War of Gods [OOC]

[Skari-dono]

As the title suggests, this is the out-of-character discussion thread for our game. Post here any questions and discussions you can think of for your and our enjoyment and interest. Be certain that I will ask several questions myself.
This thread will also host several in-game information, including charactersheets and the following description of the world we'll be playing with:

This is a world of minor fantasy where pagan gods reign in the hearts of Men. The pagan lands are suffering from the attacks of a monotheist kingdom that wishes to purge the lands of the wicked. They are the servants of Lohim, a god that teaches his followers that the pagan gods are corruption that must be purged.
To make things worse, the occasional raids from the wretched darklings that live under the ground have left several villages in ruins. They are the Orcs, a name given to them from the ancient language that mean "filth". They are monsters, being given in to eternal lust and hunger for the human flesh.
You stand between the two. You know the only way to win the war against invasion of the Lohim faith is to unite the pagan kingdoms, dukedoms and baronies. The survival of your gods are in your own hands.

[Skari-dono]

I will be using this post to describe notable NPCs and monsters. I will edit this post as appropriate.

(Sir) Baron Wilhelm Gottheim
[stats will come later]

Ungle Gunther
[stats will come later]

Sir Harold of Ghant
[stats will come later]

[Skari-dono]

Since politics will be playing some role in our game, I decided a little list of the pagan lands and their political relations with each other. I will edit this post when their relationships either improves or turns to the worse.

After the game has started, I will fill in the stuff that is missing.

Gottheim [Lord Xeitbragh; currently at war with Niedrig] (a nation based around plate-age ideals, advanced compared to Reigia, Vana and Banagher)
Niedrig [Lord Erhblut; currently at war with Gottheim] (similar or same as Gottheim's description)
Reigia [Lord Mervik; currently in allience with Vana and at war with Banagher] (a horse-nation similar to Tolkien's Rohan)
Vana [King Heimdal; currently in allience with Reigia and at war with Banagher] (a viking-like nation with broad men and bold women)
Banagher [King Faolan the Wolf; currently at war with Vana and Reigia] (a nation based on legends such as Beowulf and Cuchuláinn)

Lohim forces [unknown leader; at war with everybody! Always!] (Mores in heavy plating, advanced military)

[elgorade]

Name: Fyr

Background: Son of a hardworking farmer. Went off to war in the 'army', more rabble, of Lord X. with his older brother. He served in the shield wall at the Stone Bridge -- known in the histories as the Battle of Garandur -- where his left arm was crippled. Unable to serve further, he was left to fend for himself. He made it back to an area near where he was born and fell into 'working' with his uncle. For a while that fed his need to get the better of the nobility, but ultimately it didn't satisfy him. His uncle realized that poaching and smuggling wasn't the life for Fyr and helped get him accepted at a local temple. After some instruction, Fyr went to a remote mountain shrine of Artol, warrior-priest and hero of Murgath.

Lifepaths: Born Peasant, Foot Soldier, Smuggler, Temple Acolyte, Custodian
Age: 29
Stats: Will 4, Perception 6, Agility 4, Speed 4, Power 4, Forte 4

Attributes: Steel 7, Hesitation 6, Resources 1 Circles 2 Health 4 Mortal Wound 10

Affiliations:
* 1d with devoted followers of the Gods (from Tonsured)
* 1d with foot soldiers and vetrans
Reputations:
* 1d An ordinary person even if he is learn'd
Relationships:
* Baron Wilhelm Gottheim, incompetent (or worse) commander at the Stone Bridge (major, hate)
* Uncle Gunther, mentor who steered Fyr from smuggling into the belief in the Small Gods. (minor, non-immediate family)

Beliefs:
B1. Judge others by their actions not looks for actions are under their control. There are traitors at this meeting disguised as ardent defenders of the realms.
B2. There is no heroism in battle, just endurance. Murgath's gift is the ability to endure and we will need that gift before this fight is done. I will gather a supply of Artol's memory before I leave this valley. (Artol's memory being the local name of a healing herb.)
B3. The people of the land are more important than the nobility and the nobles need to understand that. I will get an apology from Baron Gottheim for how he mislead his troops at the Stone Bridge.

Instincts:
I1. The shield wall is stronger, but the knight gets into the histories. Be conspicuous.
I2. Gather herbs whenever I can
I3. Read people's stresses when meeting them

Traits: Paranoid, Believer, Tonsured, Strange, Missing Limb (crippled arm), Stubborn

Skills: Persuasion 5, Foraging 4, Folklore 4, Mace 4, Doctrine 3, Firebuilding 3, Herbalism 3, Knife 3, Obscure History 3, Observation 3, Read 3, Relic-wise 3, Saint-wise 3, Telltale Signs of Stress-wise 3, Temple-wise 3, Brawling 2, Inconspicuous 2, Soldiering 2, Ugly Truth 2

Gear: Clothes, shoes, traveling gear, ordinary weapons (mace & dirk), reinforced leather breastplate, leather cap, reinforced leather half-sleeves and half-leggings

----
I'm in the process of changing the beliefs and instincts

[DaGreatJL]

This is a rough draft, subject to change as we develop what things better. This goes double for the beliefs I made up.

Concept: Priest/Judge of a vengeful god of law and storms
Lifepaths: Village Born, Acolyte, Village Priest, lead to Soldier, Chaplain, lead to Religious, Inquisitor

Beliefs:-These infidels defile our land with their blasphemy. I will stand in judgement over their leader, and carry out the punishment my god demands.
-The shrine to Artol is a holy and sacrosanct place, and must be protected. I will no allow it to be sulleyed by political battles.

Traits: Tonsured, Vested, Ideologue, Suspicious, Cold-Blooded, Merciless, Psychotic, Righteous, Faithful

Power B4, Forte B4, Speed B3, Agility B4, Perception B4, Will B5

Resources B2, Circles B2, Steel B7, Health B3, Reflexes B3, Faith B5
Age: 38

Skills: Doctorine B3, Oratory B3, Interrogation B3, Suasion B2, Symbology B2, Read B2, Write B2, Bureacracy B2, Ritual B2, Religious History B3, Temple-wise B2, Riding B2, Armor Training, Mounted Combat Training, Axe B3, Torture B2, Heresy-wise B2, Rule of Law B3

Gear: Finery, RotM Arms (Footmans axe and dagger), RotM Chainmail, House (10 rps), Shoes

2D Affiliation as inquisitor and judge of church (free from traits)
2D Reputation as ruthless and bloodthirsty punisher of lawbreakers

Hateful relationship with town leader, a priest in his own right (maybe a venal one?) who wishes to use the coming struggle to gain more political power, and sees the zealot as an obstacle
Haven't thought up any good Instincts yet.

[Owen]

Edward Ill-born

Concept/Bio: Ambitious bastard.

Lifepaths: Born Noble, Bastard, Lead to Professional Soldier, Bannerman, Cavalryman, Herald

Age : 25

Stats: Wi: B5, Pe: B4, Po: B4, Fo: B5, Ag: B5, Sp: B4, Speed Mult.: x3.5

Attributes: Ref: B4, Ste: B7, Hes: 5, Hea: B6, MW: B10, Circles: B2, Resources: B1

PTGS: Su: B3 Li: B6 Mi: B7 Se: B8 Tr: B9 Mo: B10

Beliefs:

Just as the gods above are united against the gods below and their orcish servants, so must we be against this enemy from across the sea. Our old conflicts are irrelevant.

My father is a fool and a knave. I will make him pay for what he did to my mother.

Still working on belief number 3

Instincts:

Always tend to my horse before and after a journey.

Assess before entering conflicts

Always make the necessary offerings and sacrifices to the gods.

Traits: Mark of Privilege, Bastard, Honored, Aggressive, Cool Headed, Disturbingly confident

Skills: Armor Training, Conspicuous B4, Doctrine B3, Etiquette B3, Family Secret-Wise B2, Haggling B2, Heraldry B3, Horse-Wise B2, Mace B3, Mounted Combat Training, Oratory B4, Riding B4, Shield Training, Sword B3

Affiliations: 1D Baron Wilhem's Retinue

Reputations: 1D Defender of the banner

Relationships: His father; Sir Harold of Ghant, a knight in Baron Wilhem's retinue. (Minor, immediate family, hateful/rival), His mother; a disgraced Lady, now a handmaiden in the shrine of her family's local deity. (Minor, immediate family)

Gear: run of the mill arms, clothes, shoes, traveling gear, warhorse, plated leather armor, finery


Weapons:

Bare Fisted I:B2 M:B4 S:B6 Add 2 VA - Fast Shortest

Sword I:B3 M:B7 S:B10 Add 2 VA - Slow Long May Great Strike

Dagger I:B2 M:B5 S:B7 Add 1 VA - Fast Shortest

Mace I:B3 M:B6 S:B9 Add 2 VA 2 Slow Short May Great Strike

[Jim]

Name: Ruger Vandrang

Concept/Bio: Mercenary Captain (Landsknech/Condottiere)

Lifepaths: Born Noble, Page, Squire, Lord, Lead to Professional Soldier, Captain

Age : 34

Stats: Wi: B6, Pe: B4, Po: B3, Fo: B3, Ag: B6, Sp: B5, Speed Mult.: x3.5

Attributes: Ref: B5, Ste: B6, Hes: 1 (4 vs Surprise/Wonderment), Hea: B5, MW: B9, Circles: B3, Resources: B5

PTGS: Su: B2 Li: B4 Mi: B6 Se: B7 Tr: B8 Mo: B9

Beliefs:

My first loyalty is to my troops and followers, that my company may grow and prosper.

No matter what noble cause is given, wars are ultimately fought for money and power. I will profit from this conflict.

Misplaced or not, faith in gods motivates and inspires the pious. I will use their belief to motivate and inspire them to act in my interest.

Instincts:

Intimidate your opponents.

???

???

Traits: Mark of Privilege, Your Lordship, Savvy, Fearless

Skills: Armor Training, Brawling B3, Command B5, Conspicuous B3, Contract-Wise B2, Crossbow B3, Etiquette B2, Field Dressing B2, Haggling B3, Hunting B2, Intimidation B3, Knives B3, Logistics B2, Mounted Combat Training, Oratory B5, Persuasion B3, Polearm B3, Read B2, Riding B3, Shield Training, Strategy B5, Sword B6, Tactics B2, Write B2

Affiliations: 2D The Vertrage (Ruger's Mercenaries), 1D Nobles

Reputations: 1D Blessed in Battle, 2D Captain of the Vertrage

Relationships: Stanger, 2nd in command of the Vertrage (Minor), Aldirce of Ghant (daughter of Harold, half-sister of Edward) (Minor, romantic love)

Gear: Clothing, Shoes, Traveling Gear, Warhorse, Chain/Lamellar Armor, Shield, Superior Quality Sword, Dagger & Polearm.

Property: Large Villa/Small Estate in Niedring

Weapons:

Bare Fisted I:B1 M:B3 S:B4 Add 2 VA - Fast Shortest

Sword I:B3 M:B6 S:B9 Add 2 VA 1 Slow Long May Great Strike

Dagger I:B2 M:B4 S:B6 Add 1 VA 1 Fast Shortest

Polearm (Axe Strike) I:B3 M:B7 S:B10 Add 2 VA 2 Slow Longer Two Handed May Great Strike

Polearm (Thrust) I:B2 M:B5 S:B7 Add 2 VA 1 Fast Longer Two Handed May Great Strike

[elgorade]

Beliefs:
My first loyalty is to my troops and followers, that my company may grow and prosper.

No matter what noble cause is given, wars are ultimately fought for money and power. I will profit from this conflict.

Misplaced or not, faith in gods motivates and inspires the pious. I will use their belief to motivate and inspire them to act in my interest.



I'm not an expert. My first reaction though is that these are good beliefs, but don't drive Ruger to do anything. He'll be just sitting waiting for something to happen and then he can react. Basically, they give the GM some guidence -- something to push against -- but they don't describe goals and actions you will have Ruger take so they still expect that the GM will provide the plot.

[DaGreatJL]

I agree with elograde. What you have are good half-Beliefs. Think about some action Ruger can take, NOW, that will address the larger goals your Beliefs entail.

[DaGreatJL]

Also, have you considered buying a reputation that references your supposed ties to Murgath?

[Jim]

Cool. I wasn't feeling like they were tight enough yet either, but I also don't want to hold up the game for y'all while I hack away at Beliefs so I wanted to get something up.

As far as reputations, yeah, I've thought about it. I'll worry about that when I get to allocating RPs though.

[Skari-dono]

Alrighty, this all looks really cool you guys. I'm gonna finish planning your first gig in this game (I have a rough plan) so you can just take your time to finalize your characters.

[elgorade]

Cool. I wasn't feeling like they were tight enough yet either, but I also don't want to hold up the game for y'all while I hack away at Beliefs so I wanted to get something up.


As a side note, I think Ruger ends up being everything Fyr dislikes about the nobles :) Patronizing and manipulative towards his troops and thinking about war as a way to make his fortune. Which is probably why I reacted to the beliefs; and that's nice.

I added B & I for Fyr. Feel free to comment.

My own comments are:
* I think my beliefs are somewhat weak about involving the other characters. The involvement is indirect. I kind of assumes that will mean that Baron Gottheim is a snooty bastard and there is no way he would ever talk to a crippled peasant on his own.
* I really like my first one, but I could change it if you don't like it Skari. I wanted the first bit in general as a peasant among nobles and a cripple among fighters. I just realized that the second bit was such a nice tie in to the specific situation that I had to suggest it.
* My third instinct sounds weak to me. Basically I want to push towards getting the Manhunter trait using the Telltale signs of stress wise. So I want that to bring it in at the start of scenes. With only a 3 skill, most of his readings will start out pretty boring, but hopefully they can get better over time.

[Skari-dono]

I added B & I for Fyr. Feel free to comment.

My own comments are:
* I think my beliefs are somewhat weak about involving the other characters. The involvement is indirect. I kind of assumes that will mean that Baron Gottheim is a snooty bastard and there is no way he would ever talk to a crippled peasant on his own.
* I really like my first one, but I could change it if you don't like it Skari. I wanted the first bit in general as a peasant among nobles and a cripple among fighters. I just realized that the second bit was such a nice tie in to the specific situation that I had to suggest it.
* My third instinct sounds weak to me. Basically I want to push towards getting the Manhunter trait using the Telltale signs of stress wise. So I want that to bring it in at the start of scenes. With only a 3 skill, most of his readings will start out pretty boring, but hopefully they can get better over time.

Alright, here are my comments for Fyr's Beliefs and Instincts.
Your Beliefs are rather short in a sense of timespan. "There is a traitor in this meeting" is very focused and may not last very long. It depends really, though, on where we start the game, but you may find this traitor fairly quickly. The same goes with B3, speaking with Baron Gottheim is fairly simple, focused and easily done. B2 does this also, but is easily fixed.
What I think is the main problem is that you focus on single persons instead of generalizing your Beliefs. Not saying that you have to, and it's fine if you don't want to, but here are my suggestions:
B1. Judge by actions not looks. There are traitors in this meeting and I will find them.
B2. There is magic all around us; the Gods are remote, but the Small Gods are part of the everyday world. I will convince others of this.
B3. The people of the land are more important than the nobility and the nobles need to understand that. I will work with Edward to convince the nobles of that view.

Your Insticts are alright, I think, except for I1 because I think it fits better as a Belief of a sort than Instinct. Maybe changing it into "give prayers/sacrifices to the Small Gods everyday at dawn/noon/dusk/twilight/whatever" would make it more like an Instinct.

Also, just out of curiousity, how would you describe the use of your Telltale signs of stress-wise? I think it is very clever and that you should definately use it, but I'd like to know exactly what kind of information you think you should be getting out of it.

[Owen]

B3. The people of the land are more important than the nobility and the nobles need to understand that. I will work with Edward to get a chance to talk to Baron Gottheim


Cool, I like this idea. Perhaps Edward was the bannerman in your former unit, both characters have Mace as their appropriate weapons. I don't think the time-lines match up enough to have them serve together, but Edward and Fyr could have a certain esprit de corps.

I think I should have my last belief relate to Fyr. Perhaps something along the lines of "What Fyr knows about the battle of Stone Bridge will help me get the better of my father."

[elgorade]

Telltale signs of stress wise: I slipped that in with a general point. (I like to use those for wises.) I expect it has two uses.

The most common one is probably as a FoRK or help for tense conflicts. "I see you sweating, did I strike a nerve?" "He's looking desperate, press him!" That type of thing.

The other is probably less likely because wises used directly have high obstacles. But with Ob 3 or 4 (almost certainly with higher) I might get at least the indication that someone is tense/stressed in cases where it isn't expected. Depending on the roll and the situation maybe some insight into why they are stressed. Of course, at only 3 dice, that will be unlikely to work at first since 3 successes is just small details -- "Hmm, he looks worried whenever someone mentioned traitors", perhaps or something like that. But it's a start.

[elgorade]

Your Insticts are alright, I think, except for I1 because I think it fits better as a Belief of a sort than Instinct. Maybe changing it into "give prayers/sacrifices to the Small Gods everyday at dawn/noon/dusk/twilight/whatever" would make it more like an Instinct.


Hmm. I was thinking of it as basically a fancy way of phrasing "Always save some food for later". And, perhaps a bit more magical sounding that stuffing food into his pockets.

[elgorade]

Alright, here are my comments for Fyr's Beliefs and Instincts.
Your Beliefs are rather short in a sense of timespan. "There is a traitor in this meeting" is very focused and may not last very long. It depends really, though, on where we start the game, but you may find this traitor fairly quickly. The same goes with B3, speaking with Baron Gottheim is fairly simple, focused and easily done. B2 does this also, but is easily fixed.
What I think is the main problem is that you focus on single persons instead of generalizing your Beliefs. Not saying that you have to, and it's fine if you don't want to, but here are my suggestions:
B1. Judge by actions not looks. There are traitors in this meeting and I will find them.
B2. There is magic all around us; the Gods are remote, but the Small Gods are part of the everyday world. I will convince others of this.
B3. The people of the land are more important than the nobility and the nobles need to understand that. I will work with Edward to convince the nobles of that view.


I was trying to follow some of the guidelines from http://www.burningwheel.org/wiki/index.php?title=Belief_workshop
The overall philosophy is stated and then the immediate actions that is likely to generate.

The reason things are stated "singularly" is that I expect to be able to resolve those goals, get the persona point and move on. To take the last belief as a specific example, if it is written as "convince others" it really doesn't end. It suggests he's trying to spread his beliefs and he'll keep doing it. Phrasing it as "convincing one other" gives a milestone. If he convinces someone, we move on and I work out what's next from the overall idea that the Small Gods are the everyday magic of the world.

My only worry is that if Edward is (in game) too willing to help Fyr, then B3 is too easy. It is essentially already accomplished, so it should be rewritten, probably about getting an apology from Baron Gottheim. Or, if Owen is willing, Edward can be reluctant to work with, talk to, etc. Fyr until something happens to change that. The characters would be a bit antagonistic, but by player agreement. I'm fine either way, and am happy to let Owen choose since I'm putting forward a bit of noble vs peasant struggle and his character is caught in the middle.

[Skari-dono]

The reason things are stated "singularly" is that I expect to be able to resolve those goals, get the persona point and move on. To take the last belief as a specific example, if it is written as "convince others" it really doesn't end. It suggests he's trying to spread his beliefs and he'll keep doing it. Phrasing it as "convincing one other" gives a milestone. If he convinces someone, we move on and I work out what's next from the overall idea that the Small Gods are the everyday magic of the world.

I hate to admit that I have some problem with Beliefs that are solely aimed at gaining Persona artha. I don't know, it just feels wrong. Maybe it's just a poor choice of words, but it looks to me like you are doing exactly that.

On the other hand, I also see your point. Having all the goals open-ended as I suggested is kinda pointless. However, I do think your Beliefs are too simple and too easily achieved. I could of course do a lot of things to complicate things, but I'd get tired of it eventually. I do think you should consider complicating them a little bit, like saying "convince Baron Gottheim" instead of just "talk to." If you just talk to Baron Gottheim, it suggests you don't actually need to convince him of anything, you just need to speak your mind.

Likewise, the other two are too simple in my mind. B1 suggests that you only need to find one traitor, but what about the others that might be hiding? Surely, Fyr would have thought of the chance that there were more than one. And B2: You just need to convince one other? You could just walk up to the next farmer, win in Duel of Wits and call it a day. You might just as well say "I will kill another" and call it a Belief. I wouldn't find it acceptable. Just something for you to consider.

[elgorade]

I changed B3 back to getting the apology I had mentioned before.

If you want me to change B2, I'll change it, but not to "others". If you are worried I will DoW a random farmer for one conversion, I could DoW multiple farmers for "many". The philosophical part of the belief is in the front, the first step towards it is in the back. If you are questioning the step, I'm probably best with changing the philosophy.

I'm not sure about B1. Maybe you are just saying it flows better if read more broadly. If so, ok. Maybe you are saying that to complete the belief I would need to read your mind and find _all_ traitors at the meeting. In that case, I'm not happy with the change.

[Skari-dono]

I see your point with B1. I guess I'll just have to make that traitor really hard to find ;)

Yes, for my suggestion towards B2, you could simply DoW multiple farmers and I would be OK with that since that is much more work than DoW just a single random person. I would also be OK with you convincing a certain group or person since that is still more work than just a single other person.

I'm saying I think your Beliefs need some changing or modifying. If you don't agree, fine, you don't have to do as I tell you. It won't hurt my feeling. If you do agree and are willing to make some minor or major changes, that's good too.

Don't take this personal though, I am going to make comments on any B & I that I think needs it.

[elgorade]

Sorry. I like the comments & suggestions.

I do think you are somewhat wrong about the Small Gods / conversion belief. It isn't about finding random people to convert, it is about getting someone in the story to change a belief. Could be a PC, could be an NPC, couldn't really be someone circled up for the purpose. But that's OK, I'm fine with changing it.

About the traitor(s). If you are planning on making a traitor explicit from the start, then of course finding a traitor is nothing. If everyone else at the meeting thinks all is good, there are no traitors, finding one is a big thing. Maybe better to change the word from "finding" to "exposing" lest there be a fear that Fyr would just sit on the info.

[Skari-dono]

I do think you are somewhat wrong about the Small Gods / conversion belief. It isn't about finding random people to convert, it is about getting someone in the story to change a belief. Could be a PC, could be an NPC, couldn't really be someone circled up for the purpose. But that's OK, I'm fine with changing it.

What I would want then is for you to state your Belief completely as you thought of it, so that when you have achieved your goal there's no question that you did. "Convincing" and "changing Belief" are two seperate things mechanically I think, since you can be convinced without having it stated in your Belief. This is why I thought convincing someone would be too small of a task, because I did not know your intention was to change someone's Belief (which is much more difficult).


About the traitor(s). If you are planning on making a traitor explicit from the start, then of course finding a traitor is nothing. If everyone else at the meeting thinks all is good, there are no traitors, finding one is a big thing. Maybe better to change the word from "finding" to "exposing" lest there be a fear that Fyr would just sit on the info.

I'm not going to lie to you, I did plan for a traitor to become involved very early in the game. That would, in fact, have been on the top of your to-do list once the game got started. Exposing him would work much better than finding him, since that would mean I could make it that much more complex to finish :)

[elgorade]

What I would want then is for you to state your Belief completely as you thought of it, so that when you have achieved your goal there's no question that you did. "Convincing" and "changing Belief" are two seperate things mechanically I think, since you can be convinced without having it stated in your Belief. This is why I thought convincing someone would be too small of a task, because I did not know your intention was to change someone's Belief (which is much more difficult).


We may be a cross purposes because we don't know each other and aren't talking face-to-face. I think changing a belief is a valid DoW stake, so I think a DoW win could get conversion. I also think you can quite validly have someone "walk away" from such a duel if they don't have anything to stake.

That said, perhaps the real issue is that that belief has no counter. Nothing is pushing against it. I was seeing it as a stepping stone for character growth, but if no-one opposes that growth, it is likely boring. So I should rethink the belief.

In the process, I may drop the Small Gods. I like them as a counterpoint to the usual fantasy gods and as maybe a fitting group to join for a crippled peasant fighter turned hermit. I may have to rethink that though, and maybe Fyr becomes a disciple of Murgash. (The more I think about that, the more I like it.)



I'm not going to lie to you, I did plan for a traitor to become involved very early in the game. That would, in fact, have been on the top of your to-do list once the game got started. Exposing him would work much better than finding him, since that would mean I could make it that much more complex to finish :)

No worries. BW is about open communication of such things. It seems we both want there to be a traitor or two. Cool!

One things that might help would be for you to describe a few of the NPCs you will use. What are their beliefs or goals? If you want, I'll burn up Baron Gottheim since he is a relationship of mine, but you might prefer to do that yourself since Fyr will conflict with him soon enough.

[Skari-dono]

One things that might help would be for you to describe a few of the NPCs you will use. What are their beliefs or goals? If you want, I'll burn up Baron Gottheim since he is a relationship of mine, but you might prefer to do that yourself since Fyr will conflict with him soon enough.

I'd like to burn Gottheim myself, but if you will leave open his Beliefs and Instincts that's enough for me to work with.

The main NPCs that I had thought of using would of course be the leaders of the pagan lands, their close family or political associates and maybe few other minor roles. I haven't had as much time this weekend to think much deeper into them between my studies for an exam and personal health, but I'll get to it.

I have done some thinking about an Old Norse-like kingdom that will be attending the meeting. There we have King Heimdal, his two sons, Breki and whats-his-face, his daughter who is of such beauty that even her brothers seek her comfort and passion, and King Heimdal's advicer, Lykil. That's all I've got so far, but when I have given the other countries some thought I will do some thinking about who's who there.

[elgorade]

I'd like to burn Gottheim myself, but if you will leave open his Beliefs and Instincts that's enough for me to work with.

Go ahead, enjoy :)

[Skari-dono]

Alright guys, I've added the IC thread to the forum. You can find it by following the link -

http://burningwheel.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7118

- or you can just look for it on the forum. It's really not hard to find :p

Please, if you haven't finished your character, don't start posting. It's OK if you haven't finished Beliefs or Instincts, since you can fill them in later, but if there's anything you'd like to change (exponents, weapons, any number) I suggest you do that first.

Also, I'm not sure how you prefer your dice rolled. I'm used to do all the rolling myself in a PbP game that I GM, but I think I can trust you completely to do your own rolls and post them with your posts. So either way is fine with me.

Well, since that's out of the way, have fun, enjoy and I hope you like the first post :cool:

[Skari-dono]

Damn it!

I totally forgot about Resources and that cycle it needs to go through to replenish itself. Should we set it at one month?

Also, because I want to have things detailed, any special thoughts on coinage in this world? Of course, I know how the Resources system works, but I would like those merchant guys to be able to say "that'll be 12 gold pieces" instead of saying "that'll be an Ob 3 Resources test." I don't know, I just think the former one sounds better.

As a translation from Ob to coins (and vice versa) I was thinking something like:
Ob 1 = up to 10 coins
Ob 2 = 11-100 coins
Ob 3 = 101-1,000 coins
Ob 4 = 1,001-10,000 coins
Ob 5 = 10,001-100,000 coins
...and so on. On the other hand, I admit I haven't given it really much thought. Any brighter ideas?

[elgorade]

A cycle of a month sounds pretty quick. Not a problem, but quick.

Should we start with a resource roll or wait and roll one after a month of game time?

[Skari-dono]

Let's just wait for one month. I see no reason to roll now.

[Jim]

Ok, I've allocated Skill and Resource Points and updated Ruger's info in Post #7. Still working on the last two instincts, and I may want to narrow the focus of Instinct #1. I'm letting Beliefs stand as they are - if they don't prove out in play I'll change them.

Owen, are you ok with me 'relation-ing' a half-sister for Edward? It draws a connection between Ruger and Edward that I felt was lacking before, and also gives Ruger some reason to want peace and an alliance as opposed to ongoing conflict. But I don't want to screw with your concept or enjoyment of the game, so if you're not OK with that NPC/relationship for any reason, I'll revise it.

I'll work on a fuller bio if it's useful, and can supply some more info on Drang-Berek, Dranglunders, the Vertrage and such as there's need/interest.

Bio in brief: Ruger Vandrang, born Lord of Drang-Berek, which confers a title, some rough property and little else. Raised to the life of a soldier, most of his wealth and renown come from his success as the Captain of the Vertrage, a mercenary company.

[elgorade]

Do you want us to just open up scenes in IC or should we wait for you to set scenes.

Doug

[Skari-dono]

Yeah, just go on ahead and post what you want. Just start with an opening post and I'll start the plot around that.

[elgorade]

Ok, I expect to be busy today, but I'll start up on Sat morning.

I want to start by circling up a local kid who noses around the shrine some times. I would like him to have valley-wise as a skill. I'll use circles and reputation (3d) and will take enmity if offered.

[Skari-dono]

This brings me back to a question I thought I had asked you guys: Would you like me to roll for you or will you be rolling yourself?

[elgorade]

I am OK with either. If I am going to roll them, I will probably use a die roller web site. I have one I like, but I don't have the linke handy here. I'll post it later.

Even if you are doing the roll, I'd like to know the obstacle. In this case it doesn't really matter, but for some rolls knowing it would change what I did with arthe.

BTW, do we start with any arthe?

[Skari-dono]

I am also OK with either, which may complicate things. So, for now at least, roll them yourself using whatever tools you prefer. I'll set the Ob at 2-5 depending on the time (pg. 113 in the brown book). So if you want him now or at your own desposal, I'll set it at Ob 5. Ob 3 if it's just going to be soon, and Ob 2 if you don't care when (someday in the far future).

You all start with 2 Fate, 2 Persona and 1 Deed Arthe.

[Jim]

Cool. Yeah, I'll vote for 'roll yer own' in regards to dice, and also second the request that the OB be stated before rolling in most cases.

I'd be ok with Skari doing all the rolling if there was a preference towards that, but I'm more interested in getting a feel for BW mechanics from the players side of the table than 'winning' right now.

If I get the inclination to cheat, I'll delegate rolling to SD. ;) ;)

I'll also try to get an IC post up on Saturday.

[elgorade]

I am also OK with either, which may complicate things. So, for now at least, roll them yourself using whatever tools you prefer. I'll set the Ob at 2-5 depending on the time (pg. 113 in the brown book). So if you want him now or at your own desposal, I'll set it at Ob 5. Ob 3 if it's just going to be soon, and Ob 2 if you don't care when (someday in the far future).

I'll go for Ob 3. An outside chance of making it, and he'll show up before I'm dead.



14.02.2009, 13:49:41 3d6≥4: (3, 2, 6:≥4) = 1 circles roll for boy, doug


failed. As stated, I'll take enmity if offered.

As a side note, the roller I'm using is
http://www.metstuebchen.de/cgi-bin/DIESERVER/roll.pl
I used 'Fyr' as the code in case you want to check rolls. If more than one of us use that roller, we might want to use a common code (so one that isn't a character name).

[Skari-dono]

The boy did hang around the shrine occasionally, always asking questions about Artol and stuff. But after his parents died in a fire the boy has been much less friendly than before. He even lashed out at you once, blaming you for his parents' death. The occasional times you've seen him since he has stared angrily at you with tears in his eyes. The boy must be really angry and it appears he has decided to direct that anger towards you.

Is that good? We can assume the fire was few weeks ago.

[elgorade]

Fine by me. The mystery aspect -- why does he think Fyr was involved -- doesn't grab me too hard, but maybe it will if more gets exposed in play. :) Looking at Fyr's beliefs though, if the kid is dreaming of glory and resentful of Fyr's more 'practical' view of Murgath, that might be interesting.

[Jim]

So, I just want to 'establish my camp' and then see if I can gain entry into the nobles congress. Not sure if that requires a roll though, or what to roll on if so.

[Skari-dono]

The nobles are well guarded against outsiders, specially since two factions are enemies. Getting near them would mean convincing the guards to let you through. A simple roll would suffice.

I'm thinking about a versus test, your Persuasion versus the guards Intimidation. I think I will give him exponent 3.

[elgorade]

Owen, feel free to assume Fyr is down at the encampment if you want to bring him into a scene. Fyr could recognize Edward (you can narrate it to save the back and forth posts) or the other way around. Since they are PCs, they are automatically "relationships" of each other and can assume the meeting if plausible.

I'm cool with any type of relationship between the two other than close friendship. Edward may be an OK noble and they may have served together, but he's still a noble. :)

[Jim]

Cool. I'll take the test, no FoRKs.

At this point I'm just trying to establish some positioning, so it's not really that important to me that I get in... yet. I'd like that test towards advancing Persuasion though.

As for stakes & consequences here, are we ok with just a simple pass/fail split? So success = talk your way past the guard / failure = you don't, let it ride and find another way to gain audience or a way to lower the guard's OB. (If anyone has a spin on consequences like 'you achieve your intent, but...' or anything, that's cool. I'm just not coming up with any novel ideas here myself, I'm afraid.)

To keep things moving, I'm going to assume the above is true and roll now, and we can back up if I'm assuming too much.

<rattle-rattle> Ha. All traitors. (1, 1, 2) Probably time to try another tack, but I'll wait for the guard's dice.

Oh yeah, I've been meaning to ask this - since play is ongoing rather than by session, how do we want to handle 'refreshing' call-on dice from traits and the like?

[Skari-dono]

The guard rolled 2 successes (4,4,1) so he won't let you in. I'll include a proper respons when I post again IC so you can wait until then to see what other options you have if you like. In short though, the guard won't let you in but will tell you how you can arrange a meeting with the nobles at a later time.

[Jim]

No problem. I've got plenty of things I want to do. :D Difficult Persuasion test marked and I'll await your next post and give the rest of the group a chance to jump in.

Cheers!

[Skari-dono]

No problem. I've got plenty of things I want to do. :D Challenging Persuasion test marked and I'll await your next post and give the rest of the group a chance to jump in.

Cheers!

Actually, that was a Difficult Persuasion test, not Challenging. You had to beat 2 successes so I guess we can count it as an Ob 3 test, but that's still only Difficult and not Challenging.
I'm not sure how you usually deal with versus tests, but I will be counting opponent's successes+1 as the Ob and not the number of dice he rolls (although in this case it's the same). I'm also not sure how you figured it was a Challenging test.

[elgorade]

Brown book, page 47, says that the test ob for a versus test is the number of successes the opponent got (not that +1).

[elgorade]

If you're going to mark the test, shouldn't there be something about it in the IC thread? How did you try to persuade the guard to let you in? What was his reaction; what reason did he give for keeping you out?

Besides, putting up that scene would give me something to hook Fyr into.

[Jim]

Sigh. My bad. Typed challenging, meant difficult. Oddly enough, I actually physically marked difficult, so just chalk it up to cognitive dissonance and chill.

(Now that I think about it, :confused: I know it's just created terminology, but wouldn't it make sense that a task that is, by definition, Difficult would be... uh, more difficult than something that's Challenging, but not, by definition, Difficult?)

I'd personally favor using the RAW rather than the OB+1 thing, but whatever.

elgorade: I'm sure there will be something up about this in IC soon.

[Skari-dono]

Well, the Ob assumes the number of successes you need to succeed (as in Ob 1 you only need 1 success). In a versus test that can become a little confusing because the defender always wins in a tie (unless other means are used to break the tie, such as call-ons). That means that the attacker (you) needs as many successes as the defender (the guard) and one more in addition to win the test. That's how I ended up with successes+1 thing.

But yeah, that may be a bit confusing to follow. We'll just stick to the RAW then. It's much easier anyway :P
It's still a difficult test, though.

[Jim]

Thing is, passing the test and getting to mark the test for advancement are two different things. I guess I get what you're saying - because you loose in a tie, the test is actually .. well, it'd be more difficult OR challenging. Maybe I should say it would be less routine. I can see that.

But it is more complicated than just comparing dice pool to successes, and pushes up the 'effective OB' for Vs. Tests in regards to marking tests. My impression is that routine tests are precious in their own right - Unless you can get some real risk involved and/or there's some interesting consequence of failure, there's no need to test under 'Say Yes or Roll the Dice." so you're vying for position and trying to find something that justifies a test at a low OB...

There's never been any argument from me about whether it's a Challenging or Difficult test. The correct term for a 3 dice vs OB2 or OB3 is 'Difficult'. I apologize for my unintentional misuse of terminology and will edit my previous post to contain the correct term.

Moving on, I don't have enough of an impression of others visions of this camp/meeting yet to feel comfortable 'posing' a lot of stuff into the SIS via IC posts beyond just my character. The medium is too slow to 'play 20 questions' on every scene. I'd envisioned some kind of big council like the 'House of Lords' with the 'heads of state' being the ones who wielded the most influence in the proceedings. But now I'm getting the impression that it's more like '4 kings sitting in a tent, deciding the fate of nations while their retinues wait in the camp below.' Either of those, or something else is fine, but my original request was made mostly to get the scenario/situation to coalesce so we're all 'acting in the same production'. That's all. I don't want to have a big RP with 'Sgt. Guardsman', I just wanted to establish how open the meeting is.

In addition, to provide a detailed play-by-play of this exchange for elgorade creates some dissonance for me between the actions of the characters and their results if Ruger makes a valid argument that fails to convince a nameless guardsman.

So. I'm gonna leave it to someone else to put the next post up on IC. Ruger's 'argument' is something like, "I'm Ruger Vandrang, Lord of Drang-Berek and Captain of the Vertrage. Can you let me pass?" and whoever's posting can quote me on that if they want.

Depending on what the guard says, I may arrange a meeting with one or more of the muckety mucks, and while I'm waiting for that audience, I may start trying to find a woodcarver, which I guess will be a circles roll.

[Skari-dono]

I envisioned the big tent thingy with the lords inside, sitting by a huge round table and debating. I'd say you should go with that.

You don't need much RP, just a little bit to add to your post. Something like: "I'm Ruger Vandrang, Lord of Drang-Berek and Captain of the Vertrage. I wish to speak with the lords." That's the short version which is plenty, I think.

The guard would then either say "piss off" or something tad bit more polite. It won't be really long either.

Not sure how many woodcarvers would be in the camp. I envision the town/village to be few minutes walk from where you are. I would probably count that as local. A woodcarver in that village, would probably be Ob 7+ depending on a timeframe in which you'd like to find him. Instantly would be Ob 10. I will read over the Circle rules again before making a decision on the Ob, just to make sure.

[elgorade]

I can understand the feelilng of not wanting to put every little thing into the IC thread, but to my mind if it is worth a test and a roll, it is worth putting in IC. Otherwise, we might as well all just get series of tests here and ignore IC.

To that end, I don't think all attempts to find people are automatically circles rolls. They could be cases of saying 'yes'. The example I have in mind is if Fyr was to look for a foot soldier, he would most certainly find one and I think w/o a roll. Of course if he wanted one with specific features, maybe that is worth a roll. Or, if Skari had somethng interesting in mind for the failure, maybe it would be a roll. (Actually, I just read Skari's post now and it sounds like maybe circles rolls will be more important. And that likely the world will be mostly pissed off at the PCs. :D )

As for the SIS, I was kind of thinking of a few main leaders -- maybe 6 or so, something fairly managible -- and potentially a few other movers and shakers. It still might be a fair number of people camped on the plains, but a modest enough group when it comes to pushing NPCs.

To link the ideas:
I was hoping to follow on from the IC of Ruger and the guard to have Fyr meet the guard. I assume no circles roll 'cause the guard is obviously right there. Then I want to use that guard to help point me towards where Edward and Baron Gottheim are camped. That may not need a roll either.

[Skari-dono]

Of course, I didn't think of anything but using a Circle test. Still learning, I guess.

What I would use Circle tests for would be on the lines of someone specific (such as a guard that can let you into the tent of nobles for a few pieces of gold or an uncle in a town you are arriving to) or someone out of place (like a woodcarver in a camp of soldiers).

More simpler requests, such as "do I find a farmer in this village?" would probably be dealt with by a clever use of Die of Fate. For this example, there would not be a flat out "NO!" but rather a "you don't find one in the village, but there would probably be one near the cropfields."

Simpler still, like "is there a merchant in this shop?" would be resolved with a simple "yes."

I think I would still let you make a Circle test if the Die of Fate does not roll in your favor.

In case you're wondering; yes, this is me brainstorming about the rules for myself. I tend to think clearer when I'm writing down my thoughts.

[elgorade]

Of course, I didn't think of anything but using a Circle test. Still learning, I guess.


I wasn't saying you were wrong. Sorry if it came out that way.



In case you're wondering; yes, this is me brainstorming about the rules for myself. I tend to think clearer when I'm writing down my thoughts.

To be honest, I'm kind of brainstorming on the thread too.

The thing I'm trying to work through now is how to mix small bits that help show the characters and larger scenes that actually put bigger issues in play.

[Jim]

How about this: I DON'T mark the freaking test, Ruger doesn't talk to the guard, and we can just go from the last IC post.

To clarify, I don't want to speak with the lords. Or at least that wasn't why I wanted to gain entry into the noble's congress. What I wanted was to learn how that meeting is going - where there are tensions, who're the hawks and who're the doves, that kind of thing. If it's just Lord Xeitbargh, Lord Erhblut, and Lord Mervik's stand-in having a round-table discussion in a tent, getting in there won't reveal any of that.

By extension, if the situation is '3 men in a tent', it would be evident, so there's really no point in pursuing entry. But that situation wasn't clear to me when the test was offered, and I thought S-D would elaborate on what the hell was going on when he posted in regards to that test.
But since he's apparently waiting for me to pose before providing the scene, the IC activity is at an impasse.

It's becoming apparent that my take on the SIS is incongruous. These four kings couldn't effectively call all the shots in the feudal hegemony as I've been conceiving it. I wouldn't have thought it would be OB10 to find a person who could carve wood in a primitive village. (Maybe 'woodcarver' is too specific, but what the hell else would you call the guy?) And I wouldn't think it would be so hard to pick your former commander out of a group of 60 men that you'd need directions. (To be fair, I'm not sure if elgorade is trying to find Lord Gottheim or maneuvering to get the PCs acting in the same arena.)

Sorry I'm not playing yr game right, guys. I'm not familiar with PbP, and this is becoming more frustrating than fun for me at this point, so I'm going to back off and watch y'all play for a while.

[elgorade]

How about this: I DON'T mark the freaking test, Ruger doesn't talk to the guard, and we can just go from the last IC post.


Sorry you're frustrated. That was not my intent.



To clarify, I don't want to speak with the lords. Or at least that wasn't why I wanted to gain entry into the noble's congress. What I wanted was to learn how that meeting is going - where there are tensions, who're the hawks and who're the doves, that kind of thing. If it's just Lord Xeitbargh, Lord Erhblut, and Lord Mervik's stand-in having a round-table discussion in a tent, getting in there won't reveal any of that.


At the risk of frustrating you more, I would say that if that was your intent, you didn't need to (shouldn't have) started out with a persuade roll against a guard. I can see some of your frustration, since a series of small rolls like that won't get you what you want. The flip side is they won't get what you want unless Skari reads your mind to figure out what you really want and then breaks out of the series of small task rolls to give the information.



By extension, if the situation is '3 men in a tent', it would be evident, so there's really no point in pursuing entry. But that situation wasn't clear to me when the test was offered, and I thought S-D would elaborate on what the hell was going on when he posted in regards to that test.
But since he's apparently waiting for me to pose before providing the scene, the IC activity is at an impasse.


I was hoping we would get small intro scenes from each character. Something that could place them a bit. Then back to a scene from Skari giving more of the situation. For that, the test against the guard might have been interesting if it told us something about Ruger and/or if it gave us more information about the gathering and the attitude of some people towards mercs.



It's becoming apparent that my take on the SIS is incongruous. These four kings couldn't effectively call all the shots in the feudal hegemony as I've been conceiving it.


But maybe they are the only 4 that came here. Maybe someone needs to point out to them that they are thinking too small. Maybe someone besides on of the kings needs to make a stab at becoming the focal point. Can we get your more complex view tied in with the simpler to manipulate situation at hand?



I wouldn't have thought it would be OB10 to find a person who could carve wood in a primitive village. (Maybe 'woodcarver' is too specific, but what the hell else would you call the guy?) And I wouldn't think it would be so hard to pick your former commander out of a group of 60 men that you'd need directions. (To be fair, I'm not sure if elgorade is trying to find Lord Gottheim or maneuvering to get the PCs acting in the same arena.)


I agree that I don't think finding a woodcarver would be Ob10 in the region as described. I don't think it is a roll at all, just saying 'yes' and moving on. There may be some confusion about whether you want a carpenter or a sculptor.

As for what I'm nattering on about with Fyr, it is two things. First, I guess I think of it more like 120-160 men (mention of 'scores' of men from some of the leaders I think). So with tents and horses, and being a stranger to many of the men, sure I figure directions are nice -- and not mechanically important. The other is, as you said, trying to get the characters hooked together. Not all necessarily formed up in a party, but at least getting people posting in IC and in the same SIS area.



Sorry I'm not playing yr game right, guys. I'm not familiar with PbP, and this is becoming more frustrating than fun for me at this point, so I'm going to back off and watch y'all play for a while.

As Skari and I both said, we're trying to feel our way into how this might work as well.

Can I ask what you would like to see as the next IC post?

[Skari-dono]

Sorry I'm not playing yr game right, guys. I'm not familiar with PbP, and this is becoming more frustrating than fun for me at this point, so I'm going to back off and watch y'all play for a while.

This isn't just mine and elgorade's game, it is yours too. I'm sorry if it doesn't look that way, I blame myself. I have never played BW before, so the rules are a bit tricky for me. That is probably what is the cause of your annoyance, and I am sorry.

I would like to point out, you did ask for a Circle test. I told you what I thought would be the Ob for that test. I also told you that I would look over the Circle rules again before giving a definite Ob to the test (or that's what I meant anyway). I agree that Ob 7+ is perhaps way too up there for a woodcarver which I why I wanted to look the rules over and see if I misunderstood them.

Circle tests are used when you want to 'know' a specific person in an area ("a woodcarver that I saved from certain death by Arham river") while a Die of Fate would be used for just any common woodcarver ("a woodcarver"). You asked for a Circle test which is why I looked up an appropriate Ob for that test. I may have failed in calculating the Ob, adding too many modifiers to it, but I told you what I thought was the correct Ob.

As for establishing the scene, I am at fault here. My usual approach in PbP is to post once with a overlooking description of the closest area (which I did), wait for everyone to bring in a post that describes their character and then start the story with more details. I usually don't expect players to make rolls on their first post. I am at fault for not explaining that.

There are at least five nations that will attend the meeting. I have given a small description of each in the second or third post of this thread. Those are just the ones I have made and more will be added later as the story advances. You are also free to add in more. I envisioned the meeting taking place in a huge tent with a big round table inside. I didn't think there were any military or political structures on the battlefield or even in the valley. There is a town or at least a village nearby, but that's still several minutes worth of walking before getting there (10-20, not that many).

If you need a better description, just ask and I'll try to answer it or let you decide yourself.

I was hoping everyone would post at least once, but it seems I'll add in a post soon. Perhaps today, perhaps this weekend, probably tomorrow.

[Jim]

I didn't mean to derail play here. No anger, just recognizing 'This is frustrating the hell out of me, and there's a good chance it's the medium of play and my lack of familiarity with that medium, and nothing more.' Seems like we already lost a couple players a while back, so I'm sorry if my decision to become a spectator squelched things. Whatever comes of this, I had a blast doing Campaign and Character Burning with y'all.

Cheers

[Skari-dono]

Yeah, it was a blast, but I'm afraid I won't be doing this with just one player.

If someone comes up and wants to join, that's cool. Until then, though, I don't think this game will move anywhere.

[elgorade]

No worries. Thanks for the try.

Doug