[OOC] Worlds of Fire

[Poonbahbah]

Originally Posted by momothefiddler

Sorry for not mentioning it in the thread - I didn't think about character creation overlap. If it ends up being too much, I'd be willing to replace him at the beginning of next mission (with Totem's approval, of course).

No worries, I was thinking the same thing. Especially if his equipment seems over powered which it kinda already does to me, but I ain't posisitive.

[Poonbahbah]

Originally Posted by Totem

[IQ roll for Memory, modifier -3]
John Smith: IQ-3 = 12: 5+5+4 = 14 (failed by 2)
Jorin Slade: IQ-3 = 9: 6+4+3 = 13 (failed by 4)
John Lazarus: IQ-3 = 12: 3+3+1 = 7 (by 5)
Michael: IQ-3 = 11: 4+1+3 = 8 (by 3)

My effective IQ for non spell matters is 20 thanks to the +5 I get from one of my items. All of my stats are at +5 thanks to equipment!

[ericthered]

Where can we get the files on the fate of specific worlds? I really want to check on the world where Michael saw Patrick before we meet the guy.

[momothefiddler]

You are so good at slipway walking. You invent a new kata based on the different movement speeds of different parts.

[Totem]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Where can we get the files on the fate of specific worlds? I really want to check on the world where Michael saw Patrick before we meet the guy.

Any research like that would need to be done back at the Western Harbour. The Shakti don't keep such records themselves since they're only marginally involved in the war, and that is mostly to do with supplying food to the Western Harbour and occasionally sending a team out when the Blazen attack a world that other Shakti live on.

[Poonbahbah]

[OOC: it's not that I wouldn't be willing to get into the role-playing of such a conversation, but with three other players to think of, and when role-playing Harry means being in a hurry to deal with this situation, I don't think we currently have time for it.]

Which is why I said I'd be happy to do it off-screen, so to speak. Or rather that we only had to role-play it out if you wanted to. I recently had a bad experience where someone said they were getting bored with the game because another charecter and mine got into an off topic conversation thanks to my charecters obliviousness to puns and jokes.

Edit:

I'd just about convinced myself that this would require a Flight roll to make a controlled landing or something, but that's for endurance, not control...

Aerobatics is what your looking for maybe?
Aerobatics default of 9 (3d6=11)
If that isn't good enough I'll pick myself up, catch up, and try try again.

Edit2: would it be possible to go around and pick people up while we're still relatively close together on the slipway and plop them down just behind Harry, or whoever I last ploped down in order to keep us together? Or at least get them into the correct lane? And then pick, at least some of, them off if the miss the exit?

[Totem]

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

Which is why I said I'd be happy to do it off-screen, so to speak. Or rather that we only had to role-play it out if you wanted to. I recently had a bad experience where someone said they were getting bored with the game because another charecter and mine got into an off topic conversation thanks to my charecters obliviousness to puns and jokes.

I have no objection to characters role-playing conversations. That being said if people are trying to move things on then I'd request that the conversation gets moved to PM or IM and then posted into the thread later on. As I mentioned, in this case for me to role-play Harry meant cutting the conversation short because he feels that he's on a schedule (and doesn't entirely want to be explaining those kinds of basics to someone who can pick up info like that a lot more easily at the Western Harbour).

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

Aerobatics is what your looking for maybe?
Aerobatics default of 9 (3d6=11)
If that isn't good enough I'll pick myself up, catch up, and try try again.

Landing and taking off doesn't need a roll; I rechecked a few bits (like Flight and Aerobatics) and reached the following conclusion: for taking off and landing, there's no roll; following the slideway likewise has no issues; landing at speed would be a problem requiring a roll, as would anything else listed under Aerobatics. If you're planning on flying frequently then I'd buy up at least one point to get it off default.

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

Edit2: would it be possible to go around and pick people up while we're still relatively close together on the slipway and plop them down just behind Harry, or whoever I last ploped down in order to keep us together? Or at least get them into the correct lane? And then pick, at least some of, them off if the miss the exit?

In theory, yes you could. In practise dropping someone onto the slideway like that could just throw them completely and make things worse. This time around no one actually got lost, everyone has just arrived a bit later than they might have done, so there's no worries.

[momothefiddler]

Originally Posted by Totem

[OOC: now the complications creep in. Shakti aren't Human, and as such they quality for Cultural unfamiliarity (-3 penalty). Additionally, even with the Babel effect, you've still got trouble with the language: as we've already seen, the Shakti don't understand "home", they used "den" instead, and they don't have "police" they have "Justicae". There are dozens of other bits like this. In the Western Harbour these wouldn't be a problem, but here the Babel Effect is working at extreme range and such things don't come out perfectly, giving you effectively Accented comprehension (-1 to appropriate skills). As such the success by 4 becomes Success (Barely). Please include the -4 modifier in future rolls. I was meaning to mention this sooner.]

The Shakt that Slade is speaking to looks surprisingly relaxed about the situation; she's actually looking more nervous about the rest of the team than she is about Slade.

"I suppose I can..." She looks over at the manager who is still talking with Harry but manages to make a few get-on-with-it gestures to hurry her along.

Oh, yeah. I was expecting that, and meant to include a -?, but I guess I forgot.

[Poonbahbah]

Originally Posted by Totem

As a general note here: if any of you have multiple questions to ask then please ask them in bulk where possible; if you want to do bulk rolls for things like Truthsayer then do that as well. The Shakti will respond to direct questions, but are sufficiently overawed that they're not going to be simply volunteering information, so simply asking for general information and hoping that I'll fill in the questions isn't going to work (in general at least).

For the three rolls: one success (barely) on Diplomacy, one fail on Fast-Talk (failed by 5 for IQ 15-5-4 coming to skill 6), and the Charm/ Truthsayer I'm still trying to work out the way that works. To look at it though, the skill for the spell would be the lower of the skill of the person who made it in either that particular spell or Enchant. Since you don't appear to have specified the power for these two spells (and curiously where you have listed power it tends to be 6, which isn't possible since the lowest possible power is 15), I'm ruling that the spells are working at 16. If someone can point me to a rule where it says otherwise in GURPS Basic Set, or GURPS Magic, I'll be happy to reconsider that.

Given that you had a Barely and a Failed By 5, you didn't exactly get much in the way of information (see the note about asking specific questions), and the Shakt in question didn't want to touch the staff. With that in mind I'm going with Smith casting Truthsayer with a success of 2. Resistance roll is [WILL 10: 5+6+2 = 13 (failed by 3)], so you'll either know whether the Shakt has lied in the last five minutes or whether the last thing that he said is a lie. Given that the Fast-Talk was a failure, the last thing that the Shakt said was probably a comment about that rather than relating to the actual situation.

(Deep breath...) Overall, please refer to the comment about specific questions. You can't rely on anything entirely useful based on the Fast-Talk roll though.

I can see why Thorin would say this game takes a lot of work if you want us to ask loads of questions instead of a general one and letting the dice roll do the bulk of the specifics, which is how I've been lucky enough to have it most of the time.

The fast talk roll is at +5 because it's not a spell and my effective IQ is at 20 thanks to a +5 IQ item, that only doesn't affect spell ability, bringing that six up to 11. Which still fails by three. Sorry if the intent of that roll wasn't clear. It was meant to convince the as of yet unnamed Shakti to touch my staff long enough for me to cast charm on them.

Diplomacy roll succeeded by three thanks to the +5 to IQ as well.

Did I forget to make a note at the top of my skill list saying they're all effectively at +5 unless my cloak and/or amulet get stolen? Do you think it would it help if I did?

I assumed I would use truthsayer after I had gotten a response to a question. But I stated a general goal of the questioning rather then a list of specific questions... So I'll be making and posting one of those soonish.

