I thought I'd start a new thread for this.
B&B is (well, actually B&B is Bunnies & Burrows, but let's pretend the term's not already taken for a moment) Backswords & Bucklers. It's a reimagining of OD&D for Elizabethan era gaming and for me one of the more interesting looking items to come out of the OSR.
The webpage is here (http://tiedtoakite.com/backswords_bucklers) and the core rules can be downloaded from that link at the bottom of the page. So far there's one supplement which is mostly focused on how to actually run the game, and comes with lots of random tables (in a good way on this occasion).
I haven't run it yet, but hope to. The combat rules look a little odd, but the whole thing's so light it looks distinctly bendable. I would like some guidance on demons, spirits and so on but hopefully that will eventually arrive.
Anyway, nice to see the OSR doing something more than yet another version of essentially the same game experience. Also, I love the idea of replacing the dungeon crawl with the tavern crawl.
I like it's simple yet flavorful bits, but some aspects of it would have to be developed more before I was tempted to run it. For example, a more historically-based set of rules for spells would really go a long way for me. (Dowsing is...pretty boring.)
I haven't look at the supplement yet, however. Maybe it's full of goodies.
My plan for eventual play when I can get da' boys back together is to graft this on to it:
http://akraticwizardry.blogspot.com/2009/07/magicians-and-colours-of-magic.html
(no clerics, colored magic system, black magic can burn wisdom)
To the point, I love the simplicity of the B&B rules. I'm not too sure about the Downright Blows, and ranged weapons seem kinda crazy-lethal, but I'm willing to try it as-written for AP the first few times.
Where's the supplement? I can't find it.
Danbuter: supplement is here -
http://www.lulu.com/product/ebook/backswords-bucklers-book-two-tavern-trawling/17415108
what about the combat is odd?
Well, thanks to you all I have added yet another game to the "I want to run this" list.
So far I have only skimmed the game but it looks quite serviceable. Good for early period swashbuckling adventures, Piracy with Drake, lots of interesting things happening in the world beyond London.
The supplement has lots of juicy tables relating to all sorts of things tavern.
Reading through it now. There are certainly borrowable concepts in the main book - I particularly like that your first drink of alcohol after being wounded instantly restores d6 hit points. A fine, bracing whiskey indeed! This is a great example of a one-sentence rule (blink and you'll miss it) which helps establish genre in ways a full paragraph of how-to or fluff might not. I may steal this for LL at some point (maybe just for the dwarves...).
The switch to damage reduction isn't seducing me, but I didn't download the pdf looking for a game, but rather ideas to mine. I expect I'll pick up the supplement for the extra tavern tables, but the few 'looking for work' tables in there are nicely liftable, as is the sample tavern and associated NPCs/rumors.
ha, I already have that rule in my S&W game.
Quote from: Aos;491062ha, I already have that rule in my S&W game.
...Whaddya want, a medal? :p :D
Quote from: RPGPundit;490671what about the combat is odd?
i wouldn't say "odd", but seemingly quite lethal. (which again may be entirely accurate..)
melee weapons do 1d6...ranged weapons do 1d6 per level of the attacker.
obviously, the bows and crossbows changed the course of warfare and missile weapons are crazy powerful, so maybe it's just a nod toward realism.
"Downright Blows" are the result of causing an opponent to go to 0 HP. You roll 1d6 in this case, and if you get a "1", the wound is
instantly fatal.
In the second book, they do make a point of stating that, Yes, the game can be lethal, but that's
by design. The guys I play with would be totally cool about this and just whip up another "Basterd" and be done with it, but I can understand that some people might mince around the table like their old sweet auntie just died, railing at the DM about unlucky dice and the unfairness of it all.
tl;dr i think it's awesome, but I imagine that others may not.
Quote from: kregmosier;491137i wouldn't say "odd", but seemingly quite lethal. (which again may be entirely accurate..)
melee weapons do 1d6...ranged weapons do 1d6 per level of the attacker.
obviously, the bows and crossbows changed the course of warfare and missile weapons are crazy powerful, so maybe it's just a nod toward realism.
"Downright Blows" are the result of causing an opponent to go to 0 HP. You roll 1d6 in this case, and if you get a "1", the wound is instantly fatal.
