Some houserule systems have started replacing Attribute rolls for boons with rolls using an epic rating of the highest consecutive purview level, in order to facilitate a wider variety of character (IE, not all health Gods are stamina monkeys) Is this ever something you have considered, and what sort of advantages and disadvantages do you see for this ruling?
We have definitely considered it. In short, we dont like it. While Im answering this Im actually talking about this in the Fire and Ice post from what will now be 2 weeks in the past.
Pros:
Simplicity. Rolls are easier. You always know what your boon roll is.
PCs are better at things. If you buy a purview, you'll automatically be amazing at it.
PCs dont feel forced into some attributes that maybe they didnt prefer because they want one of their boons to work better
Cons:
Most of the cons are different variations on a theme.
Boring.
If every fire god is exactly the same level of good at all of their boons as every other fire god that also has all of those boons it gets real lame real quick. At that point the roll hardly has any meaning and should probably be removed. If we're dealing in the realm of 50 successes, and all that happens for the roll is we both roll 10 dice, and then we both add 46 successes.....that just sounds horrible.
I find it way more interesting to have gods using different powers, sometimes for reasons of "well Im better at this one and worse at that one".
We've also had interesting, sometimes unexpected character growth from characters getting attributes for boons they didnt think they'd like, or didnt think fit their character, but then added some growth. One character doesnt think they'd ever need charisma, or doesnt think itd fit their character. But then they buy some up to make fire work, and by the time they hit god, they find they're like a flame themselves, drawing others closer to them with the power of their charisma.
Im in no way saying that our way is perfect, Id actually like a bigger spread across boons and purviews of attributes and abilities. But we are of the very firm believe that using the boon as the epic for the boon is the wrong way to go for most purviews(hello mystery).
I havnt thought very seriously on it because its not something we'd do. But Im actually thinking that if you arent using attributes for boon rolls, it doesnt make any sense to have scaling successes on them at all. Just let all boons do things automatically based on the level of the boon. Yeah....the more I think about it, the more Im not sure scaling epics based on level of purview is the way to go at all. If the real goal is getting rid of attributes, Im muchmore in favor of getting rid of successes on the roll, or geting rid of the roll entirely.
Anne pretty much summed up the reason for the divergence here. In your system, Fatebonds absolutely ensure that every Sky God has the exact same *selection* of Boons: all of them. Every single Sky God has every single Sky Boon because there's quite a small number of potential Sky Boons and so even if one Sky Boon doesn't make a lot of sense for the Sky God to have, he'll have it purchased for him by Fatebonds.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, since all Sky Gods have the exact same selection, the only way to differentiate them is by being good or bad at *using* certain powers. That makes sense. That's how y'all roll.
I much prefer that every God be *good* at the Purviews they've chosen, just as they're good at the Attributes they've chosen. The differentiation comes in from more choice. Which Boons do you buy? Thor and Quetzalcoatl should *not* have the exact same selection of Sky Boons because they represent drastically different manifestations of Sky. Thor is all thunder-and-lightning, while Quetzalcoatl is all wind-and-clouds. Tlaloc again is going to be slightly different because he's all about some rain-and-thunder meaning he's got more in common with Thor than Quetzalcoatl does, but he's still manifesting powers that Thor isn't.
Just removing rolls entirely can work, but it limits the mechanical choices you have quite a lot and takes away any element of randomness (very common in RPGs) and any element of variety since now you can't super-charge a Boon with Deeds and Virtues and Stunts. So, that's kinda lame.
There's problems with both approaches. Your approach ends up with characters forced to take traits that don't fit them in order to effectively use Boons that do fit them because the traits don't fit the Boons. Yeah, it *can* be interesting and take characters in fun directions, but it can also just be a big hassle for the player and siphon away XP from stuff they'd actually enjoy investing in. So, bummer.
The Epic Purview approach relies heavily on a wide selection of Boons being available, which generally is NOT the case and therefor it suffers from Sameness. Yeah, that's lame and boring too. I think it's the better solution because more Boons = more diversity = better! But Boons are time-consuming to write, test and tweak, so generally that path is not taken or if taken, leads to further complications as the newly written Boons need to be tested and adjusted in the course of play.
I go with Epic Purviews because if anything, I'd rather the difference between Thor and Quetzalcoatl be that Thor is *alright* at using Wind Boons, but Quetzalcoatl is AWESOME at using Wind Boons instead of Thor being *shitty* at Wind Boons. It just feels better to me because I'm actually a bunny-powered golem made of hard candy.
