FASA Games, Inc.

As a long time player, I am invested in Earthdawn. I know a lot of people really still want to know if it's worth shelling out anything for a 4th edition. The step system is the one killer thing that almost all new players dislike, keep in mind I only speak for my personal experience. In contrast, the setting is the one killer thing that almost all new players like. If 4th edition is just a streamline of 3rd edition and nothing really new, then I would rather just put my money into age of legend, unless it's a d20 system. I have not played d20 systems since the 90's and don't intend to go back. That system is too floppy for me. I prefer the Effect Engine (Monsters&Magic), or perhaps FATE Core dialed in for Earthdawn. Either one makes it easier to focus on story rather than get bogged down on number crunch. I converted Fading Suns to Effect Engine - way smoother and it works well. So, if anyone has some insight to offer as to whether ED's game system is something worth looking into, I would like to hear it.

I'll be honest, ED4 is not a huge revolution in the system, especially if you're not a fan of the core Step System.

The game engine is somewhat divisive in that regard. It's a love-it-or-hate-it kind of thing, largely driven by one's overall taste in systems.

Age of Legend (Vagrant Workshop's version) is most assuredly not d20. I've not read it in depth (not enough hours in my day), but it's a much looser, narrative style system (which is Vagrant's strength, honestly). It's a bit more internally defined than FATE, but it's along those lines.

As a tangential question, what is it about the Step system that people don't like? I remember loving it in 6th grade when I first learned it, so I've had a tough time understanding the initial confusion people have with it. Is it just too many dice? Having to reference a table to tell you what to roll?

What are the complaints, and how can we address them as GMs that enjoy the system?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the modern "Core" Step System (as seen now in ED4 and 1879) is pretty different from the 90's version.

The problem is that the basics are still there, which may turn people who had a negative experience with the previous incarnations off from trying it again.

The core change I see in the new edition is that "handling time" has been significantly reduced, and this improvement has sent rippling changes throughout the system. The problem I've had in the past introducing people to Earthdawn is that they would get "lost" somewhere during the resolution-of-an-action sequence.

And let's be franks, in the past it was:
Add attribute + skill +/- modifiers.
Look up dice on a simple table (don't forget to re-look up the Step if any of your modifiers change).
Roll Dice vs Target number.
Compare Result to Target Number on a complex table to determine Result Level.
Consult Talent/Skill description to see if Result Level gives any bonuses to the Effect roll.
Calculate final Effect Step.
Look up dice for that step on the Step Table.
Roll Dice for a Result (modify result for circumstance - Armor, etc).

Now that there is no such thing as a Result Level Table, and with the very good advice of adding or subtracting temporary modifiers from the Result rather than the Step rolled, we now have:
Roll the Step/Dice listed on your character sheet (this only changes when you spend legend, or other "permanent" things).
Add/subtract temporary modifiers from the Result.
Compare Result to Target Number, with the rule of thumb of +2 Effect Bonus for every 5 scored over the Target.
Calculate and Roll final Effect Test (most of the time it's +2 per extra success level from the prior roll).
Apply Result (modify for Armor, etc).

So, that's where I think ED4 has seriously improved the game's mechanics. The other cool things are possible because that basic "handle time" has been reduced.

Those are good assessments, Telarus, but I don't necessarily think it's the Step System per se that is problem, but the more "old school" style of multiple options (talents, powers, spells, etc) each with its own way of tweaking/altering/breaking the rules, different modifiers, equipment lists with a bunch of minor differences between things, etc etc.

As opposed to FATE or similar systems where there is a lot less crunch and detail in the game systems, and dividing the description from the rules. That is, a piece of equipment that gives you a +2 modifier in combat could be described however you wish (within the accepted collective definition).

I can certainly see the appeal for that sort of thing if that's what you're after (for example, I'm a big fan of the Atomic Robo iteration of FATE). It could even work for Earthdawn, but would require a bit of effort and you would end up with a game that was recognizably ED, but perhaps felt different in some ways (depending on where you put your focus).

ED4 is evolution, not revolution. If you're looking for something that has radically different conceptual underpinnings from previous editions, you're not going to be satisfied. (Thought Vagrant's "Age of Legend" might be up your alley.) I think the edition mostly succeeds at what we set out to do, but that was to deliver some updates and polish to the core, and make some other changes to mark a clear departure from the rocky end of the RedBrick era.

Thank you for the advice everyone. That was indeed the information that I needed to make an informed decision. I have been playing Monsters&Magic for about 6 months and it really makes running d20 fantasy games so much easier with its 3D6 system. That's the core of the system, again adding modifiers and even extra dice, which reminded me so much of Earthdawn. I've introduced ED to several players over the years, and in my opinion, the difficulty is that most of these are new players and they didn't discover it on their own. This is how I came to rpgs - I discovered a red box with some wicked cool artwork on the cover and at the tender age of 13, I was entirely hooked just on the artwork alone. I made it a point to get my friends involved and they loved it as much as I did, only I ended up being the GM from that point on in my life. So, years of playing that d20 system helped me cut my teeth on rpgs, helped me to understand the concept of campaigns, sandboxes and story hooks. Darksun became my campaign of choice until Earthdawn caught my fancy. It was a glorious day when that happened, even more so when we finally made it through mists of betrayal. I started making my own adventures from that point on (Parlainth! O' thou corrupt and alluring beauty!). Since then I've played a few different systems and I've come to the conclusion about some of the crunchier systems (ED is one of those systems - somewhere between RQ6 and D&D 5e) that if the players don't buy in to the character creation process, they are less likely to endure an entire adventure if it takes more than three or four sessions. So, for beginners, I try to keep it simple and avoid optional rules, house rules, limiting spells, limiting magic items and such until they get the hang of it. I focus on story, try to keep combats gritty, and quick. In my opinion, RPGs should be fun for everyone not just the GM, not just the Players. So, I'm far from being a rulesmonger with new players. I do like to play ED the way it was designed and intended to be played (which can be nearly euphoric when I'm with experienced players), but if I can't get new bees to play it and keep their interest, then I have to use a different game altogether or adapt a different system, which I feel is sometimes best for that specific group. Works better when the Character sheet is one side of one page long or better yet, fits on a large index card! LOL. I blame the internet and cell phones for low attentions spans...oh, and sponge bob! hehe...

The problem isn't with the character options. Players are not intimidated by complexity. Shadowrun and FFG's Warhammer 40k games are every bit as complicated, if not more so, than Earthdawn.

The issue is that Earthdawn feels unnecessarily complex. The key word here is "feels." While the Step System isn't hard to grasp, it's not an elegant ruleset. In my experience, nothing happens fast in Earthdawn (although I'm perfectly willing to admit that I've been "doing it wrong" for 20 years). For many longtime fans, this may be a positive, but for new players, I think Earthdawn can come across as a bit archaic.

zayven, is that based on previous editions, or is this your opinion of 4th ed?