Questions

If playing the troop game, what is the name of the company?

If playing the troop game, do you have fewer good troops or more crappy ones?
A handful mounted or many more on foot?
Do the characters ride horses? Do all the troopies ride horses?

Do I need to delay the game three additional weeks designing cults the
players need not be joining anyway or can I just design a couple that are
local and let the players be initiates at best?

Make sure to CC the players in the game: shigeta@deepthought.stanford.edu,
karazoe@best.com, jlw@slac.stanford.edu, derry@jugenstil.com,
turney@nas.nasa.gov, ken@adaptivemedia.com, samfnord@concentric.net

"Ronald T Shigeta Jr." <shigeta@leland.Stanford.EDU>

Hi Micheal,
Looking forward to your new campaign already.
Since I've been thinking about this a bit already, I am ready to
give a quick response.

>Questions
>Do the players with to be solo mercenaries (no followers) or principles in
>a mercenary company?

I would personally like to start out as a small band of solo high quality
mercenaries. Like that recent DeNiro/Pachino movie (forget the title )
I don't mind the troop game however.

> Variant of above question is do players want to have the troop game?
I favor acauiring troops as time goes on.

>If playing the troop game, what is the name of the company?
Oakland's Raiders? Cosi Fan Tutti? Fin del lino?
I don't have any bright ideas right now.

>If playing the troop game, do you have fewer good troops or more crappy ones?
>A handful mounted or many more on foot?
>Do the characters ride horses? Do all the troopies ride horses?

I feel more like going the marine route if possible so no horses.
A large number of men might get tiresome...

>Do I need to delay the game three additional weeks designing cults the
>players need not be joining anyway or can I just design a couple that are
>local and let the players be initiates at best?

Lets start the campaign earlier rather than later...just a couple of local
cults for now.

These are my current opinions. I am flexible on these points of course.

I am leaning toward the bursar character if we have a troop game or a
scout/thief if we have no troops.

Ken McKinney <ken@adaptivemedia.com>

>Questions
>Do the players with to be solo mercenaries (no followers) or principles in
>a mercenary company?
> Variant of above question is do players want to have the troop game?

Let's play the troop game! With us as troop leaders/specialists, of course.
>
>If playing the troop game, what is the name of the company?

The Black Company!
>
>If playing the troop game, do you have fewer good troops or more crappy ones?
>A handful mounted or many more on foot?
>Do the characters ride horses? Do all the troopies ride horses?

Fewer good troops! The characters ride horses. I don't know about the troopies
>
>Do I need to delay the game three additional weeks designing cults the
>players need not be joining anyway or can I just design a couple that are
>local and let the players be initiates at best?

How about a compromise where we have less than 20 cults but more than two. A
mercenary game seems like it would be a natural for cultists.

Hey Mike, you really should pick up the book _The Black Company_ by Glenn
Cook.... come
to think of it, maybe I have it and can loan it to you.

"Michael A. Derry" <derry@jugenstil.com>

Ken wrote:

>How about a compromise where we have less than 20 cults but more than two. A
>mercenary game seems like it would be a natural for cultists.

More than a couple cults will only work if the players realize that levels
above initiate are diametrically opposed to the requirements of being a
mercenary in this game. The obligations would be the worst problem and the
time requirement of basically all your time for Lord would make cults not
work.

Having even several people as initiates would not be too much of a problem,
since 10% of time is not so bad for once a year divine magic. Since the
guild can provide spirit magic and 10% of the player's time is well beyond
the cost of the spells, people will not be joining cults for the spirit
magic. It is even possible that some players become senior initiates with
8+ points of divine spells and still never become Lords or Acolytes because
of the obligations and time.

This will definitely be a game where the characters will have very high
skill over time, but limited magic, even later in the game. Sort of a low
magic game, but in reality a high freedom game. The cost of even
maintaining the characters is high and missions will need to be done
constantly.

>Hey Mike, you really should pick up the book _The Black Company_ by Glenn
>Cook.... come
>to think of it, maybe I have it and can loan it to you.

Yes, I would like to read it. From what I know about it, this game will be
similar, but with a much more Machiavellian and Renaissance feel.

Ken McKinney <ken@adaptivemedia.com>

>>How about a compromise where we have less than 20 cults but more than two. A
>>mercenary game seems like it would be a natural for cultists.
>
>More than a couple cults will only work if the players realize that levels
>above initiate are diametrically opposed to the requirements of being a
>mercenary in this game. The obligations would be the worst problem and the
>time requirement of basically all your time for Lord would make cults not
>work.
>

That's a good point... hadn't thought of that, just that "heal wound" is very
important when you are a mercenary.

Hey Mike, what is the current setups with initiates? Do initiates get reusable
rune magic? Here's an idea: divine magic is usable once per year for
initiates.
Initiates can spend double POW to get it reusable once per season... or
whatever,
you get the point. The idea is to make the magic system meet the needs of
the game,
which, for now, it doesn't. I would advocate similar changes to the
shaman/sorcery
paths. If you look at modern RPG's... one common theme is that the magic is
available
to the characters without effectively removing them from the campaign.

>Having even several people as initiates would not be too much of a problem,
>since 10% of time is not so bad for once a year divine magic. Since the
>guild can provide spirit magic and 10% of the player's time is well beyond
>the cost of the spells, people will not be joining cults for the spirit
>magic. It is even possible that some players become senior initiates with
>8+ points of divine spells and still never become Lords or Acolytes because
>of the obligations and time.

Ken McKinney <ken@adaptivemedia.com>

>This will definitely be a game where the characters will have very high
>skill over time, but limited magic, even later in the game. Sort of a low
>magic game, but in reality a high freedom game. The cost of even
>maintaining the characters is high and missions will need to be done
>constantly.
>
>
>>Hey Mike, you really should pick up the book _The Black Company_ by Glenn
>>Cook.... come
>>to think of it, maybe I have it and can loan it to you.
>
>Yes, I would like to read it. From what I know about it, this game will be
>similar, but with a much more Machiavellian and Renaissance feel.

Mike,

What will the pace of the game be like? Will there be downtime between
missions?
Also, what will be the capabilities of the guild re: spirit magic? For
example, will
we be able to learn spells to summon/control spirits, like healing spirits,
through them?
So, if the guild has a shaman or sorcerer who teaches these spells, will it
be possible to
be their apprentice and follow one of those paths?

"Michael A. Derry" <derry@jugenstil.com>

>What will the pace of the game be like? Will there be downtime between
>missions?

Downtime is solely up to the players with little referee intervention. At
the beginning of the campaign, I expect the players to continually go on
missions to not only stay afloat, but also to get money to reinvest in the
company. The cost of all the guys sitting around is very expensive and
mercenary payments are usually not huge percentages above what it takes to
live.

>Also, what will be the capabilities of the guild re: spirit magic? For
>example, will
>we be able to learn spells to summon/control spirits, like healing spirits,
>through them?

The guild will be able to teach any spirit spell, with only limited
restrictions. The guild also teaches sorcery, but this is much more limited
and a small selection of spells and skills are available.

>So, if the guild has a shaman or sorcerer who teaches these spells, will it
>be possible to
>be their apprentice and follow one of those paths?

Possibly.

But remember that being a shaman apprentice requires 25% of your time and
provides no real benefit. Being a shaman could work in the game, but the
number of skills and time required would limit the person's ability to be a
troop leader. I could see someone taking the shaman path if they do not
want to lead troops and want to be the magical guy for the company. The
party could also just hire the right kind of magic guy when needed.

Being a sorcerer would be worse. The religious aspect would be against
being a killer. The time and number of skills required would eliminate any
hope in being a troop leader.The power of the person would suck for a while
too, compared to the other players.

I really do expect that only one or two people in the campaign will be
higher than initiate/apprentice level. Initiate level already provides
divine magic usable once a year (a long time between castings with constant
missions), but at a very high price 10% of time. The players will probably
be more inclined to get political, military, or other positions before
becoming cultists or members of the faithful (sorcerers.)

The game will sort of be low magic, but the players will know many spells,
have many personal enchantments, capture magic items, purchase items and
other magic occassionally. Just the difference between choice of spirit
spells will be significant between the players and the choices on how they
spend their POW will also be significant.

Most of the character differentiation will be in the roles the character
takes and the background of the character.

Ken McKinney <ken@adaptivemedia.com>

>Being a sorcerer would be worse. The religious aspect would be against
>being a killer. The time and number of skills required would eliminate any
>hope in being a troop leader.The power of the person would suck for a while
>too, compared to the other players.

Yes, I had forgotten about the religious aspect of sorcery... it's hard to
not be a killer when you work in a mercenary group!
>

>The game will sort of be low magic, but the players will know many spells,
>have many personal enchantments, capture magic items, purchase items and
>other magic occassionally. Just the difference between choice of spirit
>spells will be significant between the players and the choices on how they
>spend their POW will also be significant.

This sounds cool... it'll be nice to actually play missions again where we get
to divvy up treasure... that was one of the funnest things about old runequest.
>
>Most of the character differentiation will be in the roles the character
>takes and the background of the character.
>
You've only given 4 backgrounds... is it your intention that we each take
one of these...
and will you make more?

Ken

Oh, it seems like you need to define whether the scope of the game will
mostly be
naval, or mostly inland, since it really determines what kinds of characters
we pick.
I.e. it sucks to have a lot of horse skills/abilities if you're going around
on a boat
all the time.

"Michael A. Derry" <derry@jugenstil.com>
>>Being a sorcerer would be worse. The religious aspect would be against
>>being a killer. The time and number of skills required would eliminate any
>>hope in being a troop leader.The power of the person would suck for a while
>>too, compared to the other players.
>
>Yes, I had forgotten about the religious aspect of sorcery... it's hard to
>not be a killer when you work in a mercenary group!
>>
>
>>The game will sort of be low magic, but the players will know many spells,
>>have many personal enchantments, capture magic items, purchase items and
>>other magic occassionally. Just the difference between choice of spirit
>>spells will be significant between the players and the choices on how they
>>spend their POW will also be significant.
>
>This sounds cool... it'll be nice to actually play missions again where we get
>to divvy up treasure... that was one of the funnest things about old
>runequest.

I expect the discussion this time to be a lot like it was in the Magica
campaign, where the players must decide how much to spend on the troops and
how much to divide as shares for principle members.

>>Most of the character differentiation will be in the roles the character
>>takes and the background of the character.
>>
>You've only given 4 backgrounds... is it your intention that we each take
>one of these...
>and will you make more?

Yes, I will provide more backgrounds. I already have four-five more that I
have not put on the page yet. I am almost finished with the guild rules too.

Look for the draft guild rules up on the web pages soon.

>Oh, it seems like you need to define whether the scope of the game will
>mostly be
>naval, or mostly inland, since it really determines what kinds of characters
>we pick.
>I.e. it sucks to have a lot of horse skills/abilities if you're going around
>on a boat
>all the time.

This is really up to the players but Melbin is on a river that leads up to
a big lake. Along the river and around much of the lake are fields and
plains. To the west of Melbin is the vast and dense Tada Forest and to the
east is the Great Swamp and mountains. Southeast along the coast are the
goblin hordes, threatening the stability and power of the city of Melbin.

I expect the party to be in thick forest, craggy hills and mountains, and
in marsh and swamp. These adventures would probably be without horses. But
the horse game could be accomodated. The main problem with the horse game
is that the economics are more challenging that the foot game.

I do not want to repeat the boat game, even with the boat being owned by
the Company. I expect the number of troops combined with the number of
inland adventures to be against boat ownership by the Company, mainly
because of cost issues and because patrons will usually arrange passage if
necessary.