Barwickian

Re: Fantasy Locations that should be real

Minas Tirith' date=' because I always found Tolkien's description of it to be confusing, and I'd like to see the "real" version so I know for sure what it looks like.[/quote']

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45201[/ATTACH]

 

I kept all my old MERP modules. I never had all of them, but I do have most of them - and this is one I do have.

Re: Always knows a name

OK, after further discussion with the player, the power is a mystical one; a side effect of him being granted a 'true name'.

It provides, through cracks in the cosmic yardlefrip, the current name being used by the person or thing. If someone's in disguise, he gets the name of their disguise, not their real name. if something of a given type has a given name, he gets that rather than the class name (if Farmer Butterworth's named his favourite cow Bessie, he gets Bessie rather than cow). It is, he says, intended to be little more than a gimmick.

On the basis of this, I think Nolgroth's Detect suggestion is the best way forward.

The others have potential for different flavours of the power (and I also considered Telepathy, only to learn name, as a possible way of allowing him to bust through a disguise name to get the real one with high enough success).

Re: Always knows a name

It's a fantasy game, not true name magic.

I don't at this stage know the player's rationale for the power. I can see some possibilities for abuse (he'd know the real identity of disguised characters, for instance).

One of my players has an idea for a power: Always knows people's names, and the names of things. (Even if he doesn't know what it does or how to use it).

My first thought is a very broad Knowledge skill bought at sufficiently high level (40-) and a -2 limitation (only to know names).

Can anyone think of a better way to build such a power?

Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now?

Currently listening to Music of the Troubadours, by Ensemble Unicorn, a selection of 12th- and 13th-century songs from Provence, Catalonia and Andalusia.

I love early music, and used to own this one on a CD that's long since gone walkabout. However, I just found out early music specialists Naxos now have an online shop that does downloads - one of the few music download sites I can use in the Middle East.

I got several others - I highly recommend From Byzantium to Andalucia, which has a selection of 12th- to 14th-century Christian, Islamic and Jewish tunes from the Mediterranean, and Songs from the Taverne, a selecton of ballads and drinking songs "from the time of Chaucer".

I will be using these as background music for my forthcoming Fantasy Hero game.

Sumer is icumen in!

Re: 13 Things learned about supers gaming

An interesting blog I ran across and thought I'd share. It discusses the author's thoughts on running supers games after running several sessions. The game engine was Mutants and Masterminds but would be just as applicable to Champions' date=' IMO.[/quote']

 

Repped.

 

That's perfect for me. I've run Hero System for years, but only just got Champions Complete and Champions Universe (and a couple of other Champions supplements).

 

I've run precisely one superhero game before - a single session of Golden Heroes, back in the '80s. It did not go well.

 

In fact, I was coming into this area of the forum (hey, so this is where you all hang out when Fantasy Hero and Star Hero is empty!) looking for just such tips is the blog is offering.

 

If anyone has more advice, or disagrees with the blog, keep it coming.

 

Does this mean I need to buy more superhero comics than just Watchmen and The Killing Joke?

Re: A Thread for Random Videos

Old school vs new school:

Re: Genre-crossover nightmares

Withnail and Iron Man

Talking Subterranean Homesick Betty Blue

Jung Guns

Re: Hello

Hi Character,

I didn't see this thread first time around, but I'll add my twopennorth...

Almost every bit of maths you need (apart from applying modifiers to dice rolls, which is a straight add/subtract) is done in advance. Character generation (and campaign creation) is the tough part.

In play, Hero works very smoothly, and gives a great deal of tactical flexibility in combat, particularly if you use minis or markers. I think this is why it's often perceived as a combat intensive game - the combat is very, very well put together.

You need to keep track of three kinds of 'hit points': BODY (physical hits), STUN (temporary/subdual hits) and END (fatigue). You can generally recover STUN and END in the middle of combat, so those go u as well as down.

