[CoH] Let's playtest online (in English)

[Joshua Bearden]

First I'll admit I was certainly having a bit of a lily-livered GM moment re potential TPK on our first session. I was also unsure about whether it was fair to count a mere ten mopes as a full mob vs two well armoured and obviously badass circle knights. (It was previously established that there were only 10 of them, and that they were unremarkable except for their leader who was down by the time they arrived).

The events of role play lead the two knights to split up.  Gisa joined the women and was being initiated into some sacred rites that took place in and around a sacred grove. Gehardt had joined a group of 13 disaffected young men who resented the womens' secrecy, (suspecting black magic), and who were determined to disrupt the rites that night. The men had spent the evening wrestling and training with Gerhardt and his presence, as well as much beer, bolstered their courage to attack the women in that sacred place.

The action starts when Gisa in the grove, (having cast Warding earlier that evening), detects the impending ambush.  She gives the alarm and the women, not showing too much concern, simply make their way to the edge of the grove and dive into a dark pool for a midnight swim. Aghi's men spread out to the edges of the grove and he starts to cast a spell. Gerhartd doesn't recognize the spell and tries to interfere or delay the casting by questioning him.

Aghi directs 2 of his 12 to keep Gerhartd under control.  Two move to grab him but he bashes one down with his shield on a Q v. 12 roll. I rule that this distraction however is enough to prevent Gerhardt from interfering with Aghi's spell casting.  [See I'm starting out with this assumption that spell casting can be easily interrupted]. The spell turns out to be Glow which illuminates the grove revealing all parties. Gisa shouts to Gerhardt to attack Aghi and he responds by taking out the other mope, letting himself get sucked into a clash with Aghi, suffering a few BQ.

At this point we establish that Gisa can run across the grove and join Gerhartd and Aghi in about the time it will take for another exchange. I also warn that the rest of Aghi's men (10 more) will likely arrive immediately after.

Since Aghi attacked most recently, it's Gerhartd's move. He opts to go full defensive hoping to avoid injury but keep Aghi distracted until Gisa arrives. Aghi opts to go full offensive. I struggled with the allocation procedure but Vernon and Justice seemed to have a handle on it as follows:  you have a pool of offence & defence equal to 2x your quickness, you determine prior to roll how to allocate between O and D. If you spend 0 offence then you will do no damage regardless of roll.  Then you add your die roll to each of O and D. So in this case Aghi's Q5 = 10 offence + a roll of 11 for 21 offence.  Gerhardt's Q7= 14 Defence + roll of 7 equalled 21 defence.  A tie, so no damage dealt either way.

(My original thought was that the die rolls can be allocated as well as quickness which would have given Aghi 10+22=32 offence and Gerhardt 14+14=28 defence.)

Back to the action. As this takes care of both Gerhardt and Aghi's actions I now declare that Gisa enters the fray. She opts to tackle Aghi from the side.  I rule she has the advantage die for flanking if not surprising Aghi. They tumble to the ground and Aghi takes enough BQ to reduce his Q to 0.

Gerhartd's turn is next, he kicks at Aghi to keep him from interfering with Gisa who's trying to cast a spell (Glamour) now to prepare for the arrival of Aghi's 10 henchmen.

My doubts about this are:
(1) Should Gisa have been required to completely disengage with Aghi before casting a spell? 
(2) Should casting Glamour and then attempting to use it to exert influence a mob in the middle of a fight be separate actions - allowing the mob to act in the mean time?

As it was I allowed the Glamour to come off in time for Gisa, holding a knife to Ahgi's throat, to order the mob to disperse and go home. They eagerly complied. Leaving their leader alone in the sacred grove with the two knights. Aghi immediately began pleading for his life, explaining he never intended to harm the women but sought only to protect them from the influence of black magi---, but concluded his remarks around the time Gisa slit his throat.

My strongest feeling is that I could have maintained more hygienic play (to use an Eeroism) by declaring precisely how many rounds it would take for the mob to arrive. The vagueness about when they would be able to come to bear on the fight left me uncomfortable telling the players that they were out of time to cast spells etc.

[Joshua Bearden]

After getting all that out, I think I've resolved one problem already by reading the rules. When its your turn in sequence you can cast a spell without fear of interruption UNLESS someone spends B to get in front of you.

Clashes collapse if they are mutual. There is no I swing, you swing back type rounds. So Gisa attacked Aghi sucking him into a clash. He fights back, using up his turn.  It's then Gisa's turn again, she cast a spell. It wasn't necessary for Gerhardt to do anything to prevent Aghi from interfering unless Aghi had spent B to jump ahead, then Gerhardt could have done the same or Gisa could have as well.

[Ron Edwards]

You did the first clash fine! Gerhardt barely avoided getting nailed, with that full defense.

(1) Should Gisa have been required to completely disengage with Aghi before casting a spell?

No. You can cast spells right there in a fight.

(2) Should casting Glamour and then attempting to use it to exert influence a mob in the middle of a fight be separate actions - allowing the mob to act in the mean time?

You're confounding two things unnecessarily. The spell and then talking to the mob are two different actions. However, I saw no reason in your description to think the mob was right there and attacking already. Therefore moving directly to her talking to them isn't a problem.

I suggest not establishing "how many rounds," but keeping such information in much more functional units: (i) right on top of you and already attacking, (ii) over there and about to get here, and (iii) way over there, plenty of time to tie your shoes or deploy to wherever you want or whatever.

With that array in mind, it seems clear to me that the mob was in (ii) - you'd said they'd "arrive immediately after." I can see you'd wonder whether "arrive" meant "attack," but considering the knights were no longer in the thick of battle with Aghi, your decision works fine for me.

Here's my advice: as you play through a situation like this, go ahead and say (i), (ii), or (iii) so the players are right there with you and you will never be in the situation of deciding something consequential in a way which gives you too much story-influencing power. In your c case, saying something like "Arrive immediately after" needs to get categorized in one of these.

The "how many rounds" solution is extremely primitive in comparison and requires running speeds, hex or grid maps, and many other things.

Clashes collapse if they are mutual.

Not quite. I was thinking they would for a little while, but changed my mind (I'll review the text to make sure that's not still in there).

Therefore Aghi's action got skipped. This isn't a big deal - Gisa could have spent B to hop in front and everything would have proceeded exactly the same. Also, frankly, Aghi was fucked - Gerhardt would have had the advantage, and Aghi was at 0 Q, so armed only with naked dice. So it's most likely that any struggling he'd so at that point would have resulted in his death anyway.

[Vernon R]

Thanks Joshua and Justice, it was a fun evening tech problems and figuring out the rules and all!

My impressions.

We were floundering around a bit at first in a typical way with interactions.  I felt the gears grinding in your head a bit Joshua when we first encountered the various NPC's, trying to decide when to go to the mechanics and what the npc wanted out of the situation and how much they were willing to reveal as opposed to .  It seemed to go much smoother once we went back to check the rules on the mechanics, realized we should have used a C vs 12 roll right off the bat to set the situation off right.  The interactions seemed to flow more smoothly once we did that, not sure how it felt for you and if the smoothness was a result of that roll telling you something or if it was enough that you didnt need to worry about thinking of whether to call for a roll or not on each and every exchange.

A couple things I noticed about the dice.  Rolling with advantage is a damn huge swing so yeah you are going to want to turn that around pretty quick.  The unarmed contest was much easier with advantage than the armed combat without.  The all out defence was interesting, took us a bit to figure that out correctly I think Justice found it in the rules question thread here.  Trying anything where you just get one dice, difficult even with good stats and yeah impossible if all you got is a 5.  I think we were able to use professions to guide us away from rolling too much.  There are a lot of judgement calls going on here when it comes to what to roll and when, noticing those probability differences and knowing what you want from the dice rolls is going to be huge running this game.

The mob situation is tricky.  The way things went down it worked out well but if it hadnt, if say the glamor spell and the subsequent C vs 12 roll failed how would that play out?  Would they have just rolled over us and the attempt to cast the spell would have been our action or could we have pumped a point of B to try and take initiative and run? 








   

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Vernon,

it hadnt, if say the glamor spell and the subsequent C vs 12 roll failed how would that play out?  Would they have just rolled over us and the attempt to cast the spell would have been our action or could we have pumped a point of B to try and take initiative and run? 

"Yes," because some of your options are contingent rather than alternates. I'll try to break it down.

If both knights tried to fight the murderous mob, no frills, no special actions, then the mob kills them. Then you get to see what it's like to play wraiths.

Ways to avoid that fate include:

1. Pumping B to get ahead of the action and running. That's a fine option, probably requiring a Q vs. 12 roll. However, I hope you'd used W earlier to learn a bit about the lay of the land, because if not, you're running in the dark in an unfamiliar spot, and that gives your Q roll a single die my friend.

2. It's valid to single out someone in the crowd as a target for an ordinary C vs. 12 roll. Even better if it's someone you can identify a little from what might have been a throwaway detail in earlier play: "That guy who saw me pet the kitten this morning," like that. The GM has to ascend this NPC into named status. If you can make that roll, then this person can do a lot to deconstruct the mob as a game-unit, so it's not acting as a group and therefore isn't a mob any more even if some of them still want to kill you.

3. There's always Wrath, if someone knows it. Many other spells can make a big difference, e.g., True Way solves the problem mentioned in #1. Very thoroughly, in fact, because it takes maximum effect against a group, you simply escape the whole chase without a roll.

(forgot! editing this in: if the Glamor was cast but the C vs. 12 failed against the mob, the Glamor is still working ... and there's another group right there, correct? The women, who are a valid target for a second attempt at a C vs. 12 roll vs. a group.)

[Ron Edwards]

Oh yeah, in addition, and in light of some of John's concern about "how much time" for things, one of the unpleasant things about being killed by a mob is that it's not fast. Which would at least provide plenty of time for the things I mentioned. "They kill you before you can try anything" isn't an issue. The GM only says "They kill you" if you're stupid enough simply to try to fight them as if they were an individual.

[Vernon R]

Right that makes sense, of course it takes my mind down a rabbit hole of possibilities of where things could have gone and have you explaining every possible ruling for every possible eventuality which is crazy.  There is a bit of a question in my mind of when is a mob no longer a mob, simple answer as you said when they cant use their numbers to gang up on you.  So find a terrain feature (W vs 12 roll?)that forces them to come just a few at a time and then I guess it's a judgement call based on the situation. i.e can enough of them get into the battle to make it a clear situation where they overwhelm the defenders or maybe just a situation where they have the advantage etc.

In this situation the terrain feature I'm thinking of is the pool/waterfall where the women mysteriously disappeared, we didnt fully wrap up the situation and discover what the matriarch was up to.  Aghi suggested demons and he fired off a white? spell to kick off the conflict.

[Joshua Bearden]

The context for all these interactions with local people is the Charm vs. 12 roll, which is serious business. It's always made during the first interactions with named people, and it works especially well as parallel rolls to have one's acts well-regarded.

In this thread I'll say that the C v. 12 basic mechanic is one of the things that most excited me during my first read through of the rules.  I'm surprised I completely forgot about it at first.

The characters enter a town on a mission to find out why things are going so well;  there is no obvious crisis or cry for help.  I've predetermined in set up that NPCs who like the status quo are going to be preemptively cautious, even distrusting of Circle Knights, while the discontent will be seeking outside allies.

Never-the-less it wasn't till your characters had met with the third named NPC that I remembered the importance of  Cv12.  It was, as I had anticipated, kind of magical to defer to the mechanic and then pick up role-play afterwards.  No more than magic, its a role-playing revolution for me personally.

