Forum Game: Bounty Hunters of the Cadaverous Earth

[LD]

Thank you both for the interest.

The rules are quite simple especially once you have set up your initial characters. All you need to do each turn is determine 6 actions- 2 for each character, and figure out where you are putting your wealth. Now, the actions can get quite complicated if you want them to be- with contingencies, etc., but that's all up to you. At the most basic, your turn could be:

Hunter 1:
Research Target 1 (Research Location, Vitals, Associates, achieving success on each category depending on how high GM rolls the check)
Research  Target 1 (Research Location, Vitals, Associates, achieving success on each category depending on how high GM rolls the check)

Hunter 2:
Travel to Target 1 Using Hunter 1's information.
Hunt Target 1 ---Choose to attack with Aim. Choose to Spare.

If successful: Collect reward.

Hunter 3:
Research Target 2 (Research Location, Vitals, Associates, achieving success on each category depending on how high GM rolls the check)
Hunt Target 2 ---Choose to attack with Strength. Choose to Slay.

If successful: Collect reward.

The GM does all the rolls, all the results, and subtracts the money.

---
This being said, I have considered that perhaps each player would prefer to control less hunters at the beginning, so as to better ease into the game? More could be hired relatively quickly. Would you rather control only 2 you make, or 1 you make and 1 you hire from my pre-gens? I suspect that characters may die fairly easily, thus, my initial idea that each player should create 2 characters, so the loss of one won't be missed.

[Rose-of-Vellum]

To clarify, it's not the hunting mechanics that I find particularly cumbersome. Even controlling a minor handful of hunters wouldn't be too hard (although creating several is far more time-consuming, so I like your idea of creating 1 and controlling 2 at the beginning). But the combination of multiple hunters, coupled with corporate actions might be unwieldy -especially since the corporate actions can be quite disparate.  

More importantly, some of the corporate crunch seems a bit bland. For example, do we really need to know or care about how many clothes stands are in a building? Or whether the chair is varnished or sturdy? Not only does such material seem unnecessary, but it also seems rather mundane, and thus a bit incongruent with CE's gritty, bizarre, eclectic tone.

One potential alternative is simply to provide costs for tiers of HQs. Provide the cost to upgrade/purchase said tier/rank, and then make higher tiers provide bonuses. For example, we might start with a rank/tier/level/etc 1 space (which could be anything from a shanty outside the Walls, a floor or two in a Pulsetown row home, or a series of connected chambers in the Catacombs). A tier 2 might provide a +1 bonus to research checks, notoriety, or loyalty, while a tier three bonus would be +2, etc.. Players would then be free to describe whether their chairs are upholstered with moth-eaten embroidery, sutured ghul-hide, or wine-stained satin.

Or, HQs could have 'stats'.

Opulence might represent how comfortable and aesthetic a place is, and thus would include everything from the richness of its dinning ware to the etiquette and exoticness of serving staff. This might add a bonus to notoriety and hunter loyalty (assuming the hunter cares for posh and pampering). However, the higher a HQ's opulence, the more tempting it is to robbery and rivalry -and if you are successfully robbed, your charter's notoriety -and loyalty of hunters- typically decreases.

Defense might represent how secure your HQ is. It represents how skilled and vigilant your guards are, how numerous, cunning, and powerful any traps might be, the strength of your walls and wards, etc. Defense would add a bonus against robbery attempts, deter such attempts in the first place, and may, if the GM decides, increase the notoriety of a charter after a notably thwarting a robbery/attack/etc.  

Resource might represent how well stocked your library, laboratory, etc. are. It would also represent how erudite and intellectually helpful your staff are (e.g., your mephit butler plays hexagonal chess with you every evening, during which time you talk strategy and politics). A Resource score would thus add a bonus to research checks. It would neither attract nor deter robbery attempts, nor would it directly increase notoriety checks (but better research would likely lead to greater successes and thus increased notoriety). It likewise wouldn't directly affect hunter loyalty, except perhaps to a more scholarly bounty hunter (GM call).

One could spend money to upgrade any of these stats (and thus increase their bonuses). Generally, robberies wouldn't decrease any of these stats (e.g., thieves are generally after your bone-pennies, not your chandeliers and upholstered chairs), but the GM might rule otherwise in specific cases (e.g., a rival breaks in and manages to partially torch your library, decreasing your resource score, or a robber made off with your well-known collection of silk screens allegedly commissioned by the Mad Magister himself, decreasing your Opulence score).

Regardless, players would have artistic freedom to describe their HQ's location, accommodations, staff, layout, etc. Naturally, the GM would supervise. For example, an Opulence 1 HQ isn't going to be an ornate cathedral in Hexwarren, lush with gilded tapestries, stuffed sand-rays, and crystal decanters of aged gloomwine.  It might, however, be a mold-infested shrine in Slimesquallor, with a blood-stained tapestry, a rotting, poorly-stitched piranha rat, and half-drunk bottles of kombucha and cloth-wine.  

Or, depending on player discretion, it could just as easily be a timber-nailed structure in the Shanties, stocked with a keg of piss-beer and blood, with splintering chairs upholstered with ostrich hide, and a bullet-ridden roof of rusting tin.  

Personally, I think such a system fosters greater creativity, while still providing mechanical incentives and strategy to upgrade a charter's HQ -and does so in a way that doesn't require a lot a lot of menial work (e.g., no need to count how many chairs and clothing racks you have). Additionally, players can choose the depth of detail they prefer. Some players might simply give a basic description of their HQ and select their stats. Others might meticulously detail each room. Both can play the game to their preferred style in a way that does not impinge on the other.

Or, at least, that's my take on things. :)

[LD]

You are correct that Headquarters may be a better term than Office. I will change that.

The hunting is what matters more than anything else. Thus why I didn't really bother to stat out the building upgrade rules yet. The Headquarters and Home are for prestige, a measure of how good the players are doing and essentially as a different way to get bonuses and to suffer negatives than just through equipment.

I had imagined all the HQs to be essentially next to each other and my goal is to have them standardized- to have the same building blocks inside and the same servant types inside so that it is easy to compare 1:1 how well someone is doing. Essentially in building a home and stables, each player is building a sort of Gormenghast Castle, a sprawling nightmarish monstrosity that is collapsing under the weight of its servants and its grounds. The players will be making choices on what to construct, much as they chose buildings in Underdeep or as players gain "upgrades" in flash games like Protector or build upgrades in games like "Rogue Legacy", and trying to avoid bankruptcy.

Bureaucracy and increasing costs are meant to be a large theme here. People will need increasingly large amounts of licenses and fees, to be able to meet regulations and requirements. Thus, while I see a large benefit to doing away with precise numbers of wealth and abstracting it, I decided to keep things by the obelus rather than White Wolf-it into abstract Resources (there is much good to be said about abstracting money, but here, it made sense not to do that).

Given your comments, I can see a benefit to allowing players choose where to locate their Headquarters, so that's a good point. From the exterior, the buildings can look like whatever- but their floorplans will necessarily be the exact same with the same types of rooms to choose from.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by menial work. There isn't any menial work in the current system; as I wrote it up the descriptions are illustrative of what the level included. Level 3 included 4 clothing racks b/c 4 racks are a symbol of status. Everyone's room upgrades need to be equalized or else it could be confusing to compare what level of success each person has; so rather than just writing Level 3- I wrote (3) and then described what 3 includes; essentially it already presents the room's level of opulence. The only things that matter ultimately is how the room upgrades affect the statistics. At the moment, the building rules are for my pleasure as a GM and as a source of versimmiltude-you're playing bureaucrats, not adventurers- and this is a strategy game, not a RPG adventure- from a Players point of view, the building rules present the realism of money-sinks that are necessary costs of doing business as legitimate bounty hunters.