The listed power is for the Power Enchantment, not the effective skill of the item. Power 6 as an enchantment means that the first 6 energy/FP/mana/whatever you want to call it is covered by the item. Free 6d fireballs all day. Or free charms iirc as they "only" cost 6 as well. Spent a large amount of money for power 8 on my amulet so that vigil would count as always on.

I didn't specify power(skill) of items because I figured that was more up to you then me. If I got to pick I'd probably say 20, of course I hired great enchanters. It's not like skill of enchanter is listed in cost of enchanting... But that seemed sorta cheap to try and do so I figure you decide as it's your game and I'm just lucky enough to play in it.

Alright think I covered everything there. Let me know if I missed anything or you want more feedback on something I didn't cover well enough.

[Totem]

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

I can see why Thorin would say this game takes a lot of work if you want us to ask loads of questions instead of a general one and letting the dice roll do the bulk of the specifics, which is how I've been lucky enough to have it most of the time.

The way I'm running this is that the roll will get you a quality of information, but the questions determine what information you are searching for. The reasons for this are two-fold. Firstly, you may wish to read the When in Doubt, Roll and Shout cutout on page 497 of the Basic Set; I am fully aware that I sometimes think at right angles to other people, and so questions help me to not only keep myself on track, but to better guage how everyone else is handling things. Secondly, these are, ultimately, your characters, and I can't claim to role-play them as well as you do; Harry Sheridan has a disadvantage that he is worried by the Powers That Be, meaning that he tends to see god-like beings lurking in the shadows when there aren't any there, and your characters will have similar points that might not even turn up as disadvantages sometimes. Play on these.

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

The fast talk roll is at +5 because it's not a spell and my effective IQ is at 20 thanks to a +5 IQ item, that only doesn't affect spell ability, bringing that six up to 11. Which still fails by three. Sorry if the intent of that roll wasn't clear. It was meant to convince the as of yet unnamed Shakti to touch my staff long enough for me to cast charm on them.

Diplomacy roll succeeded by three thanks to the +5 to IQ as well.

Right... I've frigged my spreadsheet so that I'm running the skills off the modified attributes rather than the base ones. I'll repost stuff in the IC.

Oh, and I'll mention this now: having Nonchalance on your character sheet will get away with a variety of things, but be careful about how you word stuff, as in some cultures you might visit asking if someone wants to "touch your staff" could get you in trouble for sexual harassment (as it is in this case she just thinks that John Smith is being a bit crude, but she's forgiving because of the Diplomacy success).

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

Did I forget to make a note at the top of my skill list saying they're all effectively at +5 unless my cloak and/or amulet get stolen? Do you think it would it help if I did?

Given that I'm running things off my copy of the character sheet, probably not. I've added the +5 to basic attributes (without modifying the point cost). I could do with confirmation of the effective levels of skills and stuff rather than the unmodified ones though.

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

The listed power is for the Power Enchantment, not the effective skill of the item. Power 6 as an enchantment means that the first 6 energy/FP/mana/whatever you want to call it is covered by the item. Free 6d fireballs all day. Or free charms iirc as they "only" cost 6 as well. Spent a large amount of money for power 8 on my amulet so that vigil would count as always on.

That now makes sense.

Originally Posted by Poonbahbah

I didn't specify power(skill) of items because I figured that was more up to you then me. If I got to pick I'd probably say 20, of course I hired great enchanters. It's not like skill of enchanter is listed in cost of enchanting... But that seemed sorta cheap to try and do so I figure you decide as it's your game and I'm just lucky enough to play in it.

I went with 16 originally because that's an awful lot of enchantments on those items which will a) cost a lot in themselves, and b) greatly increase the chances of a critical failure on a single spell and break the item altogether. I'm guessing that at least two or three of these items needed to be replaced due to this kind of issue during their construction, which limited the overall cash available. Obviously, John Smith went with the best enchanters that he could, but at the same time even he doesn't have unlimited funds. I'll compromise on 18 however, on the basis of a reduced effective skill being part of the crafting in order to avert such disasters.