Eon Personal opinion on Eon IV after On-shot session

[Yahuna]

First of all, thank you all for helping me during these last weeks figuring out certain things of the game.

Particularly thanks to @Thalaski for recommending to me the scenario "Vito Chaseres sista färd". It is a great scenario for one-shots. Also particular thanks to @Zeedox for some handy pre-gens and rules clarifications.

So, we did play the Last journey of Vito Chaseres. I did not used the Mundana setting, instead used The Old World setting from Warhammer, so there were some cosmetic changes, such as the Eyre barbarians being Norse instead, and other small things.

The scenario is a blast, we had tons of fun. We did not manage to finish it in one single session of 4 hours most probably because I GM for 6 players and everything is a touch slower. Nevertheless, we got nearly to the end.

As for the Eon system. We play 100% RAW and with the following rule book: Core book, Mages book and the Pyrotropic aspect book (I wanted to try the magic system and in particular a fire mage to see how well it would it fit in the Warhammer setting).

I was afraid that Eon, and particularly the combat system, would be slow, but it was not. It ran very very smoothly. We barely "felt" the system during play, which is great. The only combat we had was very interesting with all the strategic decisions players have to take each round. Although the player characters were very strong in combat, it was also clear how deadly combat can be.

We also loved the challenges and conflict mechanics, very neat and engageing.

All in all, we liked it, and I, as the GM, liked it very much. I think Eon IV is the best system I have run so far for a Dark fantasy setting. Note that I don't like rules-light systems and I much prefer systems which are "crunchy", that is if the rules crunch is properly done, which I think Eon IV has managed to do perfectly.

I am most probably going to run another session in a month time or so, where I am going to introduce some of the rules from the Strid book.

Besides all the positive vibes we got, my players had a doubt or concern that it is impossible for us to assess. They were left wondering how character progression is. With the exception of Call of Chtulhu, we are used to play games where player characters have a long progression path ahead where they get better and better at what they do. We feel that in Eon this is not the case. All characters started with one or two skills at 5d6 (one of them a combat skill in all characters), which makes them very proficient at that particular skill, and according to the rules, progressing at those "high" levels requieres many atempts and XP. So it seems to us that in Eon, starting character progress more horizontaly (spreading and acquiring new skills) than rather on a few focused skills. I am not saying it is a bad thing, but some player were left wondering if this may create the feeling that for example your warrior character is stagnant in his combat progression.

In summary, great system, great scenario and we are looking forward to play it again to run some more combats.

I hope Eon V turns out to be a great game as well and it gets translated to english, because oh man! translating all those books is very time consuming

 

[Svarte Faraonen]

Glad you liked the scenario! As its author, I'm always interested in hearing how things went.

 

[Yahuna]

Glad you liked the scenario! As its author, I'm always interested in hearing how things went.

You did a hell of a job sir! Really great and fun scenario!

 

[Thalaski]

Glad you liked it. Hopefully you'll be able to dip your toes into Mundana as well in the future. I really love the setting.

The progression is a bit stagnant at the higher levels. But that is a feature, not a bug. I usually recommend my players to spread out their "improvement rolls". And sometimes I give them new expertises based on specially good roleplay instances. In Eon having a well rounded character is usually better than having a character proficient in just one thing.

 

[Zeedox]

As you say, characters start out very competent, and it’s way easier to pick up a new auxiliary skill rather than going even deeper in your existing experise. Personally I don’t like rolling for progression, since failing to improve is a letdown, but players in my group seem excited about where to put their points and whenever they can increase their already high skills, so some people might like it.

As a GM, it can be very hard to challenge players even with 5T6 in a skill, so a “soft limit” can be useful in that way.

 

[Zeedox]

The progression is a bit stagnant at the higher levels. But that is a feature, not a bug. I usually recommend my players to spread out their "improvement rolls". And sometimes I give them new expertises based on specially good roleplay instances. In Eon having a well rounded character is usually better than having a character proficient in just one thing.

Can you give an example of how it’s better to be well rounded than a specialist? I tend to make jack-of-all-trades just for flavor, but thinking about usefulness my characters tend to be outshone by ones that have maxed a combat skill, social skill, etc. (and as a mage, it’s almost a requirement to have high skill…)

 

[Svarte Faraonen]

Can you give an example of how it’s better to be well rounded than a specialist? I tend to make jack-of-all-trades just for flavor, but thinking about usefulness my characters tend to be outshone by ones that have maxed a combat skill, social skill, etc. (and as a mage, it’s almost a requirement to have high skill…)

In general, I feel that this depends on how much one uses the conflict/challenge systems. If a challenge requires you to roll three different skills, or one stat and two skills, you need a somewhat more varied skillset. But it is a general problem in skill design that, for example, knowledge and combat skills have different restrictions on their use. If you encounter a knowledge-based problem, you will typically need one specific skill – History can't replace Medicine, Occultism can't replace Geography, etc. However, if you encounter combat, you can apply your best combat skills no matter the situation, unless you've for some reason lost your weapon. This means that if you want to excel in most intellectual challenges, you need more skills than if you want to excel in combat.

 

[Yahuna]

Glad you liked it. Hopefully you'll be able to dip your toes into Mundana as well in the future. I really love the setting.

I have to say that I have liked the little I have read about the Mundana setting (only what appears in Eon IV core book), but my players have invested already a good amount of effort to get to know the Warhammer Fantasy setting and I would prefer to stick to it. Luckily, the Jargian Empire is very very similar to the Empire of the Warhammer setting, Daak is like Sigmar, there are inquisitors and witch hunters in both settings, corruption in the society, witch craft is forbidden etc.

Who knows if in the future I will have the chance to ran to groups of players and with the new one I can try Mundana.

 

[Yahuna]

As you say, characters start out very competent, and it’s way easier to pick up a new auxiliary skill rather than going even deeper in your existing experise. Personally I don’t like rolling for progression, since failing to improve is a letdown, but players in my group seem excited about where to put their points and whenever they can increase their already high skills, so some people might like it.

I am also not a fan of rolling for progression, but we are used to this system as well as we have played our deal of Call of Cthulhu rpg

As a GM, it can be very hard to challenge players even with 5T6 in a skill, so a “soft limit” can be useful in that way.

Indeed, the skills at 5d6 can be hard to challenge, but as @Svarte Faraonen says, the Conflict /Challenge system helps here. In the scenario, there were some instances where a challenge or a conflict was unsuccessful or barely successful thanks to the conflict /challenge & Control system.

 

[Yahuna]

In general, I feel that this depends on how much one uses the conflict/challenge systems. If a challenge requires you to roll three different skills, or one stat and two skills, you need a somewhat more varied skillset. But it is a general problem in skill design that, for example, knowledge and combat skills have different restrictions on their use. If you encounter a knowledge-based problem, you will typically need one specific skill – History can't replace Medicine, Occultism can't replace Geography, etc. However, if you encounter combat, you can apply your best combat skills no matter the situation, unless you've for some reason lost your weapon. This means that if you want to excel in most intellectual challenges, you need more skills than if you want to excel in combat.

I am happy that you bring this topic, because it is one close to my heart.

Actually, a ttrpg that would use a system for weapon & armour's technology more plausible, or more realistic if you prefer, to what was the warfare technology in the late middle ages would "force" players to have characters with a higher variety of combat skills. With a bit more of realism that what already Eon brings (which is already fantastic, and I have not yet have the time to read Strid in detail), combat focused characters would need to be proficient in something like 4 - 5 combat skills.

Skill in a weapon with a good reach, a sword, spear, a poleweapon ... that is because in reality, under equal skills, the combatant with the longer weapon has the edge.
Skill in a weapon that is good against armour because let's be honest a sword cannot cut even a padded armour and a spear cannot pierce mail, so an ax or a mace, that can break bones against someone that wears gambeson and or mail, is needed. Or in a more extreme case a big poleaxe.
Skill in shield, because you need to defend yourself against bows and crossbows.
Skill in dodge because this is a fantasy setting and you cannot parry the club of a troll or the claw of a dragon
Skill in brawl and dagger, because when you face a knight in plate armour (or similarly highly armoured opponents), this is really the onyl way you are going to be able to kill the opponent. Get him tired, pass his defense to get close into "grapple distance" and stab him with the dagger through the armour holes.

So this makes for a need of about 4 - 6 skills, which are alot, if you want to be a warrior that can cover alll situations. A similar break down of needed skills can be done for a bowman /crossboman specialist.

