Zit

Well, characteristics are already used for defining the resolution points, so using them again for the "damage" may exaggerate their weight. I thought however about adding a kind of Might to the rolled damage, based on the Might from STR but with otjer characteristics, but it would be for spirit combat. One of my players found 2d6 too high, but since this is for advantages only, I think it is ok. There is however quite a lot of luck involved, even with 1d6. Some players may not like it. Others may enjoy this uncertainty which avoids min maxing during thee play. Your suggestion of using the difference between 10's is not bad. This is simple math with one die roll less. It could be an alternate way, but it increases the force of the opponent with the better skill, since he can achieve bigger differences. It makes bonuses and traits even stronger for the same reason. For the bonus, I understand this as applying one of the Perrin's rules of good gaming: a bonus must be significant. 5% or 10% don't really matter, so forget them.

Hey, I just came in Sweden today. We're now in Öland.

http://paris-jeux-de-roles.blogspot.de/p/boutique-de-jeux-de-role-sur-paris.html

If you can find it, you may have a look at The Celestial Empire. Martials arts are handled with powers powered by the Qi, from the BGB (like super skills) or specific to the setting (like blind fighting). Then you have martial arts schools teaching some of these powers. If you want a fantasy genre like in wuxia films, this works well, and it allows to introduce non-hitting technics like leap, acute awareness, etc. It depends also if you want the different styles being cosmetic (a Wushu Kick or a Karate Kick have the same effect, just the description is different), or if you want to detail different effects. g33k's suggestion may be the easiest, and you can even decide to apply the results on a normal roll. You may write a list of effects (crushing, knockback, stunning, entangling and some setting specific effects like blinding...) and each technic (sweeping kick, direct punch, hand blade, snake hit in the eyes...) allows one of these effects. And you alocate these technics to the appropriate styles (or schools), every style teaching only some of these technics. For the yang/yin styles, you can also impose some DEX/STR requirements for each specific technic, like for the weapons: not any style fits better to everyone. However, from my point of vue, you should not detail so much. A martial art is a bunch of technics which you use according to the immediate situation and the opennings: you rarely decide to use that or that kick before the chance arises, but you can decide which general tactics you use (attack, counter, defense...) and for which goal (wound, neutralize...). So I would rather limit the list of single technics and gather them into a more general skill. You may then have one skill (e.g. wushu) giving some advantages and allowing some effects, and sub-styles allowing some additionnal effects or enhancing some of them, while decreasing or forbidding some others.

