D&D General Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants

[clearstream]

OK, so a bit of Googling solved the problem. There's an error in the printing, as discussed on this RPG.net thread: Bushido Iajutsu rules

Here are the rules:

1092.2b The Iaijutsu Duel​

​

This form of duel is extremely dangerous. Participants receive enhanced On (see Section 1064.1c). The opponents face off, weapons sheathed, a mere yard or so apart. When the moment is right, weapons are drawn and strikes made. If both survive the first exchange, the duel proceeds normally.​

​

In the game, the Gamemaster rolls a D20 to determine the action phase on which this first strike will occur. If the roll is lower than a character's Base Action Phase, he will strike immediately. If it is lower or equal to the Base Action Phase of both combatants, the strikes will be simultaneous. Each character is allowed only one strike in this first turn of the duel.​

​

The first strike is made using the Iaijutsu Skill. If a character does not have Iaijutsu Skill, he may use 1/4 his Kenjutsu score to generate a Base Chance of Success. In this case the Base Action Phase for the first turn is halved.​

​

The effect of the first strike of an Iaijutsu duel are as follows. A roll within the character's BCS results in a Critical Hit. A normal failure results in a normal hit. Only a Critical Miss will result in a miss and will only be a normal miss. Normal situational modifiers apply to a character's Base Chance of Success.​

​

Iaijuts duels are fought only with swords and cultural sanctions tend to confine it to the katana.​

Thank you for digging into that. It helped me recall that my main character had an okuden that permitted using iajutsu on opponents behind him. I have no idea now why that would be useful!? Maybe it allowed him to enter duels against multiple opponents (which sounds like suicide!)

Maybe why Bushido has proven memorable is that combination of lethal combat with social/political play.

 

[clearstream]

I don't know about warefare, in terms of mechanical wargaming type support, that would have to be introduced through another level of mechanics perhaps. OTOH I think the basic 'clan politics' and family loyalties, court intrigue, rivalries, etc., all filtered through the lens of the whole highly cultured, artistic/craftsmanly/scholarly sort of lens would not be too hard to achieve in BW.

Bushido contains good war support, at least in terms of the individual battles. Do you mean the overal strategic picture? That doesn't need to be too complex. One might even use a boardgame like Shogun (now Ikusa).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Bushido contains good war support, at least in terms of the individual battles. Do you mean the overal strategic picture? That doesn't need to be too complex. One might even use a boardgame like Shogun (now Ikusa).

I always liked the game 'Samurai', which is kind of roughly 'Kingmaker in Japan', though the rules are somewhat different and not based on Kingmaker explicitly. Still, the two games play rather similarly overall. It is equally slow and prone to reaching a sort of deadlock too, lol.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Anyway... I think, getting the discussion back into the realm of the thread topic, that Bushido does illustrate a non-D&D version of skilled play, maybe not GSP, but something fairly close. The GM is entirely in charge of presenting scenarios and scenes, and their elements, NPCs, essentially is a plot-giver too. The job of the players is to work within the milieu of fantasy Feudal Japan (at least as we played it was actually not super fantastical, mostly historical with basically 'folklore beliefs are pretty much true') and make thematic action choices for their PCs. You can certainly do a lot of RP within those limits, and the choices SHOULD be fairly significant. As with D&D there are generally clever and less clever moves, risk mitigation, etc. I think Bushido admitted of more of a style of 'trade offs' though. You could hire a ninja to deal with your enemy, but that is, at least, giving up a chance to get some experience and honor! A duel is very risky, but having your assassin traced back to you, or getting into a nasty clan war, is probably at least equally problematic. The game gives you plenty of things to stake too, at least if you are of the Samurai class.

