Alternate Chargen Test Challenge

[Hzark10]

8 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

  9 hours ago, jeffjerwin said:

I do think that 'high-level' campaigns, where Lancelot doesn't exist, and is replaced by a PC or group of PCs, for example, should be an option.

I agree on this one.  In the gamemaster section we should have either 1/2 a page or full page on scaling the campaigns and notable choices. For example, how powerful do we want the characters to be. Which Merlin is present, which characters have plot immunity, and so on.

 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

There was an alternative option being expressed which was that rather than try to balance the stats by their usefulness, balance instead their COSTS. This is something we tried out in our Middle-earth campaign (in part), by making SIZ cost 2 points while other stats were just 1 point. What ended up happening was that the players usually didn't max out their SIZ (unless they wanted to play a hulking giant of a man, which one player did... I think he ended up with SIZ 24 or so with Glory bonus points). This was because SIZ was so expensive and buying STR and CON instead seemed like a better deal: a few points of SIZ and then STR & CON. Now, we didn't do it (yet), but lowering DEX and APP to 0.5 points might work nicely, BUT... you still need to give them something to do, especially APP. In our Middle-earth campaign, we did use the DEX/2 and APP/2 defaults for some skills, which did encourage the courtier to get his APP to 20. Also, we gave APP Glory for skill use, instead of a flat 10 Glory.

This also might be a way to increase the little used stats. The only problem would be is to determine what the default numbers would be, and how do you reflect this for the random choice.

[Morien]

1 hour ago, Hzark10 said:

The only problem would be is to determine what the default numbers would be, and how do you reflect this for the random choice. 

Not a problem, really. We already know what the average PKs look at 21 in 5th edition, with around 15 years of playtesting using GPC. We can simply use that as our touchstone.

For instance, the average NPK has a statline of 14/10/14/14/10. So that is something I would like the PKs have as well, at minimum. Yes, I know this is the ordinary knight, not the young knight, whose stats are worse, but I would like to make the PKs at least a bit more capable as a default. They are supposed to be the heroes of their story, after all.

Random roll is even easier, since you don't have to do any stat balancing there. The rolls are random, not assigned, so you are just relaying on luck and simply have to set the variance you want to have (1d6, 2d6 or 3d6?), and where you want the average to end up.

[Atgxtg]

3 hours ago, Morien said:

KAP 4, p. 156; "... the Double Feint tactic, which requires a DEX roll. Normal modifiers for encumbrance and footing apply."'

KAP 4, p.165: "... attempt a DEX roll, as modified by armor, load carried, footing, etc."

Emphasis mine. YPWV, just wanted to quote the chapter and verse.

Oh, I know it in there, I just didn't apply it.

3 hours ago, Morien said:

 

Dunno. One of my big issues with Double Feint is that in ALL other cases, the way you control your Sword is your Sword Skill. But suddenly, a master swordsman has harder times getting through the gaps and joints in armor than a pickpocketing streetrat?

I never like the two roll nature of it either. That's why what I was thinkng of was something like:

• Use Sword, Spear, etc.
• -5 modifier to skill (possibly greater depending on the weapon. I would think Swords and Spears would be the easiest to do this with, axes and maces harder, and fails the hardest).
• Ingore armor up to half the wielder's DEX so DEX remains in the equation). 
• Possibly double the peanlty to ingore up to DEX in armor

This was still in the though experiment phase. That Is it hasn't gone anywhwere except for one email and then here.

 

[Atgxtg]

On 7/31/2019 at 12:48 AM, SDLeary said:

If they were on the lands that the city controlled, yet were on a villa outside the walls, they would still be considered from the city. In this way they have roughly the same living conditions as their Celtic equals (though of course they consider themselves better). They would visit the city more often, escorting their lord to his duties, their ladies on excursions to the market, or attending council themselves, assuming they have enough status. 

In this way, they already fit into the frame laid out by K&L, and the older editions.

SDLeary

Except that K&L seems to give some Romans who are not city dwellers, such as in Dorset. THere were county villas as well as urban ones.

Once again, historically there were villas that were far enough away from the cities to be more like manors. Tsbury and Grateley in Salisbury were both Roman villas, for example. I think the manor system from the medieval period evolved from the old Roman villa model. Thengs just sort of broke down and became more localized with the loss of Roman engineering and sanitation to help with the cities and roads.

[Morien]

8 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

I think the manor system from the medieval period evolved from the old Roman villa model.

That is the consensus, yes.

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Hzark10 said:

I agree on this one.  In the gamemaster section we should have either 1/2 a page or full page on scaling the campaigns and notable choices. For example, how powerful do we want the characters to be. Which Merlin is present, which characters have plot immunity, and so on.

Maybe this concept might be best served in a supplment based around such high powered characters. 

