It is currently Tue Nov 20, 2018 12:49 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
Are the numbers at left the Rounds?
Yup.
Ian.Plumb wrote:
In other words PC2 does nothing until Round 4?
Same thing happens in the "old school" equal pie share thing, although with PC4.

I mean, I only see two basic options:

1) running one round per player around the table, ensuring as equal "limelight" as possible and hacking up melee combat flow (with possible silliness in loading times if each ranged character is expected to get a shot off each round).

2) running multiple rounds in row for melee combat and thus making other players wait their turn longer.

Do you see a third option?

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
I don't have a problem with that...

...if...

the characters excluded from the combat process by the natures of their characters -- the archers, the wizards, the non-combatants -- are given similar face-time with the referee to the exclusion of the other players.


higgins wrote:
So, essentially you're saying that we should focus on the real time around the table, not the meta time in the game, and that makes sense.


Not really. There are two points. Firstly, game balance is about more than ensuring that particular races or particular professions are overly advantageous. It encompasses such ideas as equal game time. Secondly, we all greet with horror the notion of the melee-combatants being excluded from scenes that revolve around the non-combatants. But this is the same feeling the players of non-melee-combatants will greet combat scenes once they have been conditioned to the idea that for the next half hour their character will achieve one or two actions.

We don't want players drifting away from the table when particular scenes are unfolding, whatever those scenes might be. So a design goal for the game should revolve around player engagement.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
In other words PC2 does nothing until Round 4?


higgins wrote:
Same thing happens in the "old school" equal pie share thing, although with PC4.


I don't understand this. Firstly, why are we discussing Round-by-Round combat resolution? Secondly, in Round-by-Round, the flow works like this:

Code:
Round Reflex Activity
1        7       PC 1 combat
1        6       PC 2 combat
1        5       NPC 1 combat
1        3       NPC 2 combat


So everybody is active in each Round, and the order is set by Reflex or Initiative or whatever. The Rounds don't tick by with each individual's actions

higgins wrote:
I mean, I only see two basic options:

1) running one round per player around the table, ensuring as equal "limelight" as possible and hacking up melee combat flow (with possible silliness in loading times if each ranged character is expected to get a shot off each round).

2) running multiple rounds in row for melee combat and thus making other players wait their turn longer.

Do you see a third option?


Nobody is advocating option 1.

The only position being advocated is the second option. The difference lies in how it is handled in play.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
Firstly, why are we discussing Round-by-Round combat resolution?
Because this ensures equal slices of pie to everybody? And ensuring that is our first priority? That's how I've come to understand things now.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
Secondly, in Round-by-Round, the flow works like this:
Code:
Round   Reflex   Activity
1       7        PC 1 combat
1       6        PC 2 combat
1       5        NPC 1 combat
1       3        NPC 2 combat
So everybody is active in each Round, and the order is set by Reflex or Initiative or whatever. The Rounds don't tick by with each individual's actions
From the OOC time perspective, I see no difference whether the round numbers tick or not. Fact is -- with four players in action, one of them needs to wait until other three are done with their activities.

Code:
Reflex   Round   Activity
7        1       PC 1 combat
6        2       PC 2 combat
5        3       NPC 1 combat
3        4       NPC 2 combat
Do we agree that from player's waiting perspective this table and the one you presented are identical?

Ian.Plumb wrote:
higgins wrote:
I mean, I only see two basic options:
1) running one round per player around the table, ensuring as equal "limelight" as possible and hacking up melee combat flow (with possible silliness in loading times if each ranged character is expected to get a shot off each round).
Nobody is advocating option 1.
In that case I've failed to understand everything what you and PJ have said about this topic.

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
higgins wrote:
In that case I've failed to understand everything what you and PJ have said about this topic.


I really don't think that you have been confused, but instead, not very open to differing ideas on this subject. Throughout all of this discussion you have not even acknowledged that there may at least be "confusion" concerning the 1-2 second rule, much less acknowledging the common sense fact that the mechanic is broken. It's really hard to discuss something with someone when their only debate tactic is to concede nothing and and ignore things they don't want to hear.

I confess that I would probably take load/prep times much more seriously if this game was not one that included magic, monsters, ect.

If EoS was to be a game that was all about recreating the Battle of Agincourt, then by all means let's embrace as much sim crunch as possible when it comes to combat prep/load times.

But it's not...fixing this broken mechanic while still maintaining that kernal of TroS melee combat for EoS, means that certain things such as load/prep times and differing styles of magic are logically going to be much more "hand waved" or open than in Core.

I find it hard to believe that your suspension of disbelief can embrace magic, elves, wizards and monsters, but collapses if you can't rule that a crossbow takes x amount of time to reload.

So I do not take your "load/prep" times seriously.

When I sit down to game with my group, I do so to enjoy a social game with my buddies. There are 6 players in my group. Three run melee characters, two are archers, and one is a sorcerer. I am not going to track time lines or count prep/load rounds for my crew + all of the monsters and villains. My players simply want to play when their limelight moments come about, not wander about bored until their preparation rounds expire and they can at last shoot or cast a spell. Ian had some hilarious spot on examples (which you ignored) on the confusion and folly that could easily come about with the "Time-lines" aspect of your mod.

For some games we play old school style and for others we play the more traditional version of TroS using Ian's ACS 15 second rules. Generally when I update my old school thread it indicates that we are then playing a round of old school, and that's when changes in those experimental rules take place, otherwise a more regular version of modded TroS is being played.

If I foisted this mod of yours on them, my buddies would insist that I keep up with all the "accounting", since all they want to do is "play" their characters in such a way that all players at the table feel fair. Telling folks to "drop their crossbow and do something useful", would only enrage folks at the table. Sometime in the future you will have to tell me how you get away with those kind of comments at a gaming table with your large crew.


Round by round or your way are not the only ways to move forward. I did offer the below listed solution as a compromise:

Maybe part of our disagreement is in the language we use and how we use it. What if the concept word of “Round” was replaced with another word such as “Scene”?

Having jointly constructed the narrative with the players, the director sets the “Scene” for the players, who then play out the scene. The limelight flits about amongst the players until the scene is resolved.

One player’s limelight may involve multiple sword fights, another player’s limelight moment may involve an archery shot or spell cast, with terrain rolls aligning moments within the scene as desired. No rounds, Time tracking, prep times, ect. Just a single extended movie-like scene. Does not the term "Scene" better define what we are looking for in EoS than "Round"?

Say the fight ends with a crossbow armed villain fleeing the scene followed in hot pursuit by an archer player character. The opponents end up ready to swap shots across some rooftops.

The player would then have the option of changing the cinematic presentation to a more tactical one since he is now in a solo limelight situation vs. a fellow specialist. This could be called a “Tactical Scene” which consists of ”Phases”. This is where optional prep/load times, etc, would be used as the two enemies prep/load and shoot in defined Phases.


Ian's 15 second ACS mod might even work better that my idea. As a matter of fact that may be our most elegant solution. I think it is well worth revisiting. I do recall, that both Michael, myself, and of course Ian, liked it, with again, you as the dissenting voice. But my point is that it's not true that round-by-round or your way are the only possibilities. Since you have repeatedly stated that I am a stalwart advocate of round by round combat for EoS (I am not), I must remind you that the narrative compromise I offered above, or Ian's solution are about as far away from old school or round by round as you can get!

Is what we propose so awful a concept? It would seem to eliminate the various issues that folks have brought up. My version even includes an option for the prep/load times that you hold so dear for those "Battle of Agincourt" scenarios that may crop up.

We have never even discussed sorcerers and their casting times...

Core's load/prep times for sorcerers was linked to a system of magic that will not be going forward into EoS (as far as I know).

Must they still have a load/prep time for spells as well? And if so, how would that be considered "realistic"? I mean come on, we are talking about magic. There is no empirical data on the subject of fantasy magic, which is nothing if not cinematic! Could not the casting of a spell be abstracted to one's moment of limelight? Can you at least concede this much?

I do think some kind of compromise must be the order of the day. Players have to be able to run characters that will have equal time in the limelight. As you yourself said in an old thread:

"I like a gaming system if I can create the character I want with it."

But you would deny this to others???????????????????????????

