Guildschool 101
This is pretty hard to write. I am the first to admit that I have been running games with this system as it evolves for over 2 decades, closer to three. And some of the rules and ideas go back further.
But the game has been a work in progress forever; so trying to understand how to present it in easy, simple to understand chunks is making me crazy. I will try to add onto this over the next few days. This is also not meant to be a long term thread, more of a q&a for anyone interested.
At the very basic level, Guildschool needs three things defined.
1) The broad description of the game.
2) The breakdown of how a character is made and what it means.
3) The breakdown of play; how that character is used in the game.
The Broad description would be a pretty 'Math-Heavy; skill-based, d100, low-power, magic heavy, slow growth-curve, high-lethality'.
'Math-Heavy' is not a positive term, but it is an honest one. Most character sheets in GS use a spreadsheet format for a reason. There are some aspects of the game if the spreadsheet handles it for it is for the best. I would also say that there are a number of underlying rules that players forget after a while, that they let the spreadsheet do the heavy lifting.
'Skill-Based' is normally used as a term in contrast to 'Class-Based'. In a class based system, the character's skills go up together with the level of accomplishment of that class. A skill based system normally ties advancement with the use of that particular skill. Indeed, in Guildschool, we keep experience in that specific skill. In the earliest forms of the game, experience was only given when a skill was used. Now we give roleplay experience that can be placed wherever, but there are limits.
'D100' means that we use percentiles to determine the success of all actions. Sometimes an effect of this success or a failure might need other dice, like damage dice or protection, or something, but the success or failure of everything is based on those percentiles.
'Low-Power' means that the power level of an adventurer, compared to people in the world, is not extremely high. Players cannot shrug off blows like they would in higher-power games.
'Magic-Heavy' means that magic is common enough that all people are familiar with it. Magic is somewhat common. However, the way magic and spells work is that the ramping effects of using most even medium power enchantments is that very, very few individuals can do more than the most rudimentary things with magic. This also creates a world where ritual and magical tools are commonly used.
Even still, only one in twenty people in Celtricia can touch the Void, and of that, few can use more than one discipline.
More coming.
Sweet, always enjoyed a good vreegish back to basics post. :)
Well, what is good for GS is good for ME....
"Slow-growth Curve" implies a system where either the growth increments are small, far between, or both. Guildschool was designed by a psychologist; so there are constant little level breaks in skills; to give that wnderful reinforcement that the character is improving. But the increments of change are pretty small, and each little level break is normally in one skill.
It is also worth noting that this method of giving experience into the skills that are used means that characters grow organically. They 'become by doing'. We had a fire mage who ended up as a secondary healer due to the group 'breaking the healer...again.' So since he had taken one level in restorative spell points, he was able to manage a few spells...but as he was using more healing spells, he got better at it, and become almost a mage/healer.
A PC fighter who has been played for 2 dozen sessions won't have three times the HP or or a mage three times the spell power of a beginning character...the growth curve is built to get to a point that players want to pick up different skills, as well.
This is a nice start to describing the system from the ground up. I think that I am following you fairly well.
One thing I am not following: "constant little level breaks in skills"... you mean like perks?
Quote from: Light Dragon
This is a nice start to describing the system from the ground up. I think that I am following you fairly well.
One thing I am not following: "constant little level breaks in skills"... you mean like perks?
We actually keep experience and levels in each skill.
So since most characters have a lot of skills, they break individual skill levels pretty constantly. An average newish character may have 8 to14 skills...and the levels, especially early, are pretty easy...so I'd say an average character breaks a skill level a session...
And thank you for the reply...
I'm following this tread, but looking forward to points 2 and 3: while it's interesting to hear about how the system was designed, I'm looking forward to more details on the gritty of how it works. :)
Quote from: Black Market Xathan
I'm following this tread, but looking forward to points 2 and 3: while it's interesting to hear about how the system was designed, I'm looking forward to more details on the gritty of how it works. :)
I'm more defining what kind of system it is right now. Before we get to exact pieces of crunch, i want to really try to define what we are doing.
This is sort of the 'what we are doing', with a little bit of why. I am still trying to work out saying the rest with any clarity.
"High-Lethality" is not a difficult term to decipher. But is has Some roots in game style and in the crunch.
