Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
Tags

Questions about Callings

A topic by Tr33Dw3ll3r created Jun 22, 2021 Views: 79 Replies: 3
Viewing posts 1 to 2

I've been reading through this version of the game and I came up with a few questions about advances and calling specials


1) Do advances that allow saga tokens to be gambled grant experience when the saga token is lost in a gamble? What about the counselor's good counsel ability, does the gambling player or the counselor add exp?


2) Does the Scoundrel special starwise have an action modifier added to its roll? 


3) it seems like some callings get much more kit slots than others. Do Hegemony Deserters have to trade away their re-breather mask to have coms or a basic jag knife? Are the stats for being naked worse than the stats for clothes? It seems many Ritters could be incentivised to trade clothes for a other gear, it might be socially acceptable if they are walking carpet alien.

Developer

Hey Tr33Dw3ll3r! Thanks for reading!

1) Do advances that allow saga tokens to be gambled grant experience when the saga token is lost in a gamble? What about the counselor's good counsel ability, does the gambling player or the counselor add exp?

Whenever a Laser-Ritter spends a Saga Token, they mark XP including when they spend it to use an Advance. For abilities like Good Counsel where one player lends another a Saga Token, the player the Token originally belonged to marks the XP if it gets spent.



2) Does the Scoundrel special starwise have an action modifier added to its roll?


By default, no. It's meant to have a high likelihood of things having changed. It makes the Scoundrel someone who has a lot of stories about the way things were in a changing galaxy. That said, it won't break anything if the Scoundrel adds a modifier to the roll.


3) it seems like some callings get much more kit slots than others. Do Hegemony Deserters have to trade away their re-breather mask to have coms or a basic jag knife? Are the stats for being naked worse than the stats for clothes? It seems many Ritters could be incentivised to trade clothes for a other gear, it might be socially acceptable if they are walking carpet alien.

Yeah. Each Calling has different Kit needs and the different load outs weren't really composed with parity between Callings in mind.

A bit of character creation that, at the moment, lives on the playbook sheets but not in the book is:

Discuss what other Kit the group needs and would reasonably have: Hand Comms, Rations, etc. Ammunition and Fuel Cells are a given. Record them on your sheet.

If you're on a planet with a toxic atmosphere, it might make sense for everyone to have re-breathers. If you're palling around a space station Deep Space Nine style, maybe there's a locker full of void sleeves with each of your names on it.

As for swapping around major pieces of Kit like weapons and armor, I'd say that's something that has to be negotiated between the GM and Laser-Ritters.

Clothes are meant to be the baseline. The only thing you'd have less of when naked is dignity (maybe). For aliens with knife-proof fur or laser-reflecting carapaces? I might say "pick an Armor; you always have the traits of that Armor. You can do the same sorts of stuff you could with it, like Gambling, but instead of marking Condition, mark Pathos." But, it honestly might work fine to, mechanically, just use the game as written and describe the effects of your Armor as being whatever natural features your Laser-Ritter has.


All of that said . . .

There's an update with pretty significant reworks and adjustments in the pipeline. I don't want to give a definite release date, because last time I tried doing that I burnt myself out trying to meet it. Changes will include:

  • The core rolling mechanic is being modified for a more traditional model of game where both the GM and other players roll dice.
  • Saga Tokens are being depricated. Game abilities fueled by Saga Tokens will now be fueled by Pathos and Domains (a new skill-adjacent mechanic).
  • A major change to Kit including reworked rules for Armor and additional rules for Weapons that gives more differentiation.
  • Deep Sigh. A semi-optional currency system for Kit that will make it easier to eyeball how equivalent in value things are. Load outs will be balanced to be roughly equivalent in value to each other within Callings but not across Callings. This will make it easier to swap things in and out of load outs.
  • Action Modifier spreads will be completely based on Calling. Origin and Lifepath will give some extra Domains.
  • Calling Special Abilities are being rolled into the new Domain system.
  • Calling Advances are being reworked as needed based on playtesting feedback and other changes to the game.
  • A new Calling, the Teknos, is being added.
  • Adversaries are being reworked to fit the new rules (they'll each still fit on a tarot size card, though).
(+1)

Awesome! Very excited to see it all come together. Domains sound cool. I can definitely see attributes being reworked into the callings, Hegemony Deserter has a one in four chance of having a maximum of +2 to its only weapon and doesn't start with a melee weapon for its automatic +2  so having the attributes tied to callings seems like a great opportunity to cull "trap options". Definitely interested in the new calling as well. Does the new calling increase the max number of players?

Developer

Hegemony Deserter has a one in four chance of having a maximum of +2 to its only weapon and doesn't start with a melee weapon for its automatic +2  so having the attributes tied to callings seems like a great opportunity to cull "trap options".

Among other things, the Hegemony Deserter load out will start with a Jagg Bayonet in the next draft.


Does the new calling increase the max number of players?

Yes, and the changes overall make the game more friendly to having more than one of each Calling at the table. I still personally wouldn't want to play with more than four Laser-Ritters, but I prefer GMing for small groups, generally.