DAMage is not for me. Why? I'm a fan of the Mage: The Ascension game line, and my thoughts start from there. Your mileage may vary.

The game defines magic separately for each group. It defines four "pillars" for each group, each with five ranks. These serve (supposedly) to measure what a Mage can and cannot do. Like any good game mechanic?

A lot of people didn't like the ambiguity inherent in M:tA's description of spheres. If that's you, avoid DAMage like the plague-- DAMage mechanics for Magic are described totally from the in-character point-of-view of the individual paradigm. As a way to understand what each kind of magic can really do, or settle disputes about whether a given Mage has the right knowledge to attempt a casting, they're completely unplayable.

They are, however, creative, even sometimes inspiring. If they were presented as magical theory, rather than a game mechanic, they'd be alright.

They'll also be good for selling supplements. The pillars demand exhaustive lists of "rotes," concrete definitions of individual powers, to be playable, and STs and players will find themselves obliged to go buy the "tradition book" for all the groups they intend to portray.

Another thing that bugged people about Mage: The Ascension, was that the sphere system seems "homogenous." That is, the progression in various abilities is pretty arbitrary, and if it's seen as universal among all kinds of will-workers, it intrudes on the in-character integrity of that paradigm.

I think that's a reasonable objection-- the Mage line's approach to Magic is it's own scenario, and though people claim you can do "any kind" of magic with it, that's not entirely true.

And, I think this helps us see why DAMage was developed along these lines. People wanted each paradigm to make sense "unto itself." Unfortunately, they chose to carry baggage from M:tA over. (Why? In an attempt to sell copy to Mage players.)

Wary of alienating Mage players, they retained an analog to a "sphere system," and gave lip-service to the "dynamic" quality of magic as found in Mage. And the result is something that is a glorified freestyle role-playing of magic, based on flavor text, or, with the eventual publication of massive rote lists, will really boil down to spell lists.

What people don't realize is that M:tA's sphere system was *born* out of a desire for a playable compromise between the reliable klunkiness of spell-lists, and the flexibility, but potential twinkery, of free-form role-play. It's imperfect, but, taken as what it is, it's also superb.

DAMage could have used M:tA's finely-tuned compromise. Instead it tried to reinvent the wheel, moving in both directions, failing to do either justice. DAMage could have been Mage: the Ascension with really cool, useful material on RPing in the Dark Ages setting.

And by the way. The presentation of the setting is rather lackluster, in DAMage. Possibly this is because they expect you go out and pay more money for Dark Ages Vampire. But if you're an Order of Hermes fan, for example, prepare to be disappointed. (Moreover, personally, my mind boggles at the authors' encouragement to send Muslim sorcerers off with their Christian cabalmates to kill Muslims in the Crusades.)

Alternatives better than DAMage include Mage: the Sorcerer's Crusade, Mage: the Ascension, or Sorcerer, each already in White Wolf mechanics, and adaptable to the Dark Ages setting (DAMage expects you to have other books too!) If you're a vampire player, particularly, I would think Sorcerer would be the way to go. There're also Ars Magica and D&D. And GURPS puts out great supplements, including on the Middle Ages. Which, if you want setting and flavor, are far superior.

Not to say the book is bad, because for the most part it is rather good. For Storytelling material it is bad, but as setting information and rules it is excellent.

Oh, on a final note, i only gave it 3 stars because White wolf decided not to put any rules in it outside of magic rules simply to sell more copies of Dark Ages: Vampire. It desserves 4 in its own right.

The similarities are obvious and yes, it is the World of Darkness set back into the Dark Medieval, but the truth of the matter is that this is not the same game as it's predecessors, Mage: The Ascension or Mage: The Sorcerer's Crusade. There is no War for Reality, there is no competition. There is only magic. The opening chapter on medieval superstition gives a blanket feel of ambiguity to everything in the age and I think this is where the real strength of this game shines.

This book is not intended for first-time roleplayers. This book is advanced in every respect of the word. As a Storyteller for Dark Ages, having the rules to create and use Mage NPC's in my chronicles is outstanding and the rules for their creation, advancement, societies, everything... is right here. However, I was disappointed by the fact that although this game (and although it requires the use of Dark Ages: Vampire to use it, it -is- a separate and dinstinct game unto itself if allowed) has rules to actually play Mages, I can't say it's that easy. But then again, it obviously isn't supposed to be simple, after all these are willworkers, people whose expectations charge reality and force it to change. It's just not cut and dry.

