 Goto [ Index ] |
Even though the "high concept" of Army Ants doesn't really interest me, I've tried (successfully, I think) to give it an objective evaluation. One disclaimer: although the author gives me credit for "constructive criticism", this is because of changes made to the system in response to my review of Guardians of Metro City, which uses the same game engine. I was not directly involved in any way in the creation of Army Ants.
As I said, the system used in Army Ants is similar to that used in the author's previous game, Guardians of Metro City. (I haven't seen earlier editions of Army Ants, so I've no idea what kind of system they used.) Here, the system is called "BUGS, the Basic Universal Game System", which I thought was a really cute name. There have been several improvements made to the previous version of the system. For example, one of my major criticisms of Guardians was the extra complexity added by the need to convert character scores ("ranks") into "Benchmark Values", which are the numbers actually used in play. Here, the rank is the score that's actually used (i.e., it's the same as what was previously called the Benchmark Value). The "old" rank still exists in the background, in the sense that higher ranks cost more points. In other words, the way it works is essentially the same, but the way it's presented is less confusing.
The core mechanic is as follows: You roll a number of dice equal to your rank in the relevent trait; a roll of 3-4 gives you one success while a roll of 5-6 gives you two. The Difficulty Target (DT) tells you how many successes you need to succeed. Skill ranks are added as bonus successes. If you roll 1-2 on all the dice, you botch. Another criticism I had of Guardians was that your skill level had no effect on your chance of botching. The author's solution is to change the rule so that even if you botch, you still get to add bonus successes -- but every 1 you roll takes away one of those successes. Paradoxically, this means that you may still have a chance of succeeding even when you botch. It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than it was in Guardians (and better than either version of the botch rules in the Storyteller system, IMO).
So now that we've seen how the basic system works, let me give you a rundown of the contents. The first 16 pages after the table of contents are taken up by a comic which gives a first-person account of a squad of ants on a mission. As I said, war stories usually don't interest me, but this one is at least competently done. The distinctive personalities of the characters are established quickly and clearly. The illustrations are simple, blocky and cartoonish, but that's perfectly appropriate to the "Saturday morning cartoon" feel of the game.
After a brief and perfunctory explanation of how a role-playing game works, the basic system is described, beginning with a very efficient point-by-point explanation of game terms. (Again, this is a small improvement over the glossary in Guardians, in that the terms are more clearly explained.) Following this, the scores that make up a character are defined, although the actual rules for character creation don't come until later. Traits are the same as in the author's previous games: Dexterity, Might, Persona, Reason and Stamina. The only one that's not self-explanatory is Persona, which is "a measure of perception, intuition and awareness." Either Dexterity or Might (whichever is better) can be used in hand-to-hand combat. Each trait also has an associated talent, which serves a defensive purpose and adds bonus successes to trait rolls in the appropriate situation. The talents are Avoid, Grapple ("the ability to avoid being grabbed, held, or bound in combat"), Sense, Will and Endure, respectively.
The next section is entitled Gameplay, and begins with a chart showing how different levels of weight, heat, cold, hardness, distance and speed correspond to different DTs. (This is equivalent to "Table 3.01" which I described in my review of Guardians.) For example, if I want to lift an object weighing 100 mg, I need at least 7 successes on a Might roll. This is followed by explanations of how other DTs are determined and how distance, movement and time are measured, as well as a grenade scatter chart (which follows on from "Range and Distance") and a paragraph on Victory Points which feels as if it was just randomly stuck in here.
Next come the combat rules, which are mostly straightforward. Initiative has a couple of noteworthy quirks: First, every character gets to act a number of times per round equal to the number of successes scored on their initiative roll. Second, you're allowed time in between combat rounds to reload, change weapons, etc. Damage is the degree of success (the number of successes scored over and above your opponent's Avoid talent) times the weapon's damage multiplier. Armor reduces damage, which is measured in health points and heals relatively quickly (especially if you have a good Stamina). Cover, falling, improvised weapons, multiple targets, stationary targets, fighting with two weapons, and sacrificing actions to gain bonus successes are all outlined. All told, the Game System chapter takes up only 9 pages, but it feels longer (in a good way) because it's so thorough.
The next chapter goes into character creation, which consists of picking a species and specialty, then spending points on quirks, traits, talents and skills. The species available to PCs are ants, beetles, crickets, ladybugs and potato bugs (never mind that ladybugs and potato bugs are beetles). Each represents a different military stereotype:
- Ants are the default, G.I.Joe variety of soldier.
