Power Characters?

[Carriker]

I think its ok for an experienced Charackter to win against 6 of them, but not a brandnew.

So, let's take this opportunity to address another misunderstanding about this system as compared to many other RPG systems.

Characters in Song of Ice and Fire are not "brand new," unless they are very young characters. The scout character is not just a middle-aged character that has been fighting most of her adult life, judging by her ratings in Agility, Athletics and Marksmanship, but she is also an intrinsically heroic character, based on the character's access to Qualities, Wounds and Injuries.

Characters in this system do not necessarily take the D&D approach, where you're a potato farmer from Shirehamington who goes into a big scary world and ends up with a backpack bristling with magic items and a laundry list of spells and murder-tricks at his disposal. Not everyone is created equal in Westeros.

Those who are really good at what they do are likely to have been good at it from an early age. Those who aren't great at something rarely get much better. I mean, let's be honest - if this were a "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" sort of setting, Sam Tarly would be the perfect character to suddenly be much cooler. But even after a time in the Night's Watch, he's still pretty much fat, scared Sam.

So, the disparity between the clansmen tertiary characters and the Scout who is a primary character isn't some flaw in the rules. It's sort of the point to them.

[Ser Richard]

Zorbeltuss wrote
You can't do that.

At character creation, it technically works like this:
Ability A starts at rank 2.
If you reduce it to 1, you get 50 XP to spend on the rest.
It costs 10 XP to start with rank 3, 40XP to start with rank 4, 70XP to start with rank 5 etc...

How much XP out of your pool (determined by your age) that each stat costs (or gives in the case of 1) is determined by what rank you end up with.

After character creation, it costs 30XP to increase a rank one step, no matter your current value.You can't do that.

At character creation, it technically works like this:
Ability A starts at rank 2.
If you reduce it to 1, you get 50 XP to spend on the rest.
It costs 10 XP to start with rank 3, 40XP to start with rank 4, 70XP to start with rank 5 etc...

How much XP out of your pool (determined by your age) that each stat costs (or gives in the case of 1) is determined by what rank you end up with.

After character creation, it costs 30XP to increase a rank one step, no matter your current value.

the rules doesn't say if you drop a stat to one in creation that you can't up it in creation to 2 or more evem thou the rules say to use on other abilities you just use some points from your other total so the end result is the same. you have 40 more points than normal.

[coldwind]

Character creation isn't an iterative process. You pick your starting ranks and then make sure the total cost for them is equal to your age limit plus any extra gained from reductions to 1.

Just because humans aren't physically capabale of doing all the at once, doesn't mean the step is considered to be done in pieces.

[DaimosofRedstone]

Also there is a LARGE logical fallacy here which i already tried to play on earlier.
There is, unlike with 7s, no limit to how many skills you can drop to one.
If it worked like Ser Richard claims, really the only sensible way to build a character would be to dump EVERYTHING to 1 and then buy it up, giving you something like 700 more xp than usual (it is 18 skills, no?).
So if the game designer would want you to have 700 xp more, they can just GIVE them to you instead of letting you fret over the rules and only bestow them to those who do the 2-1-2 trick.

[Lord Ben]

Also there is a LARGE logical fallacy here which i already tried to play on earlier.
There is, unlike with 7s, no limit to how many skills you can drop to one.
If it worked like Ser Richard claims, really the only sensible way to build a character would be to dump EVERYTHING to 1 and then buy it up, giving you something like 700 more xp than usual (it is 18 skills, no?).
So if the game designer would want you to have 700 xp more, they can just GIVE them to you instead of letting you fret over the rules and only bestow them to those who do the 2-1-2 trick.

I think there is a decent sized portion of gamers who will not be happy with how rules are laid out until developers hire lawyers to pore over the rules looking for bad phrasing and unclear statements until combat rules look like a legal document.

If you don't actually start with 1 in a skill you don't get 50 points for having a skill at 1... this seems relatively clear to most people regardless of what actual phrase the book uses. But until the age of the literal rules lawyer some people will claim to have found loopholes.

[Tao Jones]

Yeah this argument is a bit silly and the intention of the rules is clear. Plus, if you look at the table of starting Abilities values and XP cost you see there is no option for how much it costs to raise an Ability from 1 to 2 during character creation, because you can't do it.

[Ser Richard]

The Rules do not say that you can raise a stat from 1 to 2 table 3-8 says to up an ability by +1(not 2 to 3) is 10 points so to up it to 2 is 10 points but to up it to 3 is 30 points and the 1 rank reduction is done in the same step as the assigning of abilitiy points.

[Zorbeltuss]

The Rules do not say that you can raise a stat from 1 to 2 table 3-8 says to up an ability by +1(not 2 to 3) is 10 points so to up it to 2 is 10 points but to up it to 3 is 30 points and the 1 rank reduction is done in the same step as the assigning of abilitiy points.

Which book are you using?

[Ser Richard]

the pocket edition, In character creation the table just says to raise a stat by +1 is 10 points or +2 for 40, +3 for 70 and so forth

[Zorbeltuss]

In my book, that table has another column named "new ability", along with accompanying text that is fairly specific in that you distribute XP cost according to final rank.

[Ser Richard]

that's if you buy a new ability you're not buying a "New" ability you upping an ability that you all ready had and the only abilities that start at 0 are other langauges so you have to buy them as "New Abilities."

the rules never state when you drop the stat to 1 you can drop it any time in Step three of charcter creation to get the 50 points.

[DaimosofRedstone]

If that is so, SerRichard, then way did the designers go to this rather, lets say, 'odd' design decision?
I mean, if i take your meaning, they practically put a 700 xp trapdoor into their character creation. If you find it you have enough xp to boost 5 skills to rank 7, if you don't one rank can be hard.
So is it some kind of odd hazing or a 'easteregg'?
I mean they need to have reason to give everybody somewhere between 120 and 360 points, but double it for the few faithful really reading the rules.
Do they feel their work is not appreciated enough?
What is your opinion on that, Ser Richard?

[Zorbeltuss]

that's if you buy a new ability you're not buying a "New" ability you upping an ability that you all ready had and the only abilities that start at 0 are other langauges so you have to buy them as "New Abilities."

the rules never state when you drop the stat to 1 you can drop it any time in Step three of charcter creation to get the 50 points.

No, it lists it like this: Rank +1, new ability 3 (or 1 for new language), experience [cost] 10.

more examples:
Rank -1, new ability 1, experience [cost] gain +50
Rank +5, new ability 7 (or 5 for new language), experience [cost] 130

There's also the accompanying text:

you can improve an ability by purchasing additional ranks. The higher you improve an ability, the more Experience it costs.

Put it simply, it does not work the way you claim it to do. You start with agility, decide how much XP to spend on it, and then you proceed to animal handling.

[Tao Jones]

Yeah, the intent is pretty clear, the lack of explicit restriction in the pocket guide is probably the result of saving space. While they should have been explicit about it, as Daimos said, game systems aren't designed with 700xp "trapdoors" in mind.

[jyster]

In most games there are ways to rape the rules. You have to decide if you want to play by the spirit of the rules or the rules that can be ambiguous or just poorly written.

[Ser Richard]

I mean, if i take your meaning, they practically put a 700 xp trapdoor into their character creation.

Were are you getting the extra 700 points you can only drop one stat to 1 for 50 points, and it has to be approved by the Gm

Put it simply, it does not work the way you claim it to do. You start with agility, decide how much XP to spend on it, and then you proceed to animal handling.

the rules never say you assing points in order and only inorder it says start with status then assign points even in there example text of character creation he doesn't go in order or at final he jumps around sending points to make his character.

few faithful really reading the rules.
Do they feel their work is not appreciated enough?
What is your opinion on that, Ser Richard?

My opinion much like your own is that I'm really reading the rules and you've taken want i've said out of context
we were ask to talk about power characters so i was shareing a rule that has the ability to, if allowed to unbalance the game do to the rules not having limited the use of the points or the raising of the rank.

[DaimosofRedstone]

I can reduce 'an' ability, not one.
For the rest:
Whatever (makes you happy).

[Carriker]

I can reduce 'an' ability, not one.
For the rest:
Whatever (makes you happy).

To be fair, this isn't entirely clear from the rules. Some take it to mean you can reduce as many as you like; others take it to mean that you can reduce only one (using a strict reading of "a/an" as singular). I only allowed my players to take one, personally.

[Paedrig]

We also (and as far as i know everyone in the two groups that i know) had read "an" ability as meaning only "one" ability.
Perhaps it is in this case a benefit that english is not the native language. No one even got the idea of "interpreting" the rules by claiming that "an" could mean "as often as you like".

I alwasy thought playing a rpg means also getting along with the others players and having at least some sort of common view of the rules...
So such funny interpretations should be dealed ofplay with a little bit common sense i think...

[Cidius]

Thank you very much for your hints!

I tried out also used distract, and it all works a lot better than before

Are there any boni/mali concerning attacking from behind or the flank? I did not found anything.

Thank you.

[Zorbeltuss]

There's no facing rules on the character scale that I am aware of.

[coldwind]

Thank you very much for your hints!

I tried out also used distract, and it all works a lot better than before

Are there any boni/mali concerning attacking from behind or the flank? I did not found anything.

Thank you.

The closest are Assist to represent multiple attackers, or attacking an unaware foe +1D, but getting someone to be unaware in combat can be tough.

[DaimosofRedstone]

I would not read that as unaware per se but unaware of you.
And a knight in a greathelmet can be quite unaware of the trooper coming up behind him to brain him with a mace.

[coldwind]

I would not read that as unaware per se but unaware of you.
And a knight in a greathelmet can be quite unaware of the trooper coming up behind him to brain him with a mace.

Yeah, that's what I meant - unaware of you.

I'd argue about the unawareness of a knight in a greathelmet, but that's what Stealth vs Awareness is for.