So I was giving Draw Steel a first look. While doing that I stumbled upon something that I didn’t like, how the game treats the player as this hero, while doing that pretty well it was not my cup of tea and I asked myself, WHY? I like most marvel super hero games but why does it struck me here as something negative.
So I wrote a small blog post exploring that thought further, https://www.patreon.com/posts/draw-steel-and-135673755
As someone who doesn’t own Draw Steel (or likely will), what does it do to generate that “vibe”?
I find the borderlines of “heroism” or “superheroism” quite fascinating, as often the distinction teeters on something rather superficial. So can you give some examples of the presentation that pushed you over this personal border?
When I want to play superheroes, I break out one of the superhero game systems I have available – Champions, V&V, Golden Heroes, etc. – and not a fantasy system. I’m not interested in superhero fantasy. So, upon reading descriptions of Draw Steel, I’m certain there’s nothing there that appeals to me. When many modern fantasy systems leave me cold due to super-powered PCs, already, a system that purports to make superheroes right from the start has no appeal for me.
I have not yet read Draw Steel, but I have followed some of the content about the design of the game, and this review fits with how Colville talks about the game. He has explicitly used superhero analogies in the past, even when talking about a fantasy adventure game. It is not my cup of tea either, but I appreciate that he’s clearly advertising what the game feels like.
My impression of Draw Steel is that Colville and his design team strongly believe in a tight, thoroughly tested, rules-defined mechanical loop for each character. Everybody has something powerful and mechanically defined to do from level one onward. This is not my cup of tea in RPGs, but I can see the appeal. There are video games and board games that I love that do exactly this, even if I don’t seek that vibe in a TTRPG.
And I think he may have also made a very canny business decision by pitching Draw Steel (in part) to the people who miss the 4E style of play that WotC abandoned. This way he is not crowding up against the half-dozen other major players (including Critical Role) that have all been competing with each other and WotC to make 5E-style games.
I don’t know that I’ll ever get around to playing Draw Steel, and I almost certainly wouldn’t run it. But it is cool that it exists for the folks who want it.
I was reading the playtest material for Draw Steel and that came out around the crowdfunding launch, and I thought it sounded really fun. I certainly relate to some of the feelings you related in your blog post: it’s not exactly the type of game I’m generally drawn to either.
But I think it’s a smart idea by Colville and company to go in this direction. I feel like a criticism I’ve had of Fifth Edition D&D was that my characters kind of felt too powerful too fast, and that I wanted something a little more gritty. And 5e is kind of caught in this muddled halfway spot of feeling like a super hero fantasy while retaining some of the traditional trappings of older editions.
Draw Steel on the other hand is what it says it is. The messaging is clear, and the mechanics go fully into heroic fantasy, and I think if 5e players enjoy that kind of power fantasy they might actually be better served here. And it’s probably a better business decision than making a 5e clone or making another fantasy game where hit points are low, and death is always present. I think people into that kind of game are totally covered.
I don’t think it’s a negative, it’s just a genre of game that doesn’t grab me the way a grittier OSR inspired game might. I don’t know if I’ll ever run it, but I’d totally be down to play it.
Somebody from a discussion on reddit phrased it quite good. Don’t remember the exact words but it was something like:
“If you flip through the pages and look at the artwork you see all these clean images, every character in each image strikes a heroic pose, there is no dirt or scratches on their armor, it looks like a page from a comic book.”
While that focuses on the artwork there is also a huge part of character creation about why and how you became a hero. There are a lot of tables for that. It does not try to be superhero it literally says it in the character creation.
If you like superhero in fantasyland definitely go check it out. You will like it.
I read a thread on r/rpg that included some description of specific mechanics involved and they’re exactly what I’d expect in a superheroes game – “knock a foe back through a flimsy wall into another foe and incapacitate them both” style four-color comic action. That’s definitely not what I want in my escapist fantasy, though I know a lot of other players would love that exact thing (based on how popular video games are that provide that).
I mean, saying something is quite easy. I remember the game I grew up with having a lot of heroic flowery language, but then you often played dung-farmers rescuing other dung-farmers, and there were prominent rules for contracting gangrene…
And I’m not sure whether I like fantasy superheroics, as I find the concept to be rather ill-defined. I mean, in a recent campaign I basically disallowed the D&D fly spell and similar mechanics, as that trips my personal thematic mismatch. On the other hand, I’ve seen people focus on things I’d consider just “swashbuckling” as being “superheroic”, so it helps me to hear other people’s limits and edge cases.
Ah, thanks for that example! Yes, that would both seem to fit more Marvelesque visuals as well as going for that forced movement wargaming that was so popular with D&D 4E.
(It’s also very American 
)
It does seem a bit much. I wouldn’t mind having that as a Crowning Moment of Awesome, but once you get things like that as basic character abilities or at least common enough achievements, where do you go from there? (The basic problem with powers and, dare I say, even spells).
Exactly. Anything that resembles play from Champions is right out, for me. Heck, even the more over-the-top stuff in AD&D throws me out of the setting – Barbarians and Cavaliers from Unearthed Arcana, say.
I mean, saying something is quite easy. I remember the game I grew up with having a lot of heroic flowery language, but then you often played dung-farmers rescuing other dung-farmers, and there were prominent rules for contracting gangrene…
WTF, you had my curiosity but now you have my attention! In which game did you play dung-farmers rescuing other dung-farmes?
To Draw Steel, not only the vibe/language of the game is heroic but also the mechanics. Somebody else already mentioned you can literally throw an enemy through multiple walls into another target.
And I’m not sure whether I like fantasy superheroics, as I find the concept to be rather ill-defined. I mean, in a recent campaign I basically disallowed the D&D fly spell and similar mechanics, as that trips my personal thematic mismatch. On the other hand, I’ve seen people focus on things I’d consider just “swashbuckling” as being “superheroic”, so it helps me to hear other people’s limits and edge cases.
There is definitly an edge somewhere. I would describe it as super hero if it feels and play like marvel or DC movie. I mean D&D character can be super human and have abilities like fly like you mentioned but don’t feel like super hero. Here it directly mentions that you are a hero to save the day, not some guy that fought hundred thousand boars and is now a level 10 wizard with fly.
The Dark Eye always had a mixture between quite heroic language and “help out the local populace, fairies are stealing their beetroots” plots, while the characters themselves could be quite lowly. Some editions basically had the same profession spread that WFRP had, so ratcatchers with vicious dogs could be a thing.
Well, that’s what I meant about personal limits, flying without wings or brooms is probably the most superhero-coded thing possible to me. I mean, Superman does that. Even Theseus needed his little winged boots.
Sometimes it seems that it’s not even about the powers, but about the morality. Where BAMFing around and cone-of-colding people is all right, as long as you do it for Gold-as-XP 
Or related to that, more a genre filter and aesthetics, similar to the vague border between what people call High Fantasy or Sword & Sorcery (Elric was a bit more capable than Aragorn, but that’s not the issue).
Draw Steel seems to hit all the buttons, reading this thread, so it probably won’t replace my D&D-ish games. Might be interesting in its own right, but from what I’ve read I’d probably have an issue with the roles/classes, just like with Daggerheart. I don’t like too specific visions there…
The Dark Eye always had a mixture between quite heroic language and “help out the local populace, fairies are stealing their beetroots” plots, while the characters themselves could be quite lowly. Some editions basically had the same profession spread that WFRP had, so ratcatchers with vicious dogs could be a thing.
The Dark Eye. As a fellow german I know that rule set. Never played it but heared it has a metric ton of rules. One guy once told me they played one fight for 8 hours. That would be hell for me. But interesting to hear that it can emulate a more “sword and sorcery” style of game.
I absolutely loved the professions from WFRP, the artwork in the 4e book is phenomenal. Sadly I really didn’t become friends with the d100 system and the rules in general.
Well, that’s what I meant about personal limits, flying without wings or brooms is probably the most superhero-coded thing possible to me. I mean, Superman does that. Even Theseus needed his little winged boots.
I can totally understand what you mean but for me personally the power level is not enough to be a superhero game. It kind of needs the “Trying to be a good person” vibe, “doing the right thing” which is a common theme of Peter Parker, Batman and other comic books.
But I can total see why you would want to remove such super human abilities if you want a more grounded “Sword & Sorcery” game.
Draw Steel seems to hit all the buttons, reading this thread, so it probably won’t replace my D&D-ish games. Might be interesting in its own right, but from what I’ve read I’d probably have an issue with the roles/classes, just like with Daggerheart. I don’t like too specific visions there…
Neither my games. What would be your go to roles/classes then ?
Not quite. I’d say if you focus on its lower end – and admittedly, few people do – it’s more a “historic” game, with some folklore/fairy tale touches. Not quite HârnMaster, but definitely not Conan - maybe a bit Solomon Kane.
…and alignment systems.
Within the OSR sphere, I’m probably more in the OD&D line. Casters/fighters, let them choose how to define that, and what fiction they want to emulate. I’m not a big fan of creating new cliches or picking rare ones and then putting them front and center – which is what core classes do. So a Fighter who asks about going into berserker mode? Sure. A Caster who wants to style their spells as song? Awesome! But do we need barbarian and bards?
I don’t blame Draw Steel for that. Long before they had their “Furies” and “Talents”, we got over-specific stuff like AD&D 1E Monks or shape-shifting Druids.
Granted, this is “If I get to pick”. Sometimes one has to accept that 50 years of gaming culture just can’t get removed that easily, and Andy just likes clerics.