I do appreciate the amount of thought you put into your response. Thank you for the clarification!

General Comment to all:
The system, with the exception of the building rules is finished. It's extremely simple and straightforward. It even has less overhead than my Righteous Empire game, which was extremely simple to run- and is set in a setting that people are familiar with and which has limits because it is in a familiar setting-I can't quite do whatever I want willy-nilly (though that does make more work on my end), but it allows players to can go into it with certain expectations rather than everything being a surprise. I could start a game extremely soon (as soon as I write up some more bounties and hunters for hire). Not really sure what I may be doing wrong here since I've gotten feedback from others (not just in this thread) that it's confusing?

[Rose-of-Vellum]

You are correct that Headquarters may be a better term than Office.

Charterhouse might the most accurate term, if you're looking for a mechanical title. IG, I could see different charters using a vast array of terms, titles, and names. For example, I could imagine a charter named the Fetch's Fane, a double entendre reflecting the charter's focus on bringing back escaped slaves for the Fleshmongers as well as their ties to the Church or Striga and the House of Untainted Flesh. But I digress.

The hunting is what matters more than anything else. Thus why I didn't really bother to stat out the building upgrade rules yet. The Headquarters and Home are for prestige, a measure of how good the players are doing and essentially as a different way to get bonuses and to suffer negatives than just through equipment.

I agree that the hunting is the most important part, and I think the hunting rules are definitely the best part of it. I also like the concept of a game where you do get to measure and build your organization. My point, however, was that the building rules seemed to be unnecessarily bland and uniform, likely squelching creativity and diverging from the motley nature of the city and setting as a whole. Naturally, tis your game, but I thought I would share my two pennies and offer a potential (from my perspective) solution.

I had imagined all the HQs to be essentially next to each other and my goal is to have them standardized- to have the same building blocks inside and the same servant types inside so that it is easy to compare 1:1 how well someone is doing. Essentially in building a home and stables, each player is building a sort of Gormenghast Castle, a sprawling nightmarish monstrosity that is collapsing under the weight of its servants and its grounds. The players will be making choices on what to construct, much as they chose buildings in Underdeep or as players gain "upgrades" in flash games like Protector or build upgrades in games like "Rogue Legacy", and trying to avoid bankruptcy.

As mentioned above, having the buildings all be the same, inside or out, seems to contradict the motley, variegated nature of Macellaria. It also doesn't seem very fun, at least from a player's perspective.

Moreover, with either of the two alternatives I suggested, you could still do all the things you listed. You could compare charterhouse stats and instantly get a feel for their relative advantages and weaknesses. The players would still have choices on how they wanted to upgrade. There would be costs, tactics, strategies, and consequences.

Bureaucracy and increasing costs are meant to be a large theme here. People will need increasingly large amounts of licenses and fees, to be able to meet regulations and requirements.

Agreed. I don't see how the alternative mechanics would compromise that though. Increasing a charterhouse's Opulence of Defense by 1 rank would not only have a hefty initial cost, but then an uptick in upkeep as well. The costs for both might well geometrically progress.

Thus, while I see a large benefit to doing away with precise numbers of wealth and abstracting it, I decided to keep things by the obelus rather than White Wolf-it into abstract Resources (there is much good to be said about abstracting money, but here, it made sense not to do that).

Once again, I agree. Similarly, I'm not sure how that applies to the proffered alternative (or maybe that comment wasn't made in regards to it?).

From the exterior, the buildings can look like whatever- but their floorplans will necessarily be the exact same with the same types of rooms to choose from.

Could you explain your reasoning behind the latter? Why is it necessary to have exact floorplans?

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by menial work. There isn't any menial work in the current system

Menial, as in not requiring muck skill and lacking prestige. 'Pick and click' choices -e.g., Do I choose the (1) simple bed and mattress with possible bedbug infestation, some simply woven sheets with holes and stains, a rotten table, a second-hand rickety chair and a clothes stand, or (2) simple bed with railings and mattress, some well-woven sheets without holes or stains, a sturdy unfurnished chair, three clothes stands and a weapons-stand.