There are quite a lot of tables scattered through the books. Pre-preparing a GM reference screen or pages before combat will ne extremely useful. I use the reference tables from the Hero System Resource Kit, which is for 5th Edition, but the actual changes are minor, and I've edited them in. PDFs of this are still available from the online store, and I highly recommend it.

Outside of combat, Hero is simple and quick: roll Skill Level (adjusted by any modifiers) or less on 3d6 to succeed. If someone's opposing you, beat their roll to succeed.

One power that could be confusing in play: Variable Power Pool allows for creation of powers on the fly. Many GMs ask players to pre-prepare some stock powers they'll use; experienced players may actually be able to create on the fly. Some GMs don't allow VPPs, particularly in an inexperienced group.

As to the GURPS comparison, I'm most familiar with GURPS 3, rather than GURPS 4. I found Hero somewhat tough to use after years of GURPS playing. There's a bit of a paradigm shift: in GURPS you buy the power you want; in Hero you buy the game effect and then decide what power that represents. That's key to Hero's flexibility, but until you grok it, it can be a bit of a stumbling block. Here's a description of my efforts to come to terms with Hero (written for 5th edition, but still applicable).

Re: Non-Phase Segments - what is happening then?

I honestly don't have problem with the speed chart as given.

12 segments, each of one second. Someone has SPD 2, each action will be about 6 seconds. Someone with SPD 4, each action about 3 seconds.

When they go on the SPD chart is simply when their action is resolved.

It's gamey, but no more so than initiative, or fire/movement/fire/melee breakdowns.

The only fluid action point system I've seen that's been workable is C&S4's, and even that has a few niggles.

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

Any assumptions I made were no more rank or erroneous than the ones you seem to have made with the "you spill the beans" (as you put it) example.

That was me, not Vondy.

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

There would seem to be only two solutions:

 

1. Don't let NPC social interaction rolls influence players at all, or

2. Trust the GM to apply the rules fairly and not to be out to get you.

There is a third way: be completely open about what's happening. Make your dice rolls in public.

It means the players have to really separate their knowledge from character knowledge and take part in the meta-game, not leave it all to the GM.

I think of this as the Burning Wheel method.

Re: A Thread for Random Videos

 

because I really need to punish death tribble (and maybe AndyStaples as well )

We took your Kylie and made her SexKylie.

Re: Interesting article about Sexism in Geek Communities

[h=3]“I am the Lorax' date=' and I speak for the creeps!”[/url'][/h]

There's a very good essay/rant linked from there. It's four years old, but new to me.

Long, but a very valuable read.

Re: A Thread for Random Videos

What do you make of this ? It is currently played in the gym every now and again.

Love it. Mama Africa was an incredible singer, Pata Pata's a great tune and this is a nice remix. Video's pretty cool as well.

This is probably my favourite (and I apologise, because it's a gallery rather than video). Harry Belafonte and Miram Makeba sing "Malaika", by Fadhili Williams and Daudi Kabaka. Neither Belafonte nor Makeba spoke Kiswahili, but they do a very good job of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVrtrB84_AA

And because I want you to suffer

That's evil. I might have to counter with Clive Dunn... and I guarantee they will not like it up 'em.

Re: Harn Swag

I'm afraid I didn't - around the time of Vondy's original uploads, I was too tied up with RL issues to be involved in much gaming at all.

Re: A Thread for Random Videos

Dr McCoy was right to distrust transporters:

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

Right, in the light ore detailed discussions with Hugh in particular, let me rework the Mata Hari example in much greater detail to see if those in favour of the dice-roll method consider this a reasonable use.

Background: The PCs are good types who've heard the lord who runs the city is an evildoer of some description. They have reason to believe he's involved with the latest scheme of Campaign Villain, and are determined to (primary objective) throw a spanner in the works and (secondary objective) ensure he gets his just desserts. To do either, they'll need to get into the lord's castle. Their various good deeds throughout the kingdom have won them some small reputation.

