This item is dedicated to discussion of Over the Edge, Castle Falk, 
Storyteller, and other symple mechanic games where the mechancs are
simple, the simulation is of fiction, and the characters and stories
take precidence over the dice, cards, or numbers.
        Anyone here play these games? Personally, I far prefer Over
teh Edge to any other system, but I can be talked into playing almost
any non-level based system.

20 responses total.

Cool! I'm first!  Ever played Star Wars, mneme?

I have to agree, Over the Edge is one of the best systems I've
had the pleasure of running.

#1 Yep!  Star Wars is and was one of the first (if not the first) good
comercial simply-mechanic system, and wit worksed, and worked well.  Only 
problem I have isthat architype creation was safely hiden, and not utterly
elegant (as opposed to OTE, wehre the character creation is both incredibly
simple, and universally flexable).

#2: yep.  Now we need to think of topics to discuss, short of just patting 
each other on the back for picking the best system in creation.  Are you on
the On-the-edge mailing list?  The traffic on there's pretty low, but some 
really good stuff occaisionally comes over it.

No I'm not on the OtE list. I'm not suprised one exists, but I'd never
found an address for it so I didn't sign on. SO you happen to have it ?

Oh, you ymean, you want me to actually post the address?  OK.  
to subscribe, send mail to over-the-edge-request@gojira.monsta.com with
subscribe in the body.  To actaully sned to the list, mail to 
over-the-edge@gojira.monsta.com.
        Have you seen edgework?  There's a fun article in Edgework #2 (still 
have yet to see #3) about an alternate magic/psionic system, as well as lots 
of other neat stuff.

No, I haven't even heard of edgework. I assume it's an OtE magazine
of some sort ?

It's an atlas sponsored, full production values fanzine, meaning that they 
don't have ads, they do cost money ($7 an issue, or $20 for a 4 issue sub), 
and Atlas doesn't control the content any.  Rather good, and I should subscribe
so I can get #3.  For more info, mail me at mneme@dorsai.org, or just mail
the list -- I'm sure the editor or the head of Atlas (both of whom are on 
the edge list) would be HAPPY to give you info.

Re-reading this makes me think I should dust off my OTE campaign and start
mucing about with the PC's brains again.  (big grin)

hey howbout starting an OTE or Vampire:the masquerade game on-line?

sounds fun, but if we do an OTE, somebody would have to teach me how to play.
  :-(
Instead of doing a strictly Vampire game, how 'bout one with combinations from
different WW games (ex. changelings, werewolfs, mages etc.)

I've noticed from people who have run cross-overs (Hye - I was playing!), that
even though the systems are similar - they do not overlap well.

I made the offer once before if there was enough interest. Nobody  said they
were interested. I might still be able to if there were enough interest.
-coyote- OTE is very easy to learn.

I'd have to learn too, so howbout it? who's GM?

Um.. I think I said I was interested then; therea re three(Kain, Coyote and
myself) in this very thread. Agred; OTE is VERY easily to tpick up -- I've ven
created a character with someone  (or rahter helped them create a character) in
real time over IRC with no difficulty at all.
        The WW backgrounds for their games aren't really compatible, though the
        system is, and the 
games can be if you craete compatible characters to begin with.

I've never played any WW games

Most--scratch that---All oif the WW games I play are mixed..Vamps with
werewolves with mages, ect. this particular storytellercan mesh them quite
effectively.  In facet, I have a 15-year-old 1st-rank Japanese Silver Fang
working as an operative for a (fairly radical) branch of New World Order.

The games are supposed to mixed to some degree. They're all set in the same
world, and each has references to all the others at some point. I just wish
the bullet crew had done a little more work on mechanicle compatability and
unity.

The games are mroe than mixed; they are interwoeven (though in a particurally[D
commercial/iritating way.
        WhatI was more refering tio was worldview; most of the characters in
        one game have little reason to
deal with characters from aonother game -- a ghost is unlikely to have anything
to do with a vampire, who is likewise unlikely to have anything a mage wants,
wh may very well consider a gypsy or wearwolf (wash and, even) beneath his
notice.  The model they present is a bunch of largely seperate magial groups,
each with its own heirarchies, and worldview, but no exposure to any other, and
little if  any chance to mingle.  They never even really synthesize any of the
views, or give the GM a self-consistent view of what's going on, instead only
complicating the web of lies.
        Now, the Nightlivefe model, despite its many flaws, is much more
        self-consisten and
workable than the WW one.  Instead of the Race(vamire, werewolf,
mage)->Conspiracy within the race-> Type(malk, tremere, nRedcap) heirarchy,
with no conspiracy which contains more than one group, Nightlife  uses an
overlapping model, with various forms of kin (daemons, werewolves, ghosts,
mages) involved in any ofa number of gloval conspiracies (The commune wants to
live side by side with the humans, the complex and  Morningstar want to rule
the world, thBlack Solstice want's it's sorcerers to rule the world; Red Moon
Rising is crazy, Hexenbanner wants to eradicate all sorcerors), with only a few
limited by race, so  you are much more likely to see a sorceror and werewolf
working together (bedcause, say, they are both involved in the commune).  Now,
WW could have done this with Mage, since their plots is "bigger", but ass far
as I know, they didn't.

Actually each of hte books has presented ways for all the seperate 'species'
of beings to have ways of interacting. The major theme in each of the books
is for interaction of of the type (Vamp.Mage, etc) to interact within it's
own grouping, because there's no gaurentee that people are going to buy any
of the other games, so the focus of each is internal to the game itself, with
some idea for a little crossover between them. But as each game has come out
they have presented more and more ways for ecah 'group' to have interaction
with other groups. The independant agendas of the organizations in general
don't present much opportunity for mixing up with others. However the
organizations are made up of individuals who all have the opprtunity to mix
and match as they please.

'struth, the way the things work with largely seperate species is largely an
artifact  of the marketing scheme of WW.  On the other hand, while explicable
and somewhat  compensated for, it's still a dreadful way to design a suposedly
unified world.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss