While thinking about what kind of hobbies could a Chelaxian Wizard have, I ended up with another question to ask. Are there any chess-like games in Golarion? What actually ARE all the possible hobbies a noble could have aside from studying and reading? Thanks in advance, hopefully this thread will help others in fleshing out their characters a bit more as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
According to Adventurer's Armory there is a board game called "Pits and Perils" that is in fashion with the Cheliax and Taldor elite (with those in lead get to dictate usually symbolic penalties to those in the rear).
Another game mentioned is "Siege" which is a "deeply strategic game" where you try to surround the other player's pieces (sounds a bit like Go to me).
As for chess... no idea.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ah, just reskin Jetan and call it Golarion Chess :-)
"I'd let you watch, I would invite you.
But the queens we use would not excite you."
There must be chess on Golarion, because my character has a chess set looted from Delvehaven in the Council of Thieves adventure path.
Good point there, Charlie. Now I need to think of good hobbies for my priestess of Pharasma.
A follow-up question might be - how does one conduct a chess game in Pathfinder?
As any chess player knows, this could be dependent on any of the mental stats - intelligence (for strategy), wisdom (for sudden inspired insight into a game), and charisma (for bluffing and even intimidating one's opponent). Knowledge of the game (more intelligence) is helpful as well, as one can draw on previous games, use classic openings, and so on.
That is, I don't think there can be a "chess skill"; I think a chess game (and other complex games) might be better adjudicated using something akin to the "chase mechanic": create some cards which can be randomized (or "shuffled" for you non-mathematicians!), each card requiring a choice of one of two mental-stat linked skill, linked with an opposed check with the opponent. Cards could be classified into three categories: opening, middlegame, and endgame... maybe 3-4 cards per phase (depending on how inventive the GM wants to be), eg:
Opening Card
1. Varisian Defense (check K: nobility) "Ease into the game with a classic opening"
2. Brevoy Gambit (check Intimidate) "You seek to unsettle your opponent with an aggressive set-up"
So maybe "A" decides to open with the Varisian Defense while "B" counters aggressively with the Brevoy Gambit, ie. they are rolling opposed K: Nobility vs. Intimidate.
Game "points" could simply be a tally of relative +/- over the history of drawn cards, eg. "A" rolls "18" on his Varisian Defense while "B" rolls 21 on the Brevoy Gambit, so "B" has netted 3 points. Or whatever!
There could be factors beyond the cards, such as a Tactician's "Battle Insight" archetype ability and so on. Lots of possibilities!
(I know this ramble wasn't solicited, but it just sprang to mind...)
The "chase" mechanic could be adapted to a wide variety of games, actually.
|
I disagree with your mechanic, and suggest something much simpler. Profession (Chess Player) as a skill, which can be used untrained, making it just a wisdom check.
As a serious chess player in the real world, I think this makes the most sense. Those who play a lot and read books on chess strategy have the specific knowledge necessary to be good at the game. But even those who don't know the specifics, but are good thinkers, can be pretty good for amateurs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A game of chess (which could take hours) should be at least as involved as resolving combat (which takes seconds); also, a simple skill check doesn't capture the back and forth, the tension, and the suspense of two well-matched players at chess.
From a playability standpoint, I guess I'd say that if chess is just a backdrop activity ("oh I'll go play chess with those guys") then resolve it with a roll (or if it's just being used for an income check); if the game is *important* ("okay, I challenge the archdevil to a game of chess...") then a more involved mechanic may be called for :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Think about the chess game at the end of the first Harry Potter. The entire game wasn't shown in detail, in the book or movie. It was described briefly, and just enough shown to evoke feelings of suspense. But in the end, it came down to Ron's skill as a player vs the enemy, which I'd say sounds like a single skill check in Pathfinder terms.
I'd say make it a single skill check, but the GM makes his roll in secret and describes the game in enough detail to build the suspense.
Or if you want more detail, possibly make it three skill checks - one for the opening, one for the middle game, and one for the endgame. If one side wins by a large enough amount (maybe 11+) in the first two parts, then they checkmate early and win instantly. Otherwise, the winner of each part earns a bonus to carry into the next roll. Maybe make the bonus that they carry into the next roll equal to half or one third of the amount that they won this roll by, rounded down.
...a simple skill check doesn't capture the back and forth, the tension, and the suspense of two well-matched players at chess.
I am sorry but I cannot help but laugh when I see someone complain that D&D/Pathdfinder does not make the in game recreation of chess exciting enough.
That is what home rules, a GM and good storytelling skills are there for in an RPG.
Or simply play a game of chess as your characters.
...a simple skill check doesn't capture the back and forth, the tension, and the suspense of two well-matched players at chess.I am sorry but I cannot help but laugh when I see someone complain that D&D/Pathdfinder does not make the in game recreation of chess exciting enough.
That is what home rules, a GM and good storytelling skills are there for in an RPG.
Or simply play a game of chess as your characters.
Haha, fair enough :P
I suppose I'm coming at this a bit from having played a lot of Legend of the Five Rings RPG, where your samurai's life and the honor of his Lord might rest in the outcome of a single game of Go. I recall an incident where my Ikoma courtier was playing in a Go tournament at Winter Court - and cheating - by manipulating the game so that he would *win* but make his opponent look *good* (he was not) so as not to lose face... anyway, another game, and one far, far more concerned with the minutiae of politics and social intrigues!
