[Circle of Hands] Rules questions

[Moreno R.]

Seeing that Ron created this thread for rules questions, I am posting the question he answered in my thread, with his answer:

OK, now about the profession...  I checked to see how many spell a non-wizard would have,m and I found contradictory answers...
Page 22: Non-wizards are trained by the wizards of the Circle, so they begin with points of spells equal to Wits
Page 64: Player-characters without the wizard Profession begin play with five points of spells
What is the right rule?

Points of starting spells = W. That was a late-stage change, and it looks like I didn't find every instance of "five."

[Ron Edwards]

So, unless an opponent is getting in your face (in which case you're sucked into a Clash) all ranged attacks are Q vs 12? And the target can do not a thing to avoid damage except hope the roll goes badly?

Right. Fuckin' guys with bows and stuff ...

And all damage is 6 + difference, whether it's a spear, a crossbow bolt or a lobbed rock?

Yes, but spears and bolts go right through mail, and I'd count the lobbed rock as an unarmed attack (that final stage of stoning someone to death is really horrible).

Oh yeah, and spears, axes, other thrown weapons get +B, not +6.

Does the target of a ranged attack include all armour - shields, helms and everything - as per hand to hand fighting? (with exceptions for spears ignoring chainmail and so on)

Yes. I consider that to be a function of abstracting armor a bit. Hit-location seems to me to do better as a function of calculating BQ.

Regarding narration, your paraphrase is fine, but I was thinking about narrations that go into strikes during clashes, prior to the roll. They're plenty of fun, like "I scream and strike overhand," in a moment of passion, but that's the one window I want to close regarding affecting the mechanics with how we talk.

edited to add some bits - RE

[Andrew S]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for taking questions!

A couple of my own:

Character Creation: Is there any mechanical benefit to playing a non-wizard? As it stands I can create a character, select a few favoured spells as I would for a regular knight, call them a wizard and reap all the versatility of the system without any drawbacks.

Task Resolution: The playtest seems to imply two methods of resolving non-clash tasks - binary yes/no based on profession and vs. 12 based on abilities. Which is it, and under what circumstances would one apply and the other not?

Combat: Just to clarify, Brawn is added to all successful melee attacks? If so, that's pretty brutal.


Thanks!

[Ron Edwards]

Character Creation: Is there any mechanical benefit to playing a non-wizard? As it stands I can create a character, select a few favoured spells as I would for a regular knight, call them a wizard and reap all the versatility of the system without any drawbacks.

I get this a lot. The difference shows up in play. Wizards always run really close to burnout in the action. It's a powerful way to play, but also volatile. The B cost is a major limitation, very much counteracting the ostensible "OMG no downside" impression. It's also for players who like the idea of knowing all that stuff (the person, not the character) and enjoy having a whole constellation of options. People who get analysis-paralyzed don't enjoy it as much, although I think some might once past the not-very-high learning curve. So the choice is emphatically not a strategic one the way it is in almost every fantasy RPG I can think of. It's merely tactical and therefore a matter of preference.

Task Resolution: The playtest seems to imply two methods of resolving non-clash tasks - binary yes/no based on profession and vs. 12 based on abilities. Which is it, and under what circumstances would one apply and the other not?

Binary yes/no occurs when you're looking at a vs. 12 situation and either (i) no particular adversity seems involved or (ii) the character is in an advantaged circumstance. Rather than adding a third die to roll, I say give it to'em.

Remember that a lot of such rolls do not start out at the base 2d6, especially C rolls, when encountering people at the outset of an adventure. Care and courtesy matter. For example, it's a good idea to stay very cultural and not start sayin' crazy shit like "I am gentry of Rolke" when to this person you're just some peasant yotz sitting on a horse for some reason. And then to do something decent like help them tend their hearth fire or something.

Combat: Just to clarify, Brawn is added to all successful melee attacks? If so, that's pretty brutal.

Brutal indeed. Mail helps a lot. I always enjoy the point when the player-characters look at one another and say, "That's it, we're putting on our mail now."

[Joshua Bearden]

Character Creation: Is there any mechanical benefit to playing a non-wizard? As it stands I can create a character, select a few favoured spells as I would for a regular knight, call them a wizard and reap all the versatility of the system without any drawbacks.

You have to have wits enough for at least two professions and then spend one on wizardry.  That's not nothing. My first character didn't even have the option.

I have a related question about 'key event' was my character able to use both magics before joining the circle, or would she necessarily have been a monochrome wizard like another NPC?

[Andrew S]

Thanks for the clarifications!

On the topic of chainmail, I'm a little unclear on starting armour. Non-gentry are trained in the use of mail, shields and helms, but are they available to them prior to play?

