Just got a copy, have a few questions

[Tywin Lannister]

Hello,

I just bought a copy of the Burning Wheel at my local game store and I had a few questions in a few areas where the rules conflict. I have not absorbed the entire rules yet so if I did not spot a later clarification please don't flame me :-)

1) Versus Tests
I'm a little confused here. Under versus tests it says that both players throw dice for their ability, and gives examples of Persuasion skill vs. Willpower, as well as Haggle vs. Willpower. This is intuitive and always gives characters a chance to "stay in the action".

But under the skill descriptions in the character burner it doesn't say anything about a versus test, just that the Obstacle for the test is equal to the opponent's will. Which is it?

Or is it a combination of the two (both players test using the others ability as the Obstacle). Who would win if both failed under such circumstances (more successes over opponent?).

I must say I prefer either the first option or the third, as both give the other player a chance to make a roll, and use Artha if needed.

2) Armor
Is it just me or does armor seem to fly off quite a bit, with each one subtracting a die from the armor pool? Is this considered temporary (just that fight), or until repaired. I can see larger battles with everyone running around naked.

3) Shades of Sorcery
If someone has a Gray Sorcery, when they make a Sorcery roll to cast a spell are both the Willpower and Sorcery dice Grey, or should you roll dice of two different colors, one 4+ for a Black Willpower, and the Sorcery dice 3+ for the Gray Shade? (this is assuming of course that your Willpower is still Black)

4) Taking Superfical and Light Wounds
The +1/+2 DTN's seem a lot worse than losing dice. Am I interpreting this the right way?

Thanks again, I'm sure I'll have more questions in the following days. I'd like to start a campaign in August.

One last question. Has anyone tried to adapt Burning Wheel to A song of Fire and Ice series? I'm a huge fan of Martin's book's (you might be able to tell from my username), and I was thinking of running the campaign there. Thanks again!

John

[foxandwarlock]

Welcome Lannister.

Boy, I'd never thought I'd use those two words together in a sentence. :twisted:

I can only confidently help you with two of your questions.

For your #2 question, only the first one of any roll constitutes a die loss. So if you rolled 5 dice of armor and four came up ones, you'd still only lose one die. In the group I play in this is considered temporary until repaired. In fact, if you check under the Mending skill in the Character Burner you will find an Ob setting for repairing your own Leather armor.

In regards to your #4 point, let me direct you to this thread which handles the Why's pretty well:

http://www.burningwheel.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=518

[SirEktar]

1) I sort of noticed this but it hadn't really impacted me until you made your post. I'd use Versus Tests when two entities are competing against each other and a fixed Ob when there is not direct interaction. For example, spotting an object in the dark or a person standing there would be a fixed Ob. If the person was Stealthing, then it would be a Versus Test. You are right that the rules could use a bit of clarification in this area. :)

2) The dice are lost for the course of the battle. Whether each die lost is permanent (i.e. needs to be repaired) or temporary can vary. I'd use a mix of the two options depending on the needs of the campaign and the situation. Not all of the dice lost should be due to equipment breakage but a large portion of it can be. The rules is for equipment failure - whether due to damage or misalignment is up to the GM.

3) IIRC, you're supposed to have seperate sets of dice for the black/grey/white contribution. You can simplify matters and use a single shade but that opens the door to potential abuse. I'm not certain how this would work with FoRK'ed skills but I'd probably go with a die the same shade of the skill that is FoRK'ing to the main skill.

4) There are some variant wounding rules in the download section. Basically, the +?DN penalties are replaced with an Ob penalty.

[Tywin Lannister]

Thanks for the clarifications guys, and thanks for pointing me to the downloads section. I like the new wound rules better.

I'm still quite a bit confused about this though:



Hello,

1) Versus Tests
I'm a little confused here. Under versus tests it says that both players throw dice for their ability, and gives examples of Persuasion skill vs. Willpower, as well as Haggle vs. Willpower. This is intuitive and always gives characters a chance to "stay in the action".

