Yes it does indeed seem fair but still, I feel bad for haveing possibly have lost her her place.
We could start with a normal Wagon, drawn bu extraordinary animals and maybe work our way up to the traction engine. That way we would have more loot and more experience in the crafting of such a contraption.
New post is up!
Torque you could definitely craft while in a moving wagon but the DC would be different depending on how fast you guys are moving. DC+5 for moving at a slow pace, DC+15 or more if you are careening down a mountain being chased by frost giants!Also a traction engine would be doable, but expensive to create and prone to breaking down. What kind of DC and cost to create it are we talking here?
+5 for normal movement? I can work with that. Obviously I won't be trying to mix chemicals when we're in an actual fight.
Introducing steam power into northern Ustalav is a major undertaking. The big problem is manufacturing machinery of that quality requires metal casting, which doesn't exist yet. Having Torque design the industrial revolution single-handed would be absurd, but there is an alternative: the fabricate spell. A single scroll of fabricate costs 1125GP. That can shape metal components taking up 9 cubic feet of space. Two castings of that will be enough to shape the precision parts, requiring, say, a DC30 craft(mechanisms) check and 1000GP's worth of high-grade steel and brass per casting.
The boiler and furnace would then have to be built. A further two castings of fabricate would be enough to produce the curved steel plates required (make a stack of them), which wouldn't require a craft check but would require another 2000GP of steel per casting. Affixing these plates together would require riveting or welding them, which again is not possible in Ustalav. Make Whole seems the best bet, as long as it can be used to assemble the pieces of something that was never broken.
Finally, the thing will have to be assembled. This would take Torque a week in a large workshop, requiring a further DC30 craft (mechanisms) check. Furthermore, a wooden chassis will have to built by a skilled carpenter. Renting the workspace and commissioning the chassis would cost 500GP.
Once all that's done, it's crunch time. Since the thing has to be magically assembled prototyping is impossible beyond a few minor experiments. Torque would have to make a DC25 knowledge (engineering) check to determine if his designs work. He can't take 10 on this check. If he fails it, he will at the very least have to reshape the steamworks, requiring a further scroll of fabricate. If he fails by too large a margine, he may have to buy a further 4, break the whole machine down and start again.
All told, the project would cost 10,000GP, possibly more if any Use Magic Device checks are botched (though for Torque, that's unlikely).
So, is it really worth it?
For a start, it's almost free to run. Minor Creation allows one bag of coal to last a lifetime (though it would mean Torque is down a level 3 spell slot). Next, I would ask for it to obey the same relaxed laws of physics as everything else in D&D. Top speed of 120' per round on a decent surface, potentially reaching 240' per round on a rare few top-quality roads. And it can keep that up 24 hours a day (barring breakdowns). What's more, it would be very difficult to stop, and would ensure we became known throughout the region.
From an out of character perspective, I think it fits with the themes of the campaign. It seems to me like we're bringing in elements of real-life warfare to a fantasy setting, subverting the traditional 'band' of adventurers with a more professional 'squad'. A steam wagon lets us take this further by opening up mechanized tactics. Think of the new types of encounter this enables. Assaulting an enemy force head on, fighting from the roof of the wagon as they try to swarm us before we can break through their line. Engaging in high speed chases without the need for everyone to take riding skills and feats. There are a huge number of possibilities.
What do you guys reckon? If this isn't where you want the campaign to go, that's fair enough. I'm playing an artificer already, which is already more full-metal goodness than I'm usually allowed.
And it needs a steam-powered calliope that plays crazed carnival music when we are about to assault something. That would totally freak somebody out. ;-)
That is definately happening. Gotta keep the theme going.
I'm gonna be takin over this encounter, but am currently at workin with a dyin cell. Will try to post later
Is it worth it? With seven of us, at your price of 10,000gp. it would cost a little under 1,300gp. That to me is acceptable indeed. But alas it would not be 10,000gp, it would be a little more. That is for the base wagon. To kit it out with weaponry and, may I suggest, armor, would increase the price (I am not sure by how much but I assume it would not be astronomical.).
So we have -
"The Big Top" -
Traction Engine with the ability to run none stop 24 hours a day, excepting breakdowns.
And we have the option (Atleast I think we do), of adding a Ballista, a Catapult, a battering ram and armor plating. Also, may I suggest scythe wheels?
