Celtricia

[LordVreeg]

What Type of Games is Guildschool made for?
 

From a macro perspective, this entry is written for those who play the games as much as for those who run them.  Often, players will look at the game or games they have played as the only games that are played, or as the style of games they have been part of.  

And often this has to do with the GM.  I often am influenced by the large-scale, epic works of Tolkien and his ilk.

However, some of the most satisfying games I have played have been much lesser scale.  I played 2 espionage/intrigue games out of Igbar and Stenron that were tremendous, with one main character who had 75% of their experience in social and thieving skills.  I've had games played by 3 characters that were mainly casters, that lasted 2 years, and encouraged me to make the rules for scroll creation, as well as the balance on the cost of learning magic.  The Online Steel Isle game is an example of a game that has changed from what I thought it was going to be, becoming a roleplaying extravaganza with many of the PCs playing characters from mechant guilds.  

 
As players learn the ins and outs of the system, they also learn how to take advantage of part of the game, and indeed, as a homebrew, there are still parts of the game that are 'under construction'.  And every player complains that their first character would have been built completely differently.  I subit that while this is true, and more true in GS than most games, it is true for every game.

And having watched many players and many games, invariably the normal arc of character creation is seen.  As players learn the system, they learn how to make better characters,  and they optimize more.  And after they've built a few optimized characters, they start to build the quirkier, more individual characters that GuildSchool really thrives on.

So while many GMs tend to work on the epic level game, myself included, and while some familiarity with the rules leads to more optimized characters, the characters that survive and thrive are, interestingly enough, the quirky ones.  While any ruleset can be optimized, Guildschool has more options for customization after the thrill of building cookie cutter combat monsters is over

[LordVreeg]

Great Igbar game last night, using the heavier roleplay exp rewards that we've been stressing lately.

Inebriated players can mean interesting character decisions.
I promise.

The New Legion moved back to the Teque Guild stockade.  Made friends, spoke to the Guild Master (an omwo~ Trader Tertious, Venolick PonPoi), integrated a new KNight of the Blue Turtle Honorable warriors (Yrtl).  Helped heal folk at the Temple of The Hosting.

The other main temple in the stockade, the Church of Black Irony, took offence to Igli, Priestess of Heroes and Fools, and threw her from their steps.  (The Pact veritus says anyone can go to any temple, BTW).  And in Igbar, Igli does not know of any trouble between the house of worship.  SO the New Legion gets pissed and comes to take the temple to task, tossing the temple guards from the steps and breaking down the temple doors, and Pollina rushes inside, using her martial abilities to throw around a grou pf fighting priests.  She gets a little fried, but as the clash really gets underway, on of the last remaining gurdsmen, Charles Rettick (human olde male) breaks it up, convincing all that they might suffer a great social stigma.

The the group went to the Black Boar inn, the last remaining unburnt bar, and Pharren played the Lyre well while others did less well entertaining.

[LordVreeg]

Last night's Igbar session was rough.

Sometimes, Players take their roles very seriously, and playing an NPC who is wracked by guilt and has little faith in a PC he is speaking to is difficult.  The PCs want you (the GM) to respond logically as yourself, whereas you have to respond in character.
I am referring to Pharren, who started as a PC Bard/Archer type, whose Player was very on/off (and who had a new baby, so no blame).  The Character had a good, developed personality, so I took him on as an NPC.  Pharren turned out to be one of 2 members of the Grey Legion that survived their waking of the Antroo Vampyre, and after that flight, he survived a night time visit from the vampyre into Igbar [note=Blood everywhere] that night was a bloody mess, as the Antroo Vampyre wiped out most of the apprentices in the School of the White Paladin as well as the Novice Strings of the Frigid Song.  The other remaining Grey Legion Members were also killed messily, except for Father Eodl, since he was on very sacred ground.[/note].
Pharren lost most of the use of his left hand that night, now a blackened, shrivelled thing.  He is no longer a bowman, and the near death event furhter scarred him, as well as 3 days of near death with some understandable nightmares.  Pharren came out of this wracked with huge guilt, since he was one of the last survivors of the group that had woekn this ancient evil.  This got worse as the undead scourge fell upon Igbar's area.
In his pursuit of creating a counterforce strong enough to challenge this Vampyre (yes, and he hasnightmares about facing this creature again), he has already watched over a dozen members of the New Legion perish, as the group goes throguh a transformative culling.