One weakness I seem to recall is that your average unattached bushi is pretty much just hanging out there without any attachments. You might have family, maybe. You could enter service, etc. but some of the PCs seemed to be a bit cut off from the main social action.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Anyway... I think, getting the discussion back into the realm of the thread topic, that Bushido does illustrate a non-D&D version of skilled play, maybe not GSP, but something fairly close. The GM is entirely in charge of presenting scenarios and scenes, and their elements, NPCs, essentially is a plot-giver too. The job of the players is to work within the milieu of fantasy Feudal Japan (at least as we played it was actually not super fantastical, mostly historical with basically 'folklore beliefs are pretty much true') and make thematic action choices for their PCs. You can certainly do a lot of RP within those limits, and the choices SHOULD be fairly significant. As with D&D there are generally clever and less clever moves, risk mitigation, etc. I think Bushido admitted of more of a style of 'trade offs' though. You could hire a ninja to deal with your enemy, but that is, at least, giving up a chance to get some experience and honor! A duel is very risky, but having your assassin traced back to you, or getting into a nasty clan war, is probably at least equally problematic. The game gives you plenty of things to stake too, at least if you are of the Samurai class.

One weakness I seem to recall is that your average unattached bushi is pretty much just hanging out there without any attachments. You might have family, maybe. You could enter service, etc. but some of the PCs seemed to be a bit cut off from the main social action.

I'm not sure I see these examples you present as skilled play. I'm not familiar with the system, but in the discussion the resolution of these things (having an assassin traced back to you, or even the resolution of the assassin's attempt) don't seem mechanically tight or influenced by the player, but rather are GM adjudications of how they think it will go, either by what mechanics they determine apply (if any) and what potential fallout there may be. That's not leveraging skilled play, in that the player isn't utilizing the system to achieve goals, they're reaching consensus with the GM.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Realizing that this is not super-on-topic here, but I should note that Bushido was a level-based game during a period when getting to upper levels was assumed to be a years-long process, and had a compressed level scheme. So the fact it took a long, long time to get to 6th level was probably a deliberate design choice.

 

[clearstream]

Anyway... I think, getting the discussion back into the realm of the thread topic, that Bushido does illustrate a non-D&D version of skilled play, maybe not GSP, but something fairly close. The GM is entirely in charge of presenting scenarios and scenes, and their elements, NPCs, essentially is a plot-giver too. The job of the players is to work within the milieu of fantasy Feudal Japan (at least as we played it was actually not super fantastical, mostly historical with basically 'folklore beliefs are pretty much true') and make thematic action choices for their PCs. You can certainly do a lot of RP within those limits, and the choices SHOULD be fairly significant. As with D&D there are generally clever and less clever moves, risk mitigation, etc. I think Bushido admitted of more of a style of 'trade offs' though. You could hire a ninja to deal with your enemy, but that is, at least, giving up a chance to get some experience and honor! A duel is very risky, but having your assassin traced back to you, or getting into a nasty clan war, is probably at least equally problematic. The game gives you plenty of things to stake too, at least if you are of the Samurai class.

Another take away for me in line with my OP is being able to reflect on early game designs that aimed for high realism. Bushido felt for me more playable than LRS. In hindsight it makes sense that what would be most valuable in RPG would not be realism.

One weakness I seem to recall is that your average unattached bushi is pretty much just hanging out there without any attachments. You might have family, maybe. You could enter service, etc. but some of the PCs seemed to be a bit cut off from the main social action.

I played a budoka who was the servant of another player, who treated him callously IIRC. I mean in a way that made for interesting (and sometimes funny) interactions: it wasn't a negative thing.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I'm not sure I see these examples you present as skilled play. I'm not familiar with the system, but in the discussion the resolution of these things (having an assassin traced back to you, or even the resolution of the assassin's attempt) don't seem mechanically tight or influenced by the player, but rather are GM adjudications of how they think it will go, either by what mechanics they determine apply (if any) and what potential fallout there may be. That's not leveraging skilled play, in that the player isn't utilizing the system to achieve goals, they're reaching consensus with the GM.

Well, there's a lot of mechanics in there though. I mean, honor, family/clan standing and relations, that sort of stuff, has rules attached to it, and there are specified outcomes in those areas when things happen. Also, remember, a LOT of the game is you running around as your character doing stuff. I'm not sure it is any more GM adjudication based than the typical dungeon where the GM has to decide how loud that fight was and if it attracted more monsters, or if the fighter can leverage the rock off the cleric's leg with a 10' pole before the green slime reaches him.

Yes, some of it is about personalities and factors beyond total PC control. Maybe this is true to a degree that low-level D&D play isn't, but that highly depends on the DM and the scenario. As I say, it isn't GSP because there are a lot more things mediated by checks, but a lot of it is just plain determined by what you the PC decide to do, and what you narrate. Then the GM decides how it goes, or there are checks, whatever. My recollection of play is that you better really be on your toes and make good decisions, else you will end up on the (not very) pointy end of your own wakasashi or the business end of someone else's katana.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Another take away for me in line with my OP is being able to reflect on early game designs that aimed for high realism. Bushido felt for me more playable than LRS. In hindsight it makes sense that what would be most valuable in RPG would not be realism.


I played a budoka who was the servant of another player, who treated him callously IIRC. I mean in a way that made for interesting (and sometimes funny) interactions: it wasn't a negative thing.

I think Bushido was one of the few games I remember which DID use its attempted realism in a way that seemed to add to the game vs subtracting from it. Honestly that was probably what made it an interesting game. Things seemed pretty realistic in many ways, so you tended to play a bit more like you were THERE, where in D&D it was a lot of pawn stance stuff in those days.

That same approach didn't work well in a lot of other games, but there is a sort of feeling about the culture of that period and place that the details of things were paid attention to, and that the feel and texture of the place, the people, etc. was really important and clearly drawn. Now, maybe some of that was the guy running our game too, but you can see if you read the rules, the game's designer(s) clearly saw it the same way.

So, probably if you wanted to do a, say, PbtA, you'd have to find a way to capture that 'sharp focus' kind of feeling. It might be a tricky game to design and get right.

 

[Numidius]

Last session I let my players run the fight between npc aggressive young blue dragon (eager to occupy the haven of) and the npc fallen cloud giant ruler of the mountain; a female paladin of Ket, dear captive of the aforementioned giant, in the mix; their minions, also (after sessions of setting it up due to consequences of actions by the party).

Just, like, out of the blue. They accepted and engaged in it.

We went all diegetic, no character sheets on the table; plain language declarations, outcomes of rolls were described by them, mostly.
I ran the supporting factions with a backstory not yet fully revealed, like dwarves in debt to the giant, hobgoblins in the pay of Ket, imprisoned patrol of Ket, who could help, or hinder, depending on players actions.

Cloud giant firing anti-aircraft crossbow, dragon breathing lightning: dice rolled poorly for both (D20 vs D20 w dis/advantage)
Ground combat ensues, maneuvers on both sides, without a decisive outcome (2D6 vs 2D6 w dis/adv).
Giant retreats into underground lair, its player hinting at pre-planned traps as last resort. Dragon follows him anyway aggressively and breaths in closed environment hurting giant ; trap is operated: vault collapses, dragon is wounded. Enters paladin (run by dragon player), but soon she needs to flee to save her own life.
Dragon tries to break free desperately while giant delivers a killing blow: opposed roll (D20s) favors the cloud giant, who is now blocked inside the big dungeon, wherein the pc party is located.

When a single powerful individual (paladin, druid...) had to confront a group of people, or a solid obstacle (parley/command dwarves, or hobbies; survive dragon-cast flood, escape the giant's garden of stone...), I went with D20 vs 3D6, granting dis/advantage when appropriate.

Tactics employed, use of ambiance and terrain, twists, ideas, all came from the players extemporaneously, I limited myself to refereeing and adjudicating rolls vs the other factions, and their reactions when faced.

Ala Free Kriegsspiel Revival...