You know, it's a very pretty book, but the game somehow lacks the charm and depth (despite a ridiculously deep setting) of WFRP. Still, it's a game, the system works, the possibilities (within the limited scope provided) are manifold, the critical hit charts make me snort with happy laughter.
Many people gripe about the limitations of the significantly reduced number of career paths. I disagree with all that. With a proper GM limiting players from taking absolutely every ability a path presents (which would really be ridiculous powergaming... I don't think players are MEANT to take every single skill, just like in WFRP), there are just as many possible takes on the careers to be comparable to WFRP. Also, by focusing on talents, rather than hard characteristic advancement, it makes what can be done with a character's characteristics much more robust. Yes, the base numbers look lower, but put a gun in the hands of a Guardsman acolyte with a 45% BS, and, with wise selection of talents in the Guardsman's advancement tree and the proper actions taken, the character is hot, projectile-fueled death with limbs a-flying.
Ahem. Back on topic.
I was well aware of the Vetruvian Man images in both books. Nowhere in my mind did the idea of books copying each other ever occur. It's a very famous drawing for its scientific and metaphorical examination of the possibilities of the human body. One of my favorite renditions of this was the DaVinci Virus in the movie Hackers. It had an Italian accent, after all.