I don't like games without consequences. Real ones. It is perhaps part of my OSR atitude towards RPGs that death happens. Part of playing a game with a combat system and killing other creatures sometimes is that I like a game that has a feel like a sharp blade means something.
Mechanically, this has a number of manifestations.
HP are low in GS. a character might start with 8-15...but a lumberjack may have that. And while, like all skills, HP does improve, a character has gotten to rarified air to have 30 HP, and only a handful get into the 40s.
Damage is also higher, on average in GS. A broadsword without bonuses does 1d10+16 with a d6 divider. So it can do up to 26 hits without any bonuses. A big axe like a bec-di-corbin does 3d6+17 with a d5 divider, or up to 35 hits without bonuses or critical hits.
These are som broad strokes, leaving out some important mitigators like armor protection and criticals...but gives some idea of the mechanical parts of the lethaility of the game.
Quote from: LordVreeg
"High-Lethality" is not a difficult term to decipher. But is has Some roots in game style and in the crunch.
I don't like games without consequences. Real ones. It is perhaps part of my OSR atitude towards RPGs that death happens. Part of playing a game with a combat system and killing other creatures sometimes is that I like a game that has a feel like a sharp blade means something.
Mechanically, this has a number of manifestations.
HP are low in GS. a character might start with 8-15...but a lumberjack may have that. And while, like all skills, HP does improve, a character has gotten to rarified air to have 30 HP, and only a handful get into the 40s.
Damage is also higher, on average in GS. A broadsword without bonuses does 1d10+16 with a d6 divider. So it can do up to 26 hits without any bonuses. A big axe like a bec-di-corbin does 3d6+17 with a d5 divider, or up to 35 hits without bonuses or critical hits.
These are som broad strokes, leaving out some important mitigators like armor protection and criticals...but gives some idea of the mechanical parts of the lethaility of the game.
I always loved the damage curve in guildschool. It's akin go a big humped beast with a long tail. The meat of the beast is the primary focus as it is the part that will be gnawing on your arm the most often. However if you aren't careful the big long tail will whip around and catch you in the backside. And it's a tail with a really big spike on it. A careless hero can be slain by a punk with a little blade and a favorable nudge from fickle Ishma.
Overarching rule/concept #1...The 'attribute-over rule'
Guildschool is a d100 system, and the mainifests as the success or failure of all actions is seen in game terms as a percentage chance of success. Trying to hit something, trying to learn something, trying to build something, seeing if you know something...always done as a percentage.
And when I was switching to % was back in the early 1980s, when d20 was the primary paradigm. And even then, I wanted to slice things up, especially in progress in skills/feats or bonuses/sutractions in amounts smaller than 5% (a d20). That was the origin for going percentile. I wanted to have more differential available. I wanted to have fighters increasing their chance to hit by 5% per level, but rangers increasing by 4% per level, and clerics by 3% per level...etc.
Now you have the backdrop.
So at this point, I am finally dealing with the fact that my houseruling of AD&D has gotten ridiculous. It's fall 1983. SO I write out my original skill list, mainly grafted from the AD&D classes, plus a few more. It had always annoyed me that some skills/abilities were affected by attributes, and some were not. And it also annoyed me that many attributes really were not afffected by an attribute unless if was very high or very low. For example, there really was no difference between having a 9 strength compared to a 15. Those 6 point mean nothing. However, the difference between 15 and 18 are huge. Those 3 points are gigantic.
And then, in one of those blinding flashes, I created something called the attribute over rule. It could apply to anything that attributes would affect. By adding an attribute over tag to any skill or weapon or language, i created a bonus/subtraction system that applied to the whole system.
From the Wiki...
"Attribute Over Rules
a few people have asked me recently a number of questions that are answered somewhat by full knowledge of this Bip rule. So I thought I would once again go over it. To me it seems like I've explained this a lot, but to the rest of you, it's probably the first time in 6 years I've put it to parchment. Since skills, weapons, and spells all use it, I might as well explain it again.
Every time this rule is invoked there is an 'attribute needed' and an 'attribute modifier'. For a weapon, it is normally Strength needed/Strength modifier, and Coordination needed and Coordination modifier. For Skills and Spells, it can vary as to what attribute is used. The Attribute needed is pretty obvious. What the modifier does is give you a bonus or subtraction for every point you have over or under the amount. So if you have an attribute needed of 10 and a mod of .5, and you have a 12 for that attribute, then you have a +1 mod gained. These do add together for multiple attribute modifiers. It might read (ST12/.02), which means that for every point f Strength over or under 12, .02 is added to the skill. or attrib mod
What these numbers are used for is different based on whether you are getting a modifier for a skill, a weapon, or a spell. For a skill, it is added to the experience modifier, for a Spell, it is added to the spell success, and for a weapon, it factors into the chance to hit, the damage bonus, and the speed bonus.