First of all, I apologize for this very long post. I don’t like long posts myself. Its purpose is however to describe a Conflict which I played and get the comments from the game designer and other testers: what was wrong, how we could have done, etc. It is a kind of exercise to help me and the readers to better feel the mechanisms. This hasn’t been played around a table but over a blog which we’ve been using for playing a campaign since a couple of years (in French, here: http://wos-rpg.over-blog.com/). It started for the supplement Wind on the Steppes, which I intend to convert to RD100. Considering the form of this game, it is difficult to explain rules in details to the players or to spend much time asking for precisions, or waiting for all the players to react. I wrote in italic my comments and some questions to Paolo. The situation: The scene takes place in the mid-6th-Century in the Gobi area. The party are Türks coming back from a secret diplomatic mission in the Western Wei kingdom. They have been guided by a smuggler along a remote path up to the camp where his colleagues are dwelling. The adventurers are actually trying to secretly go back to their territory while avoiding the city of Kumul which is controlled by the ruling Avars (or Rouran). The camp is a semi-permanent place where ruffians are leaving with their families away from the Wei and the Kumulian authorities. The party has to negotiate the passage and avoid being plundered or sold as slaves: this is the purpose of this Conflict. On their way, the PCs managed to gain the friendship of their guide by winning a previous Conflict and for some other reasons which I won’t detail here. PCs: Ayu-Kulak, young noble, leader of the group Kenjeke, a young woman of high nobility, on her way to becoming a shamaness and Ayu-Kulak’s fiancée Arslan, a mounted archer Ulap, a mysterious black shaman Geche-Yüz, an elite warrior, NPC Jebe-Tsenkher, a messenger, NPC They are travelling with horses and camels carrying goods, food, water and presents for their Khan (silk). Ayu-Kulak is looking for support and a guide and is ready to give up one camel to sacrifice, plus a part of the carried goods. He will be leading the Conflict for the party. The smugglers are a mixture of settled Kumulians, Weis, outlawed Nomads and mixed people. The fact that the Conflict has been played by blog with players ignoring the rules disturbs the normal sequence, with the character rolling for effect posting sometimes before the supporting characters. I thought at first that the description of each action had to follow the sequence of declarations, or at least that the player rolling for effect comes at last. It was not possible over the blog since players do not always wait for the others to post. It seems however to me now that only the actual die roll comes at the very last, but that players can describe their actions in another order, as long as it makes sense. This allows for example a supporting in-game speech to better fit the leader’s action or speech, and can even simulate a kind of simultaneity. Another point is that since the players did not know the rules, I had to wait for them to describe their action before deciding myself which Trait was in use or even who would better roll for effect. Setup The Chief is an opposition of 14 RP and 65% “hard to convince”. The friendly guide gives a free bonus bead to use when the PCs want, as consequence of gaining his friendship in a previous Conflict. As explained above, I had to wait for the player’s description before choosing the RP and skills involved for the players. Ayu-Kulak stars at the chief’s eyes, holds a hand up, snaps the fingers and says “Arslan, the Chief wants to have a demonstration of our force”. Ayu-Kulak tries to impress the ruffians’ chief by showing how his men are good and how well he can lead them -and hurt ennemies. I choose as RP the average of Ayu-Kulak’s CHA 09 and WIL 12, since it is not only about convincing but also imposing one’s will (and Ayu-Kulak’s CHA was pretty low). The players have a RP of 11. Setup is finished. Turn 1 For this first round, I stated that the main action will be the “demonstration of force”, so I left Arslan roll for effect, with Ayu-Kulak “command” Trait as bonus (good warriors with a good leader). Question: Is that OK to base the RP on a character'S characteristic but allow another one to roll for effect for the first turn? It seemed sensible to me in this case. Arslan tries to impress the Chief with his archery skill. The chief will resist with his best combat skill, since it is not so easy to impress a good fighter. Arslan uses Bow + Fast Shooting Stunt + bonus Command from Ayu-Kulak. Question: could Arslan use a double Trait (Bow + Fast Shooting), or is the 2nd Trait considered as a bonus bead which has to be gained during a previous round? From my side, I just stated that a fast shooting is more impressive than a simple shooting, so I granted an arbitrary bonus to Arslan, working around the question. Arslan wins the first round, the Chief loses 3 RP. 11 to 11 The Chief “counterattacks” by doubting that the PCs will be able to make their way through the desert, and as consequence, that they depend on his good will: “being a good warrior is of no use in a sable storm!” (Hard to Convince 65%). Arslan knows the region and replies that he can find the way and ask his way to encounters, using his Language Türk and Region [Eastern Tarim] traits. See my question above about double traits. Arslan will make the defensive roll. Anyway, encountering somebody in the desert is not credible, and Arslan actually knows a parallel route where people speak another language. So I simply kept “Knowledge Region” (56%) vs. the opposition, refusing the Language Trait. The common RP is involved, since Arslan works here for the group. Ayu-Kulak suggests Arslan to use the free bonus bead from their friendly guide for the roll. The friendly guide talks to his Chief in a language the PCs do not understand, but it seems to help. Arslan has 86%, rolls 36, the Chief has 65%, rolls 19. Arslan wins, the Chief loses 3 RP again. 11 to 8 Turn 2 Ayu-Kulak makes a long speech, explaining that the horde will be coming in the near future, that the ruffians have most interest in helping them, that he’s the son of a noble, all which I interpreted as using his Status [Noble-Chief of Hundred] Trait. Since the chief is not a full Nomad and the status is not very high, Ayu-Kulak suffers a penalty, but since the speech was good and the player involved, I gave him an arbitrary bonus which cancelled it. This is however not enough and Ayu-Kulak loses this turn: the ruffians’ Chief does not believe him and laughs. The party loses 4 RP. 7 to 8. Turn 3 Then one of the ruffians whispers in the Chief’s ear. Jebe-Tsenkher (a NPC but formerly PC which I now play) makes a raw perception roll and recognizes the member of a gang they defeated a few weeks ago: this is a support action with an information roll. The party can imagine that this will be a bonus bead for the chief, who won’t be pleased to learn that the PCs already killed some of his men in the past! Ayu-Kulak orders his elite warrior Geche-Yüz to immediately defy the ruffian at wrestling before the Chief reacts. In the same time, Ulap the shaman prepares a Confusion spell to provide a bonus bead when requested. Why shall this combat help the party in their negotiation? I stated that this fits to Ayu-Kulak’s strategy to impress the ruffians (like “we killed some of yours and we could do it again”), and wrestling is a common way to set disputes among Nomads. The Chief accepts the duel, but since Ayu-Kulak asked his champion to fight, the Chief summons his own champion, a colossal boxer with a +2 Might. He thinks he will win and that this will bring Ayu-Kulak to shut up. I managed this fight as a secondary Conflict. The fight is resolved with the basic combat rules, nomadic wrestling “Bökh” vs. brawl. After a few rounds, the outcome is a total victory for Geche-Yuz (who is a specialist of the Bökh), and the Chief loses 2d6 RP. 7-2 Question: would have it been possible to use the Chief’s bonus bead in the secondary conflict? The chief takes now the PCs seriously and shows that he is willing to negotiate an acceptable price to give them shelter. Ayu-Kulak could decide a Quick exit, but he wants to keep as much goods as possible and to get a guide and so decides to try a total victory. At this point, I did not have the Chief counterattack, since he was supposed to be ready to accept a compromise. That the reason why I waited for Ayu-Kulak’s reaction in the next turn for the Chief to counterattack again. Could I have him counterattack on turn 3, as soon as the players said their intention not to go for a quick Exit? It seems that the narrator does not declare any roll for effect in the declaration phase, so he can decide when he wants to roll for effect, without any pre-declaration. Correct? Turn 4 Ayu-Kulak is not very diplomatic in his answer: instead of trying to give an acceptable outcome to the chief, he tries to humiliate him by being quite rude. I decide to give him a penalty: the chief cannot accept to be humiliated in the presence of his men. But Kenjeke, the young noble woman, makes her own speech and makes it clear that she wants a compromise and that her brother is the leader of a big horde and is going to come back in the region in the near future. She’s using her Status [Begum -high noble woman] Trait to support Ayu-Kulak and soften his words with an in-game speech. Ayu-Kulak makes a sign at Ulap the shaman who releases his Confusion spell, granting his bonus bead. At the end, this crucial roll would be: Chief’s “Hard to Convince” = 65% vs. Ayu-Kulak’s ”Command” 68% - penalty 30% + bonus Kenjeke 30% + bonus Ulap 30% = 98% Rolls: Chief 84, Ayu-Kulak 90. An advantage for Ayu-Kulak!! The chief loses 7 RP, and finishes at -5, a total victory for the PCs. The attentive reader may ask “but what about the Chief’s bonus bead gained in turn 3?” Actually there was some confusion during the game -we were all learning- and I decided to cancel it. But even with this bonus bead, the result would have remained unchanged. Question: is it possible to use a Trait to roll for effect if it has already been used as support? And conversely? By the same or another character? This is what I did, but I could have used Ayu-Kulak's Status Trait instead, which I only used to roll for effect before. Outcome The Chief doesn’t know what to think. Who are these people at last? He is confused and even more worried. He prefers to accept to welcome the PCs for the night against one single camel, hoping that they will recall it when the horde will be back. Ayu-Kulak’s player reminds me that he wanted a guide, and that’s the reason why he took the risk of a total victory. I agreed but stated that the guide will show them the way for a few days only, not knowing the route beyond.