So yes! It's all about the GMs call and what works "for the moment"... and as we all know the player whose character is *good* at chess will want more elaborately run games than others. Such are players :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main reason not to make Chess a single opposed skill roll is the huge variation you'd get. IRL, a competent player (never mind a Master or better) will never lose to a rank amateur. But a Master in PF (Wis 16, 5th level = +3+3+5=+11) is by no means safe against that amateur (no skill points, 11 Wis = +0). Even a maxed-out professional (Wis 18, 10th level, Skill Focus = +4+10+6 = +20) is only just guaranteed a win.
I'd go for multiple skill rolls, and the first one to get a lead of 3 wins is the winner. If that takes more than 10 rounds, it's a stalemate.
Hnefatafl is played in the Lands of the Linnorm Kings. That's kind of chess-y.
|
|
As a serious chess player in the real world,Fide rating?...
USCF rating?...(I'm USCF 1865 (much stronger Blitz Rating -- but haven't played in a tourney since '06, not regular in tourneys since '01)
My USCF rating peaked in the high 1700s, though I was hovering around 1700 the last time I played regularly, which was over a year ago.
I'm actually much better playing slow than quick. I think my quick rating was around 1500, and I consider that highly over-rated, because it was influenced by a few G/30 - G/55 tournaments I played in that were dual rated. Those dual rating tournaments tend to bring up my quick rating and bring down my standard.
|
|
In Pathfinder Adventure Path #50(Night of Frozen Shadows):
"There include a hnefatafl(a traditional Ulfen game)board and pieces made of walrus ivory worth 120 gp..."
EDIT: Oops, missed gang's post. ^^'
Oddly enough, I've actually played hnefatafl in the real world. I may even own a set, buried in with my Ren Faire gear somewhere.
I love how people are asking how to run a chess game in Pathfinder. I personally would just get a board out and play a game.
|
@ Harak,
D&D is a social game, not a game between two people -- unless you're gonna play bughouse or something. Also, gamers don't all know how to play or play at very different levels. And some play really slowly.
Bottom line, when we go to play D&D we wanna play D&D. Not chess. When we go to chess club we play chess.
A single skill check for normal games and 3 checks for a chess match really important for the plot, is a good idea to me.
Also, for the thing of master players losing to noobs...they can just choose 10. And the gm can just choose 10 too, for realism issues =)
Think about the chess game at the end of the first Harry Potter. The entire game wasn't shown in detail, in the book or movie. It was described briefly, and just enough shown to evoke feelings of suspense. But in the end, it came down to Ron's skill as a player vs the enemy, which I'd say sounds like a single skill check in Pathfinder terms.
I'd say make it a single skill check, but the GM makes his roll in secret and describes the game in enough detail to build the suspense.
Or if you want more detail, possibly make it three skill checks - one for the opening, one for the middle game, and one for the endgame. If one side wins by a large enough amount (maybe 11+) in the first two parts, then they checkmate early and win instantly. Otherwise, the winner of each part earns a bonus to carry into the next roll. Maybe make the bonus that they carry into the next roll equal to half or one third of the amount that they won this roll by, rounded down.
I'd rather see this as one or two opposed skill checks. I've never found Chess itself to be all that exciting.
|
|
I'd rather see this as one or two opposed skill checks. I've never found Chess itself to be all that exciting.Think about the chess game at the end of the first Harry Potter. The entire game wasn't shown in detail, in the book or movie. It was described briefly, and just enough shown to evoke feelings of suspense. But in the end, it came down to Ron's skill as a player vs the enemy, which I'd say sounds like a single skill check in Pathfinder terms.
I'd say make it a single skill check, but the GM makes his roll in secret and describes the game in enough detail to build the suspense.
Or if you want more detail, possibly make it three skill checks - one for the opening, one for the middle game, and one for the endgame. If one side wins by a large enough amount (maybe 11+) in the first two parts, then they checkmate early and win instantly. Otherwise, the winner of each part earns a bonus to carry into the next roll. Maybe make the bonus that they carry into the next roll equal to half or one third of the amount that they won this roll by, rounded down.
Well, some of us find chess to be more exciting than you do.
But as stated in my post that you quoted, I agree with you about keeping it to a couple of opposed skill checks, and then letting GMs discretion about the chess game's role in the story decide how much detail to include when describing it.
Per my suggestion above, it could be just one opposed skill check, with the GM spending all of 5 seconds saying, "It's an interesting game, with the PC attacking on the opponent's left flank and eventually overcoming his defenses to win."
Or for a situation where the game plays a large role in the overall Pathfinder story, and you want a lot more detail, you could go for 3 skill checks as I described above, with the GM giving more detailed descriptions to build the tension until the game finally ends. But even that shouldn't be more than a minute or two of Pathfinder game time. After all, RPGs are storytelling games, and the demands of the story should determine the detail in which the chess game is described.
Thread Necromancy time! A proper Golarion Chess-like game should take some thematic material from its world. An example of this invented by Gary Gygax wsa Dragonchess. It looks like at least 1 physical set has been constructed (and photographed in the article linked here). This sounds like a good start (at least thematically speaking). Also note that this is a 3D Chess-like game.
Earth itself has a large list of Chess-like games, some of which achieved major regional popularity.
^To expand on that last post, existing chess variants with substantial regional popularity (at least at one time) include Xiangqi (Chinese chess), Shogi (Japanese chess), and Chaturanga (the Indian subcontinental common ancestor to chess and its variants).
* * * * * * * *
For more fantasy-themed chess variants, I'd like to see Dragonchess played some time. Not sure if anyone other than the photographer in the Wikipedia article linked in the previous post actually has a physical set or if anyone has developed a computer program to run it, though.