The lord, in addition to his walls and guards, maintains a network of informers throughout the town. His ace agent is Mata Hari, a beautiful bombshell who's willing to use every weapon in her social armoury to get what she wants. Unlike the historical Mata Hari, this one's loyal to her master (we could have a lot of fun if she could be turned, but that's beyond the scope of this hypothetical workthrough). We build Mata with +2 Striking Appearance (Beautiful), EGO and PRE 15, INT 13. We give her skills in Acting, Charm, Conversation, Disguise, Persuasion, all at 12-. We buy her +1 with Acting (maybe this is how she started her career) and +4 with all Interaction skills, giving her a boost to spend on any given skill(s) at any given time. At most, she could raise one of her skills to 15- at any given tiime. She'll also have some contacts and Area Knowledge, but they won't come into this example. All in all, she costs 13pts for characteristics and 33pts for the skills (not counting the AK and any contacts she may have). SHe's not a combatant or an assassin; we won't add her any combat skills or characteristics.

The majority of the townsfolk are decent people who are too afraid of the lord and his informers to stand up against him. Besides, some of their sons, daughters and other relatives need those jobs at the castle.

Players are aware that interaction skills can be used against them, so the lowest EGO in the party is 13, just to get that extra point of resistance (EGO roll 12-). The PC who'll be our target has no particular complications which have a bearing on the scene - not a prude, not lecherous, no vow of chastity, not married.

When the party arrive at the town gates, they'll attract attention. They know they have a reputation, so they try to conceal their true identities and purpose in town. They succeed, so the town guards let them through. They're still as party of adventurers, though (they haven't disguised themselves as merchants or anything), so they're of interest to the lord's spymaster. The informers are something of a passive tool, so he sends an active agent after them. Enter Mata.

Informers have determined that the PCs have set up in an inn in the town square, then gone their separate ways. One's gone to the alchemist, another to the weaponsmith. One's stayed in the inn, where he's dining and having a beer or two (not getting drunk).

We assume that Mata is known as herself around town - even if the townsfolk aren't quite sure what she does up at the castle, they know she's got some middle to high station there. She'll need a disguise, though not as any specific person.

I, as GM, decide that if she's going to be playing a servant, she'd better be a bit more non-descript. The disguise will reduce her effective Striking Appearance to +1. With the aid of the spymaster, she makes her disguise roll (I don't want to test the INT of every NPC she meets in this guise, so it's a simple success).

Mata enters the bar.

We tell the player he sees a plainly dressed but pretty young woman enter, gaze around at the townsfolf chattin and enjoying their ale, then light on him. She walks over and sits at his table. "Hello, you're new in town aren't you? Where are you from?"

(She isn't asking his permission to sit at his table; no need to give the player an easy refusal. He'll have to be actively rude to avoid this - which he can do if he wants; it'd be a shut-out on the rest of the scene though, so let's assume he goes along with it.)

Test 1: First, we'll have to have Mata make an Acting roll to see if she pulls off the servant girl routine. The player asks if she seems on the level, so we make it an opposed roll. His character's INT is 10, so his roll is 11-. Mata has Acting 13-, and adds one of her Interaction skill levels as well, because it's crucial she pass this. Her looks have no bearing on this. As a GM, I decide that she'll have to keep this level dedicated to Acting throughout the scene, or have to make another check. It's 14- vs 11-, and Mata succeeds.

We tell the player she seems to be on the level - a pretty girl curious about a stranger in town. (Question: is this a reasonable use of NPC on PC skill?)

Test 2: She calls the innkeep for a light ale, happy to pay for it herself, though giving the PC a chance to buy ot for her, and strikes up a Conversation with the PC, putting her two remaining skill levels into it. She's not plumbing for information at this stage, just trying to be engaging. (Mata has 14- at this and it isn't opposed because she isn't digging). She makes it fairly well, and we tell the player she seems friendly and interested as they talk about his life on the road and the drudgery and boredom of life as a serving girl at the castle, a job she's only had a for a few weeks. "I thought it would be so much more exciting to live in a town and work for the lord." (Is this a fair use of NPC social skill?)

