Oderint dum probent is a blog about Russian Military History. The February 3rd post includes this map which, according to the blog writer (and as near as I can determine using online translation), is a map of Kiev "Upper Town" built in 1654 at St. Michael's Mount. The drawing is either from 1654-58 or 1669-1673. On the map is marked "okolnichy yard." Okolnichy is a type or rank of governor or administrator. In 1656-58 the commander in Kiev appointed okolnichy Andrei Vasilievich Buturlin, and in 1669-1673 - Gregory Afanasevicha Kozlovsky.
The map is conveniently oriented to the cardinal points, close to the standard (i.e. the north is at the top). In my experience with 17th century maps this is unusual. Most maps from that period choose (for no apparent reason) some other orientation.  

St. Michael's Cathedral on the map is identified clearly and unmistakably.  

I've added this map to my file for Russia. Should the PCs ever get that far east I now have a handy town map. And for those that like the idea of a campaign in the Wild Wild East, Kiev would make a great civilized starting place.

English Royal Ordinance 1637

The always interesting English Civil War blog recently had a post on Royal Ordinance in 1637. (I read it back when it came out, but my ready to post queue is 2-3 weeks out so it took awhile for you to see my post.) Now I'll admit that if it had been a 1637 (or better yet 1627) list of French Royal Ordinance I'd have been more intrigued and I probably would have bumped this post up in my queue. But our campaign is set in 1624 France and none of our PCs really care what sort of cannon the foul smelling Le Rosbifs use on their barbaric little island.

However the link in the article took me to a very nerdy web site with several interesting technical articles about historic ordnance. Just glancing at a few the articles I found several interesting factoids.

Interesting Factoid #1: Cannon and their shot were cast so that the diameter of the gun was wider by a fixed ratio than the diameter of the shot used. This difference or gap was known as windage.

Interesting Factoid #2: The usual ratio for the weight of powder to the weight of the round shot used in a cannon varied both over time and according to how far away the target was that the gunner was trying to hit. In general there were standard ratios that varied as technology changed.

• ¹/₂  the weight of the ball around 1600;
• ¹/₃  the weight of the round shot was the standard British service charge from 1760 onwards. 

The greater weight of powder in the early period was due to powder of lesser quality and cannon cast with greater windage. Because of this even though more powder was used the ranges achieved would have been similar.

Interesting Factoid #3: Territorial Waters was defined by how far your coastal gun batteries could fire. One of the reasons put forward for the international agreement that territorial waters extend 3 nautical miles from the coast, is that 3 nm was the maximum range of shore battery guns in the 18th century. In the mid 20th century the distance for Territorial Waters was extended to 12 nm.

Here are the articles from which the various factoids were derived.

Cannonball Sizes 

This article has an analysis of both weight and diameter and a comparison to the nominal gun sizes of the day. It also has a nice explanation of windage and its affect on Early Modern gunnery.

Smooth Bore Cannon Ballistics

This article covers the ballistics of Early Modern smooth bore cannon. It includes information on  the weight ratio of powder to shot that was used in the cannons in the period and an interesting footnote on how artillery range affected maritime law. 

Alternate Chase Rules

I recently came across An Updated Version of My Chase Rules on the Retired Adventurer blog. I seldom play games (or write house rules) that use dice matching. At heart I'm a numbers guy so totaling has never been an issue and I have to admit I'm a bit prejudiced against. Matching seems like a kids game to me. 

However, chase scenes in RPGs tend to fall flat for me. Seldom do I get the suspense and unexpectedness of an action movie chase nor the heart pounding adrenaline of real chases. What I usually see in RPGs is one of the following. (Sometimes a combination of one or more of the following.)

• A strict comparison of rate of speed where 12" movement rate always catches 9" movement rate (boring).
• A series of skill rolls until someone fails or (worse yet) until someone rolls a critical or fumble (repeated die rolling without a state change is tedious and boring).
• A series of skill rolls that add to a total until it gets high or low enough for something to happen (at least there is a state change, but this is still tending to tedium). 
• Something that requires the use of 4 or more tables and the calculation of a lot of modifiers.
• Something where the players and GM have to think of one outlandish or creative thing to try and boost their chances of a skill roll. (Can be fun, but can also default to one of the above. And if the GM or players aren't feeling the creativity then expecting them to imagine what James Bond would do in a coach chase in 1624 London can be an exercise in frustration.)

I want something simple, but I want something that will yield some unexpected results and that doesn't require everyone at the table to be really imaginative. If you've seen one cart of cabbages in the Paris streets...well you maybe get my drift. 

I think that what John Bell came up with might fit the bill or at least be a step in the right direction. He wrote his rules for some D&Desque OSR kind of game so I'll need to do a bit of modification to make it fit better with H+I. On the plus side the default roll is 2d6 which is exactly H+I. So that's a plus. 

While I was at it I thought I'd try writing up the rules in a way that I find easier to parse. And yes I did play SPI games before I played RPGs thank you very much.

Optional Chase Rules for H+I

EDIT: I've revised the rules based on playtest examples. You can see them tomorrow.

Once a chase, route, or pursuit begins use the following procedure. A chase roll is 2d6 plus or minus dice based on various modifiers. It uses dice matching not totals.

1.      Make a Chase Roll. Each group or side rolls separately. (The default roll is 2d6.)

1.1.   If the fugitives are significantly slower than their pursuers they add 1 extra die to their chase roll for each significant level slower e.g. foot pursued by horsemen, the foot roll 3d6 for their chase roll.

1.2.   If the fugitives narrate some clever maneuvering or other interference with the pursuit, the pursuers only roll 1d6. In this case the pursuers cannot corner the fugitives that round since they cannot get a match. In many circumstances being faster than the pursuers counts as clever maneuvering.

1.3.   Pursuers and fugitives may split up. Each group makes separate chase rolls. For simplicity of play, a group may only split up if they are taking a separate route, moving at significantly different speeds, etc.

1.4.   If the pursuers are unable to continue or choose not to continue pursuit the Chase Ends.

2.      Compare the Dice for each chase roll with that of all other groups or sides. Events occur in the order listed.

2.1.   Fugitives: If all dice match e.g. doubles, triples, etc. the fugitives have escaped and the Chase Ends.

2.2.   Pursuers: If both dice match they corner the fugitives. Ordinary combat resumes and the Chase Ends.

2.3.   Pursuers: If dice total “7” they may perform 1 major or 1 minor action: Bladework, Reload, etc.

2.4.   Fugitives: If dice total “7” they may duck out of sight and hide (Sneak) or they may perform 1 major or 1 minor action: bladework, reload, etc. If they hide, then the pursuers must notice them (combined action Savvy roll) in order to continue the chase. If they fail, the Chase Ends.

2.5.   If a die in the fugitives chase roll matches a die in the pursuers chase roll then members of either group who have a ready and loaded weapon may exchange missile fire e.g, make Ranged Attacks. This is quick or snap shot, therefore they cannot perform other actions such as Aim Shot, Reload, etc.

3.      If the chase is still on, go back to step 1 and repeat.

Fortune Points: Spending a fortune point allows that side to roll one extra die and then choose one of their dice to discard. There may be situations where the GM will decide that 1 fortune point must be spent for each Hero in the group rather than a single fortune point for the entire group.

FAQ                                  

How are differences in speed handled?

• Minor differences in speed are ignored. Significant differences in speed are reflected by changing the number of dice that are rolled by the slower party.
• Significantly slower fugitives roll more dice. Rolling more dice significantly decreases the probability that the fugitives will escape since it is much harder to roll triples on 3d6 (6/216) than it is to roll doubles on 2d6 (6/36). Similarly rolling more dice decreases the probability that they can hide since it is harder to roll a “7” on 3d6 (15/216=7%) than it is on 2d6 (6/36=17%).
• Significantly slower pursuers will (usually) be limited to rolling only 1d6. This prevents them from catching the fugitives. They can hope to get a match and then hope that their Ranged Attack hits and causes enough damage to slow the fugitives. If it makes sense in a particular situation GMs might allow fatigue to slow the fugitives. Note too that their chance of getting a match is lower since they only have one die to match with.

You said that “usually” a slower pursuer would be limited to rolling only 1d6. Why wouldn’t they always have to roll 1d6?

• Because sometimes they can’t use their speed to full effect e.g. on a very crowded city street. In those situations the fugitive cannot effectively move significantly faster.

What if both the pursuers and the fugitives succeed in the same kind of matching?

• Outcomes operate in the order listed. So fugitives who roll and get all matching dice escape and the chase ends. Therefore it doesn’t matter what the pursuer rolled since the chase is over. If it seems appropriate to the situation the GM may rule that a pursuer whose roll would have allowed a missile attack or melee attack may get a parting shot. Which in some cases may prevent the fugitive from escaping. Parting shots should be rare in this system.

