I am currently playing in a group using the original draft rules and am a Kickstarter backer. As the campaign ended successfully several months ago and I have actually tested the rules in active play since then I believe I can objectively rate the game with no suspicion of ulterior motives. The core mechanics remain the same as in the older version with some changes to secondary concepts and the addition of some new rules for other game concepts.
The rules are skill and attribute driven, with some general attributes being the basis of more specialized skills that a character can use. The mechanics rely on dice pools of 1+ dice and work rather smoothly once you get used to adding up what dice are applied in what situations. The addition of maneuvers, stunts that can improve rolls in different ways, add a flavorful swashbuckling element integrated in mechanics and narrative. Speaking of narrative play the system excellently facilitates this through the addition of Passions, a mechanic that allows players to use the characters' beliefs and emotional investments actively in play.
The Alpha and Omega of the system however are the ubiquitous Style Points, earned for performing good feats of roleplaying and for making 'critical' rolls. Style Points are used to activate maneuvers, use passions actively and generally increase player control over the rules mechanics at critical moments. They are limited to only three per character at any given time, preventing hoarding, emphasizing fast use and keeping the players thinking of how to best spend their resources.
The game world is very closely modeled after 1600s Europe, with byroads into the mid-east and the Americas. This makes the setting easy to picture while allowing for greater creative freedom on part of the game master. I would have liked to see more on the different cultures, the addition of a calender describing time keeping in the game world is a nice detail but seems an odd thing to focus on in the introductory play-test rules. an extra page of background material had been preferable.
The game's creator has a stated goal of focusing on diversity of sexual orientation and gender, and while the setting mostly keeps to societal norms of the 1600s that is its inspiration gender roles are very different from our own history. Another reviewer has claimed that the game focuses needlessly much on sex and gender. This is untrue in my opinion. Looking through the play-test document I've found four mentions of sexuality and gender roles, only two of which directly concern homosexuality and only in passing. I wouldn't call that excessive or 'preachy'.
All in all I've enjoyed the game very much so far and found the rules to work well. My group have established a few house-rules, mostly concerning the use and acquisition of Style Points which seemed a little too generous. The setting is nicely evocative of Dumas and his successors. I give the game a solid 4/5 for its evocative setting and smooth system, with only minor quibbles in that the rules still need some polishing and balancing.
|