Long ago, inspired by the fact that one of my players had the nickname of "Bear",  I had the idea of letting a PK draw the Sword in the Stone in 510, and then basing a campaign around the PK being Uther's son, secretly raised in exile (under a false name). My plan was to let the other PKs form the core group of main heroes around the PK King Arthur and see how they handle the major events. I had planed to cxreate some sort of mechanic to let Arthur call in Merlin for help. Kinda something like Stormbinger's Elan/Allegiance system. Early on (when Melrin is desperately needed to put Arthur on the thone and keep him there), the PK would have a lot of "Merlin Points"l, but as time go by and he uses up the points faster that they replnetish, the PK would have to be more selective on when to aks Melrin for help. Eventually, when the point pool runs down, Merlin would disappear.

The gaming group changed, and I once clued in some of the players on the idea, which prevented me from implementing it-at least so far. On the plus side, my players are never quite sure if I'm going to spring that on them, so they still have hope whenever they try to pull the sword from the stone.

 

[SDLeary]

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Except that K&L seems to give some Romans who are not city dwellers, such as in Dorset. THere were county villas as well as urban ones.

Once again, historically there were villas that were far enough away from the cities to be more like manors. Tsbury and Grateley in Salisbury were both Roman villas, for example. I think the manor system from the medieval period evolved from the old Roman villa model. Thengs just sort of broke down and became more localized with the loss of Roman engineering and sanitation to help with the cities and roads.

In Dorset is Dorchester (Durnovaria). Not the best source (its what I've got at the moment) in the world, but the intro on Villa from Wikipedia:

Quote

A villa is a type of house that was originally an ancient Roman upper-class country house. Since its origins in the Roman villa, the idea and function of a villa has evolved considerably. After the fall of the Roman Republic, villas became small farming compounds, which were increasingly fortified in Late Antiquity, sometimes transferred to the Church for reuse as a monastery. Then they gradually re-evolved through the Middle Ages into elegant upper-class country homes. In modern parlance, "villa" can refer to various types and sizes of residences, ranging from the suburban semi-detached double villa to residences in the wildland–urban interface.

and...

Quote

Towards the end of the 3rd century, Roman towns in Britain ceased to expand: like patricians near the centre of the empire, Roman Britons withdrew from the cities to their villas, which entered on a palatial building phase, a "golden age" of villa life. Villae rusticae are essential in the Empire's economy.

There was the Villa Urbana, which was close to a city, and Villa Rustica, which were the large independent rural farming/production centers that we normally think about. Its simply my thought that a Roman Knight would live at one of the former, due to the nature and space requirements of horsemanship, and assuming that most reduced cities don't have available grounds for proper training (they would have stable, but not a space big enough for proper equestrian drilling). This villa is probably not owned by the knight, but his lord.

But then I'm weird, and also use the earlier timeline, with Badon around 495.

SDLeary

[Mugen]

21 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Oh, I know it in there, I just didn't apply it.

I never like the two roll nature of it either. That's why what I was thinkng of was something like:

• Use Sword, Spear, etc.
• -5 modifier to skill (possibly greater depending on the weapon. I would think Swords and Spears would be the easiest to do this with, axes and maces harder, and fails the hardest).
• Ingore armor up to half the wielder's DEX so DEX remains in the equation). 
• Possibly double the peanlty to ingore up to DEX in armor

This was still in the though experiment phase. That Is it hasn't gone anywhwere except for one email and then here.

Problem is that reducing skill to gain benefits may be counter-productive, especially if you have skill over 20 and a substantific chance to roll a critical attack.

Perhaps a second damage value, based on either DEX+STR (or even 2*DEX, but it may be overkill) and only usable if you have a 1 handed sword or a dagger ? Perhaps also only if your attack roll is 5 points above your opponent's ?

EDIT: if you REALLY want to give more value to APP, that second damage value could be based on DEX+APP. 😁

Edited August 2, 2019 by Mugen

[Morien]

19 hours ago, SDLeary said:

But then I'm weird, and also use the earlier timeline, with Badon around 495.

You might be interested in checking out this thread, if you haven't already:

 

[Tizun Thane]

2 hours ago, Mugen said:

Problem is that reducing skill to gain benefits may be counter-productive, especially if you have skill over 20 and a substantific chance to roll a critical attack. 

True. Maybe you can make one roll with the lower of the two skill/DEX. On a success, only half the armor.

[Atgxtg]

15 hours ago, Mugen said:

Problem is that reducing skill to gain benefits may be counter-productive, especially if you have skill over 20 and a substantific chance to roll a critical attack.

Yup, it might. But then if someone had a high change of scoring a critical they probably would bother with doing a double feint. 10d6-12d6 is usually enough to get the job done, and when it's not, double feint probably wouldn't help. 

15 hours ago, Mugen said:

Perhaps a second damage value, based on either DEX+STR (or even 2*DEX, but it may be overkill) and only usable if you have a 1 handed sword or a dagger ? Perhaps also only if your attack roll is 5 points above your opponent's ?

Maybe. I can think of one game that has a wounding skill specfically for small weapons. Basically you roll it sperately and if you make the roll you increase the weapon's damage. The idea is that it was more useful for small weapons, that didn't do much damage to begin with. 

15 hours ago, Mugen said:

EDIT: if you REALLY want to give more value to APP, that second damage value could be based on DEX+APP. 😁

Hard to justify. I could see APP being used to help lure a character into getting stabbed, but would normally treat that as a surprise bonus to the attacker.