Subject: MYSTARA-L Digest - 3 Feb 2003 to 4 Feb 2003 (#2003-36) From: Automatic digest processor Date: 05/02/2003, 19:00 To: Recipients of MYSTARA-L digests Reply-to: Mystara RPG Discussion There are 9 messages totalling 605 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Combat Stunts (7) 2. Atruaghin Clans and Darokin (2) ******************************************************************** The Other Worlds Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/OtherWorlds.asp The Mystara Homepage: http://www.dnd.starflung.com/ To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM with UNSUB MYSTARA-L in the body of the message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:06:54 +0100 From: Felix Holtschoppen Subject: Re: Combat Stunts Hey, great work Jacob! I'll introduce it to my game next week... One or two small questions/suggestions: 1)Are there always consequences for a failed stunt? Or only if the stunt is failed by a natural roll of 10? Is there something like "critical" failure? 2) To prevent players using the easy category stunts every single round (failure has no consequence at all but there's plusses to hit & damage) I'd suggest that a disastrous/critical failure (=natural role of 10) always has consequences. Maybe the opponent was not surprised and counterreacted in the right way, so the character gets the expected boni subtracted/turned into mali. This rule'd still encourage players to imagine vivid combat scenes and perform little stunts (the chance for anything negative happening is only 10%), while preventing abuse of easy stunts to, so to speak, "decrease the base THACO" :-) Further suggestions after play-testing. I'm really looking forward to seeing it in action! Greetings, Felix ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:29:54 +0100 From: Jacob Skytte Subject: Re: Combat Stunts Felix Holtschoppen wrote: > great work Jacob! I'll introduce it to my game next week... Thank you very much! I'm so pleased that someone (besides myself) might = actually try it out. > One or two small questions/suggestions: > 1)Are there always consequences for a failed stunt? Or only if the = stunt is > failed by a natural roll of 10? Is there something like "critical" = failure? I avoided critical fumbles in purpose. But I felt that to balance things = out, there should always be a negative consequence for failing the = harder stunts. They should be spectacular, and the players should know = that they're really taking a chance, if they want to do something truly = impressive. Knowing my players, at least one of them will go for an = Extreme stunt, if only to be able to say, "I step on the goblin's head, = performing a somersault in the air before landing, sword first, on the = chief's chest" and actually have a chance of pulling it off, = consequences be damned! :) > 2) To prevent players using the easy category stunts every single = round > (failure has no consequence at all but there's plusses to hit & = damage) I'd > suggest that a disastrous/critical failure (=3Dnatural role of 10) = always has > consequences. Maybe the opponent was not surprised and counterreacted = in the > right way, so the character gets the expected boni subtracted/turned = into > mali. I wanted my players to always at least go for an Easy stunt, so I = decided that failing that should have no consequences. Remember that I = wanted the players to come up with cool combat descriptions, = particularly at low levels, where fumbling a stunt roll might mean the = end of the character, if it had consequences. That might make some = players simply choose to not risk performing a stunt and stick to the = old, safe, unimaginative combat system. If such a time comes that my = players automatically are able to think up cool stunts, I might impose = consequences for critical failure at the Easy difficulty as well. But I = think it's important to dangle a carrot in front of them at the start. = ;) > This rule'd still encourage players to imagine vivid combat scenes and > perform little stunts (the chance for anything negative happening is = only > 10%), while preventing abuse of easy stunts to, so to speak, "decrease = the > base THACO" :-) 10% is still a lot. If you make 10 stunts during one session, you will = probably fail one of them. 10 comabt rounds in a single session is not = unheard of. If you're a level 1 or 2 character, that might prove = disastrous, if it was accompanied with something negative. I don't have = a problem with players using Easy stunts to lower their THAC0, so long = as they're coming up with interesting and really cool combat moves. = Naturally, if you would rather have that 10% chance of bad things = happening, you should definitely go with that, but I didn't choose no = consequence for failed Easy checks for no reason. > Further suggestions after play-testing. I'm really looking forward to = seeing > it in action! I'm really looking forward to hearing how it worked out! And remember, the stunt system could also be used outside of combat, to = perform various stunts. Failing those would better be accompanied by = some amount of damage for failing the stunt. Gotta work a little on = that. Oh, and if you think that magic-users were really left out here, I'm = giving Spell Stunts a few thoughts... "I cast Magic Missile at the = goblin" isn't as cool as "I conjure a bolt of glowing force, using the = two mirrors to bounce it a few times before striking the goblin in the = back of the head" or "Using the energy of the Magic Missile, I cut the = chain, dropping the chandelier on top of the goblin" after all... Thanks again, Jacob Skytte scythe@wanadoo.dk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:36:57 +0100 From: Jacob Skytte Subject: Re: Combat Stunts I wrote: > If such a time comes that my players automatically are able to think = up cool stunts, I might impose consequences for critical failure at the = Easy difficulty as well. Naturally, I meant "impose consequences for failure at the Easy = difficulty", since there a re no critical failures in the system, just a = flat-out 10% risk of automatic failure. Jacob ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 15:03:08 -0600 From: Magister Mystaros Subject: Atruaghin Clans and Darokin Hi All! I'm working on my next Mystara campaign, the first I will run in some = time. I'm basing it in the borderlands area between Darokin and = Atruaghin, circa 1000 AC. I've made some changes to the Atruaghin clans, = and added some detail to the region. I wanted to see whether anyone had = made their own changes, and what they thought of mine. The geography of the land has changed a bit. The entire region south of = the plateau is now forest, deep, old-groth forest, dotted here and there = with glades where the tribesmen grow maize. Two major river groups = define the region. In the west (west of a line drawn through the Palace = of Atruaghin) there are five rivers, north-south, from the plateau base = to the Sea of Dread. In the east, there is a series of slow-flowing, = meandering rivers, swampy on the banks. The top of the plateau is = entirely grasslands, with only a few stands of trees here and there. The = lands north, east, and west of the plateau are essentially the same. As for the tribes, things are essentially the same with the Children of = the Viper. I solved the "Viper" versus "Tiger" situation by saying that = the "Children of the Tiger" was the name of the macro-tribe ruled by = Danel Tigerstripes, which led the revolt against the Red Orcs in 800 BC. = This tribe was overthrown and decimated in 452 BC, when Mahmatti Running = Elk leads the rebellion against the horrible Kingdom of the Tiger. The = modern Children of the Viper are the descendents of the survivors of the = Children of the Tiger; they came to power in the eastern woodlands, = pushing out the Children of the Elk, about two centuries ago. They = re-established the ancient temple pyramids in their territories, and = reignited the sacrificial flames, in which are burnt the still-beating = hearts of their sacrificial victims. They are ruled by the Jaguar Tribe. The Children of the Elk are no longer on the plateau (and never were); = they share the western forests with the Children of the Turtle. The = Turtle clans subsist off of fishing and whaling, while the Elk hunt and = grow maize. The two tribes work together to stave off the depredations = of the Viper tribe, and trade with each other on a regular basis. The = Elk tribe is the eternal enemy of the Viper tribe, as the Viper tribe = stole about half the territory of the Elk two centuries ago. The Children of the Horse rule the top of the plateau, which is now all = grasslands. They trade regularly with the Children of the Bear and the = Children of the Vulture (a new tribe).There is a "civilized" border = trading post at the World Elevator, known as Rattlesnake Gulch, where = can be found merchants from Darokin and strangers of all odd sorts. The Children of the Bear are essentially unchanged. The Children of the Vulture is a new tribe, which inhabits the western = and north-western cliffs and lands below, as the Children of the Bear do = in the north and east. They are modeled after various South American = tribes mixed with Comanche and Apache culture, and have been heavily = influenced by the Sind culture as well. They are also descended from = survivors of the Children of the Tiger, but they are not so outright = evil as their cousins to the east. They are just plain mean and ornery. The campaign is set in the southernmost borderlands of Darokin, between = the Atruaghin lands and the Malpheggi Swamp. I have divided this largish = region into four new regions: the Free City of Tenobar, the Westerlands, = the County of Mondira, and the Anselbury Territories. The Free City = occupies the ten southernmost 8-mile hexes. The Westerlands consist of = four small provinces (equivalent to Baronies) between the northern = border of Tenobar and the hills west of Elstrich. The County of Mondira = consists of the remaining lands south of the Mond river. The Anselbury = Territories consists of all lands north of the Mond and south of Lake = Amsorak. The Westerlands, where the campaign will be based, are modeled loosely = after the Westermarck of Robert E. Howard's Conan tale, "Beyond the = Black River" (itself loosely based on the colonial tales of James = Fenimore Cooper and others). There are four provinces: Naronga (the = southernmost), Arbandar (south-east), Conestoga (central), and Corwynia = (northernmost). Naronga, pressed on the west by the Jaguar Tribe and on = the north by the Python Tribe, has the largest fort, Fort Nar. Arbandar = is