But under the skill descriptions in the character burner it doesn't say anything about a versus test, just that the Obstacle for the test is equal to the opponent's will. Which is it?

Or is it a combination of the two (both players test using the others ability as the Obstacle). Who would win if both failed under such circumstances (more successes over opponent?).
John

Is there anyplace I might get an ofical ruling on this?

Thanks,

John

[SirEktar]

There is not definitive errata for this as far as I know. I'm inclined to go with the specific skill descriptions rather than the brief mention under the Versus Tests section.

Note that using a Ob equal to the Will stat generally makes the Versus Test harder for the Persuader or Haggler. For these two skills, I'd judge it on a case by case basis. If the opposition is static, then use the fixed Ob - otherwise, use opposing roles.

For example, a shopkeeper has items for sale with traditional prices. This would call for a Haggle test vs the Will of the shopkeeper. In this case, the only real direction the price may go is down (you don't want to haggle and find that the price is HIGHER! :shock: If two merchants were trying to agree on a trade of goods, then it would be a Versus Test using the respective Haggle skills.

Similarily, if you wanted to Persuade a guard to let you into the castle, a Persuasion vs Will Ob (including some bonuses, you don't let anyone into the castle!) would be the way to go. If two politicians are trying to persuade each other on a way to vote, then the debate can be a Versus Test using the respective Persuasion skills. [Actually, you may want to use Rhetoric here but just ignore that for the sake of argument]

Does this help?
Abzu, has this been answered elsewhere?

[Kublai]

When it comes to Social tests, if the result is defined by a "Yes" or "No," such as getting a guard to let you pass, I will make the Obstacle equal to the NPC's Will. When there are many possible outcomes to the Test, like Haggling for a price, I make it a Versus Test, PC or NPC with the largest amount of successes wins.

[luke]

Social test obstacles, except Haggling, are defined by the target's Will.

The examples in the front of the book are poor, I'll admit. The skill list is generally a better guide (though far from perfect).

-L

PS we've found, through play, that it's better to use a Vs test for Haggling than a straight Ob. It allows for either side to win and set their price.

[Tywin Lannister]

Social test obstacles, except Haggling, are defined by the target's Will.

The examples in the front of the book are poor, I'll admit. The skill list is generally a better guide (though far from perfect).

-L

PS we've found, through play, that it's better to use a Vs test for Haggling than a straight Ob. It allows for either side to win and set their price.

OK, thanks for the clairification. I'm alittle concerned though about players getting screwed because if they are targets of these skills (or magical attacks, which work the same way), their hands are tied, since they can't use their own Artha to conteract the test, because they aren't rolling any dice. What I think I might do is use the rules you sugguested as default, but allow PC's to make a versus test at their option, so they might bring their Artha to the table. In some cases I'd expect they'd want a high Ob (if their Stats are high enough) that an opponent must beat, but in others they may want (or need) to use Artha to save themselves.

Would this solution break the game too much?

Thanks,

John

[foxandwarlock]

Your other option might be to allow your players to use their Artha in new/inventive ways:

Since a Persona point (using the new Variant Rules) allows you to reduce an Ob by one for your own roll, why not let them spend one to increase their opponents Ob (Will+1 Ob) for those particular circumstances?

My group (though new to the game) has tried to stay really open to cool, new uses of Artha that allow the players to influence the story - regardless of whether or not its on "the list" of accepted uses.

[luke]

forgive my double standard, but these rules only apply to player vs npc interactions.

a player can never be convinced of anything he doesn't want to be. It's pure social contract/agreement at that point.

social mechanics are going to be GREATLY fleshed out in the Annual.

-L

[Tywin Lannister]

Your other option might be to allow your players to use their Artha in new/inventive ways:

Since a Persona point (using the new Variant Rules) allows you to reduce an Ob by one for your own roll, why not let them spend one to increase their opponents Ob (Will+1 Ob) for those particular circumstances?

My group (though new to the game) has tried to stay really open to cool, new uses of Artha that allow the players to influence the story - regardless of whether or not its on "the list" of accepted uses.

