Random Thoughts on Various Posts

First off, kudos to Gabe for picking up the pace and posting quite a few blogs! A couple more regular contributors and RMBlog.com will be creating quite a bit of material.

Not even a month ago, I posted up a query asking about other d100 systems. Since then, Peter and Gabe have put up numerous blogs about vsDarkmaster, Zweihander, and most recently Chivalry & Sorcery. C&S aside, since it was published in the very early days of RPGs, both vsDarkmaster and Zweihander were purposeful attempts to create a newer version of early RM/MERP AND recapture the early feel and essence of the game. For me this interesting as these new games are concurrent with I.C.E.’s own path in revising RM with RMU. Basically you have 3 different mandates with each system, but all attempt to improve parts of RM that needed refinement, rewrites or new mechanics. So here are some basic thoughts on various blog posts:

Zweihander Skills. To me, Zweihander skills were very reminiscent of RM regular and secondary skills. That’s good and bad. Obviously, parsing skills leads to skill bloat, but more importantly, skills end up varying quite a bit in utility or have such defined parameters it get’s a bit silly. For an example of a ridiculous parsing of skills (to me at least):

AWARENESS (Perception)
Awareness represents the ability to visually notice minute details and sounds, scents within the air, watch for ambushes, find hidden objects and spot contrivances designed to trap or kill. You’ll use Awareness not only to visually see, also to sense using smell, taste and touch. You may also use Awareness to estimate numbers and distances.

This Skill doesn’t allow you to see through lies, sense motives or innuendo – refer to the Scrutinize Skill in those cases. If you wish to listen in on a conversation or distinctly make something out you heard, refer to the Eavesdrop Skill instead.

While some would argue that are those skills are relevant or useful in some specific situations, it’s harder to argue that Awareness, Scrutinize and Eavesdrop are equal in scope and utility. For me this is a lost opportunity to tune up the RM skill system–something we have discussed here on the blog quite a bit.

Zweihander: Trappings and Skills. I wasn’t impressed with these sections of the rules. Maybe reading the finished product will be different; I am relying on Peter’s assessment and description so I am working with second hand info. The wound “levels” is nice in abstract but it must eliminate a lot of specific magical healing (if that exists in this game). Do spells just reduce your damage classification? Without jumping ahead, I think ZH “character law” and chargen is more compelling than their “arms law” rules.

Stats, Kin and Cultures in vsDarkmaster. A lot of this was very interesting to me. If you’ve read my blog on RM chargen in 15 minutes, you might detect a similar philosophy in this game. Basically by using preset “packages” you can quickly build a new character quickly without sacrificing diversity. I’ve been using just “Culture” & “Vocation” while VsC uses “Kin”, “Culture” “Vocations” and “Backgrounds”. Treating race (kin) a package makes a lot of sense and I’m going to build into my system. I write extensive backgrounds for PC’s so I don’t generally need “Backgrounds” (although I do have a Shadow World background chart HERE). However, if I were designing a system for publication I would add Background packages as well. VsD is not the only system that tackles RM style chargen this way and I think RMU should have adopted this approach as a default. They could still provide the framework for skill buy with development points as an optional rule set but having a “cafeteria style” approach would have been more accessible to new users.

Passions and Drive in VsD. I really can’t get my head around it. Perhaps I’m jaded, but my experience is that players always default to self-interest; even if they camouflage it with clever roleplaying. Passions and Drives seem interesting, but I think it’s hard to build a game mechanic around qualitative morality.

Diseases, falls, fire, intoxication, poisons, sleep deprivation, starvation and suffocation in Zweihander. This is a pretty good list of hazards outside of combat. RMU has addressed these as well. I like ZHs use “toughness check”. I only use 2 types of RRs. “Will” based to resist certain types of spells and “Hardiness” based to resist poisons and diseases. I treat all magic the same so there isn’t a differentiation in saves vs. Essence, Channeling, Mentalism, Arcane, Essence&Channeling, Channeling&Mentalism, Essence&Mentalism. (Did I miss any?) Saving Rolls in VsD also seem simplified. That’s good.

VsD Combat. It seems very similar to Rolemaster and MERP. Maybe they felt it was streamlined or easier, but that’s not the impression I get. Like ZH, it seems like building a new and better combat system was just too much of a task. Just picking through the early RMU beta provides a number of very clever ideas that could be executed for a RM type combat system. I don’t even know what to say about the tactical round. Is it just a almost copy of RM? Oh well. It seems if it’s not much, much better than RM or MERP why change?

Travel in VsD. Feels very much like a boardgame with “campsites” and “safehavens”?

So just a few random thoughts about Gabe and Peter’s review of Zweihander and vsDarkmaster. I’m not overwhelmed with either of their combat systems and definitely not digging their magic systems. I thought there were some really good ideas in both of those systems on character builds and fascinated how other people resolved their own problems with RM and MERP. It makes you wonder what you would get if you put both of these systems and RMU into a box…

This post currently has 2 responses

 

Considerations of Social Status and Action Economies in Chivalry & Sorcery and Rolemaster

Going forward, my reading of Chivalry & Sorcery will be entirely with a mind for how I might adapt attractive features into Rolemaster. My exhaustive, three-part exploration of Chivalry & Sorcery Character Generation, I believe, well enough presents the basics of C&S’s system, so I pass with little comment over sections detailing its Core Mechanic, Vocations and Skills.

