|
Leather neck
|
1# |
Rank:none
Status:
Score:0
Posts:329
From:
Registered:
08/03/2004
Time spent:
0 hours
|
RE:La Verdadera Destreza
(Date Posted:04/27/2008 11:22:16)
This is only to fit into the model of other schools.
Replace one school knack with Exploit Weakness.
Chose a weapon type. Fencing or HW.
Where does Tacto come from? Why claim it as an advance knack? It is only mentioned at the end of the write up.
I would rather have Scholar in the school skill than Athlete. The Scholar skill would at least tie to the mastery abilities.
These are just my thoughts, looking over you school quickly.
(Message edited by Leather neck on 05/01/2008 16:18:53)
--------------------------------------------------------------
"I"ll tell you a secret: When your number comes up, you"re going to go. Well, every morning I get up, I change my number." - Edward Chun, 83 year old Pearl Harbor Survivor
|
|
RPGArchitect
|
2# |
Status:
From:
Registered:
04/27/2008
Time spent:
0 hours
|
RE:La Verdadera Destreza
(Date Posted:04/29/2008 17:40:50)
This is only to fit into the model of other schools.
Replace one school knack with Exploit Weakness. |
LVD was more like 7th Sea strategy schools than the fencing schools. It was applied martial science, not a martial art style. That's why it had no set techniques that could be exploited. Chose a weapon type.
Fencing or HW. |
While the rapier was the preferred weapon of most practitioners, LVD was applied to different weapons. Moreover, it was applied to French, German, and Italian methods. Where does Tacto come from?
Why claim it as an advance knack?
It is only mentioned at the end of the write up. |
Tacto comes from Caranza's texts. It basically means that you read your opponent using your eyes and blade contact. I rated it as an Advanced Knack because it's a gestalt skill requiring a foundation in the basics (regular Knacks) rather than actually being something basic. I would rather have Scholar in the school skill than Athlete. The Scholar skill would at least tie to the
mastery abilities. |
LVD is very much built upon footwork, bladework, and scholarly achievment. However, masters did not learn mathematics and physics in LVD. They learned to apply mathematics and physics in LVD. By contrast, they did learn the principles of footwork in LVD. Thus, it is much more correct for the School Skills to include Athlete as a School Skill. It does make the school much more costly to use effectively, but I think that makes it more faithful to the genuine article. A LVD swordsman must truly be a Renaissance man and not just another fencer or swashbuckler. These are just my thoughts, looking over you school
quickly. |
Much appreciated.
|
|
danar
|
3# |
Rank:none
Status:
Score:0
Posts:799
From:
Registered:
09/23/2002
Time spent:
0 hours
|
RE:La Verdadera Destreza
(Date Posted:04/30/2008 17:17:53)
i've got to say. I don't love it.
While I understand that you don't think that Verdadera Destreza fits as a swordsman school, that is precisely what you're creating. As such, you'll need to squeeze/nip/tuck it until it fits the proper format or you're going to hear complaints about it. For example, savate is far more than a couple of kicking tricks and that's about all you can really create with the swordsman school format. but you can certainly create something with the proper flavor. without that, you run into the problem of play balance.
Weapon : Any is too broad. for play balance issues, you need to pick one. If you want to be exceedingly broad, allow the swordsman to pick one when he takes the school, but he should be limited to just one flavor. Personally, i think this should be specified as fencing weapon.
Basic Curriculum : again, i think you should stick with just fencing weapon. I believe you should use scholar rather than athlete. yes, footwork is a requirement, but that's true of any swordsman school. scholar is the one that you're actually using. you may not teach mathematics, but if you're using mathematics, it is what should be part of the curriculum.
Knacks : Beat, Lunge, Riposte, Sidestep, Tacto.
First, Tacto needs some more explanation. is it an advanced knack of this school? of fencing? of scholar? If it is not a part of the school, then others can use it. if it is a part of the school, then for balance reasons, you should have fewer swordsman knacks.
Second, exploit weakness should be added. the only reason that it is not part of the martial strategy schools is because the selection of opposing maneauvers acts as exploit weakness. for something with an individual style, facing someone else who knows it should remain a disadvantage. for example, i'd suggest that if you knew someone was using this school, you could purposefully display a feigned weakness and when your opponent tried to take advantage of it, you could smite them.
Third, From the description you've got, i think that feint is probably better than beat. I'd suggest taking Feint, Lunge and Tacto.
Tacto : I think its too powerful. First, it MUST have a limit. If i purchase it up to rank 3 as an apprentice, I take a +7 to my tn for a free raise against that opponent. So technically, I could spar with my opponent for a few hours. let's say I succeed 6 times. so, now I'm +6 raises for the rest of the STORY!? That's incredibly powerful. now look at the same case of the master. in one round, I use the ability which only requires a +5 to my tn. I now get 3 free raises and I still got to do my normal damage. Then he counter attacks. I decide to get ruthless and use riposte (assuming you kept it) and tacto to parry him, and then counterattack with tacto again. assuming I succeed (with the help of those 3 free raises for both parry and attack), I'm not +9 free raises for the rest of the story! eep! IF you keep it, I think it probably needs to be changed to "Once per story, you can voluntarily raise the TN of any fencing (attack) roll or (fencing) parry by 5x your opponent's Wits, subtracting your rank in tacto x2 from the TN...This bonus lasts for the duration of the combat." so for an apprentice fighting wits 2, you're probably talking +4 (that is +5*2 -3*2) to the tn for an extra free raise for the rest of the combat. as a master fighting wits 4, you're looking at +10 to the tn for an extra three free raises. Personally, I think this probably works better as the master level ability using the feint/beat knack (to get some added use out of that) instead of tacto.
Apprentice, Journeyman : I'm not a huge fan of any ability that provides a tiny bonus. it just doesn't feel like it is enough to make the swordsman care. "I'm not tn 15 to hit, I'm tn 17." I know other schools provide such incremental bonsus, I just don't think they're a good idea.
Also, while I understand what +1 to passive defense means, I'm not sure on the others. Is +1 initiative per rank in mathematics mean +1k0 initiative dice? or does it mean +1 to the initiative total. I would hope it is the second. Likewise, does +1 to active defense and attack rolls mean +1k0 or +1? (i believe this is just +1, but an example here would clear up the confusion.) Of course, at the high end this means +10 to active defense and +10 to attacks which is extremely potent. it required a large investment, but is this guy really that much better than an Aldana swordsman? I'd limit it to one knack. (I'd also suggest that you not use calculus which is supposed to be incredibly rare.)
master : its been done before, so I can't really complain. given the strong power of the journeyman class, I think this certainly doesn't need any additional bonuses. (I think using the tacto ability as a master ability works better)
--------------------------------------------------------------
-dana
"All of our best and oldest legends recognize that time passes and that people grow old and die."
|
|
RPGArchitect
|
4# |
Status:
From:
Registered:
04/27/2008
Time spent:
0 hours
|
RE:La Verdadera Destreza
(Date Posted:05/02/2008 00:07:05)
i've got to say. I don't love it.
While I understand that you don't think that Verdadera Destreza fits as a swordsman school, that is precisely what you're creating. As such, you'll need to squeeze/nip/tuck it until it fits the proper format or you're going to hear complaints about it. For example, savate is far more than a couple of kicking tricks and that's about all you can really create with the swordsman school format. but you can certainly create something with the proper flavor. without that, you run into the problem of play balance. |
The problem is this: what is a common weakness in a system that doesn't use fixed techniques? Just about the only thing in common is that a practitioner has to keep his cool in order to use it. | Weapon : Any is too broad. for play balance issues, you need to pick one. If you want to be exceedingly broad, allow the swordsman to pick one when he takes the school, but he should be limited to just one flavor. Personally, i think this should be specified as fencing weapon. |
Historically, Destreza ran the full gamut of weapon combinations. Players generally don't have enough points to invest in many weapons and they can't carry every weapon, so I don't believe that it's necessary to artificially restrict choices. For effective play, they'll limit themselves. | Basic Curriculum : again, i think you should stick with just fencing weapon. I believe you should use scholar rather than athlete. yes, footwork is a requirement, but that's true of any swordsman school. scholar is the one that you're actually using. you may not teach mathematics, but if you're using mathematics, it is what should be part of the curriculum. |
The problem with that is you would be able to create a LVD master without good footwork and that completely defies the nature of the system which requires very good footwork to execute it. It's like a dance. Sure, anyone can memorize dance steps, but not everyone can perform them. Knacks : Beat, Lunge, Riposte, Sidestep, Tacto.
First, Tacto needs some more explanation. is it an advanced knack of this school? of fencing? of scholar? If it is not a part of the school, then others can use it. if it is a part of the school, then for balance reasons, you should have fewer swordsman knacks. |
It's a limited, but not exclusive Knack. Any swordsman could use tacto, but it's not something that I've read in any treatise for any style other than LVD. It was not meant to be a required Knack for LVD, but as something optional. | Second, exploit weakness should be added. the only reason that it is not part of the martial strategy schools is because the selection of opposing maneauvers acts as exploit weakness. for something with an individual style, facing someone else who knows it should remain a disadvantage. for example, i'd suggest that if you knew someone was using this school, you could purposefully display a feigned weakness and when your opponent tried to take advantage of it, you could smite them. |
If I was to make an Exploit Weakness, it would have to relate to getting the LVD practitioner to lose his cool. Perhaps a Contested Roll instead? | Third, From the description you've got, i think that feint is probably better than beat. I'd suggest taking Feint, Lunge and Tacto. |
I considered it, but the old treatises' discussion of proper angulation and leverage when "beating" stuck firmly in my mind. Thinking about it, I might replace Lunge with Feint, stressing LVD's more intellectual approach. Anyone can Lunge, but a LVD practitioner fights more thoughtfully. | Tacto : I think its too powerful. First, it MUST have a limit. [...] |
Tacto, by its nature, will not stack on itself. How good of a feel you get for your opponent is dependent upon your mastery level, not additional rolls. I should have made it clearer. | Apprentice, Journeyman : I'm not a huge fan of any ability that provides a tiny bonus. it just doesn't feel like it is enough to make the swordsman care. "I'm not tn 15 to hit, I'm tn 17." I know other schools provide such incremental bonsus, I just don't think they're a good idea. |