There's not much imagination required or prestige offered in either choice. Same thing with a running a laundry list of monthly salaries for footserfs and maids. It's (to me at least) not very evocative or enjoyable.

But if you give me the choice of spending hard-earned obeloi on either increasing my HQ's defenses, decorations, or lore -and then give me the flexibility to describe what that increase looks like, then that sounds evocative and enjoyable, even as it retains the tactical and strategic complexity and economic verisimilitude you seem to be aiming for. Especially since a character's description wouldn't change the mechanically ramifications of their OOC choice (e.g., if you paid to advance your HQ's Defense stat from 3 to 4, the mechanically bonus against robbery and attack would be the same, regardless of whether the player described the advancement as a function of buying better armor for her extant guards, hired more or better skilled guards, bound a minor demon to patrol the place, paid a witch to inscribe a few protective glyphs on the windows and doors, or bought massive locks.

It's cosmetic, but it's more creative, and likely more enjoyable to decide and describe than picking between a "second-hand rickety chair and a clothes stand" or a "sturdy unfurnished chair, three clothes stands and a weapons-stand".

Not really sure what I may be doing wrong here since I've gotten feedback from others (not just in this thread) that it's confusing?

Perhaps I've miscommunicated my sentiments. I'm not saying you've done anything wrong here. To the contrary, I think your game has an awesome concept. The setting and region are perfect for it, for many of the reasons you have already listed. Additionally, I love the first bounty hunter and contract. Both are evocative, well-written, and engaging. The Hunt, Research, Travel triad are great. I like the different categories of weapons and how you made armor act as DR. The Notoriety and Loyalty concepts are perfect. I love how it all fits perfectly for asynchronous play-by-post play.

Consequently, my intent was to suggest ways to make a good game even greater, and the biggest area for improvement (that I saw) was the building rules -not the concept, but the mechanical execution. Hence my first post and proffered solution.

There are some smaller issues that I think could be tweaked as well, but I didn't bring them up, because I didn't want the negative to outweigh the positive feedback. For example, the second step of the Hire Away rules is a little confusing to me. Additionally, I don't see the point of having a separate domicile for the charter's boss. Just roll that into the charterhouse. Not only would this make the mechanics more parsimonious, but it would also reflect how the most of the city works -e.g., the Robber Barons, like Mr. Rasp, dwell in their Guildhouses. 

The weapon rules are likely okay, but their visual format makes them a bit cumbersome to read and compare at the moment. The one thing I do see is a lack of guns. All I see is a repeating rifle. No six-shooters, pistols, muskets, blunderbusses, etc.

Hopefully the above clarifies my intent and feedback.

[LD]

Thank you again. I'll do what I can to respond to and address the rest later, but for the moment, I have acted on and improved the weapons based on your good feedback.

re:

The weapon rules are likely okay, but their visual format makes them a bit cumbersome to read and compare at the moment. The one thing I do see is a lack of guns. All I see is a repeating rifle. No six-shooters, pistols, muskets, blunderbusses, etc.

== Fixed. Weapons now in tables. New Aim weapons added.

[Rose-of-Vellum]

The tables really improve the readability. The expanded firearms are also a welcome addition.

Looking over the weapons though, I think that guns are prohibitively expensive, especially since they don't seem to provide any significant advantage. Perhaps I am missing some rule?

For example, compare the repeating pistol to the shortbow.
The former is 1,500 obeloi (30 obeloi/bullet), +1 Aim, 1 damage, concealable & illegal.  
The latter is 150 obeloi (10 obeloi/arrow), +1 Aim, 1 damage, open & legal.
So, despite having the same bonus to attack and damage, the gun is 10 times more expensive? What's more, it has a 60% chance of jamming?

