7th Sea General /7sg/ - Frankly my dear... Edition

Actually, unless you're rolling only a single die (and this would never happen), you're looking at a bigger than 50% chance of success, which only goes up from there. By the time you're rolling 5 or 6, which is average, your chance of failure is effectively nonexistent.

To be fair, just because one "succeeds" does not mean it is a clean win. Complications are a big issue and that's where the risk comes in. Unless you have enough raises, the cost of success may be more than you wish to pay.

For those unfamiliar, you roll your dice pool, generally stat+skill+misc, and are trying to make sets of 10.
First set is success, additional sets are raises.
Whenever taking an action state a goal in the scene, such as escape the burning building. The GM then says "yes, but..." and then lists concerns, such as damage, damage, damage, the hostage you were there to rescue, the loot, ect...
Success gets you out of the fire alive. You then spend raises to cover complications, such as getting hurt less, saving the innocent, getting hurt less, getting the treasure, getting hurt less, ect.
So a base success is the fail forward version of story progression. You almost always at least fail forward and thus the narrative keeps flowing.

This works differently in combat, but that is a different chat.

The more I think about this, the more I find myself liking it... though I don't yet know how well it will go down in my group. Guess it's time to pick up the GM mantle

>Warning, plenty of talk about RAI since the book is a bit of a pussy and doesn't want to set up hard rules.

I'm not one to complain publicly about people's ideologies, but I feel that the beliefs of the author sank in a bit too much into the game, but in such a lazy way that it feels empty and that it exists just because it felt like it should.

From the crunch, the no fail system. Unless you as a player say that your character fails, by definition you succeed. Yes, negative Consequences will happen, and you will miss Opportunities to gain better things, but no matter what you will succeed. Even without Raises (Something akin to successes on WoD/Shadowrun) you succeed, but something happens that either makes it irrelevant/secondary. And on combat, being a duelist gives you an amazing advantage, but all styles lost a lot of personality to them.

On the lore side of things, it feels like the world is fake in a lot of things. No more racial, religious or political tension within borders makes it clearly obvious that they wanted to remove a lot of "incorrect" ideologies from the game. On the Glamour Islands, the tension between the three Kingdoms is played down heavily from 1st ed; not to mention they have no issue with foreigners making the bulk of their sailors (Mostly Eisen and Numa) and all the racial tensions are already gone.

Remember how Eisen was destroyed because the idea of having a "different" kind of religion other than pure Vatician was pure heresy? And that freedom of religion was something that was worth razing an entire nation? Well don't worry, in the Commonwealth, both pagans and Vaticians have been living in harmony for centuries. And the mages that make literal pacts with the devil? The priest look the other way.

It makes so much changes to the values of people, as if the world population was lobotomized in between editions, because most of the background stays the same.

On a pure mechanical standpoint, if you like heavy narrative and you are able to don't make your players get bored out of always succeeding and making the system how it is intended to be (Using Consequences and Risks to let the players choose HOW they win or lose) it can be honestly really good. Just the feeling of the game will be different depending on your view of the game.

(Cont)

However, if you ignore most of the fluff mistakes (Vesten feels weird when you still have vikings, they just don't go outside the borders) the system fees a lot more free on what you can and can't do. The character creation both lets you make a character from the get go, and not just a bunch of stats that might or might not have a past. You can choose the cost of your actions, and the scars and failings of your character are according to his personality and not so much to the whims of the dice.

But, this is a big thing, this is now a game that a GM can just fuck you over and you can't do anything about it. Even for a narrative system, the GM has an insane amount of power, to the point he can forbid your character to progress and let someone else keep growing. It puts a shitload more of duty in charge of the GM, to the point that he has to constantly come up with Opportunities or Consequences, otherwise the whole system crashes. The Story system is inflexible, so you either end up either being too much of a focus or you end up betraying the common goal for the sake of your own growth.

(Cont)

>Some suggestions/House rules from someone with only 1 session in

Maybe add a "Group Story" system, where the group itself has a Story to fulfill and complete, and at the end of it they have "extra steps" to spend in order to gain some stuff without being decided from the start. It helps if for some reason there is a shift on the tone or setting of the game later on, and to give them a meta reason to work together.
Second, give the players a chance to spend "extra" raises, to create their own Opportunities of their own so they can have more control on what happens, or even they can spend hero points to "bargain" with the GM and choose to gain Consequences in exchange for better success. Use the idea of playing around with that to let them have more control on their own fate in more ways than just failing or not. It helps prevent players crippling in ways they don't want (A stealthy character gets a feet cut and has a finesse penalty) and for the GMs more window to create unique story elements(After another fateful fight, the duelist gains his 4th scar on his face)
Third, if you plan to not touch the Story system, or even if you do, look into baning foul weather jack. It basically lets a single character grow twice as fast as the rest and it can prove annoying, and gives the player more reason to act out of personal action instead of moving forwards.
And lastly... Try to make sure the party is forming to play fits the GM's idea. A Hexen will have issues gathering materials in the middle of a pirate ship or mingling in the high society of Montaigne. The system really hits you hard if you have a member that doesn't fit the story, and you won't have much options of at least increasing the value of skills you don't have.

Actually, as far as European history analogues go, rabidly zealous Vaticines fighting Objectionists over every patch of dirt on Eisen while their brothers in the faith in the east tolerate pagan practices is much more accurate than not.

Anyone know a trove where I can find the 1e books? Specifically Cathay Jewel of the east?

Bump

Found a torrent with the books, give me a minute or two to download and upload to something more useful

mega.nz/#!MRYT2DzY!tWGTVhu2EFwNY1HMGD28whkoVsBUdmkqodJjFAX7zVA

In an hour or two I will upload the full trove of manuals of 1ed and d20

Thank you O most awesome of posters, I had nearly given up on Veeky Forums but you have reaffirmed my faith.

Reading through it now, once again thank you

No problem, anytime

New pastebin with the 1st Ed + d20 Trove
pastebin.com/5PqSdRth

Thank you so much!!!

You don't want Cathay. It is shit. It is such shitty shit that it should have never seen the light of day much less print.

B-b-but the collector in me wants everything user

What does 2E do really well, mechanically? What makes it fun to play?

I say this as someone who has never played 7th Sea but was told it's the premier pirates game.

From a GM perspective, 2nd edition gives you a lot of creative control over the flow of the game, making "railroady" tools to guide your players while giving them enough freedom on how to play them out. Very narrative, and easy to pick up after a few basic rules, and player creation is by far one of the most intuitive things. The Story system also allows you to know from the get go what your players want to do, and you always know what to fit in case anything new happens since you have plotpoints for everyone at the grasp of your fingers.

From a Player perspective, you are a Hero. In every sense of the word you feel like someone who can just fight a group of henchmen and feel cool. The Dramatic Wound is one of the most fun systems, given that you get STRONGER as you run out of life, making fighting to the end more fun, instead of going "Oh, I'm at -4, I just sit down and cry". The Opportunities and Consequences lets you choose how to succeed and fail.

Balance wise, it feels like all players are great at what they do without being to overpowering, and Villains are enough to take the players 4/5 to 1 if required.

Lorewise, it's 1600/1700 europe with a coat of paint and a layer of magic on top. Easy to pick up for anyone with some basic idea of the age, and different enough to find out plenty of weird new stuff.

Be prepared, this is a very "Good GM and good Player-GM relationships" in order to succeed, so don't try it out with randoms at your first. However, if it works it just flows like a great movie, to the point of making the shenanigans of Pirates of the Caribbean like a mediocre theme park ride.

Thanks for writing this up, I'll look into 2E!

>Maybe add a "Group Story" system, where the group itself has a Story to fulfill and complete,
Already exists, actually. Page 199-202. Only real difference is your suggestion of banking steps.

>Second, give the players a chance to spend "extra" raises, to create their own Opportunities
Also kind of exists. Pg. 175. Essentially instead of being able to make your own opportunities by spending a raise, you spend a raise to make an opportunity available for your ally, and then they spend one of their raises to actually take advantage of it.

Coming from one of the playtests, my issue is Wick - There wasn't enough ways for the players to put the GM in check, with few chances for collaborative story telling mechanics (other than opportunities). And from what I can tell, the only playtest group that had its suggestions listened to was Wicks. I actually submitted a fix for how the Action/Dramatic scenes worked (it's real easy to get screwed over if you roll too few raises, or if another action makes your intent impossible), and it got in just as they closed the playtest cycle. That's right, we only had 2 or 3 months of playtesting, because Wick wanted to have a gencon release.
So, expect either standard houserules via Explorer's Society, or 7th Sea 2.5.

As for lore... Our lore (we had Jews, Romani, and a Crescent) just wasn't looked at - and people have been wanting Jews and Romani since 1st edition.
I'll get that lore (and the resulting changes to other lore) up on Explorer's Society (if Wick ever lets it go through because people might change his vision in their versions).

>There wasn't enough ways for the players to put the GM in check,

The GM shouldn't have to be in check or in any way beholden to the players. That's why they're the Game MASTER.

I'd really like to know what your proposed fixes are for the action/dramatic scenes, if you don't mind. I've read through the book several times, but have yet to get a group together to test it out, and would like to know if there's something glaring I'm missing you might have a fix for.

Yes, but player's need to have their choices and ideas respected in the game.
Yeah, most of the time they're really fucking stupid, but you can always find good things past the crap. Currently, 7th Sea makes it too easy for GMs to railroad like crazy.

Basically, I added a third scene type and reworked action sequences.
My thoughts were that we really see three kinds of scenes in action tv shows (when there's a chance of failure) - I label them Action (pretty easy to describe, but really anything that has a lot of chaos and quick timing), Dramatic (contests, stuff that is going quick but is focused like chases, debates, straying from your methods can easily punish you), and Extended (parties and the like. Meandering with a focus, with lots of opportunities to cause trouble or shut it down, and you need flexibility).
So the mechanics for Dramatic Sequences stayed the same. Just the scope got changed.
Actually, taking a closer look at the new rules in the book (I wasn't allowed my own copy of the playtest docs), the new rules for Action Sequences match pretty close to what I sent in. The difference is that I had an initiative mechanic (so we don't always have the freaking "highest total raises first", and locking people in with approaches is as bad as locking them in with intents), and allowed for a lot more fluidity in combat. Initiative was done with two highest traits added together, make raises, each raise is an Action. Actions go in an order determined by the highest die used in each raise, ties broken by going successively lower. Each Action has Intent and a Trait+Skill roll. If someone is affected by Intent, they can React (spend a waiting action, AKA giving the matter their full attention; or at -1 value to their dice [cumulative over a round] for free), and it becomes a bidding war of raises to get shit done and make it worse on the other guy.
[cont]

[cont] Extended Sequences are done with an Intent and an Approach of Trait+Skill+Skill. Most raises in extended scenes are used to open opportunities for other players take advantage of, or closing down others.

I feel that all three scene types can easily flow into each other too.

>Currently, 7th Sea makes it too easy for GMs to railroad like crazy.

I've played at Wick's table. You're mistaking a feature for a bug.

Please be a troll.

GMs are ALWAYS beholden to the players. "Give us what we want or we walk" is true in every game system and every game table. GMs have only the power players allow them, and if they try to steal more, then leave them to their own pathetic masturbation.

Then how come it's always the players whining and crying about not being able to find a GM? If you want to play, deal with what the GM is giving you, or you can go back to your 3 year break between games while you're just "looking for a good group".

Players are ultimately expendable. There's always more players. But a good GM will have a story to tell and they're rare and precious. That's why they get the power in the interaction - they're the important party.

>Then how come it's always the players whining and crying about not being able to find a GM?
A thing that never happened. It's always the other way around.

There are other pirate games that are D&D on water. The author is continuing the ideals of HotB, which was written to specifically be an anti-D&D.We could get into a flame-war over whether the no-fail system is bad or good, but the point is that it is what it was meant to be. Some people will see that as a narrative focused system that favors the main characters. Some will see it as bad game design.

As to the lore, I think this again comes from the writer's current game design theory (rather than his earlier theory, coupled with AEG's direction) that states that any setting design beyond what is needed for the GM to run an interesting game, is "literary masturbation". Honestly, the earlier fluff you mention is more likely actual inserted fantasy, as John hates religion.

You are both right, and both wrong. The GM is a player, just one with different responsibilities. If he's not having fun, the group suffers, just like any other player. The consequences are just more obvious.

>John shit talking about "literary masturbation"

Pot and kettle, much?

...

Jews confirmed in the Crescent Empire sourcebooks. Resident JIDF of this thread are kindly requested to stop shitposting and never return.

תודה אדוני

Swash-bump-ling

Neat. Is this official?

Yes, it's on the new book.