Difference between revisions of "Talk:Burning Wheel"

Revision as of 14:06, 2 July 2012

--Ethicalthief 08:44, 2 July 2012 (MST)0) I had a good time.

1) It feels like you're conflating a couple things. BW's assumed setting is medieval in outlook, and its character generation supports that. The game design is less modern than I like. It feels like it's far more concerned with getting things right than making things fun. 1.1) I have a modern outlook, yes, but I don't think that's causing me a disconnect with the medieval nature of the setting. Instead, my modern outlook on game design makes me wonder why the system obscures the fun. 1.1.1) See 0); I had a good time. But at some points it felt in spite of the system instead of because of it. 1.1.1.1) I just like doing this.

4.6) Persuasion in general. When the Obstacle is set at a target's will, and then potentially increased for disadvantages and other things, it is automatically at least 3 and probably 4-5. 4.6.1) When a character with Exponent 5 (mine) is supposed to be an expert, exponent 4-5 means I fail ~50% of the time. That number is frustratingly high. 4.6.2) Yes, I can FoRK and find Advantages, but that's not the point. If Exp 5 means I can make a good living at whatever it is because I'm an expert, the basic example of a roll, the lowest Obstacle of a roll, shouldn't be causing me to fail half the time. 4.6.3) It's possible that the Duel of Wits makes Persuasion less frustrating. 4.6.3.1) Though that should only occur when you want to have a debate or something. Not when you want to lean on an innkeeper. 4.6.3.1.1) I still just like making these.

5) You need to remember to give out Artha. I don't know whether you consciously thought there were no moments that merited it at game, or you were caught up in herding us cats and managing the system. 5.1) I would totally have been too busy herding cats to remember.

7.1) I wouldn't worry about explosive character growth right now. This is a test of system, not a long-term campaign you need to balance. 7.1.1) Even if it were, you would get your stride on roll this, don't roll this before we gained more than, likely one point of something. 7.2) I think the sandbox is working fine so far.

--Dieter the Bold 12:06, 2 July 2012 (MST) I don't disagree with your (1) points. More examples and explication of its philosophy would help in finding the fun, but the system doesn't do itself many favors in helping towards that goal. I'd appreciate more from you on what in the system is "pre-modern" compared to modern.

Your (4) points reveal a flaw?/exception? in the skill level system. Most Social skills are either Versus (meaning variable Obstacle) or Obstacle=Target Will (which is default 3). Which means that any rolls you make require exceptional luck, a master level skill, or detailed plotting (Help + Advantage). This definitely seems like a disincentive unless you're making a full-on schemer or diplomat. While the game classifies B5 vs Ob3 as a Routine/Easy test, it's definitely on the high end.

5.1 was for sure the situation, and as I've evaluated how the game went, you were good for a Fate point or two.

You're right on (7). I'm not sure whether I'd pick this back up where we left off or if I'd start again from the beginning.