Anyone ever tried Warrior, Rogue, and Mage?

[Starsign]

So I've been scouting the net for some RPGs that I might feel like giving a try, and I came upon one known as Warrior, Rogue, and Mage. For those who know the system and have tried it, how was it in your opinion? I've always been fond of the good ol' Fighter, Mage, Thief dynamic, (and it's many variants, including Warrior, Spellcaster, and Expert found in the Generic Classes of Unearthed Arcana) even if it can be hilariously unbalanced, so this RPG has shown an interest to me.

[Knaight]

This is a wonderful game. As far as I'm concerned, WR&M is basically D&D as it ought to have been - it is a rules light game that is still somewhat robust, and the core conceit is a very elegant method of archetype emulation - Warrior, Rogue, and Mage are the three attributes. Moreover, WR&M is easily tweaked, up to varied attributes, with the suggested Warrior, Rogue, and Scholar; the pulp Resolute Adventurer, and Genius; and whatever people choose to home brew.

It is also free and all of 40 pages, so it takes very little time and less money to take a look at it.

[Starsign]

This is a wonderful game. As far as I'm concerned, WR&M is basically D&D as it ought to have been - it is a rules light game that is still somewhat robust, and the core conceit is a very elegant method of archetype emulation - Warrior, Rogue, and Mage are the three attributes. Moreover, WR&M is easily tweaked, up to varied attributes, with the suggested Warrior, Rogue, and Scholar; the pulp Resolute Adventurer, and Genius; and whatever people choose to home brew.

It is also free and all of 40 pages, so it takes very little time and less money to take a look at it.

Ah, so you've been in games with it then? How well did those games go if I may ask? I'll take a look at the book in the meantime. :smallsmile:

[Manateee]

I've pretty much used it for D&D-type games for a few years.

Despite its name, it's not something I'd use for an archetype-driven game like you mention. I'm not sure I've seen a character maxed to one of those archetypes yet.

The lightness is its most shining trait - new players can very easily start playing, and do so more naturally than something like GURPS, d20 or even Fate.

Even though I've used it as a D&D-type, the focus shifts a bit from D&D. Whereas with all D&D iterations since Player's Options D&D places a huge emphasis on tactical combat, WR&M lets you focus the game on abstract problem-solving unaddressed by specific rules... "puzzle" monsters and traps where the PCs are expected to come up with something clever rather than just bashing things with numbers.

If your players are used to the D&D-type problemsolving and combat (rolling dice, then saying whether they succeed or not), the game will get pretty dry fast. It's when the players start reacting to Giant Slug traps by hauling salt from the water in the local Exotic Kraken Aquarium that things get fun.

[Knaight]

Ah, so you've been in games with it then? How well did those games go if I may ask? I'll take a look at the book in the meantime. :smallsmile:

They consistently went well - that said, the group I've played it in is a very solid group, and this same group can play most everything and have it go well. Still, we all liked the system itself.

I second Manatee's comment regarding abstract puzzle solving - however, in addition to that, there is also the role playing aspect - I've found that it actually encourages roleplaying through minimalist mechanics, where other systems that theoretically do the same thing fail to do so. A lot of that is simply in how it gives room within the archetypes to explore a character, rather than push the idea that they should be locked down to a particular form before the game, and because you can play around with the personalities more before settling into one they tend to work better in play.

[Starsign]

Ah, I think I get it. I've always been more of a fan with roleplaying with my character's powers/abilities/traits than actual combat, though I also can enjoy combat when it comes to it. The abstract puzzle solving part does sound like fun, though it would require a good GM. (of which I am definitely not :smallredface:) Might there be any sort of flaws or slight issues you have with WR&M that I might want to be aware of? :smallsmile:

[Knaight]

Ah, I think I get it. I've always been more of a fan with roleplaying with my character's powers/abilities/traits than actual combat, though I also can enjoy combat when it comes to it. The abstract puzzle solving part does sound like fun, though it would require a good GM. (of which I am definitely not :smallredface:) Might there be any sort of flaws or slight issues you have with WR&M that I might want to be aware of? :smallsmile:

WR&M requires a good GM, period. You can't get around that, and that can be an issue.

[Starsign]

WR&M requires a good GM, period. You can't get around that, and that can be an issue.

Ah, I see. That... Will likely be an extreme challenge. :smalleek: Have you ever tried GM'ing WR&M before or have you only tried being a player? If so I'd like to know what it is like to GM that game.

[Knaight]

Ah, I see. That... Will likely be an extreme challenge. :smalleek: Have you ever tried GM'ing WR&M before or have you only tried being a player? If so I'd like to know what it is like to GM that game.

I've GMed and played, and found it easy in both roles - that said, I'm used to groups which are good at player driven games, and it seems like leading around a bunch of baby-bird players would be nightmarish.

[Manateee]

The abstract puzzle solving part does sound like fun, though it would require a good GM. (of which I am definitely not :smallredface:) I don't think it takes any astounding talents other than the abilities to come up with details of a situation on the spot (similar to most RPGs), to introduce a problem (again similar to other RPGs; you don't necessarily need to have a solution in mind either) and to run with whatever the players come up with. (Also to affect terrible accents when the situation demands.)

The main thing that keeps this fun is avoiding a dead-end "No."
That doesn't necessarily mean letting everything the players try to do to get around an obstacle work, but it means not to let a failure stop the action. As long as every action (success or failure) introduces new complications, players will have something to riff off, and the game can keep some upbeat momentum.

If you've ever done any improv, it's basically like that.

[Starsign]

Sorry for the delay in post, but thank you both for your info. I got a hold of the game and it's been really fun so far. Hopefully we'll get a chance to play it on GitP some day :smallbiggrin: