Brilliant Gameologists Forum

Show Stuff => Show Talk => : Meg June 15, 2008, 08:41:31 PM

: Review #3: Grimm
: Meg June 15, 2008, 08:41:31 PM
This is the first of our full Origins' Awards Reviews-- we'll release 1 review per day to complete the series!

In this episode we review Grimm (http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/hr02.html), published by Fantasy Flight Games. 

(http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/grimm/images/cover-thumb.jpg)

We give this a "3" on our rating scale:

1= If you are only going to buy 1 book, get this one.
3= If you are going to buy 3 books so you have a "main game" plus a fun pickup, this is the book for you
10= If you are going to get 10 books for a bit more variety, get this one
0= Don't buy it.

This game would be a ton of fun for a few one shots or to pick up when you're normal game is sidetracked for a couple of weeks.  Very intesting concepts, great flavor, good production values-- a good book overall.  The lack of clarity and that everything is written in text blocks (I mean everything- there is not a single formula or chart in the book that says "Attack = Scrap vs Defense -> Inflict Wounds") is insanely frustrating, but other than that, it's a good book. 

Listen to the show to get the full review!
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Kai June 17, 2008, 02:09:51 AM
I enjoyed the review. The concept is very appealing to me, but the 'clarity' portion would keep me at bay.

I have a general question about the review episodes...is the format meant to be one main reviewer and the other two jumping in occasionally? So, Josh had CthulhuTech, Meg did Grimm and Zeke helmed The Savage World of Solomon Kane?
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Meg June 17, 2008, 02:14:43 AM
Yes, pretty much.  Josh kept telling us "we're all reviewing it all" but we split up the books as to who would read each fully to have the most info. 

I did Faery's Tale (with Josh pretty close) too and Josh did Battlestar Galactica. 
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Josh June 17, 2008, 02:18:47 AM
I enjoyed the review. The concept is very appealing to me, but the 'clarity' portion would keep me at bay.
That is why we do reviews the way we do.  It is just as important to know why you might not like a game.
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Kai June 17, 2008, 02:23:04 AM
I'm also glad that you compared playing it in sort of a one or two shot sense to Paranoia. Since I have experience with Paranoia, I knew exactly what you guys were talking about even though the games are so vastly different in concept.

I enjoyed the review. The concept is very appealing to me, but the 'clarity' portion would keep me at bay.
That is why we do reviews the way we do.  It is just as important to know why you might not like a game.

Well, it's appreciated.  :clap
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Meg June 18, 2008, 01:59:32 AM
So I'm checking out the website, and the character "class" chapter is up as a sample chapter so you can get a sense of the game, the art, etc.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/grimm/media/Grimm_SampleChapter.pdf (PDF, 1MB)

Very cool.

I also started to get all excited when I saw a download titled "Grimm Reference Charts (PDF, 384KB)" but alas, it is NOT the mechanic .pdf we think this game could do so well with.  I actually suggest you check out this "chart" too because these are the only charts in the book and this is their idea of a chart.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/grimm/media/grimm-ref-charts.pdf

Finally, the opening 7 page story that is in color in the book that is a good read but totally over the top for a book intro is also available for download:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/grimm/media/Grimm-Intro-Story.pdf (PDF, 12MB)
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: heffroncm June 19, 2008, 06:59:46 PM
I'm interested in this for one of my groups, as most of the players are in high school and I think this game could really spark some RP in them, but I'm detered by the amount of prepwork I'd need to do to get them interested.  I'd have to be the fan that put together the 3 page mechanics quick referance for them to play.  So, if anyone sees something like that, lemme know, and I'll be buying the book ^.^
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Meg June 19, 2008, 10:56:32 PM
To get them interested, I actually think you need amazingly little prepwork.  The fact that everyone knows what a fairy tale is will really help. 

And the mechanics aren't hard-- you just have to read word for word to find it.  I like to skim and then read word for word when I have to.  There is no skimming in this book.  No graphs to remind you.  No charts. 

If you have the time to sit and read the whole book, you could probably just jot a few notes and be fine.  If you have it down, you can easily talk your players through the book.  It's just getting it all solid yourself.

I really want to actually run this for our group and the only way I can do that is to create a cheat sheet for myself just to organize it in my head.  When I do that I'll gladly share.

I still recommend it.  A group of high schoolers would probably really get into the different sterotypes of kids and I bet they'd have a ton of fun with it. 
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: heffroncm June 19, 2008, 11:22:34 PM
Oh, we'll enjoy it.  I'll definitely have to set all the mechanics up in charts though, and print a quick referance for each of them.  These kids cut their teeth on 3.5, and are ENTIRELY mechanically focused.  Gaming with them is an adventure in rules arguments, tactical discussions, and book referencing.  Roleplaying is limited to in town interactions with NPCs, and mostly revolve around haggling for better prices and holding out for higher pay.  I'm pretty much the only one that RP's in combat or tries to push party interaction.  Despite the odd looks, I keep shouting the battlecries and prayers with my Cleric, hoping they'll catch on.
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Leress June 23, 2008, 08:02:56 AM
I would agree with your review. I prefer the d6 version of the game.
: Re: Review #3: Grimm
: Meg June 23, 2008, 10:29:13 AM
I didn't realize until after that this version is a redo of another version of the game.  Leress- could you tell us how the previous "d20-ish" version was different?