Les Ombres d'Esteren - Forum officiel

My first weird moment was when learning that Empathy makes you faster in a fight. The ability to understand other people's feelings makes you strike first ?
I'd probably replace it with (6-Empathy) to get the opposite effect if I'm running the game, but I wondered what other people think about it.

I think Empathy is a good choice. With the abstract Ways, its going to be tempting to tinker along these lines but I don't think it will be an improvement. Its better to take time to understand the full umbrella of ability each Way covers.

Empathy is more than just understanding people's feelings. In Esteren it basically covers how much a PC is in tune with his surroundings (its used as the base for Natural Environment and Stealth) and other people. As such, Empathy would include the ability to read other people, predict their actions and judge the flow of battle. It makes more sense to add that to Speed, than it does Reason, Conviction or Creativity.

Skywalker a écrit :I think Empathy is a good choice. With the abstract Ways, its going to be tempting to tinker along these lines but I don't think it will be an improvement. Its better to take time to understand the full umbrella of ability each Way covers.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Yes, it's clear that each way is an "umbrella" even more than attributes in many other games.
However, I want to remind you about that line just after the description of Ways. High Ways isn't always a good thing, low Way isn't always a bad thing. In a way, they remind me of the madness meters in Uknown Armies.

Empathy is more than just understanding people's feelings. In Esteren it basically covers how much a PC is in tune with his surroundings (its used as the base for Natural Environment and Stealth) and other people. As such, Empathy would include the ability to read other people, predict their actions and judge the flow of battle.

It's all this, and more. But it doesn't mean having it is a good thing.
Yes, Empathy is senses and ability to cold-read people. That much is clear even from the most cursory reading of the rules.
But it's also the ability that is most likely to make you hesitate before you hack down another person using an axe, or even before you shoot them down from ambush. If anything, higher Empathy is more likely to make you go "I have to stab him so he doesn't stab me, but he's going to be in so much pain if I do this that..."
And usually it would make you go for it at the wrong moment, too.
Hence why I offered my rule change. It would mean that the less Empathy you have, the less you hesitate before you go for the kill. Which is consistent with what I know about psychology of extreme situations.

It makes more sense to add that to Speed, than it does Reason, Conviction or Creativity.

I beg to differ. Conviction might well be the better choice if you want to add a straight Way. It's much easier to assume that the other person having to die is not your fault but a higher being's decision,if you believe in said higher being to begin with!
In a darker theme, it's much easier to believe that whoever is facing you is a bad person if you're absolutely certain you're the good person there, and therefore, they deserve to be hacked down. Either of those would result in lessened hesitation.
Empathy, though, would still tend to slow you down.

I think that's enough on this matter .

About the two-weapon fighting, I'd like to note that the only thing I dislike is it giving you greater benefit than a shield. Granted, it's easy to construct it as the skill in using the off-hand, including a shield. (And whoever thinks a shield isn't an easy to wield offensive weapon has never been punched with one. If it had the reach of a sword, I'd rather fight with two shields than two swords).
Arguably, I think Esteren makes TWF far more realistic than most systems. After all, you would use one of those either in defence or in trying to free the way for the other. Striking with both hands at once is something I've never seen used.

So, the winner in this picture probably simply tied the main weapon with his second one, and stabbed, getting an Offensive bonus from his TWF skill.
Or maybe he deflected an attack with his own and made a riposte, using TWF for a Defensive bonus. Since his opponent was in Offensive mode, he still got a heavy hit in, the problem was to avoid being hit.

Granted, I'm sure the Renaissance masters weren't playing Esteren. My point is simply that the rules emulate the feeling from reading the manuscripts quite well.

Oh, and one last thing, I think the rules for multiple opponents are too forgiving . Compare with all of them getting a cumulative +2 bonus to attack for each opponent beyond the first, and maybe a +1 to their defence for every other opponent that can reach you. Because you really ain't got the time for a carefully-planned attack if there's another one!
Now, that would require some of the tactics you see in swashbuckling movies.
Does that mean I dislike the game? Of course not, all of that is easily fixed with a couple simple houserules! I'm mentioning them here because someone else might want to try using them as well, that's all.

AssenG a écrit :However, I want to remind you about that line just after the description of Ways. High Ways isn't always a good thing, low Way isn't always a bad thing. In a way, they remind me of the madness meters in Uknown Armies.

That's true. A high Empathy may call for an Influence Test if you decided to inflict cruel amounts of pain on your target, such as torture.

AssenG a écrit :But it's also the ability that is most likely to make you hesitate before you hack down another person using an axe, or even before you shoot them down from ambush. If anything, higher Empathy is more likely to make you go "I have to stab him so he doesn't stab me, but he's going to be in so much pain if I do this that..."

I don't think I would want any rule that says being more aware of other's feeling and thoughts makes one slower in combat. That seems to be a very limited interpretation of that stat IMO and more intrusive than Esteren's system is intended to be.

If it was an unusual situation, such as attacking a child, a beautiful animal or maybe a mother defending her baby, that would seem to come under the Influence Test of Empathy.

Skywalker a écrit : That's true. A high Empathy may call for an Influence Test if you decided to inflict cruel amounts of pain on your target, such as torture.

Wait, you think an weapon attack doesn't produce "cruel amounts of pain" on the target? In my book, cruel is cruel, even if it's necessary.

I don't think I would want any rule that says being more aware of other's feeling and thoughts makes one slower in combat. That seems to be a very limited interpretation of that stat IMO and more intrusive than Esteren's system is intended to be.

If it was an unusual situation, such as attacking a child, a beautiful animal or maybe a mother defending her baby, that would seem to come under the Influence Test of Empathy.

Yes, I said we might have to agree to disagee, didn't I ?

AssenG a écrit :Wait, you think an weapon attack doesn't produce "cruel amounts of pain" on the target? In my book, cruel is cruel, even if it's necessary.

No, I don't . But I do think empathic people can fight without being hindered by their ability to sense feelings and thoughts of others. Its too simplistic to equate sensing feelings and thoughts of others with universal reluctance to attack. For example, what if a highly empathic person attacks someone who is torturing an innocent or something that doesn't feel pain like a zombie?

This situation is best dealt by the wider interpretation of what Empathy means to include an awareness of one's surroundings (as already covered above) and the use of Influence Tests where appropriate.

Skywalker a écrit :

AssenG a écrit :Wait, you think an weapon attack doesn't produce "cruel amounts of pain" on the target? In my book, cruel is cruel, even if it's necessary.

No, I don't . But I do think empathic people can fight without being hindered by their ability to sense feelings and thoughts of others.

You might well think that. I prefer to believe people with actual combat experience and psychologists, though .

This situation is best dealt by the wider interpretation of what Empathy means to include an awareness of one's surroundings (as already covered above) and the use of Influence Tests where appropriate.

And I find it problematic to state that the best killers are also the most empathic people.
So maybe it's just me, but I still plan to using said houserule if I run Esteren.

So, enough on this issue, I'd say. What do you think about making the multiple opponents nastier?

Hey a lot of interesting stuff there
But sorry I have read quite fast, excuse any poor comprehension or repetition in my post. I am the main author of the game system so I will try to give my point of view.

About the ways and the combat...

Hence why I offered my rule change. It would mean that the less Empathy you have, the less you hesitate before you go for the kill.

AssenG, it can be interpreted. Ways are psychological and therefore several interpretations are possible. Through the Shadows of Esteren, we proposed a system that relies on a particular interpretation of the ways but I am sure GL can make another interpretation.

After numerous playtest, we also considered the balance in terms of game design between the Ways and each things like speed, attack, defense. Roleplay concept are great, I love thel so much but in my opinion a game system should first run correctly, be fun and be balanced. The game system really matter. We have tried to do this but I don't know if we succeeded.

If you choose another interpretation of ways, (and I think you really can, it could be really relly interesting) but be sure to balance all the things like speed attack, madness and all. You know it is like domino, you change one thing and everything is changed...

And yes it is VERY deliberate that the fight is not only summarized by the strength or agility.

That said, my real issue with multiple attacks is not the attacker's actions per se, but the way in which a character *defends* against multiple attacks.

As stated in the book, it is managed like normal fights. No penalty, no adjustments but of course the defender can only attack ONE single opponent.

The playtest showed that fighting against multiple opponents are so fatal that there is no need to add further adjustments that would slow the whole. I agree, we clearly sacrificed many simulationists aspects for speed and efficiency during the game.

Besides, combat rules are only three pages ... obviously you are free and encouraged to complete according your style of game

Nelyhann a écrit :Hey a lot of interesting stuff there
But sorry I have read quite fast, excuse any poor comprehension or repetition in my post. I am the main author of the game system so I will try to give my point of view.

About the ways and the combat...

Hence why I offered my rule change. It would mean that the less Empathy you have, the less you hesitate before you go for the kill.

AssenG, it can be interpreted. Ways are psychological and therefore several interpretations are possible. Through the Shadows of Esteren, we proposed a system that relies on a particular interpretation of the ways but I am sure GL can make another interpretation.

After numerous playtest, we also considered the balance in terms of game design between the Ways and each things like speed, attack, defense. Roleplay concept are great, I love thel so much but in my opinion a game system should first run correctly, be fun and be balanced. The game system really matter. We have tried to do this but I don't know if we succeeded.

If you choose another interpretation of ways, (and I think you really can, it could be really relly interesting) but be sure to balance all the things like speed attack, madness and all. You know it is like domino, you change one thing and everything is changed...

And yes it is VERY deliberate that the fight is not only summarized by the strength or agility.

Yes, Nelyhann, I agree a game system must first run smoothly. But then, we already have that in Esteren, AFAICT.
I'll take exception to the notion of "balanced", though. I mean, you don't need Empathy to be helpful in combat for the game to be balanced. You can have other uses for it, and if they preclude or replace combat, it's still balanced even if Empathy is detrimental during combat.
And well, not making enemies is easier with higher Empathy. Which means you need to fight less, and probably have friends to help you survive it.
That's still balanced. It's just a different balance point to the one in the rules. Just like any object might have different points of balance while having roughly the same shape, so could a ruleset.
Of course, if you think it's a good idea for someone with Empathy 5, Combativeness 2 to strike before the guy with Combativeness 5, Empathy 1, it's a different point of balance to the one I tend to prefer, that's all. I posted the rule as an option, and was fully aware some people would dislike it.
Now, I'm just going to follow the other discussions in the thread. They're more interesting even to me.
So far, the Riposte question seems like a discussion between people that prefer more or less abstract representations of combat. But maybe I'm wrong on this and there's an objectively better way to treat it.

I think the discussion of Empathy here is missing the fact that just because you can sense someone's feelings, that doesn't mean you care. Historically, value systems have been extraordinarily varied: people have been able to do horrendous things because their values allowed them to justify their acts as being against targets who didn't 'count' as human or as being part of the natural order. There's no reason to think these people lacked empathy - they just lacked our moral code, so it doesn't look like empathy to us.

SoE's Empathy emphasises being at one with nature, and we know from elsewhere in the book that its nature is anything but 'nice'. It's beautiful but can also be capricious and cruel. It strikes me that a very empathic person from this world could quite easily justify killing in open combat to himself, precisely because he understands the red in tooth and claw side of nature so well. Perhaps he says a prayer for the soul of his fallen opponent out of respect, when a less empathic person wouldn't. But the combat itself wouldn't be an issue.