| Character |
What Can I Do With This New Character?
How Do I Handle Combat With My Character?
| Reality Fault |
General Info
 |
BESM System Review
Disclaimers
Various personal opinions of the author of this page, which you should be aware of as you peruse the BESM pages:
Why this page was written
This was originally a very simple, short, single page of combat tips for players, for "Big Eyes, Small Mouth," the game system that was to be used for the DNAnimals/Tamashii game, but... due to repeated request, it got larger... and larger... and exasperatingly, time-consumingly larger...
Why did this happen? *sigh* It sort of accreted... the first time I used the system was unpleasant and annoying. Thus, I wanted to be sure I was giving the system a fair shake and not just letting one bad experience color my entire view. Consequently I put some time, effort, and research into BESM, so that I could make a well-considered, thoughtful decision on the system.
The version I've covered is second edition, second printing, revised November 2000. I hope this will help streamline any combat that may occur in any BESM games on Reality Fault, for both GMs and players, as I firmly believe better understanding by all involved helps games run more smoothly.
Book layout commentary
The writing style is fairly clear and clean, which I like. However, I consider it a failing of the book that similar things are not listed together. For example, if you start at the beginning of the book and go through the process of building a character, you'll find that stats and normal attributes are listed and described, one after another. Then you get to special attributes, which are listed -- and then you're told for the descriptions you'll have to flip to another chapter. Why? No explanation... just a note that special attributes and special defects have their own chapter.
Having to flip back and forth through the book to reference various tables and descriptive pages is not good layout. In fact, the worst example of this I can find is the last page in the book, which is an addendum on merging... an addendum that's not referenced anyplace else in the book, that I can find. I guess you're just supposed to get lucky and stumble over it.
The book's page layout is a bit more colorful than I think is truly helpful -- I'm a firm believer in substance over style -- but that's not really relevant to the big issue I have with their layout. What really bothers me is their assuming their abbreviations and terminologies will be clear to everyone. They're not.
There's a table for all the skills, on pg. 60, that's nicely laid out. On the far right is a label: "Table 2-6: Skills (General)." The various genres are across the top of the columns; the skills head each row. The writing is easy to read, and relatively descriptive. How the table is used seems relatively clear also -- you run your finger horizontally along a row until you hit the column for the genre you are interested in, and there you find a number.
The problem I have is... what does that number mean? There's nothing on the table itself to explain this pretty table of numbers, and if you peruse the paragraphs before and after it, there's nothing to explain it. Want to know where the explanation is? Two pages before the table, in one single sentence. This is not clear layout format, as any college student that's put tables into a scholastic paper can tell you. I hope the rest of the tables and charts are better explained.
I could live without some of the cutsier parts of the book -- labels such as "Gun Bunny," "Hangar Queen," and "Damn Healthy!" spring to mind. Also, some of the art work is... um... saccharinely cute, and none of it appears to have any relevance to the text next to it. Those things aren't really pertinent to how the system itself runs, though -- they're just personal preferences. The actual mechanics of the system itself is what really matters. So... what did I think of the system itself?
Book system comments
Well, while reading through the ECR I found myself thinking repeatedly, this is just one of the Hero advantages re-written. Why not just use proper Hero and be done with it? I'm not a big fan of clunky add-ons in rules systems -- I don't appreciate a poorly-laid-out morass of swiped and borrowed bits from other games and genres, which hasn't been adequately tested to be sure the numbers crunch properly. Instead, much like the Big Blue Book edition of Hero System, I believe rules should be an elegant and numerically balanced toolkit that allows you to select only the tools you need.
To put it bluntly, I can use Hero for an intricate combat game or a swift cinematic game. I can't do that with BESM -- I can only use it for a swift cinematic game. Faced with limitations like that in a system, my thought is usually why not use the better, more flexible tool?
Furthermore, I feel it is a bad idea, in-game, for all the characters to be utterly independent, self-involved individuals working on their own with no care for their fellow characters; or for the players to feel a 'team' is no more than a bunch of characters all roughly heading in the same general direction. Unfortunately, this assumption seems to permeate BESM. Even the rules book examples are of disconnected and mostly isolated individuals, rather than a group of closely-coordinated, mutually supportive characters.
It's my guess these sorts of cooperative efforts do not show clearly in anime, and thus the author saw no reason to put anything much to simulate them into the rules of BESM. Alternatively, perhaps the author isn't used to real-life fighting, and thus it never occurred to him to have rules to specifically encourage teamwork, both in combat and out, like Hero's co-ordination or comping rolls, which work with any skill you chose. The third possibility is that the rules do indeed exist, but I've not yet stumbled across them in the rules book. If anyone can find such rules in the mechanics, I'd love to know!
Assumption clash
There's also the player (as opposed to GM) side of gaming in this system. From what I've been told, as long as the GM has a firm grasp on what their background is like and what the characters can do, the system runs fairly smoothly. However, my personal preference isn't to be just a passive participant in someone else's game world. I want my character to be active, and I want to be creative along with the GM. I see games as mutual story-telling, with players being just as responsible as the GM for interesting character and plot creation.
However, before people assume I consider the story paramount, let me state clearly up front that, having been burned repeatedly by them, I'm quite distrustful of rules-light games -- as opposed to games with strong mechanics systems where you only rarely need to refer to the rules. To me, mechanics are a way to keep things clear, up-front, and honest between players and GM. Dice rolls bring an interesting element of randomness to a game, and to people's reactions.
All too often I've seen rules-light games become nothing more than a vehicle for the GM's prejudices. If your dice rolls over a long period of time cover a wide selection of numbers, and yet your character consistently fails in all efforts, then that's a pretty clear sign the GM is running a game where what your character does is secondary to his story. However, there are many players and GMs who find this a bug, not a feature -- they feel the needs of the story are more important than allowing character choice, or the occasional randomness of real life. This is not a matter of being right or wrong... it's a matter of personal preference.
However, it then becomes extremely important to make sure you, whether GM or player, have the same attitude about the rules system as your fellow players do. If you sit and tune your character carefully -- which isn't that possible with this system, unfortunately -- you may well be irritated and bored if the GM is a slap-dash sort who just uses the numbers on the sheet as a rough guideline, and doesn't care about all the whistles and bells. The reverse is also true -- if what you really want is just to dash about excitingly within the GM's story, having the GM constantly insist you fine-tune your character sheet can get old very fast.
There's no problem with either kind of game. The problem occurs when there is assumptions clash between players, or between players and GM. In a system like this, which seems designed more for "storytelling" type play, with only minimal usage of a bare-bones system, it would be rather easy for a GM to simply start pushing his players around, and for the players to not immediately realize they were being so manipulated -- as opposed to a more well-designed and detailed system such as HSR, where the "common language" of the mechanics system provides for a unified set of expectations.
You'll have to decide for yourself what sort of player you are... then select your games and fellow players accordingly.
Personal system comments
However, that being said, the reader should keep firmly in mind that I've not yet gotten a chance to actually play-through a combat in this system. Therefore, fair warning if you've actually read this far -- take these pages with a huge grain of salt! If there's anything you think needs more review here, let me know.
In closing, I'd have to say that while this system, on paper, does not thrill me (I like more granularity and more tactical teamwork possibilities in my games), it's entirely possible I would enjoy it far more after having actually played it. Yes, this web page does sound disapproving of BESM... but that's just my current and untested opinion.
I understand many people cannot comprehend this, but I do and will change my mind if the facts or data reveal that my current opinion is unfounded. Thus, since I now have someone who is willing to actually run a few combats for me and some other folks within this system, I'll be updating as needed as soon as I've done the necessary research to properly update this page.