Jacob posted this on DrivethruRPG: (paragraph breakdown is mine since DT removed all line breaks).
So, some constructive criticism... I saw your game at MidSouthCon (I was one of the two who couldn't make it to your morning game!) and decided to take a look at your game even if I couldn't be in it. Me 'n my BF have been reading through it, and we have a few thoughts.
My BF has phrased it the most bluntly: Ozaka needs to commit more to either being Classic Japan But With DnD Fantasy, or being Wild Dungeon-Crawl Fantasy In Magical Demiplane Japan. You have the basis for either of those, but there are a few things that keep either idea from soaring. If you want to feel like old-school Japan, you've taken out too much of the interesting parts of old Japan for them to pop. I understand not wanting to burden players with honor or bushido, but... really, suddenly having to care about another culture's social mores that you haven't internalized would make some great gameplay, which is why L5R focused on that.
Likewise, trying to feel like this period of Japan also blocks the "oh by the way Magic Missile and Cure Light Wounds are abundant" weirdness of it. I know you don't like characters that are inherently "scary" or would cause friction with the locals, but it feels extremely weird that warlocks get a pass when they're seemingly on the supply side of Ozaka's monster problem. If you really don't want to engage with old social mores or social constructs (the lack of the state religions really jumped out at my BF as something that made the game feel very not-like-Japan), I'd advise a revision of the game leaning into the fantasy-weirdness and making something less historically Japanese but more bizarre and exciting: "the demiplane of Hong Kong and all its precariously dangerous politics" would make for an exciting smaller-scale 5e setting whether the characters were locals or visitors.
If you want to really engage with Japan-but-it's-5e, I'd advise excising the more Euro-Fantasy classes (...mostly the non-bard magic-users) and relying on your homebrew casters to help convey the feeling of a world that isn't just not-Europe.
The overall presentation of the game is good and you've got some good art and functional layout. I am, admittedly, also not a fan of 5e, so seeing your game work with 5e-isms instead of break out from them frustrates me a little. You have the start of something really cool here, and I'd love to see it bloom outward into something that really draws eyes across a crowd.
Thanks, Jacob. A lot to unpack here.
TLDR: I took a middle-of-the-road approach, but whenever I had a choice, I picked that “let the GM decide for his/her game.” Also, I tried to be cognizant of future class/player options that may come in later books.
First off, thanks for your purchase and feedback.
Second, you will have an opportunity to try the adventure at Gencon (search for "Legacies First Ones Entertainment") when the games become available. It'll be called "Fiends of Dreams," but there will be 3 other adventures set in Ozaka: "A Stolen Daisho," "Friends we make," and "Battle of Shiro Azaki."
The points you note about 5e-isms and the design of the settings are among the elements I had to determine early on as I laid the foundation for Ozaka. Do I write my own game or use 5e (or Pathfinder or GURPS)? The decision to go with core 5e was a deliberate one (driven by sales and game attendance). Which brought some oddities and 5e-isms with it, I agree. But do they detract from the enjoyment of the game? I think moreso while reading the book than when playing.
HOWEVER, if you look at the design of the book itself and skip the sections on character options/ monsters, you will find that the setting itself was written in a non-system-specific way. (Also deliberate). As such, the setting itself has no stat or system built into it.
I don't want to create a full game - don't have the time, people, or interest in doing that. So that decision has worked well for me and for FOE. As I write more and more, I find my role is to provide YOU, the GM, with the tools to create a compelling campaign for your table. Which WILL be different from another table. And that’s fine
That’s great!
The Honor system... Ha... Yes... I wrestled with that more than anything else. Being a fan of the original Oriental Adventures and of L5R (where that is less burdensome), I remember its system for honor, which became almost a mini-game in itself, with everything the player did adding +1, -2, +3, etc. I like the game to focus on... It inevitably led to its abandonment, or seppuku. And going back to “regular D&D where I don’t have to deal with that crap.”
Let the PCs do [stuff], rather than count beans for every off-colored joke or thinking of a dishonorable plan. Samurai were honorable, but also practical men. Let the world/story deal with the consequences of their acting like bandits, burning towns, stealing from temples, and the world around them treating them like garbage for it. Therefore, I chose this "light" system.
Okay, okay.
"But JP, you don't have a system for honor," you say. I admit. I present the concept, but let the story dictate how it's used. I prefer the less rigid approach to the rules (where my old-school roots shine through), and let the players do their thing - but now they have to worry about their honorability. I chose to place the onus of adjudication in the GM’s hands and to dictate the consequences.
Now... for "realism" vs "magic missile." I have spent years trying to create material historical gaming, and experience taught me that most people want to PLAY and don't want a HISTORY LESSON. As proof: The GURPS historical supplements are great. I have several of them that I read regularly. Whoever played them? No one. (Not sorry to the one guy who played it). Why? Because people have a passing knowledge of these subjects, and when they come to play RPG, they want the Japan-flavored D&D. Not the full-on Japan where the GM must spend 1h of the game slot explaining how it works, but that doesn't factor into the GAME.
I do.
Players don’t. They want to do “cool things.” (and they should be given the opportunity to do that.)
You are 100% correct that warlocks should be hunted. However, there are several types of warlocks that don’t deal with fiends or Cthulhu. There are some with angelic or divine ties. Would those be treated the same? How would the average person know of the pact vs a sorcerer? Or a strange type of bard? What happens if a daimyo is a warlock? Or one who becomes one? Or his wife? Would it be the same in Kobochi, Makida, or Midori? What about the Wakou?
Again. That leads to “the GM will decide for his campaign,” the story, and story potential dictating what should happen.
About the state religion. It is in there, perhaps not explicitly stated as such. The 5 gods of the pantheon (plus the Thousand Gods) are the only deities presented and discussed in the book.
I do not mind scary characters, don’t look at anything with the First Ones... (Power is Fickle, Tarsyn, Akhamet). What I mind are characters/players who have whole side-games designed around them. For example, the rogue who sneaks everywhere and never works with the party. Or the player who plays an orc just to get the NPCs to react to him. EVERY NPC.
Now, I’d LOVE to talk to you more about this. You can find my email on FoeLegacies.com (I can’t post it here). We can zoom/discord/phone. I’d like to hear about your idea for the Hong Kong setting…
I think I addressed everything. But let’s talk. I wanna pick your brain.
JP
The Crown Table is present in the campaign, led by the First One Sir Garrick of the Order of the Whip. Since the Knights of St Edras made an official alliance, Dame Sabine de Montrevault serves as liaison to the group.