And that's not the only such disparity. Look at the longbow and rifle -same attack and damage, but the rifle -and its ammo- costs 5 times more and has a 25% chance of jamming.

Are the prices a typo? Or is there some rule/advantage I'm missing?

[LD]

It is a mistake in part.
The reloadability and the concealability can be a big advantage.
The repeating pistol can be fired more times without rest than a shortbow can be fired. I intended to account for the cost somewhere. And I did... in the bullet cost.
Thank you for pointing out that I never reduced the actual item's cost proportionately. Essentially I was charging twice for the same thing. That's now fixed. Thank you.

Guns are a long-game purchase. They are good for protracted shootouts.
Bows are good for short/small encounters.
Magic is a utility hammer, but you have to invest your character points in Magic, Luck, and Clever to make good use of it because it can fizzle.

[Rose-of-Vellum]

The repeating pistol can be fired more times without rest than a shortbow can be fired.

How so? Mechanically, that is? I looked, but didn't see any rules on reloading, action economy, or whatnot.

Guns are a long-game purchase. They are good for protracted shootouts.
Bows are good for short/small encounters.

As above, could you explain how/why this is the case? A pistol has to be reloaded every time, theoretically just like a bow. And a bow has no chance of jamming. Relatedly, I may be misunderstanding the jam %. Does a repeating pistol have a 50% chance of jamming every time it is fired? So on average, the weapon only works half the time? Or does it means something else?

Magic is a utility hammer, but you have to invest your character points in Magic, Luck, and Clever to make good use of it because it can fizzle.

Makes sense.

[LD]

How so? Mechanically, that is? I looked, but didn't see any rules on reloading, action economy, or whatnot.

As above, could you explain how/why this is the case? A pistol has to be reloaded every time, theoretically just like a bow. And a bow has no chance of jamming. Relatedly, I may be misunderstanding the jam %. Does a repeating pistol have a 50% chance of jamming every time it is fired? So on average, the weapon only works half the time? Or does it means something else?

JAMMING WEAPONS
Regarding Jamming- yes, that is the chance for a weapon to jam. Perhaps the chances could be adjusted a bit, but on my current read of the rules, this makes sense. Jams are auto-cleared in the next battle round- I didn't want to get into adding rules of un-jamming a weapon.

I see the CE's pistols and weapons as being new inventions, devilishly difficult and prone to malfunction.

Up in the battle rules, I had some elaboration on Jamming: Jamming Weapons: Some Gun-based may Jam if your Knowledge was not high enough so that you were able to avoid problems with the powder. On each use there is an x% chance it will jam, see the Aim Weapons sheet for the chance). Before each encounter the GM will make a Knowledge check for you to see if there is a risk of jams. If you pass, nothing will jam. (The Rule on Jamming weapons was here before I read your feedback, but I added the final sentence to clarify the issue).

Thus, when using pistols, you may want to invest in both Aim and Knowledge.

RELOADING
The rules regarding reloading are in the same chart as the Aim weapons themselves. For the Repeating pistol, for example:
1 to Aim (reload after 6th shot) (Jam: 50%)

The pistol can fire in 6 rounds of attack concurrently. The short bow, however, can only fire in 3 rounds of attack concurrently. 1 to Aim (rest after 3rd shot), so your opponent may get an extra attack on you while you are reloading.

This did point out an important thing I did omit in the Battle rules. There were no rules for how the enemy actually damages the Hunter. The rules were implied, but they were not explicit. Now they are. Thank you.

CHARTERHOUSES

Additionally, I don't see the point of having a separate domicile for the charter's boss. Just roll that into the charterhouse. Not only would this make the mechanics more parsimonious, but it would also reflect how the most of the city works -e.g., the Robber Barons, like Mr. Rasp, dwell in their Guildhouses.

That makes sense and it is a good point. I forgot that Mr. Rasp lived in his guildhouse. The two houses are now one.