The player's got some options here. He could have his character try to pump her for information about the castle, but this isn't our Face. Let's say Face is off trying to get snippets of info from the real serving girl of the first example.

He could try hitting on her. That'd make her job so much easier.

Or he could decide to disengage. For the sake of argument, let's say that's what he does. "Well, it's been lovely talkng to you. I hope life at the castle stops being so boring for you."

Test 3: Mata can't have this. She needs him to stay so she can work her wiles on him. She'll start now. "Oh, please stay for one more drink. Just one? It's my only night off this week, and you're so different from all the town lads. Don't leave me with just the dullards." She looks down and looks up again, giving him The Look. "And maybe later we could think of something fun to do together." This is clearly Persuasion, with Charm as a complementary skill. It's opposed - our PC has already stated his intent to leave. Tactically, Mata's better off putting her 3 remaining skill levels into Persuasion, so she does. Charm will be supported by her +1 Striking Appearance. She makes the Charm roll by 1 - not enough for a bonus to the persuasion, so she needs 15- on that. The PC has EGO 12-. Mata wins the contest, so the PC sits down again and orders another round, against his player's wishes. (Is this a fair use of NPC social skills against a PC? I think those who advocate against such rolls would consider this serious railroading.)

Test 4: After that round, Mata makes her play. "Why don't we find somewhere a little more private. Do you have a room here?" This is Charm, possibly complemented by Persuasion. Again, it's better the skill levels go with the main skill. Mata's got Persuasion 12-, and rolls 9. That gives her a +1 bonus on the Charm, where she already has +3 for skill and +1 for Striking Appearance - a total of 17-. Mata's offering sex, right now (-4, according to HSS), which brings her back down to 13- vs the PC's 12- EGO roll. The player is suspcious, but the character (thanks to the past Acting and Conversation test) is not. Mata wins the contest. They go upstairs. (Is this a reasonable use of NPC social skills against a PC?)

Test 5: Upstairs Mata wraps her self around the PC. "Make me happy, stud!" We'll draw a veil over the details. In among the pillow-talk, Mata intends to ask seemingly innocent little questions for find out if the PCs are passing through, as this PC claims, or what their interest might be in town. She'll uses leading comments ("You know, the lord is a very bad man. I've not been here long, but I've heard stories. Somebody should do something, but they're all too scared. Maybe someone like you could do something...") Mata is putting everything she's got into this. It's a straight Charm roll, +3 for the skills (she still has to act) and +1 for the Striking Appearance, for a total of 15-. She's after a secret though (-2) and it could land the PC in major danger (-4), which brings her target down to 10- (8- if you regard the secret as Top Secret). Our PC has an EGO roll of 12- to resist. The odds are significantly in his favour. (Is this a reasonable use of NPC social skills on a PC?)

If Mata wins, she can trot back to the spymaster with the information that the PC was definitely more interested in the castle than he should be, and told her not to worry about the evil lord. He and his friends might even be planning something tomorrow night - he said he'd be "too busy taking care of other things" when she suggested a second bout. The spymaster doubles the guard and orders his informers and field agents to watch the PCs more closely. He might even send guards to bring them in.

In the more likely event that the PC resists Mata's honeyed words, he'll realise she was trying to worm information out of him. It's time he dusts off his Intimidation skill to find out who she's working for... and if she's forced to admit who she's working for, she'll use Persuasion to try to win sympathy instead of approbation ("They have my little sister, they said they'd kill her if I didn't do this.") Maybe she can bide her time and make a break for the castle - if only she'd invested points in Escape Artist, Stealth and Running.

Ok, individual tests aside, is that the way people who use NPC on PC social skill tests would play it. Too many tests (odds are that Mata wouldn't get as far as the final test - she'd have to get 4 straight wins to get that far) or too few? Are the penalties at the right kind of level?

