The groups / clumping is interesting. The rules for giving +1 Rank in
subskills are too complex for the gain, and too hard for a GM to remember
all the subskill rank variations, so they will ignore the variations.

The subskill mix of titles are good and seem more spy and less courtier than
those currently bandied about.


Just a general comment - the posts show I'm on my own on the courtier vs
thief/assassin split, so could someone help me understand why everyone wants
to leave out Thief & Assassin overlap and put in lots of Courtier overlap?
Thief & Spy have historically (DQ rules-wise) been a lot closer than
Courtier & Spy.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: dawnhaven@xtra.co.nz [mailto:dawnhaven@xtra.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 14 October 2002 8:31 p.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: [dq] Spy - an oblique approach


Errol and I joined the fun on Saturday, so maybe we preempted the fun -
never one to _follow_ fashion - and wrote a version of Spy.

I have simplified it a bit (or at least inserted a simpler option) and added
a table for reference. I find the simple version bland and the complex
version a bit spicy. bland means more similar spies, spicy means few are the
same. Still there may be some merit in the middle path.

Main reason for circulating is that we have some good groupings, so that a
GM has only 5 groups to remember, and can recall which ones each spy has.

We also introduced "counter spy" and "deception". This way a spy may detect
another at work, and slip them a dummy.

We purposely left out thiefy or assassiny activities. Learn it or hire one.

Once again, thanks to Sally for getting things started and for putting up
with insanity. Hmmm, on re-reading this sentence I think I will leave it as
it ambiguously is...

cheers, Ian and Errol (who knows nothing of this email) <grin>


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

> Just a general comment - the posts show I'm on my own on the courtier vs
> thief/assassin split, so could someone help me understand why
> everyone wants
> to leave out Thief & Assassin overlap and put in lots of Courtier overlap?
> Thief & Spy have historically (DQ rules-wise) been a lot closer than
> Courtier & Spy.

Your not alone :-)

I too think Spy's sneak into places and occasionally remove those who get in
their way :-)

Mandos
/s


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

AndrewW@datacom.co.nz wrote:

>The groups / clumping is interesting. The rules for giving +1 Rank in
>subskills are too complex for the gain, and too hard for a GM to remember
>all the subskill rank variations, so they will ignore the variations.
>
I agree with Andrew.  This seems unusually complex and I think I now 
understand Stephen's comments about sub-skills at various different 
ranks.  Please no.

>Just a general comment - the posts show I'm on my own on the courtier vs
>thief/assassin split, so could someone help me understand why everyone wants
>to leave out Thief & Assassin overlap and put in lots of Courtier overlap?
>
I do not.

 If it appears that way from the Simple Spy doc that I hacked together 
from your more elegant (but more complex) suggestion then it was in 
error.  Perhaps the reason it appears that way is that the purposes of 
the Thief and Assassin skills are fairly clear and thus the boundaries 
with Spy are clear.  The purpose of Courtier is less clear or less 
focused and thus the boundary is ambiguous.  If we were to agree (for 
example) that gaining gossip or other information (though not perhaps 
through illegal means such as blackmail) are part of the Courtier's 
skill set, then I would suggest that the suggested "gossip/converse" 
subskill, along perhaps with a "befriend" subskill could be happily 
moved to Courtier -- where it can be equally used to find out who the 
Duke's new mistress is, as the deployment of the Duke's army.

Cheers,
Martin

-- 

 _/_/  Peace Software International     Email: martin.dickson@peace.com
_/     Martin Dickson                   Phone: +64-9-373-0400
       Senior Analyst                   Fax  : +64-9-373-0401


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

>
> How do GMs feel about keeping which options a mid-to-high rank spy has
taken
> in their head? Is this a problem worth worrying about?
> Nearest thing that we have now is Courtier. In most cases the PC would be
> actively doing something to bring the skill into play. With Spy, I would
> think there are more instances of it being passive from the PCs point of
> view, requiring the GM to remember it.

I dislike 'passive' abilities that require me to fork over infomation
whether the player is snoozing in the chair or not. And I am never going to
remember them unless I know the character (and their players don't take
naps).
'Active' abilities are better. That way the player informs me of whatever
skill, subskill, wierdo thang that they have. Active stuff is far more fun
too and I prefer the players to act rather than react.

Example: The PC needs to retrieve some documents from a town house of some
minor noble. I will ask the character what skills they are using to do the
deed.

Like:

I use my spy to look like a servant and bribe the guard if found snooping.
I use thief and sneak in through the back window, crawl through the house
and sneak out.
I use courtier and intimidate the guard to let me into the palour and seduce
the noble, I leave with the documents.
I use assasian, sap the guard, poison the servant with a blow dart and
torture the noble until he gives me the documents.
I tell the noble that as an Imperial Princess of Alfhiem he had better hand
it over. NOW!
I open a warp gate and little pixies run round the house while a balrog
flattens it, picks up the documents and says 'here you are master'.
I use warrior and smack anybody who tries anything. I go through the front
door.


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dawnhaven@xtra.co.nz [mailto:dawnhaven@xtra.co.nz]
> 
> Errol and I joined the fun on Saturday, so maybe we preempted 
> the fun -
> never one to _follow_ fashion - and wrote a version of Spy.
>
<snip> 

> 
> cheers, Ian and Errol (who knows nothing of this email) <grin>
> 
I'm OK with it. I'd just like to add that we (or maybe it was just me)
thought the 'non-cluster' ranks a bit 'empty'. This was part of the reason
for the 'specialise in sub-skills' bit. Without this, we might like to
change the EP curve to put emphasis on the cluster ranks (note the effective
EP for many (most?) Spies will change radically anyway, assuming the link
with Thief goes).
I wouldn't expect the GM would need to keep track of the exact base chance
of any 'boosted' subskills, the player should know it. It is only an extra
rank in any case - and if the player doesn't have it to hand, they are
likely to miss out, aren't they?

Anyway, I'm not firmly attached to the 'specialise in a sub-skill part'. I
think the 'skill cluster' approach _is_ better than the 'freeform', as it
provides more focus and a better fit with most DQ skills, while being easier
for GMs. I look upon our groupings as 'proof of concept' that balanced
groupings are achievable. Improvement in the detail is certainly possible -
make that likely.

I agree with Martin's comments re refining/reviewing Spy/Courtier
boundaries.

After looking over the skills we are now talking about (rather than various
other ones merely floating about in my head), the only 'passive' one would
seem to be observation, which would generally need another skill or
knowledge to kick in anyway. And to make use of it the PC should probably
say "I look about for anything of interest, Spy 3, Merchant 2"

Cheers
Errol


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

 so could someone help me understand why
> > everyone wants
> > to leave out Thief & Assassin overlap and put in lots of Courtier
overlap?
> > Thief & Spy have historically (DQ rules-wise) been a lot closer than
> > Courtier & Spy.

Thieves steal property
Spies steal information
Thus the traditional Theif /spy overlap.

IMHO the spy/courtier overlap arises because there have been Too few uses of
PC spies to B&E into merchant or naval ship yards, guard houses or other
such places were valuable information is kept, to steal or copy/memorise
documents.
And far more use of PC Spies to gather information from sailors, guardsmen,
courtiers in social interaction, ie using the courtier skill.
Thus current thinking of many on the skills needed for spy has a strong lean
towards the spy/courtier overlap needed for an embasidor or social spy
rather than the military scout or corporate espianage type spy, who would
need b&e skills, as well as camoflage/disguise type skills to successful
observe a target, ie obsevring military camps, fleets outfitting for
voyages, merchant wagon trains.

TO ADD MY THOUGHTS

What sub skills do spies really need, seperate from theif, courtier or
troubadour (milsci & merchant) ?Nothing really.

Under the current rules, if you have both theif and spy you get to use the
best BC  but otherwise, everything in the current spy is in theif, its just
theives do it better than spies of equal rank.

WHAT IF instead of a Spy skill with sub skills, we just have a spy skill
that adds to the rank or BC as apropriate of the theif, courtier and
troubabour etc skill?

This way you will have bonuses from ranks in spy improve a B& E specialists
rank in theif to give a better BC, or an embasidorial type spies ability
choices in courtier, simular to chosing to specialise.
Keep the photographic memory and stealth bonus, and make the using of Theif
abilities (or any other enhanceable skill) with out rank 0 in the skill,
1/2 (BC at Rk0) + spy bonus. All theory, no or very little practice.

Example lock pick - theif  (2x MD + 6x Rk) - (6x lock Rk) thus Spy no theif
becomes (MD + bonus)-(6x lock Rk) very simular to current spy of (MD + 4x
Rk)-(6x lock Rk)

Thus low characters with few skill, or a high rank social spy trying some
B&E out side their normal specialisation would still have some chance of
sucess.
The advantange to having spy over the skills alone, is spy will improve more
than one skill for your ep. plus the memory and stealth bonus.

Warrior is after all a skill that enhances combat skills why not make spy
simular.
Simple enough of a solution?

Helen Saggers


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --