Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

A brand new feedback forum for our massively revised draft!
User avatar
Korbel
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1211
Joined: 13 Apr 2015, 12:09
Location: Poland

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by Korbel » 09 May 2017, 04:48

Benedict wrote:Both of them are low skill.
Sorry, I meant: numbers. Not just skills, but Profs and Attributes.
Of course I don't say it's always like this, just often. As you say, Low Freeman is just about right, gives you money for a sword, light armor and some equipment. My guess is, many players are just like: "yeah, maybe not the best possible armor / weapon / equipment, but I'll just steal / win something more and be fine... I like those high numbers on my sheet better". And it's quite natural, can't blame for that. Besides, Low Freeman just fits Scoundrels / Bastards.
What I'd suggest, is to try and make Edges even more sexy. So that when you pick a low tier, you really feel like losing something very, very cool.
User avatar
thirtythr33
Editorial Inquisition
Posts: 1248
Joined: 12 Aug 2015, 03:23

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by thirtythr33 » 09 May 2017, 06:26

I've noticed the same trend. Some of it is the system and some of it is the game.

The game is based on TROS and still in beta, so naturally everyone wants to try out the combat.
In The Floating City I've made it clear from the start that it's a city-based campaign and you can't walk around in armor. That means the benefit of being able to afford a suit of proofed plate armor is quite minimal. Plus, running a party of vastly different social classes can get messy when PCs essentially become henchmen of other PCs.

The thing is, picking up more flaws isn't really a drawback. Most of them actually generate SAs and are desirable.
The minor edges seem quite lackluster compared to bumping up an attribute.

I must be in the minority though; I think most of the major edges are absolutely amazing. Particularly the ones that give you henchmen. I'm surprised more people haven't tried using them.
"O happy dagger!
This is thy sheath; there rust, and let me die."

- Juliet Capulet
User avatar
Agamemnon
Grand Master
Posts: 1126
Joined: 05 Jan 2013, 13:59
Contact:

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by Agamemnon » 09 May 2017, 10:09

Korbel wrote:I guess this is the best place to ask.
A trend I've observed here on forums (characters created by all of us, that's more of a dozen already) is to pick a Low Freeman status (Tier 2) and then the lowest Tier 1 to Edges and Flaws. Then such a character would be "blessed" with a dark secret, enemy or something... and voila, you have 12 priority pick points to buy Attributes, Skills and Proficiences.
For example, latest character from Agamemnon himself: Pope's bastard. And many others.
I won't go so far to say that it's a cheap tactic... but I kinda find it boring, when most of the characters are low freemans with good skills and an enemy (I'm perfectly aware that that was kinda imposed by the theme of the campaigns we decided to have, but still)
For my part, this wasn't a case of min-maxing so much as a confluence of other factors.
  • The Bastard part of the concept came first, which naturally pushed me further down the social ranks and demanded that by the current rules, I needed at least a Major Flaw in there.
  • I actually started by reading the Edges & Flaws section before I did anything else as the rest are just numbers. The ones that stuck out to me were Secret, Bastard, and Honorable. I was tempted to take on more, but that seemed to be a good trifecta to clash with from the start. I tend to like playing struggling, flawed characters to begin with.
  • Conversely, not very many edges fit with the character concept in this case. Most of them grant some ability that doesn't add anything to the character I wanted to play.
  • On the other hand, what I did need for this character was for him to be a sort of jack-of-all-trades. I wanted him to have combat ability, and he was going to need quite a bit of skill points to throw around. Compounding this, the way the current build is set up, he needs good attributes to be effective at either. Thus the triple-4 allocation.
  • Beyond this, a big part of it is how I saw my role in the game. Marco is the default nobleman here and in theory, his house is the central impetus of this story. I thus didn't want to be any kind of proper noblility as I don't want to either steal his thunder or accidentally drag attention from his house by bringing my own.
  • This further compounds the edges & flaws pick logic because so many of the edges are about elevating your character in some way. The theme of this campaign, however, seems to be about pawns and henchmen. Even Marco is effectively Primus inter Pawnus in the scheme of this because we're all being shuffled around by nobles and kings. Given that my angle in was as Giovanni's man, I wanted to be in some ways the mirror of one of Marco's men.Thus, I deliberately avoided anything that would have given me status, men, etc of my own.
In this case, at least, it's a combination of where I wanted to fit in, the themes of the campaign, what I actually wanted to do, and, frankly, the fact that I like playing flawed characters.
taelor wrote:Edges and Flaws are very dump-staty in the current draft. I seem to remember one of Higgins or Agamemnon saying that they would be reworked in the upcoming release.
I can see the former and can confirm the latter. It was one of the sections I found more annoying to rework and rewrite.
Korbel wrote:Anyway, do you find it a problem?
I've heard the Flaws are going to work differently now, under S&S. How will it change this situation?
taelor wrote:Personally, I like the Burning Wheels approach of just giving you trait points, and you can spend them how you want; if being blind or having a nemesis or what have you is really important to the character, then spend the trait points just like anything else
Which is exactly why we went the trait point route this time. This is for three major reasons. First, you have people like me who actively like playing flawed characters, and thus a low-priority pick in the existing category is actually an incentive rather than a discouragement. Next we have the problem that flaws are actually very beneficial, because they offer you a constant source of SAs if you are playing them right. Finally, the issue where there's a lot of cross-over between flaws and edges. Honorable could really go either way, as could any given reputation/infamy inthe right context. Thus division between what is an "Edge" and what is a "Flaw" seemed to arbitrary for comfort.

