Trea The Hunter
msg tools
This is a bit of a workshop for house rules pertaining to Principal: New LIfe and Intimacy.

In my group's first playthrough, our Settlement is rather savage in how they deal with many of the Principals. We therefore decided to stick to that and go with the Survival of the Fittest New Life Principal (we're doing a blind run and haven't done research to spoil our efforts. (As a note, I'm part of two groups that are running almost simultaneously; sorry if that's confusing because of other posts I make about the other playthrough.)

Alright, so if you've read anything about the Principal post taking it, you know that Survival of the Fittest seems like a trap. It sounds super badass at first, right? We'll be like Spartans! Billy is born? GIVE HIM A SPEAR AND LET HIM GROW STRONG. No toys for little Jamie! Only KNIVES!

Cool. Alright, so let's look at what it does.

Pardon me for my paraphrasing here...
"When rolling on the intimacy table, roll twice and take the lower result."
"New Survivors gain +1 permanent Strength."

At a glance, that doesn't sound too bad, right?

Well, let's first take a look at that table.
On a roll of 1: Nominated survivors die. (-2 Population.)
2 or 3: Female nominated survivor dies, losing the child. Male survivor gains a random disorder and +3 insanity. (Kinda like +1 - 2 Population.)
4 through 6: New Survivor. +1 Population.
7 or 8: +1 Population. Nominated survivors gain +10 Survival each. If the settlement has Beds: New survivor gains +1 permanent Strength.
9+*: Twins! +2 Population.

* if the Settlement has Hovels, a Savior is born instead of twins. +1 Population; triggers the Savior event.

So that can get kind of dangerous. 2d10 means you've got two chances to roll 1, 2 or 3 on each Intimacy roll, causing you to lose Survivors very easily. It seems to me that this might be able to use a trio of tables, similar to the Murder Settlement Event, where there're different 1d10 tables according to Principal adoptions (I'll let you read that for yourself instead of including more spoilers here).

I'm not sure how much doctoring the New Life: Protect the Young (or whatever it is) needs; if I'm not mistaken, you roll 2d10 and pick whichever result you want, so the table is ... pretty nice to you as chances that both your dice are low enough to really screw you are low.

But thematically, I think that Survival of the Fittest needs to adapt this new list. Here're my ideas.

On a roll of 1: The couple dies. (I have no arguments here. Natural 1 always means absolute failure. Or at least almost always.)
2 or 3: The mother dies during childbirth. The father is wracked with grief and suffers a random disorder and 1d5 insanity. The baby survives but is slightly stunted, also gaining a random disorder (or perhaps you roll on the serious wounds table for the child? Or -1 Permanent Strength, defeating the +1 Strength of the Principal?)
4 through 6: A new survivor is born. +1 Population. (I don't see the need to change this either.)
7 through 9: The nominated survivors have twins! The twins are constantly tested against each other from the time that they are born and one proves itself the stronger of the two, killing the other. +2 population, -1 population. (Or we could nest in another table here, ex.: "1: the pair kill each other (+2 pop, -2 pop), 2-3: one kills the other, the killer gains +1d5 insanity (+2 pop, -1 pop), 5~9: one kills the other and gains +1 Strength (+2 pop, -1 pop), 10+: one slays the other and revels in its victory, gaining +1 Strength and one random Fighting Art (+2 pop, -1 pop)" or something like that)
10+: The newborn Survivor is remarkably hardy and strong, gaining +1 permanent Strength and Speed. (Or somethin'. I dunno.)
The bonuses from Hovels and Beds would still apply, meaning Savior on 10 and Strength bonuses on 7 and 8.

What do you guys think? I mean, this is certainly a workshop! I just threw all this text down as an idea, so critique and discuss it as you would like. It's all from one guy's head; I haven't discussed actual hard details about it at all with anyone, only the idea of it.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Arnold
United States
New York
flag msg tools
If you are playing blind, I won't spoil anything specific, but there are many ways to alter dice rolls on the Intimacy chart. So Survival of the Fittest is not as big a trap as it seems.

Also, Poots made it a point several timed throughout the Kickstarter that all decisions are not going to be perfectly balanced. So some choices are poorer, from a Min-Max perspective.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
anthony
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rather than changing tables, just roll 1 die for Survival of the Fittest. Much simpler.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trea The Hunter
msg tools
Lord Charidarn wrote:
If you are playing blind, I won't spoil anything specific, but there are many ways to alter dice rolls on the Intimacy chart. So Survival of the Fittest is not as big a trap as it seems.


I'm saying for future plays, really. laugh We'll see about the upcoming events that mitigate losses in a later playthrough, after our current settlement collapses because of poor Intimacy rolls.

