that it wasn't purged. If that isn't a purge, you'd better write the historians and demand they stop calling Stalin's culling of his military officer corp a purge (some of them survived!) and perhaps to NASA to inform them their airlock vacuum systems don't actually purge the air (a few molecules still exist!). Furthermore, there is no evidence that the Wolfen mage actually created the Eye of Eelemore, many think he simply found it. No mistake here.


Regarding your mistakes number 5 and 6 (a couple reprints):

The only actual errors I see you mention - a spell printed twice by mistake, and a spell reprinted from another book. Ooooh, biiiiig mistakes. Definitely worth panning a book for.



I feel like you didn't actually have the "high expectations and hope" you claim. Your post seems like a rules-lawyery literalist, freaking out over the collapse of their perfect world, and seems more like a troll than a review. You don't have to like it, obviously, but this mistake count crap is absurd.

[Library Ogre]

Thank you, J. Lionheart; that more or less was how I would've responded to his claims of mistakes.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

So, the mistakes you just wrote an essay to complain about consist of an innaccurate quote in context, whether an ancient war was the first or second of its kind, the use of the term "rare" to describe something you feel doesn't happen, the use of the word "purge" to describe the not-quite-total elimination of something, and a couple reprints?

Really?

My head is spinning on why almost any of those are worth writing up, but let's take a look

Yeah it's called a "A Detailed Review" hence the title.

Regarding your mistake number 1 (innaccurate quote in context):

The Library of Bletherad is a legendary place, and it's perfectly conceivable that the speaker has never been there himself. It's a form of hyperbole - not literalism. Also, there is mystic knowledge other than spell forumlae, which the Library does have available. Theory is a field of study too, and the statement is accurate in that regard. This is a quote from one person in game, to another person in game. No mistake here.

And your still not going to attain any new mystical power there short of breaking in and looting the place where they keep the spell books hidden. The whole point is that the Library isn't a place to learn magic. Learning theory is kinda moot when your already a spell caster. At that point magic isn't a theory. It's a fact and one you put into practice.

The LoB is best used as a great place for information and to get leads. But your not actually going to learn anything new in the mystical arts while there. Notes and what not may be good clues. But your not gonna get any new spell knowledge while there unless like I said you uncover where they hide the spell books and manage to steal them.

Regarding your mistake number 2 (whether an ancient war was the first or second of its kind):

The fact that religious people were involved in a war doesn't make it a religious war. The specific cause of the war against the Old Ones was not religion - it was the fact that the Old Ones were horrifically evil, enslaving the world, and generally slaughtering people and making them miserable. Even if the members of the two (or more) sides are of different religions, it isn't a religious war unless the war is being fought over religion. No mistake here.

It's semantics really. But something that should have been caught.

Regarding your mistake number 3 (the use of the term "rare" to describe something you feel doesn't happen):

So because a player character Gnome can't reach a 14 attribute on a natural roll, there has obviously never in the history of the world been an NPC that got there? Are you suggesting there has never been something in PF that raises an attribute above its original roll? Are you suggesting GM's haven't been known to adjust NPC stats, and historical figures don't sometimes have extraordinary characteristics? Never say never in a fantasy game. For somebody as intensely involved in magic as a person becoming an alchemist would be, there are options out there to bump attributes. They would be few and far between, "rare" as we call it, but they're out there. No mistake here.

No what I'm suggesting is that by the rules there is nothing known in the game to get the Gnome to the required stat. The write up suggested that they do occur. I'm pointing out that by the rules it can't happen. Sure there probably has been one or two who have had stats changed due to DIVINE INTERVENTION FROM GODS but yeah.. Gnome Alchemists.. Not happening.

Oh and since when did summoning become so up beat and cheery? The new book states that due to the Gnomes nature they generally don't practice Dark Arts. Last time I looked most people considered Summoners to be dangerous mages which are on the borderline at best of the dark arts. Keep in mind Summoning is one of the required backgrounds needed to become an alchemist.

So again Gnome Alchemists... NOT HAPPENING. GMs and players should be playing by the rules. OR at least the ones agreed upon by the gaming group. (IE House Rules) But stuff from Palladium should be consistent and actually be possible by the rules. (Yes I know this is an inherent flaw with a lot of things in Palladium) Regardless the way it's presented isn't suggesting that it's only been a couple of gnomes in history that have become Alchemists. It suggests that it's something that has been attained by a number of gnomes which simply doesn't pan out by the rules.

Maybe your style puts characters and story ahead of the rules and what not. If so then that is your game and have fun playing that Troglodyte Mindmage.

Regarding your mistake number 4 (the use of the word "purge" to describe the not-quite-total elimination of something):

Rune magic was purged eons ago. The practitioners were killed, the use of it banned, and the examples of it seized and cached away with the intention of never finding or using them again. The fact that one particular mage tried to bring it back doesn't indicate that it wasn't purged. If that isn't a purge, you'd better write the historians and demand they stop calling Stalin's culling of his military officer corp a purge (some of them survived!) and perhaps to NASA to inform them their airlock vacuum systems don't actually purge the air (a few molecules still exist!). Furthermore, there is no evidence that the Wolfen mage actually created the Eye of Eelemore, many think he simply found it. No mistake here.

purge –verb (used with object)
1. to rid of whatever is impure or undesirable; cleanse; purify.

Judges?? BUZZZZZZZZZZ!!

Oh I'm sorry but had you taken the ten seconds to read the description of the Eye on page 61 the beginning of the last paragraph on that page you would have noticed that it states Elemore finished the eye. Meaning he constructed it. Shortly after he was killed off. Oh and he also did it after returning to the Empire so yeah Elemore made the rune item it wasn't something he just found.

Regarding your mistakes number 5 and 6 (a couple reprints):

The only actual errors I see you mention - a spell printed twice by mistake, and a spell reprinted from another book. Ooooh, biiiiig mistakes. Definitely worth panning a book for.

Well yeah they are kinda big mistakes. I mean how long has this book been in the works? Look I can see a lot of the spells being converted over from Rifts. Fair enough, it's good to have the SDC conversions. While most players will already have brought those spells in anyway, it's good to have the official conversions.

But to toss in a spell THAT APPEARS IN THE MAIN RPG BOOK under the "New Wizard and Warlock Spells" Section is a pretty big mistake.

Now I don't know whom is at fault for it. Writer? Editor? Guy in the print shop maybe? But all the errors and inconsistencies kinda shows that the new era for PFRPG might be one of reprints and shoddy work.

I feel like you didn't actually have the "high expectations and hope" you claim.

Yeah why let a few inconveniences like having a consistent story line, the rules and good editing and what not get in the way of Palladium making a quick $16.95 off the fans.

Your post seems like a rules-lawyery literalist, freaking out over the collapse of their perfect world, and seems more like a troll than a review. You don't have to like it, obviously, but this mistake count crap is absurd.

And you sound like a fan boy who is willing to defend a bunch of reprinted material (Even in the "New material" section) until he is blue in the face and woe be to anyone who thinks otherwise. If I sound like a rules lawyer it's because I do actually play by the rules of the game. So I don't think it's too much to expect the people who write, publish, edit and produce the books to take some time to ensure that it's of a better quality then what this first Mysteries of Magic is.

Look.. Bottom line is that I don't think this book lives up to the quality of other Magic themed books in the Palladium line. I expected this book to be more along the lines of the quality in the Federation of Magic, or Through the Glass Darkly. Both of those books are far superior to what this new book is. If this book had been done more along the lines of either of those books then I would have been writing a totally different review.. But unfortunately it wasn't.

Who knows maybe future books will be better but I'm a bit skeptical about that.

[Sureshot]

Your not the only one disappinted by the book Hobbes. I had some time to waste before going to work and after spending an hour looking through the book just did not care to buy it. For all their hype about the book imo it does not live up to it. Which player in his right mind will take the proest varients. Lose a whole bunch of skills and priest to get abilites that imo barely compensate the loss. I guess I was epxecting maybe too much. So I just put it back on the rack. It will be getting the book as I really like PF but at a uch later date. I do think some on this board need to remember that a review can be both positive and negative. Not just overly positive because it's being posted up on the PB boards. I'm the same way when I review a book I discuss both the good and bad. When it comes to reviews I am not here to make you feel good just review the book. So while Hobbes could have phrased the review more diplomatically so to speak their is abolsutrly no call to get on his case for a bad review. I rahter get a balanced review then "buy this book it's the greatest thing since sliced bread" type of reviews. To me those type of reviews are not reviews at all but fans shilling for the company.

That being said I do want to give props to Mark Hall for all the hard work that went into the book.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Well they can put what is missing in other MoM,s books?

Tell me what do you think is missing?

I think the book should have done a bit more like the Federation of Magic or Nightbane's Through the Glass Darkly books.

New Magic OCCs. There is one new one and essentially an add on OCC in the new book.
New types of magic. They make a bunch of references to all these new types of magic in the new book yet no real info on them. How about some conversions of the 1st edition Yin Sloth Jungles OCCs to second edition.

More then 15 pages of "new spells". I think TTGD had 20+ pages and I think the FoM had 30 or so pages of new spells. New studies of magic.

[Sureshot]

Not goingto happen Hobbes. Once they broke the book up into smaller books that just goes under the window. Take the FOM and Through the glass Darkly andpicture them being given the M.O.M. treatment. They would not be as good as one whole book imo.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Your not the only one disappinted by the book Hobbes. I had some time to waste before going to work and after spending an hour looking through the book just did not care to buy it. For all their hype about the book imo it does not live up to it. Which player in his right mind will take the proest varients. Lose a whole bunch of skills and priest to get abilites that imo barely compensate the loss. I guess I was epxecting maybe too much. So I just put it back on the rack. It will be getting the book as I really like PF but at a uch later date. I do think some on this board need to remember that a review can be both positive and negative. Not just overly positive because it's being posted up on the PB boards. I'm the same way when I review a book I discuss both the good and bad. When it comes to reviews I am not here to make you feel good just review the book. So while Hobbes could have phrased the review more diplomatically so to speak their is abolsutrly no call to get on his case for a bad review. I rahter get a balanced review then "buy this book it's the greatest thing since sliced bread" type of reviews. To me those type of reviews are not reviews at all but fans shilling for the company.

That being said I do want to give props to Mark Hall for all the hard work that went into the book.

Keep in mind I was merely trying to be funny with some of the stuff in there. The whole "Ya know you could spend 50 years at the most expensive taverns and brothels in the Western Empire and you still won't know 1/4 of the magic that is out there." Was just done to be funny. Nobody should be taking it personally and I don't mean to take away from the effort that Mark put into the book.

My understanding is that there is a lot more then was submitted then what got released. I'm just pretty let down by this book.. That is all.

[Sureshot]

Keep in mind I was merely trying to be funny with some of the stuff in there. The whole "Ya know you could spend 50 years at the most expensive taverns and brothels in the Western Empire and you still won't know 1/4 of the magic that is out there." Was just done to be funny. Nobody should be taking it personally and I don't mean to take away from the effort that Mark put into the book.

My understanding is that there is a lot more then was submitted then what got released. I'm just pretty let down by this book.. That is all.

Don't apology for writing your review. It is what it is. You read the book found that it was not your cup of tea and gave a honest review. Now you seem to be getting flak because your review is not overly positive. As I said writing a review should be what you think of the book. Not make the author feel good. To me praising a book and reviewing a book have always been two seperate things. I agreed with your review and still do for the most part. Just try to be more neutral in tone next time.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Not goingto happen Hobbes. Once they broke the book up into smaller books that just goes under the window. Take the FOM and Through the glass Darkly andpicture them being given the M.O.M. treatment. They would not be as good as one whole book imo.

Yeah I agree with you there.. Busting up the FOM or TTGD would really diminish the quality of the book. Which makes this new book all the more infuriating. I mean the next book is supposed to focus on Necromancy, Witchcraft, demonic Familiars, clergy and some extra stuff. I'm guessing a lot of the Necromancy will be the Bone Magic from Rifts Mystic Russia. Probably some new stuff thrown in as well. But not a ton of new material unless they include those other styles of magic listed like Enchanting, Serpent Magic, Shadow Magic, Sex Magic, and War Magic.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Keep in mind I was merely trying to be funny with some of the stuff in there. The whole "Ya know you could spend 50 years at the most expensive taverns and brothels in the Western Empire and you still won't know 1/4 of the magic that is out there." Was just done to be funny. Nobody should be taking it personally and I don't mean to take away from the effort that Mark put into the book.

My understanding is that there is a lot more then was submitted then what got released. I'm just pretty let down by this book.. That is all.

Don't apology for writing your review. It is what it is. You read the book found that it was not your cup of tea and gave a honest review. Now you seem to be getting flak because your review is not overly positive. As I said writing a review should be what you think of the book. Not make the author feel good. To me praising a book and reviewing a book have always been two seperate things. I agreed with your review and still do for the most part. Just try to be more neutral in tone next time.

OH don't get me wrong I'm not apologizing for the review.. It's my honest opinion. Just don't want people to mistake a bit of sarcasm and humor as a personal attack.

[J. Lionheart]

And your still not going to attain any new mystical power there short of breaking in and looting the place where they keep the spell books hidden. The whole point is that the Library isn't a place to learn magic. Learning theory is kinda moot when your already a spell caster. At that point magic isn't a theory. It's a fact and one you put into practice.

The LoB is best used as a great place for information and to get leads. But your not actually going to learn anything new in the mystical arts while there. Notes and what not may be good clues. But your not gonna get any new spell knowledge while there unless like I said you uncover where they hide the spell books and manage to steal them.

You don't have to be learning spells to gain mystic knowledge, and again, I'll repeat the comment that this is a form of hyperbole. Flavor Text is exactly that - it's storyline! It's background! It's spoken words from one person in the game to another. This isn't some rules list or meta-plot, it's a person who's never read the books, because he's a character in the books!

If I were to say "You could spend 25 years in the Library of Congress and still not finish 25% of da Vinci's original works" you'd understand what I was saying. It's a way of saying there is a lot of it out there! Nevermind that da Vinci's original works are not in the Library of Congress - the point is made. In this case, the mage is simply citing the world's greatest repository of knowledge as an example to emphasize how incredibly large the world of magic is.

It's semantics really. But something that should have been caught.

If it's just semantics, why did you even bring it up? The first one wasn't a religious war, there's nothing to catch.

No what I'm suggesting is that by the rules there is nothing known in the game to get the Gnome to the required stat. The write up suggested that they do occur. I'm pointing out that by the rules it can't happen. Sure there probably has been one or two who have had stats changed due to DIVINE INTERVENTION FROM GODS but yeah.. Gnome Alchemists.. Not happening.

Ok, so the attribute booster rings from Western Empire don't exist in your game? With one of those little beauties (which are not at all expensive by alchemical standards), a third of all gnomes would have the required stat.

Oh and since when did summoning become so up beat and cheery? The new book states that due to the Gnomes nature they generally don't practice Dark Arts. Last time I looked most people considered Summoners to be dangerous mages which are on the borderline at best of the dark arts. Keep in mind Summoning is one of the required backgrounds needed to become an alchemist.

So again Gnome Alchemists... NOT HAPPENING. GMs and players should be playing by the rules. OR at least the ones agreed upon by the gaming group. (IE House Rules) But stuff from Palladium should be consistent and actually be possible by the rules. (Yes I know this is an inherent flaw with a lot of things in Palladium) Regardless the way it's presented isn't suggesting that it's only been a couple of gnomes in history that have become Alchemists. It suggests that it's something that has been attained by a number of gnomes which simply doesn't pan out by the rules.

Maybe your style puts characters and story ahead of the rules and what not. If so then that is your game and have fun playing that Troglodyte Mindmage.

The word "generally" means "most of the time." It does not mean "all of the time" as you are presenting it. Those gnomes who are not part of the "generally" are the ones most likely to be pursuing something like alchemy, and who would take the measures to become capable of it. That's no house rule, that's an undisputable word definition.

As a side note, Character and Story always come ahead of the rules. That is the difference between role playing and roll playing. No violation of the rules is necessary in the aforementioned case, however.

purge –verb (used with object)
1. to rid of whatever is impure or undesirable; cleanse; purify.

Judges?? BUZZZZZZZZZZ!!

Oh I'm sorry but had you taken the ten seconds to read the description of the Eye on page 61 the beginning of the last paragraph on that page you would have noticed that it states Elemore finished the eye. Meaning he constructed it. Shortly after he was killed off. Oh and he also did it after returning to the Empire so yeah Elemore made the rune item it wasn't something he just found.

