The Long Road: OOC

[Antilles]

RAW each tradesman bonus is one guy "...Each Tradesman makes a single
Downtime check to earn income at the end of ..." Mechanically, this restricts the number of allowed tradies to a concrete maximum, the number of guests.

As for NPCs well +1 Assistants cost 1 rep each. You have 69 rep but have only spent 65.
You could take 4 helpers plus 'Bob' who has Impress +8

I guess I was a bit unclear about what I meant with the whole 'Tradesman isn't just one person' concept, I'll try to clarify a bit. Basically, even with your 'small caravan' suggestion, counting PC's there's at least a dozen entertainers, over half of which are NPCs. By RAW, those NPC entertainers are at best earning just enough to break even, at worst they're just noise in the background. Seeing as they're (presumably) full-time entertainers and we (the PC's) are probably just doing it to earn our keep at the caravan, it seems a bit wrong to me that they are so completely overshadowed by the PC's. So therefore I thought that making the NPC entertainers mechanically similar to Tradesman (Impress) would be a rather elegant way to let these NPC's contribute directly to the caravan.

If you're concerned about doing Tradesman in this fashion would throw the NPC numbers out of whack, we can meet halfway and say the Tradesman represents the lead entertainer (or merchant, if/when we go for Tradesman (Haggle)), but clarify that it's the entertainers as a whole who earns the money, not him singularly. Also, Tradesmen are limited to 3 per Holding, so no worries about going overboard with Tradesmen.

Alternately, I have made a more detailed suggestion on the spreadsheet. I don't want to get bogged down so you have until Wednesday 6pm (Eastern Australian time) to finalise your proposal on the sheet. Otherwise we'll go with my suggestion made on the sheet

(click to show/hide)

Catodon's Suggestion         
Caravan Holding         
Scale   scale 6   30   3 or 4 wagons
Tradesman (Impress)   4   6   
2 Guards (Goon stats)   2.33333333333333   27   
2 Assistants (pick skills)   2   6   
         
TOTAL      69

   

A couple of issues here.... 2x Guards would give us 20 people, as well as costing 2x Goon XP cost, or 54 xp in this instance. (Yes Guards are friggin' expensive...) Also, if we're using Guards then we're in effect giving stats to most of the NPCs in the caravan, which means IMO one group should be Entertainers (costing a cool 34 xp), with the other group being either Attendants (35 xp), Laborers (27 xp) or Servants (19 xp) with the PC's as the professional guards, or as Man-at-Arms (36 xp) or Goons (27 xp) and using, I dunno, Assistants to represent the remaining NPCs.

It's not a perfect system, and there are several options down the road that can and will be wonky (i.e. if someone were to take Bob the juggler as a contact, using the Entertainer statblock wholesale, the Contact bonus would be noticeably better than the Tradesman bonus), but it's the best we can do with the tools we've currently got.

[Jigger]

Good point. You're right guards are extremely expensive and a bit expendible.

Tradesmen or Assistants is fine with me. Having to put on shows sounds like a downtime activity, so it could be handled either way.


I like the NPC boss idea, it takes some of the organizing pressure off the group, and also gives the GM am easy method of control to help guide the games.

[Mister Andersen]

See, this is why I'd prefer to keep NPCs to an absolute minimum. Worrying about NPCs is a pain, but if we're going to have them having them run the joint seems by far the logical choice for a drop-in style game. Of course, that also raises the question of why we're bothering to expend PC resources on it.

Also, remember that RAW if you're going that way limits scale to higher of prudence or panache

[Jigger]

I was investing in it because still a group and personal resource. A wagon and horses is a lot cheaper right now as a prize, then it is in coin.

Besides last time I checked, you hadn't invested any points into it, so I'm not sure what you're concern is.

[Mister Andersen]

As a current player and future GC I still have to deal with its presence and its ramifications.

[Mister Andersen]

She's Disney-level creepy

[Jigger]

Thanks, I'm not sure how to make her smaller though.

Any pointers?

[Catodon]

Great image.
Every body make sure you have taken your AD for images or wiki.

[Catodon]

As a current player and future GC I still have to deal with its presence and its ramifications.

As a referee my preference for this project is for no underlying organisation and definately no on-going NPCs especially long term bosses. The at the metagame level the organisation only exists because some players wanted it enough to invest in it. Investment was always optional.
By keeping the PCs in charge and following the RAW the caravan is little more than a place to sleep and should provide little in the way of ramifications.

I have posted the next bit so we can keep moving but will call a halt if nessisary while we finalise the caravan.

[Mister Andersen]

Thanks, I'm not sure how to make her smaller though.

Well, assuming you don't have something like photoshop handy, if you upload to a flickr account the site automatically generates smaller versions which you can use.

Alternatively, google provides the following:

[Mister Andersen]

As a referee my preference for this project is for no underlying organisation and definately no on-going NPCs especially long term bosses. At the metagame level the organisation only exists because some players wanted it enough to invest in it. Investment was always optional.
 
By keeping the PCs in charge and following the RAW the caravan is little more than a place to sleep and should provide little in the way of ramifications.

Those desires in no way mesh with actually having PC holdings & associated minions, which are by their very nature permanent right up til the point someone burns them to the ground, and which transfer from adventure to adventure. And they cpme withthe expectation that you'll likely get to know 'Bob' and watch as he develops at the very least a basic personality.

As already noted, the PC with the biggest investment has the least reason to be in charge, AND I think pretty much everyone else seems to want a GCNPC running things in some fashion.

I'm not against the idea of a caravan as a narrative device -- and we are pretty much more or less stuck with it for this adventure I think -- but if we have it then I think it needs to be a GC rather than PC tool. The PCs should be the hirelings / passengers, not the owners.

