|
Post by huillaume on Apr 30, 2020 16:11:14 GMT
Forgot to say:
Une advantage of the system I suggest is that no character modifications is needed, as all results given to now are possible on it (though some can be difficult).
And a suggesion would be to allow players who have already a career in mind to ask for one specific skill to be given a bonus (regardless the background)
e.g. if a character wants to go to artistic career, allow him, by telling the GM beforehand, to roll 2d6 H instead of 1d6 (or 3d6 remofing higher and lower). Likewise if someone wants his character to be in the military, or a doctor or lawyer
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 30, 2020 16:44:38 GMT
I disagree on this ,as land agents would not be used by most nobles. After all, most noble PC families are assumed to stay at their states, so they can administer themselves, and at the prices they charge (minimum 20 L a month), only rich states are worth it... Note the second part. Most smaller estates would be managed by the wife. (Apart from anything else, you don't want the person who knows the paperwork going off to war).
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 30, 2020 17:35:08 GMT
If you want to go my way, and keeping with the modifiers you put in your OP, i'd suggest something like (abilities are given in alphabetical order, MA aside as being the only in the Original game): I like these, although I'd say the later modifers are probably better in terms of balance. The big issue I could see with this is that it wouldn't be possible to port over existing characters in the same way.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Apr 30, 2020 17:49:14 GMT
If you want to go my way, and keeping with the modifiers you put in your OP, i'd suggest something like (abilities are given in alphabetical order, MA aside as being the only in the Original game): I like these, although I'd say the later modifers are probably better in terms of balance. Well, of course, the exact number of dice for each cell may be changed, if you think (to give an humorous example) that as merchants care only at money, whatever the means, they should have 2d6 H in thievery... I was writing my post whily you posted yours (it took a while to smooth the tables), so it hs not taken into account... As per balance, it can be modified so that everyone receives the same bonus and penalties, but in a game where you can begin as the SL 1 bastard of a poor peasant or as a rich SL 13 Viscount (the two extremes I've began a game with, you could even begin as a Duke), game balance is somwhat doubtful... In fact, those two characters would play diferent leagues, even if in the same game, so to say... The big issue I could see with this is that it wouldn't be possible to port over existing characters in the same way. Curious, I see this as an advantage, as it needs no changes in existing characters and allow those whose characters have been arround for a while to keep as they have been (as wel las justifying past actions)... Again to give na example, if all the sudden Huillame had an etiquette skill of 6 but an admin skill of 2, the time he has devoted to improve it would not have been worth of it, and would have been better devoted to learn administration in the hope for someday to redeem his state...
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 30, 2020 19:18:33 GMT
How do people feel about these stats? Based on Hullaumes with modifications.
| STR
| CON
| EXP
| Military
| Admin
| Artistic
| Dancing
| Etiquette
| Medical
| Music
| Legal
| Pistol
| Tieving
| Peasant | 4d6 H
| 4d6 H
| 4d6L
| 1d6
| 1d6
| 1D6
| 2D6L
| 2d6L
| 1d3
| 1d6
| 1d3L
| 2d6L
| 2d6H
| Merchant | 3d6
| 3d6
| 3d6
| 1d6
| 2d6H
| 1D6
| 2D6L
| 3d6
| 1d3
| 1d6
| 2d3H
| 1d6
| 1d6
| Gentleman | 3d6
| 3d6
| 3d6
| 1d6
| 1D6
| 1D6
| 1d6
| 3d6
| 2d3H
| 1d6
| 2d3H
| 1d6
| 2d6L
| Noble | 4d6 L
| 4d6 L
| 4d6H
| 1d6
| 2D6l
| 1D6
| 1d6
| 4d6H
| 2d3L
| 1d6
| 1d3
| 2d6H
| 2d6L
|
Each time a roll is followed by H means discarding the lower one, If an L, discard the higher one.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Apr 30, 2020 19:37:57 GMT
Looks good Just a couple of things seem strange... Etiquette: Merchant and Gentlemen should be 1d6 I think? (Though maybe Gentlemen should be 2d6H ?) And a couple of observations... I take Huilaume's point that although Peasants should be stronger than Nobles, their diet would be a lot worse, so maybe where CON is concerned the H & L should be switched? The Nobility was 'the officer class' so maybe their Military should be 2d6H ? To offset that, music requires a degree of application less prevalent in the Nobility, so maybe their Music should be 2d6L ?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 30, 2020 20:10:59 GMT
Etiquette: Merchant and Gentlemen should be 1d6 I think? (Though maybe Gentlemen should be 2d6H ?) They should be. (And I think gentleman are more likely to run the full range). I think that maybe Peasants should be 2d3L though and same for Nobles and thievery.