C&S, as we understand already, is a percentile system; tasks are resolved with a d100 roll. Attributes and Skills might contribute to the likelihood of succeeding at a test. Even though C&S utilizes a “Critical Die,” Skill resolution is more or less pass/fail (as in conventional RM). C&S Vocations essentially are RM Professions, and here the GM interested in running a game that simulates medieval history might do well to read carefully the Vocation descriptions and consider translating them or finding their analogues in RM. The C&S list of Skills is as prodigious and entertaining as anything found in RM. Movement contains, I suppose, slightly different calculations and estimates for types of travel over various terrains.

Now we get to C&S’s Social Class system. Social Class contributes to a character’s Influence Factor, which is calculated in this way: (INT + WIS + BV + APP) / 4 + Social Status. It’s easy to see how readily this might be translated into RM; instead of using the base values, as C&S does, RMers could average the bonuses for their characters’ RM Attribute analogues. Or they could total them altogether. I can see making some allowance for low-born characters who, because of their qualities, are “destined” for greatness. The C&S method for Exerting Influence is a bit of a process, but I can see an RMer comparing the two Influence Factors and using that as a modifier for the main actor on the Skill roll. C&S mechanizes the amount of any bribe being used, which would be easy in my Against the Darkmaster game that uses an abstract Wealth system. A single integer of Wealth would translate to +/-10 on the appropriate Skill roll.

Like the latest version of RM, C&S uses an Action Point system for resolving physical conflict. Unlike RM’s, however, C&S Action Points aren’t static. We already have seen how my character’s Action Points are derived from certain Attributes. Now, at the beginning of a Combat Round, I roll 1d10 and add this result to my PC’s Action Points total. This 1d10 roll might be modified if my character is wearing Armour. (Armour also burns Fatigue.) Then the conflict begins (or continues—the process is repetitive).

Actions are declared and resolved in the order of whoever currently has the highest number of Action Points, so the high number holder could—and most likely will—change after each action is declared and resolved. No more than 10 AP can be spent per Action Phase. Not to be confused with the Round, the Phase essentially is the declaration and resolution of a single Action, though a single Action could take multiple Phases (APs exceeding 10, with most likely a new character declaring an Action after this 10 AP Phase). APs can be held and carried over into the next Round.

With the exception of this last feature, it appears that C&S and current RM use differing mechanics to achieve similar results. Instead of adding a random number of AP to a character’s pool, as C&S does, RM uses an Initiative roll. Armour modifies the C&S AP roll; penalties modify RM Initiative. RM has a leaner action economy than C&S. Some C&S Actions take multiple Phases to resolve, some RM Actions take multiple Rounds.

There appear to be just two significant differences between the two systems: C&S allows PCs to hold over (and thus hoard?) Action Points into subsequent Rounds, and, in C&S, the AP cost of combat Actions might vary based on a character’s proficiency (or Personal Skill Factor) in that Action.

Without actually sitting down and playing this out, I’m having a difficult time imagining just how much of a “game changer” it would be to allow characters to carry over AP, from Round to Round, without penalty. A character might “sit the action out” for multiple Rounds, racking up AP, to finally explode, top of a Round, in a bewildering sequence of Actions. Would this strain credibility and realism, or does such a feature emulate the cinematic character who pauses and considers and then takes care of business with fluidity and economy? It’s important to note that, within C&S, Fatigue Points and Exhaustion are one more obstacle to C&S characters exploiting—if game imbalance is indeed possible—this freak of AP economy.

A final observation about C&S combat is that not all weapons, because of their varying sizes, equally are able to parry one another. The latest version of RM doesn’t appear to codify weapon sizes in this way but leaves such rulings to the purviews of individual GMs—definitely something I shall do in my home game if VsD doesn’t already have something in place (I shall have to investigate).

This post currently has 3 responses

 

Zweihänder Read Through – Game Mastery II

This is the second of my posts on Zweihänder’s mammoth Game Mastery ‘chapter’.

The first bit that sticks out is the world building rules. So far I have been somewhat critical about how Zwei can be both setting neutral and yet detail races, magical sources, gods, religions and to some extent monsters. The last will come up in a later post but the rest are, to my mind, all setting dependent.

The solution is an onion skin approach to campaigns. The inner most layer of the onion is the core rules. You can always remove stuff from the core rules like red lining gnomes or pyromancers. What you are left with are the game mechanics for your game.

The next layer is the campaign layer. These are brief descriptions of actual settings. There translate the rules as written into setting specific versions. This is where you can rename gods and their spheres of influence or decide on different magical sources.

This being Zwei, campaigns are based around conflicts. I believe this is a WFRPG concept but the campaign layers describe The Enemy Within, The Enemy Without, The Enemy Beyond and then a set of adventure hooks or ideas. So ‘within’ details the internal struggles within the nations detailed in the setting. ‘Without’ details potential hooks for adventures centred on other nations or powers from trading partners to demonic forces. The Enemy Beyond is all about the supernatural forces acting on the setting.

This section gives guidelines on creating your own campaign layers, such as Carrion Crows a user created world of corruption and contagion. There are also prepared settings such as the 30 years war (Germany 1630), a fantasy setting, Goth Moran Divided and an Egyptian campaign. That is only a selection.

The cool thing is that this does demonstrate the flexibility of the system and I can understand why they maintain that the core rules are setting neutral.

Hmm,

There will always be things that I don’t like. I am sure that if ten GMs read this core book then there would be ten different opinions about what is great and what is not so great.

Stables of Characters

Zwei is so dangerous that it is suggested that players create a small stable, three or more, PCs. Each completely different from each other. When playing a character all the other characters in the stable earn 50% of the experience (Reward Points) that the main character earns.

