Should Boon/Bane be moved to the Companion?

[-Daniel-]

So Loconius, in your view:

-- Difficulty set by GM for task.
-- Difficulty changed when unique circumstances warrant (Weather shifts?)
-- DMs should come from rule based equipment, attributes, or wounds only (+1 from my DEX of 9)
-- Boon/Bane would be assigned when the character does something (Boon because I aimed?)

So I want to shoot my gun: GM says normal fire would be Average, but because it is dark my difficulty is shifted to difficult, I get a +1 for my high DEX and a +1 for the laser sight I am using and I roll this all as a Boon because I aimed?

Just trying to see if I followed your suggestion.

 

[Loconius]

So Loconius, in your view:

-- Difficulty set by GM for task.
-- Difficulty changed when unique circumstances warrant (Weather shifts?)
-- DMs should come from rule based equipment, attributes, or wounds only (+1 from my DEX of 9)
-- Boon/Bane would be assigned when the character does something (Boon because I aimed?)

So I want to shoot my gun: GM says normal fire would be Average, but because it is dark my difficulty is shifted to difficult, I get a +1 for my high DEX and a +1 for the laser sight I am using and I roll this all as a Boon because I aimed?

Just trying to see if I followed your suggestion.

Yeah that sounds about right.

 

[TrippyHippy]

To be fair, I think Matt and co. have probably already decided how to approach Boon/Bane now in terms of the core rules. There may be some development in the Companion though.

 

[Loconius]

To be fair, I think Matt and co. have probably already decided how to approach Boon/Bane now in terms of the core rules. There may be some development in the Companion though.

Yeah I think your right. For the most part my interpretation seems fairly close to how the rules as written want them to be handled, they just need to eliminate the any DMs that run counter to their desired goal (DMs that are more circumstantial).

Overall I'm pleased with the direction 2nd is going. Can't wait to get it to the table.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Overall I'm pleased with the direction 2nd is going. Can't wait to get it to the table.

Agreed. I'm basically aiming to introduce the Pirates campaign using it next year - having been running the Ancients campaign this whole year (it's nearly done!).

The rules are basically sound, notwithstanding some clarity issues, so really I'm just waiting to see how the art and general presentation pans out now.

 

[Wizard]

Overall I'm pleased with the direction 2nd is going. Can't wait to get it to the table.

Totally agree. The only thing that still bugs me is not allowing more than one Boon/Bane on a check. I don't like game mechanics that restrict for no apparent reason. No biggie, as it is easy enough to houserule, but since this is a playtest I thought I would nag about this little blemish (my opinion of course) in what is a solid set of core rules.

 

[Loconius]

Overall I'm pleased with the direction 2nd is going. Can't wait to get it to the table.

Totally agree. The only thing that still bugs me is not allowing more than one Boon/Bane on a check. I don't like game mechanics that restrict for no apparent reason. No biggie, as it is easy enough to houserule, but since this is a playtest I thought I would nag about this little blemish (my opinion of course) in what is a solid set of core rules.

I personally like the single die for simplicity sake. It makes it easier for me as referee to decide if some choice of the players provides a benifit or not. Otherwise I would have to judge "how much" of a benifit what they do is. Not impossible, but the simpler approach might be better for a core rule that can be expounded on later in the companion.

 

[Wizard]

I personally like the single die for simplicity sake. It makes it easier for me as referee to decide if some choice of the players provides a benifit or not. Otherwise I would have to judge "how much" of a benifit what they do is. Not impossible, but the simpler approach might be better for a core rule that can be expounded on later in the companion.

From p59 of the rulebook this extract explain how to apply Bane:

If a Traveller is hindered in a check, such as with poor tools, a dimly lit environment or other negative circumstances, he receives a Bane.

What I don't like is that, strictly by the rules, you can have multiple negative circumstances and it makes no difference. I play it that if a Traveller has poor tools and the environment is dimly lit, well they have double Bane. They can then either get better tools or a light source to improve their chances by reducing the check to a single Bane. Or get both and have no Bane on the roll.

Also most of the time it's a single Boon/Bane, sometimes a double, and rarely a triple. I like having this flexibility as a referee to give player's choices and obstacles to overcome.

 

[Loconius]

I personally like the single die for simplicity sake. It makes it easier for me as referee to decide if some choice of the players provides a benifit or not. Otherwise I would have to judge "how much" of a benifit what they do is. Not impossible, but the simpler approach might be better for a core rule that can be expounded on later in the companion.

From p59 of the rulebook this extract explain how to apply Bane:

If a Traveller is hindered in a check, such as with poor tools, a dimly lit environment or other negative circumstances, he receives a Bane.

What I don't like is that, strictly by the rules, you can have multiple negative circumstances and it makes no difference. I play it that if a Traveller has poor tools and the environment is dimly lit, well they have double Bane. They can then either get better tools or a light source to improve their chances by reducing the check to a single Bane. Or get both and have no Bane on the roll.

Also most of the time it's a single Boon/Bane, sometimes a double, and rarely a triple. I like having this flexibility as a referee to give player's choices and obstacles to overcome.

That makes sense, a good candidate for the companion. As written, a character in such a situation (multiple banes) would suffer a harsher failure at my table, giving them incentive to reduce as many of the circumstances that provide bane as possible even though it doesn't effect the roll. I would be more forgiving with a failure with multiple boons as well.

 

[FallingPhoenix]

I personally think the issue currently is the presence of DMs that are circumstantial based on the referee's description of the environment. The referee already sets the difficulty of a task, and should set the difficulty higher if circumstances warrant (target has cover, shooter is using auto fire). Circumstantial DMs should be eliminated, instead having DMs from characteristics, equipment or injury only. If the referee thinks something should be tougher because of circumstances (environmentals)she should increase difficulty or lower it if it makes it easier. Finally if an action taken by the player makes something harder or easier, she should use boon or bane.

Circumstantial DMs should be replaced with "Difficulty Steps" and should adjust the difficulty and should largely be transparent to the players except for seeing the end difficulty.

What about something like, if it's a modifier the player has/is (Characteristic, skill, equipment...) it's a DM, but if it's something the Referee applies, it affects the difficulty, and Boon/Bane could be clarified as a catch-all for something the rules forgot to mention?

 

[Loconius]

I personally think the issue currently is the presence of DMs that are circumstantial based on the referee's description of the environment. The referee already sets the difficulty of a task, and should set the difficulty higher if circumstances warrant (target has cover, shooter is using auto fire). Circumstantial DMs should be eliminated, instead having DMs from characteristics, equipment or injury only. If the referee thinks something should be tougher because of circumstances (environmentals)she should increase difficulty or lower it if it makes it easier. Finally if an action taken by the player makes something harder or easier, she should use boon or bane.

Circumstantial DMs should be replaced with "Difficulty Steps" and should adjust the difficulty and should largely be transparent to the players except for seeing the end difficulty.

What about something like, if it's a modifier the player has/is (Characteristic, skill, equipment...) it's a DM, but if it's something the Referee applies, it affects the difficulty, and Boon/Bane could be clarified as a catch-all for something the rules forgot to mention?

Yeah that's my direction for it. The referee should handle the extra die and the difficulty target number, DMs should largely be pre factored into the task like your mentioning.