- Beetles have a feudal society complete with modernized "knights".
- Crickets are described as "bohemian" and seem inspired by some combination of the French Resistance, the Foreign Legion, and/or the dissidents in Les Miserables.
- Ladybugs are intelligence experts.
- Potato bugs are TMNT-style martial artists, who for some reason have mostly Hebrew names.
The specialties are templates which determine most of a character's starting scores; 24 out of 30 starting Victory Points are assigned according to specialty. Each has 3 ranks in one trait, 1 rank each in the rest, and about 14 skills at 1 rank each. The specialties are grunt, metal (heavy weapons specialists), ops (vehicle specialists and techs of all sorts), pathfinder and shadow.
Quirks are advantages or disadvantages, about a dozen of each, most costing (or granting) 1-4 VPs. There are 30 skills, mostly combat-oriented. The cost to increase your traits is the same as that to increase your skills, which seems unbalanced to me. I can't see any real benefit to spending points on a skill rather than the associated trait. (The botch rules do favor high skills over high attributes, but the benefit is marginal.) You might want to buy more skills to avoid the +2 DT penalty for using skills untrained, but since non-specialty skills (those that aren't already part of your specialty package) have a whopping 5-point "buy-in fee", it hardly seems worth it.
Starting gear is determined by specialty, with some specialties getting bonus "clout points" to purchase additional gear. As the name suggests, these seem to represent requisitioning power rather than actual money. "Weapons and Gear" is the longest chapter, at 18 pages, and covers weapons, miscellaneous gear (including uniforms), vehicles and bases. Most of the weapons and vehicles are manufactured by "Ant Munitions" and have names like "AM-16". Many of them also have simple silhouette illustrations. Armor seems rather outclassed by weapons; a light flak jacket only reduces damage by 2 points, which any weapon can exceed with even a single success, and a heavy flak jacket reduces it by 6 points, which most weapons can exceed with two successes.
"Running the Game" is the shortest chapter, at only 3½ pages, but it includes advice on different types of missions, genre, conflicts (man vs. man and so forth), villains and genre conventions. The next chapter covers character advancement, which comes in two types: victory points (which can be used to improve your character) and promotion (which costs victory points, but gives clout bonuses and higher security clearance). I like the way promotion works; after each mission completed, you roll for promotion against a DT set by how long it's been since your last promotion. There are details of the different paths of promotion a character can choose to follow, the different levels of security clearance, and various awards and decorations. Unfortunately, the question of how promotion works for other types of insects (beetles, ladybugs, and so on) isn't addressed.
The next chapter covers "Enemies and Predators", the difference being that "enemies" are other types of bugs, while "predators" are vertebrates such as mice, toads, bats and sparrows. The chapter starts off with rules for "archetypes" for enemies, which take the place of specialties, and the stats for each of the enemy species have an archetype assigned to represent a typical member of that species. Enemies range in power from the formidable centipede (built on 200 VPs) to the lowly gnat (built on a measly 20 VPs). The predators are tougher, as you would expect, ranging from the 140-point mole to the 480-point garter snake.
The last few pages consist of appendices including "A Day in the Life of an Army Ant", an outline of military structure in the Ant Army, a brief sample mission, a sample base and important NPCs to go with it, and a simple but functional character sheet.
Style
The layout of Army Ants is simple but effective, and not as table-heavy as the author's previous works. The text is laid out in single columns with narrow margins and an easy-to-read font. The illustrations are all done by the author in the same cartoonish style. There aren't a lot, but there are enough. There are a fair number of typos, more than in the author's previous games, I think, but they're not as bad as in some games I've seen. (I've already sent a list to the author, so they may have been corrected by the time you read this.) The writing style is very clear and not too dry. Overall, Army Ants has no serious stylistic shortcomings, but nothing to make it stand above the pack either, so it earns a 3 for Style.
Substance
Although Army Ants doesn't hold much appeal for me, there's no denying that what it sets out to do, it does competently. If the premise appeals to you, it's probably worth a look. The basic dice mechanic still doesn't really grab me (I preferred the system in Mythweaver, another game by the same author), but that's purely a matter of personal taste. I gave Guardians of Metro City a 3 for Substance, and Army Ants uses a simpler, more complete and more streamlined version of the same system, which is enough to bump it up to a 4.