In the second book, they do make a point of stating that, Yes, the game can be lethal, but that's by design. The guys I play with would be totally cool about this and just whip up another "Basterd" and be done with it, but I can understand that some people might mince around the table like their old sweet auntie just died, railing at the DM about unlucky dice and the unfairness of it all.
tl;dr i think it's awesome, but I imagine that others may not.
I like it all too, and once again, it's similar (in spirit) to how I run my home game. In my game any small or medium sized target of a bow or gun is automatically an armor class 10. If a character is hit with a missile he gets a saving throw, a successful ST results in 1d6 dmg; a fail results in a roll on the brutal 1d4 wound table. On larger animals, however, guns and bows function normally in terms of damage- excepting when a critical hit is scored, in which case it's the wound table again.
I like the. Switch from Armour Class to Defense and Damage Reduction.
In a nut shell, high Dexterity makes you harder to hit, armour makes it harder to damage you, high Dexterity makes it easier for you to hit your opponent and high Strength let's you do more damage.
Downright blows actually make going below zero hit points a less than certain death sentence, and give. Time for those long Shakespearian death speeches, of course most of the time you will still die.
A simple combat system, but with a bit of narration it could capture period feel. Certainly it does as well as any rules lite system can.
I look forward to the magic users supplement. The Wise Woman/Cunning Man class is ok, certainly useful in it's way, but I want more. Alchemy, demons, sorcery, prayers of devout priests, so much more could be included within period feel and scope.
To me this feels like a game I would want to lay every fourth or fifth RPG session as a break from an ongoing campaign, or as a pick up game whe player continuity from session to session was not required.
The vastly greater lethality of missile weapons makes sense under the design assumptions of the game. Hit Points largely model your ability to get out of the way at the last instant when a blow is struck. This is fairly easy to do in melee combat, turning a solid strike into a glance or a scratch. Even a blow to a limb is not likely to be immediately fatal, and is more likely than a blow to the torso.
With missile weapons on the other hand, a hit is more likely to occur ithe torso, and more likely to prove fatal.
The thing about hit points in this game that will take the most getting used to for me is that a good night's sleep restores all lost hit points, and even a bad night's sleep will heal half of them. Characters recovering and healing between adventures is not new, but having it happen overnight its.
Anybody up for a PbP of this?
Quote from: DavetheLost;491184The vastly greater lethality of missile weapons makes sense under the design assumptions of the game. Hit Points largely model your ability to get out of the way at the last instant when a blow is struck. This is fairly easy to do in melee combat, turning a solid strike into a glance or a scratch. Even a blow to a limb is not likely to be immediately fatal, and is more likely than a blow to the torso.
With missile weapons on the other hand, a hit is more likely to occur ithe torso, and more likely to prove fatal.
The thing about hit points in this game that will take the most getting used to for me is that a good night's sleep restores all lost hit points, and even a bad night's sleep will heal half of them. Characters recovering and healing between adventures is not new, but having it happen overnight its.
Anybody up for a PbP of this?
Hit Points and Vitality split would seem to solve the "Did I just heal all those bloody cuts and bruises, or did I just restore my energy?" question.
Quote from: Narf the Mouse;491187Hit Points and Vitality split would seem to solve the "Did I just heal all those bloody cuts and bruises, or did I just restore my energy?" question.
I think that wounds should be handled by a separate system that does not involve points. If for no other reason than I'm averse to using points any more than absolutely necessary.
If I were to want more detail for injuries I would probably import something like the Major Wound Table from Stormbringer and iirc King Arthur Pendragon.
Any downright blow would be considered a Major Wound, if it didn't kill you outright it would leave a permanent mark. Results ranging from a nasty scar to amputated limbs with resultant Attribute loss.
Any roll of 6 for damage could inlfict a wound requiring an extra d6 days Ned rest to recover.
A couple of ways to handle it there.
OE D&D included hit location tables, and hit points by location in Blackmoor iirc. Hit points by location is too fiddly and record keeping bothersome, but a simple hit location table and note that a limb is out of commission for a period would be workable.