[Catodon]

As a referee my preference for this project is for no underlying organisation and definately no on-going NPCs especially long term bosses. At the metagame level the organisation only exists because some players wanted it enough to invest in it. Investment was always optional.
 
By keeping the PCs in charge and following the RAW the caravan is little more than a place to sleep and should provide little in the way of ramifications.

Those desires in no way mesh with actually having PC holdings & associated minions, which are by their very nature permanent right up til the point someone burns them to the ground, and which transfer from adventure to adventure.

Yes, sorry that was kinda my point, I'm not keen but also I'm not in charge I just facilitate. THe players seemed to want to build something and I did not want to unreasonably stand in thier way. Besides it was an elegant solution with limited PC reasources to the problem of surviving the harsh weather. Effectively the Players used PC resources to overcome the first challenge of the adventure.

And they cpme withthe expectation that you'll likely get to know 'Bob' and watch as he develops at the very least a basic personality.

No problem I always intended to provide that.

As already noted, the PC with the biggest investment has the least reason to be in charge

Why? I'm not sure I've understood your reasoning.

, AND I think pretty much everyone else seems to want a GCNPC running things in some fashion.

that's not what I've been getting from the conversation in fact my understanding is that most of the players want to be running things

I'm not against the idea of a caravan as a narrative device -- and we are pretty much more or less stuck with it for this adventure I think -- but if we have it then I think it needs to be a GC rather than PC tool. The PCs should be the hirelings / passengers, not the owners.

Totally disagree.

[LordKruelos]

I'm not against the idea of a caravan as a narrative device -- and we are pretty much more or less stuck with it for this adventure I think -- but if we have it then I think it needs to be a GC rather than PC tool. The PCs should be the hirelings / passengers, not the owners.

Totally disagree.

I would argue that the Caravan as a world-item has been created, it won't always be available to the PCs, but it seems reasonable once accepted among this band of traders on the Long Road that one can drop out and reappear later with minimal questions asked (so long as you don't bring trouble following you).

I'd say anyone willing to do the work of giving a nameless "Tradesman #4" a name, personality, and life that exists outside the parameters of the PCs should get bonus AD not be grumbled at.

[LordKruelos]

(click to show/hide)

Grandmother: make a bluff roll to beat 12 to fool the hired help. PC can roll sense motive to see through the act if they want

To speed the game along, would it be easier for the GM to make those rolls since the PC's sheet is right there? Otherwise, you end up losing multiple days for every single roll.
The difference might be if the GM reports the roll (just like if the PC had rolled it) or doesn't (hidden roll)

Thoughts?

Scene 1: The lure of the north
Despite the nervousness of some in the caravan the dark hours pass without incident. You can’t be sure how long you have slept, it is dark so long that your days must begin and end in darkness. By unspoken agreement you slowly rouse and take a meagre breakfast. You were told the far north was a land of ice but you did not really understand it until you were here. It has been days since you saw an animal and there is no wild forage for the horses. Everyone, man and beast, is on rationing. You travel north nurturing hope. A few hours and the sun skims the horizon then vanishes. As the orange glow fades from the sky your heart leaps as to the north you see a twinkle of yellow lights. Out there in the distance is a living village you should reach it in an hour or so.

(click to show/hide)

How are you approaching the village? All together? Send an envoy ahead? Who is visible who is hidden in the wagon? Any other preparations? Etc

I vote for an initial stealthy recon, then, assuming they don't immediately look like warlike folk, a friendly envoy or two presenting the caravan and entertainment in exchange for hospitality.

[Fiendbasher]

As already noted, the PC with the biggest investment has the least reason to be in charge, AND I think pretty much everyone else seems to want a GCNPC running things in some fashion.

I'm not against the idea of a caravan as a narrative device -- and we are pretty much more or less stuck with it for this adventure I think -- but if we have it then I think it needs to be a GC rather than PC tool. The PCs should be the hirelings / passengers, not the owners.

When I suggested throwing rep points in, it was as a group resource... just like the silver. Unfortunately there don't seem to be any rules on group resources (that I've read yet anyway), so we're playing it by ear. Pitching in is entirely optional, it's just something you do if you have the points and there's something you'd like the group to have and be able to use. If you don't want to or can't, you don't have to... nobody will resent you for it, and you'll still have full access to the group resources until the point where, for whatever reason, you decide to leave the group.

I don't think the others should have to "buy you out" if you leave, either.

Also I have no objection to the GM's having some say in what happens with it as there are obviously NPC's involved.

A stylistic note however... when we all decided to make this trip north, I imagine at some point we traded out the horses for a bit hardier sort of animal. Andersen described in one of his posts a shaggy ox... that works. I am a bit concerned though, that anywhere we go we won't be able to make too extended a stay however. It doesn't seem like the people who live in this environment would grow much grain so we're probably carrying all the supply for the beasts that we're going to get. There may be some grass buried beneath the snow in places, though.

To speed the game along, would it be easier for the GM to make those rolls since the PC's sheet is right there? Otherwise, you end up losing multiple days for every single roll.
The difference might be if the GM reports the roll (just like if the PC had rolled it) or doesn't (hidden roll)

Thoughts?

I try to include any rolls I might need with the post where I do it, but I never object to a GM rolling for me if I forgot a roll, or if it's something I shouldn't know about. Do it.  

I vote for an initial stealthy recon, then, assuming they don't immediately look like warlike folk, a friendly envoy or two presenting the caravan and entertainment in exchange for hospitality.

Vashkar could do a fly over while it's dark... but he's unskilled in stealth, a skilled sneaky on the ground might be just as effective if not more. Plenty willing to have a go though if you all think it's a good idea.

When we start getting close, Vash will definitely stay hidden in the wagon until we know how the people are going to react.