Scan barcode
mc_j_ho's review
3.0
I am on the fence about the one. It is a great system with loads of potential and the book helps to present lots of these options, evoking many ideas in the process with useful advice for adapting the system. On the other hand some of the information is poorly presented at times with what feels like overblown padding to make up the page count that could have been used for more rules. It is also very light on usable stats for most of the settings, leaving a lot of the work for the GM to do. It ends up feeling like they take you only halfway there (and then later supplements show you why). Feels a bit cynical, but still a great system for all that.
obnorthrup's review
4.0
Looking forward to playing this when it's safe to play games in person again. In the meantime, I think the dice system would be tricky to teach and use over VC.
shane_tiernan's review
3.0
The first word that comes to mind after reading this is "repetitious". Maybe it was a technique to help people remember things but I often found myself thinking, "Didn't I just read that a couple pages ago?" The key thing with Genesys is you can fail a check, but still have something good happen, and you can pass a check and still have something bad happen. What happens is determined by the player making the check and then approved, modified or completely changed by the GM.
Other than that the only thing that really stuck out as different is the "looseness" of the magic system. There aren't 200 individual spells that are very specific in their effects. Instead there are 6 or 7 different types of spells and then you can adjust them by making the check to cast them tougher. It's something I've been looking for, for a long time and something I've attempted to create a couple times, though I haven't had much of a chance to test anything I've written.
Having dice that are unique to a system can be a deal breaker for some people, especially those who have amassed a collection of 100's or even 1000's of "normal" polyhedral dice. For me it's definitely a thumbs down, though I do see how they are needed to achieve the "fail, but with advantage" mechanic that pulls players more into the story.
I actually played a session of the game and I was surprised that putting the dice pool together wasn't as cumbersome as I thought it would be, the GM being experienced with the system definitely helped. Having to decide what the advantages/disadvantages were did slow the game down a bit, but it added to the fun so I felt it was worth it.
I'm not a "Theater of the Mind" guy, so no minis or grid is definitely a big thumbs down for me. If I was going to run it I would use minis anyway and a map, if not necessarily a grid. Or I might just homebrew movement rules and use a grid.
This is a big book but don't let that scare you, most of it is not needed to play the game and even GM's can skip large parts of it without impeding their understanding of how to play.
Other than that the only thing that really stuck out as different is the "looseness" of the magic system. There aren't 200 individual spells that are very specific in their effects. Instead there are 6 or 7 different types of spells and then you can adjust them by making the check to cast them tougher. It's something I've been looking for, for a long time and something I've attempted to create a couple times, though I haven't had much of a chance to test anything I've written.
Having dice that are unique to a system can be a deal breaker for some people, especially those who have amassed a collection of 100's or even 1000's of "normal" polyhedral dice. For me it's definitely a thumbs down, though I do see how they are needed to achieve the "fail, but with advantage" mechanic that pulls players more into the story.
I actually played a session of the game and I was surprised that putting the dice pool together wasn't as cumbersome as I thought it would be, the GM being experienced with the system definitely helped. Having to decide what the advantages/disadvantages were did slow the game down a bit, but it added to the fun so I felt it was worth it.
I'm not a "Theater of the Mind" guy, so no minis or grid is definitely a big thumbs down for me. If I was going to run it I would use minis anyway and a map, if not necessarily a grid. Or I might just homebrew movement rules and use a grid.
This is a big book but don't let that scare you, most of it is not needed to play the game and even GM's can skip large parts of it without impeding their understanding of how to play.
tiggum's review
3.0
Mostly pretty well laid-out - except that the equipment and sample NPCs are split up among the different genre sections rather than all being in one place - and the system is pretty neat; flexible and certainly not overly complicated. I haven't tried playing it yet, but it seems like it should work pretty well.
svarnyp's review against another edition
4.0
A general RPG rulebook from Fantasy Flight seemed like an interesting thing to check out and it truly was. Obviously, when reading such a book, one is going to also discuss the rules and not just the writing style. In general, if you are new to RPGs and want a modern RPG system that is close to the classical D&D games but with some original and interesting designs and applicable also to other settings quite easily, then Genesys seems like a good option.
I liked many aspects of the book. The quality is top, with great sketches that suggest that also the book content is more like a sketch, not a full painting.
The semantics of dice (i.e. having successes, advantages) seems really good and is used in other FFG RPGs, so I believe it stood already some test of time. Reading about it excited me to use it in-game with its potential for narrative storytelling. In the same topic, I liked how even dialogues or other social encounters are treated similarly as combat encounters and the GM is motivated to think about the goals and outcomes of each encounter and what purpose they play in the story.
The focus on narration is also present in explaining what skills should be used for and what they shouldn't be used for. Similarly, I loved how dice results are often illustrated by a piece of narrative that shows how differently very similar dice results can be interpreted based on the context of the throws. There are many other interesting design decisions, as streamlining encumbrance less as a weight problem but more as a "ease to carry" problem or a deep dive into the character's desires.