Don't you have to focus to do that, which takes double the time? I supopose it could be argued that characters could steady themsleves for such a confrontation, I'll think about it!


John

[Tywin Lannister]

forgive my double standard, but these rules only apply to player vs npc interactions.

a player can never be convinced of anything he doesn't want to be. It's pure social contract/agreement at that point.

social mechanics are going to be GREATLY fleshed out in the Annual.

-L

WOW, I did not see that coming :shock:

I can't say I agree with you, but I understand your reasoning (and for the same reason you don't have an Intelligence based stat).

But this still doesn't solve the issues with Obstacles and magic, as most test spells against an Obstacle based on the defender's stat (Deleriums Tremens, and Sarch's Glare, for example). A PC won't get a chance to roll or use Artha against such effects, as the rules are written.


John

[foxandwarlock]

You mean I didn't have to go along with it when my GM rolled some dice behind his screen and said, "Okay, you believe his sad story and give him all your gold."

I knew something didn't seem right! Crap! *slams fist on table*

[luke]

But this still doesn't solve the issues with Obstacles and magic, as most test spells against an Obstacle based on the defender's stat (Deleriums Tremens, and Sarch's Glare, for example). A PC won't get a chance to roll or use Artha against such effects, as the rules are written.

And forgive my splitting hairs, but Magic is separate in this regard.

When I speak to you, you have a choice whether or not to believe me. When I summon the powers arcane to force you to believe, you have no alternative or option. It is, essentially, the same mechanic as getting shot with an arrow. Your body does not get a chance to protest, deny or refuse the exchange. Unfortunately, the force of the arrow pierces skin and there's little to do about it except fall down. Magic operates under this same principal. It is not a social skill, it is an external, invasive, hostile force set to work against you.

-L

[Tywin Lannister]

And forgive my splitting hairs, but Magic is separate in this regard.

When I speak to you, you have a choice whether or not to believe me. When I summon the powers arcane to force you to believe, you have no alternative or option. It is, essentially, the same mechanic as getting shot with an arrow. Your body does not get a chance to protest, deny or refuse the exchange. Unfortunately, the force of the arrow pierces skin and there's little to do about it except fall down. Magic operates under this same principal. It is not a social skill, it is an external, invasive, hostile force set to work against you.

-L

I didn't realize you could not use Artha to protect yourself from missile fire either (since you don't get a vs. roll against that either, you can't block bow shots, I get it now :oops: ). But still, at least there is a way using Artha to "ignore" certain wounds. There is no such mechanic for Artha. Oh well.


John

[Wuxing]

You mean I didn't have to go along with it when my GM rolled some dice behind his screen and said, "Okay, you believe his sad story and give him your weapon."

I knew something didn't seem right! Crap! *slams fist on table*

Hey, everyone knows vampires are suave bastards that can convince most people to do what they need done. Besides, Ravenloft/D&D aside, I'm a pretty big proponent of letting you choose whatever it is you choose. I dislike spells/skills/effects of any kind that compel you to do something (and that's as a player and a GM). I don't think I've pulled that out on the GMing side of the table more than 5 times in my life. :)

Oh, and don't change the story. I roll out in the open, just like any other player. :P

Just to add something of substance and not just derail... Consider changing what you do with Artha. I want the artha flowing in and out of the game. I want my players to feel that they can change something. I want them taking risks, playing in character, making tough choices, etc. I encourage them to come up with ways to use Artha. I try to stay within the general boundaries of the variant artha rules (in terms "value" of artha versus effect), but overall anything is up for grabs. So if a player wanted to use artha to somehow contest one of these kinds of rolls we're talking about, we'd likely talk about what and how much to help that happen.

How much are the players using this three sessions in? A little, but not much. But every week I hear a new thing, so maybe it will catch on. I'm not running a "plot" or an adventure for them either, it's pretty free flowing. So maybe that effects why I am pretty comfortable with this idea. It's certainly not canon, but it's my game. :twisted: