Café de Nuit

Metaflux wrote:Crud...looked into the Birthright setting and I wish I could change my vote...

I'll make a note of a shift of one vote from Ravenloft to BR.

Ravenloft for me!

Okay, well it looks like the tide is going against Pendragon. Even though that would be my preference, I'd be totally up for a Ravenloft campaign.

Brock Marsh Runoff wrote:Okay, well it looks like the tide is going against Pendragon. Even though that would be my preference, I'd be totally up for a Ravenloft campaign.

Noted, although one respondent would have shifted a vote to BR.

I do expect Ravenloft to poll well on a Ravenloft forum, natch.

Nine votes. Yep, well you definitely have people interested. XD

Given the trend towards Ravenloft, I may wait until after my January residency and then kick off a Ravenloft sequel.

I'll leave the poll open through Christmas, though, because I definitely have had more than nine total players over the last few years. I'd like to get the opinions of everyone from previous campaigns and also possible new players before I make a final call.

For people curious about Birthright, I recommend the setting notes on BR.net. Don't worry much about those 3E rules, though, as I use 2E. I recommend that you don't assume NPC descriptions will be accurate.


For people curious about Pendragon:

http://www.adnd3egame.com/pendragon.htm

This file tells you how to play and contains a set-up scenario/combat example:

http://www.adnd3egame.com/documents/gk- ... -howto.pdf


As far as Ravenloft goes, I would like to know in advance which of the players who finished The Devil's Dreams with active PCs want to bring those PCs back in a sequel.

Kintire-

One more thing on Traits and Passsions in KAP--

I don't know how your GM did it, or which edition he used but in Third Edition KAP-
Traits and passions that run from 5 to 15 are considered 'ordinary.' That means that you don't have to roll against them if you wish to decide based on your own will.

There might theoretically be an exception for a very powerful enchantment, but otherwise [dice]only[/dice] a notably low or high trait or passion can dictate actions, and then you still get a roll.
16s and up earn you Glory, and certain patterns or sums of high traits can give other benefits.

I post that because I realize you played with a GM who assigned random Traits. That could be frustrating, if you end up with some very high traits that force your hand early in play, well before you have established through a series of choices in crisis situations that Sir Kintire never runs away, or is a total womanizer, or is terribly greedy, or what have you.

If I run, note that knights will start with all Traits in the ordinary range (the cultural and religious mods are tweaks, not big fat plus 6 or more), unless the player of a knight elects to knock one pair of traits to 16/4.

I hope that makes it clear the system is about supporting and rewarding consistent RP, as opposed to straight jacketing role-play.

That does sound better. I have to say I have a Thing about systems telling me what my character does instead of letting me choose, however rarely!

RP wise of course. If the character has been charmed, dominated or something that's different.

Indeed, not a fan of that unless I've at least had a chance to combat it.

Zilfer wrote:Indeed, not a fan of that unless I've at least had a chance to combat it.

There's no need to 'combat' it, because it's not an adversarial system. It's not about GM versus player, or player versus the rules.
Your knight will not start off with any trait that may require rolls unless you freely choose to set one of his traits that high. That's under your control as a player. Traits may shift in play because of choices that you make or certain encounters that come about because of your choices, but never in an arbitrary fashion.
Note that the shifts in personality traits are not automatic, just because the GM calls for a 'check' on trait.
There's a roll, made by the player, during Winter Phase.

Let's say you decide to generate a very brave knight. You elect to shift Valorous to 16, thus reducing Cowardly to 4. All your other Traits start off at 10/10, or close to that with minor mods for culture/region/religion.

As the GM I can ask if you'd like to roll against a Trait, but I can only require rolls on Valorous and Cowardly. You chose to let me do that when you set Valorous really high.

What does a player character get out of assigning a 16, or earning one in play?


1: It's a guaranteed source of extra Glory points every year.

2: If you get a sum total of 80 points in Energetic, Generous, Merciful, Modest, and Valourous you gain the Chivalric Bonus.
3 point magical protection against all damage.
This also nets an extra 100 Glory every year!


3:If you have all five Traits listed as Virtues in you knight's religion ranked at 16 or higher, you also get 100 extra glory and you get a special bennie by religion (harder to kill, more damage dealt, etc).

4: Passions over 16 can also net extra glory, and they can be rolled against to try to gain the benefits of inspiration. A holy knight defending a church or a romantic knight defending his lady-love might try a Passion roll to gain a boost. A crit success son a Passion check iniatiated by a player could , for example, double sword skill for a fight.


5: All of the above gives benefits that require balance. The balance is that sometimes a knight with such very strong Traits and passion is not going to make chess player type moves, but will be driven to action by these deep urges and needs.
As a player, you get to choose if you want to assign a pair of high/low Traits, how you play (which has a big effect on checks gained), and whether you wish to pursue an ideal.

ewancummins wrote:

Zilfer wrote:Indeed, not a fan of that unless I've at least had a chance to combat it.

There's no need to 'combat' it, because it's not an adversarial system. It's not about GM versus player, or player versus the rules.
Your knight will not start off with any trait that may require rolls unless you freely choose to set one of his traits that high. That's under your control as a player. Traits may shift in play because of choices that you make or certain encounters that come about because of your choices, but never in an arbitrary fashion.
Note that the shifts in personality traits are not automatic, just because the GM calls for a 'check' on trait.
There's a roll, made by the player, during Winter Phase.

Let's say you decide to generate a very brave knight. You elect to shift Valorous to 16, thus reducing Cowardly to 4. All your other Traits start off at 10/10, or close to that with minor mods for culture/region/religion.

As the GM I can ask if you'd like to roll against a Trait, but I can only require rolls on Valorous and Cowardly. You chose to let me do that when you set Valorous really high.

What does a player character get out of assigning a 16, or earning one in play?


1: It's a guaranteed source of extra Glory points every year.

2: If you get a sum total of 80 points in Energetic, Generous, Merciful, Modest, and Valourous you gain the Chivalric Bonus.
3 point magical protection against all damage.
This also nets an extra 100 Glory every year!


3:If you have all five Traits listed as Virtues in you knight's religion ranked at 16 or higher, you also get 100 extra glory and you get a special bennie by religion (harder to kill, more damage dealt, etc).

4: Passions over 16 can also net extra glory, and they can be rolled against to try to gain the benefits of inspiration. A holy knight defending a church or a romantic knight defending his lady-love might try a Passion roll to gain a boost. A crit success son a Passion check iniatiated by a player could , for example, double sword skill for a fight.


5: All of the above gives benefits that require balance. The balance is that sometimes a knight with such very strong Traits and passion is not going to make chess player type moves, but will be driven to action by these deep urges and needs.
As a player, you get to choose if you want to assign a pair of high/low Traits, how you play (which has a big effect on checks gained), and whether you wish to pursue an ideal.

I think there might have been a miss understanding there. I was simply agreeing with the above poster that being forced to do something in a game isn't ideal without a chance to at least 'combat' and by combat I mean. Make a save, have a reasonable way to avoid or ability to avoid, ect. I wasn't meaning anything about the system was bad and I haven't looked too closely yet. Sorry if my comment came off as defensive. It really wasn't meant to.

Zilfer wrote: I think there might have been a miss understanding there. I was simply agreeing with the above poster that being forced to do something in a game isn't ideal without a chance to at least 'combat' and by combat I mean. Make a save, have a reasonable way to avoid or ability to avoid, ect. I wasn't meaning anything about the system was bad and I haven't looked too closely yet. Sorry if my comment came off as defensive. It really wasn't meant to.

Ah, no probs.
I probably missed that sense of 'combat.' And , yes, there is something very much like a saving throw. You roll D20 against the extraordinary trait, under specific circumstances.
Effects are never automatic. There's always a roll.

In that way, trait rolls are a bit like fear/horror/madness throws in Ravenloft: mechanical aids to RP.

Yep sounds interesting.

With Ravenloft getting such a strong showing, I'll prep notes in case I decide to run it.