So when an extremely chaotic and irresponsible PC (Paulina), one that has almost gotten the group killed a few times recently and the one who attacked the Church of Black Irony, starts taking Pharren to task about not telling the group what is really going on [note=truth] the damn New Legion has barely asked Pharen word one about what their ultimate goal is[/note], the poor GM feels like it is bending a consistent reality not to have Pharren grind out a Chromatic Blast at 12th level he has stored in a Ring on Paulina's ass.

At this,  Paulina and Pharren come to a sort of agreement, where Pharren says he'll be more forthcoming if people ask, but he warns Paulina not to say anything to the rest of the group.  They are still at the Black Boar inn, BTW.
Paulina gets drunk enjoying the attentions of a number of worthies (she's very amazonian, 6'5" human female), but someone passes her a glass of poisoned Brandy (someone affiliated with the Church of Black irony, Duh).  Paulina makes her Fort CC, but then she passes it to the Bartender (who is toally innocent), and asks him to drink it, as it tastes 'off'.  The bartender drinks, chokes, dies.  In the Middle of the bar.  In a sea of people.  So this Paulina is now making even more friends, and is lucky that the few authrities left don't come after her.

The group gets up, and gets ready to leave to go to the Old Killraven Manor House, where the original Grey Legion actually started adventuring (then took it over as an outpost), when Paulina tells the whole group they should ask Pharren about where they are going.  *sigh*
The group did eventually leave and go north on the Recum rd, and took the small path to the Wibble Hills areas, where the group was set on by an ambush of 12 Firehazers (hobgoblins and Gnolls, who they dispatched.  But right now, between hired assassins and Pharren and regular adventuring, I don't give a plugged nickel for the chances of Paulina to survive.

[Ninja D!]

Will someone fund Vreeg writing a book on gaming experience and design theory, already?

I think that's something that would make the world a better place.

[LordVreeg]

Will someone fund Vreeg writing a book on gaming experience and design theory, already?

I think that's something that would make the world a better place.

I am LordVreeg and I approved this message..

[LD]

Re: Your earlier debate with sparkletwist about low level ==more mature than high level,

I'll disagree. Instead, I'll posit that the "maturity" level as you define it (and I do not necessarily accept that definition of maturity, but I will use it for the purposes of this post) is one of focus.

Players can focus on leveling-up and the system, or players can focus on interpersonal relationships... and those can happen at any power level as long as there is the potential for teamwork, struggle, and conflict (and possibly creativity).

In my opinion, all the power levels are really the same, because the GM can just make something more powerful-- what differs is that the characters have more options. This may or may not reduce chances for the players to invent creative solutions, but a good player is a good player and will have the potential to be creative at any power level.

[LordVreeg]

Re: Your earlier debate with sparkletwist about low level ==more mature than high level,

I'll disagree. Instead, I'll posit that the "maturity" level as you define it (and I do not necessarily accept that definition of maturity, but I will use it for the purposes of this post) is one of focus.

Players can focus on leveling-up and the system, or players can focus on interpersonal relationships... and those can happen at any power level as long as there is the potential for teamwork, struggle, and conflict (and possibly creativity).

In my opinion, all the power levels are really the same, because the GM can just make something more powerful-- what differs is that the characters have more options. This may or may not reduce chances for the players to invent creative solutions, but a good player is a good player and will have the potential to be creative at any power level.

See, you're placing the power level question in a vacuum, depriving it of context.
it is not merely a question of power level, but power level vs the rest of the world, and vs the common person.  Of course the Gm can always make up something more powerful...that;s what happens in the , 'well, you fight Orcus' campaigns.  Which is what I am describing in the less mature games, the GM has to invent something tougher.
Same with the +6 weapons they find, the need for better treasure.
 I would replace your term, 'Focus' and replace it with, 'Context', in that I agree with you if you can focus to the point that context is irrelevant, this can be achieved.
 I agree that a good player will make due with what is in the setting and game around them.  But that possibility and plausibility for the struggle you define is less of a stretch at one end of that spectrum.  
But again, I could be wrong or only seeing what is available to my eyes.  Go on.

[LD]

t is not merely a question of power level, but power level vs the rest of the world, and vs the common person.

Which is what I am describing in the less mature games, the GM has to invent something tougher.
Same with the +6 weapons they find, the need for better treasure.[/quote]

Hm. I'm still going to argue that this is one of game focus. Is the game's purpose about the items and tactics, or is it about the adventures and players' personalities?

A high-power game where the focus is just on +1 +1 +1 ad infinitum does seem like it would be less "mature"; since nothing is changing- the options for the players aren't expanding, and ultimately the players will tire of that.

But if it's a high-power game where the more powerful items present more OPTIONS for the players, I think that's suitably 'mature'-- people like unlocking new things.

Alternatively, the high-power game could be about the adventures and the quests and maybe it's more traditional in that the rewards are never much better than the previous time something was discovered. Then, the game is about the journey and the players' interactions. I prefer this type of game, but I don't think it's any more mature necessarily than the game where people are unlocking new things. Some people just like tactical games rather than story games.

-
Does that clarify? I think we agree on the +1 +1 point, but there is still a point of difference on the High Level game-changing items point.

[LordVreeg]

t is not merely a question of power level, but power level vs the rest of the world, and vs the common person.

Which is what I am describing in the less mature games, the GM has to invent something tougher.
Same with the +6 weapons they find, the need for better treasure.

Keep that contextual ideal in your head for a second.
How do you feel about communication and interaction with NPCs?  You can callit focus all you want, but I, at least, am talking about Roleplaying gmaes as they diverge from Tactical wargames.  The hobby's entire history is based on this differential.
This is where the caricature of the immature Powergamer comes from, the Min-maxer.  
"In gaming, a Munchkin is a player who plays what is intended to be a non-competitive game (usually a role-playing game) in an aggressively competitive manner. A munchkin seeks within the context of the game to amass the greatest power, score the most "kills," and grab the most loot, no matter how deleterious their actions are to role-playing, the storyline, fairness, logic, or the other players' fun. The term is used almost exclusively as a pejorative and frequently is used in reference to powergamers and to immature players in general.

The term was applied originally to young gamers by older players[1], presumably because the connotation of being short and ridiculous (like the Munchkins in the book and film The Wizard of Oz) made it an apt label for the childish gamers it was applied to. However, before long it came to refer to anyone who engaged in a juvenile gaming style no matter their height, age or experience."

[LordVreeg]

t is not merely a question of power level, but power level vs the rest of the world, and vs the common person.

Which is what I am describing in the less mature games, the GM has to invent something tougher.
Same with the +6 weapons they find, the need for better treasure.

Keep that contextual ideal in your head for a second.
How do you feel about communication and interaction with NPCs?  You can call it focus all you want, but I, at least, am talking about Roleplaying gmaes as they diverge from Tactical wargames.  The hobby's entire history is based on this differential.
This is where the caricature of the immature Powergamer comes from, the Min-maxer.  

"In gaming, a Munchkin is a player who plays what is intended to be a non-competitive game (usually a role-playing game) in an aggressively competitive manner. A munchkin seeks within the context of the game to amass the greatest power, score the most "kills," and grab the most loot, no matter how deleterious their actions are to role-playing, the storyline, fairness, logic, or the other players' fun. The term is used almost exclusively as a pejorative and frequently is used in reference to powergamers and to immature players in general.

The term was applied originally to young gamers by older players[1], presumably because the connotation of being short and ridiculous (like the Munchkins in the book and film The Wizard of Oz) made it an apt label for the childish gamers it was applied to. However, before long it came to refer to anyone who engaged in a juvenile gaming style no matter their height, age or experience."

Again, nothing is absolute and I agree a good GM can make a mature, thought-provoking game almost anywhere.  Hell, there is a lot of fun in a challenge.  But certain games lend themselves to certain playstyles.  

[LordVreeg]

Celtricia is supposed to be a balanced game, one where combat is not the be-all and end-all of the game.

So here is a work-in-progress look at the combat page.

Combat is part of RPGs.  Pure and simple.  It does not have to be the only focus, it does not have to be the only way to settle disputes, butit is a large part of the history of the genre, and it is part of the Celtrician/Guild school game, as well.  How does combat feel,   how does combat fit into the puzzle of the game, and how is it done are all questions that this page is designed to address.

The threat level of the game is one thing that needs to be addressed.  Some people use the term grittiness here, as an opposite term of '˜Super-Heroic'.  Celtricia and Guildschool are made to make combat dangerous.  Both the critical hit system and the combination of High damage and low hit points reflect the desire to create a game  where the decision to enter combat is not take lightly, as is the reward systems for other forms of resolution.    In many games, an experienced, uninjured character can waltz into a combat with a certain level of impunity.  In Guildschool, the closest equivalent would be that an experienced,  uninjured, and heavily armored character can enter a normal combat with decent chance of survival.  But getting hit by a 2 foot piece of metal can hurt, injure, or even kill a person.  

Guildschool also has skill options, and spell options.   Direct attack spells are not super common or totally effective in this system, but 'buffing' style spells are available in all sorts of styles and can be very effective.  Social skills are powerful and varied, and since the mechanics of the game often give /14 to 1/2 experience for avoiding a combat through other skill use, it is a more attractive proposition.   Combat is someties fun in the game, and there are times it cannot be avoided, but there are ways to increase the chance of surviving and often avoiding it many times.

In terms of game design, combat or even the encounter is not central to the game.   In actual gameplay, we've had 3-4 sessions go by without a weapon being picked up.


Combat itself is, at it's most basic, a group of participants deciding actions, finding out when they can perform these actions, and the fallout from them.  For over 20 yrs, we have used a continuous initiative system, as opposed to a round-based system.  So particiapants decide what they are doing, and get an initiative for it, and once they do that, they get an initiative for the next action.  If they change their minds based on other events, we move from the time of the other events.

Often, in combat, these actions involve trying to cast spells or strike other people.   Every weapon has a chance to hit based on the skill of the user, and bonuses of the weapon, and the native attributes of the wielder.  This is displayed as a percentage chance to hit.  A character might have a +5% to hit based on their skill, a +7% based on their attributes, for a total of +12% t hit.  This is applied versus the 'avoidance' of what they are trying to hit.

[LordVreeg]

Clark, one of the players in Igbar, is going to play his first character that is a major spellcaster.
He has played Sam from the Grey Legion, Pollina, George, and Janos of the New Legion.  All of which have died in some spectacular fashon or another.
(yes, Paul, George, and John...this one should be Ringo)

He's the player that has made me make some adjustemts in the combat system, moving Crit hit bonus to a level 3 skill, etc.  He's probably going to cause similar grief to the spell rules.
Which is good, it makes the game better.

Full Spell Rules
Since I have been reviewing and working with this, I thought the interested parites here, SIG players and other designers, might be interested.

Of special interest is how GuildSchool handles spell skills.  


Rules For Spell Point Reclamation
     Spell points also take a while to return to the caster. The caster's Spell point reclamation skill determines this. That skill is a 50% auto dropdown from the spell points, so until the caster grows in power, the spell point reclamation skill is normally ½ the casters actual skill in that type of spell points. This translates into the caster reclaiming at .05* their reclamation skill per hour while active, and .15* their reclamation skill per hour while sleeping.
     Also, a caster can reclaim up to 3 different types of spell points back in a given hour while awake, but up to 5 different types per hour while sleeping.
     So this means a character with 20 spirit points has probably a 10 Spirit reclamation skill. He will reclaim .5 points an hour awake, and 1.5 an hour while sleeping.
     Obviously, since Spell Point Reclamation is a skill, it can be learned and improved.  So a character who learns this skill in a spell type and starts putting points into it will pay dividends over time.
The Alternate rule I have been working with is a little more complicated, but I like the affect more.  The top half of a PC's spell points come back at 10% of the SPell reclamation ability per hour.  The last 50% come back at .2 of the reclamation skill.  It adds some tougher decisions for casters, as they can cast some of their points easily, but after they get down to half, they came back more slowly.  And the caster has to get the hard ones back first...
 
Rules for Spell Level
        Some spells have an effect based on the level of the spell caster.  Spell level is normally determined by the characters highest achieved level; normally spirit. However, there are mitigating factors. If the spell that is being cast's primary focus is a category the character has, they may add ¼ of that spell type's level onto their Spirit level. So if Joe Templar is L5 Spirit, L3 Order, L2 Water, and L1 Artificer, and was casting a Water based spell, he would be considered level 5.5 (5 for Spirit and .5 for Water).
       This effect is increased if the spell cast comes from a in which the character is specialized or devoted, to ½ that skill level being added on. So if our friend Joe Templar was casting an Order base spell, his functional level would be 6.5.

 
Spell Success
       Spells are not assumed to always work perfectly.   The concentration needed to draw energies from the disperate source, the twisted logics that must be used, are all difficult.  So every spell must be rolled for, to see if it succeeds.  The players have a spell success dropdown skill at .5 of each spell skill they have, though as with all skills, the spell success skills can be learned and improved, adding onto the .5 dropdown from the parent skill.
Spell success for a skill is adjudicated as follows.  Each spell has a natural spell success modifier, the lower level ones with positive modifiers, the more powerful ones with negative modiefiers.  Enviromental factors also come into play, such as being in a caster's sanctum, trying to cast while being attacked, magic resistance can all play a part.  
The player uses a variation of the spell level rules to determine their addition to the spell success.  They get their spell success skill for their highest spell ability, plus 1/4 of the spell success of the type of spell that is being cast (water, Restorative, etc.).  As before, if the type of spell being cast is one the caster is specialized or devoted in, the addition for that second spell type is 1/2.  
       Also note that if by some chance the caster is casting a spell of a type that has their highest spell success, the spell success is actually doubled.  This is very rare, as normally spirit is the highest level for 95% of casters.  
Spell casters can actually increase their chance of success by putting more power through the pipeline, so to speak.  This can only be used with spell points that are needed to cast the spell.  But there are many situations, especially when the caster is trying to overcome Magic Resistance, or if they don't plan on casting any more after a spell, where using more points to improve success is useful.
       The spell success of the caster is added to a random roll from the GM, the envirtomentals and sucess% of the spell factored in, and the caster must roll under this to have the spell succeed.
 
Spell Resistance      
       Spell points of every type are skills, as we have mentioned, and they have a few drop-down sub skills.  Spell resistance (and counterspelling) is one of these.   The skill is an automatic dropdown at 1/4 the ability of the spell point ability, excepting Spirit Spell Points.  In other words, if a person has 16 points of Fire Spell points, they have Fire Spell Resistance at 4% skill.  The idea behind this skill is that if a caster is conversant in a type of magic, he will know better how to resist it.
    This has 2 major uses.  The first is simple, passive resistance.  Whenever a person casts a spell that is in a realm the caster has points in, any CC gains a bonus of the 1/4 of the spell points.  So if the caster above has a fire spell cast at them with a reflex CC needed, they have a 4% bonus on their CC.                    
    The other use is to counterspell.  Instead of casting, a caster can gain initiative, and wait for an opposing caster to work magic.  They can try to agressively counterspell if they have 'Spell resistance'  as mentioned above in the type of spell the caster is using.  If so, they can subtract their spell resistance skill to the caster's success% (as Magic resistance ability), and it only cost them one Spell point in that type of spell[1].  Note that the point it lost whether the spell comes off or not.  Also, please note that is with other casters, infering the actual casting of spells.  This is often what casters do when they are low on points and trying to still be a little useful.  Note well, One cannot counterspell the spell-like effects of an outsider  as they cast differently, and it would be alien to a caster.
 
Spell Knowledge    
      This is the ability to see an item or a spell being cast and know some information about it, if it is of the same casting discipline that the user has the skill in.  For instance, a caster with OrderSpell Knowledge skill can add this skill to a lore chance to know facts about a famous Order caster or about a magical item that was mainly Order based.
 

[Lmns Crn]

Very cool page; your wiki presentation is very polished. I'm glad to have the examples up, too; they're helpful.

Here's a question: Why have all the spell point costs in the spell writeups, for all the schools that aren't used? For Minor Kinetic Blast, why list the cost as

Spirit cost 10
Earth cost 0
Water cost 0
Fire cost 0
Air cost 5
Life cost 0
Death cost 0
Law cost 0
Chaos cost 0
Restorative cost 0
Necromantic cost 0
Mentalist cost 1
Artificer cost 0
Animist cost 0
Total cost 16

Spirit cost 10
Air cost 5
Mentalist cost 1
Total cost 16[/quote], which would be (I think) easier to read, cleaner-looking, and maybe less "oh god wall of info!" intimidating, also. Is there some reason I'm not thinking of, which makes the specific listing of all the zero costs important?

[LordVreeg]

Very cool page; your wiki presentation is very polished. I'm glad to have the examples up, too; they're helpful.

Here's a question: Why have all the spell point costs in the spell writeups, for all the schools that aren't used? For Minor Kinetic Blast, why list the cost as

Spirit cost 10
Earth cost 0
Water cost 0
Fire cost 0
Air cost 5
Life cost 0
Death cost 0
Law cost 0
Chaos cost 0
Restorative cost 0
Necromantic cost 0
Mentalist cost 1
Artificer cost 0
Animist cost 0
Total cost 16

Spirit cost 10
Air cost 5
Mentalist cost 1
Total cost 16

Thanks LC, I am aware that due to the density of GS/Celtricia data sometimes it is hard to reply.  I am glad you and others have played it so that it is familiar and not too alien.

I think I need to cut the page into pieces, the way I did with the Igbar page. it's just too much at once.
I listed the spells the way I did because that's the template I use on the spell pages. But I totally agree with you that the spells are a lot better looking cut down to what they do use.  Which might take some work...

[Lmns Crn]

Yeah, you're absolutely at a point where the sheer amount of data you've posted makes it difficult to make those sorts of changes.

At the beginning of a project, it's difficult to foresee the kinds of organizational setup that'll be useful as it grows. And once the project has momentum, it's difficult to go back and make changes. Tough to win.