Unknown Armies 3rd Edition - any interest?

I'm interested in playing a game of Unknown Armies , but since that's not even one of the games on the site's drop-down list, it makes me wonder if I'm the only one. So - how many people here are interested in playing or running a game of Unknown Armies: 3rd Edition ?

Just took a look at it quickly on wikipedia. Seems like it's gonna be a hard sell, a game with several sanity meters and so on... Kinda sketichy to be honest.

I'd jump at the chance at playing some UA but then again I'm in the CET time zone. As for the drop-down list...well...its quite lacking. Anyways, if enough people could be gathered up I'd be up for something. Elhazzared said: Just took a look at it quickly on wikipedia. Seems like it's gonna be a hard sell, a game with several sanity meters and so on... Kinda sketichy to be honest. UA has a great setting, simple mechanics and is excellent for one-shots. Well worth looking into. 

Yeah, the mechanics look very simple (never actually played, sadly), and the Identities system used in the 3rd Edition looks like a wonderfully simple way to create and run characters. Honestly though, the setting is what attracted me to the game. Where else can you play a mage who must play out movie tropes when they come up or lose their magical fuel, or play a mage who loses that fuel whenever he's not at least tipsy?

The setting is subjective. I personally don't enjoy modern settings so for me the setting is not really good but it can work with good story telling. Then you got sanity systems, those are always terrible. Again this is subjective but to me they are one of the worst thing roleplaying games have ever invented. I don't have even the slightest amount of fun playing a character who is going insane, who is afraid of everything he sees and such, that's isn't fun at all for me. Fun is being able to roleplay the character the way I want, not roleplay the character the way a dice told me to and have my character being forcibly changed in ways I don't want because of said dice. Also something being perfect for oneshots doesn't makes it a good system, if anything it hints at a really bad system because a good is one where you are actually supposed to develop attachment to your character as keep going and stuff happens. Not creating an emotional connection with the character leads to very shallow roleplay (in my experience anyway).

Elhazzared said: Also something being perfect for oneshots doesn't makes it a good system, if anything it hints at a really bad system because a good is one where you are actually supposed to develop attachment to your character as keep going and stuff happens. Not creating an emotional connection with the character leads to very shallow roleplay (in my experience anyway). Just out of curiosity, what system would you give as an example of a good one?

I'd give UA a try, FB. Not up for GMing though. 

Henrik S. said: Just out of curiosity, what system would you give as an example of a good one? Well a few examples. Fate is mostly ok. It's a little bit loose with rules and the character creation is not perfect, but in general it works with a good GM. D&D 5e is pretty decent though they over simplified some areas to the detriment of the game. Savage worlds is also a pretty good classless system although it could use a tiny bit of rebalance towards starting stats, carry capacity need a huge change and some advantages and disadvantages need a little tweek to become actual choices. Dark Heresy 2 is probably the closest I've seen to a perfect system. Remove the use of sanity and corruption, add a proper monetary system. Change the character creation to allow players more freedom over the choices of some stuff and generally increase slightly the starting attributes and it would be a perfect system.

Absolutely. Love the post-modern magic & sanity settings - fantastic stuff. Only have the 2E PDF though :c

I've been reading through "Book 2: Run" (got it for Christmas) and so far it seems like an interesting system for the GM and players alike. It's more collaborative than, say, D&D - in the first session, the players and GM are supposed to get together, decide what sort of game they want to play (including its power level and what the player characters' objective is - this sounds like a very player-driven game), and make characters with some connection to each other and the objective. Just thought I'd share some new observations, in case it piques anyone else's interest.