Re: Game Discussion

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

Just checked, the film is not coming out before christmas...

So, which of our eight enemies looks like this:
[size=50:xwdulsx4]

I'd imagine the most likely candidate to be the foreign mercenary, though he'd have to be from Sothoros.

[Reader]

That should be easy to guess from the descriptions? :;
):
(Edit - beaten to the punch by Corrine)
I'll just have to be patient, looking forward to the film!

[Septon Arlyn]

viewtopic.php?f=191&
t=1935&
start=10#p51639


oh wow. Orokos finally is showing some love for my rolls on this one. Apparently bringing peace agrees with the septon

[Luecian LongBow]

Great rolls Septon!

[Reader]

Silly idea for next story to cause OOC and IC chaos:

Rotating commanders, like the Greeks supposedly used at Marathon. Who would intrigue their way to extra command days, like Miltiades? :;
):

[Yoren longshore]

Silly idea for next story to cause OOC and IC chaos:

Rotating commanders, like the Greeks supposedly used at Marathon. Who would intrigue their way to extra command days, like Miltiades? :;
):

Early romans used the same tactics. If an army is a joint force between commanders with very big differences it may be good, and it will make for some interesting RP.

[Athelstan]

Good idea, now Im curious to see the stats for the 3 brothers and how hard a fight I just got my self into lol

[Luecian LongBow]

I got your back if reader gives the go ahead. Seems only fair though, then we could keep one eye on each of em!

[Athelstan]

Lol on eye on each for sure, if they are all 3 primary npc its gonna be though, but the reward is high

[Ser Walton Dulver]

hm, I'm just curious how will be handled splitting Commanders and Subcommanders :d

[Yoren longshore]

The old Roman model was having one of the consuls lead the army while the other led the equities. Then the next day they chamged. This just continued until they split up.

[Reader]

Shots fired.

Should have kept massive! I would have liked to see a PC with that quality trashing enemies like flies lol

yeah, but by Reader's ruling I had to drop Massive or Fighting to 4... Fighting at 4 would be shitty and make me loud faller... Lesser evil was keeping fighting at 5 and changing benefit I am also still disappointed by the ruling, but what can we do...

[OOC: not just addressed to Walton, but to EVERYONE.

- Event threads are not the place to complain about the narrator's tyranny.
- In general, too much complaining via PM and snide comments in forums. I got back late from work today and answering various complaints delays story &
events both in answering complaints and by demotivating your narrator.
- The TONE of many complaints is out of line. Be polite - I do this for free to replace a previous PbP that died suddenly.
- Constructive disagreement is fine: "
I'm disappointed in x, because I wanted my character to do Y. Is there a different way to arrange things so the character can still follow my vision?"
is a good way to ask.
- Proper punctuation from everyone please: many of the players aren't native speakers, spelling/odd word choice is not the issue. At the very least, quotation marks around direct speech. There are certain minimum standards.]

[Dunstan Tullison]

I appreciate banning character builds that brake the game.

Massive with plenty of Fighting and Acrobatic Defense with a ton of Acrobatic bonus dice are way too powerful in combat.

Sorry if i muck up the typing or spelling at times!

[Theomore Tullison]

Dunno, massive hulking greatsword-wielders are not necessarily worse than people with persuasion 5 and plenty of intrigue benefits.

The former can always be intrigued into picking a fight they can't fight themselves out of.

[Dunstan Tullison]

That never happened in any pbp game (or live for that matter), at least for me. It can sure, but often people just quit or never go through with it.

Not arguing, I agree that it should happen but I didn't notice that it does.

[Baelon Drakeson]

I agree with Dunstan - unless your intrigue specialist can defeat the brute in one exchange, it's unlikely that they can defeat them at all - and often that will be the case no matter how many dice you roll.
After the action, quit (or worse, switch to combat) limit the "
talk them into an unwinnable battle"
approach.

Assuming a 3 Will and indifferent disposition, in order to defeat someone in one exchange that would require 4 (DR) +9 (composure) + 9 (frustration) = 22 damage. Assuming 4 DoS, that means you have to be doing 6 damage per DoS - possible on charm or seduce with 5 persuasion and Compelling;
beyond that it would require someone to have two 5 attributes - possible, but a red flag in and of itself.

On top of that, as has been stated many times, intrigue is not mind control.

[Theomore Tullison]

That falls into the territory of refusing one's weakness to be exploited, though.

Then it's a bit like, you're here to win over the other players.

[Baelon Drakeson]

To be honest, that's what it sounds like your hypothetical intrigue monster is doing. Can't beat the fighting monster on the battlefield, so beat them with words.

To be clear, I would have a problem with both of those characters - I just don't think you can say that one is worse than the other.

[Theomore Tullison]

Well, a competent intrigue character could still twist a combat brute around his little finger if the player of the latter is okay with it.

A competent combatant could kick the ass of an expert schemer, but the issue there is that finding an IC justification for it is much trickier (plus guards, plus often being illegal, etc etc).

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

My sense, with the caveat that I'm still pretty new to this game and its nuances, is that the consequences of combat far exceed (generally) the consequences of intrigues. However, it's much easier to engage in intrigues, and far less subject to social scrutiny.

The intrigue monster, threatened by a menacing barbarian, might pull off a Tyrion and wind up recruiting them instead. But if the barbarian had decided that he'd rather have Tyrion's head than Lannister gold and quit the intrigue, then the books would have been out a very entertaining character. The successful intrigue, successful by wild odds really, did not damage or really inconvenience the barbarians. In fact, if he hadn't given them a very real incentive...that was later followed up on...then they most likely wouldn't have 'yielded' and he'd be dead now due to the very successful combat that the barbarians would have pursued instead.

It's true that intrigues used against people who are invested in noble society...and thus have something to lose from them...are potentially more impactful. But a schemer trying to intrigue a combat monster always has to be wary that said monster always has the physical to fall back on, if he's willing to accept the consequences.

[Ser Raynald Dulver]

IMHO Intrigue and Combat exist in two separated spheres of influence. Intrigue has collective consequences (when two lords strike an alliance, they are influencing the fate of everyone on their social net), while combat operates on personal/individual level (any soldier could easily kill any lord of the previous example). I think that's the point of Varys riddle of the sellsword and the three powerful men (the rich, the king and the priest): those three men can decide over the lives of millions, but all it takes is a single man to make them powerless.

So while it is true that a strong warrior could easily kill a strong scheemer, the very nature of being skilled in intrigues presumes the existence of some social structures like hierarchy to put scheemers out of the reach of strong soldiers. Like not having permission to enter the castle, for instance. Or not having any legal protection against highborn abuse.

[Theomore Tullison]

Or Lords having bodyguards.

[Samurel Manderly]

Or Schemers being the killers themselves

[Septon Arlyn]

Or assassins striking in the night. Not that we have too many of those... :?

[Samurel Manderly]

Yes, It's good that we don't, I could see how troublesome that could be!

[Sponsored content]