Freebooters obviously uses some of the material from dungeon world and the perilous wilds.

10 thoughts on “Freebooters obviously uses some of the material from dungeon world and the perilous wilds.”

1. .

2. Parley is replaced with Negotiate or the CHA Saving Throw moves, I believe.

   There is also no Defend move, but I use it anyway.

3. I also think that a lot of the moves in Freebooters are designed with the big picture in mind of what the game is supposed to be about: Schmucks getting their asses kicked in foreign treasure-lands. No one is gonna listen to a homeless, blood-covered robber, and if he has leverage on them like Parley says, they’ll probably just try and call the local law enforcement!

4. Negotiate is my attempt to write a better Parley, or at least one that flows more easily in play and has a broader use. I wanted a move that could do everything that Parley does, but with an easier and more obvious application to the straight-up buying and selling of goods. I tried to word it so that it can be used to intimidate, charm, or haggle.

   I would love to know what the difference feels like to you, Timothy Stanbrough.

5. I must say that my thoughts were more a gut feeling than deep analysis. I’ll do my best to explain what I feel the difference is.

   First off I think word for word Parley and Negotiate can accomplish the same results. However, considering rpg’s are reliant on semantics the wording of each move will change its use and function in the game.

   Let’s take a look at Parley.

   When you have leverage on a GM Character and manipulate them, roll+Cha. Leverage is something they need or want. ✴On a 10+, they do what you ask if you first promise what they ask of you. ✴On a 7–9, they will do what you ask, but need some concrete assurance of your promise, right now.

   Calling out leverage specifically is useful, it gets the players thinking in terms of their position and how they can exploit the situation. On the other side of the table the GM is aided with the NPC creation system which gets you to create instincts and knacks whenever you encounter someone.

   More importantly are how the results are worded, they all push for further conflict, either with the NPC herself or with the NPCs goals.

   They ask you for something, you need to promise, you need to help now, ect ect.

   Compare this to negotiate where the results suggest transaction rather than exchange. And the name implies money rather than conflict.

   I think this could be a problem when using the move for anything other than haggling, because it doesn’t promote conflict in the same way that parley does.

   When you want something from someone that they don’t want to give up,

   make your case and roll +CHA: on a 10+, they name their absolute minimum price; on a 7-9, they name a price they could live with; on a 6-, mark XP, and prepare to be milked for all you’re worth.

   The results you get out of Negotiate, at least how it’s worded, seem very final.

   I hope that makes sense.

   And if I may, what aspect of parley do you find limiting or difficult to use?

6. The way Parley is required, you have to have “Leverage” over the other party.

   Often, you don’t have leverage. Examples that have come up in play:

   In a shop buying a sword

   Appealing to a Goblin’s “better nature”

   The Negotiate rule says “price”, but it doesn’t have to be monetary price.

7. Just to be clear, I  can see how you can use Negotiate in the same way as parley. 

   Rather I would suggest that while Negotiate fixes the lack of leverage in a bartering situation,  it  also weakens the language of Parley.

   Perhaps i’m wrong though. I’ll think over it some more.

   Another question Jason Lutes, are adventurers meant to negotiate for every treasure after they find a buyer?

   Edit: I’ve been loving the game so far btw, top notch material.

8. No, Timothy Stanbrough, you’re not wrong. I agree that it weakens the language of Parley. That’s what happens when you rewrite a move, by necessity. Negotiate is actually stolen form a G+ post made by John Harper a while back. I Iiked how direct it was, tested it in our home game, and eventually subbed it in for Parley because I like the way it felt in play. Of course, you are free to use Parley in its place if you don’t like the way it feels,

   To what degree adventurers negotiate the price of each treasure will vary from play group to play group, I imagine. What I’ve seen happen in the four campaigns I’ve run to date is, the party finds a buyer for a particular type of item (a sage who buys scrolls, a smith who buys gold and silver to melt down, etc.), and goes through the negotiation process with that buyer. If they’re happy with the transaction and feel like they trust that buyer, we skip rolling to negotiate on future deals and just give them whatever percentage of “retail” value that buyer offered. I never tell the players the actual percentage though, it’s all roleplayed. Sometimes they meet buyers who are really trying to rip them off (6- Negotiate roll and/or NPC character traits like “greedy”). Sometimes they develop relationships with certain buyers, who then contract with them for the spoils of future treasure-hunting. A lot of times the buyers end up being the most developed NPCs in town.

   Short answer: they tend to Negotiate once per buyer, then either trust whatever that buyer’s going to offer them in the future, or try to avoid them/find a different buyer. 

9. Different design goals as well i’m sure, compared to dungeon world. We might end up using both :).

   I like the idea of having specific dealers, I’ll try adding it into my game next time. Although i’m still trying to find the right balance between simulation, downtime and adventuring.. How important is the town phase to the rest of the game. Probably going to varied between groups.

10. My group has never been to town since we started this campaign. They were just commenting on that last night as we were doing end of session. “Hey, we’ve never even done the Carouse move”.

Comments are closed.