Re: Game Discussion

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

I thought one could choose what combination of things to do too. I wasn't aware debauchery was essential. I like the event, but it does rather seem to favour single PCs or ones who don't care for fidelity.

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

It's a pretty huge value judgement, really.

It's basically saying, "you think you have personal ambition? You gotta fuck for it. Don't fuck? Then get out. Here's your consolation prize, now go home."

I mean, okay, I'm pretty sure that's not how you intended it, but it feels like that requirement is saying that this party's only real if you get down...and then to have you say things like we're being faint of heart feels pretty condescending.

It's still a fun event, and I like reading what people are doing, but finding out that it was intended all along to reward a very specific and exclusive activity definitely takes some of the enjoyment out.

[Baelon Drakeson]

Faint heart never won fair reward.  Although, much can still be gained without fully 'participating'.

It means that those with a different morality than Nathan's can't get all there is to be gained from the event.
Anyone can play, but only certain characters can win. It would be like having an event that only those who have sworn wedding vows before a Septon and kept them could win. Nathan couldn't simply because he's not married.

Thematically, it ties ambition to wanton sex. Now, certainly there are some who use sex to achieve ambitions, but it seems odd for it to be the only way.
Perhaps there should be an option to decline an invitation to debauchery that could count instead of Debauchery?
It could be a choice of:
Athletics(Strength) to push them away (but might provoke violence?)
Stealth(Blend In) to disappear into the crowd
Will(Dedication) to resist their seduction

Also, those who choose not to get drunk are significantly hampered in their chances. There is only one option for the Politics test, and if you opt out of getting drunk, you get a -1D. Those who get drunk get a +1D (I for one have never found drunk people to be persuasive). Again, only those who give in to excess can really hope to succeed. Perhaps an Awareness test alternative for politicking, to overhear some secret that was let slip?

It's a flavorful event, which is cool. However, the mechanics are rather one-sided in favor of a certain sort of character, which most of the PCs aren't. I mean, even if you get drunk unless you have at least a 4 Persuasion you have less than a 10% chance of getting 3 DoS on the Politics test. If you choose sobriety, you need Persuasion 5 to even be ABLE to get 3 DoS. Nathan, Theo, and maybe Yoren could get it. Corrine could, if Ben counts for debauch and she gets drunk (or lucky with the dice, too). Maybe some of the new characters I don't know. The rest either don't have the persuasion or wouldn't engage in the debauchery.

There's also the fact that there's almost no risk of unmasking. I mean, even sober no one of significance is likely to be unmasked. the TNs are simply to high. A TN 5 character (say a kingsguard violating their vows) would have a TN 19 unmasking. We simply don't have awareness specialists to have much chance of hitting that.... and PCs? Even having Deception 3 is enough to be all but immune to discovery.

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

Well you don't need all 3 DoS on the Politicking test. It just has to be one of the three DoS earned across the activities.

That said, I agree that the event as portrayed puts a lot of 'emphasis' on certain activities. And while it makes sense that Nathan the character might try to encourage those things, it makes less sense that the game mechanical rules also do.

It'd be like Corrine throwing a tourney with lots of activities and saying you get a special prize if you get 5 DoS across them...but then after the fact, and after people commit and post, it comes out that what she actually meant was that certain activities count and others don't, and you HAVE to do archery. If you do everything else and DON'T do archery, then it still doesn't count.

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

I may have grumped too much about the lack of tourney archery, methinks.

[Baelon Drakeson]

Well you don't need all 3 DoS on the Politicking test. It just has to be one of the three DoS earned across the activities.

The way I am reading Nathan's post, you have to get 3 DoS each in all three of the listed tests, not 3 DoS total.

I don't really have a problem with the difficulty, as a VP in a personal goal is pretty hefty prize. However, it shouldn't be effectively tailor-made for 2-3 PCs with the rest having at best about a 10% chance.

I may have grumped too much about the lack of tourney archery, methinks.

well, it might be quality, not quantity. It was a good high-quality grump.

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

Well, quality is my aim in all things.

[Nathaniel Mason]

The Debauchery requirement for the VP was absolutely deliberate.   This is not a Noble dinner party or a Festival feast.  This is in every way an orgy, first and foremost.  You do not have to participate in the 'entertainment' but you are hampered if you do not.  That is a choice each character can make for themselves.  There is nothing mechanical that prevents any character from participating.  If there are character reasons that someone does not wish to attend or participate in certain 'activities', then that is the choice each player makes.

Choices have consequences.

The VP was intended for those that fully participate and excel at the activities of the event.

No single event is going to be all things to all people.  If there was a war event that required the torturing of enemy prisoners for important and vital information, Nathan might choose to not participate in that event, whether he had the requisite skills or not.

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

Hm. Ya know, I was going to mention something about the instructions being unclear...but I'm starting to suspect I was just too hasty in reading them.



That said, it seems like I'm not the only one who misread.

The way this was set up still doesn't make sense to me, but it's not my event, and it was entertaining to read.

I do apologize if it seems as if I don't appreciate your work and effort in setting this up, Nathan. I shall say no more on the matter.

[Nathaniel Mason]

It means that those with a different morality than Nathan's can't get all there is to be gained from the event.
Anyone can play, but only certain characters can win. It would be like having an event that only those who have sworn wedding vows before a Septon and kept them could win. Nathan couldn't simply because he's not married.

So this event is based on Nathan's morality?  Such events were common for the period.  I am sorry if only certain characters can win.  I have had no chance in winning the three jousting tourneys during downtime.  Oh I can get on a horse and give it a shot... but I have zero chance.  I have not complained once.  Those who are Knightly specced should have their fun.  I don't expect to win a melee or jousting tournament.  

Also, those who choose not to get drunk are significantly hampered in their chances. There is only one option for the Politics test, and if you opt out of getting drunk, you get a -1D. Those who get drunk get a +1D (I for one have never found drunk people to be persuasive). Again, only those who give in to excess can really hope to succeed. Perhaps an Awareness test alternative for politicking, to overhear some secret that was let slip?

Drunk people are usually not persuasive to sober people, however they have a very easy time persuading other drunk people to do stupid things.  Sober people, on the other hand have a difficult and fairly frustrating time persuading drunk people to do much of anything they don't want to do.  At least that has been my experience.

It's a flavorful event, which is cool. However, the mechanics are rather one-sided in favor of a certain sort of character, which most of the PCs aren't. I mean, even if you get drunk unless you have at least a 4 Persuasion you have less than a 10% chance of getting 3 DoS on the Politics test. If you choose sobriety, you need Persuasion 5 to even be ABLE to get 3 DoS. Nathan, Theo, and maybe Yoren could get it. Corrine could, if Ben counts for debauch and she gets drunk (or lucky with the dice, too). Maybe some of the new characters I don't know. The rest either don't have the persuasion or wouldn't engage in the debauchery.

And those without Markmanship do not participate in Archery contests.  Those running around with Fighting specs can easily get those kind of TNs in similar situations.  You, Baelon, have rolled 19+ with Charm tests on many occasions, often much much higher.  Nathan has a 4 in Persuasion and he made the 3DoS (with his Qualities and the Drunk bonus.)  It is perfectly achievable.  It is, however, not automatic.  Nor should it be.

There's also the fact that there's almost no risk of unmasking. I mean, even sober no one of significance is likely to be unmasked. the TNs are simply to high. A TN 5 character (say a kingsguard violating their vows) would have a TN 19 unmasking. We simply don't have awareness specialists to have much chance of hitting that.... and PCs? Even having Deception 3 is enough to be all but immune to discovery.

The TNs for unmasking was based on people taking their time and preparation for the event.  The NPCs can spend money on their costumes just like everyone else.  Still, Awareness specced individuals can achieve the 29 for a Status 7.

I am sorry you have such a problem with all of this Baelon.  I will only say that I worked closely with Reader and all mechanics were approved before this went live.

[Theomore Tullison]

Yeah, with taking time you get an average of 14 on 2 Deception, 21 with 3, then add up to 10. It makes it really difficult to look through disguises, but Theo could have tried to stay sober, and if succeeding crank out Winning First on the awareness roll, get 7k6 and lucky/BoA in reserve, then use his deception for information gathering full stop, which would likely give him the same information as he got now. Gets him a better than 50% shot at unmasking a status 6. Still, those are some prohibitive TN's for anyone not managing 5D in awareness before adding the sober bonus.

He'd forego the VP chance, getting 22 with 3 kept dices doesn't work. But if personal objectives as suggested to reader is approved, he'd probably get a VP out of the unmasking bit anyway.

So it's a choice if you are capable of both, and I actually did debate on playing up his general disdain for getting drunk and be better than he used to be. Ultimately in character for him to fall to his vices.

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

For what it's worth, I don't have an issue with difficulty.

It's more that I approached this from the perspective of, 'oh hey, here's a fun sandbox I can play in.' It was constructed in such a way as to imply there were many ways to play it; that there were multiple paths to success.

And then it turned out that those paths were illusory. There was no real choice offered (if one wished to take full advantage). Progress was mapped along predefined paths.

That's not in and of itself a terrible thing. As you note, an Archery contest is similar.

But an Archery contest is explicitly a contest of Archery. You go there, and you shoot. And that's it. There's no expectation of more. Which is why I cited the example of a tourney, as it more accurately conveys what I thought this was. A big event comprised of smaller sub-events, that all contributed to an end goal.

So my irritation stems from what was a miscommunication and/or misunderstanding between us. If this had been posted as, "Come to Nathan's Orgy," I probably wouldn't have gone. And that probably seems impossibly naive of me, but what can I say? It was marketed as a party. The description was of a party. Yes, a raunchy, naughty party, but not just a big sex party.

And when I got to the part about the VP, I didn't understand what the conditions were, even though I thought I did.

All that said, I don't regret having had Gwyn go. I was just really disappointed to find out that the event wasn't structured the way I thought it was, and that the things I'd hoped to do I actually could not. And in that disappointment, I seem to have sparked some kind of controversy....which was not my intent.

So. Deep breaths. It's just a game, and a very good one. Lets learn what we can and move along, shall we?

[Ser Walton Dulver]

I thought it was event for spies AND hedonists. Thateans Walton did not get VP for which he intended to pay with two little Waltons Waters'/Hills?

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

Indeed, but I thought it was an event for spies OR hedonists, was the thing. That was the crucial point I missed.

[Ser Walton Dulver]

Sorry, in rush used AND instead OR bloody not native english... I get Your point, my rules interpretation was just like Yours. Then Walton must wait for some hedonists event, maybe something he can use strength, agility and fighting- in random order :-)

[Nathaniel Mason]

Hopefully it was more than just 'Come to Nathan's Orgy'. It was certainly intended that way.

The debauchery was at the heart of it, yes, but it was also an opportunity for lots of people to get cash, interesting tidbits of information, npc contacts, promote character interaction, gain some faction, provide something that isn't fighting, provide good narrative most of all, and... yes... give an opportunity for people to get a VP if they fully participate and excel.

No event has free reign. I was trying portray an event of this type that was indicative of the period. Perhaps the upcoming Bartheld Ball or the Bartheld party from story 1 is more in line of what you were thinking. However, that was not how this was intended, or how it was portrayed in the opening narrative.

If you judge the success or failure of the event based on whether someone gets a VP or not, then I can see why you would be disappointed. The information you get may mitigate that somewhat.

I am very disappointed as well, for other reasons.

[Gwyneth Drakeson]

Ah, I was just excited because I thought I had it, and then had it yanked away.

It's just a letdown, but it's not the end of the world. I'm sorry you're disappointed, and for any role I played in that.

[Ser Walton Dulver]

Isn't that women who roll for pregnancy? Because their Athletics 1 and Walton's 5 may make slight difference xD and in case of NPC is it in Narrator's discretion?

[Nathaniel Mason]

Ah, I was just excited because I thought I had it, and then had it  yanked away.

It's just a letdown, but it's not the end of the world. I'm sorry you're disappointed, and for any role I played in that.

I hadn't thought about it orginally, but I suppose someone could use Deception (Act) to pretend to seduce someone.  People are drunk enough it could work.  Ask reader.

Would that clear up some of the motivational issues?

Yes, your partner is at narrator discretion, but you can give a general description of what you are looking for. You don't learn their identity unless you get 3 DoS.

[Theomore Tullison]

Sounds like a DP spent for ability substitution, which reader tends to be a fan of.

There is a certain ambiguity to the wording of the VP requirement, I had to read it a few times before landing on the conclusion that 3 successes in X, Y and Z means 3 DoS in each of those, but I've got 15 credits worth of law/tax courses, and probably have a bit more talent than most for that sort of thing. So always a good idea to overdo it when explaining event mechanics in the future.