And if you had taken more than ten seconds to read the description, and continued through the part on page 62, you would have noticed that it states the Eye of Eelemore is not canonically proven to be a creation of Eelemore, and that some believe it to be a found item.

Furthermore, as I stated above, rune magic was purged. That does not mean it stays purged, and purgation does not always succeed 100%. It wasn't some magic aura from the heavens that descended upon the world and made rune magic vanish. It was a group of fanatical soldiers, a la the inquisition, that travelled around killing people and taking stuff. Just as many scholars and their ideas survived the inquisition, it is no mental feat to imagine that traces of ancient magic survived the purges.

And you sound like a fan boy who is willing to defend a bunch of reprinted material (Even in the "New material" section) until he is blue in the face and woe be to anyone who thinks otherwise. If I sound like a rules lawyer it's because I do actually play by the rules of the game. So I don't think it's too much to expect the people who write, publish, edit and produce the books to take some time to ensure that it's of a better quality then what this first Mysteries of Magic is.

If there were actual inconsistencies, I would be less inclined to defend them. All I see on the above four points is lack of imagination when reading them. I have no interest in reading crap, but I don't trash-talk stuff simply because I don't like the definition of a word they use.

Look.. Bottom line is that I don't think this book lives up to the quality of other Magic themed books in the Palladium line. I expected this book to be more along the lines of the quality in the Federation of Magic, or Through the Glass Darkly. Both of those books are far superior to what this new book is. If this book had been done more along the lines of either of those books then I would have been writing a totally different review.. But unfortunately it wasn't.

Who knows maybe future books will be better but I'm a bit skeptical about that.

Your bottom line is fairly worded and I take no exception to it. If you have examples of things that demonstrate this, I would in no way go after you for them. There are people here who seem to think I'm attacking you just for disliking the book, but all I'm attacking are specific points I disagree with, because I believe they are treating the entire series unfairly, and are attempting to stick way too close to some kind of invisible line that defines your specific game, instead of what the books actually say (or don't say, being how notoriously vague they are!). I'm not telling you or anybody else to like it, what I'm saying is that many of the absolutes used to make the statements in the first post are not absolutes, and cannot be used that way in a general review.

[runebeo]

Well they can put what is missing in other MoM,s books?

Tell me what do you think is missing?

I think the book should have done a bit more like the Federation of Magic or Nightbane's Through the Glass Darkly books.

New Magic OCCs. There is one new one and essentially an add on OCC in the new book.
New types of magic. They make a bunch of references to all these new types of magic in the new book yet no real info on them. How about some conversions of the 1st edition Yin Sloth Jungles OCCs to second edition.

More then 15 pages of "new spells". I think TTGD had 20+ pages and I think the FoM had 30 or so pages of new spells. New studies of magic.

Thanks for posting your review. I too would have like more of a Federation of Magic or Through the Glass Darkly approach and while I still enjoying the book it could have saved allot room for more new material by having less of a refresher coarse on the core book's magic section. Our group has been using the familiar creation table from Glass Darkly for most of our games but limited breath weapon ability only 3 times normal creature damage. I would have liked to seen in the familiar section some mention of certain mundane animals ability to harm some supernatural creature like in Chaos Earth: Creatures of Chaos. I hope in a future book more a classic D&D cleric feel is one thing I've always felt was missing from my party, none of my players want to play a Palladium style priest for very long due to the lack of combat spells and such low healing ability.

[runebeo]

Book 1 MOM = A swing and a miss. I have been waiting for something good from the fantasy line since Coffin left and I am hoping it will be in the second and third installments. Not to say that there were not a few good things in it and at less than twenty bucks I don't exactly feel ripped off. On the whole it seems like book one is a "cliffhanger" for books to come and it is not the most compelling cliffhanger at that.

I agree!

[UR Leader Hobbes]

You don't have to be learning spells to gain mystic knowledge, and again, I'll repeat the comment that this is a form of hyperbole. Flavor Text is exactly that - it's storyline! It's background! It's spoken words from one person in the game to another. This isn't some rules list or meta-plot, it's a person who's never read the books, because he's a character in the books!

If I were to say "You could spend 25 years in the Library of Congress and still not finish 25% of da Vinci's original works" you'd understand what I was saying. It's a way of saying there is a lot of it out there! Nevermind that da Vinci's original works are not in the Library of Congress - the point is made. In this case, the mage is simply citing the world's greatest repository of knowledge as an example to emphasize how incredibly large the world of magic is.

Yeah you do have to be learning spells to gain mystic knowledge. That is the whole point of playing a wizard. Learning new spells and rituals. Learning theory is a waste of time for them. They are already believe in magic and can wield it. Nothing really theoretical left other then learning new spells.

I mean I suppose I could theorize that PPE comes from fairy farts (Why do you think so much is released when you sacrifice them? The gas man the gas!) but that is just dumb.

Point being he could have used a far better example.. Say "You could spend a fortune having an alchemist teach you everything he/she knows. Yet you would only know a small fraction of all there is to know."

Would have worked better. Even as hyperbole it's a bad example.

It's semantics really. But something that should have been caught.

If it's just semantics, why did you even bring it up? The first one wasn't a religious war, there's nothing to catch.
[/quote]

Gotta disagree. I really think the first one was a bit of a religious war. Sure it also had the benefit of freeing other races from the tyranny of the Old Ones. But still religions played a huge part into it. You had the Old Ones and those who follow/worship them vs well.. Everyone else. Many of whom were gods who more then likely recruited their followers into the battle as well. Hmm fighting because a God says to, against other Gods and their followers.. Yeah sounds like a religious war to me. While it may not be the only reason.. It is still a big part of it.

Ok, so the attribute booster rings from Western Empire don't exist in your game? With one of those little beauties (which are not at all expensive by alchemical standards), a third of all gnomes would have the required stat.

Oh OK cool.. Forgot about those.. Good call. So it is possible with some mods. Thanks for pointing that out..

The word "generally" means "most of the time." It does not mean "all of the time" as you are presenting it. Those gnomes who are not part of the "generally" are the ones most likely to be pursuing something like alchemy, and who would take the measures to become capable of it. That's no house rule, that's an undisputable word definition.

As a side note, Character and Story always come ahead of the rules. That is the difference between role playing and roll playing. No violation of the rules is necessary in the aforementioned case, however.

Here we disagree. Character and Story have to fall within the accepted rules of play for the GM who is running the game. Players should know that anything the GM pulls on them is book legal and vice versa. I think it really destroys a GMs credibility if he puts his story ahead of what the rules permit.

I've always felt that it's a really inept GM and/or player that needs to break the accepted rules for purposes for story or character.

And if you had taken more than ten seconds to read the description, and continued through the part on page 62, you would have noticed that it states the Eye of Eelemore is not canonically proven to be a creation of Eelemore, and that some believe it to be a found item.

Are you referring to the GM note? It says that the rumors of Elemore finding the eye were started by the Western Empire. So actually him returning to the Empire and making the Eye actually is cannon material. It's how he attained the knowledge that isn't cannon.

If there were actual inconsistencies, I would be less inclined to defend them. All I see on the above four points is lack of imagination when reading them. I have no interest in reading crap, but I don't trash-talk stuff simply because I don't like the definition of a word they use.

Wait.. Are you saying that Palladium Books don't contain any inconsistencies? BWAHAHHAAHHAHA!!! Oh wait. Your serious about that.. That requires two. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Again you admit you put character and story ahead of rules and cannon material. I was pointing out things I saw as inconsistencies. It's not a matter of lack of imagination, it's a matter of lack of quality and things that frankly could have been caught before it saw print. That just shows shoddy work on the part of PB.

Your bottom line is fairly worded and I take no exception to it. If you have examples of things that demonstrate this, I would in no way go after you for them. There are people here who seem to think I'm attacking you just for disliking the book, but all I'm attacking are specific points I disagree with, because I believe they are treating the entire series unfairly, and are attempting to stick way too close to some kind of invisible line that defines your specific game, instead of what the books actually say (or don't say, being how notoriously vague they are!). I'm not telling you or anybody else to like it, what I'm saying is that many of the absolutes used to make the statements in the first post are not absolutes, and cannot be used that way in a general review.

Take a look at Nightbane's TTGD and Rifts FOM. Far superior to this.

Given this is the first book in the series and the relatively low quality of it doesn't really give me high hopes for the rest of the series. How is pointing out the flaws in this book treating the series unfairly? I'm pointing out what has already been published and established as cannon material that this book apparently doesn't adhere to/ignores. You do realize that a review is a persons opinion right? Frankly for the near $20.00 they charge I expected a lot better then what they delivered.

[The Dark Elf]

I expected this book to be more along the lines of the quality in the Federation of Magic, or Through the Glass Darkly. Both of those books are far superior to what this new book is.

I agree with this and was disappointed with the book (ie Id hoped for more). Thats more content. The amount of pages and new info, IMO (thats IMO) is not value for the price. If it was $9.99 it would be an awesome book. We all know Marks ideas are super theorised and have been proven to be good time and time again so who knows where that stuff is. Hopefully the other two(?) books.

It is GREAT to see a new book for PFRPG but I probably had a slight downer on MoM before Id got it as I wanted to see LotSW, LotD 3, Old Kingdom etc etc as the next books. That might explain some negativity the is misdirected to this release.

Trying tbh so Palladium and Mark (who we know is active on these forums and must be a golem to not take reviews personally) can understand the feedback. I am a die hard fan. I am crossing the Atlantic to the Open house 2010 and will be asking Mr Hall to sign the book so hell, it aint that bad is it. And ofc, Im going to buy the next in the series.

[Sureshot]

Again I get that you don't like the book, and that's fine but you are being a bit over-critical.

I don't see Hobbes being at all over-critical. He posted a review that for the most part was negative. Could he have phrased certain things differently yes. Otherwise I see nothing wrong with the review. That is why it's called a review. It's supposed to talk about the book good and bad. Not make the author and company who published it feel good.

[Soldier of Od]

I don't have a problem with people expressing their opinions on the new book, negative or positive. But I do think that some of the main points that Hobbes has gone into great detail about are really not worth troubling yourself over, even if you disagree with them or think they are plain mistakes. Just to briefly put my oar in:

Bletherad: The new book gives rules for creating your own spells, so although Hobbes is correct that you cannot learn specific spell knowledge from books in the library, there may be books that will be of great help with advice, examples or theory to aid in creating your own. Perhaps not the best example the fictitious wizard could have given his fictitious pupil, but still a valid one.

Religious war: I guess the old ones had worshippers, as the gods of light and other participants in the war did. So, yeah, I can see why it could be called a religious war. And as Stormchild said, it was not a religious war in the sense that it was more of a rebellion against creatures that were dominating the world and destroying and enslaving its people. Just because they were worshipped as gods doesn't make it a 'religious war' (if that makes sense!). I think it can be taken either way, and there is no need to nail it down with a definite definition. Does it matter at all and did it affect my enjoyment of that particular section of the book? No.

Gnome alchemists: Yes, Hobbes is right; gnomes do not have the mental capacity to learn alchemy. Lionheart - The attribute rings in Western Empire specifically preclude their use to circumvent O.C.C. attribute requirements. A mistake was made. I don't think it would stop me from buying the book.

Purge: I have to say I don't understand why you (Hobbes) think that just because something is purged there is no way for it ever to come back again. Purging rune magic from wolfen territory does not mean that it cannot return at a later date from outside sources or that someone will somehow be able to figure it out for themselves later. There are plenty of examples of supposedly lost or destroyed secrets emerging at a later date. That's not a mistake or going against canon, it's an adventure hook. Besides, if Eelemore discovered the secrets of rune magic while in the Northern Hinterlands, that is an area not dominated by the wolfen (perhaps even less so 'eons ago') - perhaps the purge didn't extend to that area?

Reprinting of spells: Yeah, I noticed that too, and it shouldn’t have happened. But, while a little annoying, it doesn’t actually change anything or affect the content of the rest of the book. Printing errors that don’t actually affect gameplay in any way should probably be mentioned, but are not the most important things to focus on in a review.

Anyway, I do agree with many of the points you made in your review, Hobbes, but I think there was too much attention paid to aspects which are really inconsequential (see above). So I have extended the problem by paying more attention to them in my post as well! (Hooray for hypocrisy!)

I experienced an overall feeling of something missing in the 1st MoM book, which perhaps is mainly due to it being only the first MoM book. I can see why KS decided to split the book up - to get a new PFRPG book out as soon as possible to appease the rabid fans(!) and to make a bit more cash, but I think it was a mistake in that it does make us yearn more for some completion - there was far too much 'this will be expanded on in later books'. I feel like I was watching a trailer and am still waiting for the film. Probably the fault of the Palladium staff producing the book than its original contributor. I am amazed how many of the questions regarding the book have been answered by Mark with 'the original manuscript was somewhat different' or similar. How disappointing for a writer that must be. I always assumed that alterations to a freelance writer's manuscript would involve a discussion of ideas; reviewing, changing and reviewing - a bit of give and take (with KS having the final say, fair enough). But it seems it’s more like ‘here’s my submission’ and then you hear nothing until three years later a book comes out with your name on it. Is that really how it happens? Forgive my naivety.

[Sureshot]

I would be less critical of the book if the Priest variant were playble. They are imo unplayable. No reason at all for taking one of the variants. None. Unless you are playing a priest who has fallen from grace from your god. Otherwise your better off playing a regular priest. Picture a Priest who has gone thorugh a divine verison Juicer detox and that is what you have left. A huge penalty for almost nothing in return. Not Marks fault though. His original variant were changed from the original manuscript.

Is it as bad as the Dead Reign book which repeats the rules and restrictions for zombies literally more than 20 times? What a waste of space. (even worse for MoM which was short in the first place)

Not as bad except like others I just did not feel anything from the book. I was all set to buy it and after spending a long time reading it put it back on the rack. What really runied it for me was the depowered priest varaints. It is almost as if Kevin went out of his way to make sure you do not take one. You still can but your screwing yourself over big time imo.

[Nekira Sudacne]

i'm not sure why people dislike reprints so much. I find them highly conveient and desireable. the more places they print something, the easier it is to find them.

[DarkwingDuk]

I agree, I felt like I was watching a trailer.

I liked many of the idea's and concepts in the book, and like most Palladium books I will end up taking what's printed and twisting it to fit my campaign world. GM's perogative and the beauty of a roleplaying game. I don't feel I got ripped off. I think after waiting so long for a Fantasy book we just wanted something epic. Considering that the pre order for the second one was up before the first one was shipped, I hope that the second one will be out shortly. It takes 2 points to make a line. If I am not happy with the second then I will call it.

Mark, I liked your stuff, keep it up.

[Sureshot]

Because I do not want to keep paying for the same information, even if the prices are not high.

Agreed and seconded. A few time alright. It's starting to get a habit. One can understand reprinted material in a large sourcebook. MOM is pretty small as it is. It should have been new material and nothing else imo.

[DarkwingDuk]

Yeah I totally agree. I don't mind when a rifter article makes it into a book. At that point it's kudos for making the grade. But there really is no reason to reprint much. I guess thats the gap in a "megaversal system" Its not just a core book, and each book adds to it in one direction or another. I have nothing against "MDC", although I prefer the AR, SDC system myself. It would just be nice to see some of these core principles like psionic, magic, (dragons and gods for example) be made universal books, not just for one line. I know GURPS tried, but I think it's an idea with merit. My fear is the next mystery of magic will reprint Mystic russia and Africa's bone/necro magic, an earth shaman will end up coming out of South America's Biomancy, and a Chronomancer will be a Rifts England reprint. I understand some cross over but at some point I think you have to realize that a fair amount of fans have picked up some major cross books like the Book of Magic, Federation of Magic, Psyscape. We have had to go get those books over the years because of the Fantasy book famine.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

i'm not sure why people dislike reprints so much. I find them highly conveient and desireable. the more places they print something, the easier it is to find them.

I find it annoying on a few levels to have all the reprinted material for the following reasons.

1) This is a supplement book. Nobody is going to buy this book who already doesn't own the PFRPG book. So a wordy reprint of the Magic section is redundant, a waste of space that can be used for new material. Now I don't mind revisions to rules and updates. Thats fine. But reprints.. Just a wast of space, paper and ink.

2) It lowers the overall worth/quality of the product that is being put out. Again like I said if this was done more like the Federation of Magic or Through the Glass Darkly (Both books by Palladium with Magic being the central theme about them.) then I would have made a drastically different post about them.