I too watched the Longbow-installment of “Weapons that Made Britain”. These trained guys are fast! I am now even more inclined to state that PC archers should simply be able to shoot during their period in the limelight. But, I am willing to endorse your mod when it comes to prep/load times for crossbows and suchlike, as I am sure that most players would enjoy the superior rate of fire from longbows, and simply shoot one during their limelight time anyway. See? Compromise.

The one thing I am sure of is that if EoS goes forward, it will go forward with a substantial change from Core in the way that load/prep times and spell casting in combat are described.

Don't miss the bus...

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 8:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
This is my preferred solution:

Quote:
Limelight Period 1
Duncan plays through four Rounds of combat, at the end of which something interesting happened.

Limelight Period 2
Clarise plays through two Rounds of combat, at the end of which something interesting happened.

Limelight Period 3
Simeon cast a spell.

Limelight Period 4
Ariella plays through three Rounds of combat, at the end of which Her opponent was crippled.

Limelight Period 5
Tom made a Terrain Roll and fired his crossbow.

Limelight Period 6
Duncan plays through four Rounds of combat, at the end of which he is knocked to the ground.

Limelight Period 7
Clarise plays through two Rounds of combat, at the end of which she dispatches her opponent.

Limelight Period 8
Simeon makes a Terrain Roll, and is able to raise a Circle before an incoming fireball strikes it. The Circle holds.

Limelight Period 9
Tom fails a Terrain Roll and is unable to loose his crossbow bolt before Duncan will be struck. He fires anyway.

Limelight Period 10
Clarise fails a Terrain Roll and is unable to reach Duncan before the next blow strikes.

Limelight Period 11
Ariella makes her Terrain Roll and is able to parry Duncan's opponent's blow before he is struck.


and so on...

Notice that:

1) The number of Rounds of melee combat per period of Limelight is irrelevant.

2) The order in which individuals have their turn in the Limelight is irrelevant. The referee, like the director of a film, places the Limelight where it is most dramatic. If another player disagrees, and the newlt limelit player agrees, then the other player may spend a Drama to gain the Limelight.

3) There is no mention of time, no measurement of time, no calculation of duration.

4) Each character in the Limelight is given an opportunity to accomplish something that is relevant to the character. Something that falls within their area of expertise.

5) Elapsed time in the Limelight is not equal for each player. However, each player has an equal number of opportunities to accomplish their in-game goals. That is, periods in the Limelight are shared equally amongst the players.

If a character decides to perform a skill-based task -- say, pick a lock -- that is obviously going to take a lot of time relative to the actions of the other PCs then that task determined to be a cumulative success task and is assigned a large number of successes for successful completion. The number of Successes doesn't relate to the difficulty of the task, but rather gives the referee the opportunity to give the Limelight back to that player regularly so they can roll on that task.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
higgins wrote:
In that case I've failed to understand everything what you and PJ have said about this topic.
pbj44 wrote:
I really don't think that you have been confused, but instead, not very open to differing ideas on this subject.
No, I truly thought both you and Ian had embraced this "round-by-round" method and I was trying to object this. A matter of miscommunication, if you two object this too.

pbj44 wrote:
I confess that I would probably take load/prep times much more seriously if this game was not one that included magic, monsters, ect.
I don't think pointy ears would be the main factor to allow lighting fast crossbow/musket reloading times, but I guess we have to disagree on that...

pbj44 wrote:
Ian had some hilarious spot on examples (which you ignored)
I can't find those examples in this thred anymore, but case you didn't notice, I stopped trying to explain my proposed method of doing things after that and challenged everyone to come up with something better.

pbj44 wrote:
One player’s limelight may involve multiple sword fights, another player’s limelight moment may involve an archery shot or spell cast, with terrain rolls aligning moments within the scene as desired. No rounds, Time tracking, prep times, ect. Just a single extended movie-like scene. Does not the term "Scene" better define what we are looking for in EoS than "Round"?
Point is, I don't see AT ALL how this would qualify for your sacred tenet of giving everyone an equal slice of the pie. The melee character's multiple sword fights would sill take more OOC time than this one shot or one spell? Wouldn't it?

pbj44 wrote:
We have never even discussed sorcerers and their casting times...
The only thing I've said about magic is -- that its usability in combat depends on the setting and the nature of it.