[Ron Edwards]

was my character able to use both magics before joining the circle, or would she necessarily have been a monochrome wizard like another NPC?

I've been playing that pretty fast and loose. My example character Krimhilde strongly implies she'd managed both types of magic prior to the Key Event, and it seems OK to assume that discovering this is possible may be a major step on the path to deciding to join the Circle. In other words, it's not a secret of the Circle to use both kinds of magic - which strikes me as a very important point. However, in the setting to date, no one has done it without joining the Circle next - or perhaps, without joining the Circle, they have not yet managed to survive.

[Ron Edwards]

On the topic of chainmail, I'm a little unclear on starting armour. Non-gentry are trained in the use of mail, shields and helms, but are they available to them prior to play?

Pedantic point: I just say "mail." There isn't any other kind of heavy armor to compare it with, so no need to distinguish it from plate or whatever.

You're talking about Circle members, right? If so, then yes - they have all that equipment at the outset of play.

[Andrew S]

On the topic of chainmail, I'm a little unclear on starting armour. Non-gentry are trained in the use of mail, shields and helms, but are they available to them prior to play?

Pedantic point: I just say "mail." There isn't any other kind of heavy armor to compare it with, so no need to distinguish it from plate or whatever.

You're talking about Circle members, right? If so, then yes - they have all that equipment at the outset of play.

Excellent, and thanks again.

[Ron Edwards]

You have to have wits enough for at least two professions and then spend one on wizardry.  That's not nothing.

That's a good point too. So much competence and flexibility depends on the professions.

[glandis]

On Anglo-Saxon - familiarity with the term "WASP" (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) and its usage in the US would probably cover a lot of the issues. Circle of Hands gains no benefit from association with, say, Abercrombie & Fitch fashion (which, yeah, could happen).

[John W]

Tangent: we need a better name than "Allocation" for the mechanic of shifting some Q to be more offensive or more defensive.  The word is clunky and undescriptive of how we're using it.  Sorry if this is a writing-and-editing thing, but it keeps coming up in my notes and I can see how "Allocation" is going to be confusing when I go to teach this game.  "What's your Allocation?"

I'm calling it "Animus."  "Rancor" was a close second.  Also liked "Abandon" and "Spleen."  "Belligerence" is spot-on but too long.

I'm hoping "Animus" catches on.  Clash: determine Advantage, decide your Animus, and roll the dice!

-J

[John W]

I think the game still needs rounds.  Sorry to keep coming back to this.

If you are attacked before you have acted, then you have a choice: you can defend only, and still take an action on your turn, or you can attack and defend when attacked, but give up your action for when your turn comes around.
At the start of the fight, "if you haven't acted yet" is pretty clear.  But what about after you have acted?  We still need to have a sense of whether it's "later in the same round, and you've already acted," or "early in the next round, and you haven't acted yet."

So we still need rounds.  The only difference is, there's not free-and-clear at the top of every round; only before the first round.

/pedantic

-J

[John W]

Ranged attacks.  Just to be clear:

If the target can shoot back, it's a Clash.
It's opposed attack rolls.

Damage:
BQ = (offence - defense) + B if it's a thrown weapon
BQ = (offence - defense) + 6 if it's a crossbow or shortbow

If the target of a ranged attack can't shoot back, then it's turkey-shoot rules.
The roll is Q vs.12 to hit.

Damage:
BQ = (roll - 12) + B if it's a thrown weapon
BQ = (roll - 12) + 6 if it's a crossbow or shortbow

Right?

-J

[Ron Edwards]

If the target can shoot back, it's a Clash.
It's opposed attack rolls.

Damage:
BQ = (offence - defense) + B if it's a thrown weapon
BQ = (offence - defense) + 6 if it's a crossbow or shortbow

If the target of a ranged attack can't shoot back, then it's turkey-shoot rules.
The roll is Q vs.12 to hit.

Damage:
BQ = (roll - 12) + B if it's a thrown weapon
BQ = (roll - 12) + 6 if it's a crossbow or shortbow

I think you got it. Although I just say "bow" for the older version of the weapon because there's basically one kind.

For the rounds ... perhaps it will help to think of it merely as a list, written vertically. Initially it goes from highest Q at the top to lowest Q at the bottom. When the top guy goes, his name goes to the bottom. That continues until look, he's at the top again.

So after the start, there isn't any "first" any more, it's just "next" in the sense of a rotating conveyor belt or something like that.

You change position by popping to the top (or "next") by spending 1 B, or by getting your Q reduced in which case you bump down in the Q order - this actually might bump you up on the physical list but it means you are going later than you otherwise would be.

The way I've been playing it, once you pop to the top by spending B, that's your new position, you don't revert nor do you have to keep spending B to maintain that ordinal position.

Try it that way, just once, and see how it goes.