I personally thought it was the best way to include the wide breadth of contributing Civil Knacks so the swordsman could appreciate the investment. Otherwise, what would be the point of putting so many points in non-School Knacks as opposed to going for a straight swordsman School? What about tacto at Apprentice and moving the other bonuses upwards? Would that nerf LVD too much? | Also, while I understand what +1 to passive defense means, I'm not sure on the others. Is +1 initiative per rank in mathematics mean +1k0 initiative dice? or does it mean +1 to the initiative total. I would hope it is the second. Likewise, does +1 to active defense and attack rolls mean +1k0 or +1? (i believe this is just +1, but an example here would clear up the confusion.) Of course, at the high end this means +10 to active defense and +10 to attacks which is extremely potent. it required a large investment, but is this guy really that much better than an Aldana swordsman? I'd limit it to one knack. (I'd also suggest that you not use calculus which is supposed to be incredibly rare.) |
Yes, it's just +1. An Aldana swordsman doesn't need to put any points into non-School Skills and will still get 3k0(!) at Master level, whereas a Master LVD swordsman that only invests in just one point in each of those Civil Knacks won't benefit but for two points. As mentioned before, I did this intentionally, since if some just wants the advantages, there are easier and cheaper ways to get them than as a Renaissance man or woman. As for Calculus, if a practitioner is willing to put the effort in finding a teacher and putting points into it, I see no reason why they can't benefit from it. It is also an Advanced Knack, so it's a bigger investment. | master : its been done before, so I can't really complain. given the strong power of the journeyman class, I think this certainly doesn't need any additional bonuses. (I think using the tacto ability as a master ability works better) |
Making tacto a Master ability is a possibility, but I'd have to tweak it. Perhaps a Master "Knack" instead of ability?
|
|
danar
|
5# |
Rank:none
Status:
Score:0
Posts:799
From:
Registered:
09/23/2002
Time spent:
0 hours
|
RE:La Verdadera Destreza
(Date Posted:05/02/2008 09:57:14)
You mentioned that it lacks a common weakness, but I think one is clear. The swordsman is trained to seek the optimal solution for each problem (opponent). It reads that the way to do this is through experimentation. The swordsman tests his opponents, seeking reactions. This probing style IS the weakness. A fast opponent who goes for a blitz attack while the swordsman is still probing OR an opponent who drastically changes his style, such as switching to a different swordsman school during a duel, can both surprise and defeat the swordsman. This would be something that exploit weakness would use. And Exploit Weakness has a defined use, you shouldn't change the rule here to allow a contested roll. It should fit the pattern. more importantly, i think it MUST have it simply to fit the pattern.
Here's another example, how would you feel about two hypothetical skills. Bureaucrat grants etiquette, fashion and oratory as basic knacks (with cold read as an advanced knack). Seductress grants etiquette, fashion, oratory and cold read as basic knacks. Which would you take? Do you think it fair? Even if you wanted to argue that historically speaking, these are correct, I think this isn't fair because one is so superior to the other. Likewise, if you're creating a swordsman school without Exploit Weakness when every other one does, that isn't fair. If Goodfellow has to waste a knack on it, so should your school. Otherwise, you're comparing apples to oranges.
Weapon: I understand that the school historically used other weapons. But for simple play balance, it shouldn't. no other swordsman school allows multiple weapon sets. If a school was soley focused on allowing multiple schools, that might be interesting, but that's not the focus of this school. Historical accuracy must sometimes take a backseat to play balance. (for example, if i intentionally took all the heroes weapons away and stranded them on an isolated island, they might be reduced to using staves and spears. the other heroes (including swordmen) are all at a strong disadvantage, but THIS swordsman doesn't care because he's fully trained in using ANY weapon with this school). This is really the same issue as above. If you want to do this as a swordsman school, then you must follow the general outline or present good mechanical reasons for deviating. the fact that they get bonuses from other knacks (which you had to buy) isn't sufficient.
Curriculum: you almost can't make ANY good swordsman with a good footwork. (i actually have one, but i regretted the decision more than once.) lots of schools default to athlete as a skill because it grants footwork which is useful for any swordsman and in some cases it makes sense. but for one with a strong focus on scholastics, it really doesn't. that said, i don't think it matters. it gives you a free skill, but you'll then need to buy scholar, so there's no real cost savings.
Knacks: I don't think a Beat in 7th Sea is actually a normal beat in fencing. Feint is closer to a fencing beat, aka a minor tap designed to draw the opponent's blade out of line. A 7th Sea Beat is closer to a fencing press where the blade is physically move aside.
Tacto: Tacto needs definition. Is it a fencing knack? Only applicable to swordsmen? Only applicable to members of the swordsmen guild? It still needs defined limits (mastery level of raises and only for this combat).
Personally, I think it would work best as a master level ability using the feint knack for the roll. It is probably too powerful for apprentice level.
--------------------------------------------------------------
-dana
"All of our best and oldest legends recognize that time passes and that people grow old and die."
|
| |
