OOC

[Faolan7]

Oh, sorry! I didn't have access to the book when I saw that!

I think the game wants you to only be able to use what you're proficient with, but I can make a homebrew rule. Woo! Crazy stuff! I'll say, when you're using a weapon that isn't on your proficiency list, you effectively use Beginner's Luck except you mark a pass or fail if you already have Fighter instead of just marking a test.

[Marullus]

Using Health at double-Ob is fantastic for me... I'd much rather advance Health than open Fighter. (I actually think that is too good.)

I would have recommended it invoke the "inappropriate tools" on a normal Fighter test instead. That way, picking up a nonproficient weapon is just a +1 Ob.

Your rule has more of the "no, seriously, you aren't a proficient fighter with that" feel.

[Faolan7]

Yeah, it's pretty hefty. I like your way though, so why don't we do that? Just +1 Ob.

[Marullus]

+1 Ob it is! (My gamist self is mad at me for making my life harder. )

Okay, is Swelan ready to secure the room/campsite and get the Survivalist test?

[Rusty Tincanne]

Yes. I've got to read the rule book and remember how to make that happen.

[Rusty Tincanne]

My instinct is to update our map.
Were you thinking i would make a test to secure the site, advancing the turn counter? Then spend a check to enter camp?

[Marullus]

Yes, a Survivalist test can improve the campsite but is an action that advances us from turn 2 to turn 3. Then spend your check to enter camp rather than entering turn 4. Entering camp triggers your free Cartography test and Peitharian's free Healer test.

From page 83:

Camp Roll Bonuses
You earn a +1 bonus to this roll if you’ve used the Survivalist
skill to find a suitable site or to try to make the camp more
hospitable, or if you are an elf with the Wilder benefit. Only
one bonus applies.

Factors for the GM on page 142-43.

[Rusty Tincanne]

I PM'd coil last night.

[Faolan7]

Okay. Thanks Rusty!

[Marullus]

I checked in with Enoch tonight, too.

[Marullus]

...I am inordinately amused that for the "elixir to relieve exhaustion," I effectively described making Swelan a latte.

Latte.jpg (309.36 KiB) Viewed 759 times

It is the little things.

[Rusty Tincanne]

I have a rules-question about it the failed elixir and enchantment tests. It is an entertaining twist and I certainly believe that whatever Faolin says goes, so please read this for its academic nature, not as any griping.

Isabelle failed the tests, but the condition was applied to Swelan rather than the person that failed the tests. Usually the person(s) failing the test get the condition. Should I be looking at the twist more as, "The drink became a "cursed" item and the curse happened to be a condition?" And it could have affected anyone that drank it and it could have just as easily given a -1s on the imbiber's next test or a potion of leprosy and Swelan just happened to drink it?

And now that I type all that out, it seems so much more clear and really wonderful. And my eyes were opened to a new level of evil-GM factor in TB.


And to clarify:
- Was Swelan just testing his Will vs Ob1 or was it supposed to be a versus test? If the latter, did I pass or fail?
- Did he pass that cartography test?


And Isabelle gets the next check, I believe. Did you know that Nobel was asked to perform his experiments on a barge in the middle of a large lake? I am thinking that is about right for Isabelle's attempt at making bombs. Better than in a closet!


Last question: Faolin, is there any sign of dead bodies in the cellar? We have blood everywhere, but no mention of carrion bodies.

[Marullus]

Evil GM twists are exceptionally evil when doing twists on failed experimental magics.

I believe the tests are:

• spend check. Failed Alchemy test. (Make Elixir)
• activate trigger. Failed Enchanter check. (Imbue object, a la scribe scroll.)
• drink elixir. Versus test, Enchanter vs Will. (Like casting from scroll, would have charm result if not undead)
• Twist from failure. Ob 1 Will test passed. (Not going into rage from your anger)

Then... We adjudicated result of your Cartographer test. (2nd check spent)

Then I will do the third check.

So... You need to do your side of the versus test and we're looking for Faolan to adjudicate the mapping. (Yeah, it is a lot of tests... We talked about this in character creation. Since she has a 2 in her primary skill, I designed her to trigger as many checks as possible to give her a chance of advancing to a useful level within the scope of our play. The bad part is that most of them will fail. )

[Rusty Tincanne]

It is a lot of tests, but i don't mind. I just lost track of where we are because I rushed into the mapping test before everything else was complete. Though I think that has worked well with the narrative.

