GM Prep Time - Cognitive Dissonance in Encounter Design?

[Wicht]

Umm, what? Where in my example did we specify that Queen Victoria has to be inches from her deathbed?

Sorry, I thought someone wrote, "Go Granny, Go." or something like that.

 

[Wicht]

KM - the problem with trying to model Queen Victoria as a 1st level aristocrat is that the rules get in the way in all sorts of ways. Any significantly higher level character will never fail in a skill contest with her. Ever. She will be totally dominated by those around here. No matter what.

This does not model Queen Victoria to me at all. I want someone who is savvy enough to be able to run the most powerful nation on the planet without being able to kick every commoner's ass.

Now, cheating by making her on her deathbed and then altering our commoner smith to an elite array and more than 2 hit points doesn't prove anything.

Where to start.

First of all, there was no cheating - I would assume you would want a queen to have her high stats in intelligence, charisma and wisdom and a blacksmith would put his high stats in strength and constitution. A strength of 14 for your average blacksmith doesn't really seem much like cheating to me. Using the Pathfinder rules, as a human he gets a +2 bonus to any one stat of his choice. So even if he starts with a str 12 it becomes 14. Furthermore, a smith would not be a commoner, he would be an expert and typically, I would think a successful smith ought to be about level 3. If the queen needs in game levels to model her "abilities" why not the blacksmith? Of the two, I would think the smith more likely to have handled himself in a fight a time or two. Also, why would any smith have only 2 hitpoints? Even a 1st level commoner would have 3-4.

Secondly, a young queen should be 1st level, and even easily dominated. As she gains experience, she will toughen up her mental stance, focus on improving her skills and become a more accomplished diplomat (one hopes). I think for your average non-fantasy monarch, level 6-8 is probably a good retirement level. Level 3-4 though is where I would think most monarchs spend most of their lives. IMO.

Thirdly, your statement that higher level characters dominate her make me wonder if you aren't applying a double standard. Why would your average courtesan and diplomat be 10th level? PCs maybe, but I thought your assumption was PCs are exceptional anyway. If most of the people the queen deals with are only 2-4th level, then she doesn't need to be 10th to model her interactions with these folks.

 

[Jhaelen]

If that were true then 'toolbox' games like Hero, GURPS, and Mutants and MAsterminds wouldn't exist in usable form. While there are corner cases in these systems, by and large they produce workable and similarly effective abiiltiies for similar cost.

Relatively simple to use and relatively balanced rulesets can be made -- they just take a lot of work.

Ah, I've already been waiting for someone to play the GURPS card!

I agree with your conclusion. Another example is the spell design rules in Ars Magica. It's quite beautiful and works very well for most purposes. It's still easy to abuse for someone who is looking for ways to abuse it. If there was a CO board for Ars Magica it would probably be full of insanely broken spells respecting all of the rules.

And you brought up the second important part: It's a lot of work. And I believe that investing that amount of work is only worthwhile if it improves a central, integral part of the system. And that's simply not the case with 4e monster customization.

If D&D was a system centered on a party of monster-breeders competing to design the most terrifying creature imaginable and pitting them against each other in arena-style combat scenarios I'd expect something a lot more elaborate.

Speaking of elaborate systems that I personally could do without: For me the hybrid rules in PHB3 were a waste of precious paper space. I'd rather have seen another two well-designed classes.

I know that many have been clamouring for an improved multiclassing system but the result didn't convince me at all. It's clunky, especially if you're adding psionic classes to the mix.
It's also interesting that the designers felt they had to include a disclaimer 'use at your own risk'.

If a sufficiently large number of people were showing interest, they could decide to do something similar for monster customization. Maybe DMG3 will have more to say on that topic. We'll see.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I find this very unconclusive. So instead of sticking to the rules to archive the numbers, you simply slap some boni on. Either way, said NPC has the same plusses to skills and so on at the end. That´s Rule0 at work for me.

Well, since Rule 0 was my very first recommendation (and I readily admitted a hefty circumstance bonus was essentially the same thing), I'm not sure exactly what you find unconclusive. Looks like we're in agreement -- you can make a ruler have a high skill check when you need it simply by decreeing it to be so as a DM, so you don't need to have a high-level queen to have an influential queen.

For me, what 3e also provided was a baseline world that implied that monsters were attacking NPC's, even when PC's weren't around. A world where monsters were a fact of life for NPC's. 4e struggles more to give that world to me, and part of it is because it doesn't give me a sense of what a mundane skill check would be in the world for normal people vs. what a truly epic skill check is for the best person at that skill in the world. It just says "Use Rule 0." Which is a great thing to do, but I am not a big fan of it being the only thing to do.

 

[Wicht]

Pathfinder scalable diplomacy bonuses for the queen by the book (no fiat): assuming a 16 charisma (14 starter stat; +2 racial bonus)

1st level aristocrat - 16 cha (+3 bonus), feats: persuasive, skill focus (diplomacy) = +12 diplomacy
2nd level = +13 diplomacy
3rd level aristocrat = +14 diplomacy
4th level, 17 cha (+3 bonus) = +15 diplomacy
etc...
8th level, 18 cha (+4 bonus) = +20 diplomacy

Diplomacy, in Pathfinder, as generally used, is an uncontested skill check. The difficulty for changing a hostile attitude is 25+cha modifier. an Unfriendly attitude 20+, indifferent 15+, friendly 10+.

This means that our first level queen makes all friendly people helpful 100% of the time. She will almost always be able to make indifferent people helpful or at least friendly, and over half the time she will be able to make unfriendly people less so and about a quarter of the time might even make them friendly. By the time she is 8th level, she is a world class diplomat and can almost 100% of the time make unfriendly people friendly and hostile people, more often than not forget to be mad at her.

Furthermore, in Pathfinder, diplomacy is used to ferret out secrets. At first level, there are few common secrets she can't find out, as the DC for obscure rumors and secrets is 20, given time, at 1st level, she'll know all the court secrets and over half the time will be able to find out such information in less than an hour.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If that were true then 'toolbox' games like Hero, GURPS, and Mutants and MAsterminds wouldn't exist in usable form. While there are corner cases in these systems, by and large they produce workable and similarly effective abiiltiies for similar cost.

Relatively simple to use and relatively balanced rulesets can be made -- they just take a lot of work.

I love GURPS. But it's certainly not balanced if someone's trying. (I believe it's 53 points to selectively kill everyone in the solar system - and under the old edition, almost everyone went high Dex/Int for a good reason). Toolbox games generally break against skilled users (if they are remotely trying) - and give the toolbox to everyone playing rather than to one person some of the time.

And Jhalen, there were two well-designed classes in the PHB3? Which ones? [/Snark]

 

[ExploderWizard]

Then why the beefs with minions? Or, do I have you mixed up with someone else?

Hey, as long as 1hp means 1hp( no matter what hp may or may not represent) and that remains a constant in the gameverse then minions are fine. Very silly at higher levels but that's the nature of the beast.

Minion status as a subjective state that shifts with perspective isn't something I want or need in a game, let it stay in stories where it belongs.

 

[Coldwyn]

For me, what 3e also provided was a baseline world that implied that monsters were attacking NPC's, even when PC's weren't around. A world where monsters were a fact of life for NPC's. 4e struggles more to give that world to me, and part of it is because it doesn't give me a sense of what a mundane skill check would be in the world for normal people vs. what a truly epic skill check is for the best person at that skill in the world. It just says "Use Rule 0." Which is a great thing to do, but I am not a big fan of it being the only thing to do.

I hope that I don´t come over as obtuse right now. But reading this, my question really is: Do you really need intra-world mechanics here? If I understand you right, you take a look at the mechanics to get a clue about how things would work out in the background. Sure, the totalness of 3E mechanics provided that, also sure, the PC-centric approach of 4E don´t. But out of curiossity, would you really make invisible rolls (which don´t touch whatever the PCs are doing) to find out what two NSC are doing inbetween themselves?

Well, since Rule 0 was my very first recommendation (and I readily admitted a hefty circumstance bonus was essentially the same thing), I'm not sure exactly what you find unconclusive. Looks like we're in agreement -- you can make a ruler have a high skill check when you need it simply by decreeing it to be so as a DM, so you don't need to have a high-level queen to have an influential queen.

To be frank I don´t like either of the methods. Creating a queen with high enough level to be able to resist charm and dominate spells, as well as being a good stateswoman in terms of social skills seems cludgy to me, rule-zeroing her seems cludgy, too. Here´s one of the situations where I really only come up with a more or less approrpiate DC and nothing more. Or, to put it another way, for me a skill challange portraits interacting with her better than interacting with her stats (notice stats, not person).

 

[Coldwyn]

Minion status as a subjective state that shifts with perspective isn't something I want or need in a game, let it stay in stories where it belongs.

If you rephrase that from game to simulation, I´d agree.
But tell me, why does D&D have to be a simulation?

 

[Wicht]

But out of curiossity, would you really make invisible rolls (which don´t touch whatever the PCs are doing) to find out what two NSC are doing inbetween themselves?

I actually do that at times. Especially when in "game mode." When in "writer's mode," crafting the adventure, things happen the way I want them to. But if its happening near to the action (even social action) I will roll for NPCs interacting with other NPCs to maintain the random factor.

To be frank I don´t like either of the methods. Creating a queen with high enough level to be able to resist charm and dominate spells, as well as being a good stateswoman in terms of social skills seems cludgy to me, rule-zeroing her seems cludgy, too. Here´s one of the situations where I really only come up with a more or less approrpiate DC and nothing more. Or, to put it another way, for me a skill challange portraits interacting with her better than interacting with her stats (notice stats, not person.)

Why does the queen need to be able to have a strong resistance to magic? Why does she need good at everything to be a successful ruler? If its a powerful nation, can't she hire magical guardians to protect her from evil magic? Or have the church working with her? It seems to me that a low level queen with high diplomacy skills perfectly models what most people would want in such a situation. Princesses and queens typically act, not as a protagonist, but as a macguffin, an object to spur the action. When she becomes a villain, as in the Curse oft he Crimson Throne, then you stat her up accordingly; likewise of she is a protagonist. But most often the queen will be neither; and low level, high charisma/diplomacy will work just fine for everything you need. All without rule 0.