For those who dislike such rolls, where are your sticking points, and how would you handle it through play? Would you even go there?

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

Being drunk inherently changes what a character will or won't do' date=' Vondy, since alcohol tends to lower inhibitions.[/quote']

 

And we have good guidelines on the game mechanical effects of intoxication: if it gives -2 OCV and DCV in combat, I'd say there's a good case for suggesting it gives -2 to one's Charm skill, and -2 to the EGO roll to resist Charm.

 

GM: "OK, what's your approach to charming her?"

 

Player: "First, I buy her a drink..."

 

Actually, there's another big difference between PCs and NPCs.

 

I'll give you odds on that if a player decides s/he wants his/her character to Charm a serving girl into letting slip some information that may help get them into the castle, a suitable NPC called pops into existence. She happens to have snippets that may help. All the character has to do is succeed in a roll (after a suitable approach, if you so desire) to get those snippets.

 

If a spy-type NPC seeks counter-information out of a PC, odds-on she's a pre-planned character, perhaps not planned for that specific encounter, but there, ready and waiting with her skills and weaknesses, waiting for an opportunity to be brought into play...

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

Why should the PCs have an innate advantage?

Short answer: Because they're the protagonists. They're controlled by individuals who play that character, and only that character. By people who come to the game to play only that character. That sets them apart from villains, henchmen, mooks and the everymen, who are all played by the GM as colour, allies or obstacles to the PCs. Everything revolves around the PCs; even the bits in the background that seem to have nothing to do with them create a stage on which they star.

Counterquestion: Why shouldn't PCs have an innate advantage?

(I'm not being supercilious or flippant about this. There are arguments for and against PCs having an innate advantage; I want to know the opposing view.)

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

To me' date=' the interaction skill enables you to gather information. It does not enable you to assess what information you should be looking for, nor aid in interpreting the information you have received. Deduction might be helpful in assessing the significance of any particular comments, as might any number of other skills (realizing the repairs in progress will impede any ability to climb the south tower, or that this sounds a lot more like a coverup for some undead beast loose in the south tower, would be very handy).[/quote']

 

Theoretically, and with time to go into nuances, I agree with you. Practicalities of gaming time and scheduling, combined with players who enjoy the tactics of the battleboard, mean that cutting to the chase is frequently the only real option for me. (I'm not kidding, I live in an international crossroads, and I've lost count of the number of times I get a phone call along the lines of, "I'll be passing through in a couple of days. Got one evening spare, can you put a game on?")

 

To be honest, these days it seems like that's the ONLY kind of game I run. Rustle up the usual suspects and run a game that absolutely has to finish within one evening.

 

My outlook is undoubtedly affected by that.

 

No matter how much Charm he applies, he cannot obtain information his target lacks, so he gets nothing of any use. Maybe that's because the vapid girl knows nothing. Maybe it's because the Mata Hari's own skills were sufficient to consistently present the false front of a vapid serving girl.

 

Agreed on the no info available, nothing gained. I was envisaging the standard serving girl as one incident and the Mata Hari as a separate one, though.

 

 

 

I think most of us have focused on how it sounds no more (or less) offensive than other means a GM might use to "justify" information falling into the villain's hands when the real reason is that the GM wants the information in the villain's hands to further his plot train.

 

My fault for trying to push that to an extreme then. I was working a reductio ad absurdem (sp? ltn?) line.

 

To me, the players get the snippets. It's up to them, through player skill or character skills, to deduce their meaning.

 

But which? Player skill or character skill? Roleplay it or roll dice?thought>

 

Ignore that. I do get the point you're making.

 

I find some of these still reflect an inherent bias. My comments likely do as well.

 

I've no doubt my suggestions reflect a bias. I'm trying to reach an understanding. If yours reflect a bias as well, that helps the understanding.

 

This seems to be the fundamental difference between the two positions. I suggest it gives the players greater control of the results of the characters' actions. Allowing them to dictate whether or not they are struck in combat, the extent of damage taken, whether they hit or miss in combat, the extent of damage done when they do hit, the success or failure of their other skills, and so on also gives them more control over the results of their actions.