The character creation is easy. The rules for advancement, simple enough. Unfortunately, it's the ambiguity of each of the pillars that catches me off guard, because, although we are playing these mages and their mindset is critical to their play, having the levels of power measured by interpretation is asking for complications. However, I believe now, after having re-read this book two times + since purchasing it, that it is SUPPOSED to be ambiguous and inexact, facilitating the person to person interpretation that was the rule of the day. After all, if someone easily adhere to exacting rules in the Dark Medieval, they were not Mages. Mages break the rules in every way, shape, and fashion and don't apologize for it; rather they take their success to mean that are due even more power. Enter hubris.

All in all, this is a great book and more visually stunning that I first imagined it would be. The spine, once again, is not attached to the book itself, but I'm beginning to suspect it's not supposed to. I gave this game 4 stars (instead of 3) because of the innate potential of such a game and the Dark Ages line. However, if you're are die hard fan of the Sphere system, I heartily recommend The Sorcerer's Crusade instead. This game is darker, more brutal, and more ambigious. These can be good things in the hands of the right people, but not for everyone.

As a Y2K professional, I had high hopes for this book - it was the first 'mass market' book that I had run across regarding the Year 2000 dilema. After reading nearly 100 pages of little but potential horror stories for January 1, 2000, I had no more Y2K project management insight than I could get (for free) from Peter DeJager's home page, www.year2000.com. I was, however, siezed by the urge to immediately clean out all of my bank accounts and hunker down in a remote wilderness cabin with a manual can opener (no damn computer chips in an electric can opener standing between me and my spagettio's) and my Y2K compliant shotgun.

"Solving the Year 2000 Problem" presents a plethora of fodder for marketing presentations. Anyone in the Y2K seminar business should be buying caseloads of this book and passing them out as freebies to potential clients. But don't be tempted to buy this book on the basis of constructing a Y2K project. It doesn't quite cut the mustard in that regard.

I would recommend the following book as a primer for Y2K project management:

"The Year 2000 Software Crisis: Challenge of the Century", by Wm. M. Ulrich and Ian S. Hayes, published by Yourden Press Computing Series.

VICTORY is a companion volume to COMBAT, both of which are edited by intrigue-meister Stephen Coonts. VICTORY is a doorstop of a volume, weighing in at well over 700 pages and consisting of ten previously unpublished pieces by masters of the war story. The stories in VICTORY range in length from fifty to over one hundred pages; if they had appeared in any of the adventure magazines, they would have been serialized. Most of the stories in VICTORY would or could have found a home in Argosy, though one --- "Blood Bond" by Harold Robbins --- is definitely Stag material. More on that in a minute.

The stories in VICTORY do not glorify war. Far from it. All of the stories are set during World War II, with the exception of "Honor" by Ralph Peters, set immediately thereafter. It is difficult to pick an immediate favorite; the average reader may have several, for different reasons. Coonts's own "The Sea Witch," which opens VICTORY, begins as a fairly predictable tale with an unpredictable ending and that utilizes an unexpected technique to catch the reader flatfooted.

"Blood Bond" is typical Robbins. It is a spy story, dealing with a plot to kill Hitler, and stands apart from the other tales due to its unrelenting scatological narrative. Robbins writes the way James Bond really thinks. Though Robbins, gone for several years now, had his share of detractors, he never inflicted boredom on his audience, and this previously unpublished work continues his streak, even in his absence.

David Hagberg's "V5" concerns the German rocket that could have turned the tide of World War II and the Allied military and espionage components that feverishly work together, though at some distance, to ensure that the project never makes it off the ground.

Peters's "Honor" deals not with Americans in the war but with a German officer in the war's aftermath, trudging through the nightmarish ruin that is postwar Germany as he tries to return home to his wife. The conclusion of "Honor" is predictable, almost from the first paragraph; it is the journey, not the close-to-foregone destination, that is important here.

The biggest surprise in VICTORY may be "The Eagle and the Cross" by R.J. Pineiro, a tale of an American pilot who is sent to the Eastern front to train Russian aviators during the final months of the Battle of Stalingrad. The bittersweet ending is perhaps the most haunting of any tale in the book.

With VICTORY Coonts again demonstrates that his talent as a writer is matched by his editorial abilities. While this volume is aimed at a more narrowly defined audience, the quality of the stories involved should, for the most part, satisfy the more discerning reader of any genre. Recommended.

--- Reviewed by Joe Hartlaub