bref_weapon's page

Word up: There's talk in my group about playing Planescape in Torchbearer now.

One of my earliest ideas is to replace "Hometown" in character creation with "Faction.

I'll circle back here with any further developments.

Sounds like a superb idea for porting the setting over.

As long as you can conceptualize the "dungeon" in Torchbearer as simply the hostile place where you kill* them and take their stuff, then I think that any setting shouldn't be too alien. (* Replacing "kill" with any of the Torchbearer conflict types, although phat lewtz is still essential to the experience)

The other odd thing is the Red Box style of race-class in Torchbearer, and how that fits with the races in Planescape will be something of a challenge. How close to 2e AD&D you want to put it, that will be an interesting choice as well.

I personally find Burning Wheel to be completely unplayable. It's got a ton of good ideas, but also a lot of unnecessary paperwork. (And not a small amount of off-putting design hubris, IMO)

Luke's writing is, well, different. (It's certainly dialed back in Mouse Guard, and Thor seems to be the prime mover in Torchbearer.) BW is not for everyone, at least in part because of Luke's author voice.

It has a lot of attitude, though, and it works in a way that other games do not. The Burning Wheel is about that kind of attitude, a kind of Hubris. Players in BW cannot sit back and wait for something to interest them. Everything has to challenge the Beliefs & Instincts, otherwise you've failed. It's all about finding a way to seize the spotlight, seize the moments when decisions need to be made.

I think the critical thing with BW is that you only use the Spokes that you feel like. If you think about the entire set of rules (which are considerable), then it's unworkable. Starting at the Hub (say yes or roll dice, TEST FOR INTENT, roll once, and let it go), and then moving into the Spokes that make sense for what you do... that's how it should work.

This is also why Mouse Guard & Torchbearer make so much more sense. It's not as smash-head-into-a-rock dense like BW's drive towards player-story conflict.

Yes, Torchbearer is laser focused on a kind of game, but it's not as Luke-y as BW is, and full-on Luke Crane is not for everyone.

So Nature (Human) has nothing in it about Faith? That was the Human counterpart to Grief, Greed & Hatred, at least in my copy of Revised. Granted, you had to pick it up as a trait, unlike the other races.

Either way, it definitely sounds as though I will want to pick this up as soon as I am able...
I looked on the Burning Wheel Wiki and they don't seem to have any support for Torchbearer there, is Thor supporting it online elsewhere?

Yeah, Faith is not part of Nature (Human).

There's no theme/story questions about Faith at character creation like there is about Nature, Circles, etc (unlike BW).

Instead of Faith, divine powers run through a skill - Ritualist, which is the Cleric's equivalent to the Magician's Arcanist skill.

Oh, there is also ALIGNMENT. As in Red Box - Law, Chaos, and Fence-Sitter (I think Thor might say, "Neutral", but Neutral is for wimps. Especially on the Burning Wheel!). For the Cleric, there are some benefits for going with Divine abilities that are in accordance with your Alignment.

As for resources, Thor or Luke set up a blog-style web site here...
http://www.torchbearerrpg.com/?m=201304

There are links to PDFs, some of which actually work.

The Burning Wheel store has free PDFs as well, including a couple new classes - the Human Paladin & the Human Thief (the base game's "thief" is the Halfling Burglar, of course).
http://www.burningwheel.com/store/index.php/torchbearer.html

And, because we're on Paizo's fine site, here is the link to the main Torchbearer book in the Paizo store:
http://paizo.com/products/btpy93dg?Burning-Wheel-Torchbearer

Huh. Sounds a lot like Luke took what he did for Mouse Guard and adapted it for a High Fantasy setting. Nice. I will definitely have to take a look then.

Actually, it's Thor's book. I thought it was Luke, myself, but the primary credits go to Thor for this one.

In any case, it's a mod of Mouse Guard. As stated, the Nature stuff is great. And Monsters also work off the Nature (Monster-type) stat, plus the "Might" stat being a mod of the Natural Order scale in Mouse Guard... another great rule in Mouse Guard that is ported over in a smart way for Torchguard.

Plus, you have Nature (Human) now, unlike Burning Wheel where you only have Grief & Greed (both of which get sorta copied over with Nature (Elf) and Nature (Dwarf) in Torchbearer). Nature (Human) is Boasting, Demanding, and Running... fun roleplaying stuff there, to be sure.

If you like Mouse Guard, and you like dungeon crawling, then it's a no-brainer purchase. You must buy it.

I've heard of it, but never checked it out. I've been eyeing Dungeon World with interest, but now you've got me curious about Torchbearer. Does it mainly do traditional dunegon-crawl, elves and wizards fantasy, or would it hold up well to stuff like Eberron or Planescape?

It's cleanly focused on the dungeon-crawl. You can make an Eberron-themed dungeon, or a Planescape-themed dungeon, but it's still about the classic AD&D experience.

It depends on what you mean by "Eberron" or "Planescape", of course.

The general concept is: characters must go out into the wild, test themselves, and come back again. This was true of Mouse Guard, and is the basic underpinning of Torchbearer.

Torchbearer characters are "murder hobos" in one sense (i.e. the socially disconnected wandering adventurer who has nothing else to offer the world except for a certain kind of violence). In another sense, their individual Goal and Belief and Instinct are what drives them. Certainly, rules-wise, it's the Goals & Beliefs & Instincts that allow you to advance your character.

Let's take a character's Goal as an example. Goal is a neat holdover from the Mouse Guard rules. It's the "agenda" of the character. To quote Mouse Guard, "It's not what you fight, it's what you fight for" that matters. So, a Goal may be, "I will rescue the Princess from the Mad Overlord." Or, "I must retrieve the Dwarven Heartstone to save my Clan." Or, "I will not allow the Goblins to overrun the village."

If your Goal gets tested, or if you succeed, then you get points to advance your character. If the Goal never is tested, then you don't learn, and your character's growth (level) is stunted.

This kind of Goal is not a traditional part of a character from the old 1e AD&D days. It's not even an "Eberron" or "Planescape" thing. It's just different, and doesn't fit cleanly into D&D concepts.

Just picked up Torchbearer, being a huge fan of Mouse Guard and the Burning Wheel/Burning Empires.

I think if you come from the non-Burning X perspective, you might not feel as much about the Belief/Instinct/Goal backbone (along with the Nature stat). That's my favorite bit from the Mouse Guard & Burning Wheel.

It might be a bit easier to set those aside in Torchbearer as compared to Mouse Guard, but character advancement also rides on you being able to drive conflict through your stated Beliefs and Instincts.

And I must say, the look and feel of the actual book is wonderful. Such a great homage to the 1e AD&D tomes of yesteryear. I love the cheesy graphics, the way the pages are laid out, the inclusion of random tables (not a standard Burning X thing at all).

It's a truly retro-modern mashup. I've never thought of the Burning Wheel ruleset as "simulationist", though. (D20 was always one of the more simulationist kinds of games, in my mind, with Burning Wheel more based on intentions (and complications) rather than a strict interpretation of probability and reality.)

If someone were to set up a Play-by-Post on this board, I would be happy to join. I'm just not deep enough into the rules to be able to run it anywhere close to fluently at this point in time.

I'm interested in playing & the game I was in kind of evaporated.

I don't have a concept off the top of my head, but I'm running a Saga edition game myself & there's plenty of NPC concepts that I can flesh out into a PC.

bref_weapon wrote:

I'd still want to play in a Pathfinder pbp game that doesn't blow itself up... and nobody seems all that interested in non-mainstream systems/settings as players.

To be honest if I had access to any other game systems I would be interested. I just don't have anything else.

I've been checking out games from smaller companies, and I wouldn't expect the players to have "the book" (or pdf) in those situations. Teaching the system is just part of that kind of game.

