Add? Remove? Both?

One more thing (keep forgetting to put everything at once, I blame the painkillers I'm on). At the Oregon event this last weekend, a Chancellor entered the room and nobody stood. Gurv was flabbergasted by this blatant show of disrespect and barked at everyone to stand in the presence of Nobility.

Had this happened to Rythian nobility in their own lands, there would have been plenty of exceedingly painful lessons.

I think this is part of what people see as the difference here.

-Bryan
 
Things I'd love to see? Rewrite the system from the ground up. NERO has been around for over 15 years. I've been playing it for 14 of them. The game we play now is not overly different from the game I played then. By and large, all we've done between now and then is shuffle around some spells, add a couple more bells and whistles, and patch patch patch patch. Some of the text in the rulebook now is verbatim from my 1st edition rulebook (2nd edition weekend warriors).
 
Polare Lissenstine said:
Well, I think that's what I meant... the difference is that in Dagliano, there is no specified division of "Gentry" and "Nobility". Guildmasters, for example, are nobility, but are they as you say it "real nobility"? Obviously they are as they're covered under the "mockery of noble title" law, but they are *exceedingly* weak nobility compared to even the lowliest Baron in Rythia, or even a Knight should you wish to consider the Gentry. In Rythia, this was *very* clearly defined.

So by having the most obvious "nobles" be very very weak compared to what some people expect from a "high medieval fantasy game", it dilutes the concept of nobility's inherent power as a whole in Crocevia Fatuae. Sure, there's very powerful nobility, but whereas in Rythia if you saw Nobility you *KNEW* it, here in Crocevia if you see "Nobility" you're like "eh, ok, be a little more respectful to them". That, at least, is the average new-to-chapter-player view that I've seen get picked up.

It's not good or bad, just a different way of doing things.

-Bryan
Click to expand...
I think part of the problem is, so few people IG know whats what and whos who. Mostly becouse many of them dont want to read the laws that have the breakdown of the rules and groups. Also keep in mind that crocevia merchant and money orented, so it has a slightly diffrent swing on respect.:).
As to guildmasters and misstresses, they arnt actally nobility, and might not even be close. it depends on the guild actally, in the case of the recent guildmisstress matter (for an example) I think she is a signori which is mostly a sub noble title. Needed as a stepping point for most titles, but also mostly powerless. Or in short, it is all defined in the laws, but doesnt come up in games much. Mayhap some of the player nobles need to strech their wings a bit,and see what it all means.

That all said, I do think that some of the true nobles we have seen sould push their power A bit more. Like the baroni from the last event. But I expect we will see more, when we see more of them.
 
jpariury said:
Things I'd love to see? Rewrite the system from the ground up. NERO has been around for over 15 years. I've been playing it for 14 of them. The game we play now is not overly different from the game I played then. By and large, all we've done between now and then is shuffle around some spells, add a couple more bells and whistles, and patch patch patch patch. Some of the text in the rulebook now is verbatim from my 1st edition rulebook (2nd edition weekend warriors).
Click to expand...


Not to be too pushy, but this is *precisely* why I and 3 others wrote LOV. All the rules systems we saw were already in place were lacking in *many* respects.

The 4 of us saw that,and decided we could do better. To date, every individual who as seen that rules set has had exactly *one* complaint, having to do with names of spells. To date, over 50 people have picked the rules apart...or tried to. That's it, no more, end of story.

I'd say we succeeded. Now...end of plug for LOV :D

I wonder, though, if Mike V. and co. would even remotely consider re-writing the rules from the ground up? Somehow, I doubt they would, but I could be extremely wrong. I dunno...but it's food for thought.

Have a good one all

Spoone
 
Raygren said:
It kinda always bothered me that rogues can get all the cool stuff like repostes and the such but they get the ability to dodge spells and the sort, while us fighters are stuck taking it cause you can't parry it or effectively disarm it. Dodge and Evade are my only complaints.

Those are my 2 cents. If you eat them, then they can be food for thought, but not until then.
Click to expand...

My suggestion to fix this is allow for rogue skills to be bought by fighters and vice versa at double the requirement. IE 4 profs and you can get a dodge, 8 backstabs and you can get an evicerate. I mean by that time, you should be that good. That way fighters could have a few evades and uber assassins could have a couple slays/parrys. They'd still be WAY expensive because they're cross class skills. But I totally agree with you, they should be available without requiring backstabs.

