You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CONAN LIVES! Info on the new Conan RPG
To clarify, the dynamic between Momentum and Threat will be shifting - partly to emphasise Momentum more, and partly to give Threat a clearer place in the whole thing. However, that doesn't mean we're getting rid of Threat or changing its purpose - it's a rearrangement, rather than starting from scratch.
At the current stage, more universal options are being given for Momentum. Principally, these are the ability to buy (in advance) bonus d20s for your tests and those of your allies (there are limits), to boost the difficulty of tests made against you, and to ask questions of the GM about the situation that the GM must answer truthfully. In essence, those represent a character creating opportunities for himself or others, creating obstacles/impediments for his enemies, and simply observing or discerning more about what's going on, respectively - all things that make sense for characters to do.
Paying Threat to the GM, in turn, lets you do basically all those things, but instantaneously, on the fly, and without drawing from a resource that takes effort and a degree of planning to manifest (Momentum). However, it comes at a later cost - the GM has more Threat to use against the group - so it quite nicely represents actions which are reckless or heedless of cost.
Intelligent use of Momentum lets a group of characters move from triumph to triumph - their successes build upon one another, and individual characters can capitalise on one another's successes. Use of Threat can get a group out of a sticky situation, but it'll come back to bite them later. It builds an internal dichotomy of coordination and opportunism, and creates a situation where player characters have to tread a fine line between preparation (Momentum) and risk (Threat), because neither one alone can do the job completely. At that point, calculated risks become important - knowing how much of a risk to take (how much Threat to pay) in order to get that initial edge and generate some extra Momentum.
In turn, the GM can spend the Threat in basically all the same ways as players can - bonus dice, more difficult tests, etc. Similarly, the GM can generate Threat independently, because it serves as the GM's Momentum pool as well (the GM doesn't have a separate store of Momentum, but can turn surplus Momentum into Threat, much as players can save surplus Momentum).
At the current stage, more universal options are being given for Momentum. Principally, these are the ability to buy (in advance) bonus d20s for your tests and those of your allies (there are limits), to boost the difficulty of tests made against you, and to ask questions of the GM about the situation that the GM must answer truthfully. In essence, those represent a character creating opportunities for himself or others, creating obstacles/impediments for his enemies, and simply observing or discerning more about what's going on, respectively - all things that make sense for characters to do.
Paying Threat to the GM, in turn, lets you do basically all those things, but instantaneously, on the fly, and without drawing from a resource that takes effort and a degree of planning to manifest (Momentum). However, it comes at a later cost - the GM has more Threat to use against the group - so it quite nicely represents actions which are reckless or heedless of cost.
Intelligent use of Momentum lets a group of characters move from triumph to triumph - their successes build upon one another, and individual characters can capitalise on one another's successes. Use of Threat can get a group out of a sticky situation, but it'll come back to bite them later. It builds an internal dichotomy of coordination and opportunism, and creates a situation where player characters have to tread a fine line between preparation (Momentum) and risk (Threat), because neither one alone can do the job completely. At that point, calculated risks become important - knowing how much of a risk to take (how much Threat to pay) in order to get that initial edge and generate some extra Momentum.
In turn, the GM can spend the Threat in basically all the same ways as players can - bonus dice, more difficult tests, etc. Similarly, the GM can generate Threat independently, because it serves as the GM's Momentum pool as well (the GM doesn't have a separate store of Momentum, but can turn surplus Momentum into Threat, much as players can save surplus Momentum).
.... and to ask questions of the GM about the situation that the GM must answer truthfully.
I think this is very, very dangerous to the fun quotient of a game.
I don't see why, though to be fair I think we've established that you and I have quite different definitions of "fun" with regards to RPGs. Amongst other things, the actual rule (its current form) specifically does not require that the GM go into extensive (or even complete) detail, and while it requires the GM to be truthful, it specifically does not prohibit the GM from being cryptic, vague, or elusive. It's exactly the kind of truth that GMs have been using for decades. The key here is that the ability to ask those questions has been put squarely in the hands of players, representing character insights, investigative or knowledge-based skill use, and similar situations where the players would be asking the GM questions about the situation anyway. It's formalised as a function of the rules here, encouraging that more or less detail to be provided by GMs based on how successful a test was, etc.I think this is very, very dangerous to the fun quotient of a game.
The entire section on Momentum in its current form is headed with a requirement that any given Momentum spend must have some basis or grounding in the fictional events of the game itself - you can't gain a benefit unless there's appropriate narrative justification. This is no different: the GM is permitted, nay encouraged, to provide only that information that could reasonably be gleaned from the circumstances and context that originated the skill test. Defining it as a common Momentum spend means we don't need to set aside particular "knowledge" skills (all skills should contain some knowledge, and not all knowledge should be covered purely by skills), and means we don't have to repeat that option every time we want to describe how a character gains knowledge as a function of a skill test.
I don't see why, though to be fair I think we've established that you and I have quite different definitions of "fun" with regards to RPGs.
Often, there is mystery in an adventure. The mystery, whatever it is, is learned at the climax of the scenario. It will be something perplexing the players. And, that's good. A GM wants players to be involved and perplexed.
But, if the players can just spend a point and learn the mystery, or get enough clues and context so that they figure it out early, then poof goes one of the main pushes for the adventure.
In addition, it's very meta-game, too. Why would the characters suddenly know this information when they didn't know it before--especially if no character has a skill (or high enough skill) to know the mystery.
Amongst other things, the actual rule (its current form) specifically does not require that the GM go into extensive (or even complete) detail, and while it requires the GM to be truthful, it specifically does not prohibit the GM from being cryptic, vague, or elusive.
That sounds like a player will spend a point--a precious resource--and get nothing for it, because the GM is so cryptic,what he says doesn't help and keeps the GM's mystery hidden.
Again, I don't think this is a good mechanic to have in a game. Not unless the GM is ready for it, as with a fortune teller, soothsayer, or oracle.
Often, there is mystery in an adventure. The mystery, whatever it is, is learned at the climax of the scenario. It will be something perplexing the players. And, that's good. A GM wants players to be involved and perplexed.
But, if the players can just spend a point and learn the mystery, or get enough clues and context so that they figure it out early, then poof goes one of the main pushes for the adventure.
In addition, it's very meta-game, too. Why would the characters suddenly know this information when they didn't know it before--especially if no character has a skill (or high enough skill) to know the mystery.
...
That sounds like a player will spend a point--a precious resource--and get nothing for it, because the GM is so cryptic,what he says doesn't help and keeps the GM's mystery hidden.
Again, I don't think this is a good mechanic to have in a game. Not unless the GM is ready for it, as with a fortune teller, soothsayer, or oracle.
Wow... you've really misconstrued what this is for. I'd also hate to take part in any mystery-focussed game you're GMing, if you're only willing to parcel out information on your schedule. The mystery shouldn't just be revealed at the end; the players should be the ones to figure it out, from the clues they glean and the information they obtain. Otherwise they're just mute observers to the GM's story, rather than active participants.
How is it metagame? Sure, taken without the context of the surrounding environment (the situation a skill test was taken in, for example), it could look metagame, but otherwise you seem to be bandying that term around as a generic "bad thing" without any particular justification. Of course characters will gain information that they didn't have before - that's called being observant, making insights, and learning. As situations and circumstances change, new things presented to player characters will add to the information they already have; consequently, a player character will have more information, and more opportunities for information, as the adventure progresses.
Determining if the players have sufficient skill to know the mystery... that's what the skill test, and the Momentum spend are for - it places a cost on knowledge. It is a mechanism by which players can be rewarded for successful tests with knowledge about related things, the way both real people and fictional characters alike come to realisations, uncover previously unknown information, or make deductions. I'm actually shocked that I have to explain this to anybody, given how fundamental it should be to the very process of playing an RPG - the players talk to the GM, who acts as the player characters' senses in the world and describes what they see, hear, and otherwise sense. Have you never honestly seen a player in an RPG attempt a skill test to gain information, because I find that inconceivable.
Will it require effort on the part of the GM? Yes, but no more than is involved in the preparation of any other adventure. Will it require extraordinary preparations, such as ensuring that there's an oracle or fortune teller present? No, and I can't honestly believe that anyone would come to that sort of conclusion unless they were deliberately looking for opportunities to complain. It's a mechanic that formalises something that I had regarded as commonplace in RPGs, for when players take skill tests intended to obtain knowledge - through research ("a few hours studying ancient scrolls tells you that..."), through their character talking to NPCs ("after an evening plying locals with ale and questions, you discover that..."), and through simple observation of their surroundings ("you spot a familiar symbol on the clothes of your assailant...")
First step is the kickstarter, which is currently being planned and organised, and should begin end of this month/mid-December if everything goes smoothly. Another public release of the rules - likely a quickstart, similar to the one recently released for Infinity, is planned to be made available during the kickstarter.So what is the current schedule for this game to come out?
First step is the kickstarter, which is currently being planned and organised, and should begin end of this month/mid-December if everything goes smoothly. Another public release of the rules - likely a quickstart, similar to the one recently released for Infinity, is planned to be made available during the kickstarter.
Thanks.
Further to my previous response, we'll be promoting Conan extensively at Dragonmeet in London on the 5th of December. Anyone able to attend, feel free to come and discuss the game and/or take part in a demo. A fair few of us will be there to discuss Conan as well as our other games.
Similar Threads
- Replies
- 117
- Views
- 21K
- Replies
- 18
- Views
- 8K
- Replies
- 164
- Views
- 25K