 

This is definitely a sticking point for me. I simply don't see the correlation between, "If NPCs don't get influence rolls over PCs, then you must surely allow players to say their sword-blow killed the dragon whatever the dice say?"

 

It's not that at all. It's a choice of whether to roll dice or not to roll dice. To play it out through conversation, or to interpret whatever the dice say.

 

Is it a question of where we draw the line? What's major and requires a dice roll, and what's minor and can be dealt with without one?

 

(Actually, I'm starting to wonder if it's deeper than that, and may be related to players expecting the GM to fudge in their favour and, if they get that, starting to rely on it - that's not an issue for Hero System Discussion, though. That line of thought is starting to get into issues that The Forge discussed muchly, and would belong on General Roleplaying on this board.)

 

I find many groups who decide interaction skills should not affect PC's also prefer to role play interaction with NPC's (ie the dice will not rule the NPC's either). Taken to its extreme, it would be stupid for PC's to invest points in these skills if it is player ability, rather than character ability, which dictates the results. As well, players who don't have strong social skills shouldn't bother creating a character that does.

 

That's definitely a potential side effect. However, it's generally modified by requiring PCs to roll for their interaction with NPCs when they're seeking in-game advantage. Common practice in our group with this technique is to allow a bonus for a good approach, so I have to acknowledge that a smart, socially savvy player can gain themselves an extra skill level or three without paying for it.

 

 

 

I don't find variances between player and character harm my immersion. I find it is sometimes impeded by a player who identifies too much with their character (ie they are the same in all respects in their views and beliefs so, for example, the standard mindset of the milieu cannot be shared by their character) and others impeded by a lack of identification (ie my character does something no real thinking person would ever even consider because I find it amusing).

 

I recognise both your negative examples. We probably all do.

 

OK, if rolling dice for NPC on PC inluence doesn't harm immersion, would you go as far as suggesting it enhances it?

 

I also come back to the lack of any suggestion players should be able to veto the impact of any non-interaction adverse result on their character. If one mechanic should be subject to player discretion, I see no reason others should not be.

 

Boiled down, your argument seems to be, if you don't apply the rules to all characters equally, you may as well not have rules at all.

 

Is that fair?

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

On equal footing. "Oh' date=' I handed her our whole plan on a silver platter" is very different from "I let something slip - hopefully, nothing comes of it." [/quote']

 

Complete agreement. It's just that I tend to regard the Charm roll as something as a shortcut to roleplaying it out, which means I'm tending to look at the end result (we have the information that we need), rather than the process - the dice roll replaces the need to piece together little snippets dropped over the course of the evening into a coherent whole.

 

How did the serving girl know to go after this individual? Is he a known opponent of the Baron, or are all serving girls always looking to obtain deep, dark secrets? Why is she looking to gain this character's trust and determine he plans an attack on the Baron?

 

By the same token, who does a PC know to go after one particular serving girl?

 

If you wanted to focus on information acquisition as a major scene in the scenario, you could certainly add in much more. Analyse as written is primarily a combat skill, but one could interpret a kind of social Analyse variant with might pick out the person in a group most likely to be susceptible to Charm (and Charm might be complementary). Shadowing might be a good alternative. (Actually, this resembles how sexual predators pick their victims, which creeps me out a little.)

 

You threw this bare skeleton example out as a reason your, and by extension other, players might reasonably be opposed to having their characters affected by social skills. I agree it is an example of the GM screwing over the PC's, but I find it hard to credit that it indicates interaction skills affecting PC's is bad, but rather that any strategy the GM uses to simply override the PC's careful plans is bad.

 

It was very much a bare skeleton. I was expecting discussion of the general principles, rather than picking over the bones of this particular off-the-top-of-my-head skeleton. It rather wrong-footed me for a while, but I think picking it apart like this has actually been quite useful - it's forced me to refine my ideas.