I can't get the image of a large, gaudily painted, armored, weaponised wagon steaming across the plains out of my head. To me it just seems so... Warhammer Orkish. And I love it. I vote yes! Let us build "The Big Top"!
Don't be hating on the Carnival, little man, just coz we got style and a Tech Whiz! Tell you what... You can even have a go at steering The Big Top. It'll be great. You can see what you are missing!
New post is up!
Also, I approve the idea of "The Big Top" and will work getting that created in game with you all. Hopefuly the Steel Wolves will meet up with the Iron Carnival once its completed, as Blaze would freakin love that thing!!
One note, I am unable to totally take over your game, as I am also running a VtM game, and playing in three others. However I will do as much as I can, including introducing you all to somthing I hope you all will really enjoy.
And we have the option (Atleast I think we do), of adding a Ballista, a Catapult, a battering ram and armor plating. Also, may I suggest scythe wheels?
Now we're talking. Though even with D&D physics I don't think we'll be able to fit more than one siege engine. It's not so much the weight of the weapon itself, more the size of the chassis you'd need to fit two. Perhaps have one packed away on a trialer so that we can swap them out, or set it up free standing when we want to mount a defence?
As for armour, I reckon we should only plate it with metal on the front. Wood on the sides and rear is proof enough against arrows; if we allow a siege weapon to fire directly at our flank or rear we had it coming. If we feel the need to retreat, throw it in reverse gear.
You're right, once the price of the steam tech is paid outfitting it with armour and weapons won't cost too much. If pentor agrees with the build DCs I'll be looking to make this thing at level 6. That lets me take 10 on the craft checks and gives me a 50/50 chance of passing the design check. I may be able to get a circumstance bonus on that too if I spend enough time experimenting and researching. It also allows me to get a cohort via the leadership feat who can steer the thing, since I'll probably have more pressing duties in the heat of combat.
You see I thought of that. It would have to be detachable, you are right. Also, if, god forbid, we DO lose Acune or someone else, maybe we will get a Gunslinger. Which may open up the way to a Cannon or some other form of gunpowder artillery.
I agree! Armor plating to the front seems perfect. Also, I think it would be conductive, if we ever were to meet up with Squad 3, if we were to rob their Sappers idea for his alchemical launcher. They are small so we could, concievably, fit two, on to either side of the drivers seat, that could lob alchemists fire and the like.
We would need rather a lot of alchemist's fire. If it proves hard to come by, we could simply spray boiling water that's just passed through the steam engine.
A cannon-armed steam-wagon!? That would be spectacular. Though where we'll get a cannon in Ustalav is another matter. One costs 6000GP, and that's before whatever markup a trader charges for shipping it halfway around the world.
Also, check this out:
"Frost: ...upon command a frost weapon is sheathed in icy cold...the effect remains until another command is given"
We can magically produce the coal we need, but water is another matter. Nobody in the party can produce water, so how about this: incorperated into the steam engine is a helix of piping built around a cavity into which a sword can be sheathed. Once pressurized steam leaves the cylinders of the steam engine it is directed down these pipes. If a frost weapon is placed in the mechanism in this way the magical chill will recondense the water, allowing it to be used again instead of venting the steam into the air. If the sword is not present, the steam remains vapourized and is vented and the water tank drains as normal.
If someone takes a frost weapon, they will be able to make the steam engine run without refilling it with water as long as they're not in combat (when the sword will be needed for other purposes). In short, we only need to carry enough water to see us through an hour of fighting rather than having to refill as we travel. Assuming the DM is ok with such innovation.
I don't know about Pentor, but I am all for making this work in game. Ima check my WoW books, as there are Steam Tanks in the game and I think info on them mighta made the books. Regardless, keep up the innovation and I will work towards bringing it all together IG.
Oh and the callopie is also a must!! Especially if its playing carnivial music as opposed to spooky or badass music lol.
Is everybody ok with my rolling Init?? And before I go any further, any other combat suggestions??
Hmm. The Steam cooling system sounds like it would work perfectly. Perhaps we should double our water supply though, and add in a set of pipess that, should the Frost weapon not be present, the super heated steam can be vented in a cone like burst that could be used as a last ditch defence.
Also, as we are only starting in Ustalav, and may indeed move on, before we even get the Big Top, maybe we should consider trying to invent attachments that could aid us in other climates and topography.
Suggestions-
Attachable snow chains.
A water tight inflatable that could be fixed to the underside of the Wagon and kept inflated by the hot air from the engine and used to traverse water. (A form of pump and hose would give the wagon a continuous source of water while "sailing")
Haha! Is this getting too complicated?
I really like the idea of a steam powered war wagon, but I think it's got to be a long term project. Maybe just start off with a regular wagon and then add bits a piece to it, like armour and light siege weapons, before maybe completely re-designing and re-building it at about 8th or 9th level.
8th or 9th level is reasonable. There will have to be some major justification for Torque working out how to build one of these things. He's heard of it, and not a whole lot else. By 8th level he should be well-versed in engineering to start considering it. Until then, let's stick to good old fashioned (and reliable) horses. First thing we need to do is get our hands on a wagon for me to set up shop in so I can start brewing bloodblock.
Aye. With the proceeds we get from this job we should probably purchase one.
I actually assumed something like this system would come in to play. I love the idea of having to pay the Company. It make sense.
And as for the Ranking system, it sounds good. How would one attain a new Rank? With level or perhaps by Squad backing?
I think having active Corporals, early on, would be a good idea. If at the end of this Misson Two Bears was promoted to Sergeant in charge of the Squad then this would leave Corporal position open. I tink, having a new Corporal raised from the Ranks, in a new Squad, would be an interesting way to go. It also would take away the supreme command of the Corporal position by replacing it with an even higher Rank, that of Sergeant.
Now of course the Rank of Corporal would be both a blessing and a curse. A blessing as you gain Rank but a curse as you will be getting less loot than everyone else. Just a suggestion! :)
Rank can be tied pretty nicely into the leadership feat. Perhaps we could expand upon the existing leadership system to represent NCOs and officers:
Corporal would not have a level prerequisite nor any mechanical benefit - they have simply been assigned by a sergeant to lead a portion of that sergeant's troops. Typically, corporals are between 3rd and 6th level. They may choose to designate lance-corporals within the squad they've been assigned to aid them in commanding it (like Fury says, having a command structure within the squad would be cool)
A character who takes the leadership feat at 7th level is promoted to a sergeant. A sergeant gets a +3 circumstance bonus to their leadership score for the purposes of recruiting followers (not cohorts) since they are part of a pre-existing command structure. As a sergeant gains levels he may split his followers into multiple squads and designate corporals (higher level followers or his cohort) to lead them. We are such a squad.
Then, we add a new feat. At 10th level a character with leadership can take greater leadership and is promoted to an officer. Characters with greater leadership lose the benefits of the normal leadership feat, treat their character level as their leadership score and consult only the 1st level followers column of the leadership table. However, instead of this number of 1st level followers they gain this many cohorts. Furthermore, each of these cohorts has the leadership feat.
There may well be additional privilages associated with having these feats. Also, if veteran is to be a 'rank' perhaps leadership could have skill focus (profession [soldier]) as a prerequisit and greater leadership have skill focus (knowledge [warfare]). This would make gaining official rank quite feat-intensive and make veterans significantly more powerful combatants than officers of their level.
Obviously from a PvP standpoint greater leadership is wildly overpowered. However, and officer still answers to the leader of the mercenary company and he's not going to be allowed to take his eight cohorts and go dungeon crawling. For this particular campaign I think it could work quite well.
Also, whatever system we decide, someone has to go down the officer route otherwise we face the hellish prospect of Little Bitter outranking us...
Rank can be tied pretty nicely into the leadership feat. Perhaps we could expand upon the existing leadership system to represent NCOs and officers:
Corporal would not have a level prerequisite nor any mechanical benefit - they have simply been assigned by a sergeant to lead a portion of that sergeant's troops. Typically, corporals are between 3rd and 6th level. They may choose to designate lance-corporals within the squad they've been assigned to aid them in commanding it (like Fury says, having a command structure within the squad would be cool)
A character who takes the leadership feat at 7th level is promoted to a sergeant. A sergeant gets a +3 circumstance bonus to their leadership score for the purposes of recruiting followers (not cohorts) since they are part of a pre-existing command structure. As a sergeant gains levels he may split his followers into multiple squads and designate corporals (higher level followers or his cohort) to lead them. We are such a squad.
Then, we add a new feat. At 10th level a character with leadership can take greater leadership and is promoted to an officer. Characters with greater leadership lose the benefits of the normal leadership feat, treat their character level as their leadership score and consult only the 1st level followers column of the leadership table. However, instead of this number of 1st level followers they gain this many cohorts. Furthermore, each of these cohorts has the leadership feat.