Just jumping in to say that Thor and Quetzalcoatl are, in my humblest opinion, a terrible example because Sky and Thunder should really be separate purviews. There are no air-and-wind gods that do much thunder, nor do thunder gods have a lot to do with winds for the most part. My burning desire to separate them continues, but man, I can only do so many big projects at once.
DeleteBut there are plenty of good comparisons that way, too - Baldur's nurturing, beautiful light versus Nergal's scorching droought-causing sun, for example. I get what you're saying.
Basically you and we have already been around this mulberry bush a whole bunch, but we love you anyway. :)
Your example seems to only promote the attributes system. In the boons system, once thor buys a wind power he is instantly amazing at it. In the attributes system even if he buys it, hes still horrible at it cuase he doesnt have the attributes to back it up that quetzl, as a wind god has developed along with his powers.
DeleteRight, but the question is why would Thor spend XP on Wind Boons when he could be buying more Thunder Boons? Anne IS kinda right, there's a huge division of labor in Sky, so its super easy to make an example out of it.
DeleteAnd I address that concern by suggesting that Fatebindings would make you *better* at your specialized Boons. Quetzalcoatl has a bunch of Expectations that help him out when he's being windy, but none if he wants to throw lightning. He also probably have Birthrights that aid him with his specialization.
We've covered all this before, though. I like everyone to be equal on general terms and then be able to excel awesome at their specialization. The impediment to my preferred system is lack of selection, so everyone's specialization ends up looking quite similar.
We tend to do a lot of fanciness for boons with birthrights, too, incidentally. Quetzalcoatl probably has some kind of super relic that specifically makes his Gale Force and Create Air or whatever epically badass, while Thor has the same kind of thing for Perun's Apples or Levin Fury.
DeleteNot that that replaces a system either way, because it can be equally awesome in all systems, but relic tweaking is always a fun time.
He'd spend the XP that way cause the wind boon is crazy powerful and he wants it?
DeleteI dont get why the complaints are about boons, but not that all the strength gods are the same?
DeleteBecause *not* all Strength Gods are the same. They differentiate by their selection of Knacks. Again, you guys are probably different cause I assume that you would have Fatebinds buying you 100% of all Strength Knacks eventually. But I rarely see two PCs with the exact same selection of Knacks, even though they're focused on the same Attributes at high levels (1000+) of XP.
DeleteHel and Aphrodite are gunna have very, very different selections of Epic Appearance Knacks. Same for Athena having different Epic Int Knacks than Thoth.
I'm just a bigger fan of your list of powers defining what you're good at instead of everyone having the same list but being good and bad at different things. Applies equally to Knacks or Boons, but it's a lot easier with Knacks since they're generally easier to write, so there tend to be more. Plus, only 9 Attributes vs an Assload of Purviews.
Why did you answer this question? This is the flame war hot topic! *ducks and covers before this reaches 40+ comments*
ReplyDeleteDuck and cover!
DeleteCause its fine :) Our major "opponent" to our way is here not being flamey at all.
DeleteIt's cause of that whole thing where I'm a golem made of candy and powered by bunnies. Also rainbows.
DeleteThere are lots of opponents out here, but mostly we're fine with you doing things the way you do them because it's your game. In fact, I think some of us only post on this topic because we're afraid people in other games might think it is not a viable choice because you dislike it :P
DeleteThats fine....but people shouldnt think its a viable choice if they come here :) Theoretically thats why people come here. If not....then im confused.
DeleteBut we also think people should play how they want in their games. But we do strive and write posts because we think its the best way to do things.
And we run a blog because we are correct.
"Our way is not another way of doing things.
DeleteOur way is the right way of doing things."
Was that Hitler?
Deleteno that was me being John
DeleteAwwwwwww, shiiiiit. Someone just pulled Godwin's Law.
DeleteBut was it an accidental Godwin or an intentional Godwin? That would tell us how to proceed.
DeleteIf you tell me I cannot be good at Engender Love without buying Fire Boons, and that I cannot be good at Freeze Out without buying Moon Boons, then I will look at you like you are crazy.
ReplyDeleteSo if you tell me I cannot be good at Inferno without buying Epic Charisma, and that I cannot be good Blazing Weapon without buying Epic Manipulation, then I will also look at you like you are crazy.