...

Ian.Plumb wrote:
1) The number of Rounds of melee combat per period of Limelight is irrelevant.
Bravo! We share a goal in this.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
2) The order in which individuals have their turn in the Limelight is irrelevant. The referee, like the director of a film, places the Limelight where it is most dramatic.
I generally just go clockwise around the table, with some exceptions for drama, so... Bravo!

Ian.Plumb wrote:
If another player disagrees, and the newlt limelit player agrees, then the other player may spend a Drama to gain the Limelight.
However, if both agree, I don't see a point to spend resource. Or is this to limit the number of interruptions where it really matters?

Ian.Plumb wrote:
3) There is no mention of time, no measurement of time, no calculation of duration.
Are the reloading times encompassed in the terrain roll? If so, what happens if one fails?

Ian.Plumb wrote:
4) Each character in the Limelight is given an opportunity to accomplish something that is relevant to the character. Something that falls within their area of expertise.
Bravo!

Ian.Plumb wrote:
5) Elapsed time in the Limelight is not equal for each player.
I am still rather convinced PJ fundamentally objects this, but it's another "Bravo!" as far as I'm concerned.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
If a character decides to perform a skill-based task -- say, pick a lock -- that is obviously going to take a lot of time relative to the actions of the other PCs then that task determined to be a cumulative success task and is assigned a large number of successes for successful completion. The number of Successes doesn't relate to the difficulty of the task, but rather gives the referee the opportunity to give the Limelight back to that player regularly so they can roll on that task.
Does this mean that this character simply makes one roll to progress further down his goal in each limelight he has?

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
higgins wrote:

Ian.Plumb wrote:
5) Elapsed time in the Limelight is not equal for each player.
I am still rather convinced PJ fundamentally objects this, but it's another "Bravo!" as far as I'm concerned.


Please disabuse yourself of this notion. You refer to "equal time in the limelight". All I want is for each player at the table to have their character concept equally presented during their limelight moment, I.E., archers shooting, sorcerers casting, fighters fighting, ect.

I do comprehend that multiple events may occur a player's limelight moment.

To keep things simple: I have no problem with anything outlined in Ian's latest example on this page. It works for me. If it works for you then let's all move forward.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
If another player disagrees, and the newlt limelit player agrees, then the other player may spend a Drama to gain the Limelight.


higgins wrote:
However, if both agree, I don't see a point to spend resource. Or is this to limit the number of interruptions where it really matters?


I put this one in to show that it isn't just the referee who gets to determine the order of play.

But I also don't want the situation where something bad is about to happen to one player and so every other player decides to have their go just in case they get an opportunity to influence the outcome. By this I don't mean directly -- as in last limelight I killed my opponent so this limelight I'll make a terrain roll and see if I can help my buddy -- but indirectly such as three other players incapacitate their opponents in their Limelight leaving the last enemy to make a decision to run for it or to finish off the PC. In this situation if the NPC was making the decision while the other PCs were engaged he would probably just finish off the PC.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
3) There is no mention of time, no measurement of time, no calculation of duration.


higgins wrote:
Are the reloading times encompassed in the terrain roll? If so, what happens if one fails?


By default, no. The bowman gets to do their thing because they are a bowman. The sorcerer gets to do their thing because they are a sorcerer. But see the next bit...

Ian.Plumb wrote:
5) Elapsed time in the Limelight is not equal for each player.


higgins wrote:
I am still rather convinced PJ fundamentally objects this, but it's another "Bravo!" as far as I'm concerned.


This issue goes away if what they get to do within their Limelight period has meaning for the player.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
If a character decides to perform a skill-based task -- say, pick a lock -- that is obviously going to take a lot of time relative to the actions of the other PCs then that task determined to be a cumulative success task and is assigned a large number of successes for successful completion. The number of Successes doesn't relate to the difficulty of the task, but rather gives the referee the opportunity to give the Limelight back to that player regularly so they can roll on that task.


higgins wrote:
Does this mean that this character simply makes one roll to progress further down his goal in each limelight he has?


Even amongst non-combatants this kind of situation will be rare and is actually more than likely the heart of the scene (as in, this lock must be picked if we are to survive this fight against overwhelming numbers). However, if it happens each period in the Limelight would see the skill-based character presented with a situation update, presenting them with the dilemma of abandoning their task in order to react to the current circumstance or continuing with the task (and thus rolling and adding the Successes to the total).

So their period in the Limelight wouldn't be:

Quote:
Referee: OK Tom, the limelight shifts to you. Roll 'em.

Tom: 3 Successes!

Referee: Great work Tom, just 14 to go. Your turn Sally. Oh and Tom, can you go order the pizza -- I think this combat might take a while...


One further point. I have no issue with artillery pieces requiring a skill to load. So anything with a complicated loading procedure -- a canon, a musket, a heavy crossbow, a catapult -- is handled like a skill. So a certain number of successes are needed on the relevant skill or Terrain Roll to make it happen. However, I would only implement this for weapons that are almost certain to kill if they hit. So a player making the decision to take a heavy crossbow with its winch-load mechanism does so knowing that they may not get a shot off every Limelight but they also know that when they do get a shot off and it hits then the target will usually be maimed or killed.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:00 am
Posts: 511
Location: Cary, North Carolina
Ian.Plumb wrote:
Ian.Plumb wrote:
5) Elapsed time in the Limelight is not equal for each player.


higgins wrote:
I am still rather convinced PJ fundamentally objects this, but it's another "Bravo!" as far as I'm concerned.


This issue goes away if what they get to do within their Limelight period has meaning for the player.


I agree completely.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 10:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
One further point. I have no issue with artillery pieces requiring a skill to load. So anything with a complicated loading procedure -- a canon, a musket, a heavy crossbow, a catapult -- is handled like a skill. So a certain number of successes are needed on the relevant skill or Terrain Roll to make it happen. However, I would only implement this for weapons that are almost certain to kill if they hit. So a player making the decision to take a heavy crossbow with its winch-load mechanism does so knowing that they may not get a shot off every Limelight but they also know that when they do get a shot off and it hits then the target will usually be maimed or killed.
Yes, that makes sense... which is what I was referring to, when I spoke of "anyone thinking he would be dishing out crossbow bolts at the same rate of fire than a semi-automatic rifle dishes out bullets, being mistaken in a first place".

However, I've carefully tried to avoid creating insta-kill weapons in the playtest. I've given high powered weapons the ability to pierce armour, but the maximum wound level one can cause to a naked Stamina 2 character with a MoS1 it 3.

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:39 am
Posts: 346
Location: Orange County, California
As this is one of the most important aspects to TROS/EOS, I'm glad to see everyone's on the same page again! I'm also very interested in how these Terrain rolls are going to work in this limelight model. I remember a much earlier thread that discussed timing rolls and never quite got a handle on that.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
Limelight Period 8
Simeon makes a Terrain Roll, and is able to raise a Circle before an incoming fireball strikes it. The Circle holds...

Limelight Period 9
Tom fails a Terrain Roll and is unable to loose his crossbow bolt before Duncan will be struck. He fires anyway.

Limelight Period 10
Clarise fails a Terrain Roll and is unable to reach Duncan before the next blow strikes.

Limelight Period 11
Ariella makes her Terrain Roll and is able to parry Duncan's opponent's blow before he is struck.


So Tom spends some CP in a Terrain Roll to see if he can essentially get into position, finishing loading, and shoot at Duncan's assailant in time. Even though he failed, he has to take the shot. The storyteller can't describe anything really yet because we don't know if someone else will interrupt. Likewise if Tom's bolt strikes Bad Guy, would Bad Guy have some sort of Shock or Pain when dealing with Ariella's parry? If so, then do the players have a meta-game strategy of letting the archers go BEFORE the melee combatants?

Clarise failed her "get over there" Terrain roll and so ends her Limelight turn with dice remaining in her CP. She's cursing herself for not spending more on the Terrain Roll. Is there anything else she could do?

The other thing I'll need help with later is how to set difficulties for these Terrain Rolls that seems fair and established before the scene, but I'm more concerned about this timing aspect.