3) As this is the first in a series it kinda makes me wary to purchase the next few in the series. The next one is supposed to revolve around dark magic. The preorder says it deals with Necromancy and Witchcraft. So it's looking like more reprints then. Perhaps the inclusion of Bone Magic for the Necromancer from Rifts. I'm thinking they might include the Witch Variants from Mystic Russia as well. Yeah more reprints! If I wanted more pages of the same information that I already have I would find a photocopier.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

I'm ok with this book. The reprints were fine with me since I don't own Federation of Magic. Some of the ideas felt half-baked, but any creative GM can finish them and make them his own. The huge manuscript that Mark handed in all those years ago could have turned into a very detailed, excellent book. But, with PF not having a book out in forever and it being KS's favorite game, I think he took an easy route and broke Mark's work up (and Randi Cartiers for the next book in the series as I recall reading somewhere?). So now we have a series, which feels like a collection of Rifter articles (some good, some so so) compiled into a book. If KS had a great write up of LoD3, an Old Kingdom book, or Wolfen Wars, then we would probably be seeing those right now instead, right?

I'll take what I'm given and make the best of it.

Oh, and I appriciate the detailed review, Hobbes. It pointed out some stuff I'd missed, and solidified some exsisting thoughts on it.

No problem.. Glad you enjoyed it.

Yeah I would really like to see LoD3. How long has it been since Bill Coffin sent in that manuscript? The Old Kingdom books have been promised for YEARS and nobody has ever seen them. I'm all set with the Wolfen Wars books though. I didn't think the Siege on Tolkien was done all that well and I actually would like to have some of the things that were promised for the Wolfen Empire see print first. (One of the things that was promised was a map of the capital city Shadowfall, which never saw print.)

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Yeah I totally agree. I don't mind when a rifter article makes it into a book. At that point it's kudos for making the grade. But there really is no reason to reprint much. I guess thats the gap in a "megaversal system" Its not just a core book, and each book adds to it in one direction or another. I have nothing against "MDC", although I prefer the AR, SDC system myself. It would just be nice to see some of these core principles like psionic, magic, (dragons and gods for example) be made universal books, not just for one line. I know GURPS tried, but I think it's an idea with merit. My fear is the next mystery of magic will reprint Mystic russia and Africa's bone/necro magic, an earth shaman will end up coming out of South America's Biomancy, and a Chronomancer will be a Rifts England reprint. I understand some cross over but at some point I think you have to realize that a fair amount of fans have picked up some major cross books like the Book of Magic, Federation of Magic, Psyscape. We have had to go get those books over the years because of the Fantasy book famine.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Library Ogre]

The next section is a bit of flavor text. Essentially it's a mage giving advice to an apprentice on moving forward in his mystical pursuit. But for some reason Arius Symmelene thinks that the Library of Bletherad has magic. An easy error that should have been caught by the editor. The Library makes a point to not keep spell books on hand. The ones listed are kept in secret and not shown/shared with anyone. So I'm not sure why Arius here is letting his apprentice know that spending 25 years at the library studying won't even enable him to learn 1/4 of the mystical knowledge thats out there.. Is he just being a jerk to his apprentice? The Library won't teach anyone any spells. It's against their policy..I mean he could have just said "Ya know you could spend 50 years at the most expensive taverns and brothels in the Western Empire and you still won't know 1/4 of the magic that is out there." So that needed to not be put in there..

This is not a mistake. Spells are not the theory of magic; they're applications of theory. They're the machines that are built because you understand the theory. The Library of Bletherad contains a lot on theory... nothing available, however, on spells.

The next part reflects on History of Magic in the Palladium world. Most of it is really just a long winded version of what appears in the main book on page 277-280. Some interesting notes are that they give credit to Thoth for leading the forces of Light to victory over the Old Ones. Now it's given that Thoth had a big role in the whole saga. But errr. What about the others? I mean if Thoth was such a big player in everything then why isn't his name a power word? Why would Thoth not be the head of his Pantheon instead of Osiris? (This being prior to the betrayal of Set.) Just doesn't make sense and is contradictory to what is already in the books and more specifically in the magic sections.

The most powerful deity is not always the leader. Thoth is a relative newcomer, and while Dragons and Gods makes it clear that he was instrumental in creating the magic which bound the Old Ones, he was not a pantheon leader. As for why he's not a power word, I didn't go into that. Part of it is that he's still partially Xy. And he may simply be too wily to let himself be used in that way.

It also goes on to say that in the Age of Light the first ever religous war was fought.. Umm excuse me.. Didn't the Old Ones have worshipers? Minotaurs anyone? Lizardmages? I'm fairly certain if I crack open the Old Ones book to page 14 it will have the Chaos Priest in there. Thoth being a god, and thus by definition must have worshipers would mean that the war in the Age of Light would have been the second religous war.

Again, not a mistake. Compare it to the movement for Indian Independence. The British were almost entirely Christian. The Indians were Hindu and Muslim, primarily. It was not, however, a religious conflict... it was about freedom and self-determination, not about religion. Same with the Old Ones... while some may cast it as a religious war, the fact that there were Gods in the Age of Chaos (Aco and the Pantheon of Z'Kas were specifically deities, not really powerful mortals) shows that the Old Ones were perfectly willing to let others worship as they please... they just wanted to be in charge.

Now it is good that they mentioned Chantico in here. Especially since it provides a bit of back ground as to how things came about for him to be in such a state. But one issue I have. OK if Chantico was once a god of Light why the hell would he look to ANUBIS & SET FOR ADVICE!!!! What could Ra not pencil him in for a 10:00 AM Brunch meeting next Tuesday? We're talking about an above average intelligence here (IQ 16 for Chantico!) Not some gullible dolt off the street. I'm not gonna call this an actual mistake.. Just a dumb plot point. Maybe with more details it wouldn't seem so dumb. Now the plus side of this section is the views of both the elves and dwarves. But again a lot of it is expanded cannon material.

Compared to other deities, Chantico is an idiot; I don't have my books here, but I'd be willing to bet that Set and Anubis have 5-10 IQ points on him, and a fair amount of MA. While he may be smart, he's not deifically smart... just smarter than the average bear.

The next section goes into magic theory and how magic works. This is good, if you don't own the Palladium Fantasy RPG book with an entire section entitled "MAGIC" (PG 179 PFRPG) So it's really not necessary to include and is just a redundant reprint of information we already have. The helpful secion is the PPE beyond one's self section where it lets you know how much and how long characters can hold extra PPE. Aside from that it's just a redundant reprint of informtion we already have.

The manuscript had a fair amount more material.

Under the Gnome section it says they don't often become Alchemists. Now it's not that Gnomes aren't smart enough with their IQ of 3d6. It's that they can't get the ME requirment of 14 with only a 1d6+6 for an ME attribute. So guess what genius they can NEVER be Alchemists since they don't have the mental endurance required for the practice of Alchemy. So if you ever come across a Gnome who claims to be an Alchemist don't trust him/her. It's most likely a Demon/Devil/Dragon or some other nasty wanting you to do it's dirty work for it. Did the authors even read the secion on Gnomes prior to writing that?

I'll cop to this one; I tend to overlook attribute requirements, and have played by "Roll another die if your total is within X of maximum of your attribute roll of XD6" for 20 years. While gnomes have the capability, it's not going to be common.

Now this was not the only error in this section. Unfortunately in regards to the Wolfen race it lists Rune Magic as being purged eons ago. Yet if you look in the Northern Hinterlands book on page 61 you'll find a neat little Rune Lantern called the Eye of Elemore. It was made by a Wolfen and it only took him 6 years to figure out while being alone in the Northern Hinterlands. He even had the whole resources of the Empire behind him. Sure he took the secret with him to the grave, but apparently the secret is out in the Northern Wilderness/Hinterlands somewhere.. So the secrets of rune magic wern't purged.. Just lost and awaiting to be found.

Specifically addressed in the section on Mystics, actually.

The careers in Magic section is kind of a waste. I mean seriously if your player can't figure out a way in which the ability to wield awesome powers of magic or to summon up beasts/monsters/demons can be used to make a gold coin here and there then your playing with either a really young player or an idiot. In the latter case give up and walk away from the table and save yourself the headache.

It's not entirely about PCs. Yes, PCs can turn a coin this way. But they may also come upon instances where they have to buy these services. "We have no wizard, and need to send a fast message across the continent. How much does it cost for Magic Pigeon?" It's about living in a world.

The section on the Clergy is something that is OK. But this book was supposed to focus on Magic. When I think that I don't think priests. I think more along the lines of the Wizards, Summoners and actual practitioners of magic. Not priests and other religious OCCs.

Priests are not Men of Magic, but they are users of magic, and the ones most people will have the most experience with. That said, they were originally in a later chapter.

You should have however taken a different approach to the building of a magic guild/society. I think it was Rifter 8 which had some pretty decent rules about building guilds. Also I don't really think that religons should fall under guild construction rules. That just seems like trying to streamline an element that is best left to role playing.

Personally, I can't stand the "build a organization" rules that Palladium likes to include; I wrote up the "decide what you need" system, mostly figuring it would be replaced.

The Minerals & Magic section had promise.. But it seems a bit limited with nothing new aor even informative. I think a far better idea would have been to do an expanded alchemical section. Things Alchemists like to have on hand to work their magics. This would have lead to a lot of opportunities for plot hooks. Your local Alchemist is willing to cut you a really good deal on the magic items you want if you can go and get some of the components he'll need to make them. Another thing that would be a good addition would be a listing of herbs and items that would be useful in Holistic Medicine. I recall a bit in the Library and some stuff in Rifts England but thats about it.. More on that would be helpful since it's something mages know about and also something that other healers would be knowledgeable on as well.

The stuff about minerals was originally part of the Theory chapter.

I do like the revised spell casting times on page 54. Really clarifys things for the players. The optional Rapid Fire Magic can make for some exciting drama in a game. The mage has one action to toss that spell that may save the day or could spell certain doom for the party. Even then it's still kinda a long shot and very risky. It's the sort of thing that will either get cries of joy when it works or gripes and groans when it doesn't.

There were a few variations in the original version... the level of the caster and the level of the spell were important, and certain psychics could bypass it entirely.

The learning new spells section is another redundant waste of ink and paper. The spell creation rules are fairly decent and it seems to be similar to what appeared in Nightbane's Through the Glass Darkly supplement. This will give the mages something to do while traveling on long ships voyages and/or for that character that has made his/her fortune and has opted to retire somthing to do to pass the time while enjoying life retired.

A lot was edited from the original manuscript.

I like the expansion and clairty of the rules in the True Names section. Although I don't like how characters are able to change their true names. Given the rite of passage may kill the character and the spiritual awakening can take forever. The spiritual rebirth is another one that seems like a way for characters to switch to a new OCC and pickup a new name should the true name fall into a foes hands.

Again, a lot is edited from the original manuscript; this was originally in the Theory chapter.

The Forsaken Mage is a bit interesting. ...
The Half Wizard OCC is just a way for players to munchkin their characters out and get a few extras for nothing.

This is Kevin riffing on some very different ideas I had; more akin to my rules for minor and major psychics.

But whats this?? NEW SKILLS!!! HUZZAH Maybe something good.

Most of these are Kevin's; I think the original had Astrology, Research, and a couple of the Lore skills (plus some options for improving PPE and ISP, and some WP options).

OK well the spells Cleanse, Manipulate Objects, Mystic Fulcrum, Light Healing, is a reprint from both the Rifts Book of Magic and the Federation of Magic where it originally appeared. Cloud of Slumber is also a repeat, but since it wasn't in the PFRPG Book under Invocations thats fine that just fixes a typo. What I don't get about it is why it appears AGAIN as a level 7 spell a few pages later for more PPE? That is an obvious error

Mistake Count: 5

No clue on this one; I think I originally set it at level 2, under my not-printed guidelines for switching between Warlock and Wizard magic.

[Library Ogre]

And your still not going to attain any new mystical power there short of breaking in and looting the place where they keep the spell books hidden. The whole point is that the Library isn't a place to learn magic. Learning theory is kinda moot when your already a spell caster. At that point magic isn't a theory. It's a fact and one you put into practice.

I want to address this point, specifically. Of all of your statements, I think this one is the most wrong. To demonstrate, let me reword your statement.

"Learning theory is kinda moot when you're already a physicist. At that point, physics isn't a theory. It's a fact and one you put into practice."

As I mentioned above, I view learning theory as very important for a wizard, even as they progress. The better their understanding of theory, the better spells they can design, and the better they can understand what their spells do. Without a grounding in theory, a wizard is learning to use a machine, without learning how the machine does what it does. Studying the theory of magic does not teach you spells. It teaches you how things work, which in turn makes you better at designing spells, and can increase the potency of spells you know (i.e. learning theory gives you experience, which levels you up).

[AzathothXy]

I'll cop to this one; I tend to overlook attribute requirements, and have played by "Roll another die if your total is within X of maximum of your attribute roll of XD6" for 20 years. While gnomes have the capability, it's not going to be common.

Wan't there always a rule, that if you get 2D6 for an attribute(or equivalent), you get an extra D6 roll with a score of 11 or 12. Like the 3D6 rule. I could be mistaken, but I'm sure that was standard. That way you can have a gnome with a ME of 18, or an orc with a IQ of 18. Rare, but possible.

[Library Ogre]

I'll cop to this one; I tend to overlook attribute requirements, and have played by "Roll another die if your total is within X of maximum of your attribute roll of XD6" for 20 years. While gnomes have the capability, it's not going to be common.

Wan't there always a rule, that if you get 2D6 for an attribute(or equivalent), you get an extra D6 roll with a score of 11 or 12. Like the 3D6 rule. I could be mistaken, but I'm sure that was standard. That way you can have a gnome with a ME of 18, or an orc with a IQ of 18. Rare, but possible.

Yes and no. It was explicitly present for 2D6 and 3D6, but explicitly removed for anything with a modifier; so an elf, with a 3D6+1, would be smarter on average than a human... averaging at 11.5 instead of 10.5, but the smartest elf (19, since they don't get a bonus roll since they have a +1) is 11 points behind the smartest human (30, since there's now a 2nd bonus if you roll a 6 again).

A lot of people extrapolated from the rules for 2D6 (11 or 12) and 3D6 (16, 17, 18) to rules for 4D6, 5D6, or 1D6, and/or ignored the "no bonus roll if bonus points", allowing a gnome to get 18 about one time in 36.

But it's not canon, no.

[azazel1024]

I'd have to agree on the theory thing. Heck, if nothing else just because a wizard might know all wizard theories, doesn't mean they know diabolist theories, or summoner theories, etc.

Even that being said, a wizard isn't going to know all theories. Einstein didn't know all physics (though I think we could make his NPC a 15th level relativistic physist and 6th level quantum physist).
-Matt

[Northern Ranger]

I've read this entire thread three times now, and every time it's made me laugh like Hell! We've waited how many years for a new Fantasy book? And when the very talented Mister Hall finally gives us one, all you folks seem able to do is to tear it apart. Going into what was bad about the book. Not even mentioning the stuff that was GOOD, of which there was far more. Personally, I liked it all, as was stated in my own review of the book. I understood why it was all done, even if I didn't necessarily agree with it. I even got a kudos over there from one of the Defilers! But I digress, since it sounds like I'm tuting my own horn (which I was, I admit). Look, if you don't like the book, that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But the fact is, it's a great start to what I think is going to be a fantastic series. It was a stepping off point, a launching platform for something that WILL be epic, if you give it half a chance. Don't be so quick to criticize!

[Sureshot]

I've read this entire thread three times now, and every time it's made me laugh like Hell! We've waited how many years for a new Fantasy book? And when the very talented Mister Hall finally gives us one, all you folks seem able to do is to tear it apart.

News flash not everyone will like a product that is produced. When I review a product I do so to review the product. Not to make the writer feel good. As long as keep the critcism constructive and the review as impartial as possible that is what I do. If I have to step on a few toes to do so I will. I hate reviews that are only positive. Makes me feel that the person is not out to reveiw the product but shill for the company. I do not hate the book. i do not see a lot I like either. To expect only positve praise is naive imo. It is not so much Mark Hall work that seems to be in questions. It is more Kevin rewrites that imo harm the book.

[Library Ogre]

I've read this entire thread three times now, and every time it's made me laugh like Hell! We've waited how many years for a new Fantasy book? And when the very talented Mister Hall finally gives us one, all you folks seem able to do is to tear it apart.

News flash not everyone will like a product that is produced. When I review a product I do so to review the product. Not to make the writer feel good. As long as keep the critcism constructive and the review as impartial as possible that is what I do. If I have to step on a few toes to do so I will. I hate reviews that are only positive. Makes me feel that the person is not out to reveiw the product but shill for the company. I do not hate the book. i do not see a lot I like either. To expect only positve praise is naive imo. It is not so much Mark Hall work that seems to be in questions. It is more Kevin rewrites that imo harm the book.

My only complaint with Hobbes' review was he listed things as mistakes that were not necessarily so; his tone was confrontational, instead of critical. Some (like the gnome thing) were; it's a matter of having used a house rule for 17 years or so, and forgetting it's not RAW. Others, such as the stuff about the library of Bletherad, seemed to come from an incomplete understanding of what was being talked about. Given that it's known to be a single work that's chopped up and partially rewritten, I felt his tone (as I read it) was inappropriate, not the meat of his review.

[Stone Gargoyle]

My overall impression of the book is positive. It adds to the available source material as intended. It is an attractive book, well laid out, and easy to read. And I don't say that about most Palladium books, so that is a real compliment.
I am one of those who prefers to create my own world with others providing a guideline rather than relying on the source material for everything. The people criticizing it seem to be the ones finding the inconsistencies with what has already been written.

[Sureshot]

My only complaint with Hobbes' review was he listed things as mistakes that were not necessarily so; his tone was confrontational, instead of critical. Some (like the gnome thing) were; it's a matter of having used a house rule for 17 years or so, and forgetting it's not RAW. Others, such as the stuff about the library of Bletherad, seemed to come from an incomplete understanding of what was being talked about. Given that it's known to be a single work that's chopped up and partially rewritten, I felt his tone (as I read it) was inappropriate, not the meat of his review.

As I said in my previous posts he could have rephrased it differenlty and been more diplomatic shall we say. I am not blaming yourself because of the way I feel about the book. It's the rewrite that really sunk the book for me. In my reviews I try to word it to be impartia as possible and freely admit that is not always the case.

The people criticizing it seem to be the ones finding the inconsistencies with what has already been written.

It's not the inconsistencies that bother me so much. Though by now they should do a better job at actching them. Espcially in a book of that size. it's the reprinted material more than anything. Did we really need to see the how to run a an effective mage included yet again with other reprinted stuff. The Priest varaints are all but unplayable imo..

[Stone Gargoyle]

The people criticizing it seem to be the ones finding the inconsistencies with what has already been written.

It's not the inconsistencies that bother me so much. Though by now they should do a better job at actching them. Espcially in a book of that size. it's the reprinted material more than anything. Did we really need to see the how to run a an effective mage included yet again with other reprinted stuff. The Priest varaints are all but unplayable imo..

The constant reprinted material does get old after a while. That is probably one of the most annoying thing Palladium does in their books, especially when they reprint incompletely what was already printed in another book. Why not just have ONE sourcebook for just that information instead of the constantly repeated material? It is worse in the Nightbane books, though. I guess I am so happy to get a magic book that isn't that MDC oriented $#!% that I m willing to overlook the redundencies. I also don't have a lot of the PF books, so I probably ave not gotten annoyed by the mage material repetition yet.

[Library Ogre]

On reprints:
For me, it depends on the nature of the reprint, and the source of the original.

Generally, I don't appreciate things being reprinted out of the main book, because that's the book that everyone is assumed to have/need in the course of a normal game. In Rifts, I don't mind so much if it's equipment that's being gathered by manufacturer (like publishing all the CS equipment together in CWC), and sometimes if there's a major expansion on a class or something, republishing it makes sense (like the Psi-Stalker in Xiticix Invasion).

However, sometimes it's things that are in several books, or across lines. Like republishing the Vampire information in both Arzno and Vampire Kingdoms. If I'm specifically playing in Arzno, it means I don't need to carry around Vampire Kingdoms for vampire information. It makes my back lighter and less unwieldy, so I mind a lot less.

[Northern Ranger]

I've read this entire thread three times now, and every time it's made me laugh like Hell! We've waited how many years for a new Fantasy book? And when the very talented Mister Hall finally gives us one, all you folks seem able to do is to tear it apart.

For the record I wasn't tearing it apart. I'm actually very excited about getting a copy of my own once I get a job.

And yes, anyone's ego would get boosted from a compliment from someone like Alex Heck, I was on cloud 9 when Kevin patted me on the back at POH09 and said I was a "good guy no matter what anyone says" because I was helping clean up the VIP mess after arriving WAY too early (7:30am) on Friday.

I wasn't necessarily referring to you Apollyon, you and I have pretty much agreed on everything we've mutually posted on in the past. I was referring to those who were tearing it apart. And as I think I said in my post, if you didn't like it, that's your right. But there's no reason to be rude when saying what you didn't like. Hobbes's tone was negative, which I believe he's already addressed. I don't think he meant it to be. It's all good, I just thought it was funny that when we all finally got what we wanted, it's been almost nothing but criticized, that's all.

[The Dark Elf]

Talking about reprints I hadnt noticed the ease and amount a mage can draw ppe from others conscious alive people without them even noticing. Thats a mistake I missed/didnt bother reading when we transfered from 1st to 2nd edition. And, its a reprint from the core book.

If I hadnt read it in MoM we would be playing a very different game so - "Swings and roundabouts."

[Bronn]

I think you have to realize that a fair amount of fans have picked up some major cross books like the Book of Magic, Federation of Magic, Psyscape. We have had to go get those books over the years because of the Fantasy book famine.

I wouldn`t be so quick to jump to that conclusion. While I like Palladium FRPG and the other SDC games, I`ve never liked the MDC system and while I liked some of the ideas of Rifts and picked up the first few books many moons ago, I never found playing it overly enjoyable despite some interesting fluff. I haven`t touched it in many years, nor have I considered buying a Rifts book just for PFRPG stuff. Admittedly, part of that is that our group hasn`t played PFRPG or any other Palladium game in a fair while (but I`m planning a surprise TMNT one-shot when an old gaming buddy visits from out-of-town in a couple of weeks!!), but even were I still playing it, I can`t see myself buying a Rifts book just because I may have wanted some new Spells or Psionics. I would be one of those people who isn`t the diehard Palladium player who buys everything they put out (especially since so much of it IS Rifts, and admittedly justifiably so in this hard financial time for them), and therefore, someone who would welcome adaptions of OCCs and mechanics I`ve never seen before. They do have to take into consideration that there are some fans of theirs, lapsed or occasional buyers, who have not picked up Book of Magic, etc. From the sounds of this thread, I`m in the minority, but I am out here and I`m sure I`m not the only one.

For me, I was actually pretty interested in the release of this book, and am a little disappointed to read this review, although kudos for putting it out there, despite the inevitable flak. I`ll probably still pick it up when I have some spare cash (which sadly probably means months from now) because I`m a PFRPG completist (Arms of Nargash-Tor FTW!), but I was hoping that this would provide more of an inspiration to get the old gang or a new gang together again to play. Maybe future books in the series will give me that inspiration, assuming that my review of the book is similar to the original poster`s.

[Khanibal]

So, according to the rules, If I'm an 11th level wizard trying to invent a completely new 3rd level spell, my chance of success is 11 (for level since the spell isn't a variant or simply unknown existing spell, there are no other modfiers) - 3 (the level of the spell) for a whopping 8% chance to create my spell after a mere 105 months of work (average) or 8 3/4 years. Wow.
It's a good thing the gods invented all the spell, because at 45 yrs to get a 50/50 shot of creating a spell, humans certainly haven't crafted any.

Hunh for totally new 15th level spells, you'd have to be 16th level to have a 1% chance.

I'll stick to the Nightbane rules thank you.

[Eryk Stormbright]

I for one am planning on picking the book up at the next OH, I'd pick it up sooner but i'm saving for the trip, guess i'll save my opinion untill I can give it a good read through, but I have high hopes.

[Library Ogre]

So, according to the rules, If I'm an 11th level wizard trying to invent a completely new 3rd level spell, my chance of success is 11 (for level since the spell isn't a variant or simply unknown existing spell, there are no other modfiers) - 3 (the level of the spell) for a whopping 8% chance to create my spell after a mere 105 months of work (average) or 8 3/4 years. Wow.
It's a good thing the gods invented all the spell, because at 45 yrs to get a 50/50 shot of creating a spell, humans certainly haven't crafted any.

