Jump to content



Photo

When have you resolved social challenges in encounter mode?


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#21 icevvind

icevvind

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 06:20 AM

And, what if we do it like:

Rolling skills with difficulty 0 purple and misfortune equal to the "enemy" friendship scale seen above (as an armor) and using willpower to "absorb" successes (as soak). We can keep track of successes that pass through WP with faced down condition cards and (maybe) turn up some cards if boons are generated, applying its effect if it makes sense with the scene.

The number of successes neede to achieve the task can be three. As Emirikol sais.

Its just an aproach. If uou dont like, just do as Emirikol proposes, it sounds pretty good to me XD



#22 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,439 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 11:25 AM

phild said:

However, this also got me thinking about why we need to set up social encounters. Combat encounters don't require any set up - they just happen, and we all know how to run them. To achieve the same level of "instantaneous" social encounter, you need to have the same range of actions available that players can just dive straight into. I haven't done anything in detail yet, but my thinking was just as you have Melee action for Weapon Skill, Ranged action for Ballistic Skill, Assess the Situation for Discipline etc. you should have actions the likes of Charm, Guile and Leadership. These would be universal actions and would provide the baseline for running any social encounter.

In our games we have found this to be the bottle neck for running /setting up social encounters. Indeed, we are all more used to run combats, but also I believe that the social action cards as they are, and the lack of a more defined mechanics for social encounters are also a deep problem. I like the idea of social encounters to give the chance to non combat oriented PC to shine, but I have the feeling that FFG, in WFRPG 3rd ed, has just acomplished halve the job. Or may be is just me and a lack of experience running social encounters.

There is no doubt that to be a competent warrior you have to buy a certain (and some times determined) number of action cards. We will all agree, that no one will get too far with only the basic defences, the melee strike and the perform a stunt basic action cards (you will be able to participate, but you won't shine). On the contrary, it seems to me this is not true for social encounters. First, the rules for social encounters are too vage as compared to those of combat; within the rules for social encounters, seems that everything can be solved with a few opossed skill checks and a progress tracker or shame…  But also very important is that the existing PC social action cards do not grant a determining adventage as compared to a simple skill check /Perform a Stunt basic action card (where I assume by succeeding the check you obtain an "Influnce"  result), but neither the NPCs have social action cards of relevant impact on the PCs. So which would be the point on spending exp on buying social action cards?

I am not contributing with ideas, just with some thoughts of what in my oppinion does not work smooth in social encounters. I hope it can help anyway.


The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#23 HedgeWizard

HedgeWizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 532 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 03:59 PM

Many of the social actions have a successful result of "influence the target." If you use that as a base, say requiring x Influences in a scene, that's a good start. Then, you limit the ability for non-social PCs (or standard social actions) to influence the target. So anyone can roll a charm, or deception test, but it requires more than a mere success to "influence" - perhaps a critical or a multiple (3+) successes.

I typically have the PCs select a leader in the case of social engagements - they are the primary agent in the conversation. Other PCs can roll checks to support the agent - successes adding fortune dice to the agent's roll (or misfortune as the case may be).  However, if PCs gang up on a target - say 4 on 1, that might put the target on the defensive making all their checks at +1 misfortune. Although I created some basic modifiers, I don't adhere to them strictly, but rather try to be fluid with the encounter.

I often structure medium engagements as follows:

  1. a tracker is set whose length is equal to the NPC's WP + Noble Rank.
  2. The PCs token advances for each successful influence - the NPCs token advances for each successful influence they roll
  3. Once either token reaches the end, we've hit the final argument.  Add 1 fortune die for each PC step on the track; add 1 misfortune for each NPC step on the track. The Agent rolls based on whatever attributes/skills most meet their goal (often charm).

Sometimes it does make sense for the entire party to gang up or press on a target (same as they would in combat) - that's fine, they all get actions, but failed rolls typically aid the target by giving them fortune dice on their own roll (perhaps the PC exposed a rhetorical opening, or made a stupid comment that can be exploited).

For Major social encounters, it's often an entire session as the PCs build a single die pool, say to convince the local noble to offer aid. I understand this is similar to the methods outlined in the new epic book.



#24 RARodger

RARodger

    Member

  • Members
  • 306 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 04:14 PM

HedgeWizard said:

Many of the social actions have a successful result of "influence the target." If you use that as a base, say requiring x Influences in a scene, that's a good start. Then, you limit the ability for non-social PCs (or standard social actions) to influence the target. So anyone can roll a charm, or deception test, but it requires more than a mere success to "influence" - perhaps a critical or a multiple (3+) successes.

Interesting, I hadn't thought about the lack of "influence the target."

But here's a thought, using, say, the basic Melee Action still deals wounds and hurts NPCs without eliminating them. What's the analagous effect for charm? If "influence" equals winning in the same way eliminating an opponent equals winning in combat, what's the middle step? In the Duel of Wits rules it's Shame…

I guess basically what I'm asking is, what can you still do with a basic charm success since you should still be able to do something. (In the same way you can still hurt/stress an opponent with Weapon Skill.)



#25 phild

phild

    Member

  • Members
  • 114 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 10:14 PM

HedgeWizard said:

Many of the social actions have a successful result of "influence the target." If you use that as a base, say requiring x Influences in a scene, that's a good start. Then, you limit the ability for non-social PCs (or standard social actions) to influence the target. So anyone can roll a charm, or deception test, but it requires more than a mere success to "influence" - perhaps a critical or a multiple (3+) successes.

I've been thinking along similar lines. Perhaps "Influence" is the equivalent of an automatic crit, and that for "standard" social actions without custom cards, you need to earn a critical. The difficulty with applying soak is that Social actions are already Opposed, so you're effectively counting the opposing characteristic twice. Obviously, one way of circumventing this is to make social actions opposed by 1 challenge as per combat, and then using the opposed characteristic instead as a soak value, but I'm not sure I like that.

For me, priorities are to make social encounters easier to just launch into, to give clarity to what a "default" social skill does as opposed to the bought Action cards, to allow social encounters to have a real tactical ebb and flow, and to make sure any system doesn't need existing action cards to be changed at all.

I think the simplest solution to achieve these ends quickly and easily is:
 - Influence needed = between 1 (for simple checks) and target's WP (to persuade them of something they don't want) 
 - Need to define standard action cards for social skills, to provide the social combat baseline, using comparison between basic combat cards and advanced combat cards to inform this.

Do this, and social encounters can be launched at a moment's notice. I may do some work on this, and then pass over to someone who knows how to make pretty action cards :-) 
 

 



#26 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,439 posts

Posted 22 May 2012 - 10:39 PM

phild said:

For me, priorities are to make social encounters easier to just launch into, to give clarity to what a "default" social skill does as opposed to the bought Action cards, to allow social encounters to have a real tactical ebb and flow, and to make sure any system doesn't need existing action cards to be changed at all.

I think the simplest solution to achieve these ends quickly and easily is:
 - Influence needed = between 1 (for simple checks) and target's WP (to persuade them of something they don't want) 
 - Need to define standard action cards for social skills, to provide the social combat baseline, using comparison between basic combat cards and advanced combat cards to inform this.

Do this, and social encounters can be launched at a moment's notice. I may do some work on this, and then pass over to someone who knows how to make pretty action cards :-) 
 

 

Within my house rules, me and my party definied the following rules regarding social encounters and basic action cards:

Due to the lack of a basic social action card, like Melee Strike or Ranged Attack act for combat situations, player characters may use the Perform a Stunt action card to Influence their target. This is done by using the card normally as described in page 68 of the Player’s Guide. The following limitation applies though: In a given encounter, a single PC can only achieve 1 successful "Influence" with the Perform a Stunt action card per skill (i.e. Charm, Guile, Intimidate, Leadership).

Understanding that with the simple succees line of the Peform a Stunt you achieve an "Influence" result, and also agreeing that not all the skills are equally appropriate for all social encounters, e.g. an Intimidate skill check may not be the best option (or it can even go against the PCs interests in the case of a chaos star result) to convince Lady Ludmilla to go with you to the Mascarade Ball.

The idea behind is that by limiting the amount of uses per encounter of a given skill, players who want to have a bigger impact in social encounters will need to buy extra action cards.

I believe that this is not the best option, since by analogy, there is no limitation on the amount of uses of the Melee Strike or Ranged Attack action cards. But given the difference in mechanics between the two type of encounters i.e. wounds and critical wounds versus stress, shame and a progress tracker, and typically the difference in the amount of "opponents" involved, we have found it so far a good aproximation.


The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#27 Thug

Thug

    Member

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 12:55 AM

Yepesnopes said:

Within my house rules, me and my party definied the following rules regarding social encounters and basic action cards:

Due to the lack of a basic social action card, like Melee Strike or Ranged Attack act for combat situations, player characters may use the Perform a Stunt action card to Influence their target. This is done by using the card normally as described in page 68 of the Player’s Guide. The following limitation applies though: In a given encounter, a single PC can only achieve 1 successful "Influence" with the Perform a Stunt action card per skill (i.e. Charm, Guile, Intimidate, Leadership).

Understanding that with the simple succees line of the Peform a Stunt you achieve an "Influence" result, and also agreeing that not all the skills are equally appropriate for all social encounters, e.g. an Intimidate skill check may not be the best option (or it can even go against the PCs interests in the case of a chaos star result) to convince Lady Ludmilla to go with you to the Mascarade Ball.

The idea behind is that by limiting the amount of uses per encounter of a given skill, players who want to have a bigger impact in social encounters will need to buy extra action cards.

I believe that this is not the best option, since by analogy, there is no limitation on the amount of uses of the Melee Strike or Ranged Attack action cards. But given the difference in mechanics between the two type of encounters i.e. wounds and critical wounds versus stress, shame and a progress tracker, and typically the difference in the amount of "opponents" involved, we have found it so far a good aproximation.

I would not put such restrictions to the use of the Perform a Stunt action. Its purpose is to give players freedom to fully use their imagination. This rule also poorly simulates for example an encounter where character uses different kind of charming tricks to persuade Lady Ludmilla (he sings a serenade, kisses her hand, etc.).  Stunt is a difficult and risky action compared to well practiced specialiced actions learned through experience. I would just add more challenge or misfortune dice to the Perform a Stunt check. 



#28 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,439 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 04:42 AM

Thug said:


I would not put such restrictions to the use of the Perform a Stunt action. Its purpose is to give players freedom to fully use their imagination. This rule also poorly simulates for example an encounter where character uses different kind of charming tricks to persuade Lady Ludmilla (he sings a serenade, kisses her hand, etc.). Stunt is a difficult and risky action compared to well practiced specialiced actions learned through experience. I would just add more challenge or misfortune dice to the Perform a Stunt check.

Agreed. But somehow I want to motivate my players to buy social action cards, the same way they are motivated to buy combat action cards to have a good action cards rotation during the duration of a combat. If in a social encounter you can accomplish everything with a successful opposed skill check (with or without the Perform a Stunt action card), which is the point on investing exp on social action cards?

Another option would be the one mentioned by Hedge Wizard. Where without the proper social action cards you need to roll three+ hammers to obtain an "Influence" result.

I am looking for ideas.


The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#29 nephtys

nephtys

    Member

  • Members
  • 268 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 04:54 AM

in our group any social "action" is roleplaying. if i want to influence somebody a simple die roll will never be enough, i will have to have good arguments etc.

the amount of "influence" of your words is then determined by the GM by both, what you said and the acting characteristic you would have used (Fel usually, but sometimes ST for intimidate)

so for us social actions have never really been looked at, but reading this thread makes me wanna look through them after all!



#30 HedgeWizard

HedgeWizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 532 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 05:00 AM

RARodger said:

HedgeWizard said:

 

Many of the social actions have a successful result of "influence the target." If you use that as a base, say requiring x Influences in a scene, that's a good start. Then, you limit the ability for non-social PCs (or standard social actions) to influence the target. So anyone can roll a charm, or deception test, but it requires more than a mere success to "influence" - perhaps a critical or a multiple (3+) successes.

 

 

Interesting, I hadn't thought about the lack of "influence the target."

But here's a thought, using, say, the basic Melee Action still deals wounds and hurts NPCs without eliminating them. What's the analagous effect for charm? If "influence" equals winning in the same way eliminating an opponent equals winning in combat, what's the middle step? In the Duel of Wits rules it's Shame…

I guess basically what I'm asking is, what can you still do with a basic charm success since you should still be able to do something. (In the same way you can still hurt/stress an opponent with Weapon Skill.)

RARodger said:

HedgeWizard said:

 

Many of the social actions have a successful result of "influence the target." If you use that as a base, say requiring x Influences in a scene, that's a good start. Then, you limit the ability for non-social PCs (or standard social actions) to influence the target. So anyone can roll a charm, or deception test, but it requires more than a mere success to "influence" - perhaps a critical or a multiple (3+) successes.

 

 

Interesting, I hadn't thought about the lack of "influence the target."

But here's a thought, using, say, the basic Melee Action still deals wounds and hurts NPCs without eliminating them. What's the analagous effect for charm? If "influence" equals winning in the same way eliminating an opponent equals winning in combat, what's the middle step? In the Duel of Wits rules it's Shame…

I guess basically what I'm asking is, what can you still do with a basic charm success since you should still be able to do something. (In the same way you can still hurt/stress an opponent with Weapon Skill.)

Charm adds to the final argument pool, or to a following check. The point of a straight charm check isn't to influence per se, but rather to get them to like you which makes them more compliant when you actually DO ask them to do something for you, or give you something. So I usually award 1 or 2 fortune dice on their next check (or the check of the agent), or I add them tot he final argument pool.

Again, I try to keep things fairly fluid and not rely on rigid rules. So if a single PC is socially engaged with someone, and trying to get them to divulge a secret, they may spend a round or two charming them - chatting them up if you will, getting them to lower their guard - before pulling a Perform a Stunt social action with bonus fortune awarded for the successful charms.

Some of this is cribbed from the excellent social encounter system in ASOIAF RPG (with a little burning wheel). It's analogous to setting an opponent up in combat to deliver the final blow, but the setup isn't damaging them, but perhaps positioning them so you can kick them off the ledge ;)

For straight-shot encounters (e.g. trying to haggle a deal with a vendor) it's a straight single test typically where a success is a success regardless of action used, but I often provide better outcomes overall to people who invest in social actions (rewarding that style of play).



#31 HedgeWizard

HedgeWizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 532 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 05:04 AM

nephtys said:

in our group any social "action" is roleplaying. if i want to influence somebody a simple die roll will never be enough, i will have to have good arguments etc.

the amount of "influence" of your words is then determined by the GM by both, what you said and the acting characteristic you would have used (Fel usually, but sometimes ST for intimidate)

so for us social actions have never really been looked at, but reading this thread makes me wanna look through them after all!

This is how I *used* to run social encounters from say 1984 - 2005. But player's don't always come up with great content, or some players are less inclined to be verbally persuasive in real life, but they're playing a character who can charm a snake out of its skin.  Allowing them to roll with modifiers in any system allows them to play that role without having to BE that type of person.

However, when players come up with something particularly craft, or witty, or smart as part of their conversation, I award fortune dice.  Stuff like this is why I LOVE the new dice mechanic in WFRP.  It allows you to layer in modifier dice quite reasonably without worrying about actual modifiers, tables, or other typical trappings of RPGs.



#32 Thug

Thug

    Member

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:02 AM

Yepesnopes said:

Thug said:


I would not put such restrictions to the use of the Perform a Stunt action. Its purpose is to give players freedom to fully use their imagination. This rule also poorly simulates for example an encounter where character uses different kind of charming tricks to persuade Lady Ludmilla (he sings a serenade, kisses her hand, etc.). Stunt is a difficult and risky action compared to well practiced specialiced actions learned through experience. I would just add more challenge or misfortune dice to the Perform a Stunt check.

