Gaming Monk Review

Gaming Monk Review Returns with a look into Open Ended Games' marriage between high fantasy and heavy metal. Its it as chart-y as its inspirations? Or does it Make Criticals Hurt Again?
Avatar art by: / barbuscocomics
Join the Monastery! / discord
#RPG, #Tabletop, #Monastery, #d100, #Rolemaster, #Metal, #Fantasy
---
Invite link: / discord
Odysee Channel: odysee.com/@Mi...
Twitch: / mildrathemonk
Vimm: www.vimm.tv/mi...
Subscribestar: www.subscribes...

[@NefariousKoel]

Those were quite some Stat rolls!
While I've always had an appreciation for ICE's MERP/HARP/Rolemaster lines, their book and rule layouts were atrocious. I don't think the rules crunchiness was the issue but, instead, how difficult it was getting through them compared to most other games. Also the system didn't quite fit Middle Earth too well, but that could be overlooked. After getting Against The Darkmaster, I feel my complaints about ICE's layout and such appear quite justified. Sure, VsD did streamline the rules a bit, but it's so much easier to read, learn, and reference. I'm also happy with the extra content for creating your own setting, similar to Tolkienesque fantasy, but easily done to taste. I like it.

[@MildraTheMonkVT]

I'm still holding out hope for a streamlined Spacemaster. A monk can dream...

[@NefariousKoel]

@@MildraTheMonkVT - I've been hoping for a clean iteration of Spacemaster too. Perhaps the same crew has some interest in doing so eventually.

[@MildraTheMonkVT]

While I doubt that Open Ended Games will do it, the fact that they have some form of an open license gives me some hope.

[@farinal]

I love the idea, spirit and the themes of VSDarkmaster. Never played the old MERP system yet tho!

[@MildraTheMonkVT]

Between the two, I'd be more willing to recommend VsD than MERP.

[@doomhippie6673]

I agree with your assessment. Nicely done.

[@patrickbarnes9874]

I appreciate Mildra for the amount of gaming content he puts out there for us but I have to say his reviews baffle me. I don't understand the intent or logic behind them. I've been listening them to years and they're almost always the same. He creates a character. The end. Then calls it a review of the game. He goes through one section of the game in detailed step by step fashion, then virtually ignores every other aspect of the game. Example art, setting info, writing style, size and type of bestiary, how detailed and deadly is combat, how does magic or psionics differ from other games, overall complexity, etc - all areas that get little to no mention. But he tells you every single stat, derived stat, and skill rating of some sample character that nobody will ever end up playing. To top that off, he doesn't even explain what the stats and skills do or mean. I really do like Mildra and appreciate the work he puts in supporting our glorious hobby, but I just can't fathom his RPG reviews. I have yet to finish one of his RPG reviews with any better idea of whether I want to buy the game or not than before I watched them. I hope this doesn't sound harsh because I don't mean it to be harsh, I just am completely confused at the approach taken to reviewing RPGs. It seems to ignore really important aspects of a game and go into minute detail on irrelevant character stats.

[@Tasluk]

You dont need to play the game to make an adequate review in the case of RPGs. Sure it helps but ince you have a strong grasp of several systems, all you need to do is read the rules.

[@shaicass]

TL;DR: I like Mildra's approach and I disagree with the notion that the review is just creating a character.
I agree though that the character creation portion isn't always clear.
When I started listening to Mildra's reviews I kind of felt the same. After a second/third watch of a review, I turned to like his review style. It's direct and clear (with the exception of the character creation, but I'll get to that).
Starting with Layout (which includes some words about the art), when you think about it, there isn't much to say. Mildra gives us the important basics: how it's organized, is it easy to read, how does the art look and (of course) is there an index (along with bookmarks and the Table of Contents).
Then the character creation, I agree that most of the review is spent on it (and it could slow down the pace) and that not all the stats are clear with what they are intended for (or the logic that led to the decision of allocating points to them), but It's the first interaction of the players and the GM with the rules, and I think that it's important to show it (not many reviewers actually take the time to make a character as a part of the review). (On the other hand, we get a premade character can be used as an NPC.)
Then the Game Mechanics give an overview of how the game is played, the more comlpex the mechanics the more time Mildra spends describing them (from what I remember). Next is the special rules of the game (mainly magic and spells). Ending with the final thoughts.
I agree, that a lot of things don't get much attention (as I mentioned in the Character Creation part of the comment), but I find Mildra's direct approach more informative, than many other reviewers.
I also think it comes from a difference of gaming philosophy: combat can be as deadly or as simple as needed, the setting can be altered to the GM's wishes, the GM is usually encouraged to create their own monsters.
I find that most reviewers try to stick to the game as written, I think that Mildra gives us the bare bones with the knowledge that the rules aren't "set in stone".

[@MildraTheMonkVT]

In my early days, I used to do chapter-by-chapter breakdowns. That can work in text, but it doesn't really work in video form. Thus, I tried to distill it to focus on what's going to ACTUALLY matter, and who I'd recommend it to. I don't give attention to every little detail in a book because eventually, that descends into a "let's read", not a review.
Also, if I explained every stat it'd get repetitive real fast.