Honor+Intrigue is created by Chris Rutkowsky of Basic Action Games.
QuoteHonor+Intrigue is a new, standalone game from Basic Action Games. Inspired as much by Hollywood as by history, Honor + Intrigue pays homage to the swashbucklers of the silver screen as well as great works such as those of Dumas and Sabatini. Game Masters should feel free to use history as a source of inspiration, not a restriction. True to its inspiration, Honor + Intrigue plays fast and cinematic, leaving the focus on drama and action unfolding. (http://www.bashrpg.com/HonorIntrigue.html)
I've been running Honor+Intrigue for over two and a half years now. Our group plays once a week and to date we have played 144 sessions most of those with the same group of characters, though we have had a few changes, additions, and subtractions and a few solo adventures. Recently Spinachcat asked me to start a thread about H+I. If you like the idea he gets the credit. If the writing bores you well we know who to blame for that, don't we?
What drew you to the system? Oddly enough, what drew me to Honor+Intrigue was WEG's Star Wars D6 system. Star Wars D6 is a system that I really enjoy and the WEG materials were excellent for Rebels vs. Empire or fringe characters operating in the shadows without strong loyalty to either side. We've been playing off and on since the mid-1990s. As the Jedi characters have increased in power, the one failing in the system that I found was in lightsaber combat. The system encourages an Armageddon style of combat where each opponent needs to spend Force Points or Dark Side Points from the very first round because if they don't do so and their opponent does, the doubling of both attack chance and damage means that the one not using a Force Point will lose and the damage is not survivable. As a game mechanic one round win or die lacked even the minimal interest of a game of nuclear rock-paper-scissors. As a fun way to play it was even more lacking.
In brainstorming ideas for a more interesting way to duel with someone on another forum I heard about H+I which had a mechanic for yielding advantage. H+I also had styles which was something the prequels added to Jedi lightsaber combat. Yielding advantage to avoid a killing blow or to retreat instead of standing and dying sounded like something that might work for Star Wars.
So I bought the H+I rules and found I liked the dueling styles. At the same time, my co-GM for Star Wars was on GMing hiatus and I was ready for a change from GMing Star Wars. My players were pretty enthused about Musketeers and swashbuckling action so I was able to sell learning a new system based on the payoff of getting to play Musketeers and stuff.
What makes it more interesting to use for swashbuckling versus other RPGs? Honor+Intrigue is based on Barbarians of Lemuria which I had only vaguely heard of and have never played. Based on my experience with H+I I'd imagine BoL would do a good job of simulating Howard's Conan, Burroughs Martian series, or Lin Carter's Thongor.
Here's what I like about H+I combat.- Hit point are essentially static which matches my preference for games like Runequest, Call of Cthulhu, and Star Wars D6 all of which have static hit points.
- The combat system is designed predominantly around dueling and sword combat so it has more options that a combat system that is a bit more generic or even in the way it treats different types of dealing out damage. This allows more options for melee weapons without adding the same level of complexity for brawling or ranged combat. For swashbuckling action this is a plus. (There are adventures that include additional options to supplement brawling or ranged combat, but they aren't part of the core rules. )
- Any character can perform any combat maneuver. To me this is more intuitive and seems more natural that some sort of feat system where certain moves are unavailable to most characters. However characters can master a maneuver to get an advantage when they use that maneuver.
- Different maneuvers use or are defended by different attributes. Therefore Might, Daring, Savvy, and Flair can all be used for different maneuvers in combat. What effect of this is that characters with different stats will naturally prefer to use different maneuvers which gives the strong, brave character a different effective fighting style than the intelligent, charismatic character, etc.
- Characters can master one or more dueling styles which gives them some advantages when using their style and also some color. One thing I really like is that the combination of maneuvers in a given style and the attributes the master possess combine to make nearly every character different in combat while giving no character a guaranteed I WIN button.
- Characters begin play as very competent. The game has 3 levels of characters.
- Heroes are typically just the PCs.
- Villains who provide their main antagonist(s) or opponent(s) and are of the same level as the PCs (or higher).
- Retainers who often provide the Villains lieutenants and who may be a challenge for a single PC, but who will typically not be able to kill a PC though they might be able to defeat one.
- Pawns who form the rank and file of the opposition – think the Cardinal's Guards in most any Musketeer film or the nameless guards in an Errol Flynn movie. One PC can take on several pawns at once and will usually win and will almost never be killed.
As you can see, this replicates the conventions of the typical swashbuckler film or story where the PCs are the protagonists.
I don't want this to be one long monologue. I have a few more questions that I'll add in periodically if interest seems to warrant it, but feel free to ask other questions or to provide answers or input from your own experiences.
So what do you think about Honor+Intrigue
To be continued...
Are there any interesting mechanics for negotiation, social interaction, battles of wits, etc.?
Quote from: rawma;815497Are there any interesting mechanics for negotiation, social interaction, battles of wits, etc.?
Good question. Yes,there are mechanics. Which are basically the same as the mechanics for other actions in the game, and like combat there is enough nuance to make the social combat interesting and for it to include roleplaying choices. So I'd say it's interesting and appropriate for the swashbuckling genre.
QuoteSocial Combat
The Object: In a peaceful social situation, a PC may nevertheless find themselves in a hostile environment, where friends and enemies are indecipherable. A character might engage in "social combat" of insults, retorts, veiled threats, gossip, flattery, etc. Here the "attacker" is trying to bully, trick, or persuade the other party to do something they otherwise wouldn't. Instead of attacking Lifeblood, the attacker tries to make them lose all Composure, whereupon they are defeated. Just like a regular combat, you roll initiative; though in this case the Careers that would be useful for breaking ties are based on the sort of social situation involved. A business deal might utilize the Merchant career, while a fancy dress ball would utilize Courtier, or a scientific debate would utilize Scholar as the most important career.
Mechanically characters start with 3 Composure, so in effect three successful attacks defeats the character. Characters can use actions to attack or to defend themselves. Careers may provide a bonus to the roll as may appropriate role playing.
QuoteThe Attack: When you engage in Social Combat, the GM has you roll Flair, possibly aided by Careers, against one of the opponent's Qualities (usually Daring, Savvy, or Flair). In addition to rolling dice, role-play what you are saying/doing. If it's good, the GM may give a +1 bonus to the roll. If it's fantastic, the GM may give a +2 bonus to the roll. Tip: if you aren't as sharp-tongued as your character, it may be a good idea to have a few clever remarks prepared ahead of time. Books, movies, and TV shows are all good inspiration for this.
Social combat includes maneuvers that can be used in combat. One uses the Repartee maneuver as a Major Action. (Characters get one Major and one Minor action each combat round.) Repartee can be used to trick, intimidate, or taunt an opponent which may provide bonuses to the character or penalties to the opponent. Repartee Attacks and Defense are handled like they are in Social Combat. And like in combat, different attributes or Qualities are useful for defending against the various types of Repartee attacks, i.e. Savvy vs. Trick, Daring vs. Intimidate, and Flair vs. Taunt.
Quote from: Bren;815499Mechanically characters start with 3 Composure, so in effect three successful attacks defeats the character.
How does that defeat manifest itself? Are there specific parameters and results for a given context, is it determined by the GM, or does the victorious player have some authority to compel a particular outcome (e.g., making the defeated opponent comply with some demand, say--to stand aside, turn over some possession, flee in disgrace, etc)?
Quote from: rawma;815505How does that defeat manifest itself? Are there specific parameters and results for a given context, is it determined by the GM, or does the victorious player have some authority to compel a particular outcome (e.g., making the defeated opponent comply with some demand, say--to stand aside, turn over some possession, flee in disgrace, etc)?
All of the above, depending on what is going on. According to the rules the way it manifests may not fully be mechanically specified. Keep in mind that reducing Composure to 0 is the equivalent of reducing Lifeblood (hit points) to 0 in combat. The result should be pretty definitive. In practice it might go like this.
Player has character say threatening sounding thing. Player may say, "I'm trying to intimidate him." In which case the effect of reduction to Composure 0 is often clear from context e.g. I want him to tell me where the gold is hidden or I want him to surrender. If it is not clear contextually I'll ask for clarity.
Also note that Repartee can be used in combat, e.g. Intimidate (or Trick or Taunt) can be used in which case there is a specified mechanical effect of a (-1) penalty to certain actions. So an intimidated character can still attack, but with a penalty. A character who has been Taunted can choose not to attack but has a penalty, etc.
Similarly if the player doesn't specifically say "I'm trying to intimidate him" I may ask, "Are you trying to intimidate him" or I'll just go with the flow and interpret that as an attempt by the character at intimidation. In play it is often really clear what the character is doing.
Alternatively if the player knocks the NPCs Composure all the way to 0, if the result isn't pretty obvious I'll ask the player what success looks like. As long as it fits the NPC and situation we go with that. If it doesn't fit we discuss.
Similarly if the PC's Composure is reduced all the way to 0 I'll typically ask the player how that manifests. This is an area where it may help to agree ahead of time what loss might look like for the PC e.g. "becomes red in the face and inarticulate and stops out of the room in a huff" for the result of Composure reduced to zero in say a salon discussion.
This thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=815562&postcount=1)asked about degrees of success. Which H+I doesn't really have. So I present:
Success, Failure, Mighty Success, and Calamitous Failure
H+I uses a 2d6 roll with this is modified by adding Qualities and Combat Abilities, subtracting the appropriate defense, and adding in any situational modifiers e.g. (-2) for a shot at Long Range. An adjusted or net roll of 9 or better is a success. Natural rolls on the dice of 2 or 12 are special results. If a natural roll of 12 when adjusted a 9 or greater, then that is considered a Might Success which does extra damage or various special effects. If the adjusted roll is a failure, i.e. is < 9, then a natural 12 is an automatic normal success. Similarly if the roll is a natural 2 and if the adjusted roll would have failed, i.e. is < 9, then that is considered a Calamitous Failure. If the adjusted roll is still a 9 or greater then a natural 2 is an automatic failure.
This does mean that the chance for a special result does not scale with the chance for success. Which is a negative, but the tradeoff is speed of calculation since one can clearly see if the dice are a 2 or a 12 without the need to add or subtract to get some degree of success.
Interesting. Wonder how it would compare to Capitan Alatriste?
I don't know Spanish. Is there a version of Capitan Alatriste in English?
From my reading of the novels (I've read all but the last one which isn't translated yet), numbers make a big difference in the world of Alatriste. And Alatriste behaves as if any swordfight could be fatal. All of which makes it feel more gritty/realistic than heroic/swashbuckling. H+I is designed to emulate the sort of heroic swashbuckling antics you see from Errol Flynn in Robin Hood or Captain Blood.
It's not that you can't do gritty with H+I, just that I don't think it is designed with that in mind. One thing would be to eliminate Pawns from H+I. That would make all the NPCs closer to the equal of the PCs and would make the odds matter a lot more and would better emulate a gritty feel.
By go to for a grittier feel and the danger that 2-1 odds gives in Alatriste I'd use my go to system which is some version of a Runequest/BRP/CoC. Those systems seem to be better designed for that gritty, anybody could die feel. Possibly Flashing Blades would also do a good job, though that's just a guess based on a cursory reading of the rules. (I added the social rank system from Flashing Blades as well as the costs and income. But I use H+I for everything else.)
Here is another question.
Are you running Alt-History or more Fantasy History? This is something I discussed with the players before start of play. Honor+Intrigue has a nice section that talks about different flavors of swashbuckling action games (serious vs comedic, fantasy vs historical, high action vs. more gritty, etc). The players indicated they did not want to see regular occurrences of magic or the supernatural. Despite that one of the characters is very religious and also believes in things like devils, witches, and demons.
So far, nothing the players have seen is obviously and undoubtably magical.
- They have seen a spooky black wolf at night with glowing eyes that one or two characters thought was a demon. (It might have been supernatural, but whether it was or wasn't never came up.)
- They have seen a black armored winged figure on a black horse. It was a black armored Winged Hussar who seemed supernatural to one of the characters. (He is not.)
- They rescued a boy from a Loup Garou (werewolf), but when confronted the werewolf turned out to be a crazed man driven mad by grief who dressed in wolfskins and thought he was a wolf.
- They have met Brother Melitus, a monk who appears to have unusal healing abilities. The Jesuit Priest who is also a physican (among many other careers) has stated that the monk has healed things that he could not. The party refers to Brother Melitus as the Miracle Monk and several of the PCs think he performs healing miracles.
So far that is it as far as anything that could be considered supernatural. So the jury is still out on how fantastic the world is. But the next Book in their adventures is entitled Book 7: Tales of Magic and the Macabre, so it is entirely possible that there may be more things on earth...
The game is set in an alternate historical 1620s France. Unless changed by the actions of the PC or by the reactions of the NPCs the broad strokes one can find in the history books or by perusing bibliographies and descriptions on wikipedia are all correct. I use real people as NPCs especially for powerful NPCs and as much as possible I use their actual actions, personalities, and allegiences - at least as much as I can discern as a non-specialist playing games for fun.
I did make one change intentionally in tinkering with the time line to allow the characters to be present at the Siege of Bergen op Zoom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Bergen_op_Zoom_(1622))because I thought a siege would be fun and there were maps and such that allowed a nice description of the siege and events. Rather than chaning history, the characters ended up making the history we do know as they foiled several plots by Spanish agents to destroy the towns powder magazine and to open a gate to the besiegers. The PCs also invented the lyrics to the historical song (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_2auYMS-VM)about the victorious defenders.
The PCs recently saved Cardinal Richelieu from an assassin's poison crossbow bolt. This unsuccessful attempt and the PCs actions inspired the Cardinal to get permission from the King to form a guard. So the Cardinal's Red Guards were formed about a year early in our game timeline and one of the PCs is the Captain-Lieutenant of the guards. One of the other players actually played Richelieu when he interviewed the PC doing a masterful Richelieu. As his wife said, "Honey, you were born to play Richelieu."
So to sum up, what we are playing is very Alt-History but with the actions of the PCs having the potential to alter events and with the potential for actual supernatural events to occur. But such supernatural events should not be something that would be global in scope or that could not be explained away or kept secret from ordinary people.
The question of critical fumbles compared to critical successes came up in another thread. I gave an example of a fatal NPC critical fumble with a brief section of the write-up for one of our play sessions.
Link here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=816063&postcount=20).
jan paparazzi started a thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=816172&postcount=14)on random generators.
Since I am running an alt-history campaign right now I use these three name generators a lot.
French Name Generator (http://nine.frenchboys.net/frenchm.html)- includes male and female names.
Fantasy Name Generator (http://fantasynamegenerators.com/french_names.php)- includes male and female names and you can select the nationality on which to generate the names.
Fantasy City Name Generator (http://www.mithrilandmages.com/utilities/CityNames.php) - allows you to select the country/language on which the city names are based.
I use the City Names generator for village and small towns. I also use it to generate noble titles different from the surname since European titles are often location based and different from the surname.
Here is an example of how I use these. Let's say I want to create an NPC Count. I go to one of the name generators first, I'll select the fantasy name generator which gives me this list of names from which to select or to mix and match.
- Théo Derocles
- Victor Vannier
- Amadou Sardou
- Stéphane Hennequin
- Antoine Jacquemoud
- Nathanaël Girardot
- Christophe Beaudouin
- Porthos Dubost
- Romuald Vidal
- Omer Génin
I like the sound of Victor Vannier for this character. Now I go to the City Name generator and select France for the country. I'll leave the number at the default of 5. That gives me these names.
- Haramont
- Laudancourt
- Mayreville
- Chamelard
- Quintenas
I like the sound of Laudancourt with the other names. Now I put them together. Nobles often have the de in front of their surnames. Not being a French speaker I may check for proper use of articles, but in this case I will just wing it.
And we have the name for our NPC: Victor de Vannier Comte de Laudancourt. I'll write him up as some sort of royal courtier or hanger on. The PCs already have enough enemies so I will set this guy up as neutral or maybe even give him an enemy in common with the PCs so he might be more likely to be favorably disposed. Next I'll get stats and a personality, pick his enemy, decide on a motivation, and select a picture.
Victor de Vannier Comte de Laudancourt: Part 1
In the highly unlikely event that any of my players decide to spend time on a RPG forum...you should stop reading now. You know who you are. :)
Since I didn't have anything specific planned for Victor de Vannier Comte de Laudancourt I decided to use another random generator to help me decide what sort of an NPC he is. We know he is a count or comte. (The title of comte is lower case in French, but I capitalize it to draw attention to his title for we Anglophones.)
To flesh out Victor, I used ÜNE the Universal NPC Emulator by Zach Best. ÜNE is organized like the Mythic Gamemaster Emulator and also uses 1D100. So I rolled on charts 1 and 2 which gives a modifier and a noun describing the NPC. This resulted in a 55 and a 73 which tells me the NPC is an "Elderly Crone." Well Victor is a guy's name and I am envisioning him as someone at court who the male PCs might interact with. So I decide not to use that for Victor, but instead to give victor an important older female relative. I reroll for Victor getting a 15 and a 58 so victor is a "Rational Vagrant." Since Victor is a noble he probably isn't an actual vagrant, but instead he is a remittance man who is dependent on his elderly and cantankerous crone of an aunt for an allowance.
Next I roll for power levels for the aunt and for Victor. Since I don't have a preference I use the middle band of the table and get rolls telling me the aunt is comparable in power to the players – so she must be at least a Retainer 3 – and Victor is much weaker than the PCs. That might mean he is only a Pawn, but I'd like to give him enough capability and staying power so that the players might want to interact with Victor more than once. So I decide he will be a Retainer 1, which makes him somewhat durable, but far outclassed by the PCs.
I decide to learn more about the aunt. So I roll three times on tables 3 and 4 for motivations. These tables provide a verb-noun pair. The three pairs are as follows: 57 94 "defile animals," 35-75 "construct atrocities," 03-98 "affluence old religions." Now according to the instructions for creating NPCs I should have rerolled the 98 since it is from the same column as the previously rolled 94, but I wanted to see what I got and what I got sounds intriguingly unpleasant. It sounds like "cantankerous crone" is a very euphemistic description of Victor's aunt. Now I have a group that I've been considering introducing to add some supernatural elements to the campaign. So I decide his aunt is a pagan witch who uses animal sacrifice and atrocities to power her magic. Since the aunt sounds like an interesting antagonist, so I decide to make her a Hero/Villain level and given the description, she is definitely going to be a Villain. Sounds like I may have identified the head of the Cult of the Horned God or at least a powerful force behind the Cult. Since the Horned God is a male deity and I was envisioning druids or neodruids, the aunt may be the head of a tripartite goddess cult. Clearly she favors the Crone aspect of the goddess.
Next I roll for Victor. This results in 68-04 "process resources," 53-22 "complete the populous" (I think the designer probably meant populace), and 30-20 (20 is in a different column form 24 so no need to bend any rules here) "advance the force." Putting this together with what we know about the rational Victor, I decide he is interested in science, trade, or maybe improving the family lands, maybe adding a mine or lumber mill or introducing aquaculture or draining a marsh to create new farm lands for his people. Also, he is a follower of the new ideas about literacy and learning and so he is interested in educating and economically bettering the populace, especially the common man. Perhaps he is or may become a dedicated supporter of Richelieu or a speaker for the common man – perhaps motivated by rationality and noblesse oblige.
To find Victor's age I roll on the same table as I used for determining power relative to the PCs and find out he is about the same age as the PCs. Most of them are in there twenties, so I decide he will be 26. Thus he is born in 1598 (give or take).
Next will be deciding on Victor's Qualities, Combat Abilities, Careers, any Boons or Flaws, equipment, and a few other background details.
I'll want to figure out the Aunt's name and title too so I can include it in with Victor's background. But I think I will wait a while longer before working up her abilities. I'll need to figure out how the Goddess Cult will fit, decide if her magic is real, and figure out how big a challenge or problem she will be for the PCs. I also want to look and see what other factions she should be part of, connected to, or enemies with. But since the PCs are about to leave palace in the dead of winter to investigate rumors of a vicious and possibly supernatural wolf pack near Soissons, there is plenty of time before the PCs encounter either Victor or his Aunt.
And here is the NPC record for the Comte de Laudancourt. I use this form for all the named NPCs. I can fit two NPCs on one 8.5x11 inch piece of paper and there is plenty of room on the back side of the NPC record to include followers, a longer background, or interactions with the PCs and events in game.
The actual NPC record includes a picture of Laudancourt but I haven't figured out how to include the picture.
Victor de Vannier Comte de Laudancourt
(http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/17/1739/D5J3D00Z/posters/a-portiere-french-gentleman-at-the-court-of-louis-xiii.jpg)
Remittance Noble (SR 12)
Motivation: Education and Rationality are Forces for Good
Location: Royal Court, Paris France
Faction: To be determinedBackground: Victor de Vannier Comte de Laudancourt (b. 1598) is a remittance man and court hanger on. He is entirely dependent on his elderly and cantankerous crone of an aunt for an allowance, which is what he lives on. In addition to being a cantankerous old crone, his aunt is literally an evil witch.
Personality: Laudancourt sees himself as a man of the new century. He is interested in science and learning and he would like to use the knowledge being discovered to improve the lands of his family. (These lands are not yet his; they are controlled by his aunt.) His interest is not just personal; he wants to see learning spread and favors the education and economic improvement of the common man. Primarily he is motivated by a sense of noblesse oblige, but intellectually he sees general education as a good in and of itself. His secondary motivation in life is gambling. He finds the thrill of the gaming tables almost impossible to resist, thus he is an inveterate, though not especially skilled gambler.
Laudancourt is strongly motivated to advance the forces of science, learning, and general education. He will align himself with any force that he sees as advancing those aims. He may become a dedicated supporter of Richelieu or even a speaker for the common man.
Might -1, Savvy 2, Flair 1
Brawl -1, Defense 2
Noble 1, Scholar 0
Lifeblood 8 Composure 3 Advantage 3 Retainer 1
Languages: French (N), +1 Language Slot
Boons: Learned (Use a Bonus Die when recalling a fact from academia), Savant
Flaws: Obsession (Education), Vice (Gambling)
Rapier: 1d6-1 Dmg; +1 Parry
Cloak: No Dmg; +1 Bind, Feint
Wheellock Mazagatto Pistol: 1d6+1 Dmg, 5' Range, Reload: 2 MA, Misfire: 2-3Maneuvers: Bladework+0, Quick Cut+1; Feint+1; Parry+2[+3], Riposte+2; Ranged Attack+2
Author: BREN; NPC in: L'Honneur et les Intrigues (FIC)
This post (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=817271&postcount=31)in the You can only do what the rules allow thread has an example of how H+I treats stunts vs. Pawns.
Quote from: Bren;817273This post (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=817271&postcount=31)in the You can only do what the rules allow thread has an example of how H+I treats stunts vs. Pawns.
That's a really nifty mook system. I like it.
Quote from: Ladybird;817275That's a really nifty mook system. I like it.
Honor+Intrigue has a lot of nice features for swashbuckling action and some good guidelines for resolving the crazy stuff that the PCs attempt.
The rules leave it up to the GM to decide what taken out means for the Pawns. In this situation they are probably physically more or less unharmed, but are unable to continue fighting effectively. In another situation, say a fight on the roof of a 90' high tower, the slippery [strike]floor[/strike] roof tiles stunt would probably kill all the Pawns due to the long fall.
The players have seen two NPC assassins fall to their death in game. The first was an assassin who was working for the Spanish trying to kill Alvise Contarini, the Venetian ambassador. The Spaniards were trying to sabotage diplomatic talks to form a coalition to halt Spanish control of the Valtelline pass. Due to a calamitous failure by the assassin while trying to climb down. He fell off a 2-3 story roof. The damage from the fall was increased when the glass vial of acid he carried on his belt broke and burned him terribly. One of the PCs, Guy de Bourges was nearby.
QuoteGuy quickly ran over to question the fallen assassin, "Who hired you," he asked. All the dying man had time to say was the Left Hand of God. An examination of the dead body showed that the assassin had several extra poisoned crossbow bolts and a glass flask, now broken, that seemed to contain some acid or chemical that had burned him horribly. No doubt it broke in his fall – well not his fall exactly, more the landing really. Perhaps the same acid was used to melt the lock at Philippe Lefevre's shop?
Guy collected the crossbow bolt in the carriage as well as the remaining bolts on the fallen assassin and gave them to his trusty servant Fabre to provide a sample of the poison for the alchemist to analyze and, if fortune is with him, to devise an antidote to the poison before it can claim another victim.
Working on the antidote later became crucial as it allowed the PCs to save the Grey League ambassador when he was shot with a bolt dipped in the same poison.
I don't recall, but I thought I had heard someone talking about translating Alatriste... not sure if anything came of that.
Quote from: RPGPundit;817573I don't recall, but I thought I had heard someone talking about translating Alatriste... not sure if anything came of that.
As far as I can tell...
There were plans back in 2005 or 2006 for a translation, but an official translation never materialized. (According to this Dark Dungeons article (http://www.darkdungeon2.com/2010/10/pick-9-alatriste-as-rpg.html)and this poster (http://rpggeek.com/thread/812951/captain-alatriste-and-supplements-sell-or-trade).)
Now it looks like the company website (http://www.devir.es/producto/alatriste/galeria/index.htm)has moved or is dead. The link in both the Dark Dungeons article and the RPGnet review of the game no longer connect to an activev website.
There may be a fan made translation out on the internet. I'm sad the game seems no longer to be in production and sad that there was no official translation, as I was actually hoping to buy an official translation.
I'm curious what happened to the company and the official game line. Is anyone on this forum linked into the Spanish gaming scene?
The thread on Sports that have featured in your campaigns (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?p=817997&posted=1#post817997)inspired me to include this.
in
Adventure 22.9: Missed TargetThe Brussels Shooting Tournament of Isabella Clara Eugenie Habsburg Archduchess of the Netherlands
The Rules- The Tournament consists of at least three rounds.
- In each round a contestant can shoot up to three times. To pass a round and continue to the next round the contestant must score at least two hits.
- A misfire counts as a missed shot.
- There is no bonus for hitting 3 times in a round, so typically contestants who have scored on their first two shots skip their third shot – though a flamboyant contestant may shoot a third time for the honor or to intimidate his competitors if he hits three times in three.
- The distance for the first round is 75 feet and each subsequent round the distance is increased by 50’.
- The targets in the first three rounds are 3-foot disks (-1 to chance to hit for size).
- If more than one contestant is left after three rounds, each will shoot at clay jugs. Each contestant will have 5 jugs and 5 shots at the same distance of 175’. Highest total wins.
- If there is still a tie after the fourth Jug Round, the range will increase to 225’ and 5 more jugs will be set up. All remaining contestants will continue to shoot at groups of 5 jugs at extreme range until there is a round with a clear winner.
- Scores in the Jug Rounds do not carry over from round to round. The winner of a Jug Round wins the Tournament.
Stats for PCs and NPCs- Guy+4; Range Inc: 70’=50’+10’(Crack Shot)+10’(Aim Shot)
- Gaston Bonus+2; Range Inc: 60’=50’+10’(Aim Shot)
- Gaétan+2; Range Inc: 70’=60’+10’(Aim Shot) Signoret has a rifled musket: base range 60’.
- Toiras+6; Range Inc: 80’=60’+10’(Crack Shot)+10’(Aim Shot) Toiras uses a finely made arquebus that gives him +1 to hit. His first shot will misfire due to sabotage – Can Claude help?
- Don Alvaro+2; Range Inc: 70’=60’+10’(Aim Shot) Don Alvaro uses an arquebus. See Character sheet.
- Curro Garrote the Malagüeño Bonus+3; Range Inc: 70’=50’+10’(Crack)+10(Aim); Garrote uses a military musket.
- Count Hendrik+3; Range Inc: 70’=60’+10’(Aim Shot) The Count uses a finely made and ornate Arquebus giving him +1 to hit.
- Barón van Aaldenberg+3; Range Inc: 70’=60’+10’(Aim Shot). Barón Albert Aaldenberg (SR 10) uses a fancy Arquebus. He will try to sabotage Toiras’ chances.
- Vizconde de Cazador+3; Range Inc: 70’=60’+10’(Aim Shot). Vizconde Jerónimo de Cazador (SR 11) uses a finely crafted ornate Arquebus.
Wagers and Betting- Betting is expected.
- Both audience and competitors can bet.
- If PCs are betting, the odds and payoff for choosing the winner is listed below.
- If their chosen marksman comes in second, they gain ½ the listed return.
- If their chosen marksman comes in third, they break even.
- Bets of up to 100 livres are quite easy to place. Larger bets may require finding a gambler, bookie, or someone like a noble who is willing to play for such high stakes.
- The Gambler Career can improve either the odds or the chance of winning the bet (insider tips, etc.)
- The PCs noticed during their trip from Bevay to Brussels that Giuliano della Torre (SR 8); the Neapolitan officer of cuirassiers commanding your escort is an avid and proficient Gambler. Della Torre is not shooting in the Tournament.
Competitor and Odds- Curro Garrote the Malagüeño (3-2)
- Toiras (3-2)
- Don Alvaro ‘Iron Hand’ (1-1)
- Count Hendrik (1-1)
- Barón van Aaldenberg (1-1)
- Vizconde de Cazador (1-1)
- Others including the PCs (2-1)
In addition to any PCs competing, there are 25 contestants.
- The Vizconde de Cazador was permanently scarred by his malfunctioning gun.
- Guy de Bourges won the contest.
Time to answer another question.
What do you think of the rules for the fantastical elements?By fantastical I assume you mean magic and the supernatural. We haven't used either of those yet, so I can only go by reading, not play testing.
- One thing to keep in mind is that the system is designed for powerful magic users to be (a) evil and (b) NPCs. There are some suggestions for how to adapt if the group wants powerful PC mages, but that is not the focus, which makes sense since swashbuckling stories have the powerful mages as the adversaries not the heroes.
- The magic system and the magical orders are sufficient for a campaign that is not focused on the fantastical or supernatural or as a starting point for a campaign that is focused on the supernatural.
- The occult organizations, spell system and example spells, combined with the alchemy and apothecary sections, and the list of supernatural creatures makes an excellent framework and inspiration for a campaign that does focus on the supernatural.
- It is worth mentioning that the system includes levels of difficulty and examples for making uncommon weapons, fantastical inventions, herbal poultices, and alchemical extracts and derivations. This can be left at the level of real history for things like fine Damascus steel blades, acids, invisible ink, sleeping powders, poisons and antidotes, and healing poultices (tree bark for malaria, cobwebs and certain mosses for wounds, etc.). These are all things characters have faced or created in our campaign.
- A more fantastical campaign could include improved variations like functioning Da Vinci devices, the Philosopher's Stone, Universal Solvents, potions of Invisibility or Immortality, etc.
- The third set of adventures used a real Da Vinci codex which contained diagrams for a type of difference engine as the McGuffin that the players and their opponents all wanted.
- The fantastical creatures are solid though not exceptionally atmospheric. I don't find that a big negative, because I'm tolerably familiar with earth legends which would be easy to adapt or add and the system is intended to provide examples and a framework and expects the GM will tailor the details of the supernatural creatures for the group.
- Since the system is based on Barbarians of Lemuria (BoL) it would be easy to grab creatures or magic from BoL if you wanted a heavily supernatural campaign.
How does it compare to Flashing Blades?
Quote from: Matt;818426How does it compare to Flashing Blades?
I haven't played FB so my comparison is somwhat conjectural, but here are the main differences that occur to me off the top of my head.
Fortune Points (FPs)H+I uses Fortune Points as an in game benny with a FP currency somewhat like what one might see in games like Fate. Characters may gain FPs in play due to certain Flaws occurring or for attempting swashbuckling actions. Spending 1 FP can be used to increase the chance of success before rolling (by adding a bonus die), by adding 1 to the adjusted die roll after the roll, to reduce damage incurred, to activate certain Boons, to remove certain penalty effects (like loss of Composure). Also FPs can be used to grant the player some limited narrative control e.g. to include something in a scene like a wagon full of hay or an awning beneath a window to reduce the effects of attempted defenestration, autodeclare that the character has successfully hidden, to avoid damage from a trap that the character didn't detect, to turn a hit by a black powder weapon into a near miss, and by expending multiple FPs - to be the lone survivor of a shipwreck or to survive a killing blow.
The Supernatural]Unlike FB, H+I includes rules for supernatural monsters, magic, anachronistic or beyond real world science inventions, healing potions, and wonderous alchemical creations.
Social Rank (SR)SR is an integral part of FB and of character advancement and reward in the game. In H+I any form of social rank is either a function of free choice of careers (the players chooses to have their PC have the Noble or Aristocrat career) or a function of the Boon system: Membership of an Order can be used to have your PC knighted and Family Legacy or Friends in High Places simulate family connections to the powerful.
I like the Social Rank system so I added system from FB to my game.
WealthTracking income, expenditures, tithes, and taxes in actual money of account like livres is an integral part of FB. H+I uses an abstract wealth level system and does not even include prices for equipment. Abstract wealth systems don't really click for me so I added in the income rules and price list from FB. I modified the equipment lists to add additional items from other games in the period like At Rapier's Point and then tinkered with the prices based on some real world original source material for prices in the English Civil War and such. This is more a personal preference as my players are less concerned with tracking wealth exactly and we haven't actually used the year end tax and tithing rules from H+I.
SummaryObviously one can tinker with either system to emphasize or alter the game. I am dealing with what is in or not in the main rules of each system. In summary here's what I think drives the main differences.
Overall H+I is product of the last 15-20 years of game design. It includes in game bennies and is designed to emulate the feel of swashbuckling films of Errol Flynn and even the 2011 Musketeers movie where one hero can perform feats of derring do like routinely defeating 4 Cardinal's Guards. Ordinary Guards in H+I are Pawns and they operate using a type of mook rules.
FB is clearly the product of the first 10 years of game design with a grittier, more historical feel. It is designed to emulate the feel of swashbuckling novels like Dumas where 5 Cardinal's Guards are a credible threat to 3 Heroes to the point that the intervention of one brave Gascon youth to even the odds to 4 to 5 is significant.
Here's the answer to another couple of questions.
How is H+I related to BASH?
H+I is based on Barbarians of Lemuria. Chris Rutowsky is the designer of both BASH and H+I.
What keeps players engaged in with the system, or is it about the setting?
I've been running H+I weekly since July of 2012 which is well over 100 sessions.
When we started play, H+I was a significant change for the players from what we had been playing (WEG Star Wars D6 and Call of Cthulhu). One of the players gets particularly anxious about new systems. To help get people used to the system I did several things.
I ran some practice duels so players could get used to the system.
Initial opponents were mostly Pawns and one retainer which gave the PCs a big edge.
If there was a duel that didn't involve a player, I had the player run the NPC. This gave the player extra practice and allowed the player to understand the limitations of Pawns and Retainers so they could get a more robust intuition about relative threat levels.
We openly calculated the modifiers for both attackers and defenders so players had knowledge of relative chances to succeed.
One thing that came out of this was a realization that the players enjoy occasionally running NPCs. It allows them to experience different capabilities and try new maneuvers. Usually they ran NPCs in combat. Sometimes they ran NPCs in non-combat situations. I had one player run Cardinal Richelieu in an important scene. He really enjoyed that, as did everyone else at the table, and he did a great job as Richelieu.
We've had six players in the game. I'll use their character names.
Guy –Enjoys history and the Ancien Regime of France campaign setting and Dumas style of play are one of this players favorite time periods and settings. This player likes the fact that system allows Guy's style of combat to fit his personality and to be different than that of the skilled duelist characters. Guy is extremely adept at and enjoys playing different characters. Part of the appeal is playing a character from a different setting from that of other RPGs.
Lucien – Enjoys Musketeer movies. This player liked that the H+I system allowed their King's Musketeer to take on multiple Pawns in combat and win. I think the moral grittiness of the historical setting was a turnoff for this player who would have preferred that all the King's Musketeers (PC and NPC) would be white hats with their foes clearly black hats. Whereas I ran the King's Musketeers like those in Dumas which means some of them are really not that nice of a person from a 21st Century US standpoint. This was a factor in Lucien mostly dropping out after the playing the first year. Lucien has only played 3 sessions in the past 21 months.
Gaston – Enjoys the setting and the system, especially the dueling aspects and the historical setting in all the myriad details. Both are equally engaging for Gaston.
Signoret – Enjoys the system and some aspects of the setting – particularly the ability to play a combative Jesuit, but is not deeply immersed in the period in general and finds the French names hard to remember or pronounce.
Norbert – Is new to roleplaying and the spouse of a long time player. Norbert is not interested in system and has a difficult time recalling the details of combat and character attributes, but likes the foreign language names and such (which are mostly French, but also Dutch, Spanish, and German). Norbert seems to enjoy exploring the period. Probably the biggest draws for Norbert are socializing with spouse and friends and the playing of the character. Norbert is the player most likely to come up with an unusual idea. Some of the ideas are good, some are WFT wacky. A few are both. Norbert also likes including humor in the game and is most likely to invent humorous behavior for their character.
Cecile - Was a house guest who was staying with us for 2-3 weeks. She played a few sessions but there was no expectation that this would be a long term commitment.
In summary, most of my players are not system wonks. Mostly they want the system to stay out of the way of their imagination. Some of the players do enjoy the options of the dueling system in H+I. I think it is particularly well thought out to provide variety and a certain rock-paper-scissors set of choices so there is never one or two moves that a player can just use over and over. Depending on the opponent there will be different optimal moves.
Most of my players like history in general or the period in particular so the setting is a plus. The one player who had an expectation clash with the setting found the setting detracted from enjoyment. Which is sad, but pretty much what I would expect to occur whenever a good, strong setting is featured.
Previously I described the creation of a new character (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=816238&postcount=12)based on a random NPC generation system.
I posted the resulting character here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=816650&postcount=13) and said that I would complete the aunt (now a great-aunt) later.
If you are playing in my Honor+Intrigue campaign don't look beneath the spoiler.
Spoiler
Angéle de la Babin Comtesse de Ceyroux
I found a picture over at photo bucket that should do for the Comtesse.
(http://i1111.photobucket.com/albums/h476/starry1night/croneLG.jpg)
Very Old Noble & Witch (SR 12)
Motivation: Recall the old pagan gods
Location: Paris, France
Faction: Sisters of Hecate
Personality: A cantankerous old crone, she is a quintessential bossy and opinionated great-aunt, beneath that unpleasant exterior she is a power mad, insane, cruel, evil, witch. She likes to pinch ears and cheecks.
From the NPC random generation: 57 94 defile animals, 35-75 construct atrocities, 03-98 affiliateion old religions – she is a pagan witch who uses animal sacrifice and atrocities to power her magic and to strengthen the Old Gods and the Old Ways.
Background: Angéle de la Babin Comtesse de Ceyroux is the leader of the Sisters of Hecate, a pagan sisterhood who worhips the Triple Godess, whose three aspects are maiden, mother, and crone or Kore, Persephone, and Hecate. She is the chief priestess of Hecate and by virtue of that she is the senior witch and leader of the Cult of the Triple Goddess. Through the female line, the Comtesse de Ceyroux traces her bloodline back to the ancient Celtic tribe of the Parisi. As the chief priestess of Hecate she may be manipulating the actions of the Cult of the Horned God.
She is the great aunt, on his mother's side, of Victor de Vannier Comte de Laudancourt (b. 1598). She controls the family lands and funds and her great-nephew is a remittance man and court hanger on. He is entirely dependent on his aunt Angéle. She is an elderly and cantankerous crone of an aunt and is literally an evil witch.
Might -1, Savvy 2, Flair 2
Melee 1, Defense 3
Noble 1, Apothecary 3, Witch 4, Arcane Power 14
Lifeblood 9, Composure 3, Advantage 3, Fortune 5
Languages: French (N), Ancient Parisii (F), Latin (F)
Boons: Black Magic, Great Wealth, Head of a Cult
Flaws: Delusions of Grandeur (chosen by Hecate), Zealot (Triple Goddess)
Dagger: 1d3 Dmg; +1 Called shot
Cloak: No Dmg; +1 Bind, Feint
Maneuvers: Bladework+1, Dirty Fighting+2, Quick Cut+3; Feint+3, Footwork+3; Dodge, Parry+3, Riposte+3; Ranged Attack+2
Equipment: Noble clothing, fancy jewelry, consecrated silver athame
GM Note: the name Angéle de la Babin comes from a woman ca. 1230–1275 who was found guilty of sexual relations with the devil and burned to death.
Next I went through the list of example spells in H+I and selected ones that seemed interesting and appropriate then decided the casting requirements and calculated the resulting Arcane Point cost. The last two spells are cataclysmic, but I'd only expect to see those spells appear as the end result or dramatic climax of a series of prior adventures.
Cantrips and Spells
Cantrips: [0th 1AP] These are very basic spells allowing the caster to conjure a brief pool of light, the distant sound of laughter, or a spark to light a fire. Cantrips can be used to repair a common object, sour a jug of ale, or make the brief illusion of a common object. Other examples might include making a coin vanish, causing a rope to slither up a castle wall, or distracting a guard with an imagined sound. Such spells rarely cost more than 1 Arcane Power and only require a Task Roll when directly affecting a sentient target or perhaps if the Sorcerer has been deprived of his focus (when the Arcane Power cost would be higher too).
Compel: [1st 4AP] ( Requirements: LOS. Sorcerer can bend the target of this spell to his will. The victim will be compelled to do the Sorcerer's bidding; provided the Sorcerer's instructions are within the bounds of what the target would be likely to do if not under control (i.e. he is unlikely to attack his friends). The target's Savvy is always used to modify the difficulty.
Consort with Demons: [1st 2AP] Requirements: Casting Time: 1d6 x 30 minutes; may only be cast at night when the moon is up; caster must gesture, chant, and dance. The Sorcerer may seek guidance from the very forces of Hell. If the spell is successful, a demon will speak to the caster, giving advice and directions to help the caster achieve his goals, perhaps even revealing visions of the future, or making revelations that the caster could not otherwise discover. This spell is usually automatic when used by NPC villains because it serves as a plot device, allowing the villain to become aware of certain Maguffins or characters, and thus put the plot into motion. It makes it also possible for the villain to know things the PCs thought were secret.
Conjure Item: [1st 3AP] Requirements: Casting Time: 1d6 x 30 minutes; Obvious Technique chanting and gestures. This spell enables the Sorcerer to conjure a small ordinary item—length of rope, a tool or a weapon, clothing, or a flask of wine or water.
Evil Eye: [1st 3AP] Requirements: LOS; Special Focus: Consecrated Athame. The Sorcerer can cause the target to suffer a curse that affects his ability to perform any normal actions. It effectively gives the target a Penalty Die on all actions whilst affected by the curse. The target's Flair is always used to modify the difficulty.
Summon Beast: [1st 2AP] Requirements: Obvious chanting and gestures; Special Focus: Consecrated Athame, Wound 1d3 Lifeblood. The Sorcerer can summon a monster, which will have a slightly demonic appearance. The beast will be one of up to very large size, such as a Night-Mare. Once it appears, it will normally do the summoner's bidding until it has completed the task required of it.
• This spell usually has the casting time requirement
Beguile: [2nd 6AP] Requirements: Casting Time: 2d6 hours; Rare Ingredients including personal item of victim, 1d6 weeks; Wound 1d6+1 Lifeblood; proper Phase of the Moon. This spell is used by the Sorcerer to put the victim completely and utterly in the power of the caster. The victim will obey the caster's every command without question and is helpless to do anything else, unless they can break free.
• The target's Savvy is always used to modify the difficulty. The target can spend a Fortune Point to attempt to break free of the power, rolling Savvy +2d6 modified by the caster's rank in Sorcerer
Summon Mighty Beast: [2nd 7AP] Requirements: Casting Time: 2d6 hours; Pentagram; Ritual Sacrifice of an intact male beast like a bull, stallion, or ram. The Sorcerer can summon a hideous demonic monster. The beast will be one of up to colossal size and, once it appears, will normally do the summoner's bidding until it has completed the task required of it.
Death Plague: [3rd 12AP] Requirements: Destroy Special Focus (magic item); Pentagram; ritual maiming and scarification of caster costing 2d6+1 Lifeblood; may only be cast during the dark of the moon. This spell brings a plague to a named city that kills about 25% of the inhabitants in a week and affects up to about 50% of the city, making them weak and violently ill during that period.
Natural Disaster: [3rd 12AP] Requirements: Can only be cast in a Place of Power; Pentagram; Ritual Sacrifice of an innocent human; Demonic Transformation: Casting the spell will permanently transform the caster into some horrible demonic form with an even more clichéd maniacal laugh. (This effect is not known to the caster.) This spell causes nature to become incredibly violent, summoning earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, deadly blizzards, hurricanes, tidal waves, or even fire from the sky. The disaster will be severe enough to cause tremendous casualties (25-50%) and destroy most of the property in a major city. It can also be used to sink a fleet of ships or bury an army in snow (in the middle of summer).
Author: Bren; NPC in: L'Honneur et les Intrigues (FIC)
This thread was responsible for my ordering a copy of H+I (via Noble Knight), which was just delivered a handful of minutes ago. :)
The detailed posts, and passion, definitely were responsible. I'm looking forward to digging into it.
Quote from: Molotov;820739This thread was responsible for my ordering a copy of H+I (via Noble Knight), which was just delivered a handful of minutes ago. :)
The detailed posts, and passion, definitely were responsible. I'm looking forward to digging into it.
:cool:
I've been enjoying the heck out of the game.
I've found the rules contain quite a bit of thought and depth. And the dueling system is quite good. The only downside to the way the rules are written is that they could use more examples. But that's true of most RPGs. One other nit pick is that the rules should make it more clear what to do with fractions, i.e. which should apply: normal rounding, always round up, or always round down?
Recently Shipyard Locked asked me a couple of questions about H+I. I thought others might also be interested so I asked if I could post the answer and Shipyard Locked graciously said yes. For ease of reference, I'll put each question as a separate post. So here are the Qs and the As.
Quote from: Shipyard LockedYour writing on H+I has piqued my interest. I'm always looking for a way to fix 7th Sea. Is H+I still working out for you? How well do you think it could handle 7th Sea?
Hi Shipyard Locked,
I haven't played 7th Sea, but from various threads and things I've read, I think H+I would work pretty well for 7th Sea. I looked at the dueling styles in both 7th Sea and in H+I and I greatly prefer the way H+I does dueling and combat. In addition, some of the conversion work is already done.
This is a link (https://el-vagos-7th-sea-campaign-converted-to-honor-intrigue.obsidianportal.com/wikis/main-page) to a guy's page who did conversions from 7th Sea to Honor+Intrigue.
Also here is what the rules say about playing sorcerers.
Quote from: "I Want to Play a Sorcerer"Sorcerers as described here are not meant to be played by heroic player characters. They are meant to be among the most heinous of NPC villains. Sorcery is "Black Magic" whereas the heroes should be expected to use "White Magic" from the Magician or Alchemist Careers, which were designed to emulate 17th Century scholarly magical traditions. However if the GM wants to make "non-evil" sorcery available in the game, it's certainly possible, but requires some modification.
First, the back-story of where these powers come from will need to be altered. Heroic characters will not be the sort that gain their powers from demonic forces. Maybe it is a hereditary ability passed down through the bloodline, or gained by the possession of some special artifact. The GM may also limit the sorcery in other ways, such as having all the characters' spells follow some theme (such as light, earth, fire, wind, water, nature, etc).
Second, Healing with Arcane Power should be impossible for heroic Sorcerers—their type of magic simply doesn't lend itself to that ability. The ability to "play God" and reverse mortal injuries is unnatural, and would be a tell-tale sign that a Sorcerer is of the demonic variety. Repairing objects may be possible, however.
Next, the player should be warned to be extremely careful in using sorcery. 17th Century people are unlikely to distinguish between varieties of sorcery. If a hero is seen blasting a rampaging monster with a bolt of lightning from his hand, the crowd would not be grateful to the hero... they'd be terrified, and likely turn him into the witch hunters! In addition, if "good" Sorcerers exist, they will of course be targeted by practitioners of the Dark Arts for corruption or death.
Quote from: Bren;815962I don't know Spanish. Is there a version of Capitan Alatriste in English?
From my reading of the novels (I've read all but the last one which isn't translated yet), numbers make a big difference in the world of Alatriste. And Alatriste behaves as if any swordfight could be fatal. All of which makes it feel more gritty/realistic than heroic/swashbuckling. H+I is designed to emulate the sort of heroic swashbuckling antics you see from Errol Flynn in Robin Hood or Captain Blood.
It's not that you can't do gritty with H+I, just that I don't think it is designed with that in mind. One thing would be to eliminate Pawns from H+I. That would make all the NPCs closer to the equal of the PCs and would make the odds matter a lot more and would better emulate a gritty feel.
By go to for a grittier feel and the danger that 2-1 odds gives in Alatriste I'd use my go to system which is some version of a Runequest/BRP/CoC. Those systems seem to be better designed for that gritty, anybody could die feel. Possibly Flashing Blades would also do a good job, though that's just a guess based on a cursory reading of the rules. (I added the social rank system from Flashing Blades as well as the costs and income. But I use H+I for everything else.)
I agree that, even eliminating pawns rules (wich I used just for a couple of sessions, not really my cup of tea), the combat isn't gritty at all.
Some other casual considerations:
1) I find it handles supernatural quite well (at least of the eldritch variety). I really love the npc sorcery system, and the core engine of the game is light and flexible enough to be able to improvvise rules on the filight if things get really wierd (wich in my campaign did when my players started to use a really and incredibly powerful artifact linked with an ancient god)
2) I didn't care for the social conflict rules (at least out of combat, during a fight it's occasionaly quite funny). I found it needlessly involved and distracting.
3) I dumped the (even if it's simple end elegant) abstract wealth system when I realized my player likes to hoard and count every penny regardless of the genre or circumstances.
4) In my experience the combat feel quite fun, fast swashbuckly and even a little tactical, although the fact manouvers are linked to different attributes
made the characters often repeat the optimal patterns.
5) The rules for alchemy and invention are simple, functional.
6) I relly love the bol career system in character creation. The first character was created on the rear of two guinness coaster in a pub, whitout a manual, in 15 minutes. 15 minutes including the developping of the simple backstory that the careers (and admitedly the song "Am I evil") suggested. Said simple backstory gave me enough plot hooks to set the tones and propel almost half the campaign. I must admit that, in actual play, as a resolution system the career system was a little to fuzzy for the taste of my players.
Korgul,
Good post and very good points, most of which I agree with wholeheartedly.
Quote from: Korgul;8288062) I didn't care for the social conflict rules (at least out of combat, during a fight it's occasionaly quite funny). I found it needlessly involved and distracting.
Social conflict feels a little awkward sometimes. It certainly requires practice for players and GM if they aren't used to that sort of system. One of my players is really good at using the system. It part that is because she is just that good, but in large part I think it is because she likes and is used to the point-counterpoint of debate and she likes the British style of debating which I'd say the social conflict in H+I fits well with. I find I am better able to GM the conflict when she is running the PC involved.
What I find works pretty well for all of us is to have a brief OOC conversation to set up the object of the conversational conflict (if it is unclear) and maybe set some stakes (if they are unclear). One thing I find players sometimes struggle with is losing composure in a social conflict. They often don't want their character to lose and so setting a stake ahead of time by at least considering - "so if you character loses the argument and is humiliated, what would that look like?" can help.
Quote3) I dumped the (even if it's simple end elegant) abstract wealth system when I realized my player likes to hoard and count every penny regardless of the genre or circumstances.
My experience was similar. I'll say more about that in another Q&A post.
Quote4) In my experience the combat feel quite fun, fast swashbuckly and even a little tactical, although the fact manouvers are linked to different attributes made the characters often repeat the optimal patterns.
There are optimal patterns, but they aren't simply character specific they are character-and-opponent specific. The tactics that a PC may use against the agile and tricky Aramis may be very different when the PC faces the mighty Porthos...or often they should be. Players that ignore their opponent's strengths and weaknesses are often badly surprised when their favorite combination doesn't work and they get beaten by the NPC.
EDIT: What sorts of duelists have you seen in play? What move combinations have they favored?
Here's another question.
Quote from: Shipyard LockedOh, another question: After this much time, what key system weaknesses have you noticed and what have you house-ruled, if anything?
There are only three things I've house ruled. I suppose one could call those system weaknesses, but I think it would be fairer to call them system preferences. Here's what I've house ruled.
1) Removed Abstract WealthFor the most part I'm not fond of abstract wealth. Abstract wealth would make more sense if the game didn't really focus on wealth in any tangible way. Settings like Star Trek, Star Wars (for some characters), and Call of Cthulhu are ones where abstract wealth makes more sense to me. Supers would be another good example.
An episodic swashbuckling or swords and sorcery campaign might use abstract wealth. In Conan stories, wealth is a McGuffin that serves as a story hook or motivator, but it typically has no long term effect on Conan. By the next adventure the pouch full of jewels has turned into a good horse, a mail shirt, and a find steel blade. The rest of his wealth has been squandered and this adventure hook is the dozen riders who are chasing Conan, not a new quest for wealth...or maybe it is a new quest for wealth . The hook is frequently pretty irrelevant to the story that unfolds.
Treating wealth that way is not what I started with in gaming. In H+I, the players seemed to want to acquire wealth (or at least they picked up whatever they found of value) so as a GM I found that I needed to first figure out what something of value (say a horse or half a dozen match lock muskets) was equivalent to in Wealth Levels and then I had to tell the players that. It is easier for me to know that one match lock costs 18 livre so a half dozen will be 108 livre. And selling guns as plunder probably gets you1/4 to 1/2 of the price.
Also, I like knowing that horses come with different ratings that affect the price and quality of the mount.
- Poor (½)
- Average or Fair (x1)
- Good (x2)
- Excellent (x3)
- Superb (x5)
To get away from abstract wealth levels, I started out with the price lists from Flashing Blades then modified and added to those based on some other games and pricing from original period sources.
2)Added Social Ranks, Positions, Favors and Influence.I basically imported the systems from Flashing Blades including modifications made and posted by Black Vulmea on his site (https://le-ballet-de-l-acier.obsidianportal.com/). I wanted to get some of the period feel of the early modern social hierarchy and the quest for improving social station and position that is seen in both historical and literary 17th century Paris. This also provided different axes of power and improvement for characters. So power is not simply how good one is with a blade or gun or how much wealth one controls, but also where one is in the hierarchy, who one knows, who ones master is, and who owes you favors (and to whom do you owe favors).
3) Framing CombatThis one is new. I recently moved to a more flexible system of Initiative that avoids switching from character to character each round based on initiative. Instead I stick with one character for one or more rounds until there is either a resolution or a cliff hanger where it makes sense to switch points of view.
From the first, switching between characters based on initiative as H+I describes worked well for keeping the players engaged. However it had one problem. Several players complained that their recollection of the fight was very stochastic or stroboscopic and they couldn't follow the flow of the combat. To resolve that we ended up going back after a short fight or at stages in a longer fight and describing the flow of combat. This was a bit cumbersome, but it worked.
However, as the players increased in power they mastered actions. Mastering some actions, like Parry or Riposte gives the master an additional free action. Heroes and Villains in H+I get two actions each round: one major action (often an attack) and one minor action (like a feint or a reaction like a parry). However very experienced characters who have mastered maneuvers get more actions. So a deadly duelist like our hero, Captain-Lieutenant Gaston Thibeault fighting the villainous sword master, César de Mala Cassanha, might look like this.
Round 1- Gaston gets the initiative, he attacks with Bladework (his major action).
- Cassanha parries (free action), then ripostes (free action).
- The riposte would have barely succeeded, but Gaston dodges (his free action), then ripostes (free action).
- Cassanha parries (his minor action).
- Cassanha now acts. He lunges (his major action).
- Gaston parries (his minor action) which ends the round.
WHEW! Okay, now on to round 2 which might look similar.
As you can imagine if you are playing Guy de Bourges, you might forget what happened in your last combat after listening to the long exchange between Gaston and Cassanha. Now this sort of very long round only happens when the PC has mastered multiple maneuvers and the opponent is a Villain who has also mastered multiple maneuvers. Which is not the usual encounter in H+I, but such encounters have happened more than a few times over the years we have played.
So currently what I am doing is to combine several rounds to provide a clear sense of flow for each character and to hopefully run combat long enough to reach either a conclusion or a minor cliff hanger. What I get ends up being a bit more narrative and looking a bit like the way Framing (http://tripleacegames.com/Downloads/allforone/TAG201128F.pdf)works in Regime Diabolique.
4) Character Power (This is possible "weakness," but not one we have yet encountered.)
One area where system weakness can occur is if characters become too powerful. The game relies on roll 2d6+Quality+(Combat Ability or Career) – (Opposing Quality/Ability/Career) with 9+ being a success. A natural 12 on 2d6 is an automatic success and if the adjusted roll was also high enough to succeed, it is also a Mighty Success (i.e. a critical). A natural 2 on 2d6 is an automatic failure and if the adjusted roll is a failure, then it is a Calamitous Failure (i.e. a fumble). As characters increase in ability they can, especially if they narrowly focus, reach a point where their bonus is so high that they can't really fail a roll except on a 2. That makes contests a bit dull since the PC essentially always succeeds and never gets a Calamitous Failure.
The good news is the rules include an optional to use 2d10 instead of 2d6. This extends the range which would allow for characters with higher bonuses without them being automatically successful.
Even though some of our PCs have been in play for 3 years now which is over 150 sessions and over 200 advancement points we haven't yet needed that rule. So far, all the players have chosen not to narrowly specialize or have switched to alternate PCs so none of the PCs have reached a level of ability where they have automatic success no matter what.
Interesting. Thanks for all your effort in writing this up. I wonder if there have been any rumours about updating H+I to the new Mythic rules? Probably not and probably easy to do on the fly, but I thought I'd ask in case it's just over the horizon.
Quote from: Bren3) Framing Combat
This one is new. I recently moved to a more flexible system of Initiative that avoids switching from character to character each round based on initiative. Instead I stick with one character for one or more rounds until there is either a resolution or a cliff hanger where it makes sense to switch points of view.
From the first, switching between characters based on initiative as H+I describes worked well for keeping the players engaged. However it had one problem. Several players complained that their recollection of the fight was very stochastic or stroboscopic and they couldn't follow the flow of the combat. To resolve that we ended up going back after a short fight or at stages in a longer fight and describing the flow of combat. This was a bit cumbersome, but it worked.
However, as the players increased in power they mastered actions. Mastering some actions, like Parry or Riposte gives the master an additional free action. Heroes and Villains in H+I get two actions each round: one major action (often an attack) and one minor action (like a feint or a reaction like a parry). However very experienced characters who have mastered maneuvers get more actions. So a deadly duelist like our hero, Captain-Lieutenant Gaston Thibeault fighting the villainous sword master, César de Mala Cassanha, might look like this.
Round 1
Gaston gets the initiative, he attacks with Bladework (his major action).
Cassanha parries (free action), then ripostes (free action).
The riposte would have barely succeeded, but Gaston dodges (his free action), then ripostes (free action).
Cassanha parries (his minor action).
Cassanha now acts. He lunges (his major action).
Gaston parries (his minor action) which ends the round.
WHEW! Okay, now on to round 2 which might look similar.
As you can imagine if you are playing Guy de Bourges, you might forget what happened in your last combat after listening to the long exchange between Gaston and Cassanha. Now this sort of very long round only happens when the PC has mastered multiple maneuvers and the opponent is a Villain who has also mastered multiple maneuvers. Which is not the usual encounter in H+I, but such encounters have happened more than a few times over the years we have played.
So currently what I am doing is to combine several rounds to provide a clear sense of flow for each character and to hopefully run combat long enough to reach either a conclusion or a minor cliff hanger. What I get ends up being a bit more narrative and looking a bit like the way Framing works in Regime Diabolique.
This is one of those moments where an entirely new vista of possibilities opens up in my mind. One of those "I would never have thought to do that but it seems so obvious" moments. Thank you.
Quote from: Bren;828811Korgul,
Good post and very good points, most of which I agree with wholeheartedly.
Social conflict feels a little awkward sometimes. It certainly requires practice for players and GM if they aren't used to that sort of system. One of my players is really good at using the system. It part that is because she is just that good, but in large part I think it is because she likes and is used to the point-counterpoint of debate and she likes the British style of debating which I'd say the social conflict in H+I fits well with. I find I am better able to GM the conflict when she is running the PC involved.
What I find works pretty well for all of us is to have a brief OOC conversation to set up the object of the conversational conflict (if it is unclear) and maybe set some stakes (if they are unclear). One thing I find players sometimes struggle with is losing composure in a social conflict. They often don't want their character to lose and so setting a stake ahead of time by at least considering - "so if you character loses the argument and is humiliated, what would that look like?" can help.
My experience was similar. I'll say more about that in another Q&A post.
There are optimal patterns, but they aren't simply character specific they are character-and-opponent specific. The tactics that a PC may use against the agile and tricky Aramis may be very different when the PC faces the mighty Porthos...or often they should be. Players that ignore their opponent's strengths and weaknesses are often badly surprised when their favorite combination doesn't work and they get beaten by the NPC.
EDIT: What sorts of duelists have you seen in play? What move combinations have they favored?
I don't remeber the details, since the campaign finished two or three years ago. Maybe part of the problem is that the two characters were very focused (An assassin with an exceptiolally high daring low might and abissimal flair, and a spy/priest with an exceptionally high flair, low daring and abissimal might). I remember one of them going all riposte and lounge, the other feinting, cape parryng and impressing enemies into submission (generating a massive ammount of fortune point in the process thank to some school mastery bonus combo). I remeber that when I wanted to really mess with them I had to make them fight mighty opponents who shoved and grappled them.
As for the social conflict rules, maybe they were just not for me. I really prefer unobtrusive rules, in that area.
Quote from: Stainless;828827Interesting. Thanks for all your effort in writing this up. I wonder if there have been any rumours about updating H+I to the new Mythic rules? Probably not and probably easy to do on the fly, but I thought I'd ask in case it's just over the horizon.
No idea. BASHAMAN might know, but I've mostly seen him post at the TBP. If you post there you might ask the question or see if he pops in here.
Quote from: Korgul;828840I don't remeber the details, since the campaign finished two or three years ago. Maybe part of the problem is that the two characters were very focused (An assassin with an exceptiolally high daring low might and abissimal flair, and a spy/priest with an exceptionally high flair, low daring and abissimal might). I remember one of them going all riposte and lounge, the other feinting, cape parryng and impressing enemies into submission (generating a massive ammount of fortune point in the process thank to some school mastery bonus combo). I remeber that when I wanted to really mess with them I had to make them fight mighty opponents who shoved and grappled them.
Yeah, characters with a good Might can use tactics like Bind and Disarm that can totally ruin the day of characters with average or poor Might. Gaston Thibeault uses Bind and Disarm a lot. However it doesn't work against a very high Might, low Savvy character. Against that sort switching to Feint and Bladework will tend to work better. That's part of the brilliance of H+I is there are real tactics that make sense in game that a player can use. But the 2d6 roll is swingy enough that a character can just rely on Fortune Points and luck to succeed with less optimal maneuvers.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;828829This is one of those moments where an entirely new vista of possibilities opens up in my mind. One of those "I would never have thought to do that but it seems so obvious" moments. Thank you.
You are welcome. Glad you found something you can use. :)
Was reading that witch write-up: so magic exists in this game? I thought it was more like a Sun King era swashbuckling game; is it capital-F Fantasy by default per the rules?
Quote from: Matt;829367Was reading that witch write-up: so magic exists in this game? I thought it was more like a Sun King era swashbuckling game; is it capital-F Fantasy by default per the rules?
Not at all; there is a chapter on including the supernatural if you want it, but it certainly isn't capital-F Fantasy by default.
Quote from: Matt;829367Was reading that witch write-up: so magic exists in this game? I thought it was more like a Sun King era swashbuckling game; is it capital-F Fantasy by default per the rules?
Currently the in game date is February 28, 1624. Louis XIII is King and the Sun King is not yet even a twinkle in Anne of Austria's eye.
Magic is an option. Also, the supernatural is an option, comedy is an option, historical is an option, big damn heroes is an option, PC sorcerers is even an option. There are lots of options.
When discussing the pitch for the game with the players we agreed on a low to no supernatural game. Thus, so far in the campaign we have had 3 sessions out of 158 where there was an actual, no bullshit Jack, supernatural thing for the PCs to interact with.
The frequency of supernatural interaction may increase. The game world is in motion. I thought the PCs would mostly be heroic King's Musketeers. The two King's Musketeers dropped out or went on hiatus and now most of the PCs are in the Cardinal's Guards. A couple of weeks ago through some amazingly good fortune and a bit of clever strategy, three of the PCs defeated or fought to a draw the Three Inseparables.
For those who still have questions to ask about H+I or who are interested in my campaign, I recently started a blog to talk about Honor+Intrigue, my H+I campaign, historical campaigns in general, roleplaying in general mostly using H+I as the example, and pretty much anything else that strikes my fancy without being too off topic.
Stop by sometime and chat or see if there is anything you can use. :)
Here's the link (http://honorandintrigue.blogspot.com/).
Hey, guys. Color me late to the party. I just found out about this thread and Bren's blog. Amazing stuff. I think that idea of framing combat by characters is pretty neat, too.
Regarding Magic in the game, there is a chapter, deliberately near the end of the book, called "Mysteries, Horrors, and Wonders.". This chapter is **Entirely** optional and is for if you want to put some supernatural stuff in your game. It includes an alternate history of the world involving evil supernatural forces and rules for using "Historical" Hermetic magic like talisman crafting, alchemy, and divination. It also has "Clockwork-Punk" gadgetry you can make for those who want to go fantastic in other ways. The secret history part- you can take it or leave it; it says this is one possible explanation for how/why this stuff exists and why it works. There are also magic-based (or monster hunting) secret societies detailed in this section as well. It also has rules for NPC "Black Magic" which are much more flashy and potent magic than what is recommended as available to PCs (but as was said, with modifications Sorcery could be available to PCs). I began working on a magic supplement a while back, in fact, for those who want an "Elves, Wizards, and Dragons, and such" fantasy but it remains unfinished. I will get back to it at some point.
Regarding BOL Mythic Edition, there are no plans to change the H+I rules (though you might have recognized the Mass Combat rules in Mythic Edition from Honor + Intrigue). There are 2 reasons for this: 1. Nobody has approached me about doing a revised edition to update it. 2. I don't think it is necessary from a mechanics perspective. That is not a criticism of BoL:ME; it is just a different design approach. A couple examples:
I am happy with the weapons write-ups and how armor works, etc. I would have to completely change the equipment list (and drastically simplify it) if I were to switch weapons over to how they work in Mythic Edition. Changing the equipment might also impact game balance. The fact you could one-shot kill somebody with a dagger in H+I was a deliberate goal of design (for those wanting to know how, you do a Called Shot while Lunging with the dagger). With Mythic edition rules for weapon damage (which don't really add flat modifiers but instead alter the dice rolled), this would not really work as well as it does. Weapons would generally do less damage, making Yielding Advantage and spending Fortune less necessary and people less fragile, which might extend fights.
I am happy with many other mechanics as-is that are different in Mythic. For example, Initiative in Mythic is now a Combat Ability, replacing Brawling. In H+I, I think Brawling being its own separate thing is fine; not every courtier who can swing a sword knows the first thing about throwing a punch. Likewise a wrestler might have little skill with a blade. It would also lessen the importance of Savvy in Combat, when one of the design goals was "Every Quality will be useful in combat." Savvy's most useful combat function is adding to Initiative (followed by adding to Parry/Riposte and Ranged attacks). Every quality usually has a constant benefit that applies to everyone in combat (Might adds to Lifeblood and damage, Daring adds to Fear Checks and for the attack types that generally do damage, and Flair gives extra Fortune Points) and also an optional use for specific maneuvers (and every Quality has several that utilize it). Initiative modification is the constant benefit of Savvy, and without it, it becomes less valuable. Likewise, I could see Initiative becoming "the dump stat" for Combat Abilities, while making Melee even more of "the god stat" by giving it prowess in unarmed combat as well as armed.
A lot of these mechanical and stylistic considerations have to do with what genre we are evoking. Swashbuckling (at least of the Richard Lester / Princess Bride / PotC sort that I favor) and Sword and Sorcery are different genres with different conventions. In a land of barbarians, I think fist-fights are more common than they are among the genteel nobles of the 17th century (though certainly some were skilled in it). It also allows more variation of fighting styles.
Quote from: BASHMAN;839475Hey, guys. Color me late to the party. I just found out about this thread and Bren's blog. Amazing stuff. I think that idea of framing combat by characters is pretty neat, too.
Thanks. That means a lot to me.
QuoteRegarding Magic in the game, there is a chapter, deliberately near the end of the book, called "Mysteries, Horrors, and Wonders.". This chapter is **Entirely** optional and is for if you want to put some supernatural stuff in your game.
I like that it is optional. We opted for a low to no magic campaign. The first loup garou the PCs encountered was actually a madman who lived in the wild. Which meant they were as surprised as their PCs when they encountered a real loup garou. That wouldn't have been possible in the same way if the magic was mandatory or integral.
QuoteEvery quality usually has a constant benefit that applies to everyone in combat (Might adds to Lifeblood and damage, Daring adds to Fear Checks and for the attack types that generally do damage, and Flair gives extra Fortune Points) and also an optional use for specific maneuvers (and every Quality has several that utilize it). Initiative modification is the constant benefit of Savvy, and without it, it becomes less valuable. Likewise, I could see Initiative becoming "the dump stat" for Combat Abilities, while making Melee even more of "the god stat" by giving it prowess in unarmed combat as well as armed.
This is what I see as the elegance of the system you created. There is no dump stat, but the stat choices made actually determine the optimal moves
for that character. Which will be different for a character with different stats. I
love the variation in fighting styles that this provides.