Hunh for totally new 15th level spells, you'd have to be 16th level to have a 1% chance.

I'll stick to the Nightbane rules thank you.

A large number of modifiers were left off that table.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

My biggest gripe about Hobbes's critic of the book is he seems to operate under the assumption everyone knows what he knows, and does things the way he does them.

First EVERYONE should know what is in the PFRPG Core book.. With out that book you don't have the rules. So asking the new writers and the editor to look over what new material they are thinking about publishing to ensure it doesn't contradict or go against the established canon material isn't asking too much. In fact it should be part of the editors job. Considering there were three editors for this book, and that it takes several years for PFRPG books to come out, asking for some consistency and that the new material to not contradict the canon material in the core book isn't unreasonable.

So yes everyone should know what is in the main book. Anything new that comes out should not go against what is in that book. Given individual gaming groups will make house rules. But for the new published materials they should conform to the canon material that is already established. If players and GMs wanna make house rules then that is up to them. But new material should conform to what's already established.

If they don't do things the way he does, exactly, then they have to be wrong. No flexibility, and apparently, no imagination to speak of. This may come as a big surprise, but there are those out there who are new to this whole sort of thing, and don't know that a Sorceress is a reference to a female sorcerer, or that a Warlock isn't a male Witch. And there are many sources that use those terms to mean drastically different things.

Well I didn't really get too much into the whole root of the words thing. That was a debate started somewhere else. But regardless. The OCC has the name in it.. And if someone is confused about the rules what are you going to do? Send them to the core book or the most recent publication? Again it really comes down to it, whatever the gaming group that is playing the game gets to decide how things will or won't be used.

Myself I like to play by the rules as established. So if you feel that your sense of creativity or your imagination is being stifled because I run my games that way then feel free to change whatever you see fit. Just keep in mind that your not playing by the book. New materials should conform to what is already established in the canon materials. If you wanna allow Gnome Alchemists, Baal-Rog Priests of Ra, or Troglodyte Pirates then feel free. No way am I allowing such idiocy at my gaming table.

That being said, the book wasn't all that great. Too much reprinted material for my taste. If the book has something saying "refer to page xx of book qq for the information about this subject", that would have been better, I think, as they could have kept some of stuff said to be edited out. But, you take what you can get.

"You take what you can get" should be an unacceptable standard for quality. I agree the book was more of a teaser for future releases with way too much reprinted material.

Another small thing. I hate that so many people want the game to be static. "The main book says this, so it is CANON, and is written in stone!" When it comes to historical references, why is it so hard to accept that new information could have come to light? Or that the fluff in one book is merely a different opinion then what is said in another? Or, why is it so hard to think that when its a character saying something, it doesn't mean its the absolute truth? Just because someone in the Eastern Kingdoms thinks Wolfen are baby eating monsters, and it is written so in the book, doesn't mean that Wolfen are baby eating monsters. It just amazes me how someone that is a GM especially, can be so single minded, and take things so absolutely one dimensionally. Everything isn't as black and white as some would appear to like it, no matter how they try and enforce it in there games.

Game mechanics are black and white. That is how the game is played. Again house rules aside new material should conform to what is already canon.

The issue isn't so much that flavor text is contradictory, but when the writers bring up things that aren't legal in the system to create then there is a game mechanic issue. (IE Gnomes becoming alchemists.)

I think too many people try to throw mix groups together and think that just because they came up with a back story (Usually a really unlikely scenario) that having a Wolfen Impearial Janissary is a viable character to allow in a campaign.

Sorry but a Troll or other monster race that goes near a human settlement isn't going to be welcomed with open arms. Peasants/villagers and what not are gonna take one look at that thing, scream "GUARDS!!! A TROLL IS ATTACKING!! HELP!! HELP!!"

Sorry Hobbes, but I use quite a bit of creativity in my games. If that makes me an inept GM, then I am glad thats the case, and so, apparently, are the players that jump up, screaming and cheering at my gaming table, and say I run the best games they have played in. Everything you have said, both in this post, and most others I have seen, makes it readily apparent to me you have no depth of imagination at all.

If your players are happy with you running your games then fine. Not my concern. So your saying I have no imagination due to the fact I make players play by the rules?

So why don't you enlighten me. If your so creative then why don't you show me what you've done. If your games are so awesome that your players are jumping up and down and cheering show me and the others on this forum what you got. Post a campaign. Lets have a sample of your creativity.

If my above statement offends you, I apologize, even though I don't really see the need to apologize to someone that can openly offend other GM's without any care.

If your offended by the fact I think GMs who fudge things are inept then accept my challenge and post a campaign. Show me what concepts are behind it, post what characters you allow in it, show us what kind of GM you really are.

I find it funny how people who claim to be awesome GMs on these boards are always going on about the virtues of creativity or story over rules and game mechanics. Yet they never seem to post anything about the sessions, the characters playing in the games or anything else about the goings on.

So if you got something then by all means post it. At the very least we can compare game styles. Why not give everyone a fair chance to assess what goes on? I've posted things that happen in my games on these boards.. Some agree with what happens and some don't. At the least it is a good opportunity to compare styles and get ideas..

So please accept my challenge Darkechilde and we can see what your all about.

[Sureshot]

Unless you and I are reading diffrent things Darkchilde he is not calling you a liar. Your the one who said " readily apparent to me you have no depth of imagination at all". Then when he calls you out on it you try to pass yourself as a victim. No offence if your going to attack someone on the boards then you have to be able to receive as well as give. You came into this thread with both guns blazing so to speak then complain when someone shots back. You cannot have it both ways.

[Lord_Dalgard]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3219/2885723241_84c4f8c693_o.jpg

[Sureshot]

Agreed and seconded LD.

[UR Leader Hobbes]

Ah, so not only am I a "fail GM" for using my imagination in games, but apparently I am a liar as well.

I never called you a liar. You were the one who was bragging what a great GM you are and touting your virtues of creativity and flexibility. I challenged you to share a campaign with everyone on the board so people could see your style and assess what your all about. The challenge is still on the table.

Wow. I could list the players, their characters, and exactly what happened in the game, along with dates and times, but why do I have to prove I am not a liar to you? Not only do you insult me by saying I suck as a GM because I don't run games the way you do, but then you call me a liar.

I never called you a liar. You came up with that one all on your own. Is this an example of your creativity? Gotta say I'm not impressed. Now would you care to accept my challenge or are you just gonna prove to be exactly what I said. Someone who comes around and claims to be awesome GM, always going on about the virtues of creativity or story over rules and game mechanics. Yet you back down from a simple challenge to share what happens in your games.

I have nothing to prove to you. Your not worth the time. You really were not worth the time it took to type this out, to be honest.

Trying to take the high road after backing down from a challenge? Sad really. Your just like a lot of other people who claim the same thing. Oh sure you talk a great game. But when I ask you to provide an example you got nothing but excuses. Again I will remind you that it was you who bragged about what an awesome GM you are. So if you got something then share it. Judging from your post where you claim you have dates / times / characters and events I'm guessing you have some sort of notes on your campaign. So if it's not too much trouble for you. Step down from your high horse and please accept my challenge. Just for convince sake, I'll post my challenge again for you and bold it so you can't mistake it for me calling you a liar.

If your so creative then why don't you show me what you've done. If your games are so awesome that your players are jumping up and down and cheering show me and the others on this forum what you got. Post a campaign. Lets have a sample of your creativity.

I am sorry that the truth of what I said in my previous post got you so angry. But, thats what the truth often does.

First I'm not angry. You are the one who apparently doesn't understand the point of view I take when doing reviews of books. That being new material should fall in line with what is already established in the setting. I think that the writers, editors, and publisher should take care to ensure that there is no contradiction in game mechanics nor contradictions to what is already established in the setting. I'm just holding the publishers/writers/etc to the standards they have already set up. If you can't get that.. That is your problem.

If you got upset, you really brought it on yourself. One for not understanding where I was coming from with my review and secondly for bragging about how amazing a GM you are.

If you feel your not up to my little challenge then fine. But don't go acting all offended after your the one who said I had no depth of imagination at all or flexibility. I've asked you to share something and your next post was a bunch of excuses as to why you won't accept my challenge.