[coil23]

I feel like an ass for saying this but I think I may not be right for this game. This system does not seem like a good fit for me. I can handle 56 page rulebooks for wargames so maybe I just want something different when it comes to RPGs. I am bewildered by the mechanics here and feel lost as well as distanced from the characters and plot as a result. I think all of you and this game deserve every player be fully engaged and I'm not sure I can sustain that in this system. So I withdraw with sincere apologies for any disruption that that may cause. If it is any consolation, perhaps Peitharian could be used as a meal and thus catalyst for character conflict. And thank you for giving me a chance.

[Rusty Tincanne]

Too bad. I see where you are coming from though. The system is crunchy and until you get used to it, it could be distracting from the story line I suppose.

And with Enoch MIA... Faolin and Marullus, how do you want to proceed? Do you want to proceed? I am game for trying the rest of this with two players. It makes tests that much more difficult, of course, but it would be interesting at the least. Swelan would take on the role as mentor and guide. Isabelle would take on the role of anchor to humanity, though she is already playing that role for the most part. We would certainly gain more persona and fate at the end of each session!

[Marullus]

I understand the frustration - if you'd be willing to let us adjust before you quit, I'd gladly do so. (I also know how hard it is to come to this point, though, and if you are done, then I get that, too.)

The other systems in by this designer would be more in line with what you're seeking - Burning Wheel or Mouseguard (less so Burning Empires) are heavily-immersion focused. You keep telling the story until something consequential happens and the GM asks for a roll. Every character just keeps acting and acting. When action occurs, the acting character faces the problem and deciding to help or not is how you involve yourself in someone else's problems.

This is where they started with Torchbearer, but I feel they lost it in a key way. I felt the same frustration as you. Namely, characters no longer face their problems - any action by character has consequences on all characters. So, it pushes to OOC first. It pushes PLAYER strategizing for deciding turns/actions, spending checks, etc. We have a sea of red OOC ink before we make our one IC post. This is made worse by us being in play-by-post (all the "table talk" takes days to weeks, but OOC instead of IC, and it is explicit and red). At a tabletop, I think this would be less of a problem. It is also exacerbated by this being a new system with us learning and re-learning, so we need to talk more about the mechanics than a polished group.

So, knowing that, how could we make it better?

It is an easy choice for us to shift our play style knowing this is an issue impacting you. Rusty and I can both play Burning Wheel style, focusing on the IC and controlling our own geeking on the rules. We make a change among ourselves to focus on keeping IC and NOT focusing on the player-level group strategizing. We also agree that this means that we'll face more of certain consequences (like the Grind), and that we are okay with that. We use it to drive the IC story instead (they WILL get hungry, exhausted, etc. and that's part of the IC grist).

Personally, I would like that, too. When I first played this system, I felt very distance from my character and the story, so I know what you're saying. I'm horribly guilty at flooding-red and geeking on the system-talk as we are re-learning. But I would really like to get more into narrative and move the story forward faster.

So, proposal: We just write a good story. We stay almost completely IC. We let drop rolls only when necessary, but always keep moving things forward, immersing in the PC experience.

...

If you're really done and that didn't convince you, I understand and I'm sorry. It will be a loss.

I'm okay with continuing with just two PCs in that case, whether the others depart, get eaten, or become NPCs. I am liking this story and would like to see where it goes. I would also be happy if we moved the action faster, anyway.

[Faolan7]

I'm sorry we couldn't help you understand coil. We did move pretty fast, and I wasn't paying enough attention to all of my players. I'm really sorry for overwhelming you.

Rusty, Marullus, I would be all for continuing with just two players. I hate running one on one campaigns, but I prefer small groups of two to three players over big groups of five to six. Four players is a happy medium that, while I'm not as good at it in person, I can easily manage over forums.

However, due to personal problems that I don't want to get into, I am unable to continue. I would continue if I could, even with just Rusty and Marullus, and I really enjoyed playing with all four of you guys, but I am unable to continue posting. I'm really sorry about this. Hopefully you find a good replacement, and I'm sorry I couldn't keep this going like I planned. Farewell, and I'm really sorry.

[Marullus]

Thanks for the hard work, Faolan. It is never easy GMing and I appreciate that you took up the mantle for our benefit.

I hope all calms down on the RL front. We understand.