What do you mean the “GM may rule” I mean the rules are not comprehensive.

• What I mean is exactly what I said. There may be situations where the GM should rule that something different happens than what an exact and literal interpretation of the rules would achieve. Dealing with unusual situations and corner cases is one reason tabletop RPGs have a GM instead of a 4000 page manual.

What are Fortune Points?

• They are what a Honor+Intrigue calls bennies. You may have played other games with Hero Points, Force Points, or Fate Points. Those too are bennies. This post talks about Fortune Points. Or just buy the rules and read ‘em yourself. I’m sure Chris Rutowsky could use a few more bucks, or Euros, or pounds, or what have you. 

300

No this is not Sparta. Nor is this post about Frank Miller's fantasy comic book movie about men without shirts.

I just wanted to celebrate my 300th post. Yay me!

And just to keep this post on topic, here's a picture of Vincent Regan who plays Leonidas' loyal and nearly naked friend in 300.

This is from a different movie - Bathory - set in the late 16th and early 17th century and so is useful for the Early Modern period. And if you play RPGs and don't know who Countess Bathory was....well you should.

In a previous post I talked about how combat sometimes bogs down in H+I and I suggested some house rules for Fast Combat to address this. In our last session we got a chance to try out Fast Combat. I had already presold the idea to my wife prior to the session. Ironically she is the fastest at using the existing rules but equally comfortable with roleplaying with fewer, lighter, or even no rules. So she was an easy sale. For the other players I pitched the idea at the start of the session. Unsurprisingly reactions were mixed. My player who least enjoys rules was a bit optimistic. My player who most enjoys rules has some trepidation about how this would work, what impact it would have on the heroes in general, and how it would effect his characters in particular. I think he was comforted by the fact that what would constitute an "important confrontation" was going to partially be determined by the players themselves. So if he wanted to use the full system he had that as a justification.

Overall they were willing to give it a try.  I used the examples of natural language from my post and they seemed to Grok that.

Fast Combat seemed to work well - it certainly accomplished my intention of speeding up conflict resolution while retaining most of the look and feel of H+I. In that session they managed to achieve their goal of obtaining documented evidence of who was involved in plotting treason against King and Cardinal and what some of their specific plans were. This involved a lot of roleplaying and talking and required the resolution of a fair number of confrontations. By my rough count there were

• (4) Fast Combats where lone Heroes fought pairs of Pawns.
• (14) Miscellaneous non combat conflicts e.g. climbing walls, persuasion rolls, searching, and such.
• (1) Big Confrontation. 

The big confrontation had 2 Heroes and 2 Retainers on the player side vs. 1 Villain, 3 Retainers, and 6 Pawns on the opposing side. This is the sort of combat that can end up taking half or more of a 3.5 - 4 hour session. But by using Fast Combat for some of the confrontations we were able to resolve the combat in about an hour or so. And we reached a good stopping place well before our turn into a pumpkin midnight deadline. 

One unanticipated result of using fast combat was that I think it may have helped the players try some more creative actions instead of trying to choose the most optimal of the combat maneuvers listed in the rules. That may simply have been coincidence at work, but if it is an actual outcome of the rules switch that would be an unexpected bonus.

Next session the PCs plan to blockade the Loire river and interdict the supply and troop boats that the traitors are sending upriver from Nantes to Orleans. This will provide another opportunity to use Fast Combat and to dust off the H+I Shipboard and Battle rules. It should be fun.

Types of Sieges and Their Use for RPG Adventures

Siege of La Rochelle, with nearby Île de Ré, by G.Orlandi, 1627.

An important, perhaps to the participants even the key, feature of Early Modern were sieges. It is true in all times and all places that soldiers spend very little of there actual time engaged in battle, especially big, clash of armies battles. Hence the aphorism that war is -

Months of boredom punctuated by moments of extreme terror.

A lot of a soldier's time is spent waiting and trying to stave off the boredom of having to wait. And in early modern warfare some significant time periods were spent waiting on one side or the other of a siege line. Sieges could last for years: 

• Ostend (1601–04)
• Breda (1624 – 1625)
• La Rochelle (1627–1628)
• Mantua (1629–30)
• Casale Monferrato (1629–31)
• Candia (Crete) (1648–69) Yeah that’s right that's  twice as long as the legendary 10 year siege of Troy.
• Waterford (1649-1650)
• Copenhagen (1658–1659)
• Fort Zeelandia (1661–1662)      
• Ceuta (1694–1727) - 33 years! Claimed as the longest siege in history.

 

Our post Blitzkrieg, post Shock & Awe modern military viewpoint has a lot of difficulty comprehending the importance and focus that siege warfare and fortification design held on 17th century military and political thinkers and decision makers. Indeed we have a lot of trouble understanding the thought processes of the General Staff on either side in the First World War or the French over reliance on the Maginot line that followed it.



Capturing strong points was important to the way political and military leaders conceptualized war and its aims. And for the noble classes who provided most of the officers in the armies of the period, war was a way to gain glory and renown. And with the exception of a one army smashing into another sort of big battle - which only happened rarely in that or most periods, a successful conducted siege - whether as the besieger or the defender was likely to result in glory and promotions for some of the officers. And for the besiegers there might even be the bonus of a chance to loot the town.

The original inspiration for my post was an article I read about a year ago on the English Civil War blog Siege types of the English Civil War by David Flintham, a military historian specialising in 17th century sieges and fortifications. Flintham says,

"The origins of the great transformations of the 18th and 19th centuries (the Enlightenment, and the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions) are firmly in the 17th century. The transformation on the battlefield was no less dramatic – military engineering which was regarded as an ‘art’ during the 16th century was very much a science by the end of the 17th ..." 

Siege warfare with on one side the immense precisely designed star-shaped fortifications on the one  side and the geometric traceries of multiple circumvallations connected by parallel communication trenches on the other is the aspect of warfare most amenable to the new fascination with reason and science. And the acknowledged master of the period was Vauban.

Later Flintham divides sieges into four types.
"Civil War sieges fall into four types:

• The coup de main, where surprise was used (such as Alexander Leslie’s capture of Edinburgh Castle in 1639).
• The ‘smash and grab', where an assault was launched after a preliminary bombardment, a preferred tactic of the New Model Army (and on at least one occasion, at Dartmouth Castle in 1646, the assault was launched without any bombardment). Here, just the threat of the assault was often enough to persuade the garrison to surrender.
• The blockade, which was a longer-lasting affair, and the besieger invested the place of strength, preventing communication and offensive activities by the garrison. This was the preferred option by an attacker unwilling (or unable) to attempt an assault and was used (without much success) by the Royalists at Gloucester, Plymouth and Lyme Regis.
• Finally, and quite uncommon was the complete investiture, where a circumvallation of rampart and ditch, fort and battery would be constructed around the entire town, in so doing cutting it off from the outside world. Examples of this are few: Newark (1645-6), Oxford (1646) and Colchester (1648)."

  Cardinal Richelieu at the Siege of La Rochelle, Henri Motte, 1881.

These same categories are prevalent in nearly all military periods. Any of these types could be rich fodder for an RPG. Note that here I am not contemplating an RPG where the players are running the characters who are commanding the opposing armies or major units. That situation is closer to the typical wargaming session than it is to the typical RPG session. And if all the players are up for that the appeal should be obvious. Instead lets look at the more common situation where the PCs do not control major military units. So how does the GM use these situations? Let's look at them one by one.

• The traditional OD&D dungeon crawl is an example of a coup de main. And it points the way towards how to use the PCs. Obviously they, with their mad skillz and willingness to take insane risks at the drop of a gold piece are invaluable for a surprise assault.
• The 'smash and grab' also sounds like a traditional dungeon crawl, but arguably the preliminary bombardment may differentiate the two. Though clearly these two categories overlap as Flintham acknowledges when he mentions that the assault on Dartmouth Castle was launched without any bombardment. And presumably the assault on Dartmouth came as a surprise to defenders who, once the saw the besieging army march on up to their walls, were probably expecting the traditional bombardment prior to an assault. The PCs are perfect for the quintessentially forlorn hope that leads the assault. And if your game is one that features powerful magic users (like many versions of D&D) why your PCs are also the artillery for the initial bombardment of the 'smash and grab.' And don't forget the defenders. Most fortifications have a few key areas and a few key vulnerabilities. Put the PCs there defending the important redoubt or holding the gateway once the ram has battered it down.
• The blockade is probably the least used type for RPGs, with the possible exception of  naval and sci-fi based RPGs. The blockade and on its other side the blockade runner (you know that ship that we see at the beginning of A New Hope and the end of Rogue One). In part I suspect that is because blockade duty, like a complete investiture, is boring most of the time, but it lacks the fun of siege engines and the pageantry of one army staring at the other across their fortress walls and encircling  circumvallations. As mentioned, crashing the blockade is probably the easiest and most natural use for PCs. For naval blockades it does require that the PCs have a ship and for land blockades they should be mounted rather than infantry. 
• The complete investiture has some of the same aspects as the blockade. We may see the defenders sending for help like we see, unsuccessfully, in Last of the Mohicans. PCs are perfect for this role. Otherwise I think that the investiture is best used as a backdrop. It may be the starting point for an assault or escalade (ascent by rope or ladders) which defaults to either the coup de main for, say a night escalade, or to the 'smash and grab' for an attack on a breach in the wall or a day time assault under covering fire. Another way to use the full investiture type of siege is assign the PCs to special forces or commando roles. They may be tasked to special missions to: sabotage an enemy battery, capture or kill an enemy leader, poison the water supply, blow up the ammo dump, set fires, drop the drawbridge and jam the portcullis, etc. I used several of the special missions during an arc where I set the PCs inside the town of Bergen-op-Zoom during the Spanish siege. Their roles included counter espionage, foiling attempts to blow up the towns powder magazine or to poison wells, stopping terror attacks aimed at destroying civilian will, holding important strong points against vigorous assault, and launching harassing raids to sabotage enemy guns or destroy the attackers morale.
• Flintham left out one more way to take a fortress - treason. This too is good fodder for the PCs and it allows more scope for the more talkative and intellectual PCs and players beyond simply killing everything in their path. Figuring out how to find a weak defender who is susceptible to bribery or threats on the one hand or, for the defender, trying to catch the attacker's saboteurs and agents provocateur before they can strike on the other.

Painters of the New Cordovan School including New Boons and Flaws for H+I

Antonio del Castillo y Saavedra, Joseph Sold by his Brothers, c.1660.

When I quickly glanced at the title Painters of the New Kordovan School I thought the post would give me fluff and NPCs for some fictional Spanish Painting School. Which it sort of does and mostly doesn't. But I kind of liked the idea of a wandering band of Spanish-style Painters who might know and like or even be rivals with someone like Velasquez or that Savedra guy. So I decided to convert the group to a possible Early Modern setting and to the Honor+Intrigue system.

History Is Cool

Antonio del Castillo y Saavedra was an actual painter from Cordova and there was a painting circle with his name. So a a group of painters calling themselves the New Cordovan School makes historical fictional sense, which is kind of cool.

A Few Caveats

First, I don't have the Conan rules. I think I have a published Adventure written for the old TSR Conan system buried in a box somewhere. A friend of mine wrote it and he gave me a copy. The adventure actually looked kind of cool as I recall, but it's been decades since I read it. So I'm totally winging the stats for what I'm converting to H+I from. 

Second, in converting these characters I’m not going to be concerned with making points come out exactly even with H+I starting heroes nor Villains or even with Retainers of levels 1, 2, or 3. Essentially treat these characters as either Heroes/Villains or Retainers with a flexible number of points and boons. You could certainly get characters like this with a bit of tweaking or in some cases the acquisition and expenditure of  Advancement Points, but I'm not going to worry about any of that. Just think of these characters as being a bit special. 

For conversion purposes: 

• Might is based on Prowess and Endurance.
• Daring is eyeballed based on the character type and background, whether they end up with an H+I martial career, and how much fighting seems to be a focus for them. 
• Savvy is based on Knowledge and Perception.
• Flair is based on Insight, character fluff, and designer judgement.
• Brawl and Melee are based on Fighting and any the level of weapon skills listed. 
• Ranged is based on the level of ranged weapon skills listed.
• Defense is based on Fighting and what seems appropriate to the character.

Several characters have an Acrobatics 2 skill listed. I’m skeptical that they are supposed to be professional acrobats and suspect this is supposed to indicate they are dexterous and capable of the sort of swashbuckling actions that might look like acrobatics to we normal people who live in the real world, but that in H+I is probably covered by the system assumptions that Heroes can do cool and heroic things particularly if they have an above average Daring or Flair. 

For each character I'll provide some designer commentary on how I made my decisions. I dare you to disagree with my decisions. :-)

Volmercer / Zingara Artisan (name change: Victoriano)

Gambler, Miserly
Prowess 1
Acrobatics 2, Movement 5, Strength 5
Endurance 0
Damage 6, Magic Endurance 2
Fighting 0
Rapier 5, Dirk 4
Knowledge 1
Reading/Writing 4, Survival 2, Carpentry 4, Artisan (Painter) 5
Perception 0
Medicine 4
Insight 0
Hypnotism 2, Personal Magnetism 4, Minstrel 2
Equipment
Rapier, Steel Helmet, Bronze Cuirass

Zingara is a Spain analog so I’ll change the name to fit the location. A quick Google search for “Spanish names starting with V” gives me several names to choose from. For now I’ll use Victoriano. 

I assumed Gambler and Miserly are both flaws. Two flaws seems to fit the other three characters so that seems like a good assumption. Gambler is already covered in H+I as the Flaw: Vice (gambling addiction). Miserly is not an existing flaw, so I created a new flaw based on the existing flaw of Spendthrift as a model. 

For careers I use the closest H+I analogue, so Carpenter 4 becomes Craftsman (Carpenter) 2. Prowess 1, Strength 5, and Damage 6 lead me to figure he should have an above average Might 1. Knowledge 2 leads me to Savvy 1. Most of the other listings are managed as careers, but Personal Magnetism and Hypnotism I cover by giving him a high Flair including the Boon: Beguiling and the Charlatan career. Given his primary career is painter not soldier and the setting is 17th C Spain and not Zamora, I delete the armor but keep the rapier. I might have given him a specialization with Rapier since it is higher than the score for Dirk, but I’m satisfied with a general melee of 2 for a painter. Given the large number of careers, I assume his Survival 2 skill is covered by one or more of the various careers.

Might 1           Daring 0          Savvy 1           Flair     3

Brawl 0           Melee 2           Ranged 0         Defense 1

Carpenter 2    Painter 3          Physician 2      Charlatan 1      Minstrel 1

Boons: Beguiling, Jack of All Trades (this justifies a 5^th career)

Flaws: Miserly (New), Vice (gambling addiction)

---

Albena / Brythunian Low Noble
Weakness to Drink, Fear of Animals
Prowess 1
Movement 12, Animal Reflexes 2, Throwing 2, Acrobatics 2
Endurance 1
Stamina 5, Damage 7, Will 2
Fighting 1
Broadsword 4, Dirk 4, Two-Handed Fighting (Sword & Dirk) 2
Knowledge 0
Artisan (Painter) 4, Reading/Writing 2
Perception 0
Picking Pockets 2, Observation 2
Insight 0
Animal Senses 4
Equipment
Broadsword, Dirk, 5 gold coins

Brythunia is based on a purported Anglo/Saxon homeland. Looking at female Saxon names I see Aeaba, Aeleva, and Adelburga and decide that Albena sounds close enough for now and leave her name unchanged.

Weakness to Drink is the Flaw: Drunkard and Fear of Animals is Phobia (Animals) though since no specific animal is specified I’d lower the Fear Rating from 3 to 1. Animal Reflexes I treated as the Boon: Speed which gives a bonus die to initiative. 

The character has Fighting 1, so I assume a minimum of 1 in Brawl and Defense and raise Melee to 2 based on the weapon skills listed. Throwing 2 I convert as Ranged 1. Prowess 1 and Endurance 1 I convert as Might 2. She seems like a fighter and since she is a noble I set her Daring and Flair each to 1. Flair 1 can also cover her Will 2 ability. Her description of Beguiling is covered by her above average Flair and the Temptress career.

Might 2           Daring 1          Savvy 0           Flair     1

Brawl 1           Melee 2           Ranged 1         Defense 1

Noble 1          Temptress 1     Soldier 1          Thief 1             Painter 2

Boons: Animal Senses (New), Speed

Flaws: Drunkard, Phobia (All Animals, Fear Rating=1)

---

Decualuis / Zamoran Artisan (Name change to: Domingo)

Taciturn, Tone Deaf
Prowess 1
Animal Reflexes 3, Movement 4, Strength 3, Swimming 2
Endurance 0
Damage 7
Fighting 0
Saber 5, Short Bow 4
Knowledge 2
Blacksmith 4, Reading/Writing 4, Goldsmith 6, Artisan (Painter) 6
Perception 0
Observation 4, Picking Pockets 2
Insight 0
Animal Senses 2
Equipment
Saber, Cloak, Bronze Cuirass

H+I has a Taciturn flaw and Tone Deaf I’ll use as a special case of the Flaw: Poor Hearing. 

Prowess 1 converts to Might 1. The character has Fighting 1, so I assume a minimum of 1 in Brawl and Defense and raise Melee to 2 based on the weapon skills listed. Bow 4 converts to Ranged 2. And by a similar rationale for that of Volmercer , I remove the armor.

Might 1           Daring 0          Savvy 2           Flair     0

Brawl 0           Melee 2           Ranged 2         Defense 0

Thief 1            Painter 3          Craftsman (Blacksmith 2, Goldsmith 3)

Boon: Animal Senses, Artistic (Bonus Die to Painter)

Flaws: Poor Hearing (Tone Deaf), Taciturn

---

Borerius / Argosean Warrior
Night Blind, Glutton
Prowess 1
Strength 10, Movement 3
Endurance 1
Damage 8, Poison Endurance 4
Fighting 1
Brawling 4, Spear 4, Cinequesda 3, Throwing Dirk 3
Knowledge 0
Survival 4, Artisan (Painter) 3
Perception 0
Directional Sense 4, Observation 2
Insight 0
Animal Senses 4
Equipment
Spear, Throwing Dirk, Chainmail Shirt

Argos is sort of a mix of the Peloponnese and lower Italy e.g. Naples. Borerius sounds like Boreas the north wind, so I decide that is close enough and leave it unchanged as well.

Night Blind is covered by H+I’s Poor Vision. Gluttony is Vice (Gluttony).

Prowess 1 and Endurance 1 would translate to Might 1 or 2, but since he also has Strength 10 and Damage 8 I decide on Might 4. Fighting 1 and the listed combat skills converts to Melee 2 and Brawling 4 converts to Brawl 2. Argos is not a barbarian land so I interpret Warrior as Mercenary and give him an above average Daring 1. For careers I gave him Mercenary 3 and Painter 1 (I rounded his score down) and since he is listed as a Warrior which I convert to Mercenary, I let him keep a good set of armor but I change the armor from chainmail to 1d6 heavy armor i.e. a Back & Breastplate and given the early modern setting I’d also give him a broadsword instead of a spear. Survival 4 is subsumed under the Mercenary career since Mercenaries are out of doors on campaign and travel a fair amount. Poison Endurance sounds like the Boon: Poison Resistance, so I give that boon to Borerius. I rounded down for

Might 4           Daring 1          Savvy 0           Flair     0

Brawl 2           Melee 2           Ranged 0         Defense 0

Mercenary 3      Painter 3       Craftsman (Blacksmith 2, Goldsmith 3)

Boons: Animal Senses (New), Directional Sense (New), Poison Resistance

Flaws: Poor Vision (Night Blind), Glutton (New)

New Flaws

Glutton

You cannot resist any change to eat or to overeat. Roll a Penalty Die to whenever you try to resist the temptation of food.

Another option for Glutton would be to use Vice (Gluttony) but this would a glutton as having a food addiction and would impose a Penalty Die if the character doesn’t (preemptively) eat a lot that day. Instead I chose to treat Glutton like Greed and impose a Penalty Die to resist eating food whenever it is available.

Miserly

You are the stereotypical skinflint or miser. You never want to spend money, always look for the cheapest alternative, and hate to spend anymore than you absolutely have to. There will be times when this gives you a Penalty Die (like showing up to an important social function wearing tattered clothing, minor intestinal distress from bad food, or catching a cold from too little food or lack of heat in winter). There will be other times where it creates serious problems (like dysentery or plague from tainted food or living in dirty, flea and rat infested lodgings, or when your nobility is called into question) in which case the GM will award you a Fortune Point. Nobles are expected to be generous and to appear unconcerned about money so displays of miserliness may bring disrepute including a loss of status and social rank or even questioning of one’s ancestry.

Fear of Animals

This could be treated as a phobia flaw, but instead I treat it as the opposite of Beast Friend. So, whenever dealing with a specific animal you have incur a Penalty Die.

Albena's phobia is nonspecfic so I lowered the Terror rating from 3 down to 1.

New Boons

Animal Senses

Similar to and a combination of Keen Eyesight, Keen Hearing, and Keen Scent butm since it applies to all three senses, instead of a Bonus Die it adds +1 to perception when sight, hearing, or smell are involved.

Directional Sense

Bonus Die for any rolls to determine direction or to avoid becoming lost.