 

So why does the Baron maintain a femme fatale on his staff and why are the PCs of interest? I could make up further fictitious reasons why (he's evil, the characters have a reputation for good deeds, etc), but it's a little pointless. I think we both agree that without a reason for it, he wouldn't do it. I certainly wouldn't sic Mata Hari on the PCs 'just because'.

 

I can certainly see someone who is skilled at extracting information, and has a reason for trying to obtain information on the players' plans to attack the Baron's castle, using this approach to gain such information. I don't see her getting more than a few clues (eg. the player has let slip that "the Baron will get his", and perhaps even some hint of the timing. Which wall will be scaled at precisely what hour? That level of detail seems unlikely in the scenario you have painted.

 

I tihink what I'm reading from this is that it's not the broad sweep of the principle you were objecting to, it's that it isn't refined enough. Yeah, I can see that.

 

The original example was, in my mind, intended to be a throwaway prelude to the raid on the castle. As we discussed and debated it, I was thinking, "You know, this would make a pretty good basis for a scene its own right." But that would require much more detail.

 

I could also picture our Mata Hari trying it on with the PC's resident Face, leading to opposed Charm rolls as they dance around each other - and for that, some variant of social skill combat with more detail than simply opposed skill rolls might work very nicely.

 

"Extract information" does not equate to "obtain a full detailed plan of action from the target", at least in my view.

 

Agreed. But I think we agree that it could equate to 'obtain sufficient snippets that a reasonable prediction of the target's intentions can be deduced'.

 

Sure. But I don't think the servant has a full listing of the guard schedule for the coming months, nor do I expect he would hand that over to the PC's over a couple of beers at the inn. Rather, I can see him slipping up and mentioning something that works to the PC's advantage - like how nice it is not to have to climb those crumbly south tower steps with meals for half a dozen guards now that the Baron has cut the watch in that part of the keep. Now, he may not know why the guards' forces are reduced, or how long it will last, or why the Baron chose to reduce the guard at the south wall, rather than the eastern tower. Expanding the available information probably requires expanding the group the PC's are interacting with.

 

Exactly. That's pretty much how I'd present it to the PC succeeding in the Charm roll. "Work's got a lot tougher since they transferred the guards to the north tower while the south one's being repaired."

 

If she's actually a skilled investigator, there's some logic to her having already made inquiries, but why does the Baron have this spy on his payroll? What leads either of them to suspect there is currently a threat? If she is routinely seeking out threats to the Baron, have the PC's had no chance of hearing how the Baron seems to have eyes and ears everywhere? That seems like something a friendly NPC (one who has been charmed and likes the PC's in question) would mention, even if the PC's aren't specifically asking about the Baron's information gathering network.

 

The first points I think I addressed above. The last one's a good, though. If the Baron has a secret police or network of informers, the PCs should have a chance to pick up on that somehow. I hadn't considered that.

 

I expect the PC's will be making more common use of their interaction skills. They are often actively seeking information. The barman, serving girl and castle servant don't really have much of a reason to be gathering intel from the PCs. But that Femme Fatale working for the Baron has every reason to be doing so. The serving girl may well be trying to ingratiate herself with the PC to get some coin from him, or so he will take her away from all this, but that hardly seems likely to result in her discovering details of the plans against the Baron, nor does it give her a reason to give any credit, or make any use of, some subtle slip.

 

True, and trying to get some coin is hardly a significant event - no real need to roll there at all.

 

I think on the issue of whether PCs should be subject to interaction rolls as NPCs are we're at something of an impasse. it really depends on the ground assumptions, and that's decide don a group by group basis (ideally on a game by game basis, since each group is capable of more than one style of play).

 

I can see practical arguments in favour of, and against, both.

 

Having PCs subject to NPCs' interaction skills

a) Leads to more well-rounded character builds; even if they aren't actively persuasive, PCs should consider defending against persuasion or manipulation.