_________________
"Remember it well, then... this night, this great victory. So that in the years ahead, you can say, 'I was there that night, with Arthur, the King!' . . . For it is the doom of men that they forget."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:39 am
Posts: 346
Location: Orange County, California
pbj44 wrote:
All I want is for each player at the table to have their character concept equally presented during their limelight moment, I.E., archers shooting, sorcerers casting, fighters fighting, ect.


I think we should have the mechanics allow the archer to have a choice. Let's say this shakes out to be that archers are making Terrain Rolls in order to get loaded and in position in time to do things. When the turns falls on Tom the Crossbow Archer, he knows he can spend his limelight using Terrain and then trying to get a bolt off. If he's not concerned about Duncan because he hears other players say they'll handle it, he looks up and sees there are more baddies soon to be arriving. He decides he wants to be ready so he describes his player earnestly loading his crossbow while his ally falls to the ground. It's a risk but he has to be ready for what's to come.

Benefits of taking this risk: (1) Tom can make his Terrain Roll ahead of time or get a bonus/less of a difficulty when he decides to fire; (2) He gets a "held action" of sorts, meaning he can grab the Limelight when something is described he wants to do.

Making the choice to reload instead of firing each Limelight turn may not seem it, but it is PART of playing their character concept.

Edit: I'm going to move this over to Higgins's other thread: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=593

_________________
"Remember it well, then... this night, this great victory. So that in the years ahead, you can say, 'I was there that night, with Arthur, the King!' . . . For it is the doom of men that they forget."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:43 pm
Posts: 2112
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
One further point. I have no issue with artillery pieces requiring a skill to load. So anything with a complicated loading procedure -- a canon, a musket, a heavy crossbow, a catapult -- is handled like a skill. So a certain number of successes are needed on the relevant skill or Terrain Roll to make it happen. However, I would only implement this for weapons that are almost certain to kill if they hit. So a player making the decision to take a heavy crossbow with its winch-load mechanism does so knowing that they may not get a shot off every Limelight but they also know that when they do get a shot off and it hits then the target will usually be maimed or killed.


higgins wrote:
Yes, that makes sense... which is what I was referring to, when I spoke of "anyone thinking he would be dishing out crossbow bolts at the same rate of fire than a semi-automatic rifle dishes out bullets, being mistaken in a first place".


Let me just clarify. What I'm saying above is that there is no reload process for bows at all and none for crossbows that do not have a complex mechanism for reloading. The only crossbows that would require a reload process would be the "crank" style or larger, mounted crossbows (castle fortifications or those used during sieges).

higgins wrote:
However, I've carefully tried to avoid creating insta-kill weapons in the playtest. I've given high powered weapons the ability to pierce armour, but the maximum wound level one can cause to a naked Stamina 2 character with a MoS1 it 3.


So reload times are needed for realism but the weapon damage curves are gamed? 8 ^ )

Whatever. I'm just saying how I'd run it -- that reloading is the price one pays for the instant maim. The net effect is that the warrior has two periods of Limelight to down their opponent -- 6 or 7 Rounds of melee -- while the heavy crossbowman takes two periods of Limelight to down an opponent if they hit -- one to load, one to shoot. To me that means their time in the Limelight equates.

Regards,

_________________
Ian Plumb
Illustrations for Gamers
Lyonpaedia
Griffin Grove Gaming
Kraftworks for Kids School Holiday Program


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EoS: Pre-Alfa Playtesting - Controversial Concepts
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 8:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:05 pm
Posts: 2035
Location: Estonia
Ian.Plumb wrote:
So reload times are needed for realism but the weapon damage curves are gamed? 8 ^ )
Well, in TROS, muskets had a DR of 8, I think. Add a MoS1 and TO4 characters with no armour can't get anything but level 5 wounds. I think it's unrealistic that every hit lands on the most vital part of the zone or that a character is not able to receive a lighter wound when the bullet merely grazes. Game balance of making MoS more relevant is only a bonus.

_________________
"Brothels are a much sounder investment than ships, I've found. Whores seldom sink, and when they are boarded by pirates, why, the pirates pay good coin like everyone else."
- Lord Petyr Baelish, A Game of Thrones


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group              Designed by QuakeZone