RE: Why we play certain backgrounds less.

["Brandon Stenger" <bh010296@prodigy.net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Hogg [mailto:johnhogg@expert.cc.purdue.edu]
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 1:32 PM
> To: gmlist@ns1.cioe.com
> Subject: Why we play certain backgrounds less.
>
>
>
> This all comes down to how condusive the way we (fantasy Club) run AQ is
> to playing certain backgrounds of characters.  (As do MANY of the issues
> we have here that we don't have playing around our friends' tables in
> High School.)
>
> 1)	We rotate GM's, sometimes unpredictably.
> 2)	On any given adventure we sign up for, it's not likely that we
> 	regularly run the same players, and even those players may
> be running
> 	different characters.
>
> As such, you don't have one GM running a traditional campaign for a few
> weeks straight.  Furthermore, because the GM doesn't know which characters
> are showing up, he can't really tailor scenes to fit a specific party's
> strengths and weaknesses.
>
> I'll continue with the above in a minute ... However, let me get something
> straight:
>
> Points 1 and 2 are also what keep PFC from just being another gaming club,
> and allow the variety of styles, both GMing and playing, to mix.  The fact
> that every gaming session is different (at least from a "chemestry" point
> of view) is a big reason behind my coming when I can.  Anyway, I'm not
> blasting at how or why things are done this way, I'm just illustrating my
> point.
>
> Combat is expected during an adventure:  It's the way most characters die;
> the basis for most of the mechanics in the book; and the forte of many of
> the backgrounds.  Warriors and Marines function are to go toe-to-toe in
> one manner or another.  Most mages can get spells to do damage, alter DVs
> or MODs, or alter number of attacks.  The more common player religions,
> Anubis, Orus, Ra, and T'or have background specific combat spells or
> effects, and most priests have access to Paralyse, Abate Fatigue, Divine
> Word, etc. if they want them.
>
> I'd be willing to bet the above paragraph covers about 85% of the
> characters in AQ.
>
> It's very easy to run a "find the dingus" adventure.  Furthermore, it's
> almost nicer to run a combat rather than a negotiation for the dingus once
> it's found, as EVERYONE can participate in combat, where you run the risk
> of losing player interest if only a handful of people participate in
> planning or executing the negotiation.  Sure, some characters die, but
> everyone gets to play.

I wouldn't say that everyone can participate in combat. I have found on
several occasions (and certainly not just when playing a non-combat oriented
character) that I have no chance to make any effect on combat. For a number
of reasons I have been unable to do anything during a combat, and that gets
frustrating. I also know that this happens to everyone every now and again.
Think about the last game you ran when nobody once said "punt" when you
asked them for their action.
There are people who quickly slip from interested, excited player to bored
person who just sits there and waits for combat to end.


> It's the expectation of combat that gears most characters towards being at
> least passable at it.  Furthermore, if the majority of the eps for your
> first 15 or so ratings needs to be geared to survive combat, do you pick a
> background condusive to combat, or pay triple cost to be lousy at it?

I think 15 rates, or even 10 is way too much to spend just getting your
character hardy enough to survive combat. I just honestly think that it
isn't necessary for every character. An example from personal experience.
Warrick (my priest of Isis for the new folks on the list) very rarely
directly involves himself in combat. I have found that if I don't go after
anyone, very rarely will anyone come after me. I still try and make my mark
in combat, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't take any work on my part to
survive combat. How many people are still astounded when they find out that
my rate 70+ priest has 31 DP? Nobody believes me when I tell them that. And
survival is also not based on DV's either. Mine are all single digit, and
always have been. It just depends on how much you involve yourself with
combat. Warriors, marines, etc. may have different experiences. As you say
they are made to go toe-to-toe with the bady guys. There are plenty of
characters out there that enjoy subtlety and downright sneakiness to
actually getting in combat.

>
> Why are there so few Conjuration-based fire mages?  Because most players
> are concerned with flame dance and fireball (fire group), shadow* (shadow
> group), Common, Movement, and defer that few emphasize illusion.  More
> importantly, the GM usually doesn't gear very much interaction in 5-6
> hours that is conducive to anything but direct confrontation.
>
> In a similar manner, what about a skill-based thief (auger).  It's a
> mainstay of many FRPs, why not AQ?  Magic can do many of the things a
> thief would be interested in, for one reason.  But, the most important,
> being sneaky isn't a mainstay of most adventures.  Further, even if you
> have a sneaky character, you are one of perhaps two or three characters
> within an 8-10 player party.
>
> Because we (GMs) CAN'T give an hour to each player to emphasize what his
> character is good at, be it seduction, negotiation, entertainment, etc.
> We tend to fall back on combat so all  the players can particpate in the
> game.

I think that falling back on combat is a direct result of how much time is
put into an adventure. Don't get me wrong - I know that the majority of AQ
players are students, who may also have a job. There is nothing wrong with
having too much of a life to devote time to AQ. But it has been my
experience that the most combat intensive adventures are those that have
been whipped up in the hall at Stewart at 6:30. This certainly applies to
me. I have had to fall back on combat just to fill time - I would be
surprised if there was anyone who hasn't.

My most memorable adventures have always been those where combat was
de-emphasized. A couple of examples from games that I have run:

The game in Port Haven where the party was trying to find a kidnapped kid,
and Kevin Collins burned down half the town. I'll never forget Kevin telling
me that he was going to cast a phantasmal Quench on the fire that had
started, and proceeding to let the fire burn. I couldn't tell you if combat
even occurred during that adventure though.

Another good one - the hour and a half negotiation session between the party
and Lord Julius of Lentri. An hour and a half and the party hadn't even
begun the actual adventure - they were still negotiating for payment and
trying to pry information from the oh-so-helpful Lord J. I can't even
remember what the "adventure" itself was about, but I'll always be able to
see the looks on everyone's faces as Lord Julius sidestepped question after
question and made a general nuisance of himself.

>
> This is why there are so few nomads, augers, priests of Isis, Neptune,
> Taurus (even before the bounty) or Osiris, and water mages that don't buy
> up to mutate or transmogrify.
>
> To address nomads specifically (seeker, preserver, and trubador):
>
> 1)	They don't have any skill at combat
> 2)	They have very few effects for combat (luck, bombards, etc.)
> 3)	Their effects are ep-intensive
> 4)	They have very few perminent effects
>
> Therefore, you can't just make a nomad with the purpose of making a luck
> amulet factory, and have a playable long-term character.  When you use an
> incant, it should be used for something that counts, not as an effect for
> any given moment.  Furthermore, most incants are very subtle (exception
> for some of the high end trubador stuff).  There is no KRAKKA-THOOM and
> 1-3 people drop dead.
>
> However:
> 1)	Seekers manipulate game mechanics very well.  If you want a
> character that doesn't fail most resistance checks, or can default a great
> deal, make a seeker.  They can inflate their attributes relatively
> quickly, and can buy luck or magic resistance amulets at 2x cost.
>
> Seekers are also particularly gifted in dealing with the undead or
> spiritual.
>
> 2)	Trubadors manipulate other characters and actors well.  They can
> dictate if combat happens, control people's decision-making process,
> tie-up entire armies for finite periods of time, get people to react
> favorably or unfavorably to something, or oughtright control what people
> sense (physically) or feel (emotionally).
>
> 3)	Preservers are nice to have in general. Much like a priest of
> Isis, they are ostensibly there to keep bad stuff from happening to other
> party members.
>
> 4)	Nomads don't have to buy up a list of spells to get use from their
> incants, and don't have a restriction on how much they can finesse them.
>
> ANY background has enough fodder to be a fun, playable character, but not
> necessarily enough to be good in combat.
>
> A counterexample would be (correct me if I'm wrong) Rob's nomad and Greg's
> auger.  They're both long-term, powerful characters.
>
> However, they have the benefit of the Centralia campaign.  That is, they
> have a relatively fixed group of players, and GMs familiar with their
> characters.  Just take a look at Steve's website.  Because the same group
> of people tend to play together, and the GMs are willing to put in the
> work, you have a very player-centered setting.
>
> Further, the familiarity the players have with each other leads to much
> more teamwork between their characters, both in town actions and during
> mainstream gameplay.
>
> Here, not only do you have a group of friends playing around the table,
> but a mix of backgrounds that will compliment each other in combat,
> negotiation, other roleplay scenerios, etc.
>
>
> John Hogg			johnhogg@expert.cc.purdue.edu
> ==================================================================
> Must ... fight ... Satan.
> Make it ... up to ... him ... later.	-Bart Simpson
>
>

I think that the biggest challenge of the Fantasy Club is creating an
adventure that everyone can enjoy. The combat types, the people who like to
think their way through, everybody. That would make an excellent discussion
if those of us on the list are up to it. What makes an adventure enjoyable,
and not just for one person or one type of character? What do we do that is
special that makes some events so memorable?

Brandon