Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If You Could See A Rule Altered...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If You Could See A Rule Altered...

    ...which rule would it be?

    I'm asking this in an official capacity. Later down the road, we'll be releasing a book (as yet unannounced, so I can't discuss it quite yet) that I have budgeted word count for an appendix.

    The purpose of this appendix? Simple: rules changes.

    We all have them: House Rules. "Nah, this doesn't quite work well," nearly every Narrator has said at one point, and made some changes. God knows I have in my tenure.

    So, I decided to share some of those things that I feel like will help the system run more smoothly. And rather than keep the opportunity all for me and my writers, I figured I'd see if there were any mechanical issues (look, I know there are - I read these forums) that you folks would like to see addressed!

    Please don't use this thread as a chance to bash the game - I'm interested in folks who like the system, even if they feel the need to make a couple of tweaks. I'm not even asking that you necessarily have an answer to the issue you bring up, mind. But if you'd do, and you're willing to share it, I'm happy to take a look. I make no guarantees that I'll be using everyone's ideas, though.

    NOTE: Please do not post in this thread if you're not willing to see your idea in print. I'll be crediting the users of this forum as a general Special Thanks, but not by individual name in the book, so fair warning.

  • #2
    Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

    My personal pet would be scaling XP costs. Works like this when I run games:

    Abilities: 10XP from 2 to 3, 30XP from 3 to 4, 50XP from 4 to 5, 70XP from 5 to 6 and 90XP from 6 to 7, both at creation and in play.

    Similarly with Specialties: XP cost=new rank*5, so 5XP for the first +B, 10XP for the second (so 15XP from 0 to 2 specialties), 15XP for third one etc..

    Gently nudges players to keep themselves in the dice ranges where the system tends to work the best, plus allows for greater diversity (let's people pick up a specialty here and there to support minor features of their character). Though will also require adjustment to standard secondary NPC stats due to decreased overall power level of specialist PC's.

    After that? I'd revise the stats for the heavier armors, in particular the armor penalty for half- and full plate makes it not worth the extra AR they give. I'd scale them both down to -4 personally.

    A small errata on training requirement (p. 155) might also be welcome in general, seeing that in the very strict legal interpretation of the text, you could for example use a lance while mounted and apply the training penalty to one of the bonus dices from handle animal, not having a penalty dice even though you have no specialty ranks in spears, while the text does seem to indicate that the intention is that you take a penalty dice for lacking sufficient specialization ranks.

    I would also like to see ways to increase intrigue defenses (like shields, benefits and armor does for combat), seeing that characters with high persuasion or deception tends to rip through those a bit too quickly in my experience.

    Maybe combining the three ways of determining maximum status (from chapters 3, 4 and 6 respectively) into a single consistent method?

    Bigger things I'd like to see would be a system for house resources and holdings that scales better (The linear 0(dirt) to 70(king) approach with holdings typically costing 5, 10 or 15 points doesn't quite work out without some narrator fiat and an agreement of sorts that player houses aren't going to play in the big league), but it doesn't sound like there's going to be space for that.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

      For all the mystique about it, Valyrian Steel is decidedly... meh. Of course, there may not be much of a better way to represent "extremely sharp edge".

      Elaboration on the rules for superior and extraordinary armors (hinted/implied in the Campaign Guide).

      Expanding spend a Destiny Point options to gaining an extra action during an Intrigue exchange.

      Much like Zorbeltuss, most of my issues are with entire subsystems (mainly House & Lands and Warfare), which are likely beyond the scope you're looking for.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

        There's quite a few odd things going on in SIFRP rules-wise, but one of the most perplexing to me is buying settlements out of your house's Lands pool, and not Population. I know there's arguments regarding density versus the actual amount of people within your holdings, but it still doesn't make sense to me. While it can be justified, at the end of the day a house with an incredibly low Population score can still buy a city if they have enough Lands. Consider that the North gets the largest bonus to Lands by far, and you'll see that Northern houses have the greatest potential to have large settlements in their domain, despite the Population hit Northern houses take. This doesn't make sense from a lore perspective, nor arguably from a mechanical one. If House Baratheon lost all of King's Landing within a session they'd lose the points invested from Lands, but they wouldn't take a hit to Population at all. For my games, I always house rule buying settlements with Population, which also has the nice side effect of freeing up more Lands to spend on the new holdings from Out of Strife, Prosperity.

        I'm also in favor of changing up heavier armor for the better, and revisiting Valyrian steel weapons as well. Maybe give Valyrian steel swords and extra '6' for the purpose of resolving the effect of a critical hit, or some kind of small boost in an intrigue stat to represent the prestige inherent with the house having such a weapon. Just a brief note, SIFRP is my favorite gaming system, both because of the setting and the mechanics. I just wouldn't mind seeing a tweak or two.
        Last edited by Ser Daerin; 11-28-2014, 07:40 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

          I'd revisit drawbacks that reduce abilities by a die or that penalize specific rolls. Right now there are many ways a specialized PC can take flaws (and the -1 to one starting ability) that will have little to no actual penalty to them. The combat specialist with intrigue penalties, for example. Some suggested fixes:

          1. They can only be taken on abilities 3 or higher
          2. Limit the number (i.e., you may take only one such drawback total, including the -1 starting ability).
          3. Change the mechanic to be more like Fate. Rather than give the PC build points up front, you have the penalty work something like this: the GM decides when the drawback would cause a significant problem for the PC based on description. When this happens, the GM describes what the problem is and what the drawback will cause the PC to do. The player then has a choice: pay a destiny point to temporarily ignore the flaw for one round, or roleplay the failure/problem, and gain a temporary destiny point that must be spent before the end of the session. This way, if our example combat specialist takes an intrigue flaw, he only gets a benefit from taking it when it actually negatively impacts his situation. If it never comes up, he gets nothing for it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

            Well most of my post have been different ideas for the game, but I hope you understand I love the system and it's a great game.

            Id first like to see a change to the house stats and scaling of them specifically lands and population. It doesn't make much sense to say 70 land is all of westeros when that could buy you when one large city( 50 points) would take up almost all of it. I'm thinking of a new landed knight of the starks starting with all of the lands of westeros just doesn't make much sense. Similarly a population of 70 should just be your lands are very overcrowded with population not claiming all of the population of westeros. Pretty much any stat that says 70 is the max of westeros doesn't make much sense as than no other house would have any of that stat.

            My recommendation: Simply change the text of lands to be something less specific. Or instead why not have a limit to the number a terrains you may buy based on your maximum status. An exponential change could be nice so 2^status So a minor landed knight with a status of two may be able to buy 4 terrains and spend remaining points in features, while a greater landed knight with a status of three could buy 8 terrains. A status of 7 or that of a great house could buy 128 terrains but wouldn't need to. I can understand a Powerful house not expanding its lands but not a minor house controlling large portions of lands. This may not be the best approach but it would ensure a smaller house would have less lands at least starting out.


            Next would be dealing with language.
            I'm sure you saw the thread of language I posted and that it is a lesser used ability score and I would never imagine it becoming a common rolled ability, but it would be nice if some of the abilities had a bit more benefits to them. The primary skills involve Fighting Marksmanship Awareness Persuasion Deception, as they are the most common to be used or have an impact. 2nd rank would be Status, Cunning, Will, Endurance Agility, Athletics. These stats effect your stat line as a character determining your defense and health in combat and intrigue. Everything else is a third ranked skill that is a situation use, but even then language is a less used ability.

            My recommendation: Make language replace awareness for intrigue defense. It would downgrade awareness that would still be a very useful ability and upgrade language to a 2nd rank ability. Then even if it is used less it would still be something characters would want to invest in and force characters to spread their points instead of dumping in to awareness. Second have the different languages be speacilties of language. So common, Valyrian, Braavosi and such be the specialties. At character creation the player gets x bonus die to put into their languages they speak where x is their rank in language. This way players can spend time to learn languages they would otherwise ignore as they could invest their points elsewhere.


            Shield bonus dice could also be given a boost. Right now they are practically useless unless you take shield mastery.
            It was one of my first posts but I think if you gave for every 2 bonus dice in shields you gain 1CD would be a nice boost that could gain from shield mastery. Or give them a natural +1cd per a bonus die in shields and change Shield mastery to some sort of special shield attack or a reduction to shield bulk

            my last suggestion isnt really a rule change but more of an advanced rule suggestion for house stats.


            Get rid of the house fortune rolls and replace it with a house management roll. At the end of a month you would make a roll to see how well you have managed your house for each stat.
            Instead of One character using status though each stat would use a corresponding ability and the lord can pick who they wants to have roll the stat. Depending on the size of the house, the difficulty would change.

            stat Roll Size degree of success change to stat
            Defense Knowledge Minor 9 Fail -1d6
            Influence Status Major 12 1 0
            Lands Survival Great 15 2 +1
            Law Status Warden 18 3 +1d3
            Population Healing King 21 4 +1d6
            Power Warfare
            Wealth Cunning

            In this case succeeding on managing your resources just means you kept things running smoothly so to get a bonus to your stat the minimum roll you would need would be a 14, but you also receive your house fortune bonus to the management roll so it is not as hard as it seems.

            this is an idea that is any house has some sort of council like the small council that is made up of masters of the hunt, masters of arms, Masters of coin etc etc when the end of the month arrives the character the lord assigned makes the roll for that house stat. If the character has the lord heir or Maester benefit than they add bonus dice from stewardship to the roll. Otherwise they roll just the rank in that ability.

            The pros of this are it gives a bit more use to some underused skills and allows more players to be involved in the house management. It also helps limit characters from just maxing out status and stewardship to get the biggest bonus they can..
            The downside is adds more complexity to what is a simple roll to see how well you did and the players are fully aware of what happened to the house.

            So far my friends and I have enjoyed this change, but that doesn't mean everyone will like it.


            Here are the reasons I picked the abilities to go with the house stats.
            Defense: Knowledge is needed to know how to build defensive buildings and manage them.
            Influence: status is used because their is no better representation of your influence than status
            Lands: Survival is used because you must know how to survive off of your lands to successfully manage them. This also is about quality of lands not just quantity
            Law: status as I couldn't think of a better representation of how people respect your status
            Population: Healing is used to see how well you care for your population and see to their needs
            Power: Warfare for how well you manage your armies and prepare your troops
            Wealth: Cunning for figure out the best approach to gain more wealth



            I also agree increasing the cost of improving an ability would be a good way to keep players from having several 5's or 6's even in late game and I would like to see some drawbacks and benefits retooled and I would love it if it could be cleared up on how trade works but I think i've made to many suggestions already lol

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

              Originally posted by Kimbob View Post
              Well most of my post have been different ideas for the game, but I hope you understand I love the system and it's a great game.

              Id first like to see a change to the house stats and scaling of them specifically lands and population. It doesn't make much sense to say 70 land is all of westeros when that could buy you when one large city( 50 points) would take up almost all of it. I'm thinking of a new landed knight of the starks starting with all of the lands of westeros just doesn't make much sense. Similarly a population of 70 should just be your lands are very overcrowded with population not claiming all of the population of westeros. Pretty much any stat that says 70 is the max of westeros doesn't make much sense as than no other house would have any of that stat.

              My recommendation: Simply change the text of lands to be something less specific. Or instead why not have a limit to the number a terrains you may buy based on your maximum status. An exponential change could be nice so 2^status So a minor landed knight with a status of two may be able to buy 4 terrains and spend remaining points in features, while a greater landed knight with a status of three could buy 8 terrains. A status of 7 or that of a great house could buy 128 terrains but wouldn't need to. I can understand a Powerful house not expanding its lands but not a minor house controlling large portions of lands. This may not be the best approach but it would ensure a smaller house would have less lands at least starting out.


              Next would be dealing with language.
              I'm sure you saw the thread of language I posted and that it is a lesser used ability score and I would never imagine it becoming a common rolled ability, but it would be nice if some of the abilities had a bit more benefits to them. The primary skills involve Fighting Marksmanship Awareness Persuasion Deception, as they are the most common to be used or have an impact. 2nd rank would be Status, Cunning, Will, Endurance Agility, Athletics. These stats effect your stat line as a character determining your defense and health in combat and intrigue. Everything else is a third ranked skill that is a situation use, but even then language is a less used ability.

              My recommendation: Make language replace awareness for intrigue defense. It would downgrade awareness that would still be a very useful ability and upgrade language to a 2nd rank ability. Then even if it is used less it would still be something characters would want to invest in and force characters to spread their points instead of dumping in to awareness. Second have the different languages be speacilties of language. So common, Valyrian, Braavosi and such be the specialties. At character creation the player gets x bonus die to put into their languages they speak where x is their rank in language. This way players can spend time to learn languages they would otherwise ignore as they could invest their points elsewhere.


              Shield bonus dice could also be given a boost. Right now they are practically useless unless you take shield mastery.
              It was one of my first posts but I think if you gave for every 2 bonus dice in shields you gain 1CD would be a nice boost that could gain from shield mastery. Or give them a natural +1cd per a bonus die in shields and change Shield mastery to some sort of special shield attack or a reduction to shield bulk

              my last suggestion isnt really a rule change but more of an advanced rule suggestion for house stats.


              Get rid of the house fortune rolls and replace it with a house management roll. At the end of a month you would make a roll to see how well you have managed your house for each stat.
              Instead of One character using status though each stat would use a corresponding ability and the lord can pick who they wants to have roll the stat. Depending on the size of the house, the difficulty would change.

              stat Roll Size degree of success change to stat
              Defense Knowledge Minor 9 Fail -1d6
              Influence Status Major 12 1 0
              Lands Survival Great 15 2 +1
              Law Status Warden 18 3 +1d3
              Population Healing King 21 4 +1d6
              Power Warfare
              Wealth Cunning

              In this case succeeding on managing your resources just means you kept things running smoothly so to get a bonus to your stat the minimum roll you would need would be a 14, but you also receive your house fortune bonus to the management roll so it is not as hard as it seems.

              this is an idea that is any house has some sort of council like the small council that is made up of masters of the hunt, masters of arms, Masters of coin etc etc when the end of the month arrives the character the lord assigned makes the roll for that house stat. If the character has the lord heir or Maester benefit than they add bonus dice from stewardship to the roll. Otherwise they roll just the rank in that ability.

              The pros of this are it gives a bit more use to some underused skills and allows more players to be involved in the house management. It also helps limit characters from just maxing out status and stewardship to get the biggest bonus they can..
              The downside is adds more complexity to what is a simple roll to see how well you did and the players are fully aware of what happened to the house.

              So far my friends and I have enjoyed this change, but that doesn't mean everyone will like it.


              Here are the reasons I picked the abilities to go with the house stats.
              Defense: Knowledge is needed to know how to build defensive buildings and manage them.
              Influence: status is used because their is no better representation of your influence than status
              Lands: Survival is used because you must know how to survive off of your lands to successfully manage them. This also is about quality of lands not just quantity
              Law: status as I couldn't think of a better representation of how people respect your status
              Population: Healing is used to see how well you care for your population and see to their needs
              Power: Warfare for how well you manage your armies and prepare your troops
              Wealth: Cunning for figure out the best approach to gain more wealth



              I also agree increasing the cost of improving an ability would be a good way to keep players from having several 5's or 6's even in late game and I would like to see some drawbacks and benefits retooled and I would love it if it could be cleared up on how trade works but I think i've made to many suggestions already lol
              This. I agree with every single point made by this bro.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                Hi all,

                First off, love the system. But with any rule system... There are holes. So some patches for those holes:
                I don't really want to give specifics, because specifics are subjective and the developers job also. But these are just some things I think would improve the fun factor.

                1) makes wounds and penalty dice in general, effect passive abilities/ test results... Maybe -4/ wound or penalty dice.
                (Right now, the RAW states that someone who has a passive awareness is just as good unhurt, standing guard at high noon, as someone stating guard who is heavily wounded at midnight on a moonless night.

                2) House Resources- population
                Population should buy settlements, and settlements should be excised out of land holdings.
                Population should also limit the amount of units you can muster with some exceptions, such as a personal guard, house garrison, and mercenaries.

                3) Some expanded animal training rules.. Such as for felines (shadow and sand cats) reptiles (lizard lions and dragons)

                4) Airborne Flying Rules, and combat rules.

                5) Explain how Chronicles of Sorcery folds into the religions of planetos, such as The Seven, The Old Gods, etc.

                6) We need Fire Magic

                7) Siege rules expanded.

                8) modify Improved Armour Mastery, it sucks as written

                9) Eliminate "attack portions of units" on page 185. Bogs the game down.

                10) Against unattached characters, green units add+2D, Trained Units add +4D, Veteran Units add +6D, Elite Units add 8D.

                11) A character can attach himself to a unit, and provide a +1D for any key ability of that unit, or if they have a rank 5 or greater in that key ability, provide +2D.

                That's about it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                  Ability scores
                  I'm in agreement with the view that the system doesn't work very well once you get characters with very high Ability scores. The problem is that the number of dice rolled simply overwhelms the target number. It's no so bad in a standard test, where the narrator sets the difficulty, but it's a clear problem in intrigues and combat.

                  In these situations it's almost guarantee that the high-ability character will gain four DoS against anyone not as heavily optimised for combat or intrigue. In theory, this is mitigated somewhat by the fact that four DoS puts a cap on the damage output of the high-ability character, but in practice it's often a rational choice for a character who wants to portray a skilled warrior or schemer to also optimise damage output.

                  One way to reduce this is to lower the ability ceiling. Instead of having an 8 be mythical and a 7 be a paragon, simply remove 8 as an option for characters and rebrand 7 as mythic (requiring the Blood of Heroes). Rank 6 would then be paragon, rank 5 master and rank 4 accomplished. Rank 3 could be talented or trained, depending on how you prefer to define "above average".

                  Of course, this doesn't stop a character from eventually having gained enough XP to have all sixes in his/her abilities, but I think setting a cap on character development should be a narrator decision, to be made on a case-by-case basis depending on the sort of campaign he or she wants to run.

                  Status
                  Having different tables and methods (p. 45, p. 67, p. 100+107) describing what Status means and setting the maximum Status for a character is confusing. These should be collapsed into one. Status should also follow the same rules as other Abilities; 7 should be the max under normal circumstances and should indicate the lord of a great house (or 6, if using my proposal above).

                  Characters of greater status than the lord of a great house could instead be represented by building a benefit chain, much like Heir and Head of House. These benefits should provide bonuses equal to having Status 8-10.

                  House System
                  I don't have much practical experience with this, but the feel of it is sometimes off. Specifically, the size of the house domains and the military they can support doesn't line up well with the higher levels of Influence, which purport to represent House Lannister and their equals.

                  I'm not sure how to change this without a major rewrite, so the best solution might be to lower expectations on the system. Instead of indicating that it can cover the whole range of nobles from the Baelishes to the Lannisters, lower the ceiling to House Frey and their ilk.

                  Weapons and Armour
                  SIFRP makes many of the classic RPG mistakes concerning weapons and armour, having ridiculously overweight weapons and unnecessarily clunky (high AP) armour. Also, although most of the weapons have existed historically, several of them (e.g. the warhammer) seem to be some sort of fantasy variant. Fantasy-style weapons are not something I associate with the novels, so I don't know where that came from. (Robert is a big man, sure, but I don't recall reading anywhere that his warhammer was exceptionally, large, heavy or two-handed.)

                  Sidebars
                  Not a rules change as such, but I think a great deal can be gained by generous use of sidebars describing what the intention behind a certain rule or subsystem is. This would help manage expectations, hopefully leading to less disappointment.

                  /rax

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                    Thanks for some great ideas, folks.

                    When we're done with it, I'm intending on posting a free PDF of that appendix for anyone to download, so I'll let folks know when that happens.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                      This is a great game and I think the system captures the novels well (and indeed for general low fantasy settings).

                      - I normally adjust Full Plate's armour penalty to -4, giving it the same AP/AR ratio as a breastplate and better matching its real life flexibility and in-game description.

                      - Long Blade Fighter 2: this is useless if using the advanced "Maneuver" rule - I allow it to combine a Maneuver and attack in to a single lesser action. This represents a skilled swordsman's ability to attack while maintaining a good defence.

                      - Shields - require training dice in shields to avoid taking a penalty with your hand hand, 1B removes 1D of shield penalty (so anyone can use a normal shield and attack free of penalty, bigger shields hamper attacks for the untrained).

                      - Mounted combat - clear up whether animal handling gives bonus dice or not when fighting on a war-trained mount (only one mention of it in rulebook, and characters in Campaign Guide don't seem to be designed with this in mind - they'd have wasted dice in spears. Also leads to everyone rolling tons of dice while jousting).

                      - Jousting fatigue - each round after the first (or after rounds equal to your endurance) you take -1 to your passive ride and ride checks to stay in the saddle. Forces a resolution to epic jousts.

                      - Valyrian steel weapons

                      - Superior/exception armour - this isn't a game about equipment, but a small boost here is flavourful. I use +1 AP for superior armour, +1 AR and +1AP for exceptional armour (ie. armour penalty is lower, adding to a negative number).

                      - Adaptable weapons - gain powerful when used with two hands. Led to people actually using bastard swords as they now offer tactical flexibility, rather than simply focusing on longswords or greatswords.

                      - Knockdown - don't apply armour penalty to target's passive agility. Mathematically knockdown becomes a "dominant" strategy (in the game theory sense) and reduces battles to a farce. This is bad for variety as it discourages other maneuvers.

                      - Knives/Daggers: Users can switch between using Athletics and Agility when determining damage with these weapons, whichever is most efficient for their character. Otherwise some people are lethal with one but a joke with the other - they're both small blades so this feels weird and too "gamey".

                      - Wounds: only absorb damage equal to endurance x3 (you full undamaged health). Stops people eating a huge blow in a single wound and increases threat levels!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                        I agree with previous posters about buying settlements with Population, or perhaps a combination of Land and Population. I'd also like to see more clarity about the size of domains. IIRC there is some mention that a domain is 1 league, but that doesn't make much sense given that a league is a measure of distance, not area. Even if it is a square league, (about 10 square miles, or about 7600 acres) that's not very large and doesn't capture how much land most houses should have/control.

                        This is probably getting too much into rules revisions and needless complication, but I wonder if there should be a relationship between Land and Power holdings. The primary tool for raising and controlling military power in medieval, feudal Europe was vassalage and subinfeudation, and that seems to be the model, broadly speaking, that GRRM uses. A knight would be in a noble's service because that noble granted the knight lands. Maybe put a limit on the number of units, a house can invest in based on Land or Land holdings?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                          Originally posted by Greenseer View Post
                          This is probably getting too much into rules revisions and needless complication, but I wonder if there should be a relationship between Land and Power holdings. The primary tool for raising and controlling military power in medieval, feudal Europe was vassalage and subinfeudation, and that seems to be the model, broadly speaking, that GRRM uses. A knight would be in a noble's service because that noble granted the knight lands. Maybe put a limit on the number of units, a house can invest in based on Land or Land holdings?
                          My biggest issue with most Power Units is that there's no time-limit on them. Not including bannerhouses, there's very little in the way of ever-ready military units in Westeros - The Night's Watch, the Goldcloaks and other city guards, castle garrisons, and maybe some ships (although I don't know if the crews are always mustered). Feudal relationships allow a liege to muster his vassals, but only for a limited time every month/season/year, because they have committments to their own lands (recall various Northmen trying to balk at marching with Robb because they needed their men on their lands). The longer the service, the more is needed in exchange.

                          On that note, even without any of these changes, it should ne noted how long it takes to Begin Projects any Power Units (only Defense and Wealth Holdings have times specified).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                            I suppose maybe Joe can help clarify what he wants. While I agree that the House System probably has some vagueness to it, the question is:

                            "Does GR and Joe have the room to re-write a whole chapter from the core book?"

                            Also the other question is:

                            "How simulationist do we as players, want the rules?"

                            Personaly, and this is just my opinion, but I can think of nothing worse!!! I've always felt rules in any rpg should facilitate the story, not be a driver of the story. The rules should be in be in the background, and I try my best not to look at the rule book during the game session. I usually have to look once or twice, and sometimes I err in my adjudication of the rules.... But it's nothing I can't correct in our pre- session review next game session. "Hey guys I got it wrong.. It should be this way... And that's the official ruling... Last session I had to make a quick decision and I looked it up afterwards" everyone's always cool with that level of honesty and decisiveness.

                            I actually like a narativist format of the game. And I remind my players that the rules are by nature.. Abstract.

                            For instance... My home house has an influence of 11.. Crap... So they are virtual unknowns outside their domains. Boarding speaking Influence Holding is an expression of the House's political power, real or perceived. Thus, even there own subjects don't listen to them. But the house has a Law of about 30. So his subjects are law abiding. So, while they don't rebel.. They're not real good at taking orders from the Players.. They have no real "fear" of their Lord.

                            So I wrote in, that the current Lord sees himself as a bit of a "man of the people" and the town just under the castle isn't ruled by the Lord, but by a council in which the lord has a seat... But the lord isn't interested so rarely attends the council meetings. He not stupid, and has packed the council with many of his supporters and employees and even his master of horse.... But he would otherwise be out on the lake fishing!!!

                            It's abstract, but facilitates a story.

                            I dunno.. Should someone edit their posts to collect the commonly agreed upon rule changes?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: If You Could See A Rule Altered...

                              Commonly agreed upon rules?

                              I imagine what will happen is an appendix of optional rules people can use as they see fit. And I also imagine that Joe reads everything and takes whatever he likes the most that fits what he has in mind into it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X