First Impressions (incomplete)

[Sammael99]

So Burning Wheel arrived to my door on Saturday (well, actually on Friday night, but I got home at 2 AM, so I didn't check my mail until Saturday.)

Great production quality, especially considering the low price. It's a good looking book.

I started reading it. I'm about halfway through, somewhere in the damage section. I thought I'd give my first impressions as I progress and ask a few questions along the way :

First of all, it's a lot crunchier than I expected and lot crunchier than I'm used to these days. However, most of it so far seems like crunch that makes sense, and is therefore less daunting. Still, I can see that it's not a game you'd pick up for a one-off. Too much stuff you need to know.

In many ways, the system reminds me of Rêve de Dragon. It has a fine granularity, but tries to have an all-encompassing mechanic so that most if not all rules use the same resolution. It also emulates gritty realism, not only in combats. (This game is available in english as Rêve for anyone interested.)

A couple of things jumped at me :

- Advancement : beyond that fact that these are by far the most detailed advancement rules evar, I was wondering if there could be a risk of misuse for advancement purposes. Ie. players taking unnecessary in character risks to get their difficult and challenging checks. It's something I saw occasionally in Rêve, which has a similar mechanic. Can anyone running the game comment on that ?

- Armor : even though the combat section is hard to grok just by reading it, I love the concepts and I can easily see it work. The armor thing I don't like so much though. Why change the DNs ? It was all so elegant with fixed DNs ? I'm sure that in such a finely crafted system, there must have been a reason why armor didn't just increase Ob ? Also, in the mechanics as described, the average armor will last no more than five or six fights, right ? I'm not familiar with armomr, but that sounds harsh... And finally, is there a reason why armor is all or nothing ? In a dicepool system, armor could have reduced damage without cancelling it if not enough successes were rolled. That would make combat deadlier though, so the impact may be horrible, I dunno...

- Missile and Thrown : why isn't damage based on success ? I can't see any mechanical reason here, and I can't see any realism reasons either, despite the in-game explanations. A good marksman is a good marksman, why would the damage he deals be more random than that of a good swordsman ? Would assigning an Add to missile and thrown weapons really cause any problem ? Incidentally, the game strongly downplays the efficiency of missile and thrown weapons already by making them hard to use often, which I quite like, but I wish they went by the same mechanic as the rest...

- I haven't gone much beyond that. There are a couple of things I really love. Little touches, like your lifestyle affecting your health or the 'Get inside' move. Incidentally, just by reading, it seemed to me that this game would at last do the dagger justice. I can just see an efficient two-dagger fighter, which is mostly impossible in any other fantasy game out there...

I'll post my further comments as I go along, if that's OK with everyone.

[Sammael99]

OK, so I've more or less finished reading the first book (so no comments on chargen yet).

Magic looks OK, but didn't jump at my throat screaming 'cool'. I understand there are alternative systems out there, I got to look for that.

Faith is way cool though. This is how divine interventions should work in any game.

I've been toying with such an idea ever since I read Harn Religion, and if I adopt BW for my setting (still pending playtest, but it looks likely at this stage) I'll probably add a simple devotion score which accrues with religious actions (devotion) and goes down by the number of successes on any intervention you manage. I like the idea of faithful 'earning' their deity's help.

Artha is damn cool as well. I like the fact that you can both use it in game and invest it in longer forms.

[Luke]

these issues have been addressed in a variety of other posts but I'll recap here:

Advancement via risk -- that was one of the intents behind the rules, to force players to push their characters and take risks. I have found it to work very well in game.

armor DNs and deflection -- the variable DN is used to create a finer grain than what is available with the obstacle system. It is not something I consider perfect, but the armor system is so easy to use and possesses such depth that I find it will worth sacrifice. That said, we are experimenting with an alternate armor system that uses dice instead of DN.

A tenet of the armor system is that armor must be potentially able to completely deflect an attack. Using obstacle and reducing successes gets very problematic when trying to keep armor dice to a controllable level.

Marksman vs Swordsman The DOF is completely and utterly necessary because the world is not populated by good marksmen, but many many many many bad marksmen pick up stones, bows and guns and still manage to inflict grievous harm. Damage and accuracy had to be separated in missile weapons to represent this.  While a case could be made for inexperienced swordsmen and swords, I think the level of incident is far more rare and can easily be explained in the system using Beginner's Luck or even Artha. And one must recognize the killing power of a sword comes directly from the user's strength and skill. The bows and guns in particular are mechanical devices completely separate from the user and possessed of their own killing potential.

thanks for your comments!
-Luke

[Sammael99]

these issues have been addressed in a variety of other posts but I'll recap here:

Advancement via risk -- that was one of the intents behind the rules, to force players to push their characters and take risks. I have found it to work very well in game.

armor DNs and deflection -- the variable DN is used to create a finer grain than what is available with the obstacle system. It is not something I consider perfect, but the armor system is so easy to use and possesses such depth that I find it will worth sacrifice. That said, we are experimenting with an alternate armor system that uses dice instead of DN.

A tenet of the armor system is that armor must be potentially able to completely deflect an attack. Using obstacle and reducing successes gets very problematic when trying to keep armor dice to a controllable level.

Marksman vs Swordsman The DOF is completely and utterly necessary because the world is not populated by good marksmen, but many many many many bad marksmen pick up stones, bows and guns and still manage to inflict grievous harm. Damage and accuracy had to be separated in missile weapons to represent this.  While a case could be made for inexperienced swordsmen and swords, I think the level of incident is far more rare and can easily be explained in the system using Beginner's Luck or even Artha. And one must recognize the killing power of a sword comes directly from the user's strength and skill. The bows and guns in particular are mechanical devices completely separate from the user and possessed of their own killing potential.

thanks for your comments!
-Luke

Maybe I'll go check up the other threads now... Sorry !

[rafial]

Magic looks OK, but didn't jump at my throat screaming 'cool'. I understand there are alternative systems out there, I got to look for that.

It's not an alternative, but an extension, called the "Abstractions" system.  It allows experienced sorcerers to attempt "freeform" spells on the fly, and then provides a system whereby the freeform effects can be "distilled" into formulas that work like the ones given in the book, and can be used by mages that don't have the skill to attempt the freeform version.

Artha is damn cool as well. I like the fact that you can both use it in game and invest it in longer forms.

You should should definitely check out the revised Artha system (available from the website).  What's in the book is cool, but the revised system really nails it.

[joshua neff]

Advancement via risk -- that was one of the intents behind the rules, to force players to push their characters and take risks. I have found it to work very well in game.

That's one of my personal favorite bits of the game, in theory.

[taepoong]

- Advancement : Ie. players taking unnecessary in character risks to get their difficult and challenging checks.

In my game, I find that players instinctively try to avoid the risky moves and instead go with safe bets. However, because they need to try at least once to go beyond their means, they sometimes put their necks on the line. This makes for a nice balance.

- Armor : even though the combat section is hard to grok just by reading it, I love the concepts and I can easily see it work. The armor thing I don't like so much though. Why change the DNs ?

I, too, want to see no variable DNs at all in BW. That is why I've been playtesting a new armor system in my campaign. Please review:

All armor has a DN of 4. This works out just fine for me, but it allows for more successes than  the previous system. This is also fine with me because I use the new, graver Wound system.

Leather - 1D per location
Plated Leather - 2D
Chain - 3D
Plated Chain - 4D
*Chest location gets an extra 1D.

-Shield Dice convert directly with a fixed DN of 4.
-Weapon VA reduces dice.
-All shots must be Called Shots. Any shot not Called defaults to a Called Shot to the Chest.

- Missile and Thrown : why isn't damage based on success ?

Well, we've been playing with a ruleset that's a bit more rewarding for the skilled marksman. It works great!

Exceeding Obstacle gives a +1 to the DOF.
Doubling Obstacle gives a +2 to the DOF.
Tripling Obstacle grants a +3 to the DOF.
And so forth and so on.

- Incidentally, just by reading, it seemed to me that this game would at last do the dagger justice. I can just see an efficient two-dagger fighter, which is mostly impossible in any other fantasy game out there...

The Knife has become the weapon of choice for MANY BW players out there. A knife fighter on the inside is pure villainy!

[rafial]

All armor has a DN of 4. This works out just fine for me, but it allows for more successes than  the previous system. This is also fine with me because I use the new, graver Wound system.
...

I'm curious.  In your armor system, are the armor dice eating strike successes, or is it like the system in the book where a single success stops all damage?

[taepoong]

It's an all-or-nothing system, just like in the book. One 4+ wards off any damage. No successes and full damage.

I've talked to Abzu about this system and he feels 4+ makes it too easy. He wants me to try a 5+. But I remember my Warhammer days and nobody ever made an armor save of 5+! :o( Maybe it was just my bad luck?

[Durgil]

I like your idea of a DN of 4, but knowing the odds, I'd have to agree with Luke - it's just too easy.  what if instead of a single success, you altered it to be that you had to at least match the number of successes of the attacker?  That could make it a little more interesting.

[Sammael99]

I, too, want to see no variable DNs at all in BW. That is why I've been playtesting a new armor system in my campaign. Please review:

All armor has a DN of 4. This works out just fine for me, but it allows for more successes than  the previous system. This is also fine with me because I use the new, graver Wound system.

Leather - 1D per location
Plated Leather - 2D
Chain - 3D
Plated Chain - 4D
*Chest location gets an extra 1D.

-Shield Dice convert directly with a fixed DN of 4.
-Weapon VA reduces dice.
-All shots must be Called Shots. Any shot not Called defaults to a Called Shot to the Chest.

I'll have to reread that when I'm less tired. On principle, this is what I'd like, but as has been said, I'd have to work out if it's not too easy or too hard, and if it doesn't slow down things too much. In any case, I intend to try a bunch of combats with the rules as they are before I try anything else...

I hope it's not too weird for Luke watching us suggest fixes to something he took 7 years designing...

Well, we've been playing with a ruleset that's a bit more rewarding for the skilled marksman. It works great!

Exceeding Obstacle gives a +1 to the DOF.
Doubling Obstacle gives a +2 to the DOF.
Tripling Obstacle grants a +3 to the DOF.
And so forth and so on.

That sounds nice and easy. I still can't work out why the standard system wouldn't work, despite Luke's explanations, but it seems that this comes from experience, so I'll have to experience it myself ;)

[Luke]

I like your idea of a DN of 4, but knowing the odds, I'd have to agree with Luke - it's just too easy.  what if instead of a single success, you altered it to be that you had to at least match the number of successes of the attacker?  That could make it a little more interesting.

You could try something like this. Even use Armor dice as Block dice.

But this weights the "balance" of attack and defense in favor of attack.

Getting hit on the head with an Axe (VA 2) while wearing a helmet (3D) would mean you only roll one die and only have a 50/50 chance of reducing the incoming attack by one success.

In all my research about armor -- and i did a little -- i was led to believe armor did not work this way. This would not represent the dozens of blows needed to bring down armored knights.

[Sammael99]

I like your idea of a DN of 4, but knowing the odds, I'd have to agree with Luke - it's just too easy.  what if instead of a single success, you altered it to be that you had to at least match the number of successes of the attacker?  That could make it a little more interesting.

You could try something like this. Even use Armor dice as Block dice.

But this weights the "balance" of attack and defense in favor of attack.

Getting hit on the head with an Axe (VA 2) while wearing a helmet (3D) would mean you only roll one die and only have a 50/50 chance of reducing the incoming attack by one success.

In all my research about armor -- and i did a little -- i was led to believe armor did not work this way. This would not represent the dozens of blows needed to bring down armored knights.

How about if it was full bloxk ? Then 50/50 of blocking the attack completely sounds vaguely reasonable,no ?

In any case, there is a limit here between simulationism and playability. I suspect that such a blow would cause damage most of the time irrespective of armor, wouldn't it ?

[Luke]

In any case, there is a limit here between simulationism and playability. I suspect that such a blow would cause damage most of the time irrespective of armor, wouldn't it ?

No. Not according to my research. Armor didn't always work, but it possessed the mysterious quality of allowing heavily armored soldiers to stand up hundreds of blows.

In an age of muscle-powered weaponry, armor meant something.


I promise, the current system works, and works fine. In fact, as we go around tweaking, refining and tightening the game, it's the one mechanic that I keep coming back to because I can't find anything better. In the fight for the balance between simulation and playability, it continues to win battle after battle. Yes, I know it bends game convention slightly, but it really really works well in play.


play the game a few times before you begin rewriting it. it performs completely different at the table than it does on paper.

-Luke

[taepoong]

For me, finding a new armor system isn't about trying to fix the official one - which works just fine really. It's all about living up to the dream of a fixed DN throughout the entire system. "One DN to rule them all..." and all that! ;o)