The weapons are the hardest to keep track of for this. The attribute over rules is used for both one and two handed usages for most weapons, and the outcome affects to hit, damage bonus, and speed bonus for both uses, so you have 6 different numbers coming out of every weapon used."
Next post will be some examples.
OK, the easiest example of the 'Attribute-over Rule' is in weapons. All versions of it work the same way, but weapons is in a very direct use and is the easiest to grasp. [note=BoB] I can now hear, in my inner ear, the scen from Band of Brothers where they are learning about navigation and the differential between true north and magnetic North.." Yesterdy we learned the 'Left Add Right Subtract", today we'll put it into practice..."[/note]
First off, all weapons use the attributes Strength and Coordination. So that limits the amounts of permuatations. And in skills, the attrib mods affect the base ability of a skill and the experience modifier. So we'll start with weapons.
From the [ur=http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956679/Weapon%20typesl]Weapons sub page[/url]...
"There are many unusual statistics used by the Guildschool game. Probably the most unusual is a variation on the Attribute Over rule, used to determine the affect on attributes of a weapon. Much like we use it to describe the advantages and disadvantages of attributes on a specific skill, we do the same thing with each individual weapon. A character does not need much strength to wield a dagger, nor does the low mass of the dagger give a huge advantage to being stronger. Whereas a large axe might need a lot of strength to wield without a disadvantage, but the sheer mass of it gives someone who is very strong a lot more extra *oomph* when it hits.
•Each weapon has a Strength Needed (STN) and a Coordination Needed (CDN).
•Each weapon has a Strength Modifier and a Coordination Modifier, which describes the bonus or subtraction for every point of strength and coordination the character has over or under the attribute needed.
•Most weapons have a 1handed STN and CDN, and a lower 2 handed STN and CDN. This simulates the offensive difference of switching to two handed fighting. Since shields are so useful in GS, this is an important consideration. Some PCs also prefer to use a second weapon.
•The bonus or subtraction gained has three effects. The total amount of bonus or subtraction is used as a to-hit adjustment. Also, for every full 4 points of total Strength Bonus, the character gains +1/-1 damage after the dividing die. And for every full 4 points of coordination bonus, the character gains a +1/-1 to initiative."
This is very interesting, seems like there are a lot of good design ideas hidden away in GS.
The Attribute Over rule is quite brilliant in its simplicity, allowing for a lot more "differential"; the very same property you said you were aiming for, by making attribute bonuses dependent on their application!
I like your example of two-handed weapon use a lot, although my D&D upbringing is screaming for a multiplier of some sort; if you just lower the required strength won't the bonus increase be constant? Say, I change from a 12/0.5 one-handed stance to a 10/0.5 two-handed stance - no matter whether I have 14 or 18 strength this will always correspond directly to a +1 bonus. Or did I misunderstand how it works due to pedagogical simplification?
(From here (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956682/WeaponExamples))
Here are all three guys and their attributes, the 1-hand and 2-hand stats. The three protagonists are Pfenig Restlington, hobyt Mage, Rex Baird, a human merchant, and Bar Vog Grenthog, a Gartier Guard of the Scarlet Pilums. Since we are doing a comparison here, only Strength and Coordination matter. Pfenig has a ST of 6 and a CD of 9, Rex has a ST of 13 and a CD of 13, and Bar has a ST of 18 and a CD of 15. We are comparing the affects of the ST and CD of the three protagonists (low combat stats, average combat stats, and very good combat stats) as examples as to how the Guild School system works, especially to optimize what weapons will be useful. Without having to arbitrarily create new systems, the attribute over rules will make weapons choices and use very realistic.
Smaller and weaker weapons do less damage and have higher dividing dice...but they also have lower attibute modifiers, which means the positive and negative effect of attributes are lower. It is also intersting that the affect of one vs two handed use comes in. Small weapons it is little difference, but with the bigger weapons the difference between one and two handed use is astrononomical.
We are not taking skills into account at all. This is just the native ability to use a weapon based on stats.
OK, were are going to use 3 weapons as examples. A bank dagger, a scimitar, and a Heavy Mace.
The Bank dagger
1Hand STN4/STMOD.5 CDN5/CDMOD.95 [note]The table to the left describes the three protagonists, and their use of a small bank dagger. Due to the small size and easy use, this has a pretty low Strength and Coordiantion needed. But also due to the lack of mass and actually stopping power, they have low modifiers for those attributes. SO even a small, weak guy like Pfenig will do ok with it.1d8+10/d10--maximum damage 18, 2.6 average [/note]
2Hand STN3/CDMOD.5 CDN3.75/CDMOD.95
So, one handed, Pfenig's ST of 6 nets him ((6-4)*.5)=1 and CD of 9 ((9-5)*.95)=3.8=+4.8 to hit, no damage bonus, no Speed bonus.
Two handed, ((6-3)*.5)=1.5 and CD((9-3.75)*.95)=5, for a +6.5% to hit, no damage bonus but a -1 speed bonus.
Remember, this is a very low power weapon.
Rex Baird is pretty normal guy with a ST13 and CD13.
so his numbers with this tiny, low power dagger are...[note] It is a small weapon, the advantages of going 2 handed for someone even as average as Rex is pretty small, especially when copared with using another dagger or using a small shield.[/note]
One Hand, ST ((13-4)*.5)=4.5 and CD ((13-5)*.95)=8.4, means a total of +12.9% to hit, +1 damage and -2 speed bonus.
Two Hand ST ((13-3)*.5)=5 and CD ((13-3.75)*.95)=8.8 means a total of 13.8% to hit, +1 damage and -2 speed bonus.
Now, Bar Vog is huge, so he's going to gain even less real advantage from using this toothpick 2 handed.
One hand ST ((18-4)*.5)=7 and CD ((15-5)*.95)=9.5, giving Bar a +14.5% to hit, +1 damage, -2 Speed Bonus.
Two Hand ST ((18-3)*.5)=7.5 and CD (15-3.75)*.95)=10.7 for +18.2 to hit, +1 damage and -2 speed bonus.
Now, one thing I want to show here is that the attribute over rule allows us to have a weapon where all the characters can use it advantageously, and due to the small size, the larger character does not gain much more advnatage that the average character.
Next post will be the scimitar..and you'll see a big difference.
Quote from: Superfluous Crow
This is very interesting, seems like there are a lot of good design ideas hidden away in GS.
The Attribute Over rule is quite brilliant in its simplicity, allowing for a lot more "differential"; the very same property you said you were aiming for, by making attribute bonuses dependent on their application!
I like your example of two-handed weapon use a lot, although my D&D upbringing is screaming for a multiplier of some sort; if you just lower the required strength won't the bonus increase be constant? Say, I change from a 12/0.5 one-handed stance to a 10/0.5 two-handed stance - no matter whether I have 14 or 18 strength this will always correspond directly to a +1 bonus. Or did I misunderstand how it works due to pedagogical simplification?
Thank you!
One of the overarching ideas was to do away with non-contextual bonuses (16 ST +1 to damage, no matter one handed, 2 handed, big weapon or small weapon) and go to a system where the attrib-over allows an adjustment more specific.
One thing this system allowed me to do was create the bonuses to follow real-world weapon use. Shields are always underpowered in most games due to this, but in real warfare, shields are the very first type of armor and some of the most important and varied...but most games make them vastly inferior to any armor. Also, in ost systems, the choice to use a weapon one or 2 handed is arbitrary, and not based on the abilities of the person. Lastly, the option of using 2 weapons, so common in real blade warfare, takes care of itself in GS due to the same elegant base ruleset.
Look at the dagger compared to the scimitar, and see if that takes care of your issue. Thank you again, BTW. I was going to post the Simitar tonight, but I will try to post today.
Here are all three guys and their attributes again, the 1-hand and 2-hand stats. The three protagonists are Pfenig Restlington, hobyt Mage, Rex Baird, a human merchant, and Bar Vog Grenthog, a Gartier Guard of the Scarlet Pilums. Since we are doing a comparison here, only Strength and Coordination matter. Pfenig has a ST of 6 and a CD of 9, Rex has a ST of 13 and a CD of 13, and Bar has a ST of 18 and a CD of 15. We are comparing the affects of the ST and CD of the three protagonists (low combat stats, average combat stats, and very good combat stats) as examples as to how the Guild School system works, especially to optimize what weapons will be useful. Without having to arbitrarily create new systems, the attribute over rules will make weapons choices and use very realistic.