As a long time FATE player, I also liked the use of similar tiers of adversaries (i.e. a bunch of low enemies, one mid enemy and the nemesis). Speaking of adversaries and combat, I liked also the idea of different scales (especially discussed in the vehicle section), or the two different styles of initiatives.
The thing I loved the most about this book, however, is how honest it seemed about the design decisions in many places. The book details why there is a skill cap, why the rules work in a given way and what are the bad/good decisions of some rule changes. This way they give insight into the design but also help the GM to make more informed decisions when he alters the rules for his own settings.
On the other hand, I found plenty of shortcomings. For me personally, it still seems like the classical rule-heavy system of the old D&D with plenty of rules to remember and go through. Yet that is just a personal taste. The others, I think, are more universal observations.
The original dice used in the game still forced me to think if they are just a tool how to force people to buy proprietary FFG dice and if the distribution of the tokens on the dice was based on any statistical insight or just on gut feeling and is a must. Yes, you can have an app to throw as many FFG dice as you want. But are you really enjoying throwing digidice?
The text often felt uselessly verbose or even repeated. Example, the specification in what setting can the skills be used is repeated also for general skills so almost every skill finishes with the mantra "This skill should be used in all settings.". Or explaining on 6 (!) numbers how rounding up halved number works. Sometimes it felt as if the authors were paid per word (see the incredibly detailed and verbose description of a backpack).
Concerning game mechanisms, I found the system interesting and worth playing with one weird exception that I either misunderstood or is going against all my RPG instincts - the player initiative in a turn is agreed upon. This seems really weird and gives the player characters a lot of strength especially as they often already have more initiative slots than the NPCs.
Content quality-wise on the GM part I saw two shortcomings both tied to not following the same idea. The GM guide introduces scenario sheets for the different settings, but when the book introduces these settings, the sheet format or fields are not used at all. Second, the book introduces for many things well-detailed explanations of the
Also, the "tone" section at the end of the book seemed quite random to me, especially as the term is already used earlier with regards to the settings and was not tied to this final section.
I liked many aspects of the book. The quality is top, with great sketches that suggest that also the book content is more like a sketch, not a full painting.
The semantics of dice (i.e. having successes, advantages) seems really good and is used in other FFG RPGs, so I believe it stood already some test of time. Reading about it excited me to use it in-game with its potential for narrative storytelling. In the same topic, I liked how even dialogues or other social encounters are treated similarly as combat encounters and the GM is motivated to think about the goals and outcomes of each encounter and what purpose they play in the story.
The focus on narration is also present in explaining what skills should be used for and what they shouldn't be used for. Similarly, I loved how dice results are often illustrated by a piece of narrative that shows how differently very similar dice results can be interpreted based on the context of the throws. There are many other interesting design decisions, as streamlining encumbrance less as a weight problem but more as a "ease to carry" problem or a deep dive into the character's desires.
As a long time FATE player, I also liked the use of similar tiers of adversaries (i.e. a bunch of low enemies, one mid enemy and the nemesis). Speaking of adversaries and combat, I liked also the idea of different scales (especially discussed in the vehicle section), or the two different styles of initiatives.
The thing I loved the most about this book, however, is how honest it seemed about the design decisions in many places. The book details why there is a skill cap, why the rules work in a given way and what are the bad/good decisions of some rule changes. This way they give insight into the design but also help the GM to make more informed decisions when he alters the rules for his own settings.
On the other hand, I found plenty of shortcomings. For me personally, it still seems like the classical rule-heavy system of the old D&D with plenty of rules to remember and go through. Yet that is just a personal taste. The others, I think, are more universal observations.
The original dice used in the game still forced me to think if they are just a tool how to force people to buy proprietary FFG dice and if the distribution of the tokens on the dice was based on any statistical insight or just on gut feeling and is a must. Yes, you can have an app to throw as many FFG dice as you want. But are you really enjoying throwing digidice?
The text often felt uselessly verbose or even repeated. Example, the specification in what setting can the skills be used is repeated also for general skills so almost every skill finishes with the mantra "This skill should be used in all settings.". Or explaining on 6 (!) numbers how rounding up halved number works. Sometimes it felt as if the authors were paid per word (see the incredibly detailed and verbose description of a backpack).
Concerning game mechanisms, I found the system interesting and worth playing with one weird exception that I either misunderstood or is going against all my RPG instincts - the player initiative in a turn is agreed upon. This seems really weird and gives the player characters a lot of strength especially as they often already have more initiative slots than the NPCs.
Content quality-wise on the GM part I saw two shortcomings both tied to not following the same idea. The GM guide introduces scenario sheets for the different settings, but when the book introduces these settings, the sheet format or fields are not used at all. Second, the book introduces for many things well-detailed explanations of the
Also, the "tone" section at the end of the book seemed quite random to me, especially as the term is already used earlier with regards to the settings and was not tied to this final section.
More...