This time around, the category gives you access to points that can be spent on different things. A low Trait pick now doesn't force a bunch of flaws on you, it simply leaves you with fewer points to spend -- which effectively makes you lonely and boring. Further incentivizing the thing, traits plug in nicely to the tapping system, they still can get you SA points, and they are basically where your character goes to establish anything about themselves that isn't numbers or your social status.

Speaking of social status, we've been juggling this weird overlap of "what if I want to play a noble but don't necessarily want to be the head of the household?" In the coming build, this line gets cleaner. Social status confers increased wealth and the legal rights associated with someone of your blood status. By default you are now assumed to be a second son or some forgotten cousin or an otherwise well-off but minor part of the house to which your noble backside would belong. If you want to be the head of the house, you'll create said house as a faction and like all player-associated factions, it is built with trait points.

So TL;DR - we've dropped the Edges/Flaws dynamic and made traits more useful/interesting across the board.
Sword and Scoundrel: On Role-Playing and Fantasy Obscura

Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife — chopping off what’s incomplete and saying: "Now it’s complete because it’s ended here."
Collected Sayings of Muad’Dib, the Princess Irulan
User avatar
nemedeus
Scholar
Posts: 446
Joined: 20 Jan 2016, 12:53

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by nemedeus » 09 May 2017, 10:53

Agamemnon wrote: So TL;DR - we've dropped the Edges/Flaws dynamic and made traits more useful/interesting across the board.
I've written about this before, but o'd like to reiterate:
I really want to see more Edges/Traits that work like Dead-Eye and Gut Feeling.
Best case scenario, you already thought of this and included directions/rules on how to write your own "Stunts" as i like to call them in hommage to FATE.
"First Rule of War Club: Don't fight in the War Room" - Clint Eastwood, 1920
User avatar
Korbel
Standard Bearer
Posts: 1211
Joined: 13 Apr 2015, 12:09
Location: Poland

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by Korbel » 09 May 2017, 11:43

