Guild of San Marcos Forum

So the fire goes down by half each round, but feed requires you to pay the upkeep each phase. Does that mean if i want to keep a fire at it's full size i have to feed it each phase, 1-10 taking damage 10 times effectively to keep that fire going, or do i just need to feed it during phase 1 ( or whichever it happens to fall on) during the round that the fire is going down to keep it up? Since feed is a no action used knack i'm not sure if it requires constant use to keep up or if you can just "feed" the fire right before it goes down to make it stay.

I could just be overthinking it, but i just wanna make sure that what i'm doing makes sense.

Well, first off, remember, you are the GM. Let me say that again, You Are The GM. If it makes sense to you, go with it. This isn't a game where hard and fast rules apply. Feel free to change the rules to suit your playstyle.

That being said, as far as feeding goes, that only applies in the absence of a source. So, an El Fuego Mage in a burning house doesn't need to Feed that fire, it has plenty of fuel. But if he/she (who has a Feed Knack of 5) wanted to take that fire (lets say it's the largest of fires, an 8) down the block (where there's no fuel) to the evil villain's house, they would pay 11 flesh wounds (16 for the fire of 8 -5 for the Feed Knack) per phase to get it there.

In a home game I might be tempted to make them only pay when they had an action, but on the other hand, they can travel whatever distance you want in one action (so theoretically they could pay just 11 FW then be at the house.)

EDIT: And I really agree with you about how broken grappling is

This is where the simplification and cinema of 7th Sea combat breaks down.

The offset to grappling should be reach. I'm trying to wrap my arms around someone and they stab me. I rear back in pain or I push through (think Ajax in Troy).

There is no reach in 7th Sea. Hence the whole Polearm skill is a tad marginalized and grapple is so powerful.

It's not a big deal but due to how broken grappling is my Vesten Finnegan fighter stopped doing it years ago. Better to just go all Thwack on someone (hold a bunch of actions, bob and weave, then Corps-a-Corps and call a bunch of raises on slamming their head into the ground) It's more friendly than a grapple.

Matt

Should you be able to attempt a Disarm after an active defense, not just after being missed on Passive defense?

svensven wrote:Should you be able to attempt a Disarm after an active defense, not just after being missed on Passive defense?

Using RAW, I would say No, since it specifically says they have to miss your Passive. However, in a home game, I could probably be persuaded to do it IF you had another ready action (though I might give the defender the choice of using his original attack roll as your TN or just go with Brawn + Attack (as in RAW))

On disarm after an active defense, i also say no, because that is the sort of thing that sword schools get at journeyman ot master

Been a while since I've added one of these questions, but I was reading the AEG boards the other day and a discussion came up I thought I might get some input about. First, here's the thread http://www.alderac.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=132&t=104532&sid=e7868044422923a68b705e26a94a2818
The TL:DR version is the OP wanted to know about whether or not to add in a Perception Knack. He mentions several homebrewed rules that do add them and ends with a discussion about his players trying to badger him into letting them get it.

I'm not so much interested in the conflict between he and his players but just the generic idea of adding in a new Knack. I've long toyed with it in my head, but in the end I said this.

Black Jack Rackham wrote: I dislike the idea of having a perception knack, and here's why. It just gets in the way. You give players a new knack, they start buying it. 7th Sea is, by nature, a more freeform kind of game (so the Knack: Fencing can be used for attacking, defending, knowledge of fencing skills, judging the quality of blades, etc.). And that's exactly what's going to happen to Perception (several above have mentioned it).

And while there are some things I want players to know right away, there are also some secrets I want players to miss. But when I have players rolling 40+ nearly every time on their perception roll (cause one of them has Wits 5, Perception 5, and Keen Senses), I can't very well justify not telling them every little detail. (And if I simply choose to omit something and later on they see it, I'm going to have to endure the "But I rolled REALLY WELL the first time we met, why didn't I see it then?!?" argument).

So I say, leave it off, then I decide what I want them to see (and when I want them to see it). No rolls, no chance, when there's optional info (which I don't care whether or not they get), Wits and Keen Senses will do just fine.

So opinions?

Every GM that uses it ends up simply adjusting the TNs to notice stuff upwards. It just becomes another point sink and a crutch for players that refuse to think or ask questions about their environment. And as mentioned, there are creative ways for a GM to use other knacks like math or fashion to make this check in certain situations.

There's no need for a specific Perception knack, imo. Like Sal said, have the PCs make more creative use out of the knacks they already have.

This thought came to me while watching The Mask of Zorro the other day.

I know 7th Sea has dipped a toe into the "Smart Animal" trope, the Cresent Windrunner and that whatever the heck it was from Crapthay. But really? Zorro's horse fits right in there as one of his henchmen. Problem is none of the current crop of Henchimals really fits Zorro's horse. So thoughts?

I had this come up in my home game. the animal was personally loyal, and intelligent enough to know the difference.. I took its base stats from the book, bump up the wits of it (in this case, it was actually two animals, one a boar, and the other a monkey) the player told me what he really really wanted teh animals to be, and we discussed it.. In the end, he bought the monkey as a vodacce valet (3 in all criminal knacks) and the boar as a ruken, because he wanted it as a partner in combat. Of course, he did have pyrem, so he could actually talk to them, but the servants advantage can be used to tweak the base animal up as well.

kenderleech wrote:In the end, he bought the monkey as a vodacce valet (3 in all criminal knacks) and the boar as a ruken, because he wanted it as a partner in combat. Of course, he did have pyrem, so he could actually talk to them, but the servants advantage can be used to tweak the base animal up as well.