Lord Charidarn wrote:
Also, Poots made it a point several timed throughout the Kickstarter that all decisions are not going to be perfectly balanced. So some choices are poorer, from a Min-Max perspective.


I understand that things aren't supposed to be balanced. The game is built to induce dread and hopelessness. But in later playthroughs, it's difficult not to "meta-game" your choice between the two New Life principals... no matter how barbaric your society is.

CardboardAnt wrote:
Rather than changing tables, just roll 1 die for Survival of the Fittest. Much simpler.


But... that... that just takes away the whole negative laugh and adds nothing to the theme.. xP you'd have to replace the second dice with some other thingy to make it balanced with what it was, I think.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
anthony
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You have to choose a principle (you cannot avoid it) so 1 allows you to use 2 dice and pick, the other becomes 1 die (and a 30% chance of reducing your population...). That's the negative (and a reasonable countet-balance to +1 strength, IMO.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trea The Hunter
msg tools
Yeah, I suppose that's true. The raw 30% versus the 2 dice and pick... xD
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeroen F
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't been through an entire campaign yet, but so far I have seen nothing that'll change my mind about never getting SotF.

I like to look at the number of endeavours required to produce one more survivor, on average.
If every endeavour has a 100% chance to initiate intimacy (matchmaker), this amounts to the following:
-vanilla (campaign start): 2 endeavours
-protect the young: 0.85
-survival of the fittest: -5.88 (meaning you will lose 1 survivor for every 5.88 endeavours spent)
-SotF with +1 to all rolls: 3.44 (excluding any endeavours needed to get the +1 to the roll)
-OP's suggestion for SotF: 9.09

If the chance to intimacy per endeavour is not 1 (Augury), multiply these numbers by 1/[chance to intimacy].

If you are looking for the simplest solution based on these numbers, I could suggest for SotF:
Roll 1 die per intimacy as normal. For each survivor born, roll 1d10, they are not fit enough to survive their trials on 1-3.
The endeavours/survivor is now 4.35, quite neatly mirroring PtY.
(for reference, it's 3.13 End/sur for dying on 1-2, and 7.15 for dying on 1-4)

Although I like the option from OP's suggestion that the child survives even if the mother dies, and gets a disorder for it. And the duelling kids is an interesting one as well.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trea The Hunter
msg tools
Wowww. Thanks for the math. Yargh. XD

Yeah, looking at it more and more, it seems that any way you take it, it's best just to roll 1d10 and take the result instead of 2d10 and take the lower... 2d10/lower just seems waaay too harsh. I do really like your 1d10, on a 1-3 the newborn perishes, as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien M
United States
Salt Lake City
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This should be in the Variants forum.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam D
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
I'm enjoying my survival of the fittest run through, you care a lot more about your individual survivors more, since there won't be that many more coming.

If you want a variant o would suggest having three principles to choose from

Survival of the fittest

Nurture the young

And the new one
Casual indifference
Your survivors pay the new born little head, the world is a dark grim place and it will probably die soon

You gain no bonuses or penalties, and only roll 1D10 on the intermacy table.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
E Licious
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Slaaneth wrote:
I'm enjoying my survival of the fittest run through, you care a lot more about your individual survivors more, since there won't be that many more coming.

If you want a variant o would suggest having three principles to choose from

Survival of the fittest

Nurture the young

And the new one
Casual indifference
Your survivors pay the new born little head, the world is a dark grim place and it will probably die soon

You gain no bonuses or penalties, and only roll 1D10 on the intermacy table.


Why would you ever choose indifference if it gives you absolutely no bonus over Nurture the young? At least survival of the fittest gives each newborn +1 str at the cost of being super crappy otherwise.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Daube
France
flag msg tools
Hi,

First of all, sorry for my english.

I've played a campaign with a friend in wich we chose protect the young. It is clearly a good way to increase your population.
In my solo campaign, begun recently, I wanted a settlement more savage so I chose survival of the fittest. But having read some threads talking about this principle, I wanted to calculate how bad it was.

Without hovel and with protect the young, the expected increase of population after a roll on the intimacy table is +1,17. Choosing survival of the fittest, the expected increase of population is -0,17. Very bad, that means that after several rolls you generally lose population with intimacy, wich is not the objective in my opinion.

I think that I will add 1 to the lowest result. Doing this, the expected increase of population is +0,33 (with the following chances : 1% to lose 2 pop., 36% to lose 1 pop., 55% to gain 1 and 8% to gain 2).

(If you want better values, you can also roll 3 dice and pick the central result. The expected increase of population would be in this case +0,64).

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Arnold
United States
New York
flag msg tools
I'm running Survival of the Fittest and I have to say; that plus face painting, matchmakers, graves, Family, and Clan of Death makes for some scary youngsters.

I'll probably stick with Nurture, but if you know the game well, running a settlement built around Survival can make some buffed characters.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Wirtz
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You'll risk veterans on survival of the fittest intimacy? Seems like a big gamble.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Corporal Joe Bauers
United States
flag msg tools
No matter games or life
badge
Honesty over everything
Avatar
mbmbmb
spiralingcadaver wrote:
You'll risk veterans on survival of the fittest intimacy? Seems like a big gamble.
If they'll waste the 15 endeavors required to statistically gain one newborn survivor, literally trading several survivors in as currency before that new one is born with +1 strength, on Survival of the Fittest, why wouldn't they? (To be fair, it goes down depending on who is rolling on Augury, obviously it could be closer to 10 endeavors per newborn survivor with innovations)

Edit: I think I get it, SotF is a way to spend all the excess endeavors you get with Graves. If you have survivors who get made useless by the Bone Witch you can just trade them in with SotF until you get a fresh one with +1 strength.

Wait, why doesn't SotF give Bone Witch? It stopped making sense again.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nik Persram
Canada
Regina
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like seeing some of the suggestions. Just finished year 4, and lost one survivor to the butcher, but lost 4 others to settlement events, including the intimacy event. Ouch.
The chances to lose more than you gain is a decent amount. There isn't even a break-even spot. There's a 49% of success, versus the 70% before you got the principle. We ended up rolling 2 dice cause SofT, and rolled a 1 and a 9. =/

Looking over the suggestions, I don't like adding +1 to the lowest because you'd never get a result of 1. I really don't want to give us too much advantage, because we should deal at least somewhat with the decision we've made. I think the solution I'd like to suggest to our group is changing a 3 to lose the child, mother and father are alive but take disorders. That gives you:
1 - Lose both parents and child. (19% chance)
2 - Lose mother and child. Male survivor gains a random disorder and +3 insanity. (17% chance)
3 - Lose child. Male and Female survivor gain a random disorder and +3 insanity. (15% chance)
4+ Some sort of Success. (49% chance)

Then it changes from a 51% chance of losing one(or more) of the intimacy survivors to a 36% chance of losing them. And then 15% chance that nothing happens and both parents get disorders.

Thoughts?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nik Persram
Canada
Regina
Saskatchewan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is also all written with the understanding that I'm going on Lantern Year 5, and the only innovations we have are hovel and ammonia. And that I haven't looked ahead or read any cards we don't currently have. So I'm not sure of modifiers, etc.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben V
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmb
I like the idea of adding 1 to both results, but still applying the lowest of the two. This eliminates the possibility of both parents dying on a 1, but it's a simple adjustment that's easy to remember and I think it fits the thematic of Survival of the Fittest. I always interpreted Intimacy rolls of 1 to represent the couple essentially forming an emotional suicide pact, whereas a settlement built on Survival of the Fittest should have survivors made of sturdier stuff than that.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean-Sebastien Fortin
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
CardboardAnt wrote:
Rather than changing tables, just roll 1 die for Survival of the Fittest. Much simpler.


that's our house rule...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
aftera monthdelete
msg tools
So, I got to read the new expansions and got to thinking about modifying my next game, which would include everything I can put in, and came up with these:

Core campaign only, added right to the top: Intimacy Story Event. Add +1 to the lowest die roll if one or more of the parents has "Insight" reached. (this makes for better times for the first birth and EITHER principle choices.)
Principle: Survival of the fittest ---> The thing we're writing about. Now isn't so bad? But still...play testing.

Principle: Cannibalize ---> Drawn two basic resources, not one and pick one to keep.

This next game will be more of a... testing of new stuff that the expansions bring. Which afterwards we'll go back and only add a few things after we die.


Turns out we don't know if the change worked. One try, one kid born. As the Kingsman event got replaced with Slenderman's event we don't need to stay over or under 8. Been lucky to lose only one to deaths too.
So I don't know if its needs more work, but I like older veteran survivors having kids with Survival of the fittest versus the young-untested "diluting the pool".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K.Y. Wong
Singapore
Gardens by the Bay
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I implemented the following in my SotF settlement.

Follow the original rule with the following options:
1. Once per Intimacy attempt, you can spend another Endeavour Point to re-roll one of the dice.
OR
2. Choose to spend 2 Endeavour Points upfront to roll just 1 die instead of 2.

I figured it was a fair trade off since Endeavours are a valued resource.

Option 1 gives a better chance of gaining population while Option 2 gives a better chance of getting a Special Child.

LY08 I went for Option 1 and rolled a second 1 (!). LY09 I went for Option 2 and rolled a 10 (!!). I took that as a sign from the impassive gods of KDM that this is balanced variant.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.