Paolo, may be you could at some point write a report (here or where you want) of an actual complex long-lasting social conflict (may be including sub-conflicts) which you ran during a test game, explaining every stage step by step, how you brought ideas to counter the PCs and how they managed to get bonus beads or roll the proper Traits. I think it would not only be helpful, but also arouse even more interest for the game. I see it like writing in normal police what the players and narrator said, and in italic (or boxed) the detailed rule explanations. Just a suggestion.

ok. I've seen it, it is clear. I need to realy understand everything since my players will have to take part to the kuriltai, the warriors assembly in the Altai mountains where they'll try to push their favorite at the head of the clan !

A few things are still not clear to me: 1- how do you set the party's RP ? Is there one for the whole party, or does each character have his own (it seems to be the case) ? 2- if all characters have RPs but only one rolls, do they still all lose RPs in case of defeat ? 3- if one character decides to roll for effect with a skill/Trait corresponding to a characteristic, but in the following round another character wit a higher characteristic and hence more RPs rolls for effect, what happens to the conflict's RPs ? And what if he uses another Trait involving obviously another chracteristic ? (question bound to the preceding) 4- can the same character change the trait he uses during a conflict ? What about RPs in this case ?

I can't find the page anymore. the links lead to rpgmeetings homepage only.

There are no variable AP. The units die determines if you hit a part of the hit location covered by the armour. Chainmail bikinis are hit with a 1 only

They can be slaves as well, and earn their liberty. Slave elite warriors have been common in the history, as well as ministers and conceilors. Earning their freeing can be a good motivation. I had my player start in Sartar and been sentenced to slavery for a few years only (after a well targetted bribery from one of the players) and bought at Pimper's block by Daine. They worked for the Duke as warriors or administrators, some managed to shorten their slavery time. When again free, they already had made their life in the Raus county.

