Burning Wheel

[Campbell]

What other game has mechanics for character beliefs like in Burning Wheel??

Riddle of Steel.

 

[Glyfair]

Maybe you are talking about the character generation system. It is a lifepath system but the experience system is nothing at all like Warhammer. I think you got an incorrect notion from the lifepath tables.

Could be my fuzzy memory, too I remember my reaction more than I remember the reason for the reaction. I do remember I really disliked the combat system, but I couldn't tell you a single thing about it now.

I remember that it wasn't a system I'd never play. However, it was a system that I knew of at least a dozen I'd choose to play first.

 

[woodelf]

What other game has mechanics for character beliefs like in Burning Wheel??

Well, it depends on what you mean by "like Burning Wheel"--which aspects you consider defining. I'm not sure if any other game has exactly the same system, but plenty of them share significant portions.

The Riddle of Steel has spirit traits that relate to specific beliefs and give you significant modifiers on other rolls (such as combat or other physical things).

Ars Magica codifies at least some personality traits as mechanical modifiers to at least some rolls.

The Everlasting has you come up with your own personal mythology and symbolism, which is then supposed to be worked into the game.

Vampire uses playing according to your personality as the mechanism for regaining Willpower (IIRC)--which function much like fudge points (among other uses).

Based on a quick re-read of Burning Wheel, it looks like the personality feats in Dynasties & Demagogues (D20 System) is pretty similar.

Fading Suns has certain personality traits right at the core of the mechanics, treated just like strength and intellect. So they both influence rolls, and are tested against, depending on what you're doing. Without pulling out my copy to check, IIRC Pendragon is very similar.

Lots of RPGs reward hero points and/or exp based on playing according to your character's personality/beliefs.

Lots of RPGs codify character beliefs/personality by rating traits numerically.

The seeds of such things showed up at least as far back as the Dragon article on "priorities", which introduced an alternate interpretation of alignment for AD&D (probably circa '89).

And the mechanic is familiar enough, that i'm pretty confident that i could find an on-point example of whatever element you particularly are impressed by, if you told me.

All of which is not to diss Burning Wheel. For all i know, Luke had never seen any other RPG with such things when he came up with it. And, even if it is found in other RPGs, that doesn't diminish it, really: what matters if it contributes to the game and is well integrated, not whether it is novel.

 

[mythusmage]

Which doesn't make it any better, IMHO.

For the record, yes, I know there are scads of games out there that do this (each attempt at a skill gains a check mark, increase your skill when you have X checkmarks, etc.).

I could just never figure out why this was desirable.

Because it models an aspect of real life?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Because it models an aspect of real life?

Does it, though?

And why is "fidelity to the real world" desirable?

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I find it pretty amusing that the question about who else handles beliefs within the system was in response to the argument that somebody thought the game was very '80s style, and the systems people rattled off are all about as old as Burning Wheel.

Patryn, I hear what you're saying, and the game might not be to your taste. But the way it's handled in BW isn't "I keep making cabinets until my Carpentry goes up" but rather "I grow in skill in ways that reflect the skills I've used to overcome challenges."

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Patryn, I hear what you're saying, and the game might not be to your taste. But the way it's handled in BW isn't "I keep making cabinets until my Carpentry goes up" but rather "I grow in skill in ways that reflect the skills I've used to overcome challenges."

Which brings us to one of the fundamental flaws that I find in such systems:

The DM - and the DM only - gets to decide how I level up.

In a more abstract system, you can assume that the Fighter is practicing with, say, a set of practice lockpicks each night before he goes off to sleep. Heck, he can even roleplay some practice sessions with the party Rogue, offering pointers, showing some new lockpicks, etc. When he goes up a level, he puts some points in Open Lock to represent this.

In an LBD system, he can't get any better at picking locks unless there's locks present in the adventure to be picked - and if the DM doesn't add any, you're pretty much out of luck. And if there are locks there to be picked, then most of the time the Rogue's going to be doing the picking, which means that the Fighter doesn't really get all that many chances to practice.

Now, because this is a PnP vs. a CRPG environment, the DM can generally react better to include additional chances for the weaker characters to practice, but then you run into a situation where, in the middle of a time sensitive mission, the Rogue decides to let the Fighter try to open the lock barring their way so that he can get enough practice in. Alternatively, the DM needs to somehow make the Rogue unavailable for the same reason. That seems pretty metagamey to me ...

Then, finally, we get back to the option of just having trainers, whereby the Fighter can spend some time and gold in town in order to improve is Open Lock skill. At which point I begin to wonder, why have the convoluted, multi-layered LBD system to begin with?

I was hoping that Crothian (or someone else) might provide more info on how BW improves on this system.

 

[Crothian]

I was hoping that Crothian (or someone else) might provide more info on how BW improves on this system.

I am by no mean s an expert on the system, I've only read the books and have not had a chance to see them in action yet. But I'll see if I can find someone who is an expert.

 

[lukzu]

Which brings us to one of the fundamental flaws that I find in such systems:

The DM - and the DM only - gets to decide how I level up.

Hi Patryn,

thanks for your interest in Burning Wheel. Let me see if I can answer your questions. First off, there are no levels in Burning Wheel. It's a minor point, but important. Every stat and skill advances individually. It's a bit more book keeping that an experience point based system, but most players find the depth it creates to be very satisfying.

As for deciding, I don't know about that. All players (including the GM) have access to the advancement table. When a test is made, everyone knows what it means for advancement purposes based on the number of dice rolled vs the successes needed. So the criteria for advancing are mechanically solid and right out in the open.

Tests are earned in conflict. The GM can introduce conflict and set the level of difficulty, but so can the players. Players can use all manner of tactics and tweaks to raise and lower the task difficulty. And they are specifically mandated to call for tests in game (see the Role of the Player in the Burning Wheel).

Ther are also rules for practice in the game which are tied into the advancement mechanic. That fighter that you talked about (there are no classes in BW, btw), he could practice lockpicking if he wanted. But if that situation arises where the master lockpick is stepping aside so the incompetent swordsman can try his luck, you're going to have trouble. Tests in BW aren't simply about throwing the dice and doing the thing. (We call that Basketweaving.) Every test is crucial and pushes the game/plot/whatever forward. So that swordsman could give a try, but he's going to fail and there is going to be trouble due to that failure -- depends on what was at risk in the scene, but it's usually pretty tense. Oh, and what if nothing's at stake when picking that lock? Just counts as practice, which counts as advancement, but at a lesser currency than actual experience.

I'm not sure I understand your last quibble with trainers. Characters may teach one another in BW and give tests for advancement. We've had some awesome scenes with players trying to train each other to fight before a big battle, or train each other in etiquette before going to court. Makes for nice player to player interaction.

Of course, there's old saw: Why not just start the game and practice everything to perfection? Well, that's boring, for one. There's no situation, no conflict. And second, if you want to start uber powerful in BW, you can. No problem. Just build your character that way. The hitch, everyone in your group has to agree to it. If everyone wants to play twinked out characters, I say go for it! But if all but one player want to play gritty, low-powered characters, then the group's got to hash it out.

hope that answers some of your questions.
-Luke

 

[Dirigible]

If the guard has a better chance of noticing, give him a higher score. But don't make 5 rolls where one would suffice.

Interesting. Makes sense; we don't roll for every tumbler on an Open Locks test.
I hope combat isn't resolved with one roll

And why is "fidelity to the real world" desirable?

Answers on a postcard, please.

In an LBD system, he can't get any better at picking locks unless there's locks present in the adventure to be picked - and if the DM doesn't add any, you're pretty much out of luck.

Hang on, Patryn, think about this. If the Fighter takes a level of rogue in D&D, and the DM doesn't include locked doors, he's exactly as out of luck as the Person Whose Role Includes Certain Fighter-Like Activities in BW who spends some time learningt he skills of the Person Whose Role Includes Certain Rogue-Like Activities (I assume BW is classless. Err, I mean, is a system without classes).

(We call that Basketweaving.)

Lukzu, does that 'we' indicate you're a designer of the game or somesuch?

The hitch, everyone in your group has to agree to it.

Brilliant. That's exactly the metemechanic I need for my homebrew system... *yoink*