I think Source J has the right of it. Your fatebond system is designed to create similarities, so when every charisma god or fire god ends up with every dot and rank it is naturally going to be boring. If your fatebond system was different, then Thor could have Lightning boons but not Wind Boons and would not be boring or similar.
Also, dice adders. There are plenty of them, and you've previously argued that dice adders add a lot of individuality.
You missed one important part. In the scion system, all rolls are made Attribute + ability. If you want to write a separate system, that is fine, but thats the basis of the system.
DeleteYou will also find that if you dont buy brawl, you are still bad at dex + brawl rolls.
BUT YOU BOUGHT DEXTERITY? HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY BE BAD AT A DEXTERITY ROLL?
Read above, where the lightning and wind powers argument just doesnt hold water.
Also....whatever you're saying about dice adders isnt properly explained and doesnt make sense.
...aaaactually... as long as you have even a single dot of Brawl, you're bloody AMAZING at Dexterity+Brawl, just by investing in the Attribute. Just sayin. Seriously, it's happened in my games where I had a player who was angling for Goddess of Hackers and took a single dot of Science (Computers), then just coasted by on her massive Intelligence successes. When I pointed out it was silly that mortals knew more about computers than her and she should buy more of her Ability, she complained massively about the waste of XP.
DeleteShe was right, it IS a huge waste. The Attribute+Ability system was designed for a game that does *not* incorporate Epics and the interaction between Epics and the base system forms many of the problems that plague Scion.
The point for our system is to make it the opposite of boring - theoretically if you're positively Fatebound to a purview, you will eventually end up with all the boons in it, but you'll be able to use them with varying degrees of efficiency and success depending on what you're actually good at. Hestia and Hephaestus may both have all the Fire boons, but they're good at different ones, which is what we like about the system. (As Source J says, though, it's not the only system out there.)
DeleteWhile I see what you're trying to say with your Engender Love/Fire example, it doesn't actually make any sense. Knacks are on a completely different system from boons, and thus they don't compare across lines that way.
Making Purview + Ability a viable roll is no more or less outrageous than any of the house rules you use. You write separate systems all the time, and that is fine too. :)
DeleteYou can use all the same rules for Ability interaction for both Epics and Purviews. I personally prefer to limit access to both based on your dots of Ability, but different strokes for different folks.
Anne already said that other similar arguments do hold water, even if the lightning and wind power example was not a good one.
I'll try to explain about dice adders a little more. In the past, Anne has made arguments that two gods with the same Epic are different and unique because of their dice adders and the way they stunt them. One might get bonuses from Animal, while the other might get bonuses from Theme music, etc. So her previous arguments about dice adders supporting individuality holds equally true for those dice adders that can directly or indirectly benefit Purviews.
I don't think Knacks being on a completely different system is relevant, because this is an issue of thematic. It makes just as much thematic sense to have to invest in Fire to be good at Engender Love as it does to invest in Manipulation to be good at Blazing Weapon.
DeleteNaturally, what makes perfect sense to me doesn't have to make perfect sense to you, but writing a blog about such a hot topic is definitely going to invite people from both sides to loudly and proudly declare for their preference.
It's not like anyone is going to convince anyone, amiright? :D
I just like to argue, really.
DeleteIt is relevant because it makes a big difference in XP and timing - knacks are gained and bought differently from everything else in the game. But that ain't the main point anyway.
DeleteMan, I really hate that Blazing Weapon example, because I don't think you're wrong; I don't love that Att + Ab combo, and we just didn't find a better one for it so it remains, looking sort of shamefaced. But the system as a whole is much more often appropriate attribute rolls than inappropriate ones. The War purview's use of Charisma, the Illusion purview's use of Manipulation and Wits, the Justice purview's use of Perception, the shapechanging powers' use of Stamina... these all make hella lot of sense. Which is why we love them.
You're right, of course. :) We know the discussion will roll in every time we post. It's part of what's so awesome about all you guys being around to discuss.
It's more important to get the thematics right, because once you have the thematics then you have all the time in the world to balance the mechanics to suit.
DeleteAnd different cultures are funny things. One culture might promote charging forward at the head of your armies with charisma while another promotes sitting back and devising tactical solution with intelligence. One culture views water as an extension of a divine body, using dexterity + craft to move it, while another culture views water as spirits to be coerced with charisma + empathy.
