Gateway: I Have No Idea

I've been getting the same question quite a bit from people lately (myself included), and that question is "What are you going to run at Gateway?"

I have no idea.

Whatever it is, it'll be something FATE-based, of course. I just don't know what it'll be. Nothing's really jumping out at me right now in terms of genre, and I don't have some wacky/high-concept idea (like "Paranoia + Star Wars!" or "All the PCs are gibbons!") that's grabbing me, either. So... I have no idea.

Anyone have any suggestions?

Swashbuckling: Playtest!

So! Sorry for the radio silence. Parents are fine, baby's kicking, everything's good. I've been back and forth between home and my parents' place in the past few weeks, so the ol' blog has kinda fallen by the wayside.

Speaking of this blog-thing, though, last week we had our first actual playtest session using these swashbuckling rules, and it went pretty well. We had three PCs -- the M-Team: Michel the magistrate, Marion the musketeer, and Merlin the... er... ex-priest and 17th-century French equivalent of John Belushi in Animal House -- and two fights: one against some mooks, and the other a proper duel.

The plot, in brief, involves a kidnapping. Wealthy and powerful Michel is approached by the wife of a fellow Parisian magistrate, M. Des Lauriers. He's being held for ransom in Nice, only he's actually in Poitiers with his Huguenot mistress and the kidnappers have his double, but either way she begs Michel to round up, say, two friends and head down there to resolve things as discreetly as possible.

The mook fight was pretty much along the lines of every FATE mook fight in terms of mechanics, although I have to mention one highlight. The PCs had been tricked into thinking a bandit in a "broken-down" carriage was actually a mademoiselle in need. Shortly after her colleagues burst out of the foliage to either side of the road, Merlin knocked her out with a single punch in her face. Bam!

The duel, though, was definitely a focal point of the playtest, since it actually involved new mechanics. I have to say it went well. The opposition, a member of the Cardinal's Guards, wasn't quite the equal of Marion, but it was still a pretty good combat between them. The Advantage mechanic didn't have a perceptible effect on the speed of the combat, but I'd say it definitely added a lot in terms of the narrative. Both the player and I were encouraged to creatively one-up each other with our various attempts to gain Advantage. He used Physique to swing on a chandelier and land behind me, I used Brawn to try to trip him up by yanking on a rug, and so on. Ultimately, Marion got the upper hand, but chose to just knock me out instead of killing me, so... hello, recurring antagonist.

Meanwhile, the other two PCs faced off against the Guard's two companions. I'd anticipated that all four of them might sit on the sidelines and put aspects on the two combatants, but Merlin was so offended that they refused a friendly drink that he went right to throwing blows. So the four of them tussled, managing to get off an insult or two only occasionally but enough to make them feel part of the central conflict. I ran the other two Cardinal's Guards as true antagonists instead of just minions (i.e., they took consequences, not stress), so they were pretty persistent foes despite having a skill pyramid that topped out at Good (+3).

One thing we instituted and that I can really see myself sticking with is limiting aspect invokes/tags to once per scene. It meant that invokes were a little less frequent, and gaining access to more aspects (through story aspects, assessments, declarations, and consequences) became much more important. It made for a more dynamic conflict, since Andy couldn't just fall back on "Sargeant-at-Arms of the Black Musketeers" every time he drew his rapier -- and when he scored his first consequence, it felt like a bit of a bigger deal.

The next session's scheduled for this Thursday, so stay tuned for some more vague observations.

Real Life Intrudes

Sorry for the radio silence -- my parents were in a car accident last week, so I've been up here in LA since Thursday helping out. They both got pretty banged up (my mom, with a broken hand, got the worst of it), but it's nothing permanent.

The consequence of me being such a good son is that our scheduled "SotS" game didn't happen on Saturday, and there's a good chance that this week's swashbuckling playtest won't happen either, all of which means, well, not much to write about right now. Stay tuned.

Swashbuckling: The Princess Bride Test

So I'm watching The Princess Bride on cable right now, and I can't help but see it in light of these swashbuckling rules. Even though the emphasis for this conversion is 17th-century French musketeers and the like, if a swashbuckling game can't do this movie, what good is it? Call it The Princess Bride Test. A couple scenes in particular stand out to me in mechanical terms.

First up: Inigo confronts Count Rugen. Neither has Advantage when it comes to Readiness rolls, although Rugen wins the roll and gets to go first. He jockeys for Advantage by running away, and obtains vitesse (a.k.a. spin) against Inigo on his Physique roll. This means that when Inigo rounds the corner after spending his turn dealing with that locked door (a Brawn roll that he gets Fezzik to help him with), Rugen's able to deal a pretty significant physical consequence to him with that thrown dagger (an Arms roll). If you've read the book (and if not, why haven't you read the book?), you'll know that this probably qualifies as a Grievous consequence: "Bleeding Out." Rugen is content to just watch him die, but Inigo refuses to make a concession, instead responding with his classic catchphrase. Rugen still has Advantage, and attacks again, tagging that consequence in the process; Inigo goes full defense, and only takes a Trifling consequence of "Arm Wounds." Determined to win Advantage, Inigo repeats his "Hello! My name is Inigo Montoya!" a few times in succession as part of his use of Presence to intimidate. Success! I'm sure he spends some Fate Points on this one, too. Once he has Advantage, his superior swordsmanship virtually guarantees him the win. Rugen, being an NPC (albeit an important one), can't survive a Grievous consequence, which is what Inigo gives him when he runs him through while politely requesting the return of his dead father, you son of a bitch.

Note that even though Rugen and Inigo spend a lot of time actually fencing after Inigo gets back on his feet, that's mere window dressing for the contest for Advantage. Up until he actually deals an injury, he's isn't using Arms. The idea is that Arms is only used for dealing consequences. Everything else is describing what you're doing, be it fencing or otherwise, in terms of some other skill.

Example the Second: Westley confronts Prince Humperdinck. Westley frames this as a mental conflict, using Presence (again) and maybe even Art, for being creative with that whole "To The Pain" thing. This one's interesting, because even though Humperdinck could escalate things from a mental conflict to a physical one, he doesn't. His response to Westley isn't to shove three feet of steel into his gut -- it's "I think you're bluffing."

Let me back up, though. Westley wins initiative and, in the process, Advantage. And because he wins intiative, he gets to control what kind of conflict it is (or at least what kind it'll start off as). He chooses mental, so he can freak Humperdinck out with a bunch of mind games. It's pretty much his only option, since he's still weak as a kitten from being mostly dead all day. When he calls Humperdinck a "warthog-faced buffoon," Humperdinck's reply of "That may be the first time in my life a man has dared insult me" indicates that he's probably taken a Trifling consequence of "Insulted."

Westley's player then tags this consequence for an unusual effect: Humperdinck won't escalate things to a physical conflict. As easy as it would be to impale Westley and be done with it, the player suggests, the prince's pride and curiosity preclude him from essentially admitting defeat in Westley's little challenge. The GM agrees. Of course, Humperdinck's no match for Westley in this conflict, even going full defense as he does (Humperdinck isn't especially proactive here -- he's all "Yes, yes, let's get on with it," leaving Westley to drive the conflict).

Westley carries on with some disturbing talk of Humperdinck losing his feet, hands, and eyes (but not his ears) as part of this bizarre "duel." (I'm not clear on how "To The Pain" works, anyway -- you lose body parts until you cry "Uncle"? Can't we just fight?) Like Rugen, he can't take a Grievous consequence, so when it comes time for him to defend against Westley's final salvo of words -- ending with his impossible-to-ignore "Drop! Your! Sword!" -- Humperdinck makes a concession rather than get Taken Out. "Fine," the GM says. "He stumbles backwards, horrified by the gruesome picture you've painted. You've intimidated him into submission, but you let him live so he can contemplate what a total coward he is." The player agrees, Westley collapses, and Humperdinck realizes he's been had.

This latter example brings up something I've been thinking about lately, and that's the concept of conflict framing and escalation. More on that as it develops.