I understand that this brings some complication in terms of game design which may not be for the taste of everyone. Also, we are not used to read books, watch movies or play computer games, where the main characters have to carry an arsenal of weapons to face different opponents. We are used to see a character with his signature weapon, Aragorn with his sword, Gimli with his ax, legolas with his bow etc... and I guess that is what we want to do when we play an rpg.

Fortuantely for me, Eon (when using the rules from Strid) has a very very good framework to, with few house rules, closely emulate late medieval war technology and therefore, "encourage" combat focused players to diversify in combat skills.

So if we end up playing a campaing in Eon, I will implement such "small" changes and sit and enjoy behind my GM screen the heat and dertiness of melee combat!

 

[Swedish Chef]

I have to say that I have liked the little I have read about the Mundana setting (only what appears in Eon IV core book), but my players have invested already a good amount of effort to get to know the Warhammer Fantasy setting and I would prefer to stick to it. Luckily, the Jargian Empire is very very similar to the Empire of the Warhammer setting, Daak is like Sigmar, there are inquisitors and witch hunters in both settings, corruption in the society, witch craft is forbidden etc.

Who knows if in the future I will have the chance to ran to groups of players and with the new one I can try Mundana.

Hmm as Eon-writer and avid WFRP-player I would argue that there are some differences between the settings. Sigmar is a much more forgiving god than Daak and the empire has a lot of gods Morr/Ulric and so on.

Magic is even more suppressed in the Jargien setting. The emperor is more powerfull in Jarigen and the nobility has more power in Warhammer.Also there muskets/pistols in Warhammer.

But it’s my 2 favourite rpg-settings so cool that you can use the Eon rules for WFRP. Great that you had a good time with the rules.

 

[Ymir]

I would say that the optional system called "stridskonster" (martial arts) introduced in the expansion book "Strid" (Battle/Combat) provides much more ways for warriors to increase their proficiency at being specifically warriors. It basically functions like a kind of feats, that makes you better at certain niche things within the combat system. So if your players really want to become the best of the best when it comes to combat, I'd recommend using that system.

For a long time, we in the Eon team worked on a similar system for magic, but in the end we decided that despite the flavor it would add to the setting, magic was already complex enough, and the magic system has so many different skills and spells you can invest your experience points/rolls in, so it was superfluous, and we scrapped it.

But yes, you do start out highly competent in Eon. I feel like in most roleplaying games, there's this idea that the player characters should be very very weak at the start, and then improve tremendously over time. That wouldn't work well with the realism ambitions of Eon, so I think for Eon, having the option to be a very competent person at the start is a good fit.

 

[Yahuna]

Hmm as Eon-writer and avid WFRP-player I would argue that there are some differences between the settings. Sigmar is a much more forgiving god than Daak and the empire has a lot of gods Morr/Ulric and so on.

Magic is even more suppressed in the Jargien setting. The emperor is more powerfull in Jarigen and the nobility has more power in Warhammer.Also there muskets/pistols in Warhammer.

But it’s my 2 favourite rpg-settings so cool that you can use the Eon rules for WFRP. Great that you had a good time with the rules.

Definitely Mundana and The Old World are different settings, I did not wanted to imply lack of originality or so, but I wanted to highlight their similarities, as for me it is very good news because allows me to use all Eon rules and directly use them to evoke the old world.

As I mention, if I have ever a second group of players I will for sure try Mundana.

 

[Yahuna]

I would say that the optional system called "stridskonster" (martial arts) introduced in the expansion book "Strid" (Battle/Combat) provides much more ways for warriors to increase their proficiency at being specifically warriors. It basically functions like a kind of feats, that makes you better at certain niche things within the combat system. So if your players really want to become the best of the best when it comes to combat, I'd recommend using that system.

For a long time, we in the Eon team worked on a similar system for magic, but in the end we decided that despite the flavor it would add to the setting, magic was already complex enough, and the magic system has so many different skills and spells you can invest your experience points/rolls in, so it was superfluous, and we scrapped it.

But yes, you do start out highly competent in Eon. I feel like in most roleplaying games, there's this idea that the player characters should be very very weak at the start, and then improve tremendously over time. That wouldn't work well with the realism ambitions of Eon, so I think for Eon, having the option to be a very competent person at the start is a good fit.

I have only started to translate /proof read Strid, I still have a long way until I can use it, but I am eager.