If y'all's system worked even 80 or 90% of the time, Anne, I'd be way happier with it. I just see too many cases of rolls that have nothing to do with the power itself, or the connection is weird and abstract. Like Bolster using Charisma blows my brains and Rainbow Bridge only being for smart Gods is weird!
DeleteWhen it works, it's awesome, but when it breaks it leads to bad, strange, confusing places. And I think I see a lot more of those than y'all do, since y'all're used to them and they obviously make sense to *you* since you made 'em that way.
But the sad thing is it makes it REALLY hard to go against type and have a sullen, hateful War God or a tactically brilliant but socially inept War God, or a sickly healer or a shapeshifter who only has a working body while in the form of an animal. Weird stuff like that. It heavily enforces stereotypes.
Well, sure, but individual boons with different effects are already doing that. That's why Blessing of Bravery is Charisma but Battle Map is Perception, and so on. The different boons are already providing a bunch of different ways different Scions might use War.
DeleteWe're also very all about the thematics. It's just that we use the attributes to enhance those thematics, and find them very useful for doing so. :)
When you sit down and look at your boons, you say "Self. Most of these attributes make great sense for these boons!" Meanwhile, someone else can sit down and go "WTF, mate?"
DeleteThe Epic Purview system goes a lot way towards reducing or eliminating those issues. It's a lot more universally applicable. There is still going to be some disagreement because someone might think Abilities do not fit, but it's a lot easier to justify Occult or Medicine that it is to justify Charisma or Intelligence.
Also, Abilities are just cheaper to buy and don't require you to be more Charismatic or more Intelligent. That's a pretty important thing if you want to make a god with certain attribute spreads.
There we'll have to disagree (as we did in the last post talking about this - or at least, I did with someone). I don't see a big difference in justifying an Attribute versus justifying an Ability. But that's something that's going to be subjective for everybody.
DeleteI totally get why the purviews-as-epics system is popular for some people - it does do those things and does them well. For us, the tradeoff that makes everything undifferentiated and equal in skill, with only the piddly difference between ability levels, makes it not worth it (and, as Source J pointed out, it's also not very compatible with our Fatebond system).
I think someone commented last time this came up that everything is already undifferentiated and equal in skill when it comes to Epic Attributes. Your response to that was to point out how Attributes are fundamentally different from Purviews.
DeleteOne person can say "That makes perfect sense! They can be different and that's okay!" Another person can say "That makes no sense! If the argument applies to one then it also applies to the other!"
It's a big giant merry-go-round of agree to disagree. In fact, I'm pleased this has remained as civil as it has so far! :P
Hooray for polite internets! :)
DeleteI think the secret of the internet is that most people are actually nice. But even 1% is a whole heck of a lot of people being mean!
DeleteThat and the whole "If you heard me say this, I would sound nice and cool. But since it's just text I sound like a raging sarcasm monster".
Too much spin. The way you worded them, you make your pros sound like cons.
ReplyDeleteThats just completely wrong. Theres no spin on any but the first.
DeleteYou admit the first, so let's look at the other two.
DeleteIf you buy a purview, you'll automatically be amazing at it? No more or less amazing than anyone with an equivalent epic attribute. And 46 successes is a long way from amazing in a game with so many dice adders. Several of your Titan Realms need 75 successes just to avoid dying.
Because they want one of their boons to work better? How about because it fits their character better? How about because it lets you succeed at more character concepts?
Those would be a positive way to portray the Pros. As written, you make it sound like anybody who likes the idea must be a powergamer.
Without using dice adders, anyone who is good at the attribute being rolled does not get below 75 in our god game. If we used the purview system itd be the same way sans the 10 dice from the epic.
DeleteIt doesnt actually let you have more character concepts, and it doesnt let you "fit" the character better. It makes characters bland and one note. Our god game has been going for 4 years, weekly, for 8 hours per game. One note characters dont "fit" better, they're just blander.
Lying about the positives doesnt make it the correct way to portray them. It just makes it lying.
Also, its a VERY powergamey thing to do. Im not saying everyone who does it is power gaming. But it is a HUGE step towards power gaming.
The fact that it would be the same is the important part. Every single complaint you point at the purview system being boring and one note applies to the attribute system as well.
DeleteHow about you try it, then ask your players if they feel like it lets them have more character concepts, or more freedom to play certain attribute and boon combinations, instead of throwing out a blanket assessment based on no evidence?
Not at all. the attribute system has many many notes. That is the whole point. And no...I dont just try things. Our systems are always based on long thought and work, not trying something and "seeing if it works".
DeleteAlso our players mock the boon system mercilessly.
And of course it would allow them to get more boon combinations, thats obvious. I disagree with it working in the "world" and being interesting in the long term. I dont disagree that players, in general prefer it. Players like things easy and simple for themselves, that is the nature of players.
This is not a drug addiction where it could ruin your life. If you try it for a couple of months and don't like it, then at least you can say you gave it a real chance. Then you would really see the nuances first hand and can make an informed decision one way or the other.
DeleteOur games are very important to us. We dont make random changes to how the world works. If you were serious about your games, you wouldnt either.
DeleteThat's perfectly fine. You don't have to make those changes in your games, or start a game to test those changes out. But until you have actual experience with the subject matter, your arguments hold no weight.
DeleteGood luck ;)
As usually all these type of discussions end, if you dont think our opinion is worth weight, I find your use of our website odd. Our website/my opinion holds a certain amount of weight in itself, and the fact that you're here is self explanatory.
DeleteI think your opinions hold plenty of weight when you're talking about things you have experience with. Your own house rules, story elements, RAW Scion, themes of mythology.
DeleteBut when you try to make claims about epic purviews turning people into one note characters, or being boring, or that it doesn't enable more character concepts? When you haven't even tried it?
That's where I draw the line.
But I'll keep on liking your other stuff. :)
Having run three games now with Purview+Ability, with Abilities modifiying your skill in the Purview, I have to say that it does NOT cause a character to be bland. I much prefer it to Epics checking the ability scores.
DeleteYou can still have different themes of Fire gods, or Health gods with this direction and avoid one-note characters.
Kinda grumpy that my characters are considered bland and one-note because of this but tha'ts just personal.
Honestly, in the end, it's just another way of doing the exact same thing and so long as everyone allows everyone else to play/game the way they feel works for their groups, this discussion is sillier than cats in tutus.
O stop it. We've talked before about how your system isnt quite the usually used straight boons system and its more of the intermediary and i dont mind it as much.
DeleteWait, what now? Cause I'm in one of Aynie's games and she uses the same system for Epic Purviews that I do. Your rank in the Purview counts as your Epic Attribute.
DeleteIf that's not the "straight boons system", what is? I R Confuse.
I'll never stop. Not unless cheesecake and cookies are promised. Or you make summer act like summer. One of the two!
DeleteActually, Telgar, I think we do use it a wee bit differently. Don't you use number of boons as the modifier for the dice roll?
No, I use #OfBoons (Rating) as a scaling factor in some Boons, as John does. I just gave it a name because I was unhappy typing out "the number of X Boons known" every time I wanted to use that concept. Your Rank in the Purview determines your Epic Successes. Since your Rating can be much, much higher than your Rank, it would be incredibly unbalanced to allow people to use their Rating as the Epic. A Magic-user could start at Legend 2 with +4 successes to their Magic rolls by virtue of having three Rank-1 Spells.
DeleteMy group is in the epilogue of our Ragnarök campaign and we have decided to try a purview + ability system for the next one.
ReplyDeleteWe felt like the attributes system really forces the characters too much into one direction (all healers have to be smart and tough). I personallly thing that it's OK if a Scion has more boons in health than someone else, that scion should be the better health bringer.
I'm looking forward to finding out if that system is working for our group as there were actually a lot of complaints that someone has to take a certain attribute to be good at their chosen purview. We experimented a bit with birthrights that let you swap attributes (e.g. no more manipulation rolls in fire instead you get to use charisma) but the result has been less than satisfying. That's why we trying this system now.
I like the discussion. I think it's good if not everyone agrees on this, as long as it stays friendly, because that way you get a better grap on the pros and cons. In the end every group has to make their own decision anyway ;-)
We use it in our group, and have had some really positive results. One of our players is even trying out a spell caster character with no epics over 4 and several purviews at 8+. That kind of character was not even possible before we started using that rule.
DeleteI certainly hope that it works out great for your group as well!
Hi, i'm the question asker and i'd just like to say Bwhahahahaha...
ReplyDeleteErm, I mean, thanks for the answer and the following discussion :)