It all comes down to how much detail do you want in your game, and do you want that detail spelled out in game mechanics or left to narration and role play. Recognizing that most of us want neither pure game mechanics for everything nor pure narration for everything.
And why am I so tempted to draw up a tavern whose sign is a rooster perched on the back of an ox?
Quote from: DavetheLost;491191It all comes down to how much detail do you want in your game, and do you want that detail spelled out in game mechanics or left to narration and role play. Recognizing that most of us want neither pure game mechanics for everything nor pure narration for everything.
This is more or less how I deal with it; when a character reaches zero hp, takes a critical hit or is hit with a bullet or arrow. The PC gets a saving throw and if it fails they roll on this table.
Roll 1d4
1. Minor Wound: 1d4 days to heal [-1 to all die rolls and - 1d4-1 to movement rate during the recovery period].
2. Major Wound: 2d8+2 days to heal [-3 to all die rolls and -1d6+1 to movement rate during recovery period].
3. Grievous Wound: d30 +10 days to heal. [-6 to all die rolls and movement reduced to 1 during recovery period]. Note: A character with a grievous wound must be stabilized within 10 rounds or make a successful saving throw otherwise the wound becomes a mortal wound, and all related conditions apply.
4. Mortal wound: Save or die. A successful save reduces the damage to a Grievous Wound with doubled recovery time. A failed save results in death in 1d6-1 rounds. AT THE REFEREE'S DISCRETION dead character may be healed by miraculous means (super science or magic) for 1d100 rounds after death.
Characters with Major or Grievous Wounds who engage in strenuous activity (e.g. combat) prior to the end of the recovery period must make a saving throw. A failed save resets the recovery period back to the beginning, and in the case of a grievous wound the character immediately becomes unconscious.
As far as the actual location of the actual location of the wound I fall back on fit influenced by circumstances.
Quote from: kregmosier;491137i wouldn't say "odd", but seemingly quite lethal. (which again may be entirely accurate..)
melee weapons do 1d6...ranged weapons do 1d6 per level of the attacker.
obviously, the bows and crossbows changed the course of warfare and missile weapons are crazy powerful, so maybe it's just a nod toward realism.
"Downright Blows" are the result of causing an opponent to go to 0 HP. You roll 1d6 in this case, and if you get a "1", the wound is instantly fatal.
In the second book, they do make a point of stating that, Yes, the game can be lethal, but that's by design. The guys I play with would be totally cool about this and just whip up another "Basterd" and be done with it, but I can understand that some people might mince around the table like their old sweet auntie just died, railing at the DM about unlucky dice and the unfairness of it all.
tl;dr i think it's awesome, but I imagine that others may not.
The gross difference in ranged vs. melee weapon damages seems absurd.
Quote from: RPGPundit;491355The gross difference in ranged vs. melee weapon damages seems absurd.
Depends on how you conceptualize hit points and melee combat.
See my post above for my thoughts on this very issue.
I do not see this as a problem with the game rules.
Quote from: Aos;491358Depends on how you conceptualize hit points and melee combat.
This. If the concept of Hit Points is scratches, bruises, near misses, etc. until you're too tired/disadvantaged whatever to ward off the killing blow which is the last few Hit Points, then that doesn't seem to mesh well with the idea of missile weapons that are very hard to dodge.
Quotemelee weapons do 1d6...ranged weapons do 1d6 per level of the attacker.
This is moronic.
QuoteIf the concept of Hit Points is scratches, bruises, near misses, etc. until you're too tired/disadvantaged whatever to ward off the killing blow which is the last few Hit Points, then that doesn't seem to mesh well with the idea of missile weapons that are very hard to dodge.
The rules are retarded. First of all, from a balance perspective. Second, from an in-game perspective. (If a bow is so much better than a sword, why would sword guys ever exist except as low-level mooks?) Third, from your own explanation. You can get a flesh wound/near miss from a crossbow just as with a knife.
First, the concept of game balance is an outmoded fossil that no longer belongs in RPGs.
Second, do. You have. Personal experience with missile and/or melee weapons and combat?
Ask ankh hunter if the missile weapon rules in this game are "retarded". They quite accurately depict reality. If you do not miss your shot entirely it will most likely be fatal.
Why would swords persist over bows if bows are so much better? Ever tried to use a bow indoors? Especially in a room with a low ceiling? Ever tried to use a bow in the pouring rain? You are aware that you cannot carry a bow for long periods of time strung? Carrying a bow with an arrow ready fully occupies both hands, a sword may be kept on your hip and quickly drawn when needed.
Ever tried to use a bow for defense when the enemy is closing to melee range? One shot if that is all you get. Better hope he doesn't have friends.
Bows are fragile, expensive, specialized pieces of equipment, and require training to use. If you really want to know about the sword vs the bow, read some history. Or read Paradoxes of Defense by Silver. It is quite an eye opener.
In short, RPG trolls whose only experience comes from Hollywoetd movies and too much D&D as opposed to real world experience with the things modeled in RPGs are retarded.
If you want to persuade me that the rules are broken, let's talk real world, hands on, life experience, not armchair theory....
Also BT your use of the words moronic and retarded is as offensive as tossing around the word nigger.
Do you personally know anyone with an IQ below 70? This is the current clinical standard for "retarded", I do. They are fine peole.
It is not so much that I care one way or the other about the game. But I do care about civil discourse, and you sir, have crossed the line.
Quote from: DavetheLost;491486First, the concept of game balance is an outmoded fossil that no longer belongs in RPGs.
Ask ankh hunter if ...
First, I just wanted to say that 'ankh hunter' is an awesome typo. I want an ankh-hunter in my game, something a little Egyptian-themed. Maybe a monster? A profession? Anyway...
DavetheLost, I think you're coming down on the side of 'realism' in this, and the cult-of-realism angle isn't going to fly very well. I want my game to emulate a vision in my head, not reality.
Could be I am coming down too far on the side of gritty realism. That is the picture in my head for this genre.
Curiously for Three Musketeers, less than a century later, I go all cinematic.
I do wonder how many people arguing about the rule have actually read the game and the rule in question in context.
At the same time, its simply not true that bows did that much more damage than swords. It just isn't.
RPGPundit
How best to model combat?
A sword scratch to the arm, vs a sword thrust through the gizzard?
An arrow likely to either cleanly miss or nail the vitals?
Those long drawn out death speeches in Shakespeare which were a realistic representation of how long it actually takes someone to die after being run through with a rapier. They can talk, but they can't fight.
Bruises and exhaustion that heal with a good night's sleep vs pulled muscles, strained joints, and cuts and stabs that take longer to heal, and may even lead to infection.
Add to the mix that we play games for fun.
For me the problem rule in B&B is how fast and easy healing is. That which doesn't kill you is healed when you wake up. Even if hit points are 98% bruises and luck, there still should be some residual effects from being beaten up in a dark alley, especially if that involves swords and arrows too.
1d6 per level damage may be balanced by increasing hit points by. 1d6 per level, and of course Fighting Men getting attacks equal to their level in melee combat. On the flip side it also means that Goody Jenks the local Wise Woman is not only a skilled herbalist and mid-wife, she is a crack shot as well. Or maybe she just draws a heavier bow, she still can't hit the broadside of a barn, but when she does.....
The basic concept of missile weapons getting more effective as characters increase in level does not bother me, nor does the increased likelihood of a successful hit in combat, it is the implementation in this case that may need tweaking. I want to give it a trial in actual play and see what happens. Lots of rules look very different in play than they do on paper.
It would make a great rule for a Robin Hood type Ranger class variant.
For me the difference isn't that swords do less damage on a successful hit then an arrow or bolt, it's that with an accurately placed sword swing or thrust that would kill you, you have ways to mitigate the damage by parrying, dodging, etc. In other words, the attacker executing a lethal attack is not the end of the process.
By comparison, an arrow or bolt isn't really something you parry or dodge, you take cover behind a shield. As a result, an accurate shot from an archer is, on average, more deadly then an accurate melee attack, simply because there will be less successful defenses against it.
A quick, easy, and effective way to model this in the abstracted hit point model of D&D is...missile weapons do more damage.
For OD&D, it seems like a decent solution, once you get past the WTF! moment.
This would only make any sense at all if you really accurately modeled how difficult it is to get an accurate shot in; otherwise your quest for "realism" has just created an unrealistic situation where the archer is the greatest fighting man of history.
