Sword & Scoundrel v0.1.4

[Agamemnon]

Very cool. One small question about how the longbow stats in the example bow chart was generated. We start with the default stats of (2p, short/medium, RLD: -, 2h, ambush d6, draw 1). We then take the war and long modifiers, which up DR to 4p, draw to 2, range to short/long and gives us the foot attribute. Next, we take the stiff modifier, which limits us to one shot per round and ups our ambush to 2d6, but also increases our DR by one. We should then have 5p, rather than the 4p listed in the chart. Or am I missing something.

You are correct. I wound up having to do all of the examples on kind of a binge, so I wouldn't be surprised if I messed something up somewhere. Longbows as generated by the codex would be 5p, Short/Long and have an r4 cost.

The Wealth chapter was much anticipated by me, for this system had been mentioned a lot, but never appeared in the drafts until today.

The first impression is quite positive: the system seems neat and ingenious. Speaking for me, I almost always played games with non-abstract money systems. And, naturally, they always seemed right. Now after reading this chapter I realized that I'm quite fed up with counting my gold pieces (and that's exactly what I'm doing all the time these days in a medieval-ocean's-11-style-heist adventure that we're currently playing). I expect that after trying this system it would be extremely hard to go back to that wretched penny-counting.

Penny counting takes up way too much game time, in my experience. In practice, even games with more concrete currency systems tend to ignore the actual rules. When you have thousands of gold in a D&D game, you stop subtracting coppers to pay for meals at the Inn.

Here's my question, though. Say, the group of three characters has managed to get their hands on a small chest with money. They open it and the GM happily announces that inside they find 4 Coin. So... How do 3 people share 4 Coin?

I mean, in another system, they could've found 40 gold coins (and that also does not divide by 3). But then they can have 13 coins each and then use the last one to buy a bottle and drink it together. I'm typing this because I'm trying to answer this question myself, to figure out, how I would deal with such situations. Maybe the GM should round the number of coins gained up or down (and maybe he should do it before the characters discover the gold?)? Or maybe there may be a certain formula for dividing it. All and all, I'm quite sure that such situations would arise, and there should be a way to deal with it.

Even playing D&D, you'd wind up with situations where there's an odd number of treasure or the like and if you've got particularly annoying players, the debate over who gets the last gem/gold piece is a pain. As it stands, I tend to find that the easiest way to deal with it as a GM is just to put one's hand on the scales a bit and give them rewards in easy multiples. Failing that, the "buy a bottle and drink it together" option still works. "An evening’s worth of cheap ale, beer, or wine or a single bottle of good wine or cheap liquor" is r1. Drink up!

Another controversy is about getting Coin from Assets and vice versa. For example, I have 3 Assets and and 3 Coin. I want to increase my Assets, but I need two more Coin to do that. It appears from the rules that I can produce 2 Coin from my Assets (by making a test), and then use the resulting 5 Coin to raise my Assets. Is it designed this way intentionally, or is it, maybe, a backdoor or something?..

This is intentional. If you have Assets 3, you need 4 coin to increase it anyway and the req is cumulative. So you'd need 4 successes on 3 dice. You could do it over multiple maintenance cycles, but that's a slow way to get money. On the other hand, it also represents that a character who has a ton of money has the ability to make investments and the like which accumulate over time without us needing to make a whole "investing in businesses" subsystem.

In practice, though, for any kind of meaningful purchase, players tend to drop a coin or two whenever they have it just to make sure they get the thing they wanted.

UPD

I found these pages and pages of costs to be mind-numbingly boring. Do you really need 7 pages of lists? I'm talking about the costs of goods and things, pg 77 to 84. Surely it'd be better to pare it down to a page of guidelines instead.

I disagree here. Tables are cool, we do need them. Shopping is the most fun in this games, or am I missing something?..

Plus, we got the chance to include a lot of stuff that games normally don't which I think is pretty neat. Worst case scenario, you're inconvenienced by a few extra pages to turn or an extra couple seconds of mouse-clicking. The sections are even bookmarked for you in the pdf.

The alternate option might be to move those to an appendix, but then you have the awkward thing where all of the weapons and armor stuff is in one section and everything else is at the end of the book.

[myanbar]

On the page 98 Range table, the font seems to be in different sizes, and under Long it says "4 foot" instead of "4 ft".

On page 100, you can add the trait "Grappling", but there is no such thing. It's in the description of Hand- and Close-reach weapons that they can be used in grappling. There's no Grappling trait.

[Agamemnon]

On the page 98 Range table, the font seems to be in different sizes, and under Long it says "4 foot" instead of "4 ft".

Weird. Two specific lines got bumped to 11 pt. Go figured. Good catch!

[Seanachai]

Here's my question, though. Say, the group of three characters has managed to get their hands on a small chest with money. They open it and the GM happily announces that inside they find 4 Coin. So... How do 3 people share 4 Coin?

I mean, in another system, they could've found 40 gold coins (and that also does not divide by 3). But then they can have 13 coins each and then use the last one to buy a bottle and drink it together. I'm typing this because I'm trying to answer this question myself, to figure out, how I would deal with such situations. Maybe the GM should round the number of coins gained up or down (and maybe he should do it before the characters discover the gold?)? Or maybe there may be a certain formula for dividing it. All and all, I'm quite sure that such situations would arise, and there should be a way to deal with it.

Even playing D&D, you'd wind up with situations where there's an odd number of treasure or the like and if you've got particularly annoying players, the debate over who gets the last gem/gold piece is a pain. As it stands, I tend to find that the easiest way to deal with it as a GM is just to put one's hand on the scales a bit and give them rewards in easy multiples. Failing that, the "buy a bottle and drink it together" option still works. "An evening’s worth of cheap ale, beer, or wine or a single bottle of good wine or cheap liquor" is r1. Drink up!

Easy! If you have three players, don't put 4 Coin in there. Also, there's no reason not to describe the chest has having "several pounds of coins and jewels" and later if the party decides to split it up evenly say, "OK, it comes out to about 1 Coin for each of you".

[myanbar]

Here's my question, though. Say, the group of three characters has managed to get their hands on a small chest with money. They open it and the GM happily announces that inside they find 4 Coin. So... How do 3 people share 4 Coin?

I mean, in another system, they could've found 40 gold coins (and that also does not divide by 3). But then they can have 13 coins each and then use the last one to buy a bottle and drink it together. I'm typing this because I'm trying to answer this question myself, to figure out, how I would deal with such situations. Maybe the GM should round the number of coins gained up or down (and maybe he should do it before the characters discover the gold?)? Or maybe there may be a certain form

That's a roleplaying situation. Let the player characters figure it out! The unequal treasure trope is a good source of drama and tension.

[nemedeus]

Here's my question, though. Say, the group of three characters has managed to get their hands on a small chest with money. They open it and the GM happily announces that inside they find 4 Coin. So... How do 3 people share 4 Coin?

I mean, in another system, they could've found 40 gold coins (and that also does not divide by 3). But then they can have 13 coins each and then use the last one to buy a bottle and drink it together. I'm typing this because I'm trying to answer this question myself, to figure out, how I would deal with such situations. Maybe the GM should round the number of coins gained up or down (and maybe he should do it before the characters discover the gold?)? Or maybe there may be a certain formula for dividing it. All and all, I'm quite sure that such situations would arise, and there should be a way to deal with it.

Even playing D&D, you'd wind up with situations where there's an odd number of treasure or the like and if you've got particularly annoying players, the debate over who gets the last gem/gold piece is a pain. As it stands, I tend to find that the easiest way to deal with it as a GM is just to put one's hand on the scales a bit and give them rewards in easy multiples. Failing that, the "buy a bottle and drink it together" option still works. "An evening’s worth of cheap ale, beer, or wine or a single bottle of good wine or cheap liquor" is r1. Drink up!

Easy! If you have three players, don't put 4 Coin in there. Also, there's no reason not to describe the chest has having "several pounds of coins and jewels" and later if the party decides to split it up evenly say, "OK, it comes out to about 1 Coin for each of you".

Seeing as the increase in numbers is essentially exponential, dividing 4 coin between 3 players could look completely different anyway. it could be that with 4 coin divided between 3 players, everyone gets 2 coins or something. other than that though, yeah it doesn't even make sense to put a non-multiple number of coin. i think it should probably always be written down as "x coin per player"

Here's my question, though. Say, the group of three characters has managed to get their hands on a small chest with money. They open it and the GM happily announces that inside they find 4 Coin. So... How do 3 people share 4 Coin?

I mean, in another system, they could've found 40 gold coins (and that also does not divide by 3). But then they can have 13 coins each and then use the last one to buy a bottle and drink it together. I'm typing this because I'm trying to answer this question myself, to figure out, how I would deal with such situations. Maybe the GM should round the number of coins gained up or down (and maybe he should do it before the characters discover the gold?)? Or maybe there may be a certain form

That's a roleplaying situation. Let the player characters figure it out! The unequal treasure trope is a good source of drama and tension.

edit: good point, i retract my above statement

[myanbar]

On page 100, you can add the trait "Grappling", but there is no such thing. It's in the description of Hand- and Close-reach weapons that they can be used in grappling. There's no Grappling trait.