Swashbuckling: More Stuff About Fencing

So we sorta kinda playtested these swashbuckling rules for the first time last night. I say "sorta kinda" because all we really did was make characters, talk about new rules tweaks, and play out half of a duel between two Joel's fencing mistress and Sayler's fencing student to see how Advantage worked in play.

Andy had some concerns that the Advantage rules, as written, might draw out a combat unnecessarily, a point well-taken. In practice, I don't think this was the case, but it was also kinda hard to tell just how quickly or slowly things were going because we kept stopping to talk about it. Ultimately, Nat had a good point about the relative importance of "fun" over "fast" -- who cares if it's taking a while as long as it's creating an interesting narrative and people are having fun? This is especially valid in a swashbuckling game, where personal combat has such a focus. Sayler and Joel said it certainly had the back-and-forth feel of a duel, with each of them constantly jockeying for advantage (and Advantage) over the other, and there was a lot of thought-provoking discussion about it all.

BTW, the characters:
Andy's playing a would-have-been priest who dropped out of seminary and took up a sword
Joel's playing a fencing mistress, largely self-taught, with a unique weapon
Nat's playing a "Chamingly British" nobleman (in France!) with a title and not much else
Sayler's playing another former man of the cloth and novice swordsman
Tony's playing a high-ranking social combat monster who spreads rumors better than Twitter

It should be restated that the Advantage rules are only for one-on-one duels with NPCs of relative importance. E.g., if you bothered to name the NPC, Advantage should probably come into play. Fighting minions uses the usual FATE rules for combat. Moreover, nobody should really be ganging up on a Big Bad: Either every PC has his own Big Bad or group of minions to fight, or one fights while the rest contribute from the sidelines. Last night I compared that latter situation to the film version of The Three Musketeers starring Gene Kelly as D'Artagnan (it's no Scaramouche, but it's a lot of fun). There's a bit early on where he duels with a sargeant (or something) of the Cardinal's Guard -- and Athos, Porthos, and Aramis just watch, shouting out insults and les mots justes now and then. Mechanically speaking, they're using skills like Art, Presence, and Perception to create aspects on the sargeant, D'Artagnan, or the scene. So they're contributing to the combat, but they're letting someone else do the fighting. I mean, together, they could easily slaughter the guy, but that just isn't cricket. I don't know how (or if) I'd enforce that mechanically, though.

On a related note, I'm thinking about limiting aspects to one tag or invoke per scene. Invoke it once, and you can't invoke it again. This would encourage more aspect creation through maneuvers and declarations (and maybe assessments, depending on the nature of the conflict), which seems to fit the genre very well. It also makes the Three Musketeers' insult-generated aspects that much more important. I compare it to the Blue Raja throwing forks into the wall so Mr. Furious can climb it. If you think of every fork as an aspect, it's a pretty appropriate analogy. Right?

Anyway, here's some actul crunch.

I had the idea that disarms could happen normally, or by voluntarily taking "Disarmed" as a consequence once per scene. As a Trifling (Minor) consequence, it'd be relatively trivial to pick up your weapon again (a supplementary action, say). As a Moderate (Middling) consequence, it'd require a skill roll, like usual -- say, opposed Physique rolls between the two combatants as one tries to block the other's path. As a Severe (Grievous) consequence, it'd be something appropriately dire. At the very least, you aren't getting that weapon back anytime soon. Maybe it's broken, or drops into the ocean. Unlike the usual rules for consequences of that degree, though, it might not necessarily change your life forever. Or it might. I dunno.

Anyway, if disarms work differently in this game than usual, I got to thinking about what other fencing maneuvers could be simulated.

• Bind: A defense usable only in Melee -- spend shifts obtained on a Block vs. Brawn.
  
• Dodge: Using Physique to defend. Nothing special.
  
• Feint: Chicanery vs. Arms (or something); shifts obtained = +dF to next attack, with maximum +dF determined by Arms skill (something like Arms - 1).
  
• Fleche: Arms modified by Physique, spend shifts to close distance from Ranged to Extended to Melee to Corps-a-corps (1 shift/pace, +1 shift for R to E, plus any other modifiers for crossing borders or barriers). If you don't have enough shifts to make that happen, you can take stress instead to complete the move (resulting in a consequence).
  