[Nathaniel Mason]

In the interest of eliminating the debauchery problem and opening it to the widest possible opportunities for VP, and with Reader's permission, I don't have a problem changing it to:

Personal Ambition:  If you gain at least 3DoS in ANY two (2) event actions and Politicking, you gain a VP that can be used toward a personal goal.

That should be clearer, preserves the modesty of some attendees, and allows inveterate gamblers, rumor mongers, and pickpockets to also have a chance at a VP.  They still have to schmooze with the rest of the throng to push their agenda forward.

[Reader]

In the interest of eliminating the debauchery problem and opening it to the widest possible opportunities for VP, and with Reader's permission, I don't have a problem changing it to:

Personal Ambition:  If you gain at least 3DoS in ANY two (2) event actions and Politicking, you gain a VP that can be used toward a personal goal.

That should be clearer, preserves the modesty of some attendees, and allows inveterate gamblers, rumor mongers, and pickpockets to also have a chance at a VP.  They still have to schmooze with the rest of the throng to push their agenda forward.

APPROVED AND EDITING NOW.

[Baelon Drakeson]

So this event is based on Nathan's morality?  Such events were common for the period.  I am sorry if only certain characters can win.  I have had no chance in winning the three jousting tourneys during downtime.  Oh I can get on a horse and give it a shot... but I have zero chance.  I have not complained once.  Those who are Knightly specced should have their fun.  I don't expect to win a melee or jousting tournament.

I don't recall any such events in the books... and even with sex being one of HBOs favorite selling strategies, I don't recall anything like this in the show, either. There were certainly orgies, but the participants were not masked and the participants of status had a reputation for such things as a result. There were also quite a few characters that wouldn't go to such an event even if anonymity were absolutely guaranteed. GRRM was clearly exploring the notion of struggling to maintain or choosing to violate vows (whether Marriage, Kingsguard, or Night's Watch). In fact, I like that aspect of this event. The temptation to break one's vows should be there. Otherwise the vows are kind of meaningless for character development, right?

I completely agree that Nathan deserves events to have fun at as well, that's not really the point, though. Those tourneys didn't have a VP on the line. It would be one thing if you had to get drunk and debauch to be eligible for glory or coin. There are many ways to get those. Event-based VP are not so common, unless it is part of the personal goal itself. So yeah, having an event offer a huge, rare prize that only a few characters could win, for either mechanical or personal reasons? Yeah, I objected to that. It's a lot better now, though you still are unlikely to be able to get the VP if you are not drinking to excess.

Believe me - having a high VP cost personal goal made this very tempting... especially because as you pointed out, Baelon could do quite well at it. I could even use the bonus die I have in Seduce that I have never and probably will never use. Still, even with the mechanical change he's not going for the same IC reasons. Story 1 Baelon would have gone in a heartbeat, but he has changed and grown in the past few IC years and he's actively trying to foster change himself. Sometimes that means missing out on something awesome.

[Ser Walton Dulver]

ok, to give it a shot with information gathering, I've changed random Debauchery roll into Persuasion for Information Gathering. That gave me 3DoS (personal record on Persuasion for Walton) and left 1DoS for Debauchery. Additionally 1DoS from Politicking, but if I understood well, Walton would have to get at least 3DoS in each of those events, right? So saying it short, still no VP, but some minor info gathered?

[Theomore Tullison]

With the original intentions in mind, I'd argue that Politicking+Debauchery+Information should be the easiest route to VP, with the edit you're allowing it by making two tests at TN 19 in which you could use numerous abilities(specialities) on, while Debauchery was locked to persuasion(seduce) at TN 22, plus moral consequences.

The gambling would require a TN28 though, so I guess that's still a lot harder. While Thievery is TN 18, but carries a stealth or face the music condition, so also a lot harder.

I'd go with this version:
To get VP, you must get 3 DoS on politicking and any two of the following:
-3 DoS on Information
-3 DoS on Debauchery
-Succeed on the unmasking of an NPC of status 3+
-Succeed on cheating/thievery during gamble
-Succeed on opportunist without getting caught
-Succeed the Will(dedication) test to not drink.

Allows for more options while incentivizing the actions with risks and consequences.

[Sponsored content]