Isn't there a half-elf somewhere in Griffin Mountain's encounters as well ?

the link seems not to be working today.

At the very begining (2nd sentence) of the Size chapter, you mention the Size rank. You meant Size Class, I guess.

All these questions will be answered to soon. I suggested to Paolo to teach the rules step by step, starting with the simpliest and increasing complexity.

I find it better than the first drafts, but examples are always good. May be you can tell Paolo what are the points which are unclear and deserve examples ? Can an impersonal force make a support action ?

I'm not very found of Fate Points either. A GM should consider the players' suggestions, but I'd not like them to force me to accept how they want to alter the story. My understanding of "narrative" is that the rules, or the way to play them, do not decide if an involved skill (or Trait or whatever) does have its expecte real effect (like my sword wounds the target), but instead if it does have the intended effect on the story (I'm using my sword to sweep away an obstacle and go further). And this can be done without fate points. Letting the GM decide whether YES or NOT is arbitrary. Quack Fu master pretends to know a weak point ? His goal is actually to defeat his foe, and hitting the weak spot is only a mean to achieve that: he uses his knowledge instead of his fighting skills to win the combat. The goal is actullay to win the contest, not to break the weapon. The GM only has to evaluate the consistency of the suggestion. Narrative rules should determine if Quack Fu Master's knowledge was sufficient to win. If he does, we can consider that he knew enough about the weakness. Nothing arbitrary. The rules says if the player's suggestion brings the story in the direction he wished. Simulationist would determine first if he knows the weakmess or not, period, and so what ? That's my understanding but nodody is obliged to agree with me. Or I may be completely wrong.

I have the feeling by reading all this that you all consider that narrativist = the players can influence the background. Is this really what narrativist means ?

Don't they ask "and how many miles are 6 leagues ? " For the flair of the game, I completely agree with you. I would use Li when playing in China, verst for Mythic russia or milia passum for Rome. I'm using travel days for my Steppes campaign. Note that Glorantha is not a quasi-medieval setting, so leagues or km, it does not matter. May be the mesopotamian Beru would be ore appropriate. But every region in Glorantha would probably have its own system and not all use the Lunar KM. But for the understanding of the rules mechanics, metric is more universal as measuremetn system. As English as a language. But we already do (or at last try to) every time we want to address an international audience ! So text in English with Metric system, that's the perfect combination.

Since runes are symbols, or at least could be regarded as such, I wouldn't be surprised if it was be possible to use the rules for other settings -without fire arms- just by renaming them or may be even disregarding them, but since I haven't seen the rules, it is pure speculation. BTW, I hope the new rules kept the Metric measures which everybody understands in the World, in contrary to the local Imperial (don't ask me what is an acre). Or at least both. Long life to the Lunar Key Mile !

I don't understand a word of Swedish, but just having a look at all these swedish words makes me feel like wanting to play a Viking-like game . Much more inspiring than playing a Viking, let's say, in French.

It may be a mistake to separate the objects and their spirits as two different entities. Does the "spirit" of an object inhabit it, or is it instead an image of it on the spirit plane, like it would be a kind of soul ? The spirit is actually the object. The spirit itself would then be consubstancial to the object, and not inhabit it. A piece of furniture would not result in the gathering of wood and craft spirits, but would give birth to a new "furniture" spirit. In a homocentrist point of vue, one could even say that (some?) spirits are created or are gaining reality only when conceived, named, summoned, or in any way involved in an interaction. As would say the famous Great Shamans Ay-Zen-Berg and Shröd-Ingair. But that's only a game, we can imagine whatever we want.

A reason to hide a conflict may be for example if the NPC uses the Deceit Trait, but without an automatic success. That is, the PCs still have a chance to win the conflict. In my exemple, if the PCs do not manage to convince the NPC, how can I either give him a chance to lie to the PCs, or at least have the PCs being unsure of the result ? Can we imagine a kind of conflict with hidden results, until someone makes a perception roll ? Or better not use the conflict at all but an opposing roll instead, which result is hidden by the GM ? I know, this is a special case, but deceiving during a social conflict is not so exceptional. After many thoughts: the PCs are actually the players and you cannot deceit players with a die roll. So the Deceit Trait (or skill or whatever you rules propose) against the PCs cannot be used as a conflict, but merely for the GM to decide if he tries to deceive the players.

Is there any way to conceal the true result of a conflict ? For example, characters are trying to convince a NPC to help them: If the NPC is a master in deceiving, how can I hide his true intentions to the players if we play it as a conflict ?