Opens up a new area of conflict; social skills can be overlooked, and are likely to get more attention with this set-up.

c) Could put some distance between a player and his or her character (some groups may regard this as a pro, others as a con)

d) Potentially opens up new character development opportunities as players are forced to deal with non-optimal outcomes in their dealings with NPCs

 

Having PCs immune to NPCs' interaction skills

a) Gives greater player control over their character

May lead players to disregard EGO or influence skills in their builds, unless they actively plan to use them

c) Forces NPCs to interact with PCs through roleplaying, without formal resolution mechanics (some groups may regard this as a pro, some as a con)

d) Potentially offers greater immersion and idfentification with the character due to the greater control (some groups may regard this as a pro, some as a con)

e) Effectively gives players a right of veto over any outside skill-based influence on their character

Re: THE MONSTER HUNTER INTERNAIONAL EMPLOYEES' HANDBOOK & RPG Is Now Live!

Victory! We passed the $45,000 mark earlier this morning.

 

Now we enter the "even more cool stuff" phase of the project. We've already announced our first stretch goals, so please check 'em out! And we have plenty more beyond that if we continue to get backers.

And that brings us to international hardcopies. Huzzah!

I'm in - or I will be, come payday.

Re: Attractiveness - Comeliness Vs. Striking Appearance

That means assessing the methodology by which one would gain that character's trust. That he wakes up the next day and thinks "Oh no - I spilled the plans" indicates' date=' to me, that his trust had not been gained. Why does he suddenly no longer feel that trust?[/quote']

 

Then interpret it as he realised he may have let something slip (after the INT roll, if you go back up to the brief skeleton example you're trying to pick apart).

 

 

"If I get caught" being the key. To convince him to turn over the plans, there must have been some reason he believed he was secure or some reward that was sufficient to cause him to take the risk. If a night in the sack doesn't meet that defiinition, then that is not the logical scenario in which that Charm roll works.

 

There is a reason - he failed the opposed roll. That is the position you're arguing for, right? If a PC can gain information through a Charm or other interaction skill, NPCs must be entitled to do the same to PCs.

 

Which was the point of the skill. Why is it impossible for NPC's to successfully gather information? Why is the "seduced and loose lips sink ships" approach so much more problematic than any of the equally ham-handed examples by which the GM can assert the PC's information was obtained?

 

Since you obviously dislike this use of the skill, please give an example where you would consider it a valid use - both ways round: PC gaining information from an NPC and vice versa.

 

I think the better approach is that PC's and NPC's alike are not affected by ridiculous uses of social skills.

 

The Charm skill's express purpose is to extract information through flirting and the promise or delivery of favours, including sexual favours.

 

How is using it to do that ridiculous?

 

"Over a friendly beer, I try to persuade him to leap naked into the volcano", for example is unlikely to affect anyone.

 

Agreed - that would be a ridiculous, ham-fisted and abusive use of the skill. That isn't extracting information, it's ordering someone to commit suicide. That'd require an EGO+30 level with Mind Control, even if the GM allowed it.

 

But if it's impossible for that Charm skill to extract information on the plan to attack the Baron, then it is equally impossible for the PC's to gain similar information using the same skill.

 

And, by your own logic, if it is possible for a PC to gain information, it's possoble for an NPC to do likewise.

 

I think it's perfectly possible for a PC to gain information on guards' movements from a servant. Attempting to do so is a relatively routine thing in my games - part of acquiring the information a party needs to make a plan.

 

I'd love to know how you'd handle the use of interaction skills, Hugh - particularly Charm, which seems to be the really thorny one. That's not a snarky or sarcastic request, but you've obviously found a way that works for you and your group that I'm not seeing, and I'd genuinely like to know how you make it work. (I make the point about it not being sarcastic since I've already inadvertently made psyber concerned I was being sarcy in one comment; don't want to cause another misunderstanding.)

Re: What Are You Listening To Right Now?

Ted Hawkins: The Venice Beach Tapes

The version on the album is better.