|
|
|
Post by Valerie Valanon on Apr 30, 2020 20:26:01 GMT
And a couple of observations... I take Huilaume's point that although Peasants should be stronger than Nobles, their diet would be a lot worse, so maybe where CON is concerned the H & L should be switched? The Nobility was 'the officer class' so maybe their Military should be 2d6H ? To offset that, music requires a degree of application less prevalent in the Nobility, so maybe their Music should be 2d6L ? Au contraire, since the Peasants´ diet is a lot worse, their resilience is higher than that of the spoiled nobility. So it makes sense with the 4d6H in my opinion. And music is an universal language. I don´t see any relation to rank or status for music ability.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Apr 30, 2020 21:17:45 GMT
When there are 3d6 in a skill (as Etiquette for merchants and gentlemen) I understand it means removing higher and lower. Rigth? And a couple of observations... I take Huilaume's point that although Peasants should be stronger than Nobles, their diet would be a lot worse, so maybe where CON is concerned the H & L should be switched? The Nobility was 'the officer class' so maybe their Military should be 2d6H ? To offset that, music requires a degree of application less prevalent in the Nobility, so maybe their Music should be 2d6L ? Au contraire, since the Peasants´ diet is a lot worse, their resilience is higher than that of the spoiled nobility. So it makes sense with the 4d6H in my opinion. And music is an universal language. I don´t see any relation to rank or status for music ability. See, though, that i didn't gave anyone advantage or penalty in CON, as I believe better diet and care is offset by harder life. Alsobecause advantages in both STR and CON are too decisivee for END (and so for duels) I think that maybe Peasants should be 2d3L though and same for Nobles and thievery. Of course, when has a noble robed (whistles and rolls his eyes)?
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 30, 2020 22:45:32 GMT
Method | Expectation | Standard Deviation | 1d3 | 2 | 0.8165 | 2d3L | 1.6 | 0.6849 | 2d3H | 2.4 | 0.6849 | 1d6 | 3.5 | 1.7078 | 2d6L | 2.5 | 1.4041 | 2d6H | 4.5 | 1.4041 | 3d6 | 3.5 | 1.3710 | 4d6L | 2.9 | 1.2330 | 4d6H | 4.1 | 1.2330 |
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 30, 2020 22:52:47 GMT
How do people feel about these stats? Based on Hullaumes with modifications.
| STR
| CON
| EXP
| Military
| Admin
| Artistic
| Dancing
| Etiquette
| Medical
| Music
| Legal
| Pistol
| Tieving
| Peasant | 12.3 | 12.3 | 8.7 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 2.5
| 2.5
| 2 | 3.5 | 1.6 | 2.5
| 4.5
| Merchant | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 3.5 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 3.5
| 2 | 3.5 | 2.4
| 3.5 | 3.5 | Gentleman | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 2.4
| 3.5 | 2.4
| 3.5 | 2.5
| Noble | 8.7 | 8.7 | 12.3 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 4.1
| 1.6 | 3.5 | 2 | 4.5 | 2.5
|
Each time a roll is followed by H means discarding the lower one, If an L, discard the higher one. The expected results, based on Louis' chart as posted above, without any of the amendments suggested since. Peasant/Legal was written as 1d3L; corrected to 2d3L.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 30, 2020 23:05:13 GMT
When there are 3d6 in a skill (as Etiquette for merchants and gentlemen) I understand it means removing higher and lower. Rigth? See above; that was a typo. 1d6. See, though, that i didn't gave anyone advantage or penalty in CON, as I believe better diet and care is offset by harder life. I don't think it is. Your average peasant is used to spending a whole day working in the fields, possibly in the summer sun. A hard life would come in later with life expectancy. A fresh faced young peasant arriving in Paris is going to be used to working long and hard. Also, aside from the Guards regiments (who are elite ceremonial regiments) you'd find those fighting in heavy armour with heavy weapons in the lower ranked "common" regiments. Especially the Fusiliers, who would have had heavy armour, a polearm and a musket. (The time of nobles training in full plate was long gone by this time). Not only that, but unlike the Guards Regiments they'd have been expected to march long distances with their kit. It's not as decisive as you think. On average, they'll get 2 points more in each stat, an extra 20 End. That's two hits from a rapier or a slash for a sabre, assuming average strength of your opponent. Peasants get 4d6L Expertise, so 2 less on average. Or, when up against nobles, your average peasant will have an expertise of 4 less, leading to average nobles having a 67% chance of hitting compared to their opponent's 50%. At this point it's pretty much the classic "skill vs brute force" duel. (Peasants would be very unwise to agree to first blood duels). The big advantage that peasants do have is that EXP is much easier to raise. If you have the money so... Which brings the other obvious point. I don't think we have to worry about Peasants (10L starting money, no allowance, starting SL of 2) getting an unfair advantage. He generally uses legal ability to do it.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Apr 30, 2020 23:07:20 GMT
How do people feel about these stats? Based on Hullaumes with modifications.
| STR
| CON
| EXP
| Military
| Admin
| Artistic
| Dancing
| Etiquette
| Medical
| Music
| Legal
| Pistol
| Tieving
| Peasant | 4.1 | 4.1 | 2.9 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 2.5
| 2.5
| 2 | 3.5 | 2 | 2.5
| 4.5
| Merchant | 3.5 | 3.5
| 3.5
| 3.5 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 3.5
| 2 | 3.5 | 2.4
| 3.5 | 3.5 | Gentleman | 3.5
| 3.5
| 3.5
| 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 2.4
| 3.5 | 2.4
| 3.5 | 2.5
| Noble | 2.9 | 2.9 | 4.1 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 4.1
| 1.6 | 3.5 | 2 | 4.5 | 2.5
|
Each time a roll is followed by H means discarding the lower one, If an L, discard the higher one. The expected results, based on Louis' chart as posted above, without any of the amendments suggested since. Peasant/Legal was written as 1d3L - I assumed this meant 1d3 (2), but it may have been 2d3L (2.5. Just one detail: for STR, COn and EXP, the result should be multiplied (I guess) by 3, as its 3d6 (added) or 4D6 (ignoring the higher if H, the lower if L). This aside, they seem fine to me, as averages (and remembering variabitly can be still high).
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 30, 2020 23:07:32 GMT
Peasant/Legal was written as 1d3L - I assumed this meant 1d3 (2), but it may have been 2d3L (2.5. I actually meant 2d3L (so 1.6).
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Apr 30, 2020 23:11:40 GMT
Peasants get 4d6L Expertise, so 2 less on average. Or, when up against nobles, your average peasant will have an expertise of 4 less, leading to average nobles having a 67% chance of hitting compared to their opponent's 50%. At this point it's pretty much the classic "skill vs brute force" duel. (Peasants would be very unwise to agree to first blood duels). The big advantage that peasants do have is that EXP is much easier to raise. If you have the money so... Which brings the other obvious point. I don't think we have to worry about Peasants (10L starting money, no allowance, starting SL of 2) getting an unfair advantage. Unless they enter a Regiment, where training is free... He generally uses legal ability to do it. Oh, but they have legal ability even worse... I guess better to use etiquette to con people ...
|
|