QUESTION
Also, I have been considering to eliminate this rule:
"When you fight, the GM will
ADD a bonus of your
(Clever+Luck/2) to the rolls"
Because I was able to add other instances where Clever and Luck are important, and the rule will significantly increase my overhead in time management. Without it, I will save time from having to do additional math. I don't necessarily *like* cutting it out from a system-strength point of view. But do you think it's necessary? Without that rule, do I lose something valuable? Should I keep it? I keep going back on forth on it.

[Rose-of-Vellum]

I like the direction of your revised building rules, though I might suggest having some more of the upgrades provide bonuses to stats or be a bit more CE-ish. For example, maids, valets, and meeting rooms are okay, but they don't necessarily scream grotesquerie, transformation, addiction & appetite, and adventure (i.e., the setting's themes).

Instead, consider adding things like opium dens (perhaps filled with thrum, smoulder, lush, etc.), slatterns (i.e., cheap whores in addition to the more exclusive night companion/courtesan you already have), shrines to strange gods (increase loyalty to hunters of that faith?), gambling halls, small pit-arenas for bizarre bugs, serpents, rats, and other beasts to fight for the pleasure of the hunters. Stuff like that, or more bizarre.  

I see the CE's pistols and weapons as being new inventions, devilishly difficult and prone to malfunction.

Considering the technologies, both past and present, in CE, I find this a bit contrary to my understanding of the setting. So your comment made me wonder, do you interpret CE's flavor differently, or are you intentionally altering the setting's flavor?

If you're looking to create a wider range, you could create matchlock, wheellock, and flintlock versions of pistols, muskets, and rifles. Revolvers, however, be percussion cap and cartridge-based.

On each use there is an x% chance it will jam, see the Aim Weapons sheet for the chance). Before each encounter the GM will make a Knowledge check for you to see if there is a risk of jams. If you pass, nothing will jam.

What kind of Knowledge DC are talking about?

Regarding guns, though, shouldn't a revolver have a far lower chance of jamming than a flintlock pistol? Perhaps my firearms lore is faulty, but the current set-up seems backwards.

Related, firearms, and weapons in general, seem like they do very little damage. Moan, for instance, would have to be shot 15 times with a shortbow or pistol before dying -and technically, with his leather armor, Moan is immune to shortbows, pistols, revolvers, and many other weapons. All in all, it seems like the weapon damage are really low. Am I reading something wrong? For instance, do you also add Aim or Strength plus the weapon to your damage?  That would seem to make the math work, but I don't see any such rule.

Regarding the Luck & Clever question, I would indeed drop them from the roll. They have other roles.

[Steerpike]

Regarding firearms, I see them as being a mixture.  You'd have ancient, beautifully crafted archaic duelling wheellocks that have been heirlooms in, say, a magister's family for centuries (that might be stolen or looted and resold) and that might very well have some minor witcheries placed on them, but then there are also have crappy matchlock hand-cannons that got forged by some gutter-smith in Macellaria from melted-down scrap.

Also, I really like Moan.

[LD]

BUILDING

I like the direction of your revised building rules, though I might suggest having some more of the upgrades provide bonuses to stats or be a bit more CE-ish. For example, maids, valets, and meeting rooms are okay, but they don't necessarily scream grotesquerie, transformation, addiction & appetite, and adventure (i.e., the setting's themes).

Certainly there will be more room types, many of which will be oriented toward bonuses.
The other unspoken, but implied point is also well taken. It might be more interesting to focus on different rooms to build rather than "Tiers" of the same room.

A note about the maids, valets, etc. When writing about them, I think of Downton Abbey and Gosford Park and their scheming servants, but I also think of Gormenghast Castle, and of Edward Gorey. There is a little decay and soot in the age where servants were needed for these tasks. I'm not imagining Maid!-style or Lolita Maids, but Something more dreadful and Gothic, like This.

For an example of Evil servants:

"Mervyn Peake's world of Gormenghast suffers the misdeeds of a most enigmatic and attractive protagonist: Steerpike, the kitchen boy whose ambition raises him from the underground steams to the high roofs of manipulation and contagious madness...Even though Steerpike shows an appreciation for the quality of well-made objects, such a banal excuse for murder as Barquentine's ugliness only confirms that Steerpike's rational behaviour is not flawless. Steerpike will kill the Master [of Ritual], but at a high price: " (http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/hidalgopaper.pdf)

Instead, consider adding things like opium dens (perhaps filled with thrum, smoulder, lush, etc.), slatterns (i.e., cheap whores in addition to the more exclusive night companion/courtesan you already have), shrines to strange gods (increase loyalty to hunters of that faith?), gambling halls, small pit-arenas for bizarre bugs, serpents, rats, and other beasts to fight for the pleasure of the hunters. Stuff like that, or more bizarre.  

All very good ideas that I will make a point to add. Thank you for the suggestions!

FIREARMS

Regarding guns, though, shouldn't a revolver have a far lower chance of jamming than a flintlock pistol? Perhaps my firearms lore is faulty, but the current set-up seems backwards.

You're likely more correct than I. I won't claim to know much about weapons, especially firearms. I'll review them again.
A note though- I figure they haven't gotten repeating pistols working perfectly; or else everyone would have one. The temptation would simply be too much to restore industry capable of producing the wonders.

Related, firearms, and weapons in general, seem like they do very little damage. Moan, for instance, would have to be shot 15 times with a shortbow or pistol before dying -and technically, with his leather armor, Moan is immune to shortbows, pistols, revolvers, and many other weapons. All in all, it seems like the weapon damage are really low. Am I reading something wrong? For instance, do you also add Aim or Strength plus the weapon to your damage?  That would seem to make the math work, but I don't see any such rule.

Good point; that being said-->
1. My thinking here was generally that I do want battles to take 4-8 rounds.
2. Also, With the Aim weapons, the ammunition is key in many cases. Ammunition will add an extra few damage points per hit.

I'll give the chart a look over and adjust some things to accurately represent the propellant power of firearms. It's entirely possible that I was too conservative w/r/t damage. It's also possible that I left a skewed image by only putting 2 types of ammunition up- I planned to add some more types and I will get on that.

for a knowledge check, it would be roll a D20; if the GM rolls under or equal to your knowledge, then you were able to find the flaw in the powder.

Regarding firearms, I see them as being a mixture.  You'd have ancient, beautifully crafted archaic duelling wheellocks that have been heirlooms in, say, a magister's family for centuries (that might be stolen or looted and resold) and that might very well have some minor witcheries placed on them, but then there are also have crappy matchlock hand-cannons that got forged by some gutter-smith in Macellaria from melted-down scrap

That is very helpful! I will use that as a guide.

Also, I really like Moan.

Thank you!

[LD]

Thank you again for the feedback Rose and Steerpike. The revised weapon list (Mark 3.0) is now up, along with a table that explains costing. A revised building list is also up (Mark 3.0). More buildings will be added and a few more weapons will be added, but the general framework is now set there.

We now have dueling wheellocks, exploding hand cannons in addition to flintlocks, rifles, and blunderbussi.
We now have special hex-driven weapons.
And Master-wrought weapons.
Weapons that can be bought only with the right connections, or at a reduced price with the right rooms.

If there's a direction anyone wants to take their character but I haven't provided the tools yet, please speak up.

[Rose-of-Vellum]

Thumbs up on the changes and clarifications, LD. When were you thinking of starting this game?

[LD]

*6 Quarries added.
*More rooms/upgrades added.
*Weapons are pretty much finalized now. I *think* I have the costing right.

*EDIT: Also added the Lady/Lord of the Flies.

I could start it soon after someone gets characters up. I think I could run this with even one player. The competitive aspect will be missing, but other than that, it should be entertaining.