somewhat more peaceful, and is centered on the village of Arbanville = on the Arbandrine River. Arbanville is home to a clan of expatriate = Averoignese. Conestoga is the most primitive of the four, opposing the = Sloth Tribe lands; it has a small fort, Fort Clawson, in the west, and = the village of Malphegos on the riverbank. Finally, Corwynia in the = north opposes the Peacock Tribe from Fort Attleson. The folks inhabiting the Westerlands are a mixed breed. Most of the = settlers came here seeking freedom from the Old Gentry and the New = Gentry (the old nobility, which still rules much of the land, and the = new merchant oligarchs, who, for all their talk of "freedom," still see = lesser men as nothing more than fodder for their mills and factories.) = Those that can survive the rough and tumble primitive conditions thrive, = start their own small farms or ranches, and are active in the local = militias, which protect settlers from the Vipers, monsters, and bandits. = Those that cannot, die, or quickly move on to the Free City to the = south. The Count of Mondira is "Old Gentry," being descended from a noble who = fled across the=20 Arbandrine during the Years of Chaos (after the fall of Santhral II and = before the Great Merger). His forefathers carved out their own little = kingdom in this region with their blood, sweat, and tears. His = grandfather assented to the terms of the Great Merger only because he = knew he could not resist if it came to war. The current count, a bitter, = evil man, considers all "civilized" lands west of the Arbandrine to be = his own, and despises the rule of the Merchant Princes. He is always = scheming to take over the lands to the south, usually by pushing the = Vipers to attack (not that they need much convincing) or by bribing the = local (Merchant Council appointed) authorities to turn a blind eye to = the depredations of his desperados. Meanwhile, the merchants of the Free = City of Port Tenobar are always scheming to grift away the goods and = rights of the settlers, in order to enrich their own coffers. Gamblers, = snake-oil salesmen, and charlatans from the Free City do their best to = free the settlers from the burden of the coins in their purses, as well. = And, as if that isn't enough, strange things have recently been lurching = out of the Malpheggi... (which is NOT controlled by Darokin in the = least). And the players are dropped in the middle of all this... So... whaddayall think? James =20 ****************************** James "Mystaros" Mishler Freelance Writer and Troubleshooter mystaros@earthlink.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 16:28:32 -0500 From: Geoff Gander Subject: Re: Atruaghin Clans and Darokin This is an interesting idea - I'd certainly like to see more. Geoff -- Geoff Gander, BA 97, MPA 02 Carnifex Loremaster/Mad Roleplayer Master of the Elemental Plane of Bureaucracy au998@freenet.carleton.ca : www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Realm/2091 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 10:47:22 +1300 From: Chris Furneaux Subject: Re: Combat Stunts Quoting Jacob Skytte : > The system is still untested, I have just finished it, and is probably > terribly imbalanced, but won't stop me from sharing. ;) Interesting system. I do concur however that it is a little strange to have stunts that are always benificial to try but I can understand why you might do that. Thought I might share some ideas I use. I use a called shot system with a critical chart. A called shot is -4 to hit but is aimed at a particular target area. Because of this when a called shot strikes it is automatacally a critical roll (as is a natural 20). The chart I use for criticals has 1-12 as standard hits and 13-20 as various things (I got the chart off the net somewhere and liked it). This was because I wanted critical hits to be more concerning and less common. The beauty of a called shot is that it increases your likelyhood of doing extra damage (from the critical) and you get to choose what sort of damage that is. It is even possible to kill ANYONE in a single blow (off with their head) but to do that you need to roll a 20 after a sucessful strike to the neck with a cutting weapon (rare). If my PC fighter didn't have a ring of regeneration then he'd be short his left thumb and have -2 to his charisma because of bad scars on his face. Called shots have the advantage that they can be used to instill fear very effectivly while doing more damage. I would also rule that a target that has just been hit with a critical should be easier to hit next round. (maybe +2 to +8 depending on severity) It is a documented historical tactic, many deaths were from two hits, one to an exposed leg and a finishing blow from above. As a balance issue I might suggest that a sensible system might be to offset the to hit and to damage bonuses/negitives with a to be hit/damaged negitive. I would sugest these might seem like sensible values: For every +2 to damage (rounding up) as a bonus the opponent gets +1 to hit. For every +1 to hit the opponent gets +1 to hit. For every -2 to hit (rounding up) the opponent gets -1 to hit*. For every +1 'TO BE HIT' the opponent can choose to add +1 to damage instead. * this can be used as long as it is still posible to hit him in combat and the negitive is not being used for any other bonus. This would replace the parry rule and it is suggested that if the attack is forfeited then the minimum bonus is -4 to be hit. Additionally if the attack is sucessful then the bonuses to that opponent are halved (rounding down). This represents the fact that attempting these attacks makes you more vulnerable/commited and so easier to hit. However a successful attack means that they will be distracted such that they cannot take full advantage of the opportunity. I do think that stunts should be encouraged tho. I found your system seemed a bit complex, too many calculations, even though the goal is to make the combat more interesting. Perhaps using skills to give bonuses to attacks with a sucessful skill (or maybe just ability) check. Like to jump on a goblins head to attack another opponent might be an acrobatics check (with dificulty modifier) giving you a bonus to hit/damage because of your position. Being hit while preforming the stunt would require an additional skill check (also with a dificulty modifier) or you might suffer a penalty of some kind (falling prone, hitting your opponent and then falling on him, penalty to hit, etc). Chris. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 00:56:53 +0100 From: Felix Holtschoppen Subject: Re: Combat Stunts Chris Furneaux wrote: > The chart I use for criticals has 1-12 as standard > hits and 13-20 as various things (I got the chart off the net somewhere and > liked it). This was because I wanted critical hits to be more concerning and > less common. I'm still searching for a good critical hit system, so could you send me the chart? Puhlease!!! > I do think that stunts should be encouraged tho. I found your system seemed a > bit complex, too many calculations, even though the goal is to make the combat > more interesting. Perhaps using skills to give bonuses to attacks with a > sucessful skill (or maybe just ability) check. Like to jump on a goblins head > to attack another opponent might be an acrobatics check (with dificulty > modifier) giving you a bonus to hit/damage because of your position. Being hit > while preforming the stunt would require an additional skill check (also with a > dificulty modifier) or you might suffer a penalty of some kind (falling prone, > hitting your opponent and then falling on him, penalty to hit, etc). I agree that to use the bonus for the skill in Jacob's system, the PC would have to make a successful skill roll for the stunt he's trying to accomplish. I also agree that players should be encouraged to create vivid combat scenes by stunts. The system isn't that complicated though, because the Stunt Rating (SR) of a character pretty much remains the same (except for the skill bonus of course) for each weapon. It's just another number to jot down (out of a whole lot if you're using weapon mastery). Jacob Skytte wrote >> I wanted my players to always at least go for an Easy stunt, so I decided that >failing that should have no consequences. Remember that I wanted the players >to come up with cool combat descriptions, particularly at low levels, where >fumbling a stunt roll might mean the end of the character, if it had >consequences. That might make some players simply choose to not risk > performing a stunt and stick to the old, safe, unimaginative combat system. << Well, a +2 to hit and +1 to damage for the opponent in 10% of the cases shouldn't prove deadly even for 1st or 2nd level characters IMO (assuming that you're doing your rolls behind a screen, and even if you're not...). I see your point in "dangling a carrot" but still 10% malus 20-90% bonus is encouraging, I think (and I was talking of characters with a high SR using it on a regular basis), btw IMC PCs have rather high ability scores (since they're hard to raise later and IMC the characters are MEANT to be extraordinary heroic / exceptionally able...) I'll keep you updated on how the system worked with my group. btw I just ran "The painted bay...The bloodied streets" adventure by Ville. It was great fun. Tegell was caught and delivered to justice by the PCs. But then the Thief was trying to get access to the Kingdom of Thieves and they wanted her to bring them Tegell alive, so she had to convince the rest of the party that it was a good idea to abduct the man they just convicted, from prison... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 02:17:56 +0100 From: Jacob Skytte Subject: Re: Combat Stunts Chris Furneaux wrote: > Interesting system. I do concur however that it is a little strange to = have > stunts that are always benificial to try but I can understand why you = might do > that. I know what you mean, and I do suggest that people change that if they = plan to use it, and think their players will use the system in spite of = the dangers that might be involved. Right now, I'm not so sure my = players would, so I'm giving them a little extra incentive. > Thought I might share some ideas I use. I use a called shot system = with a > critical chart. I considered a called shot system for awhile, but decided that wasn't = really what I wanted. I've played Middle Earth a few times and got = pretty sick of the tons of critical tables; as fun as they were, they = really slowed things down. This system doesn't particularly slow things = down in the mechanics department (more on that later), and lets you have = more freedom in your choice of actions without imposing rules that are = too strict (I hope). > If my PC fighter didn't have a ring of regeneration then he'd be short = his left > thumb and have -2 to his charisma because of bad scars on his face. :) We had a player in my old group, who was questing for something to = heal a nasty scar he had across the face. I liked that; it made his = goals so personal. > As a balance issue I might suggest that a sensible system might be to = offset > the to hit and to damage bonuses/negitives with a to be hit/damaged = negitive. That could work, but with my system it's not just the players doing = stunts, but their opponents too, so they're getting their own bonuses = out of the stunt system already. :) > I do think that stunts should be encouraged tho. I found your system = seemed a > bit complex, too many calculations, even though the goal is to make = the combat > more interesting. Actually, it's not all that terrible. You find your Stunt Rating ahead = of combat, no worries there. After that, you just have to think things = through the first few times you try a stunt, then you've got the hang of = what you can or can't do. Then it just boils down to an extra die roll = and coming up with something that sounds really cool. > Perhaps using skills to give bonuses to attacks with a > sucessful skill (or maybe just ability) check. That could be an alternative way of making such a system, which would be = a lot simpler. I've done something like that in the past, but I wanted = to set some hard rules down, so I wouldn't have to think up difficulty = modifiers and such on the fly. Felix Holtschoppen wrote: > I agree that to use the bonus for the skill in Jacob's system, the PC = would > have to make a successful skill roll for the stunt he's trying to > accomplish. I also agree that players should be encouraged to create = vivid > combat scenes by stunts. I wanted to boil it down to a single die roll and wanted all characters = to be able to participate, regardless of skills. Naturally, I did try = rewarding those with the right skills. > Well, a +2 to hit and +1 to damage for the opponent in 10% of the = cases > shouldn't prove deadly even for 1st or 2nd level characters IMO = (assuming > that you're doing your rolls behind a screen, and even if you're = not...). If you think it'll work for your players, then I think it's fine if you = use those numbers. I'm just happy you're willing to try it out. :) Jacob Skytte scythe@wanadoo.dk ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:00:39 +1300 From: Chris Furneaux Subject: Re: Combat Stunts > I'm still searching for a good critical hit system, so could you send me > the chart? Puhlease!!! The one I have been using I found here (along with some other cool tools): http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8306/criticalhits.html Although I don't use the weapon breaking bit... It could use some alterations but I haven't done that much with it over and above a using it as a guideline. I've found the some of the more severe criticals make my players think twice about charging those 30 goblins. 30 attacks mean that they have a reasonable chance of a critical. Of course in 2 rounds time there'll be a lot less of them and the second thought is always they're only goblins :D > That could be an alternative way of making such a system, which would be a lot > simpler. I've done something like that in the past, but I wanted to set some > hard rules down, so I wouldn't have to think up difficulty modifiers and such > on the fly. A valid point, I've found it simple enough to go with throwing things into catagories similar to your stunt clases. It would be easy enough to use them as a basis for the dificulty modifiers. e.g. Difficulty / [hit/dmg] / check adjustment Normal [+0/+0] +5 Easy [+1/+2] none Medium [+2/+3] -5 Hard [+3/+4] -10 Extreme [+3/+6] -15 Impossible [+3/+10] -20 In itself I like the idea of a stunt rating and I like the way you create it. I would be interested to see ability bonuses come into stunts however as I think that strength and dexterity should play a part in a stunt system. Perhaps the SR could generate or be used as a modifier which could then be used to modify the above dificulty table. The stunt check would then be made against the most apropriate ability score, If the character has a skill that would be more aplicable then it can be made with as if it was one class easier (making imposible stunts possible). Additionally if more then one ability/skill is integral to the stunt then the extra abilities bonuses could be added to the score. e.g. if as part of the stunt it is 'vital' to get the monsters attention you would add the players charisma bonus. The stunt itself might actually be to hit him in the jaw with an upper cut so it would be a strength related stunt, but using your charisma to taunt him into exposing it to you. This encourageing more elaborate stunts that use more skills. Chris. (P.S. this is really just me thinking aloud and nutting this stuff out for my own use, just thinking that someone else might find it useful as well. I may do a writeup if I get something I am happy with.) ------------------------------ End of MYSTARA-L Digest - 3 Feb 2003 to 4 Feb 2003 (#2003-36) *************************************************************