• Footwork: Use Physique vs. Physique to increase or decrease pace by one.
  
• Lunge: +1dF to your attack, +1dF to opponent's next attack.
• Parry: Using Arms to defend. If your next action is an attack, +1dF to Arms.
• Prise de Fer: An attack usable only in Melee -- spend shifts obtained on a Block with Arms (usually) vs. Brawn.
  
• Punch: Fisticuffs, only when Corps-a-Corps.
  
• Shove: Usable only when Corps-a-Corps. Brawn vs. Brawn (usually); success means pace becomes Melee. With vitesse (spin), it's Extended instead. Can't decrease pace.

Of course, I don't want to overburden gameplay with too much crunch, so I don't know if we'll actually end up using these. However, I invite you to try 'em out if you're so inclined.

Swashbuckling: Standing and Social Class

[Note: This is heavily inspired by Flashing Blades and the Size/Scale rules in "Spirit of the Sword" -- which are themselves adapted from the Weight Factor table in SotC. And thus, the circle is complete.]

[Note Too: Also, there's a reference here to Elan. This is known as Will in "Spirit of the Sword" and Chi in "Spirit of the Fist." They all work the same way: Spend a point of it before a roll to replace a Fudge die with a d6.]

One's place in society is a matter of no small importance in the swashbuckling genre. Here, it's represented through your Standing and Social Class (SC).

Standing is rated on the ladder like a skill, but one that's outside of a character's skill pyramid. In some circumstances, it can even be used as a skill, but for the most part it's an indicator of a character's standing in society. If you have someone with Fair (+2) Standing and someone with Mediocre (+0) Standing, you know right away the latter's in more or less a subservient position. Standing can also be used to modify other skill rolls, such as Rapport, or limit their effectiveness, such as with Connections. Social attacks are defended against with Standing, as well.

(Why outside the skill pyramid? Because Standing needs to be a fluid thing. Musketeers get promoted; nobles get disgraced. And I think all of that should be able to happen without having to shift a character's skill pyramid around.)

Standing starts at Mediocre (+0) by default. Right now, I'm thinking that a character could take a boon that increases his Standing by +1 (but that the only way to get this boon would be to take a specific kind of phase in character creation: Position). This would be the only way a starting character could increase his Standing. Of course, if you want to start with a lower Standing than Mediocre (+0), you're free to do so at no charge. As stated earlier, Standing can increase or decrease with promotions or demotions, and traveling to a foreign country can have a negative impact on a character's Standing as well.

Social Class limits the ways individuals of disparate Standing can interact in opposition. For every 2 points by which your target's SC is greater than yours, you must spend a point of Elan to inflict a social consequence on them even on an otherwise successful attack. For example, if a banker (SC 3) attempts to spread a scandalous rumor about the Count D'Arcy (SC 5), even if he obtains three shifts on his Connections roll he'll need to spend a point of Elan to deal the Middling social consequence his skill roll earned.

When making a Connections roll to gather information on an individual, SC limits the people with whom you actually have connections. Apply the absolute value of the difference between your SC and the target's as a penalty to your roll. This reflects the fact that it's harder to discover things about someone who's outside your normal social circles, whether higher or lower in station. For example, a mere infantryman (SC 2) trying to discover the name of a captain's mistress (SC 3) will have the difficulty of his Connections roll increased by +1, but that captain would have an equally hard time gathering information on the trooper. Yes, this does make it virtually impossible for the King of France to learn much of anything about a peasant -- but that's why he has people of lower Social Class in his employ. This strikes me as perfectly reasonable in a highly stratified society. (I know the old "Let them eat cake" incident is somewhat apocryphal, but the point is that it's believable. And this supports that sort of thing.)

Standing	Example	SC
Heavenly (+10)	The King	12
Glorious (+9)	The Queen, Princes	10
Illustrious (+8)	Grand Duke, Cardinals, Royal Ministers	8
Magnificent (+7)	Archduke, Royal Order Masters	7
Formidable (+6)	Dukes, Generals, Noble Order Masters	6
Superb (+5)	Counts, Archbishops	5
Great (+4)	Viscounts, Royal Officials, Magistrates	4
Good (+3)	Barons, Knights, Colonels	3
Fair (+2)	Captains, Bankers, Fencing Masters	3
Average (+1)	Sergeants, Minor Officials, Wealthy Merchants	2
Mediocre (+0)	Troopers, Merchants, Priests	2
Mean (-1)	Townsfolk	1
Embarrassing (-2)	Peasants	1
Shameful (-3)	Criminals	0

Swashbuckling: Skills

This is a short post, but I want to get this skill list out there so I can stop renaming everything back to SotC standard in future posts.

Whenever I start thinking about a new genre conversion, taking a close look at the skill list is one of the first things I do. I like to see what I can cut and what I can combine; rarely, I end up adding something. Regardless, I'm likely to do a lot of renaming. I find it goes a long way toward communicating the feel of the genre in question. For example, in "Spirit of the Sword," I could've left Science as Science, but renaming it to Physik gives it a totally different vibe in my mind.

Anyway, with that in mind, here's a skill list for "Spirit of the 17th Century."

Skill (New)	SotC Equivalent
Alertness	Alertness
Arms	Weapons
Art	Art
Brawn	Might, Endurance
Burglary	Burglary
Chicanery	Deceit
Connections	Contacting
Empathy	Empathy
Esprit	Resolve
Firearms	Guns
Fisticuffs	Fists
Gambling	Gambling
Horsemanship	Drive, Survival's riding trapping
Legerdemain	Sleight of Hand
Occult	Mysteries
Perception	Investigation
Physique	Athletics, Endurance
Presence	Leadership, Intimidation
Rapport	Rapport
Resources	Resources
Scholarship	Academics
Science	Science, Engineering
Seamanship	Pilot
Stealth	Stealth
Survival	Survival, sans riding

For example, there's nothing wrong with Weapons and Fists, per se, but Arms and Fisticuffs just feels so much more right to me. Ditto Chicanery. Chicanery! Is there another RPG out there with a skill called Chicanery?

(I've also renamed consequences for this one: Trifling, Middling, and Grievous. "Well-placed, sir! You have struck me a Grievous Arm Cut Off, indeed!")

Anyway, a few things got combined, so maybe I ought to explain those.

Drive becomes Horsemanship, and deals with both riding horses and driving wagons/carriages/etc. Even though horse-drawn modes of transport are more central to this genre than to, say, fantasy, I still can't see having an entire skill just for carriages. In the source material, those who are good at riding horses are also capable when it comes to controlling a team of them. So Survival loses its horse-riding trapping and is completely about, y'know, survival.

Leadership and Intimidation combine, Voltron-like, to form Presence. Again, in the source material, force of personality is a big thing. Those who are intimidating are generally so because of their charisma. Anyone who wants to be decently intimidating without having any real ability to lead can supplement that with a boon (+1 Presence when intimidating) and an aspect or two, since it's likely to be a situational thing.

Likewise with Might and Endurance. Brawn is all that physical toughness in one skill.

Science kills Engineering and takes its stuff. I just don't think there should be a separation between these here. It's the Age of Enlightenment and/or Reason.

Contacting becomes Connections, which seems minor, I'll admit, but I think it contributes to the more social elements of the genre. It's not about being able to gather information; it's about being well-connected. Connections is the defensive skill in social conflicts, which I'll talk more about later.

And that's all the justification I feel I need to do for you people.

Oh, one last thing: Gamex. Gamex went well. I ran two "Legends of Anglerre" demo games, which were enjoyed by all (or seemed to be), and got some good feedback to boot. Most of the mechanical comments were actually about Starblazer and the differences between it and SotC. I've never met anyone -- in person, in real life -- who actually plays Starblazer, though several of us own the PDF, nor do I think I know anyone anymore who plays SotC as written, so for those in my groups who were already familiar with SotC/FATE, getting used to the way Starblazer does things was an additional obstacle, but hardly one we couldn't overcome.