Following Michael S. Miller’s lead, I am also soliciting feedback from the players of my 40K themed Mouse Guard game.

…and if you were at another table in the same room, I’m pretty sure you might have feedback about the volume of our game as well. My apologies if I was a little overly disruptive with my loud Mouse Marine voice.

Please feel free to provide any feedback. Here are a few things I’m specifically looking for:

  1. Was the GM’s Turn too much in the way of railroading or exposition? I know I read a lot at you guys.

  2. Pacing and/or length of the session.

  3. Did I actually need to hack/modify anything other than descriptions? I have a feeling that just calling a Mace a PowerPaw, or a Sword a Chainsword, without any additional modifications, could have worked. Or did seeing extra +D’s and +s’s actually give a more “powered-up” feel to the game?

  4. Speaking an Oath before the mission. I’m planning on maybe bringing this concept into some of my regular MG games. The Oath that was chosen really didn’t come into play (although it almost did). From what you saw in this game, do you think that having different Oaths with different mechanical effects is potentially useful, hindering, just plain unnecessary, etc.?

  5. If you could let me know the thing you enjoyed the most and the least of this session, it would help for future games.

I saw this mentioned on Twitter and was hoping some details would emerge.

I will put my hand up as someone who would love to find out more about this.

  • Neil.