We are going to stat out the scimitar next.
Scimitar 2 hand STN14/2.1mod CDN13/.95 mod 1 hand STN10.5/2.1mod CDN9.75/.95 mod
1d8+1d6+11/d6, maximum damage 25. average damage 5.4
So back to Pfenig...
1 hand ST ((6-14)*2.1)=-16.8 CD ((9-13)*.095)=-3.8 for -20.6% to hit, -4 damage, 0 speed bonus. [note=yuck] See what I mean? the system basically tells this guy that this weapon is a little big to used 2 hands...and 1 hand is a disaster. Now, Rex looks pretty good, as he is an average guy using an average weapon...[/note]
2 hand ST ((6-10.5)*2.1)=-9.5 CD ((9-9.75)*.95)=-.7, for -10.2% to hit, -2 Dam, 0 speed bonus.
On to Rex...an average guy with a 13 ST and a 13 CD, using an average weapon, a scimitar...
1 hand ST ((13-14)*2.1)=-2.1 CD ((13-13)*.95)=0 -2.1%to hit, 0 damage bonus, 0 speed bonus.
2 hand ST ((13-10.5)*2.1)=5.25 CD((13-9.75)*.95)=3.1 +8.35% to hit, +1 Dam, 0 speed.
And Bar Vog, ST18 and CD15...this guy should have the option of 1 hand or 2 hand...
1 hand ST((18-14)*2.1)=8.4 CD((15-13)*.95)=1.9 +10.3% to hit, +2 Damage, 0 speed bonus
2 hand ST((18-10.5)*2.1)=15.75 cd((15-9.75)*.95)=5 +20.75% to hit +2 damage , -1 speed bonus.
So this weapon is really average, decent, popular....some decent heft and stopping power. But it really is just to big for Pfenig, though if it was his only option, he'd need to go 2 handed. It's made for a guy like Rex, who should still use it two handed to really wield it, but if he want to use a main gauche or a shield, he has the option.
The weapon is a little small for BAr, but he can make very, very good use of it. One handed and a shield is easy, or he could wield 2 of them easily.
What I was trying to point out was that the numerical bonus from going two-handed is largely independent of a character's strength.
For the to-hit bonus of the scimitar:
Pfenig: (-10.2)-(-20.6)=10.4
Rex: 8.35-(-2.1)=10.45
Bar Vog: 20.75-10.3=10.45
As you can see, the actual bonus is identical for all the characters (the small discrepancy is a rounding error I believe). You could, in fact, do away with the Attribute Over calculations (for going 2-handed as opposed to one-handed) entirely and just add a fixed number, but I am quite certain this is not what you want. If you want there to be a less fixed difference between using one and two hands you will have to change the modifier as well.
Quote from: Superfluous Crow
What I was trying to point out was that the numerical bonus from going two-handed is largely independent of a character's strength.
For the to-hit bonus of the scimitar:
Pfenig: (-10.2)-(-20.6)=10.4
Rex: 8.35-(-2.1)=10.45
Bar Vog: 20.75-10.3=10.45
As you can see, the actual bonus is identical for all the characters (the small discrepancy is a rounding error I believe). You could, in fact, do away with the Attribute Over calculations (for going 2-handed as opposed to one-handed) entirely and just add a fixed number, but I am quite certain this is not what you want. If you want there to be a less fixed difference between using one and two hands you will have to change the modifier as well.
Let's see after the last weapon. The dagger showed different changes; (unless it is just my math), and the advantages for damage and speed bonus do change more.
I went through the dagger math and it seems like there were a few minor errors - the difference in bonus between using 1 and 2 hands should still be constant. (in the case of the dagger 1.6875 or thereabouts)
Or am I the one miscalculating?
we'll check. I am not going to get to deep into it now, because their are still differences with the bonuses, and so the calculations still need to be done...Though I think you math is making sense. It actually makews some sense that since the attribmod is constant...that makes sense.
It gets more fun wehen we get into the attribute over rules for skills, where they really shine...