Only I'm still unclear on whether all initial Cv12s should start at 1 die. When Gisa got to town she started to engage in her professional trade as an entertainer, attracting the interest of the children. Was "being entertaining" enough to justify 2d6.  I didn't even turn my mind to it at the time.

During Gisa's first interaction with Hulda, I felt Gisa was rather condescending and posturing toward the older woman at first. However in the second encounter Gisa approached her with some willingness to learn and I didn't question using 2d6.

[Ron Edwards]

Whoops, I screwed up. You guys handled the clash perfectly. Because Aghi fought back when attacked, his intended action was aborted.

[Ron Edwards]

Only I'm still unclear on whether all initial Cv12s should start at 1 die. When Gisa got to town she started to engage in her professional trade as an entertainer, attracting the interest of the children. Was "being entertaining" enough to justify 2d6.  I didn't even turn my mind to it at the time.

During Gisa's first interaction with Hulda, I felt Gisa was rather condescending and posturing toward the older woman at first. However in the second encounter Gisa approached her with some willingness to learn and I didn't question using 2d6.

I'm seeing that behaving in accordance with one's social rank and profession is good enough to put people at ease, enough to turn the roll into 2d6.

It's a really good idea not to prep specific NPCs as "hostile" or "friendly" - just let the C vs. 12 do its job.

[Vernon R]

Yeah I'd read the rules about C vs 12 initially but it hadnt really clicked for me until I saw it in play.  It sounds like something simple, I've played gurps and it has reaction rolls but it's not really the same thing.   When we initially were just roleplaying our way around town it seemed normal we were engaging in conversations and the gm had to try and pick out something that might set off a roll that would get the npc's to reveal something.  Once we swapped and rolled C vs 12 it seemed much easier, they were more willing to let us in on things (though maybe not everything) and we werent hunting for info as much as interacting.  As things worked out Gisa managed to get on the good side of Hulda and the matriarchy while Gerhart got on with Aghi and the mysogynists but if those C vs 12 rolls had gone different ways the situation would have been totally different.  We may have allied with one side or the other or been up against both, I think that's pretty cool and not typical in my experience.  I like the way it's worded in the rules, the stark contrast between sympathetic if you pass and almost anatagonistic if you fail and I can see why that makes it almost impossible to plan on having character x as the bad guy and character y as the ones you will help. 

[John W]

Thanks Joshua and players for posting this AP, very interesting and helpful to see how play proceeds.

Joshua, something about C vs. 12 rolls; I believe that the GM shouldn't roll this at the very start of a PC-NPC interaction.  I'm not sure if you were using them that way.  For as long as the characters are "just talking," the GM should play the NPC according to the NPC's own interests and responding to the PC's actions with respect to social conventions.  It is only once the PC tries to modify the NPC's behaviour, for example he asks for information or for a favour, that the C vs. 12 roll is made.  I think the point is that the roll must follow from committed action and must have consequences.  Anyone: let me know if I've got that wrong.

Vernon: yes I agree, as a GM I'm really liking the idea of the C vs. 12 roll, it means I can't plan at all how the scenario will play out.  It ensures that my games won't all feel alike, and it ensures that the games will contain some surprises for me, too.

Cheers,
-J

[Justice Platt]

I'm late to the party, but I did want to add one thing that stuck out in my mind (since Vernon & Joshua already covered a lot of the things I was curious/confused about).  In the early going, both players made wits rolls to find who the shot-callers in the area were, and that felt...odd.  It seemed like a "play can't proceed without this" roll, with the consequences being that the GM has to pull something out of this air to make play go if the rolls are missed. 

I'm thinking here of the text about this under "Groups and Scale," which, now I'm re-reading it, feels like I must've misread it, but I can't figure out how.  So, how to make this work as not a Library Use roll?

Beyond that, I feel quite cured of my initial impression that the game would have a lot in common with DitV, which is good.  The combat system seems terrifying, and I think we've only scratched the surface-I think trying to be really careful about pre/post-roll descriptions will be a big deal, along with emphasizing more color.

[Ron Edwards]

Terrifying and so satisfying - wait until you play a character who impales someone with a thrown spear, and on the one hand you're relieved that you won't have to get into one of those scary clashes with that guy, and on the other you're sickened with how straightforwardly you've killed a person with a pointed stick, in a single act.

You guys have noticed that you do not kill anyone with the full combat system engaged unless you  (the people playing) know their name, right? Yeah.

Anyway,

In the early going, both players made wits rolls to find who the shot-callers in the area were, and that felt...odd.  It seemed like a "play can't proceed without this" roll, with the consequences being that the GM has to pull something out of this air to make play go if the rolls are missed.

I'll talk about this more tomorrow, as my brain is frying out, but the short answer is that the NPCs are going to do important things whether the player-characters know who they are or not.

[Ron Edwards]

All right, let's see if I can make sense with this issue today.

1. These are not Call of Cthulhu adventures or Dogs in the Vineyard adventures. The NPCs are not hiding secrets that must be winkled out with rolls. They are going to capitalize on the player-characters' presence in some way - if hostile, they'll enlist their social network to expel or kill the knights; if friendly, they'll do the same to engage and direct them. None of this is particularly covert so much as obvious to a local and maybe not as obvious to an outsider (depending on regional familiarity and social rank).

2. There is no neutrality in this culture - not a bit. A stranger is afforded near-neutral hospitality on the condition that he or she behave in a non-disturbing way and then move the fuck on down the road. Otherwise, you're in that spot and everyone in that spot is going to have something they want - stay or leave, help or be squelched, fight for me or get killed, anything like these and more besides. The NPCs act on these expectations and desires, they do not skulk around saying "shhh!" and getting stuff done in the hopes the characters will go away.

3. Therefore interacting with any of the named NPCs (who will approach for such interaction, period), yields a Charm roll. It has to, if you're playing the NPCs as I'm describing. Given those expectations and desires, it doesn't matter whether the player-character is "trying to charm" him or her at all.

4. Wits rolls are going to be  a potential problem for players and GMs who are used to a trail of bread-crumb clues in their games.

i) Their most concrete use is to get familiar with locations and to pick up quickly on obvious social ties like kin and romance.

ii) They are not lie-detectors, they are not clue-finders, they are not a tool to work your way through the "story." A failed roll is not a block or stall-out. It's consequential because a character might not get out of the one-die hole for particular things, or because the worst features of a dangerous location might descend upon him or her, or because, less disastrously, the social environment of the adventure becomes more focused in a different direction than that particular roll would have done.

iii) They are particularly good for helping shape the ascension of NPCs. Using a W roll to find "someone who's good at midwifery," or "an old person," or whatever, even just the guy who makes wagon-wheels and knows how to fix or make shields - all of those are key to seeing lots more named NPCs appear who are not standoffish toward your character, and the W rolls pave the way.

The bread-crumb clues thing is primitive and problematic because no one knows how the adversity of such things is supposed to work. As long as the rolls succeed, then we're all good, but if not, then ... uh? A fight, killing the characters maybe? Do something else? But if the something else "gets us there," then what was the point of rolling for the first thing? Uh?

Plenty of people have arrived at coping mechanisms to deal with this, usually full-on Illusionism based on skilled narration to make the rolls seem important, or skilled improvisional characterization to make whatever happens colorful despite being trivial, or knowing how to "end" a fight when someone is colorfully wounded without it being too obvious that the creature "fled" when it didn't have to. The trouble with such skills is that they aren't necessary here, but the habit of using them is very strong among everyone at those tables, so even the concept of "arrive somewhere, see what's up" clicks into play because everyone just knows the point is to get to the canned set-piece eventually and to bask in the GM's entertainment skills along the way, punctuating it with colorful characterization of your own.