On page 102, Queue Spike doesn't specify if its attack type is swing or thrust. It should specify; perhaps say "-/0p" or "0p thrust" instead of "0p"; it may seem obvious to us, but someone who doesn't know what a queue is would be confused.

Do Blade top heads for Hafted Weapons apply their damage modifiers to additional weapon heads? For instance, if I build a weapon with a Top head of a Double Edged (0c/1p), Severe Taper blade (+1 thrust), and a Hammer Side head (1b/0b), does the +1 thrust also apply to the Hammer? I believe the rules say it does, and that seems weird.

[Agamemnon]

On page 100, you can add the trait "Grappling", but there is no such thing. It's in the description of Hand- and Close-reach weapons that they can be used in grappling. There's no Grappling trait.

On page 102, Queue Spike doesn't specify if its attack type is swing or thrust. It should specify; perhaps say "-/0p" or "0p thrust" instead of "0p"; it may seem obvious to us, but someone who doesn't know what a queue is would be confused.

Do Blade top heads for Hafted Weapons apply their damage modifiers to additional weapon heads? For instance, if I build a weapon with a Top head of a Double Edged (0c/1p), Severe Taper blade (+1 thrust), and a Hammer Side head (1b/0b), does the +1 thrust also apply to the Hammer? I believe the rules say it does, and that seems weird.

Good catch, good idea, and that's a weird area. It's an exception that only exists because of that one instance of cross-over, but it is not rules as intended. Copy has been updated on my end to clarify:

"If used to make a blade head for a polearm, any modifiers from the blade head’s profile apply to the blade head alone, but any cost increases transfer over to the polearm’s total. Modifiers from the polearm will affect the blade head as normal."

And under polearm, the blade head asterisk now reads:
"**Construct as a Short-Length blade with no hilt options. Increases to cost apply to the polearm made, but any blade codex DR modifications apply to the blade head alone."

[myanbar]

The Whiskers feature for bows on page 108 doesn't give any mechanical benefit; the Poaching Bow has the Silent trait, but there is no such trait listed on page 107.

[higgins]

Easy! If you have three players, don't put 4 Coin in there.

Ooh! Nice to see you onboard in a long while! I guess, we should change your rank from Master-at-arms to Phoenix-at-arms?

[thirtythr33]

ALL REFERING TO V0.1.4 PRE UPDATE

WEALTH

I like how assets represent immediate personal wealth and 11+ is factional. It gets around greater nobles having enough money to buy mercenary companies and skewing the tables.

Most of the prices for items look right enough to me. The only ones that jumped out at me as really questionable:
on p69, the trade workshop (which might even include a donkey to power a mill or bellows) is surely r5 or r6. A donkey alone is r4.
on p79 you have spyglasses way overpriced at r7 (this is a dnd-ism). In the renaissance glass and lenses were actually really cheap. Most tradesmen had a pair of eyeglasses. Source. Galileo's cutting edge technology telescope might be a r7, as it would have required custom fabrication. I suspect the compass (r7) and sextant (r6) were also much cheaper as well but I don't have a source at hand.

I like the if over/under your assets clause for testing wealth. It works much better than the burning wheel method. If you use coin to reduce the req but still fail to purchase entirely, do you get your coin back or is it wasted in the search?

Just for my preference, I don't like the word "stuff" being used for things like headings and such. It's just too colloquial for me.

I feel like alcoholic bear is a reference to something I don't get.

Pressing

If I'm trying to get coin from an asset, what stops me from just rolling repeatedly until the req goes higher than my asset? Why wouldn't I just do this at the start of every maint cycle, so I get the max out of my assets? It seems like all sales are final must not be applicable here, because it explicitly says you can do multiple rolls.

How do I handle SELLING items or loot? Particularly assets or big ticket items.
A req to purchase doesn't tell me, unless we assume 1 coin = 1 req but that isn't stated anywhere (only that req can be reduced by coin when purchasing).

There might be an opportunity for some pruning in here somewhere, but I don't know where yet. All these little subsystems might be more work than actually just tracking copper. I get that you want asset appreciation/returns/rental to be separate from working income (to get the lesser noble largess vs not working tension) but having 2 separate downtime revenue streams seems unnecessary. Pressing an asset for coin is rather similar to just purchasing something with an asset isn't it? I probably would just remove the pressing coins from assets and put in a liquidation value for each asset level.

Whatever the liquidation rate is, it should be worse than the purchase rate.



ARMOR

Armor is in a weird place price-wise.
Nobles get their full suit of munitions plate if they take trappings, or could afford the r10 for proofed easily if they cashed out. No problems.

High freeman trappings gives no armor at all. With Asset 3 and 2 coin, the best you can really get is a byrnie (pay 2 coin to lower to r2).
Cashing out though, you get 25 coin, which is again enough to get a horse and proofed plate easily (total 16, with 9 left for weapons, clothes, tools).

Low freeman with trappings, can only really get a short gambeson.
Cashing out, his 15 coins is again enough to get either proofed plate or munitions and a horse.

I feel like one of:
* Freeman Cash out gives too much money
* Freeman Trappings needs to give more starting cash
* Freeman Trappings needs to start with a small amount of starting armor (say a breastplate and open helm for high, and a gambeson for low)
* Assets need a way to liquidate for purchasing (probably just slows game down unnecessarily and opens gaming up starting with trappings and selling everything)

Armor durability *dry heave* Optional rule please. Armor repair should be included in maintenance, unless you are really breaking it down and doing things like horse upkeep separately.

I love jack chains. nice for preventing you from getting your arm cut off.

I like AV5 proofed plate.

Plate now doesn't protect groin? And not against THRUSTS specifically. You can buy a steel codpiece, that is still vulnerable to thrust...?
Only ways over AV2 to cover groin are:
hauberk
haubergeon
maille skirt

Why are you saying "Back of thigh and knee" instead of hamstring as the unprotected location? Hamstring is on the character sheets, so these should be unified in naming.

Only ways over AV2 to cover back of thigh and knee are:
hauberk
chausses
demi-chausses

Why does maille skirt protect groin from thrust, but lamellar or segmented plate skirts don't? Doesn't make sense.

It does make me chuckle that "I kick him in the balls" is almost always going to be a viable strategy. (front kick counts as unarmored thrust, right?)

WEAPONS

Basket hilt being upgraded to favoring whole arm is pretty big. Also, this should say "small shield" not buckler.

plate piercing p99 needs to say it also ignores maille

Bastard hilt makes a medium or long sword able to be used in 2 hands. When held in 2 hands, does it use Swords or Longsword proficiency? Technically, it looks like it still uses Swords.

Also, I had a chuckle at making a Curved Longsword (A flamberge) and it getting the quickdraw property. A flamberge would have to be the least quick-drawable weapon on earth.

I like the drawcut change (kinda, if it doesn't have to change. see below).

Shouldn't Severe Taper and Tuck be mutually exclusive? Same with Heavy blade and curved. I'm thinking that Taper and Features should all be under a single Choose 1 heading. It looks like it is that way in your example swords, too. But then Curved is always worse than Heavy Blade except for the quickdraw. Maybe it should reduce AC of drawcut? But that's an emphasis...

Other than that, I'm quite impressed with how each option is optimal in different circumstances.

Shields/Other:
Steel feature: Does this stack with armor I am wearing?
Why does Cestus do more damage than a steel gauntlet or brass knuckles?


Ranged

Projectiles doing big blunt wounds still irks me. I think they need some kind of system where they gain plate piercing on high MOS or they do Max2 blunt damage or something.

Why would I ever take Belt Hook over Goat's Foot? Is Belt Hook supposed to do BTV+2 or +3? It looks like it, or crossbows look really bad compared to bows and guns.

Items I want included that are missing:
Bayonet! Actually first used late 16th C.
How to use a cloak or such in offhand like shield.
maille sleeves (armpit + shoulder to wrist) for 0.5 bulk (This is so you can mix maille with a steel breastpate without having to stack an entire hauberk to cover your forearms. Source.)


Nitpicks/typos

status has a -2 or -3 faction cost reduction discrepancy comparing text to table.
relationship has antagonistic modifier as -2, compared to -1 proposed (not sure if intentional or not, just pointing it out).

p69 last entry in wealth table req5 ends in comma
p70 2nd last sentence top of page. "if the next they" missing word
p71 2nd sentence last paragraph "needs said" should be "needs to be said" or "needs saying"
does p85 really need the two "despite the way it is often portrayed" and "armor is nowhere near as cumbersome as it is sometimes depicted" jabs on the same page? It came off as rather pretentious to me. It's not wrong or anything, I just think the snark density was a little high. You're either preaching to the choir or being dismissive about something the reader doesn't understand.
p94 last paragraph, uses R15 instead of r15
plate piercing p99 needs to say it also ignores maille
p100 throwing should be "hand-close" not "close-hand"
p100 VERY inconsistent ways of writing hand-short-length or hand to short length etc used in hilt upgrades section
p100 For swords, possibly rename Tuck to "Triangular cross section" or "Maille Piercing". A tuck is a specific weapon, not a weapon characteristic. Also "Blade Heavy" should be "Heavy Blade", no? Rename "Length" subheadings to "Reach"?
p102 lugs/hooks/wings missing "requires" blade or spear head.
p103 peasant flail is "Chain" should be "Flexible"
p103 both flails should have thrust "-" instead of X
p104 Guiged typo shoulder'strap
p107 penetrating trait is missing property after "plate piercing" or drop "the" before it
p107 ambush: Reword to something like "the speed the weapon ambushes at". As it is now, it kind of implies a weapon with ambush cannot ambush.
ALL base cost examples in italics at start of each codex start with "R2" instead of "r2"
p107 Draw says "Brawn Brawn"
p110 Wheellock pistol should be r3, not r4 I think? And Wall gun should be r6 not r7? And belly pistol r3 not r4? Some other weirdness going on here.

[nemedeus]

Having played around with the codices a little, i have come to the conclusions that

1. blade weapons cost too much
2. armour costs too little
3. with 1 and 2 combined, (Low) Freeman still gets too little cashout. Denna can't even afford a dagger the way i have it set up at the moment.

Or at least, all in all my character got more fucked with 1.4 than she was earlier. Although that said, it's good she can afford munitions at all, i half expect she wouldn't.

[Agamemnon]

Having played around with the codices a little, i have come to the conclusions that

1. blade weapons cost too much
2. armour costs too little
3. with 1 and 2 combined, (Low) Freeman still gets too little cashout. Denna can't even afford a dagger the way i have it set up at the moment.

Or at least, all in all my character got more fucked with 1.4 than she was earlier. Although that said, it's good she can afford munitions at all, i half expect she wouldn't.

What did you spend your points on, and what did you spend your cash on?

[nemedeus]

Having played around with the codices a little, i have come to the conclusions that

1. blade weapons cost too much
2. armour costs too little
3. with 1 and 2 combined, (Low) Freeman still gets too little cashout. Denna can't even afford a dagger the way i have it set up at the moment.

Or at least, all in all my character got more fucked with 1.4 than she was earlier. Although that said, it's good she can afford munitions at all, i half expect she wouldn't.

What did you spend your points on, and what did you spend your cash on?

Traits (T3) 6pt
1dBG Warchild of the Northern Marshes -
1dT Bloodthirsty -
Reputation: The Silverwolf, the Infamous Hatchetwoman of the Hounds (6pts)
+8pts: d3 Reputation
-2pts: Enemy of significantly higher Status

Social Class (T2) Cash out: 15 coin
Weapons:
Longsword (2c/2p, Long, 1.5h) r4
Armour:
Munitions Full Suit r6
Munitions Closed Helm (Assuming Free Wolf-Head Styling) r5

I don't even want to complain, really. It's what i'm paying for, i figure; and regarding traits, i guess i care more about the nation-wide infamy than the Hound status.

[Agamemnon]

Having played around with the codices a little, i have come to the conclusions that

1. blade weapons cost too much
2. armour costs too little
3. with 1 and 2 combined, (Low) Freeman still gets too little cashout. Denna can't even afford a dagger the way i have it set up at the moment.

Or at least, all in all my character got more fucked with 1.4 than she was earlier. Although that said, it's good she can afford munitions at all, i half expect she wouldn't.

What did you spend your points on, and what did you spend your cash on?

Traits (T3) 6pt
1dBG Warchild of the Northern Marshes -
1dT Bloodthirsty -
Reputation: The Silverwolf, the Infamous Hatchetwoman of the Hounds (6pts)
+8pts: d3 Reputation
-2pts: Enemy of significantly higher Status

Social Class (T2) Cash out: 15 coin
Weapons:
Longsword (2c/2p, Long, 1.5h) r4
Armour:
Munitions Full Suit r6
Munitions Closed Helm (Assuming Free Wolf-Head Styling) r5

I don't even want to complain, really. It's what i'm paying for, i figure; and regarding traits, i guess i care more about the nation-wide infamy than the Hound status.

I'm not sure how much cheaper bladed weapons can be. A regular dagger or pocket knife is r1. A regular sword can be had for r2. A hand-and-a-half sword can be r2-3. A greatsword can be had for r4.

You bought the second lowest economic class, cashed out, and you're covered in head to toe plate with a longsword. If anything, this seems to be an argument for Low Freeman having too much starting cash, as not every character really should have access to full plate kit. Certainly the majority of professional soldiers weren't walking around in full plate during the period.