Guild of San Marcos Forum

they put wings on bears?

I know a guy in the Rennie circuit that went to Poland on vacation and participated in a hussar cavalry charge. He was on the receiving end as a ground troop.

First thing the regulars told him was, "you are going to want to run and that will go very badly for you.".

The reenactment team train the horses to avoid trampling people by narrow margins and if you move, well, let's just say it's hard for a horse withomentum to suddenly stop swerving right and go left.

So these guys stand out in a field, the hussars come crashing down on them in armor, demon themed masks, waving swords, with wings. And they charge past you less than a yard away. Then you fake your injury and fall to the ground as they pass. And the safest way to do that involves not flinching or so much as stepping even once in any direction.

Afterwards, they celebrate with a local distilled product. Next thing he remembers was two days later in a different town with the tour group.

I have to say that I really like the absence of XP from the game. Having all character progression laid out as "stories" aids a nice narrative flow to a characters growth. It also makes a lot more sense then getting XP from a big fight and suddenly your character is better at making lanterns.

Now think about how that changes advancement at a con game. You get 15 minutes per con to work on your skills or your personal story, unless we do several PAs. so, that rank 4 skill you want? If you make one con a year, itll take 4 years to get.

It's not that different from how we work backgrounds off under the current PA system. I only make 1 con a year and I have yet to completely work off any of my Backgrounds.

Honestly though it just means that Mark will have to come up with a different method of doing things. Maybe each episode can have a list of options relevant to that adventure that the PC's can choose to apply that adventure towards as part of their story.

You assume we will switch over at all. The next campaign may not be conducive to working in 2nd Ed.

The limits on Avalon glamour alone would need changed (unless you want to be the guy explaining all the Knights have been claimed).

The story issue is easy. Nothing changes but a definition of what your reward will be at the end of your PA arc.

Campaign arc XP is more fluid so that should be fine.

The Corruption rules... Those would need some work because of the theme.

But that is all years away.

My first thoughts reading the sorcery stuff was "oh neat time to run a 'supernatural' game in my 7th sea game". My second thought was on corruption points. Finally a metric to measure my groups tendancy to ignore the "you are a hero" mantra that we often have to cite.

Yep, that rule popped up and my first thought was " what will Jason and Kenny play for their replacement characters?"

I like this design in terms of advancement and quirky stuff like Pressure. Not sold on the lack of weapon damage, at least 3 dirty GM tricks I am not posting about in hopes nobody uses them, and stuff that is missing like language purchases outside of linguist.

I look at this and want to build story arcs. I never want to plan arcs. It goes against my "just wing it" style of gaming.

Back home and opened Character Creation. It looks ... limiting. Not freewheeling as in 1.0

Mike, everything is broader. I was thinking about your design style when I read it. I think once you get into it, you will be happier than I am with it. And I don't mind it.

Backgrounds will force you to decide the two most vital aspects of the character but the limited skill list and points to buy more skills will let you have the lion's share of material if you want to diversify. The trait restrictions to 15 points means most of your "XP" will end up buying advantages and more skills.

But I do envision a near future with more backgrounds in the sourcebooks.

salamanca wrote:OK, I looked at char gen. Backgrounds in the new edition are going to need to be open to player created options (with GM approval) because as it stands, I can't figure out how to build 3 of our campaign's most popular PCs.

Don't get me wrong, I like it but it would benefit from offering a selection list for related skills, advantages and quirks.

Case in point, for those of you that remember my old Rodrigo character... His driving personality quirk is tied to the Orphan background which has nothing else relevant to the character.

And the cost on Sorcery is so low you all will make me cry because it's going to become a "why not" ability.

I can't comment on the background comments, as i dont have the pdf, but as for "why not", the obvious answer is that you don't want to play a character with sorcery. It just doesnt fit with the vision of the character you have in mind.

Yep, and that concept is the only reason that a player will not have it... Because they want something else more. The first Ed cost helped limit it to an extent.

That said, last night I was on the phone with Mark and words came out of my mouth that may signal the end times are here.


"You know what Mark, I kinda like the sorcery.".

salamanca wrote:"You know what Mark, I kinda like the sorcery.".

My plan HAD been to never mention this to another human being so you'd have plausible deniability, but I guess there goes THAT plan.

I read a little bit more into the sorcery section last night, and I like that each sorcery has a good and bad side to it. I like how porte feels like it's going back to it's "roots". And Wow! sorte can be useful? Like in combat useful too? Neat.
I still want to do that hexenwurk game now.

Sadly no Fuego and no Soldano school of sword fighting. Not a big fan of any of the other schools as of yet, i'll have to dig more into them.

Soldano is 90% held for a sourcebook. Fuego is gone for good.

I would venture we will see a good number of popular dueling styles return and a few new ones. Sorcery will probably be as is until the new continent books.

salamanca wrote:"You know what Mark, I kinda like the sorcery.".

Be right back, I have to go stock up on canned goods and bottled water.

salamanca wrote:Mike, everything is broader. I was thinking about your design style when I read it.
The trait restrictions to 15 points means most of your "XP" will end up buying advantages and more skills.

Dave, I can see opportunities to game the 2.0 system too. Or, rather, how one may get to what one wants.

And, if course, the 15 point Trait total may change by GM fiat just as 100HP could in 1.0. (right Mark?)

Well anything can change by GM whim. But the original game listed the concept of using more points to build better heroes, this one does not. And that is one thing I probably would not shift as I like heroes that have weaknesses.

My two favorite Hubrises seem to have been eliminated: Rash and Reckless.

And, they are keeping Loyal!?

Rash and reckless are default operating procedure for heroes. Loyal probably should have gone too.

Stuff comes, stuff goes. It's still just stats. I am happy enough with the style of play that it doesn't matter that much to me. I can find a different flaw to play up easy enough.

Man, now there's no bonus for me to play how i always play

There's little more boring than watching/listening to some would-be actor going through the motions of being Arrogant, Stubborn, Overzealous, Hot-Headed, et.al.


Yes, yes there is. There is watching the player that cannot decide which weapon to attack with. There is watching a player agonize over what equipment to bring. There is watching a player ask for a recap of what you just described because they were watching the game at the next table. There is watching a player latch onto a single action and use it for every situation regardless of increasing failure for 5 days of gaming. There is listening to a player describe his logic behind having a dentist install fangs because he thinks being a vampire is cool.

At least bad play actors are trying to be interesting.

Dave? Is this you above !?

I am having fun going through the new book, and recreating old characters. It's so much faster and easier than before.

Having gotten to the dueling styles, man I wish that Mireli's sword dance was a thing in 1e, Ussuran sword dance taught in circuses? I would have so taken that for my Ballerina.

Sister Sonya wrote:My two favorite Hubrises seem to have been eliminated: Rash and Reckless.

So, Curious and Foolhardy are similar.

Mr Wick just received his copy of the core book Proof. PROGRESS!