Agamemnon wrote:Speaking of social status, we've been juggling this weird overlap of "what if I want to play a noble but don't necessarily want to be the head of the household?" In the coming build, this line gets cleaner. Social status confers increased wealth and the legal rights associated with someone of your blood status. By default you are now assumed to be a second son or some forgotten cousin or an otherwise well-off but minor part of the house to which your noble backside would belong. If you want to be the head of the house, you'll create said house as a faction and like all player-associated factions, it is built with trait points.
Shit. Does it mean I will have to make some sacrifices, when conversing Marco from BoB to S&S? Because during character creation I used the "second son" ruling which says that you pick Tier 3 in Social Status, have the rights and position of a noble, but personal wealth of a Low Freeman - and that suits me fine, Marco is technically a noble, but not in charge and he doesn't have much money. What will I be expected to do when conversing to achieve similar effect? Pick Tier 4 for social status? Work around it somehow?
User avatar
Agamemnon
Grand Master
Posts: 1126
Joined: 05 Jan 2013, 13:59
Contact:

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by Agamemnon » 09 May 2017, 15:11

Korbel wrote:
Agamemnon wrote:Speaking of social status, we've been juggling this weird overlap of "what if I want to play a noble but don't necessarily want to be the head of the household?" In the coming build, this line gets cleaner. Social status confers increased wealth and the legal rights associated with someone of your blood status. By default you are now assumed to be a second son or some forgotten cousin or an otherwise well-off but minor part of the house to which your noble backside would belong. If you want to be the head of the house, you'll create said house as a faction and like all player-associated factions, it is built with trait points.
Shit. Does it mean I will have to make some sacrifices, when conversing Marco from BoB to S&S? Because during character creation I used the "second son" ruling which says that you pick Tier 3 in Social Status, have the rights and position of a noble, but personal wealth of a Low Freeman - and that suits me fine, Marco is technically a noble, but not in charge and he doesn't have much money. What will I be expected to do when conversing to achieve similar effect? Pick Tier 4 for social status? Work around it somehow?
If you were trying to do the same thing to make a brand new character, RAW you'd need to take tier 4 for social status. For the purposes of conversion, though, I expect that ThirtyThr33 will give people some wiggle room to make the characters fit in the few cases that they don't.
Sword and Scoundrel: On Role-Playing and Fantasy Obscura

Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife — chopping off what’s incomplete and saying: "Now it’s complete because it’s ended here."
Collected Sayings of Muad’Dib, the Princess Irulan
User avatar
thirtythr33
Editorial Inquisition
Posts: 1248
Joined: 12 Aug 2015, 03:23

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by thirtythr33 » 09 May 2017, 20:58

Agamemnon wrote: For the purposes of conversion, though, I expect that ThirtyThr33 will give people some wiggle room to make the characters fit in the few cases that they don't.
This.
"O happy dagger!
This is thy sheath; there rust, and let me die."

- Juliet Capulet
User avatar
DannyBoy
Journeyman
Posts: 115
Joined: 09 Nov 2014, 18:09

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by DannyBoy » 01 Jun 2017, 14:43

Time to commit the vile act of thread necromancy! The stars are right, the sacrifices have been performed, and I have thoroughly rubbed myself down with the sacred unguents...

Any new content this Thursday? :)
KillerRed
Novice
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Aug 2016, 18:32

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by KillerRed » 01 Jun 2017, 17:55

Much has been written. Little will be shared. :D
"It has fallen upon me, now and again in my sojourn through the world, to ease various evil men of their lives."-Solomon Kane
KillerRed
Novice
Posts: 27
Joined: 18 Aug 2016, 18:32

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by KillerRed » 01 Jun 2017, 17:56

Not complaining. The longer the wait, the better the prize
"It has fallen upon me, now and again in my sojourn through the world, to ease various evil men of their lives."-Solomon Kane
myanbar
Initiate
Posts: 94
Joined: 17 Jan 2016, 17:16

Re: Sword & Scoundrel, Book 1 (Not Even Thursday Edition)

Post by myanbar » 01 Jun 2017, 22:48

Not necessarily. Still, I'm eager to see what they have.
Post Reply