The issue is that people just happen to like D&D-style fantasy, and occasionally stray over to D&D-style Star Wars. My recruiting thread is for neither of those things. It's only natural for players to want the D&D/SWSE games since they are a substantial investment.

In the end, I would rather the players find my game rather than try to grab people who weren't so interested in the first place. It took weeks for my Star Wars Saga Edition game to begin due to lack of interest, which was a good thing to me.

Of course, if I had a 3.5/Pathfinder game that I just had to run, I'd look here... and I am looking for a Pathfinder game myself.

I would like to try my hand at a pbp. I have never been in one before but I haven't been able to really play in over a year. They only people I know that do play are so munchkin that I can't play with them. So if anyone is looking for a newbie player I will give it a whirl.

I could also try to DM a game but I am not sure how I would do at it. I am rusty in real time so via the net I have probably already been digested by a Rust Monster and left behind in a cave somewhere.

Playing in a pbp game can be fun... although munchkins can be a part of pbp too. This is why I try to be selective & communicative with my players as a DM.

DMing d20 games is ridiculously harder than being a player, and I think that inhibits things. I barely have enough time to do the storytelling to an adequate level, nevermind the arcane d20 ruleset (map-based play doesn't help me paint a picture that much better & kind of makes my job harder).

I'd still want to play in a Pathfinder pbp game that doesn't blow itself up... and nobody seems all that interested in non-mainstream systems/settings as players.

BTW, I am a die-hard dead-tree book lover BUT I am coming to find PDFs (at least original ones where the text is accessible) indispensible in preparing for my games. When I can just cut and paste a stat block into my reference tool of choice (NBOS' The Keep right now, used to be MS' One Note) it saves me much time and book toting during the game - and I still have the full book electronically for deep reference anyway. Very handy.

x2

Also, inserting my own notes & commentary RIGHT IN THE RULES or in specific encounters in the APs... that's great.

I travel, and when I'm not on travel, I have long commutes. Having a PDF is essential now. Hardcover manuals just don't cut it anymore, and I'm an old fart with a pile of gaming books. It's rare that I actually want to get the paper version these days if I can get a true electronic format PDF (rather than a scan).

Make a better PDF and Paizo will win more than a few players away from 4e.

Here's my rolls via invisible castle...
http://invisiblecastle.com/roller/view/2133749/
(still have to toss on a d6 for the one exceptional stat that I got)

Not what I was envisioning, but I can always play a grunt, provided there is room. I have no problem playing a Coalition Dead Boy.

Humans first!

any room left in this? I can't stand running Rifts but I love the setting...

I would have no idea how to run Palladium over pbp :)

/D20 is a nightmare in itself! :)

I recently found my old books, and would love to be in on a Rifts game if there's room.

From Coalition grunt to any manner of specialist, I'd be happy to fill any OCC as needed.

I'm already roleplaying an arrogant S.O.B. of a squad leader elsewhere, so that would be what I would avoid.

Any interest in a "Scum and Villainy" game, set in the Rebellion era?

We'll need an enterprising captain, a starship (most likely with a dubious history), and a suitably sketchy crew.

For the back end of this, I have: SW Saga Edition rulebook, Scum and Villainy, Starships of the Galaxy, plus assorted other books (the d20 Rebellion Era Sourcebook (SW d20 1st e), a bunch of d20 SW:RSE books, d6 Star Wars 1e rules, d6 Star Wars Imperial & Rebel Alliance Sourcebooks).

I also have an extremely simplistic quant model behind the market economy for the sector of space we'll play in. If you want to haul cargo & play the (black) market, then hopefully this game will meet your expectations. For characters with suitable Knowledge, you can request charts & simple Excel data for goods you might be pushing around space. (It's not fancy stuff by any means, but some people like charts.)

If you really want to serve the Rebel Alliance, provisions will be made to accommodate you. The Empire will mostly be a thorn in your side, with various blockades & taxes/fees & import/export restrictions to get around. The Hutts will serve as a third faction within the Sector, and the captain may begin the game with a price on his head (in exchange for more "stuff" for the starship).

Time frame? Roughly after Yavin, but the specific details regarding the original movies aren't intended to be affected by anything in this game. The Sector will be rim-ward/fringe space... the new Moff has recently re-imposed Imperial order (which has had a positive effect on the market), but several systems are in dispute, and the most rim-ward worlds are largely run by the Hutts.

Further details regarding character creation will follow. I'm mostly interested in hearing ideas and concepts for characters, and what you'd like out of this sort of thing.

I, too, am interested, and will refrain from cracking open the new AP until my time with this group has ended.

I would be really happy playing either character.

Dustwind will be a rough, lumber consortium tough.

Morova will be a pious, hardworking, desperate clergy member.

Either one will change the overall feel of the party I think; Dustwind will mesh better with our bard and the rough and tumble halfling, while Morova will certainly resonate better with the dwarf and the druid.

I'm actually leaning toward Dustwind, but if we don't think it's working out, I can always swap them! Does anyone else have a preference? I didn't write a backstory yet, because I don't want to invest as much in a character I don't pick!

I myself would prefer playing a Bard ;)

Anyway, time to go over to the discussion thread.

I will be traveling to the in-laws for part of Thanksgiving. Otherwise, I can commit to a post per day & perhaps on the weekends.

Time to start piecing together my Bard...

Great! I'm curious about how the Pathfinder Beta plays myself...

I don't have the Guide to Darkmoon Vale, but I have a few other sources to draw upon :)

Are you using Traits (from the Second Darkness Player's Guide, and probably to be included in the next version of the Pathfinder RPG)?

...

As for character... I'm mostly a cooperative player who wants to have fun rather than try to take over things.
I'd like to play a CN Half Elven Bard from Riddleport who has fled the city in order to avoid paying an outrageously large gambling debt (deity: Cayden Cailean, of course). He will be a happy-go-lucky character who mostly likes to help others unless it involves a great deal of risk or physical effort (not a party-destroying CN character).

PrC as social org are especially annoying. Why do I have to wait until Level 7 to be recognized as a Knight of So-and-so? (Pathfinder has the Red Mantis Assassin PrC, doesn't it? At least it's available to NPCs)

Then there's the game-y aspect to it. There's a whole game to playing PrC chess. Why do I take a level in Knight of Underwhelming in order to get the most levels as a Slimeball of Whoozit?

Why can't someone be a lvl 15 "exactly what the character is meant to be"?

Some gaming systems actually do allow for that. WotC sort of went there with character archetypes in one of the Revised Star Wars splatbooks, although they were specific archetype paths... perhaps some other Wizards products allow for this.

Green Ronin's True20 allows you to build a character class of your own.

It's not impossible to let your characters be who they are meant to be from day 1.

It's funny. When I looked at True20 the impression I came away with was - why wouldn't I just play 3.5?

Did I miss something? What do folks like about True20 that makes if their preferred system?

Spells are more effect-based rather than Magic Missile - Melf's Acid Arrow - Lightning Bolt - etc etc. all being the same general spell with different names. And less of the accountant approach to magic that D&D has always had (i.e. you have X spells per day that you can always cast without fail virtually in any situation). If you had to design a magic system from the ground up, True20's system seems more logical than D&D's.

Some people don't like that True20 took away their Hit Points. I think it's interesting, and it makes the mundane assassin's dagger FAR more dangerous than its D&D counterpart.

True20 is also "old school" in that there's no need for maps & miniatures, 5' steps, AoO beancounting, and the tactical wargaming that some would-be D&D players want to stay away from.

In another nod to the old school, iterative attacks also go away with True20... you get one attack, plus an off-hand if you want. Doesn't make Warrior-types less effective, necessarily. Combined with the loss of the map-based combat, it does make combat rounds go quicker.

Is True20 for everyone? No. If you really like the 3.5-style of D&D, then why change for the sake of change?

The concept of Sin Wizards is interesting... with magical ethics reminiscent of Dark Sun's environmentally responsible spellcasting.

In the general D&D game, the way Wizards & Sorcerors "balance" versus Fighters... not all games are created equal, and sometimes some characters can be marginalized by the wild power swings as levels go up.

Maybe it's the job of the player to "maximize" each level and each choice in order to avoid marginalization... but that becomes a hair-pulling exercise for some, just as "Specialists are underpowered" or "Specialization is punishment". Why? Why can't I play a Specialist? Why do I have to plan my feat & skill outlay to attain PrC XYZ?

I don't want to see Sin Wizards as an unbalancing method of playing another new PrC, and then the next PrC being the trump card & more unbalanced than the previous.

Hopefully it will make more sense as the games in the adventure path come out.

Also, the Sin Wizards (Wizards of the Sin?) & the name of that "other company"... I find it funny.

I disagree that this will damage the hobby (change Dungeon/Dragon, boycott, etc). I think more open source publishers in the arena make the hobby stronger, especially those like Necromancer, Goodman Games, and Paizo, that want to stay as close to core game as possible and bring their considerable creativity and high quality to bear.

To tell the truth, I haven't been very happy with the core game for a couple of years. I feel like it's grown into a monstrosity of character options and drifted quite far afield from five people sitting down for a night of gaming. I thought Eberron started off in that mold, but it's starting to follow the core at this point.

x2

I'm done with Wizards products, having gone over to Green Ronin. Others have found gaming goodness in other fine publishers of OGL materials, including published OGL adventures.

I, too, soured on Wizards' game... I was willing to give them another shot with Eberron, and then got turned off after the Five Nations book.

It's worth the time to look at other people's take on the OGL standard... be it Green Ronin's "True20", Monte Cook's "Iron Heroes", or whatever. Hopefully, others on this board will actually put their money where their mouths are, and look at other variants of OGL/d20 because there are some great things out there.

For Paizo, making something exactly like Wizards' game to the exclusion of all else... that would be a mistake. "Dungeon" is dead... hopefully "Pathfinder" will be better & not so tied to its Wizards root.

If you wake up & decide that you're done with Wizards, then you won't really miss reading "Dragon" as it has become. The gaming world is bigger than Wizards & its products.

If you're really angry, try something new. There's some awesome stuff out there that is closer to the game that you want, not just what Wizards has made of the game that you used to love.

Just because Paizo can not include non-OGL material in their publications does not mean that we, the readers and gm's , cannot insert it into their adventures or setting.

My concern is that it may be too targeted at those who have every bit of non-OGL material from Wizards, such that Pathfinder might be indistinguishable from "a certain Wizards product that will remain un-named", especially rules-wise.

I think one of the criticisms of "Dungeon" and "Dragon" was that they had become too much tied to Wizards and its flagship RPG, to the exclusion of ANYTHING else... precisely because of the relationship between Wizards & Paizo.

There are so many pieces of OGL that don't use every bit of Wizards' game & have attempted to improve on what Wizards made out of the original work by Gygax & company. I don't want to have to have the "Complete UbarPrC" or whatever hardback from Wizards to decipher "Pathfinder".

I'm hoping for a more open-ended, open-minded Pathfinder product that is more OGL-compliant and less dependent on specific Wizards-isms in order to enjoy... but it's really hard to say until I see what is actually coming down the pipe. I really can't commit to a subscription until I know more.

For example, I don't personally need umpteen unbalanced, unnecessary PrCs for every little faction in the adventure path... but some people like having a lot of PrCs for everything.

I just don't want another mouthpiece for Wizards & Wizards products...

I am more interested in moving AWAY from D&D's crunch into other OGL gaming (Green Ronin's Blue Rose/True20 Fantasy), so I'm not so interested in PrCs... and more interested in interesting stories, settings and adventures.

If it's a setting and a story, I can translate it easily to True20 via the OGL. If it's more D20-type crunch, then it's not so useful.

People who use other flavors of OGL might have other opinions...