There may well be additional privilages associated with having these feats. Also, if veteran is to be a 'rank' perhaps leadership could have skill focus (profession [soldier]) as a prerequisit and greater leadership have skill focus (knowledge [warfare]). This would make gaining official rank quite feat-intensive and make veterans significantly more powerful combatants than officers of their level.
Obviously from a PvP standpoint greater leadership is wildly overpowered. However, and officer still answers to the leader of the mercenary...
I think you're onto something here, but I would suggest looking at the Taldor book. Specifically, look at the Taldan Squire and Taldan Knight feats. We could have something similar with feats for Veteran, Corporal, Sergeant, etc. I agree that the Greater Leadership feat is too powerful. =D
I agree that the Greater Leadership feat is too powerful. =D
Yeah, you're right, it's not really good practice to go introducing broken feats because 'the storyline will compensate for it'.
How about this: say the structure of the company is based on the idea of units being 'seeds' that are allowed to recruit independantly. The fluff bears that out - we're spread throughout glorian, after all. So, each unit answers directly to a regional commander - a captain - who in turn reports to the mercenary commander. Below that level, however, each unit determines it's own structure.
The three squads we're playing in are newly-created 'seed' units. Our corporals currently answer directly to their regional captains. In time, though, we may recruit more troops and start to build more layers of a command structure. Or we'll stay as a single squad but become more and more potent, specializing how we see fit (such as by becoming Glorian's first mechanized infantry squad...)
In short, this means we can decide our own ranking system and command structure based on how many of us take leadership and hence how many troops we have at our disposal. However, to have a certain rank a soldier must have a minimum number of troops under his command:
Corporal: 5 or more troopers
Sergeant: 2 or more corporals
Lieutenant: 5 or more sergeants
Captain: 2 or more Lieutentants (once a unit contains a captain high command will reassign it to a new region in order to spread the mercenary company's presence.)
This is where Hakon's suggestion comes in. We use rank (and hence unit size) as a prerequisit for certain feats relating to the troops around a character. So a sergeant gets a taldor-knight style bonus to initiative and AC if he has X troopers nearby, and so on. This encourages NCOs and officers to actually lead their forces.
Note: I still think a +3 bonus to leadership for being part of ano rganized mercenary unit is a good idea
Just a quick question for Torque - do you want this PbP to go that way?
The structure you've put together would appear to imply that progression = more troops. That could quickly turn the game from a squad based PbP into an army type PbP.
My personal view is that being promoted shouldn't necessitate having more personnel under your control. I'd like it to stay squad focused.
Being promoted to an NCO or and officer means you need troops to command, yes. But it's optional - you can become a veteran, and ultimately a hardened veteran, instead. Like Pentor said, that option is there for those that just want respect instead of authority and responsibility.
I also agree that we should stay squad focused. There's the possibility of having the best of both worlds though - players have their cohort lead their followers and keep the PCs together in a 'command squad'. The command squad does the small-scale, high-risk missions and leaves their units to do easier jobs like the ones we're all doing at the moment. They still have the option, though, of bringing everyone together for the occasional battle.
I'm aware we're playing D&D, which is fundamentally a party-based game. That doesn't mean people shouldn't have the option of aquiring followers. To be honest all this is is adding military flavour to the leadership feat as it's printed.
I personally share your sentiment - I don't see my character taking leadership and becoming an NCO, but that could change by level 6.
I like Torques idea. Also, the extra Soldiers that are involved in that way could be off screen. Done as NPC's and only present at certain portentuous events. Also, the Corporals and Vets could become interchangeable.
Say Jax becomes a Corporeal, as he has the Skill focus required, and on a misson Squad 2 need an expert tracker. Krathok took the Veteran route so Jax takes advantage of this by recquesting Krathoks involvemen in their current misson.
The Feats and skills access to the Ranks makes a lot of sense. And yes, becoming the first Mechanised Unit would indeed be our aim!
While I love the ideas presented here, there's one small problem:
Leadership **SUCKS** as a feat. It's at once far too powerful via granting a whole second PC basically and far too weak as the one can never truly accurately get the proper numbers one should have.
What I instead suggest is to create a Leadership system that grants a Leadership Score, much like what already exists, but is 1) not based off of a feat and 2) accounts and allows for not only more realasitc numbers but also a larger number of circumstance penalties and bonuses. This works really well for a military/missions based game as if we fail it would subract from the score, while being successful would add to it and the degree of sucess/failure could increase the number.
For example, the Iron Carnival is escorting a caravan. If everything goes according to plan, this might grant a +1 to the Leadership score. If howerver, they end up not only escorting the caravan, but also manage to eliminate say a major band of theives from the area, help restore peace to a troubled town and save the Count's children, all just by being on the escort, that would definitely add +3 or more to a player's Leadership score.
It also allows an easy to deal with respect/command, without having to take a feat or even gain Followers/Cohort. If say, Pvt Fury, only wanted to move up the ranks, he could and never have to attract NPCs, if he didn't want to.
Being promoted to an NCO or and officer means you need troops to command, yes. But it's optional - you can become a veteran, and ultimately a hardened veteran, instead. Like Pentor said, that option is there for those that just want respect instead of authority and responsibility.
I also agree that we should stay squad focused. There's the possibility of having the best of both worlds though - players have their cohort lead their followers and keep the PCs together in a 'command squad'. The command squad does the small-scale, high-risk missions and leaves their units to do easier jobs like the ones we're all doing at the moment. They still have the option, though, of bringing everyone together for the occasional battle.
I'm aware we're playing D&D, which is fundamentally a party-based game. That doesn't mean people shouldn't have the option of aquiring followers. To be honest all this is is adding military flavour to the leadership feat as it's printed.
I personally share your sentiment - I don't see my character taking leadership and becoming an NCO, but that could change by level 6.
Like the idea of the degrees of Veteran and that NPC's/cohorts could be utilised "off screen" as we are part of a much larger Companies.
The inter-unit specialist roles also work, something that I was keen to see play out early on in the games discussion. Like Jax mentioned requesting a tracker, sapper or ironclad carnie tank would present "guest slots" and crossovers in pbp and would be fun and realistic.
Was going to mention the Mass Battle rules too - we could have a situation where we have a Mass Battle pbp thread, where icons represent units/squads in much larger conflicts? Not sure how it would/could work in practice but again would keep making this pbp pretty damn unique.
@MonkeyGod: The Leadership Score could presumably also incorporate penalties where characters [while powerful] are drummed back down the ranks for insubordination, crimes etc?
@Black Dow: Exactly, as you'll note I mentioned penalties, and they and bonuses, could be handed out for nearly anything:
Continually back-talkin or ignoring higher-ups, penalty. Donating more treasure, bonus. Persoanlly ruining a mission, major penalty. Saving the life of a Lt, major bonus. Etc, etc.
Normally an in-depth system like this isn't needed. While I don't like the Leadership feat for the above reasons, in the vast majority of games, its ok at its job. In such a military/unit based game, where we can move up in the ranks of what could become a global spanning Merc company, Leadership as is just dosent cut it.
Oooh! Saving the Life o a Lieutenant Major gets us a bonus? :P Does that insubordination, even though it was just an itty bitty joke, mean I lose a rank? I hope not. I like being me. :( Hahaha! Yeah thi is indeed becoming something quite a lot more than it started!
I concur with the leadership points idea. I don't see my character, for example, desiring leadership, but he might earn it through his actions and behavior. Not only does this save me from taking an unhelpful feat, it also aligns better with my character.
I must admit I have never actually played in a game where leadership was used. Numerical representation of standing within the company is a cool idea. In particular I like how it opens up the possibility of rewarding our successes with something other than more loot, which has to be capped for balance reasons anyway.
I must admit I have never actually played in a game where leadership was used. Numerical representation of standing within the company is a cool idea. In particular I like how it opens up the possibility of rewarding our successes with something other than more loot, which has to be capped for balance reasons anyway.
Coupled with the Faction rewards, this system will indeed add an extra depth to rewarding us players beyond normal treasure.
Don't get me wrong, Blaze will surely want magical bonuses to his scimitar, stat boosters, as well as fun items, but this more immeresive Leadership system will let each player choose just how seriously he wants his PC involved in the command structure of the company.
Blaze for example, would be ok with a cohort along with a respectable rank, but not so interested in folowers. Not his style, especially as a follower of Sarenrae.
Pvt Fury could want just an increase in rank, perhaps climbing as far as he can, but doesn't want followers or a cohort.
Darkbiter, otoh, could want it all: decent rank, a cohort and followers.
This system allows for all of that, which in such a large, diverse game, covering as many play styles as possible, is perfect, imo.
I think I like the Leadship points idea as well. The mechanical aspects of Leadership as it directly relates to our game, ie the cohort, wouldn't really be needed. We have 7 players per squad and that's more than enough. Part of taking leadership is gaining the cohort and since having another character in the party would only bog things down. Yes they could be put on the periphery, but that would hinder the use of the feat. I know it'd allow for rank advancement, but requiring the feat for something that, IMO, should be dealt with in game could potentially hinder a character. I think if one of us wants to become an officer and we want the leadership feat part of it, it should be granted as a bonus feat upon receiving officership. Just my 2 cp.
As for the Big Top, I'm totally down for the traction enginge. For water another way we could do it is with wands of create water. We've got at least three players in our party with access to UMD and it wouldn't be all that hard and would be cheaper than a frost weapon. Also, an idea I had was adding nozzles that could be used to cast cone spells through. It would allow the person casting the spell to be inside the wagon but allow spells line burning hands and cone of cold to be cast. All it would do is change the point of origination by a square or two.
Right, I've done some calculations (I'm an engineer, this is fun for me). I can expect to produce 218kg of coal per hour at level 8. That allows for a 250 horsepower steam engine under real world physical laws and early 20th century technology - which I think is reasonable given that this engine will be magically built to perfect tolerances.
It also means that it will consume 1526 litres of water per hour. Getting water out of a wand costs 7.5 gold per 9 litres. In short, running this thing on wands would cost us 1272GP per day.
Alternatively, an 8th level inquisitor would have to cast create water every two and a half minutes to produce water at the required rate. If a round is 10 seconds, that's 4 minutes work every hour filling a 1.5 cubic meter tank. And of course, an inquisitor can cast create water any number of times per day, for free.
"Acune..."
"Hey Acune.."
Alternatively we could potentially see if Pentor will allow us to import eternal wands from 3.5. They had to be 3rd level or lower but had unlimited charges and just cost more. Being as it's a 0 level spell I don't think it'd be very game breaking, so long as we didn't use it for crazy or outlandish ideas.
Anyone else think that we should have a hot tub cart for the excess water to go into behind our Steam Wagon of doom?
Is it wrong to feel bad for absolutely decimating this man I'm attacking?
Nope! He chose to be a bandit.
Is it wrong to feel bad for absolutely decimating this man I'm attacking?Nope! He chose to be a bandit.
He should have been a merc', then its perfectly legal.
It also means that it will consume 1526 litres of water per hour. Getting water out of a wand costs 7.5 gold per 9 litres. In short, running this thing on wands would cost us 1272GP per day.
Decanter of Endless Water is 9,000gp and would allow it to operate without external water addition?
Chiming in with my DM hat on - I'm leaning towards a modified Faction based system.
The advantage of basing it on the faction means that you don't have to sacrifice any feats for the benefit, and can concentrate on building your characters however you would like to. I'm thinking faction reputation on a squad based level would be best as well, rather than an individual person by person basis.
As you gain in faction, it relates to either how trusted / feared / respected you are in the system.
For the less savory types (read Crimson Kings) that can parley into taking special ops type rewards - both titles and monetary / item. Like say we get promoted to the 'Black Knives' commando unit and we all get free 'Shadow' enchantment for our armor.
For the leadership inclined that could turn into being trusted with leadership of quantities of men. The squad itself can be 'attached' as a HQ group to another pack of mercs - or farmed out as a leadership group to a militia / pack of hobgoblins ready to raze and pillage.
Another way to explain it (for those that know Warhammer 40k): at the moment we are all Troop choices, nothing special and pretty much cannon fodder. As we level up you can choose to specialise to being an Elite troop (like Terminators) or go towards Command (like HQ squad for Imperial Guard).
Would need creases ironed out, but could fulfill both desires?
Chiming in with my DM hat on - I'm leaning towards a modified Faction based system.
The advantage of basing it on the faction means that you don't have to sacrifice any feats for the benefit, and can concentrate on building your characters however you would like to. I'm thinking faction reputation on a squad based level would be best as well, rather than an individual person by person basis.
As you gain in faction, it relates to either how trusted / feared / respected you are in the system.
For the less savory types (read Crimson Kings) that can parley into taking special ops type rewards - both titles and monetary / item. Like say we get promoted to the 'Black Knives' commando unit and we all get free 'Shadow' enchantment for our armor.
For the leadership inclined that could turn into being trusted with leadership of quantities of men. The squad itself can be 'attached' as a HQ group to another pack of mercs - or farmed out as a leadership group to a militia / pack of hobgoblins ready to raze and pillage.
Another way to explain it (for those that know Warhammer 40k): at the moment we are all Troop choices, nothing special and pretty much cannon fodder. As we level up you can choose to specialise to being an Elite troop (like Terminators) or go towards Command (like HQ squad for Imperial Guard).
Would need creases ironed out, but could fulfill both desires?
I was planning on tying it to the faction already. Since the Blood Hawks are such a varied group, especially as we PCs go, the rewards will be as varied too.
Having one rank up based more on squad as opposed to individuals is a little unfair. If a squad fails, but a specific member makes a good showing, he should still gain a point or two to his leadership score. and vice versa. If the squad is successful, but one member didn't do anything, why should he be rewarded??
Having one rank up based more on squad as opposed to individuals is a little unfair. If a squad fails, but a specific member makes a good showing, he should still gain a point or two to his leadership score. and vice versa. If the squad is successful, but one member didn't do anything, why should he be rewarded??
War is hell :) - from a Blood Hawk perspective, the squad was sent away on the mission and is gauged on how the squad performed. One of the primary appeals of fiction like the Malazan / Sharpe novels is the concept of family or brothers under fire. Rewarding specific individuals disproportionately would tend to fracture that sense of bonding.
Leads to issues of how do you quantifiably measure individual performance vs squad over the duration of a mission? Does the guy who stayed up the back healing get stiffed because the Barbarian hogged all the kills?
Having one rank up based more on squad as opposed to individuals is a little unfair. If a squad fails, but a specific member makes a good showing, he should still gain a point or two to his leadership score. and vice versa. If the squad is successful, but one member didn't do anything, why should he be rewarded??War is hell :) - from a Blood Hawk perspective, the squad was sent away on the mission and is gauged on how the squad performed. One of the primary appeals of fiction like the Malazan / Sharpe novels is the concept of family or brothers under fire. Rewarding specific individuals disproportionately would tend to fracture that sense of bonding.
Leads to issues of how do you quantifiably measure individual performance vs squad over the duration of a mission? Does the guy who stayed up the back healing get stiffed because the Barbarian hogged all the kills?
Clearly not, as it's likely the Barbarian would have either gotten killed himself, or not killed as many without healing.
However, if that guy stayed in the back and played with his ball, the ENTIRE fight, then he shouldn't get anything.
Once the system gets fully fleshed out it'll be easier to figure things out. Also, while the brothers under fire works well for a book, it needs to be tweaked and changed up for a living game with a huge number of people playing. It shouldn't be too hard to have both blend and mesh quite well.
@ Monkeygod - I'll wait until you have more crunchy guidelines before continuing the discussion in any quantitative sense. I look forward to seeing it and ascertaining whether it blends and meshes as required.
One word usage from your last paragraph I take umbrage with is your statement that it needs to be tweaked. It is your opinion that it needs to be changed, not fact. For the older ones in the audience I might say that I'm speaking from a Post-Modernist counterpoint to your Modernist perspective.
I (as Krathok from Squad 1 and Co-DM for Squad 3) would personally prefer a squad based system, though I am ready to either be proven otherwise or over-ruled through weight of votes.
Wouldn't a potential compromise be that the average of the squads Leadership score determines "squad rewards/penalties" while the indivduals can still be gaining at different speeds etc...
Am thinking of both Mark's example of Sharpe and in Abercrombie's The Heroes you have characters actively seeking death or glory, while others just want to survive/do their job.
Also grunts or squad members who felt unappreciated or out-of-place [in character I'm talking here] could ask the CO for a transfer to another squad. Likewise if a PC becomes a CO/NCO they could implement new standing orders and regime... Sharpe has tons of examples of this happening for both good and ill...
Anyway my 2 runes worth = not sure if a hybrid system is do-able, but again its something we can all help build if needbe.
It also means that it will consume 1526 litres of water per hour. Getting water out of a wand costs 7.5 gold per 9 litres. In short, running this thing on wands would cost us 1272GP per day.Decanter of Endless Water is 9,000gp and would allow it to operate without external water addition?
Isn't part of the flavor of the Decanters that they're tiny portals to the elemental plane of water? Or is it just something that is continually casting create water?