Its part of why I think realism is stupid.
RPGPundit
Quote from: DavetheLost;491486First, the concept of game balance is an outmoded fossil that no longer belongs in RPGs.
Don't ever go full retard.
QuoteSecond, do. You have. Personal experience with missile and/or melee weapons and combat?
Ask ankh hunter if the missile weapon rules in this game are "retarded". They quite accurately depict reality. If you do not miss your shot entirely it will most likely be fatal.
I know that a sword to the heart is just as lethal as an arrow to the heart.
QuoteWhy would swords persist over bows if bows are so much better? Ever tried to use a bow indoors? Especially in a room with a low ceiling? Ever tried to use a bow in the pouring rain? You are aware that you cannot carry a bow for long periods of time strung? Carrying a bow with an arrow ready fully occupies both hands, a sword may be kept on your hip and quickly drawn when needed.
Ever tried to use a bow for defense when the enemy is closing to melee range? One shot if that is all you get. Better hope he doesn't have friends.
Bows are fragile, expensive, specialized pieces of equipment, and require training to use. If you really want to know about the sword vs the bow, read some history. Or read Paradoxes of Defense by Silver. It is quite an eye opener.
And do the rules model this, or are bows just really awesome? Because I'm betting bows are just really awesome and swords suck.
QuoteIn short, RPG trolls whose only experience comes from Hollywoetd movies and too much D&D as opposed to real world experience with the things modeled in RPGs are retarded.
HE DISAGREES WITH ME, HE MUST BE A TROLL!!!!!
QuoteAlso BT your use of the words moronic and retarded is as offensive as tossing around the word nigger.
Pretty sure retarded people don't know enough to get offended.
QuoteDo you personally know anyone with an IQ below 70? This is the current clinical standard for "retarded", I do. They are fine peole.
It is not so much that I care one way or the other about the game. But I do care about civil discourse, and you sir, have crossed the line.
Has Tangency invaded us?
Hidehi people,
Just a note from the designer of the game here to clarify some things that may be worrying people about the lethality of missile weapons (and other things)!
We didn't design the game with full on realism intended. After all, it's a fantasy Elizabethan game. On the other hand, I'm a bit of an armchair historian, as well as having experience in the use of many of the weapons of the period; so I wanted the combat system to reflect a certain amount of realism without clunking everything up (because otherwise I'd cringe every time I roll the dice). The game is intended to run fast, and with a certain amount of shooting from the hip on the part of the referee, to have too much complication would cause problems there. We think we managed to achieve the balance that we aimed for here.
Another thing to bear in mind is that this is the period in which missile weapons were becoming more and more the key in military engagements. They were powerful, and effective. However, they did have their limitations, as they do in Backswords & Bucklers.
First of all, weapons such as the longbow require a lot of training. Something that most characters in Backswords & Bucklers aren't likely to have. Only Fighting Men get it, and only if they choose the weapon as their free one at the start of the game.
Secondly, weapons such as the Caliver are expensive to buy and run. And more importantly (alongside the arbalest) they take some time to reload. Remember too that in B&B you rarely have better than a 50:50 chance to hit. If you miss with your caliver and don't have some sort of back-up then you are likely to receive a sudden education in the situational advantages of weapons.
Thirdly, Backswords & Bucklers is primarily about urban encounters. Given the speed at which such things happen, the likelihood of anyone making use of missile weapons without plenty of planning is quite slim. Making them good for sniping, ambushing and scaring the living snot out of people. But a bad choice for when some bugger thumps you on the shoulder and then attempts to stick his dagger in your guts.
Fourthly, if you try casually wandering around London with a loaded arbalest, the watch will take some interest in you.
Fifthly, using any sort of powder weapon indoors is a really bad idea. Unless you want everyone deaf, blind with smoke and unable to get away from a smell that seems to have come from the devils arse itself. Which can actually be quite useful sometimes.
So, given that hit points do mostly represent your ability to turn a killing blow away, and that is much harder if someone puts a shot in the right place, and that hand-to-hand is more reliable and has more back-and-forth, and given the above considerations it seems absolutely right to me to have them do 1d6 per level damage (the same damage a sneak attack does by the by).
However, given that this an OSR game, it's supremely easy to tinker with. If you don't like the missile weapon d6 per level weapon damage, don't use it. It won't break the game. Although it will make missile weapons pretty useless beyond first level. Anyway, point is, it's your game. Just because the rules say something doesn't mean you have to play it that way.
On the speed of healing - Hit points don't represent real wounds as such. If you take a downright blow from a cutting weapon, that's when the healing stuff comes into it, and that is described in the rulebook. It's expensive, painful and often results in death instead. If you take a downright blow from a thrusting weapon, then you are dead and might just not know about it yet. This is to model, for example, how frequently both combatants in a rapier fight ended up dead, without too much complication. No, it doesn't take account of everything. Speed of play and all. If you want to make it more realistic, I'm not stopping you. I recommend a simple d6 chart that anyone could knock up in seconds. I believe there's one in X-Plorers actually that you could steal if I recall correctly. Or there's always Rolemaster.
On another subject, we hope to get the magic supplement out as soon as possible. It is, however, proving to be more work than any other supplement that we are working on so this may take some time. There is so much fascinating stuff from Elizabethan mythology to put in there that it's a difficult process trying to balance that with the simplicity and speed of play that Backswords requires. I can confirm that alongside the traditional Elizabethan magical subjects such as astrology, necromancy, alchemy and so on there will also be things such as Clockwork to fit the Moorcock style. In the meantime, you can always use the magic-user from any other OSR game with some modification. Just give them 100XP per spell level for a spell they manage to cast in a useful way in play. If they spend a week doing nothing but study they can make a Saving Throw, and for each point they succeed the roll by they get 100 XP. You'll have to figure out the starting equipment for yourself I'm afraid.
Anyhow, hope those who've given the game a try have enjoyed it as much as we do, and those that haven't have at least managed to steal some ideas from it for their own games! The tavern trawling style is certainly usable in pretty much any game.
I have to say, that is an excellent defense of your game/product, dude. Well done!
RPGPundit
Cheers man! I wasn't meaning it to be all defensive-like though. Just people seemed to be put off by the missile thing without having yet seen the context!
Did you write GnomeMurdered too? Epic.
So, I noticed that there doesn't seem to be any difference between using a one-handed weapon like a backsword and a two handed weapon like a bill. Is it intentional that the 'best' armament is one that can be used with a buckler, or is the general thinking that the GM will adjucate bonuses for times when a polearm might be more useful?
Things like that are situational. We describe the weapons in the booklet so the referee knows what the weapons are which allows him to adjudicate how they can be used. It's not generally a flat bonus. But there are things you can do with a bill that you can't with a backsword (hooking people off of horses for example).
It's not in the rules, but what I generally do is grant initiative in combat to a weapon with an obvious advantage. So, if a billman and a swordsman both knew each other was there and engaged each other from outside of their reach, the bill would get the first strike. If, on the other hand, a spearman and a daggerman engaged each other up close (a discussion gotten out of hand for example) the dagger would get the first strike.
Another thing to bear in mind is what weapons are acceptable to carry about in certain situations. In a low tavern people might not bat an eyelid about you lugging in your caliver and blood encrusted cudgel, but if you want to move about in higher circles you wouldn't be acceptable without a rapier or a broadsword (which is going out of fashion, and will remain so until the civil war). And carting about heavy ordnance in the streets is likely to bring unwanted attention your way too.
All of this assumes a certain type of campaign of course, it can work differently elsewhere. But the point remains that most things like that can only be reasonably modelled through referee fiat. Anything else starts to pile up all sorts of complication. Where you stop with the complication is down to individual taste of course, and we are adding more combat options into a supplement for the Fighting Man for those that want to use them. For example, a complete new initiative system that relies on controlling the fight instead of the usual I Go You Go system.
Quote from: NorseOnAKite;498857Cheers man! I wasn't meaning it to be all defensive-like though. Just people seemed to be put off by the missile thing without having yet seen the context!
Did you write GnomeMurdered too? Epic.
I am indeed the writer of Gnomemurdered. I'm glad if you liked it.
RPGPundit