Marc
 
Dante said:
I'd like to see more flexible scavengers...the double cost RW+RM makes it impossible for a newbie to play a caster scavenger (maybe some sort of pakage bonus/deficit deals, like the high orcs extra body and double RW+RM). More balance to the races would be the foremost.
The era seems rather well coverd in terms of weapons and tech level...maybe another lore for spellcasters and more newbie friendly things, but im more or less satisfied with the NERO world thusfar, short of the races.
Click to expand...

An earth scholar with racial slay and racial dodge are WAY worth the extra 3 points for read write. Or Racial prof. The ability to chose your own skills makes a scavenger very powerful. It easily could be counterbalanced by removing the flaws and creating a chart where you could pick a skill (ie racial prof) and be forced to take a disadvantage (double cost for scholarly skills) but then there would be way more scavengers as people attempted to create the perfect match. Currently scavengers get way more flexibility than any other race. Who knows what they can do, all you know is if they can cast or throw alchemy they paid through the nose for it. And don't dobut the power of a High Orc Scholar. Ew.

Marc
 
As to the Sarr thing on waylay and blunt weapons, I was always told that hunting cats wouldn't be about knocking out their prey, that takes all the play out of em, and edged only because of the whole ripping and tearing thing, there's no blood from a staff or club. The lack of thrown weapons same thing, no getting in close and tussling with your prey. I haven't read the racial packet, but that's how it was explained to me waaay back when I was a relative Noob.
Hope that helps.

Jeff
 
Solomon Maxondaerth said:
there's no blood from a staff or club
Click to expand...

You know, whoever came up with this piece of D&D-throwback crap should be slapped. Hard. Obviously, they've never seen someone hit with a staff or club compared to a medieval sword. Both of them did much more with their concussive effect than with any sort of cutting edge, and if you smack someone with a staff or club in an inflict-deadly-force sort of way, you're still going to see a goodly amount of blood.

Not ripping on you, Jeff, but really -- this kind of crap shouldn't have lasted 25 years. Ugh.

-Bryan
 
Polare Lissenstine said:
You know, whoever came up with this piece of D&D-throwback crap should be slapped. Hard. Obviously, they've never seen someone hit with a staff or club compared to a medieval sword. Both of them did much more with their concussive effect than with any sort of cutting edge, and if you smack someone with a staff or club in an inflict-deadly-force sort of way, you're still going to see a goodly amount of blood.

Not ripping on you, Jeff, but really -- this kind of crap shouldn't have lasted 25 years. Ugh.

-Bryan
Click to expand...

Hi, all.

A few of you know that one of my hobbies is making medieval weaponry and armor ( as well as some rennaisance stuff. Remind me to bring a rapier to show you.)

I will guarantee that a blunt weapon, such as even a *staff* WILL cause sufficient blood spatter to make even the most bloodthirsty sarr happy. How do I know this? Simple. After each weapon is completed, we (my teacher and I) test them.

We test them on watermelons, we test them on coconuts, and we *even* test them on car doors and/or hoods. Now..if I can punch a hole in a car door with a solid shot from an iron-bound staff, I can certainly knock one's head off his/her shoulders. With LOTS of blood, everywhere.

I agree with Bryan....not to shoot a hole in your theory, Jeff, but this D&D holdover crap is just that...crap.
 
Here are three questions that have somthing in common:

~Why is it that Dwarves cannot use 2handed blades & blunts? A dwarven (rather, Tolkien Dwarf) trademark is a great axe...

~Why cant Sarr use blunts?

~Why can't elves use two handers, eg. STAFFS!

They share the same quality, they are all choice related restrictions. What keeps a dwarf from CHOOSING to fight with a two handed axe? What keeps a Sarr from CHOOSING to beat his victims to BLOODY pulps with sticks? What KEEPS an Elf from using a staff if he/she is a spell caster?

What? Oh? Rules that make no sense, you say? Ah, now I get it.

This is what I'd like to see changed in the new edition. If you cannot give a reason to WHY somthing cannot be used, dont do it just for the sake of it.

A dwarf is only as small as the player who portrays him/her so SIZE MATTERS NOT. (same goes for all PC races)

I can see the Sarr things being all about slicing cause of the kitty cut n' stab fetish that they may be raised into... But lets look at an example of a kitty girl who was raised by Humans. Kiarra. She has no idea what it was like to grow up a Sarr. She only has her Sarr instincts. If she had been raised by a leigon of clerics who all used blunt weapons, she would have to have been like "Oh man, that seems like what Im SUPPOSED to understand... but... I... must... cut... AHHHH!!!!"

In short/long Why? Seriously? I don't want to make anyone mad, or get anger rialed up... but COME ON.

"The problem is choice." as best said by the Colonal Sanders wannabe in the Matrix Revolutions.

~Sean
 
Izlude_Oranes said:
A dwarf is only as small as the player who portrays him/her so SIZE MATTERS NOT. (same goes for all PC races)
Click to expand...

Not true.

Well, it's true now. But in the earlier editions of the NERO rules, it was *not* true. Many of these things are holdovers from earlier revisions of NERO, and the rules committee has simply not changed a lot of these holdovers.

There was a pretty extensive discussion of this on the NERO HQ boards, which I don't want to rehash here. Of course, without certain individuals' vested interest in the rules as they are, I think it might come out to a more reasonable result, but with even less eventual effect on the rulebook. Not to sound cynical or anything, but those of us who were asked have brought this up as an issue with the rules for the last two or more major versions of the rulebook.

-Bryan
 
From what I understand, the whole Sarrs can't use blunt and dwarves can't use 2-handers was a game balance thing.
 
Izlude_Oranes said:
~Why can't elves use two handers, eg. STAFFS!
~Sean
Click to expand...

They can use staffs, they can use pole arms. What they cannot use is two handed blunt, and two handed edged
 
Oh wait, pooey, I didnt put the note! Well, there was supposed to be a final note that said "Im not sure if the Elf thing is true, but that is what I was told and had yet to check up on it."

So in short, thanks for letting me know on that one.
 
I agree with Raissa about the Sarr limitations. I have heard many explanations why Sarrs can?t learn Waylay or use Blunt Weapons. However, none of these explanations make sense to me.

I think that even if my character?s *race* prefers not to use Blunts, as an *individual* I should still be able to pick up a blunt weapon to defend myself. I mean, as a race, Barbarians do not like Celestrial Magic, but that doesn?t limit the individual Barbarian from sleeping behind a Ward if he needs to. I think it is unfair that Sarr forced to follow their racial preferences when not everyone else is.

Also, I?ve seen a cat sneak up from behind a bird before. In my mind, a feline creature seems far more likely to sneak up behind something than to openly charge at it. Waylay struck me as being a natural Sarr ability when I first read the book.

Out-of-game, I understand the concept of adding balance to the game, but I don't understand how these limitations add balance at all. I mean, sure, Sarr can get the ability "claws", which no one else (except some scavengers) can get. But the fact that Sarr can buy claws should be balanced out by the amount of Build that we have to pay for them and by the fact that they have a lower base damage, not by limiting the variety of other weapons and attacks that we can use.
 
I think the big problem is that people aren't looking at it from the one view that makes it all work: flavor. All these racial limitations and boons are all listed quite clearly in the rules, and it makes the races unique and challenging to play. If you had to blindly pick a race based merely on appearance and name, then found out that you couldn't do these things or they cost you extra then it would be rediculous. Considering that anyone and everyone knows that Sarr can't waylay means that you as a player must decide if not having that one skill is going to make playing a Sarr no fun for you. If so, you should look at a different race. Some people even take a racial limitation and make it the whole point of a character, and it seems to work. Heheheh....

Jeff
aka Solomon the living example
 
Solomon Maxondaerth said:
I think the big problem is that people aren't looking at it from the one view that makes it all work: flavor. All these racial limitations and boons are all listed quite clearly in the rules, and it makes the races unique and challenging to play. If you had to blindly pick a race based merely on appearance and name, then found out that you couldn't do these things or they cost you extra then it would be rediculous. Considering that anyone and everyone knows that Sarr can't waylay means that you as a player must decide if not having that one skill is going to make playing a Sarr no fun for you. If so, you should look at a different race. Some people even take a racial limitation and make it the whole point of a character, and it seems to work. Heheheh....

Jeff
aka Solomon the living example
Click to expand...

Still, there should be some choice in the matter. Racial limitations could be more along the lines of increased point cost rather than simply saying, "You can't learn this skill, ever."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top