The point of the stable of spares is so that a replacement character can be cycled in should PC#1 meet their maker. It is also suggested that the most appropriate character is used for each adventure.

I struggle with this. I struggled with the completely random PC generation and once I had my PC I could not identify with him. I could cope with just about everything except random alignment. As a result alignment has atrophied to the point where it is playing no part in my game. If alignment is a barrier to having fun then alignment is asked to leave.

Stables of PCs are also something I seem to be struggling with. I like to invest in my PCs. I don’t know what personalities they will have until I start playing and their personalities develop over time. With a stable of characters their personalities are turning out to be shallow, more me than anything that has grown out of the game.

This is possibly more me than the rules as written.

Carrion Crows

I want to talk a bit about Carrion Crows . This is not an official part of Zwei. It is a 3rd party campaign layer written in the format recommended by the Game Mastery chapter.

Carrion Crows is a $1.99 supplement for Zwei. It centers around the nation of Albion and follows the Within, Without and Beyond format. It then goes on to introduce custom rules for a phenomena called Contamination that is highly contagious, as you would expect, and can infect player characters and cause all kinds of horrible effects.

The ‘stars’ of Carrion Crows are the crows themselves. These are the myriad of groups and bands that pick over the remains following battles. Each organisation is nicknamed a ‘nest’ and the members are the crows.

Nests and Crows are a useful vehicle for bringing characters together and allocating missions.

Magick, with a ‘K’, is incredibly rare in Zwei but Carrion Crows introduces a lesser form of magical item, more akin to luck charms. Items that give a little bonus here and there. They still fall into the core model of petty, lesser and greater and they still use the incantation skill to activate which makes the liable to critical successes and failures

You then get a sampling of these less powerful magics. Albion is intended to be higher magic than Zwei is off the shelf.

I have always said that I could not create a setting as they are too much work. I look at Terry’s efforts and marvel. A Zwei style campaign layer on other hand I could create. This whole thing is 21 pages, 20 without the cover and only 15 if you take the art out, and is perfectly playable.

I could create a 15 page setting. That is in the same ballpark as GRAmel‘s mini settings and they are my favourite. I am not saying that Zwei settings are like GRAmel settings, they are not but both can easily fit into 15 to 20 pages.

This post currently has 12 responses

 

Interlude: A Rolemaster Hack of Chivalry & Sorcery Character Generation

So far, I’m charmed. With time and the right group, I’d explore the entirety of Chivalry & Sorcery, on its own terms, by playing it as the game it is. But since that’s unlikely to occur—at least not anytime soon, especially since I face a multiplicity of similarly attractive systems—I’m tempted to steal some of C&S’s most exciting features and “hack” them into any version of Rolemaster.

C&S’s determination of a character’s Social Class is full of roleplaying possibilities and seems easy enough to integrate into RM in a variety of ways. I probably would treat Social Class as a Culture, that feature that awards characters with starting Skill Ranks. In the realist medievalist milieu that C&S emulates, Social Class would replace Culture (since there is, broadly speaking, just the one “culture” of Middle Ages Europe). In a fantasy setting in which regional environment contributes to culture, I would use Social Class Ranks in addition to or as a subset of these more usual starting packages. Unless I had a specific campaign experience in mind—an adventuring party comprised entirely of Knights, for example—determination of character Social Class would be random. Social Class moreover, as in C&S, would contribute to a character’s starting equipment, overall Wealth, and reflect the character’s Social Status (also while recognizing that my current game system, Against the Darkmaster, presents “Noble” as a Culture). I have yet to see how Status, in C&S, behaves as a mechanic, so, without that precedent yet in mind, in an RM game Status probably would translate into a special bonus on certain Skills and Maneuvers.

I also like the determination of the Father’s (or Mother’s, for non-patriarchal settings) Vocation and Social Status and the Sibling Rank and Status in One’s Family tables. I’m not sure if I would use the C&S charts in toto or drift them into the RM method for Sibling generation as found in one of the Companions; I’d investigate my options in more detail. Porting in these C&S features again raises the question of how C&S deals with its Status rating system, so keep tuned as I discover this and consider possibilities for translating this feature into RM.

I would browse through all the C&S Special Talents & Abilities, being sure to compare them to RM’s (there appears to be considerable overlap). Since I am running VsD for my home group, I would use both C&S Talents and Abilities and RM Talents and (going back to the Companions) Background Options as inspirations for the slightly different packages VsD offers as Background Options.

Adapting C&S’s character Body Points system for RM probably would be the most radical hack I could make, and I want to do it. The approach essentially would result in making RM hp more or less static after character generation; Body Development would be removed as an RM Skill option (or I could make it prohibitively expensive, just for Fighter-types, perhaps). This would make development of Weapons Skills critical for adventurers (as if it wasn’t already) so that plenty of OB always would be on hand for Parrying. For VsD, I would give PCs starting HPs based on Kin and character bonuses resulting from Fortitude, of course, with yet another bonus that results from C&S’s character Build table. This necessitates that I also port in C&S’s character Size rules.

I would modify and use the Horoscope table. I need not adhere to the Earthly zodiacal calendar. It also need not be contingent on celestial systems. I could see myself designing a Viking game wherein runes are used for these purposes.

Finally, character age is appealing to me as an RM variation. The game group would have to be agreeable to the use of this feature, but, essentially (contingent on random rolls) PCs would begin play at various Levels. This approach might even make up a shortcoming that I have noticed in VsD’s emulation of its inspirations: the fictions informing VsD present PC parties of varying “power levels,” something that VsD, rules as written as yet, does not accommodate.

This post currently has 5 responses

 

Chivalry & Sorcery Character Generation Part the Third

Step 14: Determine Character Fatigue Points 

Fatigue Points appear to be pretty much how they sound. To determine them, players have the choice between two calculations, whichever is more beneficial for their characters. Mine is a total of Strength and Constitution, so 30.

A PC can extend this resting period up to a maximum of 1 hour and still recover some Fatigue Points. The recovery rate after the first 10 minutes of rest is 1 FP per 10 minutes of additional rest for a PC with CON 15 or less and 2 FP per 10 minutes of additional rest for a PC with CON 16+. If the PC wishes to recover more he needs to sleep. A character can then recover Fatigue Points at the sleeping rate which has no maximum period for sleep.

If a character does not sleep once after every 24 hour period, the character’s “effective” Constitution is “reduced by one level for every hour he goes past 24 hours without sleep.” There isn’t a mention how long a character must sleep. Here’s an open door for you, Power Gamers!

Step 15: Determine Character Lifting & Carrying Capacity 

In this section appears another one of C&S’s delightful observations:

Not only in modern times but also throughout history, infantry carried a burden of 50 to 100 lbs of armaments, ammunition and equipment. In good condition and with the weight properly distributed by a decent backpack, etc., infantry can march for many miles under that load over all manner of terrain! To reflect this, Carrying Capacity is calculated as 1/2 x LCAP (rounding up).

A casual search doesn’t reveal the thread to me, but the foregoing strongly reminds me of some comments on Encumbrance I received on the Rolemaster boards over a year ago.

If a character exceeds his carrying capacity, he suffers a penalty of –1 Fatigue Point for every 20% of the character’s CCAP that he exceeds it, for every hour or part of an hour he carries it.

Uh-oh. This is the first calculation that has struck me as “fiddly.” Weight calculations are annoying enough, though in this game they are mitigated by C&S’s lenient approach to character penalties. Yet here that generosity seems to be “walking back.”

Note: Naturally I’ve been thinking about the play experience that these rules might accommodate at the gaming table, and it might be that “fiddliness” would be a boon rather than a curse. The types of characters likely to be generated (at least through the random method) encourage careful roleplaying rather than fast-paced action anyway. With the right group, I can see time-intensive considerations of weights and microscopic maneuver calculations as a pleasurable and essential component of the C&S experience. As I’ve been reading, I’ve been thinking that what this game emulates is not something that I would have enjoyed in my youth. It is something I would enjoy as an adult. On the other hand, some of the crunchiness is not something I’m particularly attracted to now, whereas, in my youth, my group would have been just fine spending an hour on something as mundane as totaling the weights of our packs.

Step 16: Define Character’s Jumping Ability 

More fiddliness. It’s Strength + Agility x .25. Then I add 2 for a Human. I get 9.

The rules for Running and Standing Jumping are interesting but a little too much to delve into here.

Step 17: Determine Character’s Movement 

There are two ways of determining Base Action Points. It’s based either on Agility and Constitution or on Agility and Intellect. The selected values are added and divided by 2.

My character is better off using Constitution. 10+12/2=11.

This is the first notice of an action economy system. It is going to be very interesting to contrast this structure with Rolemaster’s.

Step 18: Determine Character’s Horoscope

The designers say that this is optional but highly recommended. It’s another percentile roll. I roll 79, Capricorn. For this, my “Favoured Skills & Benefits” are Charisma and Materia Magica [sic?]. I’ll have to note this for later, when I deal with Skills, because, with this astrological reading, I get to choose two Skills from one category or one Skill from both categories.

It appears that the governing birth sign also awards XP bonuses whenever the character uses Skills affected by this portent. This further is skewed up or down dependent on the character’s Aspect. Finally, bonuses resulting from the use of Magick Skills are parsed away from the others.

My character gets +10% XP from the use of Charisma Skills and +10% XP from the use of Magick Skills.

This causes me to consider if every single action the character performs (such as in early Rolemaster) is going to be tracked in game for the purposes of calculating Experience.

Step 19: Character Age

Also optional. I roll 97. I’m 25 years old and therefore much more “experienced” than characters of the default age of 18. At this time, I’m not sure precisely what this might mean in game terms. It appears I have a lot of starting experience points. Are these to be spent on Skills? I wonder.

The implications of this alternate rule are exciting. I’m imagining, now, of starting PC parties of varying “power levels.” Their compositions would be something akin to Tolkien’s Fellowship which, at times, was comprised of a Maiar Wizard, an ageless Elf, a resourceful High Man and a smattering of others, including four “Level 1” Hobbits. As long as players aren’t concerned with “fairness,” this feature can be inspiring and rich with narrative possibilities.

Step 20: Determine Character’s Personalising Traits

Also (strangely) optional for such a detailed game. This section contains a table of possible physical traits, but it’s not designed to be rolled upon. There might be something like it in the GM book, or there are sources published by other parties that might be of use. This goes, as well, for something likewise surprisingly absent: a table of names, or at the very least a list of some that would be most appropriate for C&S’s default milieu of Europe in the Middle Ages. The player also is encouraged to imagine the Personal Foibles of his or her character.

Character Generation is finished—yes, I know there still is much to be done, but this closes the book’s first section. 

Postscript: The very next section details Special Abilities & Defects. In it I find a description for my character’s Low Metabolic Rate:

The character has a highly efficient metabolism. He requires half the normal amount of food per day to sustain his health and energy levels. His Fatigue Points are restored by 1/3 D10 FP (rounded down) above normal levels per hour sleeping or +1 FP per 10 minutes resting.

This post currently has 5 responses

 

Chivalry & Sorcery Character Generation Part the Second

Step 6: Determine Sibling Rank

I’m going with a Knight. Perhaps, out of a sense of obligation to his Father’s wishes and desires, my character has chosen this path to enlarge his family’s estate. I expect my character frequently will regret this decision and feel the force of a priestly “Call” whenever he encounters Men of the Cloth. He probably abjures violence but is mercifully good at it whenever required to be.

I get to roll again. I roll 59. I’m the third child in my family; three siblings are younger than I am.

Step 7: Status in One’s Family

I roll again. 82. I am a Credit to the Family (the most likely result, 16-85%). 01-15% results in a Black Sheep and a resultant +5 PC points for the point-buy method. With this Status, however, the character is penalized in status points and starting funds. 86-100% results in Good Son/Daughter, and, though penalized with -5 PC points, the character is rewarded with double starting funds.

As a Credit to the Family, I enjoy regular starting funds and the full outfit of a knight.

At this point I start wondering about gender. Recognizing the patriarchal quality of the C&S milieu, I had—largely by default—been thinking of my character as male. But it would seem that players might choose to play a female—even while recognizing her lack of power historically. I haven’t noticed a table for randomly determining gender, though of course it would be easy to do with a 50/50 (as a GM, I frequently determine NPC gender in this way).

Step 8: The “Curse”

Since my character is Neutrally Aspected, I don’t need to roll on this table and I choose not to. The option is open to me, however, if, as the rules suggest, I want “to make things ‘interesting’.”

I can see the appeal of “spicing up” roleplaying (another way that the rules puts the attraction to Curses) in this way. Looking at the d100 table now, I see compelling effects such as “flames glowing blue in one’s presence” or “plants withering at one’s touch.” But I’m resolved to keep my character inviolate—at least for now.

Step 9: Special Talents and Abilities 

It could be that these are as cool as Curses are. Let’s see if I get one or more.

I roll a 12. That means I roll for one (this result is the next likeliest eventuality next to none). Less likely rolls allow me to roll twice or thrice or (on a roll of 100) select “any special Ability I desire for the character.” I don’t see the rules stating any numerical limit to this last possibility.

I roll 47 for my Special Ability. I have a Low Metabolic Rate. (I’m not sure what this means in game terms—even in “real” terms—but there is an upcoming chapter that might provide more details and the Internet for the latter.)

Any character with a Special Ability must also roll for a Flaw.

Step 10: Character Flaws, Deficiencies & Defects 

Since my character has a Special Ability, there is a 40% chance that he also has a Flaw. I roll 80. Nope, I’m Flawless.

Step 11: Personal Fears

One isn’t mandatory. I can elect to have a Phobia for my character either by rolling or choosing. I decide to do neither.

Step 12: Determine Character Size

For a Height of a Historic Human Male (sizes are based on genders and “power ratings”) I roll 2d10+57. I get 67 total (the average is 58). For Build I roll 1d10+1. I get 4 (average Build is 6). If I had had significantly higher Agility or Constitution scores, this number would have been modified negatively or positively, respectively.

My character’s Weight is determined by adding 5 pounds for every inch over 40 to a base starting weight of 10. That gives me 145. I’m a lightweight! No, wait, it’s worse than that. My Build of 4 is characterized as an Average Build on the low end, so I reduce my total Weight by 5%. So now (rounding up the fraction, per the rules) my total Weight is 137. A part of me, knowing that average human builds have increased since the Middle Ages, wonders if this is intentionally “historical.”

Step 13: Determine Character Body Points 

This foregoing isn’t just “fluff.” A character’s Build helps calculate the character’s Body Points. My 5% reduction results in a column just below another whose range begins with a Weight of 145. I start with 18 Body. I add this to my Constitution (12) and half (rounded down) of my Strength (9) for a total of 39. At this point in my exploration of this game, I have no idea if this is “good” or not.

A table shows me how many Body Points my character may recover per day (dependent on rest) as well as his ability to Resist Disease. The rules advise to make this calculation once and to record it on one’s character sheet.

When a character’s Body is reduced to negative values, he is not necessarily dead. One can sustain negative damage up to his CON and still remain alive, although deeply unconscious. When Body Points fall below a negative level equal to or lower than CON then death occurs.

I find the C&S relationship between Build and Body Points neat, intuitive and workable. Because of the lens with which (due to the nature of this blog) I am approaching this system, I inevitably compare it to the latest version of Rolemaster, which doesn’t appear to do much with its own concept of “build” outside of calculating Encumbrance thresholds and character Stride. I ask the community here to correct and/or clarify this or any other observations I’m about to make.

I’m beginning to suspect that C&S characters develop, incrementally, by discretely improving character Skills. It may be (as in systems such as Champions) that Attributes might likewise be available for advancement. In this latter case my forthcoming observations about realism and simulationism might be minimized.

A (more or less) static hit points score is the first hallmark of realism in a fantasy roleplaying game. Yes, a character should be able to develop her or his ability to absorb or resist pain and damage, but this aptitude should not be open-ended nor constant.

The D20 systems and their derivatives such as Rolemaster, for some time now, have explained that hit points are “abstract” values, representing a character’s ability to avoid and receive damage. Presumably, then, D20 and Rolemaster characters progressively improve at avoiding damage, but, say, 6 points of Bleeding damage always is going to be literal damage.

Mind you, at this point I’m not saying that C&S is a “better” game or more fun to play than Rolemaster nor its progenitor. What I am saying, though, is that C&S, so far, appears to be more “realistic,” and I admire the elegance displayed by making Build relevant to a character’s ability to take damage.

This post currently has 2 responses

 

Chivalry & Sorcery Character Generation Part the First

Step 1: Decide PC Race

My best understanding of C&S is that the system prefers a human-centric milieu, with the option of “outsider” PC “Races.” Because of the mention of Elves and Dwarves, it appears that these outsider Races are what can be expected.

Notes such as these suggest the sorts of fictive qualities that this game might emulate: fairly realistic medievalist societies wherein folk belief is validated but actual experience largely consigned to the fringes of human interaction. I would describe such a genre as historicized versions of the Matter of Britain and “low-magic” fantasies such as A Game of Thrones (at least as it is presented early in the book series).

I prefer human-centric games anyway. I elect to be a Human.

Step 2: Select a Character Creation Method

From my first read-through, it appears that, whenever relevant in C&S, gamers have the option of randomly generating a character aspect. Personally, as a player, I would choose this every time. I’m always excited about giving up control of these choices, being handed some features—just as the real world does to the real us—and making the most of them. This “Wheel of Fortune” worldview contributes particularly well to the feudal society setting implicit in a C&S game.

But, as awesome as this is, I see this presenting the most difficult obstacle for—of all people—the GM, because this is an emulation of a feudal society. The game makes great pains to clarify that the Middle Ages is not a democracy, that serfs were little more than slaves, that they had no rights, that it was fully expected of them to obey, without question, the whims and will of their superiors. So… you can “do the math.” What kind of a player dynamic will it be in a campaign wherein all the players have randomly generated characters from the lower classes? Though the random class table (soon to be seen) is weighted towards a preference for Rural Freemen, it’s possible that you’ll get a spectrum of classes. Some PCs will have to be subservient and deferential to others. To me, this sounds cool, rich with roleplaying possibilities, but all the players will have to be on board. Such a game will be an experiment in exploring a unique, collective narrative, not escapist heroism (at least not for some).

Step 3: Divine the Birth Omens

Now I get to make my first roll. Looks like I’m Neutrally Aspected, the most likely result (a d100 roll of 16-85). If I were Well or Poorly Aspected, I would be supported by either Good or Evil supernatural forces that would affect my Magickal (yep, I “spelled” that right) affinities. Depending on either Aspect, my character would lose or gain 10 PC (Player Character) points, respectively.

Looking ahead, though, and having elected the random generation method, I see that PC points will not be tracked during character creation. All PC point values are for point-buy generation exclusively. Also, in case it wasn’t clear earlier, once Random selection is decided upon, all possible rolls will be random.  The other options are point-buy and default selections.

Step 4: Determine Personal Attributes 

This gets interesting. For Attributes I roll 2d10 eleven times and record the results, discarding the lowest two values. Then I assign them, by choice, to my nine Attributes. If I were doing the point-buy system, for the Human character I have selected there are Minimum and Maximum scores of 02 and 20 (for Historical campaigns), 22 (for Heroic campaigns) and 25 (for Super-heroic campaigns) respectively.

In the explanation of Attributes we get a first glimpse of C&S’s core mechanic. Each of these Attributes can be translated into a percentage roll. It’s a “roll under” system, so to test an Attribute I would roll 3d10 under its percentage score. Two of these tens determine the percentile. The third is the Critical Die, with a 1 denoting a Critical Failure (if the percentile test failed) and a 10 being a Crirical Success (if the percentile test succeeded). Precisely what these Critical results might mean will be detailed later in the rules.

Here are my rolls: 18, 16, 14, 10, 9, 8, 12, 12, 11, 17, 9.

Regardless of the choices to come, I’m beginning to imagine a Knight with a strong leaning towards the priestly crafts. As with most games, Appearance appears to be an attractive dump stat. We shall see if ever I learn to rue this choice.

Note: The nine Attributes are interesting to me. For almost a year I ran Le 7eme Cercle’s/Cubicle 7’s Northern culture game Yggdrasill, which organized Attributes into nine designations under the three macro-stats Mind, Body and Soul. Outside of the consonance with Old Norse numerological symbolism, I still find this a neat formulation of a sentient, physical being. RM”s ten stats make sense to me because of its consonance with the decimal system, but I think they’re more than is needed for game utility.

It’s interesting that Attribute values are to be assigned before Social Class is resolved, another deterministic aspect of the game, I suppose.

Step 5a: Determine PC’s Social Class

I get to roll again!

As you can see, the point-buy method necessitates that the higher classes be purchased with PC points, whereas choosing the lowest classes award PC points. A random roll most likely will result in a Rural Freeman.

I roll an 81. I have landed a Landed Knight. Sweet!

Whether or not the historical accuracy of this game is in question, it is features like this result that make C&S simply a joy to read. Turning to the section on the Gentry, I learn that “[c]ontrary to modern popular opinion, not every manorial lord was a knight. Some English manorial lords even tried to avoid knighthood because they did not want the extra governmental responsibilities or the hazardous obligations of personal military service.”

As a Gentle, my character enjoys +3 Action Points and -1 DF to the Skills Courtly Love and Renown. Right now I’m not certain what these terms might mean, but I’m sure that they’ll be explained anon.

Also:

Basic Chivalric Training includes Riding, Riding a Warhorse, Mounted Combat, Cavalry Lance, 2 other Combat skills, Wearing Armour, plus Courtly Manners. He might also have Reading if the INT requirement is met (this is usually due to instruction by a Priest who notices the character’s promise or at the orders of the Lord).

Step 5b: Determine Father’s Vocation and Social Status

It appears that, no matter what method of character creation is being used, the Father’s Vocation and Social Status always is rolled randomly. There is an individual table for each of the distinct Social Classes. This is in keeping with the rigid, hereditary caste system of feudal society.

I roll a 03. It appears, then, that my Father was a very minor Knight, with a feudal holding of 4 square miles. My Father’s status grants me, the PC, the Basic Chivalric Training package already described above, one more Combat Skill and a Social Status of 25 (undoubtedly to be better understood later).

Before I leave behind Part the First of C&S’s Character Creation, it appears that I have one more intriguing option as the offspring of a Landed Knight.

I shall have to mull over this.

This post currently has one response

 

Adventuring We Shall Go – Experience

I have been planning this post for a while but the blog is so busy these days with so many new voices that I was having trouble finding a free day. I try and avoid two posts in a single day as every post should have its moment in the sun.

The caravan guard adventure that we did earlier in the year has been at the fore of my thoughts for the last week or so.

The events in that adventure can be boiled down to these:

  1. get supplies for the caravan
  2. defeat toll/highway robbers
  3. relieve town from disease
  4. save wagons from wolves
  5. goblin tower
  6. protect wagons from monks
  7. learn the truth about the monks
  8. defeat wagon guards
  9. defeat caravan captain
  10. defeat pirates
  11. restore artifact to monks

RMu experience is broken in to events. The personal events are going to vary but as this is intended to be a first adventure for the characters I think there will be lots of firsts. Personal awards should be within the 10-1,000exp range with about 100exp being typical, 100 is the top of the minor award range and the bottom of the moderate award range and I do not think a character is going to have any major personal events in their first adventure. I should have thought that an active player should be able to rack up 1,000 exp from personal events over this adventure.

I do not think there will be any campaign awards except for a single award for completing the adventure. That should come to 1,000xp each for surviving the adventure.

What we are left with is session events. The events in this adventure tend to be what I think of as moderate events. Moderate events have a price tag of 500-1000 exp each. There are ten such events in this adventure which should, on average come in at about 7,500 experience.

If we add on the personal and the campaign experience then we are looking at about 9,500 each. A generous GM would probably stretch that to the 10,000 needed to level up.

I think that this could easily stretch to three or possibly four sessions. I also think that leveling up after three or four sessions is about right.

Goal Setting

I have assumed that the characters are actually 1st level for this adventure and as such I have hobbled the monks somewhat. I have them a very high level of self preservation, injure one and two others will help the wounded monk from the battle field. This means that I can throw a veritable army of monks at the caravan but not kill the party unintentionally. I have also made them 1st level. If you have gone with a 2nd or 3rd level starting party they will have a serious power level advantage.

The goblins are 2nd level but they will be met during the day unless the characters decide to try and sneak past during the night. The goblin sensitivity to daylight in a big balancing factor. -25 is more than anyone will gain in a single level of advancement so it more than wipes out the 1 level advantage that the goblins have over starting characters.

Once the characters have joined forces with the monks they have the numerical advantage in all the future encounters.

I think aiming for 10,000exp per adventure is a good ball park figure for these starting adventures.

I am going to revisit each of the suggested adventures so far and see if they also hit the 9,000-10,000 exp figure.

This post currently has no responses

 

Chivalry & Sorcery: The First D100 System?

There is a quality to Rolemaster that encourages me to read about actual history, to research real weapon and armor use and fighting styles, to consider types of fortifications and siege engines and tactics, to explore large scale military deployment, naval warfare, resource management, battlefield maneuvers that encompass horse and various kinds of troops. If I’m occupied with a version of traditional D&D… not so much. In this latter case I’m more interested in the weird, wondrous and sometimes “gonzo” elements at play in its preferred fantasy milieu. The nuts and bolts of “real” probabilities are a less considered texture in its usual background.

Informed by my light reading about the origins of our hobby, I’d suggest that some early companies might likewise have recognized a liminal space between the quality of the inspirations informing early D&D (according to Gary Gygax’s Appendix N) and some of the more “realistic” considerations in determining mechanical probabilities for narrative resolution in rpgs. They consequently wrote into this space. As just a few examples, I submit Fantasy Games Unlimited’s Chivalry & Sorcery, Chaosium’s Runequest, and (later) our own beloved Rolemaster and Columbia Games’s Harn campaign setting and rules system Harnmaster. 

I admittedly cherrypick these examples for two reasons: unlike some other crunchy game systems (such as GURPS and the Hero System) they are specific to fantasy roleplaying, and they appear to recognize the granular benefits of expanding the d20 core mechanic of the Original Games into a d100. Both aspects of these games should be of interest to RM gamers as points of comparison and perhaps innovations from which we might steal for our own homebrewed systems.

So I’m joining Peter R in an exploration of competing d100 systems. Perhaps my survey will contain a more historical emphasis, as I journey back to 1977 to begin with Chivalry & Sorcery.

Well, maybe I’m not doing precisely that, because I’m choosing to read the 2000 edition of C&S, which is subtitled “The Rebirth.” The editors of this version, in their introduction, state that these rules have been streamlined and expanded, so I expect that, as a modern gamer, there might be more for me to learn here than in its inception—though reading original editions always is interesting from the perspective of them being artifacts of antiquity. Also, all three volumes (and more!) of the core game are entirely free on DriveThruRPG. Can’t beat that!

In Designers & Dragons: The 1970s, Shannon Appelcline claims that C&S’s creators hoped to sell the prototype-version of their product, called Chevalier, as an “advanced” form of Dungeons & Dragons. They planned to meet with Gary Gygax at GenCon.

However after watching Gary Gygax chew out a staff member, Simbalist decided that he didn’t like the “vibe” of TSR, and so he left without mentioning his game, and promptly ran into Scott Bizar, who proved to be interested in the game himself. After Backhaus and Simbalist spent about four months stripping D&D from the manuscript, Bizar published it as the first of FGU’s three big-name RPGs, Chivalry & Sorcery (1977). It was one of the first roleplaying books ever published as a single trade paperback, rather than as a hardcover or in a box.

But perhaps even more interesting to us as RM gamers is Appelcline’s description of C&S. It was complicated and “realistic”: “The game provided a very thorough simulation of medieval feudalism and the economics that underlay it.”*

I can’t resist quoting from Appelcline again. He contextualizes C&S so well.

Finally, C&S fairly dramatically took RPGs out of the dungeons when few others were doing so. This resulted in the need for actual plots, and allowed C&S gamemasters to tell real stories when most other gamemasters were still running glorified miniatures games. Of course, many of those plots involved raiding “places of mysteries,” hideouts, castles, and other locations that were dungeons in all but name.

I already have read with interest volume one, the Core Rules of Chivalry & Sorcery’s Rebirth. I intend to go back to the beginning of this book, which involves character creation, and explain and model the process to the best of my ability. Some features of the system are exciting, others puzzling, but I think they provide unique perspectives on my current d100 gaming. The next part in this series should appear soon.

*”Though Simbalist would later acknowledge that it wasn’t necessarily a simulation of real feudalism, the product felt truthful (and thorough) enough that it was nonetheless widely accepted as such.” Appelcline.

This post currently has 9 responses

 

Adventure Creation on the Fly: Richard J. LeBlanc, Jr.’s D30 Sandbox Companion

With Peter R writing so much about Level 1 adventures, I’ve been reflecting on how published scenarios aren’t often that usable for me. I’ve run them, at conventions and in my home game, but—particularly in my home game—I find myself needing to “reskin” them to such an extent that I might as well just write my own stuff. I’m sure most people also have experienced how homebrewed adventures run with fewer unexpected hitches. We write them, specifically for our own campaigns, sometimes on the very day of the session; we know where all the pieces are without having to refer to someone else’s pages.

What I don’t always have are adventure ideas, though, and over the years I’ve found myself relying almost wholly on adventure creators. I have a number of generators now. I have some favorites. All of them have varying strengths and ideal uses.

I also have been thinking of doing a series, reviewing and demonstrating my favorites, so it is almost serendipitous that, at my last session, two of my four gamers suddenly couldn’t make it. A big pot of chicken curry and a cranberry coffee cake in front of those in attendance, we faced the option of breaking out a board game or entertaining a side adventure. My players opted for a side adventure. Therefore I reached for a product that seems designed precisely for just this sort of on-the-fly occasion.

The publication is the D30 Sandbox Companion by Richard J. LeBlanc, Jr. Another notable and complementary tool is the D30 DM Companion. This latter is specific to dungeon use, so, because of the nature of most of my scenarios, I find myself using the Sandbox Companion a lot more.

This book is basically 56 pages of tables. I use a lot of these (particularly settlement generators and tavern name creators), and it begins with two charts for adventure creation.

These are not the tables I turn to when I have time to prepare, but they seem perfect in a pinch. So, while my gamers ate curry and chatted, I rolled a d30 (no, I don’t own one; I make do with a d6 and a d10) ten times on ten different columns.

As with most generators, one doesn’t have to make all of the rolls nor stick to the results. The tables are designed to generate ideas, and often a result can suggest a seemingly unintended consideration. My imagination approached every result from the context of my ongoing campaign (this night was the second session of my new Against the Darkmaster campaign). The PCs currently were mid-journey in a prodigious, warm-weather forest.

Here are my results:

Next, of course, is the process of listening to your imagination and synthesizing these components. The adventure that revealed itself to me (presented here, unfortunately, out of order with my results) is as follows:

Some tree-goblins (first encountered last session), serving the Darkmaster, have torched a Great Tree all the way through its roots by using persistent, incendiary chemicals, a nasty composition of the Darkmaster’s. They were instructed to do this because this gets the Darkmaster revenge on a magic-using Elf who recently escaped his dungeons. The Elf’s imprisonment deeply and irrevocably scarred the Elf’s inner vitality; he needs the strength of Root and Stone to carry on, so he bonded his essence with an Awakened Tree friend named Heavenbough, the one that now is burned (and only just alive by the time the PCs arrive for the Animist to cast Speak with Plants). This setup makes itself known to the PCs, who have been traveling through the wood, when two (the ones whose players were absent) seem unaccountably and deeply damaged and incapacitated after a short rest. The conscious PCs likewise become aware of their own vitalities being magically sapped. They need to discover the Elf, who is sleeping in a cave and surrounded by glowing magic crystals. They need to give this insensate magic-user a potion to break his connection with Heavenbough, because now his latent, necromantic powers as inculcated within him by the Darkmaster, are sapping the life forces of humanoid creatures in the area in an unconscious attempt to heal his own inner wounds.

How did it go? I think it went fantastically, and now we have some new and interesting elements established within the campaign. As I said, normally I use much more intensive adventure generators, and I plan to introduce and demonstrate those as occasions arise for further adventure creation throughout my campaign.

This post currently has 9 responses