So same points costs?

Oh and one other thing. The interesting thing I saw in Mask of Zorro was, the horse was wiser than the hero (he moves out of the way when Z is going to jump down on him, tries to throw him at one point, etc.) So what if we have an animal companion who is more of a mentor of sorts?

I' pretty sure the animal companion as a character happens when one of three things occurs. 1- the GM wants to butt into scenes without adding a character his players can force into revealing secrets but still nudge the players long his story path. 2- somebody's 7 year old child insists on joining the campaign and wants to play a unicorn. 3- your campaign's co-GM and plot editor wants to play without impairing the rest of the groups ability to make their own choices and has discovered playing a child was not stopping players from following his lead. regardless, it probably doesn't need stats as all of those are going to suceed when they need to and fail when it's appropriate.

salamanca wrote:I' pretty sure the animal companion as a character happens when one of three things occurs. 1- the GM wants to butt into scenes without adding a character his players can force into revealing secrets but still nudge the players long his story path. 2- somebody's 7 year old child insists on joining the campaign and wants to play a unicorn. 3- your campaign's co-GM and plot editor wants to play without impairing the rest of the groups ability to make their own choices and has discovered playing a child was not stopping players from following his lead. regardless, it probably doesn't need stats as all of those are going to suceed when they need to and fail when it's appropriate.

This leads me to think the horse could be the stand in for a Hero's Intuitive (or is it Creative) Virtue

Yep. same point cost. I would have cut him a discount if he didnt have pyrem, and had to roll aminal training all the time.

Ok new comment/question, and one I am hesitant to make for fear of the possible storm it will unleash. But here it goes anyway.

Ok we all know that the elusive "7" is the maximum trait we can ever get right? Usually through a combination of Legendary Trait, a Sword School Master Bonus, and/or Secret Society Bonus. And we know that some don't stack (so no Legendary Trait: Finesse plus Alchemist - Finesse).

So for a long time I figured 7 was the max (since the rules seemed to be put in place for just that reason). But what about the Focused Virtue? It does, after all, say specifically...

Player's Guide, p.163 wrote:You may exceed your normal maximum Trait Rank with this Virtue.

If I am, say, a master of Valroux, with The Secret: Panache (due to Rose and Cross) and I'm Focused. Could I not, for the duration of a Scene (and for the cost of 1 DD) get an 8 Panache? Or are we just hard-capping Traits at 7?

It goes to 11, just like rock guitar amps

personally, id be more worried about the guy with 7 finesse from goodfellow combined with 7-8 brawn from pyrem if you are going to worry about high power characters. Im all for people paying all thier XP into ONE corner case th9ing. Ok, so he gets 8 actions for a fight. Eventually, he will get bored of being a parry-blender.

I wasn't so much worried about uber-powerful characters (cause, truthfully, none of my players would get anywhere near this before I called it quits to start a new game), more a realization that my previous assumption that a character couldn't get a Trait of 8 was, in fact, faulty. Once an 8 became possible, then my question was, "Well, is it possible?"

How about a 10 finesse? legendary, goodfellow, focused, and songbird form master of pyrem.

Ok new question. For reasons I won't get into (mostly involving spoilers for adventures well into the future) I started doing some looking at Porte.

Now I'm certain we've all read the Ill du Bete adventure (can't remember right now if its Arrow of Heaven or Scoundrel's Folly) AND we know all about the Porte transport company over in Freiburg. So of course, Porte sorcerers can jump from any point "X" on the map to any other point "Y" as long as they have something already blooded that's sitting at said point "Y", with me so far?

Ok, according to the rules, said Porte sorcerers must be Attuned to the object to know how to find/get to it/bring it to them. BUT (and here's where my question comes in) it says in the PG (p. 214 if you're interested) that with 5 pips in Attunement you can sense an object as far as 10 miles away.

Now if that's so, how are Porte sorcerers making such large jumps?

Oh I know, you say, they don't need Attunement to jump to it. Ok then explain to me, from a mechanical standpoint, why is Attunement even necessary? Sure, it's cool if you're lost or something, but this is in the main rulebook. Only the most important aspects of Porte are here (Catching is in the Montaigne book, and it would seem to me if Attunement is just for finding yourself if you're lost, that's probably less important than catching bullets coming at you).

I use attunement to track people. Bloody something inconspicuous, plant it on someone, and BOOM, know when they come close. It can also be used as a pseudo-watchdog, where you can keep checking a valuable items location.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. What I'm really looking for is, how far can Porte Sorcerers walk in a single "jump?" Is it really any distance or is it within the limits of their ability to sense the object they are trying to jump to (and for that matter, how can they jump to something if they don't even know where it is?)

I thought we always used "line of sight" in our home game, unless the porte mage was going back somewhere they knew well, like their hometown/home, or to something they had blooded. (But even then it was dangerous, going after what they had blooded, as you didn't know what may be around it, and you could re-appear in something/someone. But I could be remembering wrong, as I haven't had a decent breakfast yet, and got to get ready for work.

In the various home campaigns I've been in, we haven't had many porte PC's - and those were only half blooded. But as NPC's, they've jumped intercontinental to blooded objects with no problem.

I've never seen attunement get used, as (with catch) there's enough knacks to skip it. I can see the "plant a tracking device" idea for it though.

If you want to change it just a bit, you can use it for counterintelligence - have it let you find other people's blooded objects, so you can track them down and wash them.