 

 

 

Agreed. But somehow I want to motivate my players to buy social action cards, the same way they are motivated to buy combat action cards to have a good action cards rotation during the duration of a combat. If in a social encounter you can accomplish everything with a successful opposed skill check (with or without the Perform a Stunt action card), which is the point on investing exp on social action cards?

Another option would be the one mentioned by Hedge Wizard. Where without the proper social action cards you need to roll three+ hammers to obtain an "Influence" result.

I am looking for ideas.

Ok, now I see the problem clearer. Here's an idea: The action cards represent "special powers" that cannot be performed using the Stunt card. For example, your character meets some rich nobleman and lies to be the noble's long lost cousin. This is so outrageous lie that the character fails automatically and is sent to prison, unless, he has the Honeyed Words card! Or in another example a character wants to challenge somebody in duel, but there are no willing opponents. This attemp becomes impossible unless the character has Come, Face Me! action card. Would this mechanic give your players motivation to invest these cards, so that their characters can do almost impossible acts?



#33 phild

phild

    Member

  • Members
  • 114 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:40 AM

nephtys said:

in our group any social "action" is roleplaying. if i want to influence somebody a simple die roll will never be enough, i will have to have good arguments etc.

 

Do you make players lift heavy objects to see if they make a strength check? :-)

OK, a silly rhetorical question, but the point is valid. This makes it impossible for more reserved players to effectively play a socially adept character, which seems overly limiting given that we're talking fantasy role playing here.

I might award a bonus fortune die for a great bit of roleplaying, but even then it would be relevant to what I know of the skills and aptitudes of the player - if I know he's pretty introverted and shy, and doesn't like to speak in-character at all, any effort to do so will get the reward.



#34 nephtys

nephtys

    Member

  • Members
  • 268 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 09:55 AM

phild said:

Do you make players lift heavy objects to see if they make a strength check? :-)

well, i see you want to nit pick. well, we are "role-players". so if i can convince a witch hunter not to burn me by rolling a die…well, to us that does not work. if you just want to roll dice and do what a card tells you  -  play cards

if we take the role out of roleplaying all there is left is playing, welcome to tabletop



#35 phild

phild

    Member

  • Members
  • 114 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 10:42 AM

nephtys said:

phild said:

 

Do you make players lift heavy objects to see if they make a strength check? :-)

 

 

well, i see you want to nit pick. well, we are "role-players". so if i can convince a witch hunter not to burn me by rolling a die…well, to us that does not work. if you just want to roll dice and do what a card tells you  -  play cards

if we take the role out of roleplaying all there is left is playing, welcome to tabletop

So how do you play the "role" of someone who is super intelligent? How about the "role" of someone who is an expert tracker? How about the "role" of a master swordsman? And why should these abilities get a different treatment to that of a silver-tongued diplomat?

I wasn't nit-picking, I was raising a genuine point about how the game mechanics provide parity for all people to play all potential roles equally well. I would argue that by linking one specific facet of the role to real life ability, you may actually be limiting role-playing more than someone who uses the game mechanics available to them to allow any person to play any role. By insisting on role-playing, you're limiting the range of viable roles.

All subject to the mantra of Maximum Game Fun, and stick with what works for your group of players.



#36 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,439 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:01 PM

Thug said:

Ok, now I see the problem clearer. Here's an idea: The action cards represent "special powers" that cannot be performed using the Stunt card. For example, your character meets some rich nobleman and lies to be the noble's long lost cousin. This is so outrageous lie that the character fails automatically and is sent to prison, unless, he has the Honeyed Words card! Or in another example a character wants to challenge somebody in duel, but there are no willing opponents. This attemp becomes impossible unless the character has Come, Face Me! action card. Would this mechanic give your players motivation to invest these cards, so that their characters can do almost impossible acts?

This of course will be an option, but it implies that I have to more or less memorize all the specific actions which are covered by the already existing social action cards. 


The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#37 RARodger

RARodger

    Member

  • Members
  • 306 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:26 PM

HedgeWizard said:

Charm adds to the final argument pool, or to a following check. The point of a straight charm check isn't to influence per se, but rather to get them to like you which makes them more compliant when you actually DO ask them to do something for you, or give you something.

Great point. Thanks.



#38 Yepesnopes

Yepesnopes

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,439 posts

Posted 23 May 2012 - 08:40 PM

HedgeWizard said:

Many of the social actions have a successful result of "influence the target." If you use that as a base, say requiring x Influences in a scene, that's a good start. Then, you limit the ability for non-social PCs (or standard social actions) to influence the target. So anyone can roll a charm, or deception test, but it requires more than a mere success to "influence" - perhaps a critical or a multiple (3+) successes.

Charm adds to the final argument pool, or to a following check. The point of a straight charm check isn't to influence per se, but rather to get them to like you which makes them more compliant when you actually DO ask them to do something for you, or give you something. So I usually award 1 or 2 fortune dice on their next check (or the check of the agent), or I add them tot he final argument pool.

Again, I try to keep things fairly fluid and not rely on rigid rules. So if a single PC is socially engaged with someone, and trying to get them to divulge a secret, they may spend a round or two charming them - chatting them up if you will, getting them to lower their guard - before pulling a Perform a Stunt social action with bonus fortune awarded for the successful charms.

Some of this is cribbed from the excellent social encounter system in ASOIAF RPG (with a little burning wheel). It's analogous to setting an opponent up in combat to deliver the final blow, but the setup isn't damaging them, but perhaps positioning them so you can kick them off the ledge ;)

For straight-shot encounters (e.g. trying to haggle a deal with a vendor) it's a straight single test typically where a success is a success regardless of action used, but I often provide better outcomes overall to people who invest in social actions (rewarding that style of play).

I like this approach, but it leave at least one doubt. Do you eliminate the assit manoeuvre in your social encounters? or does it adds up to the fortune die granted by the skill check?

An assist manoeuvre grants a fortune die without the need of any roll, but as I understand you ask for an skill check (opposed?) to add one or two fortune dice.


The Book of the Asur - High Elf fan supplement

The Dark Side - Witches, Warlocks, Dark Magic and more

Secrets of the Anvil - Advanced Dwarf careers and runes

Dice statistics calculator for SW EotE


#39 HedgeWizard

HedgeWizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 532 posts

Posted 24 May 2012 - 04:34 AM

We have never really used assist outside of some basic, obvious checks. E.g. Assist to lift something, assist to search a room, assist on first aid. If you want to assist someone to achieve a goal in a conversation, that takes some kind of action on your part - same as in combat. The only real, non-action "assisting" I can imagine in combat comes from things like flanking, or feinting as a distraction, perhaps throwing out a chair in someone's way. The first is already accounted for, and we read the other two as actions. But I try to keep that somewhat defined otherwise everyone will be assisting everyone and therefore everyone gets the fortune die rendering it moot. 

Another option might be for you to adopt the ASOIF/Burning Wheel/Mouse Guard methodology of assigning a disposition to the participants (i.e. social "wounds") and which each success dealing a certain amount of "damage". In this model you can have standard checks (charm, guile, etc.) result in 1 damage per success, while the social cards that "influence" might do 2 or 3 points of "damage". This would bring it more in-line with combat where participants who aren't strong in melee can still do some damage in the fight.

I threw together a social encounter sheet moons ago - again, I use this as a guide and don't follow it slavishly in game. I do what makes sense for the PC and the scene, but it reminds of certain modifiers and affects I might want to add to a final argument pool (or a straight check):



#40 HedgeWizard

HedgeWizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 532 posts

Posted 24 May 2012 - 04:46 AM

PS - one of these days, when I have some free time I plan on re-working that overview (there are some errors in it) as well as incorporate the nobility/shame stuff.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS