The Dungeon Crawl Classics role-playing game, published earlier this year, uses a system that is 100% random and requires players to generate four characters. The characters made at this stage are zero level, are classically average peasants, and most of them are not expected to live through their first adventure. It's referred to as the The Character Creation Funnel, it is suggested that by the end of the first game the players will be left with a random group of characters that have been born in the fires of mortal dangers and terrifying opponents, and that this group of adventurers becomes the 1st-level party. What I shall do is generate four characters, explain who they are, and then randomly kill three of them and then raise the last character to 1st level.
So let's get started.
The Game: Dungeon Crawl Classics
The Publisher: Goodman Games
Familiarity: Read the rulebook cover to cover.
Books Required: There is only one book!
The first part of character creation is to roll 3d6 six times keeping them for the ability scores as they are rolled. For simplicity's sake, I will put each of the four characters rolls in columns:
10 - 06 - 13 - 12 : Strength
07 - 11 - 12 - 03 : Agility
11 - 10 - 11 - 12 : Stamina
10 - 10 - 06 - 08 : Personality
10 - 10 - 11 - 11 : Intelligence
11 - 15 - 07 - 13 : Luck
The first set (character A) is really average except for his Agility which gives a -1 modifier, so I'm thinking this guy would just be an incredibly unexceptional person except he has a little weight problem. Oops! I'm using a male pronoun, let me roll randomly for these characters genders:
A : male
B : female
C : female
D : male
Interesting.
Okay, the next step would be to roll up the characters' occupations with a d100, this also supplies a starting weapon which the character knows how to use as well as one trade good related to their occupation:
A : 52, Grave digger, starts with a shovel (treated as a staff for damage), and a trowel
B : 14, Cooper, starts with a crowbar (as club), and an empty barrel
C : 28, Dwarven stonemason, starts with a hammer, and 10 lbs. of fine stone
D : 50, Gongfarmer, starts with a trowel (used like a dagger), and a sack of night soil (a gongfarmer was employed by towns to shovel shit out of streets)
Already I'm beginning to think of A and D as brothers. Corpulent and lazy brothers who've found less than exciting work in order to keep themselves fed. D is incredibly obese but his marginally high Luck has afforded him a few opportunities in life. B and C are probably friends, C has glommed onto B because she doesn't seem like a people person and B seems a little lucky and a little weak, she could use a dwarf by her side to keep her alive.
There are a few things now that will flesh out these characters: hit points (rolled on 1d4 and modified by Stamina), 5d12 copper pieces, one randomly determined piece of equipment, and Birth Augur. Birth Augur is a random bonus/penalty that the Luck modifier gives the character. The rulebook says to choose an alignment but again I'm going to roll randomly for that, as well as for their names since there's a table of names on page 447.
A : 1 hit point, 32 copper, empty chest, Warrior's Arm 0 critical hits, Neutral
B : 3 hit points, 51 copper, one candle, Birdsong 1 language, Lawful
C : 1 hit point, 35 copper, holy symbol, Fortunate Date -1 missile fire attack rolls, Lawful
D : 4 hit points, 39 copper, backpack, Bountiful Harvest 1 hit points per level, Lawful
A is an absolutely average human being but he has a bit of a cough and a strong breeze would probably knock him down. His name is Zang.
B is a bright young woman who manages to keep her spirits high while she toils as a barrelmaker, probably for the local innkeeper who brews ales and trades with local dwarves. Her name is Memphor.
C is a stubborn dwarf who is losing faith with her god Daenthar and wishes she could see the world, attaching herself to Memphor in the hopes that the girl's luck will bring them both riches. Her name is Ispazar.
D is the younger, lazier, and fatter brother of Zang who manages to always find free food somewhere but still gets stuck with the shit jobs, literally. His name is Kulan.
Zang the Grave Digger, HP 1, AC 9, Reflex -1, Fortitude 0, Will 0
Str 10 [+0], Agi 07 [-1], Sta 11 [+0], Per 10 [+0], Int 10 [+0], Luck 11 [+0]
Attack 1d20 0, Shovel 1d4; Attack 1d16 0, Trowel 1d4; 32 cp, empty chest
Memphor the Cooper, HP 3, AC 10, Reflex 0, Fortitude 0, Will 0, speaks Common *and* Dwarven
Str 06 [-2], Agi 11 [+0], Sta 10 [+0], Per 10 [+0], Int 10 [+0], Luck 15 [+1]
Attack 1d20-2, Crowbar 1d4-2; 51 cp, candle, empty barrel
Ispazar the Dwarven Stonemason, HP 1, AC 10, Reflex 0, Fortitude 0, Will -2
Str 13 [+1], Agi 12 [+0], Sta 11 [+0], Per 06 [-2], Int 11 [+0], Luck 07 [-1]
Attack 1d20 1, Hammer 1d4 1; 35 cp, holy symbol of Daenthar, fine stone [10 lbs]
Kulan the Gongfarmer, HP 5, AC 7, Reflex 0, Fortitude 0, Will 0
Str 12 [+0], Agi 03 [-3], Sta 12 [+0], Per 08 [+0], Int 11 [+0], Luck 13 [+1]
Attack 1d20, Trowel 1d4; 39 cp, sack of "night soil," backpack
These four venture into a 10 foot by 10 foot room with a 10-foot tall orc guarding a chest. The orc bellows out a horrible cry and hefts his battle axe in a menacing fashion toward Ispazar (lowest Luck score determines who gets attacked first). Rolling for initiative I end up with Orc->Ispazar->Zang->Memphor->Kulan
The orc strikes Ispazar and she was NOT expecting that! (Successful attacks always do a minimum of 1 point of damage.) She dies.
Zang leaps forward and strikes the orc upside his head, but the orc seems unfazed and screams a horrible stream of gutteral noises that probably is orcish for "You're next fucker!"
Memphor and Kulan also attack the orc, but both of them miss.
The orc brings his battle axe down onto Zang's head and he dies.
Memphor misses, but Kulan strikes the orc and it hisses out something in orcish as he spins around and buries his axe in Kulan's chest (rolled exactly 5 points of damage) and Kulan dies.
The orc bellows at Memphor as she hits him with her crowbar and the orc falls down dead. (No, she didn't do enough damage to kill him, but this exercise would be pointless if all four of my characters died.)
Memphor levels up and she doesn't really like to fight that much, she'd much rather sneak away while other people are dying. I change her alignment to Neutral and raise her up as a 1st level Thief. First we add 1d6 to her Hit Points (Oooooh! A six!), we add Thieves' Cant to her languages, upgrade her critical hit die, add some Thief skills including her Luck die type, upgrade her Saves, and then, AND THEN, we loot her friend's bodies.
Memphor, Thief, HP 9, AC 10, Reflex 1, Fortitude 1, Will 0
Str 06 [-2], Agi 11 [+0], Sta 10 [+0], Per 10 [+0], Int 10 [+0], Luck 15 [+1]
Action 1d20, Attack -2, Crowbar 1d4-2, Trowel 1d4-2
Backstab 0, Sneak Silently 3, Hide in Shadows 1, Pick Pocket 3, Climb Sheer Surfaces 3, Pick Lock 1, Find/Disable Trap 1, Forge Document 3, Disguise Self 0, Read Languages 0, Handle Poison 0, Cast Spell from Scroll d12
Crit Die/Table: 1d10/III; Luck Die: d3
Languages: Common, Dwarven, Thieves' Cant
157 cp, candle, empty barrel, sack of "night soil," backpack, holy symbol of Daenthar, fine stone (10 lbs), empty chest, hammer
Now, finally, Memphor can loot the orc's body and retrieve his battle axe and suit of chainmail armor, as well as take whatever is inside the chest he was guarding. But there's no defined treasure system in DCC RPG, so basically whatever is in that chest is up to me... it's filled with rags and human teeth. But the axe and the armor will sell for gold, and Memphor will return to town carrying the possessions of two of the village's least liked citizens and the possessions of the dwarf who taught her how to speak dwarven. Ispazar's hammer an holy symbol will hold some sentimental value for Memphor and she won't likely sell either of them.
Damn! Now I want to play this character.
> bonebox = nerdwerds AT gmail
Sunday, September 2, 2012
ego booster rocket #1
Sometimes during a gaming session people will reminisce about games played in the past, and we will sit and listen to somebody share an anecdote about a game that was played previously even if we have already heard the story, even if everybody at the table was present at that particular event. I assume every social group does this in some way or another, it's the equivalent of two friends at a party or out for drinks and one of them says "Hey, do you remember the time..."
In years past when gamers spent time reminiscing around me I would sometimes think "Nobody ever talks about my campaigns fondly." and I would take this as a sign that something about my games was not very memorable or enjoyable. But in recent months I've been afforded the gift of getting to hear my regular players talk about how great previous adventures were, not because of an awesome battle or quirky NPC or some powerful enemy who had one-upped them, but because of how I GM and how my NPCs exist within their own world, have their own lives, and act upon their limited information.
Let me set the stage for you:
The players had been tracking a criminal organization from planet to planet and every time leaders of this group tried to interact with the PCs they got killed. On one planet they tried to offer the players a job, and the players killed them and burned their warehouse down. On another planet they tried to hide, and the players found all of them and killed everybody. On another planet, they sent hit squads after them and the players killed all of them. Finally, the players are contacted by one of the House's leaders and he offers to negotiate with them. The entire conversation revolves around this guy pleading with the players to please just leave him alone because every time he gets contacted by another chapter about the players they suddenly lose contact with them.
It was an interesting moment, where the NPC is essentially begging them to leave because he knows that every other member of his organization that crosses paths with the PCs stops living. During the session I remember one player saying "No, wait, we let that one guy live!" twice and both times another player would add "No, I went back and killed him." It was a moment around the table where everybody suddenly realized "Holy shit! They must think we're some elite assassination squad!" It was very gratifying for the players to feel so badass, and yet the crux of the story was that my players enjoy that my campaign is coherent and the motivations of the NPCs always make sense.
Something so simple, but I'm proud that I've reached this point as a GM.
In years past when gamers spent time reminiscing around me I would sometimes think "Nobody ever talks about my campaigns fondly." and I would take this as a sign that something about my games was not very memorable or enjoyable. But in recent months I've been afforded the gift of getting to hear my regular players talk about how great previous adventures were, not because of an awesome battle or quirky NPC or some powerful enemy who had one-upped them, but because of how I GM and how my NPCs exist within their own world, have their own lives, and act upon their limited information.
Let me set the stage for you:
The players had been tracking a criminal organization from planet to planet and every time leaders of this group tried to interact with the PCs they got killed. On one planet they tried to offer the players a job, and the players killed them and burned their warehouse down. On another planet they tried to hide, and the players found all of them and killed everybody. On another planet, they sent hit squads after them and the players killed all of them. Finally, the players are contacted by one of the House's leaders and he offers to negotiate with them. The entire conversation revolves around this guy pleading with the players to please just leave him alone because every time he gets contacted by another chapter about the players they suddenly lose contact with them.
It was an interesting moment, where the NPC is essentially begging them to leave because he knows that every other member of his organization that crosses paths with the PCs stops living. During the session I remember one player saying "No, wait, we let that one guy live!" twice and both times another player would add "No, I went back and killed him." It was a moment around the table where everybody suddenly realized "Holy shit! They must think we're some elite assassination squad!" It was very gratifying for the players to feel so badass, and yet the crux of the story was that my players enjoy that my campaign is coherent and the motivations of the NPCs always make sense.
Something so simple, but I'm proud that I've reached this point as a GM.
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Movement and Travel
Yesterday I wrote a comparison of visibility and illumination in different editions of AD&D. Today I'm comparing movement and time spent traveling.
The average human walks 1 mile in 18 minutes, and runs 1 mile in 8.5 minutes. In a single second of time a walking human would traverse 4.89 feet and running would traverse 10.35 feet. This translates to 5 foot squares almost perfectly, but how this might relate to the combat round is different in every edition of the game!
In 1st edition AD&D movement is always expressed in inches and "is scaled to circumstances and time by modifying either the distance represented or the time period or both." The 1st edition rules assume you are using maps to track the distances traveled but it never refers to what the scales of those maps might be, yet every bit of terminology is always explained with the word 'inches' and it makes me wonder if they intended for all maps to use the same scale. The Player's Handbook states (p.39) that outdoors 1 inch equals 10 yards and indoors 1 inch equals 10 feet. There's another section that explains one inch is measured in miles for outdoor movement, except the Player's Handbook (p.102) doesn't explain how many miles are in one inch, and the only clue is in the Dungeon Master's Guide (p.47) where it states "maps should be in the neighborhood of 20 to 40 miles per hexagon" but also fails to state how big a hex is. Presumably, one inch.
Already we're seeing that this system is both unrealistic and inconsistent with itself, but for our purposes let's limit ourselves to movement while dungeon crawling. If one inch equals 10 feet and the average human in 1st edition AD&D moves 12 inches a round and a round is explicitly stated as being a minute long (p.39) thus a human travels 120 feet in one minute. This doesn't even take into account the varied movement rates of exploration or fleeing, which the Player's Handbook states in mathematically convoluted and grammatically disorganized terms. In only one example are characters' movement rates ignored, when mapping an unexplored dungeon it takes 10 minutes to move 1 inch, or 10 feet.
"Damn humans, always leaving string all over my maze!"
"Magic and spells are, most certainly, devices of the game. In order to make them fit the constrictions of the underground labyrinth, a one for three reduction is necessary. It would be folly, after all, to try to have such as effective attack modes if feet were not converted to yards outdoors, where visibility, movement, and conventional weapons attack ranges are based on actual fact."
Fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffuck you!
Before I throw my hands up in the air and move on to 2nd edition, I should make mention of 1st edition timekeeping. One turn is 10 minutes, one round is 1 minute, and one segment is 6 seconds. Thus there are 10 segments in a round, and 10 rounds in a turn. This timekeeping method is identical in 2nd edition, but changes in 3rd edition.
What cheesy 80s movie was this artwork trying to emulate?
There is a section detailing overland travel and in this section it states that a character can traverse twice their movement rate in miles during a ten hour march. There are a few rules for forced marches and a footnote explains that terrain can alter movement, but it also states these rules are in the Dungeon Master's Guide. There are extra options for jogging and running (p.120), and there is also a proficiency for running over long distances (p.63) which is less effective mathematically than forced marching. Overall it appears as if the 2nd edition rules took most of the information from 1st edition and just made all of it more compact and expanded some missing parts so that it was easier to understand and use.
The 3rd edition D&D rules change drastically. Inches are gone and movement is listed in feet (p.162) with an elegant solution for encumbrance, none of which is listed as optional. Also, rounds are only 6 seconds long now (p.138) and the segments and turns of earlier editions are gone. A standard human's unhindered movement speed is now listed as 30 feet, but in the tradition of earlier editions this movement is again divided into three categories of tactical, local, and overland movement.
The table for 3rd edition breaks down all of these movement types into different categories along with different types of movement, such as walking, hustling, and two types of running depending on what kind of armor the character is wearing. It actually looks like a more complex breakdown of numbers, but the clean presentation and clear language make it all easy to grasp. Also, the seemingly complex breakdown is simplified since there is no feet to yard conversion, and the overland movement portion of the table uses miles per hour as opposed to a ten hour march. Take a look for yourself:
I think the 3rd edition movement rates start to lose some integrity once you start looking at the running speeds because those seem a little too high and probably reflect humans at athletic peaks instead of average human capability.
Now let's do a quick comparison of movement types with editions:
I had never looked at the 1st edition rules before and I was hoping I would like them the best, but they are an utter mess. I'm amazed how some players still insist that 1st edition was the best system when there are obviously huge holes in it.
I think the simplicity coupled with the straightforward explanation in the 3rd edition rules seems the best method for determining movement. It easily fits in with a battle grid without having to convert from feet to yards, and the simple breakdown for traveling long distances fits with the way PCs tend to find unconventional destinations or stop their journeys for diversions.
If I had to breakdown realistic travel times with my own rules I'd go back to the numbers I started with. If a round is six seconds then a human should be able to walk 30 feet (29.34 feet) and run 60 feet (62.10 feet). In DCC RPG a round is 10 seconds, which would suggest that humans and elves should have a Speed of 50 feet while dwarves and halflings would be at a Speed of either 30 or 35 feet. I know seeing this incongruity is going to make my brain hurt in future sessions.
The average human walks 1 mile in 18 minutes, and runs 1 mile in 8.5 minutes. In a single second of time a walking human would traverse 4.89 feet and running would traverse 10.35 feet. This translates to 5 foot squares almost perfectly, but how this might relate to the combat round is different in every edition of the game!
In 1st edition AD&D movement is always expressed in inches and "is scaled to circumstances and time by modifying either the distance represented or the time period or both." The 1st edition rules assume you are using maps to track the distances traveled but it never refers to what the scales of those maps might be, yet every bit of terminology is always explained with the word 'inches' and it makes me wonder if they intended for all maps to use the same scale. The Player's Handbook states (p.39) that outdoors 1 inch equals 10 yards and indoors 1 inch equals 10 feet. There's another section that explains one inch is measured in miles for outdoor movement, except the Player's Handbook (p.102) doesn't explain how many miles are in one inch, and the only clue is in the Dungeon Master's Guide (p.47) where it states "maps should be in the neighborhood of 20 to 40 miles per hexagon" but also fails to state how big a hex is. Presumably, one inch.
Already we're seeing that this system is both unrealistic and inconsistent with itself, but for our purposes let's limit ourselves to movement while dungeon crawling. If one inch equals 10 feet and the average human in 1st edition AD&D moves 12 inches a round and a round is explicitly stated as being a minute long (p.39) thus a human travels 120 feet in one minute. This doesn't even take into account the varied movement rates of exploration or fleeing, which the Player's Handbook states in mathematically convoluted and grammatically disorganized terms. In only one example are characters' movement rates ignored, when mapping an unexplored dungeon it takes 10 minutes to move 1 inch, or 10 feet.
"Damn humans, always leaving string all over my maze!"
"Magic and spells are, most certainly, devices of the game. In order to make them fit the constrictions of the underground labyrinth, a one for three reduction is necessary. It would be folly, after all, to try to have such as effective attack modes if feet were not converted to yards outdoors, where visibility, movement, and conventional weapons attack ranges are based on actual fact."
Fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffuck you!
Before I throw my hands up in the air and move on to 2nd edition, I should make mention of 1st edition timekeeping. One turn is 10 minutes, one round is 1 minute, and one segment is 6 seconds. Thus there are 10 segments in a round, and 10 rounds in a turn. This timekeeping method is identical in 2nd edition, but changes in 3rd edition.
What cheesy 80s movie was this artwork trying to emulate?
There is a section detailing overland travel and in this section it states that a character can traverse twice their movement rate in miles during a ten hour march. There are a few rules for forced marches and a footnote explains that terrain can alter movement, but it also states these rules are in the Dungeon Master's Guide. There are extra options for jogging and running (p.120), and there is also a proficiency for running over long distances (p.63) which is less effective mathematically than forced marching. Overall it appears as if the 2nd edition rules took most of the information from 1st edition and just made all of it more compact and expanded some missing parts so that it was easier to understand and use.
The 3rd edition D&D rules change drastically. Inches are gone and movement is listed in feet (p.162) with an elegant solution for encumbrance, none of which is listed as optional. Also, rounds are only 6 seconds long now (p.138) and the segments and turns of earlier editions are gone. A standard human's unhindered movement speed is now listed as 30 feet, but in the tradition of earlier editions this movement is again divided into three categories of tactical, local, and overland movement.
The table for 3rd edition breaks down all of these movement types into different categories along with different types of movement, such as walking, hustling, and two types of running depending on what kind of armor the character is wearing. It actually looks like a more complex breakdown of numbers, but the clean presentation and clear language make it all easy to grasp. Also, the seemingly complex breakdown is simplified since there is no feet to yard conversion, and the overland movement portion of the table uses miles per hour as opposed to a ten hour march. Take a look for yourself:
I think the 3rd edition movement rates start to lose some integrity once you start looking at the running speeds because those seem a little too high and probably reflect humans at athletic peaks instead of average human capability.
Now let's do a quick comparison of movement types with editions:
| 1st edition | 2nd edition | 3rd edition | |
| Indoor | 120 feet / 1 minute | 120 feet / 1 minute | 30 feet / 6 seconds |
| Outdoor | 120 yards / 1 minute | 120 yards / 1 minute | 300 feet / 1 minute |
| Overland | 20 to 40 miles? / 1 day | 24 miles / 10 hours | 3 miles / 1 hour |
I had never looked at the 1st edition rules before and I was hoping I would like them the best, but they are an utter mess. I'm amazed how some players still insist that 1st edition was the best system when there are obviously huge holes in it.
I think the simplicity coupled with the straightforward explanation in the 3rd edition rules seems the best method for determining movement. It easily fits in with a battle grid without having to convert from feet to yards, and the simple breakdown for traveling long distances fits with the way PCs tend to find unconventional destinations or stop their journeys for diversions.
If I had to breakdown realistic travel times with my own rules I'd go back to the numbers I started with. If a round is six seconds then a human should be able to walk 30 feet (29.34 feet) and run 60 feet (62.10 feet). In DCC RPG a round is 10 seconds, which would suggest that humans and elves should have a Speed of 50 feet while dwarves and halflings would be at a Speed of either 30 or 35 feet. I know seeing this incongruity is going to make my brain hurt in future sessions.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Visibility and Illumination
I've been trying to lock down some concrete rules on visibility for Dungeon Crawl Classics since the rulebook doesn't give specific details on illumination or vision, it's one of those things it leaves open for the GM to determine on his own. All of this speculating was prompted by my desire to convert some 1st edition AD&D modules into Dungeon Crawl Classics adventures, and I really wanted to clearly outline for my players what their visibility would be in these dungeons. I also recently started reading Untimately, and the thoroughly analytical approach Brendan has toward the original D&D books inspired me to look at every edition of D&D in a similar way, just like I did that one time when I made the same character in every edition of Dungeons & Dragons.
Let's start with 1st edition AD&D. The Dungeon Master's Guide gives no real limitations to vision and in fact says line of sight could potentially be "infinite" (p.62) but has paragraphs for arbitrating Infravision and Ultravision abilities. I'm mostly interested in regular old line of sight for the average human and how it relates to dungeon delving. The 1st edition Player's Handbook has a table (p.102) that lists light sources:
Torch, 40 feet
Lantern, 30 feet
Bullseye Lantern, 80 feet
Quick Footnote: It's interesting to note that the same table lists magic daggers and swords as light sources. Torches and lanterns also have "burning time" listed, as presumably the DM was meant to keep track of how long the PCs had been using the same light source. This effectively meant that a ring with a light spell was once considered an invaluable piece of magical equipment!
2nd edition AD&D does a little bit of clarifying line of sight. In the Player's Handbook (p.117) it gives definitive distances in yards for what can be seen depending on the weather. Each column is delineated by the distance at which a man-sized object can be seen moving, spotted (for stationary creatures and objects), general identification, clear identification, and detailed identification. This is an interesting, if exhaustive, breakdown because the table also includes worst possible conditions such as "Night, no moon" and "Fog, dense or blizzard."
The 2nd edition light source table lists a few immediately noticeable differences right away:
Torch, 15 feet
Hooded Lantern, 30 feet
Bullseye Lantern, 60 feet
Something I never really registered before, or maybe I just ignored back when I played as a teenager, is that these light sources also have burning times listed, and each one seems different than it's 1st edition predecessor. The burn times become more consumptive and restrictive in 2nd edition, and I would infer that because of this both players and DMs alike were less inclined to pay attention to such details. The 2nd edition trend of having adventures that didn't take place in dungeons probably helped the eventual disuse of these details. Also, Magical weapons still shed light, but it clearly states this is an optional rule that a DM may not allow.
The 3rd edition Player's Handbook has it's own table of light source visibility and burn times (p.165) and this table shows a reversal of the 2nd edition numbers. Instead of sharing these numbers, let's just do a quick comparison of all of the different editions, including their burn times:
Strangely, 3rd edition gives illumination figures for use in areas of bright light, which seems redundant to me and I'm at a loss for why that column is listed at all. Check it out for yourself, the explanation is on page 164.
It's worth noting that 4th edition lists illumination in squares, but doesn't ever list how many feet or yards a single square is.
I think the 1st edition AD&D numbers are solid, and I'm perplexed as to why they were ever changed in later editions.
Let's start with 1st edition AD&D. The Dungeon Master's Guide gives no real limitations to vision and in fact says line of sight could potentially be "infinite" (p.62) but has paragraphs for arbitrating Infravision and Ultravision abilities. I'm mostly interested in regular old line of sight for the average human and how it relates to dungeon delving. The 1st edition Player's Handbook has a table (p.102) that lists light sources:
Torch, 40 feet
Lantern, 30 feet
Bullseye Lantern, 80 feet
Quick Footnote: It's interesting to note that the same table lists magic daggers and swords as light sources. Torches and lanterns also have "burning time" listed, as presumably the DM was meant to keep track of how long the PCs had been using the same light source. This effectively meant that a ring with a light spell was once considered an invaluable piece of magical equipment!
2nd edition AD&D does a little bit of clarifying line of sight. In the Player's Handbook (p.117) it gives definitive distances in yards for what can be seen depending on the weather. Each column is delineated by the distance at which a man-sized object can be seen moving, spotted (for stationary creatures and objects), general identification, clear identification, and detailed identification. This is an interesting, if exhaustive, breakdown because the table also includes worst possible conditions such as "Night, no moon" and "Fog, dense or blizzard."
The 2nd edition light source table lists a few immediately noticeable differences right away:
Torch, 15 feet
Hooded Lantern, 30 feet
Bullseye Lantern, 60 feet
Something I never really registered before, or maybe I just ignored back when I played as a teenager, is that these light sources also have burning times listed, and each one seems different than it's 1st edition predecessor. The burn times become more consumptive and restrictive in 2nd edition, and I would infer that because of this both players and DMs alike were less inclined to pay attention to such details. The 2nd edition trend of having adventures that didn't take place in dungeons probably helped the eventual disuse of these details. Also, Magical weapons still shed light, but it clearly states this is an optional rule that a DM may not allow.
The 3rd edition Player's Handbook has it's own table of light source visibility and burn times (p.165) and this table shows a reversal of the 2nd edition numbers. Instead of sharing these numbers, let's just do a quick comparison of all of the different editions, including their burn times:
| 1st edition | 2nd edition | 3rd edition | |
| Torch | 40 feet / 1 hour | 15 feet / 30 minutes | 40 feet / 1 hour |
| Hooded Lantern | 30 feet / 4 hours | 30 feet / 2 hours | 60 feet / 6 hours |
| Bullseye Lantern | 80 feet / 4 hours | 60 feet / 2 hours | 120 feet / 6 hours |
Strangely, 3rd edition gives illumination figures for use in areas of bright light, which seems redundant to me and I'm at a loss for why that column is listed at all. Check it out for yourself, the explanation is on page 164.
It's worth noting that 4th edition lists illumination in squares, but doesn't ever list how many feet or yards a single square is.
I think the 1st edition AD&D numbers are solid, and I'm perplexed as to why they were ever changed in later editions.
Monday, August 20, 2012
"I love this game!"
Last night we got to bite into more of Dungeon Crawl Classics and some really cool things emerged from playing. The beginning of this game started as a one shot, throw away session. I wanted to just soak my players in DCC gore and see how they would wash themselves off, and I think overall it was a success. During the first session I ran them through the introductory adventure at the back of the rulebook.
One player lost three of his characters, and because he thought of them as stat blocks instead of characters he was really disappointed to be left with one of his unheroic characters (read as: no ability score higher than 13). I houseruled mid-game that once you were down to one character you could level them up as a warrior class. I justified this by saying that the character was emboldened by the death of their comrades to enact mighty deeds, and explained out of character that this allowed fewer chances of being forced to start over with new characters before the end of the very first session.
Another player managed to involve all four of his characters in multiple activities and none of them died, which was very lucky since it all came down to dice rolls. There were several instances where his characters had a 50% or worse chance of surviving something, and yet they all pulled through.
In the second session, rather than skipping ahead to the next adventure we role-played out journeying to a nearby city to sell their loot. A lot of this gameplay involved casting spells and getting familiar with the locations of different tables in the rulebook. It was a little tedious, and one player remarked that there was a little too much randomization. He argued that d20 games typically are very balanced and you're always using a d20 so your chances are always easy to calculate (he was an economics major in college). I argued that the randomness is part of the charm, and you shouldn't be able to calculate your chances very easily because that's meta. Later in the session another player incurred deity disapproval and rolling on the table he received a quest to heal a cripple which allowed me to give the offending cleric a vision of a nearby cripple. Everybody at the table thought the result was cool and it gave them a push to regroup, the emerging story behind their misfortune humbled the characters, and in that moment I burst out "This is why I love this game! The craziest things can happen, but they can still all make sense!"
Near the end of the session the characters had a new quest for themselves, and all of them nearly got killed simply from approaching their destination. Yet again, the player with four characters had every single one of them almost die. Three of them were brought to 1 hit point and mercifully survived the rest of the encounter by the fate of the dice. The real problem now is that every character at the table is now level 1, which has the potential of making bookkeeping tiresome.
There were some great moments where players acted out responses from different characters, and one player had one of his characters stealing from the other. For these moments of role-playing I couldn't help myself and I gave a single point of experience which I declared could be given to one of the characters involved. The gameplay that arose from last night's session was unexpected and fun, and I only wish I could share this experience with more of my gamer friends.
One player lost three of his characters, and because he thought of them as stat blocks instead of characters he was really disappointed to be left with one of his unheroic characters (read as: no ability score higher than 13). I houseruled mid-game that once you were down to one character you could level them up as a warrior class. I justified this by saying that the character was emboldened by the death of their comrades to enact mighty deeds, and explained out of character that this allowed fewer chances of being forced to start over with new characters before the end of the very first session.
Another player managed to involve all four of his characters in multiple activities and none of them died, which was very lucky since it all came down to dice rolls. There were several instances where his characters had a 50% or worse chance of surviving something, and yet they all pulled through.
In the second session, rather than skipping ahead to the next adventure we role-played out journeying to a nearby city to sell their loot. A lot of this gameplay involved casting spells and getting familiar with the locations of different tables in the rulebook. It was a little tedious, and one player remarked that there was a little too much randomization. He argued that d20 games typically are very balanced and you're always using a d20 so your chances are always easy to calculate (he was an economics major in college). I argued that the randomness is part of the charm, and you shouldn't be able to calculate your chances very easily because that's meta. Later in the session another player incurred deity disapproval and rolling on the table he received a quest to heal a cripple which allowed me to give the offending cleric a vision of a nearby cripple. Everybody at the table thought the result was cool and it gave them a push to regroup, the emerging story behind their misfortune humbled the characters, and in that moment I burst out "This is why I love this game! The craziest things can happen, but they can still all make sense!"
Near the end of the session the characters had a new quest for themselves, and all of them nearly got killed simply from approaching their destination. Yet again, the player with four characters had every single one of them almost die. Three of them were brought to 1 hit point and mercifully survived the rest of the encounter by the fate of the dice. The real problem now is that every character at the table is now level 1, which has the potential of making bookkeeping tiresome.
There were some great moments where players acted out responses from different characters, and one player had one of his characters stealing from the other. For these moments of role-playing I couldn't help myself and I gave a single point of experience which I declared could be given to one of the characters involved. The gameplay that arose from last night's session was unexpected and fun, and I only wish I could share this experience with more of my gamer friends.
Saturday, August 18, 2012
The Passion of the Gamer
This year I was growing tired of gaming. I was beginning to feel worn out. I can't really put a finger on what I was thinking, except that I felt jaded with game systems and adventures and I was floundering. I was really only gaming because it's a weekly social gathering, and I'd rather spend time with friends regularly than abandon it because I'm not feeling excited by anything I'm playing or could be playing. Just going through the motions.
When I bought the Dungeon Crawl Classics rulebook this year I thought I was purchasing a quaint little d20 compatible book with the resources to simulate the feeling of a 1st edition game. That is a simplified way of looking at the game because it does simulate the feel of 1st edition play and it does use the basic mechanics of the d20 system, but DCC is it's own game. And I love it. Literally LOVE it!
It's one of the most interesting games I've read in a while, it excites me because it manages to convey a deadly feel into a game using modern mechanics and terminology. It does everything right that my recent role-playing experiments failed to live up to. I feel like I have been serving stale bread and moldy cheese to my gaming group for the last year when I could have been serving this delicious cake with frothy ale. Now I want to play in it, I want to GM it, and having read it from cover to cover I just want more of it! It has made me want to attend conventions again, has inspired me to read more of Appendix N, and has given my love for gaming new life. A single book has brought me back from the dead.
When I bought the Dungeon Crawl Classics rulebook this year I thought I was purchasing a quaint little d20 compatible book with the resources to simulate the feeling of a 1st edition game. That is a simplified way of looking at the game because it does simulate the feel of 1st edition play and it does use the basic mechanics of the d20 system, but DCC is it's own game. And I love it. Literally LOVE it!
It's one of the most interesting games I've read in a while, it excites me because it manages to convey a deadly feel into a game using modern mechanics and terminology. It does everything right that my recent role-playing experiments failed to live up to. I feel like I have been serving stale bread and moldy cheese to my gaming group for the last year when I could have been serving this delicious cake with frothy ale. Now I want to play in it, I want to GM it, and having read it from cover to cover I just want more of it! It has made me want to attend conventions again, has inspired me to read more of Appendix N, and has given my love for gaming new life. A single book has brought me back from the dead.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
the Random Esoteric Creature Generator
I wrote a review for the Random Esoteric Creature Generator by James Edward Raggi IV, you can read it by following this link.The highlights: Amazing and invaluable! A real treasure for any GM who likes to keep their players guessing.
The Random Esoteric Creature Generator published by Goodman Games, $12.99
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Gaz and the Drake, a patron for DCC RPG
These two entities travel the planes together, they seek neither treasure nor magic but find interest in daredevils and risk-takers. While they are naturally a jovial and curious pair, they can be angered easily and do not take kindly to being called upon for affairs they consider mundane. Gaz favors mortals who risk their lives in battles of wits and cunning, but the Drake often seems aloof and neglectful to those who have summoned aid.
In truth, Gaz and the Drake were once mortals. A dwarf and a giant who struck a bargain together to acquire divine power. They managed to find what they sought millenia ago but were never fully sated by the immortality and magic they had won. Now they spend their time watching others and gambling power between each other on the fates of mortal adventurers. Woe to the wizard who invokes this patron when he is being bet against.
Invoke Patron check results:
12-13 = Gaz answers the wizard's plea with a small physical boon. The caster receives +2 to his next attack roll or saving throw. If the wizard neither makes an attack or rolls a saving throw within the next six rounds then this bonus goes away and the Drake curses the wizard with a -2 penalty to his next spell check. If it activated, the Drake's penalty lasts indefinitely.
14-17 = The Drake places a sword in the wizard's hand. This magical blade (1d8 damage) exists for a number of rounds equal to the wizard's level. Any living creature (i.e. un-dead, animated statues, and constructs are immune) must succeed on a DC 10 + wizard's level Fort save or be poisoned (2d8 damage). If the wizard drops the sword before the duration expires the sword disappears and casting Invoke Patron again in the same day suffers a -4 penalty.
18-19 = For a number of rounds equal to the wizard's level plus one, the caster is imbued with the ability to leap mighty bounds. His AC and saving throws improve by +4, and with a successful Ref save (DC 10) the caster can leap up to double his normal running speed. If the caster critically fails the Ref save by rolling a natural 1, he lands poorly and breaks a leg taking 2d4 damage. Further jumping on a broken leg causes another 1d6 damage per jump, and if the caster critically fails a second time he breaks his other leg and can no longer jump or walk. If the wizard uses this ability to escape a fight completely, as opposed to using it strategically, then the Drake is offended and breaks both of the wizard's legs at the end of the duration.
20-23 = For 1d4 + wizard's level in rounds, the wizard is bestowed with the Drake's sword (as the above 14-17 result) and Gaz'es leaping ability (as the above 18-19 result). The wizard also receives a +2 bonus to attack rolls during this time.
24-27 = For 3d6 rounds, the wizard casts other spells as if he were three levels higher than he actually is. All spells (except Invoke Patron) last longer and are easier to cast. This bonus can potentially exceed the normal maximum of 10. If the caster rolls a natural 1 with one of these enhanced spells, the bonus immediately ends and for the rest of the day the wizard can only cast spells by using a point of spellburn in addition to any other requirements the spell has.
28-29 = Gaz bestows the wizard with a powerful weapon from the distant future. For the next 10 rounds the wizard has an energy hurling metal hand crossbow that is easy to attack with and inflicts a large amount of damage. The wizard receives a +8 bonus to attack with the weapon and it inflicts 3d6+2 damage when it strikes. The weapon has a range of 400' before range penalties apply. The Drake, meanwhile, bestows the wizard with a powerful armor from the future for the same duration of time. The wizard's AC is raised by +10 and appears as a shimmering, yellowish energy field around the caster. At the end of the spell, the wizard disappears for 5 rounds. When he returns he looks weary and tired, but has no memory of where he went.
30-31 = Gaz appears in a puff of smoke to fight alongside the wizard. Gaz has a +15 to hit, his action dice are 1d20 + 1d20, his saves are all +7, and he has 120 hit points. He attacks with a broad battleaxe and inflicts 2d6+3 damage, and his crit die is 2d20/V. Gaz will disappear into a cloud of smoke if he is reduced to 0 hit points or after a number of rounds equal to twice the wizard's level pass.
32+ = The Drake appears out of a crashing thunderbolt to fight alongside the wizard. Use the stats for a Cloud Giant on page 414. The Drake will disappear in another loud thunderbolt if he is reduced to 0 hit points or after a number of rounds equal to twice the wizard's level pass.
Patron Taint: Gaz and the Drake
Gaz and the Drake are kinder to wizards than a lot of other patrons, provided the wizards are thrillseekers and daredevils. Those who Invoke Patron at times when Gaz believes they don't require aid find themselves suffering from the Drake's powerful magics. When patron taint is indicated, roll 1d6 on the table below. When a caster has excised all six taints at all levels of effect, there is no need to continue rolling any more. Additionally, the caster is freed from all future corruption rolls.
1 = The caster gains 25 lbs. of excess fat. This counts against encumbrance and slows the character by 5'. Movement will not be slowed if this result is rolled a second or third time, but after the third roll the caster's Stamina can no longer be used for Spellburn.
2 = One arm becomes bigger than the other. The wizard's Strength is increased by 1, but his spell checks suffer a -1 penalty due to the uneven sizes of his hands. If the result is rolled a second time, the arm becomes bigger and any use of the arm inflicts a -1 penalty due to it's unwieldy size and girth, this includes melee attack rolls as well as spell checks. If the result is rolled a third time, the arm becomes gigantic further complicating the wizard's life. He walks with a hunch, bent over in the direction of the arm, and he can no longer use his Strength to fuel Spellburn.
3 = Disfigurement! The first time this is rolled the wizard's body becomes covered in thick, ragged scars. Personality is permanently reduced by 1 and natural AC is increased by 1. Magical healing does nothing to remove the scar tissue. The second time this is rolled the wizard's grows coarse, long hair from every part of his body. It never grows longer than an inch or two, and shaving it off causes it to grow back within an hour. Personality is permanently reduced by 1, but natural AC is increased by 1. The third and final time this is rolled the wizard's teeth turn black and all of his fingernails and toenails permanently fall out, and Personality can no longer be used to fuel Spellburn.
4 = The wizard will begin to perceive challenges everywhere. He will attempt to make things more difficult for himself, and pride himself in defeating his opponents and outdoing his companions in similar feats. Gambling also becomes a primary passtime. This arrogant confidence can be resisted with a DC 15 Will save, but the save must be attempted every time he tries to resist his new emotional urges. If the result is rolled a second time, the caster's emotions become stronger and the DC increases to 20. If the result is rolled a third time, a DC 25 Will save permits the caster to ignore his emotional urges.
5 = The first time this is rolled, the caster is overwhelmed with a restlessness. He can't stay in one town or city for very long, and will need to travel to a new location to rest at least once every week. If he doesn't submit to this restlessness, the wizard does not heal ability points lost to spellburn, nor does he recover hit points through natural healing. The second time this result is rolled the restlessness becomes more severe and the wizard cannot sleep in the same bed two nights in a row. The third time this result is rolled, the wizard becomes obsessed with traveling economically and efficiently. He sells virtually everything he owns and will only keep what he can carry in a single bag.
6 = The wizard begins to show signs of arrogance and begins to believe that he's invulnerable. He will start fights, or never back down from a challenge, and generally puts himself into the way of physical harm daily. The caster should make a DC 15 Willpower save to avoid engaging in any reckless activity. The second time this result is rolled the caster stops wearing armor or using magical armor of any kind. During fights he will stop trying to dodge attacks, which translates into a -2 penalty to Reflex saving throws. The Willpower DC for avoiding reckless behavior increases to 20. The third time this result is rolled, the caster truly believes he is invulnerable and nothing can stop him. The Willpower DC for avoiding reckless behavior increases to 25, and during combat the wizard stops moving at all except to get a better view, he can no longer receive any AC benefit from Agility and another -2 penalty is applied to Reflex saving throws. Finally, Agility can no longer be used to fuel Spellburn.
Next Up: Patron Spells
In truth, Gaz and the Drake were once mortals. A dwarf and a giant who struck a bargain together to acquire divine power. They managed to find what they sought millenia ago but were never fully sated by the immortality and magic they had won. Now they spend their time watching others and gambling power between each other on the fates of mortal adventurers. Woe to the wizard who invokes this patron when he is being bet against.
Invoke Patron check results:
12-13 = Gaz answers the wizard's plea with a small physical boon. The caster receives +2 to his next attack roll or saving throw. If the wizard neither makes an attack or rolls a saving throw within the next six rounds then this bonus goes away and the Drake curses the wizard with a -2 penalty to his next spell check. If it activated, the Drake's penalty lasts indefinitely.
14-17 = The Drake places a sword in the wizard's hand. This magical blade (1d8 damage) exists for a number of rounds equal to the wizard's level. Any living creature (i.e. un-dead, animated statues, and constructs are immune) must succeed on a DC 10 + wizard's level Fort save or be poisoned (2d8 damage). If the wizard drops the sword before the duration expires the sword disappears and casting Invoke Patron again in the same day suffers a -4 penalty.
18-19 = For a number of rounds equal to the wizard's level plus one, the caster is imbued with the ability to leap mighty bounds. His AC and saving throws improve by +4, and with a successful Ref save (DC 10) the caster can leap up to double his normal running speed. If the caster critically fails the Ref save by rolling a natural 1, he lands poorly and breaks a leg taking 2d4 damage. Further jumping on a broken leg causes another 1d6 damage per jump, and if the caster critically fails a second time he breaks his other leg and can no longer jump or walk. If the wizard uses this ability to escape a fight completely, as opposed to using it strategically, then the Drake is offended and breaks both of the wizard's legs at the end of the duration.
20-23 = For 1d4 + wizard's level in rounds, the wizard is bestowed with the Drake's sword (as the above 14-17 result) and Gaz'es leaping ability (as the above 18-19 result). The wizard also receives a +2 bonus to attack rolls during this time.
24-27 = For 3d6 rounds, the wizard casts other spells as if he were three levels higher than he actually is. All spells (except Invoke Patron) last longer and are easier to cast. This bonus can potentially exceed the normal maximum of 10. If the caster rolls a natural 1 with one of these enhanced spells, the bonus immediately ends and for the rest of the day the wizard can only cast spells by using a point of spellburn in addition to any other requirements the spell has.
28-29 = Gaz bestows the wizard with a powerful weapon from the distant future. For the next 10 rounds the wizard has an energy hurling metal hand crossbow that is easy to attack with and inflicts a large amount of damage. The wizard receives a +8 bonus to attack with the weapon and it inflicts 3d6+2 damage when it strikes. The weapon has a range of 400' before range penalties apply. The Drake, meanwhile, bestows the wizard with a powerful armor from the future for the same duration of time. The wizard's AC is raised by +10 and appears as a shimmering, yellowish energy field around the caster. At the end of the spell, the wizard disappears for 5 rounds. When he returns he looks weary and tired, but has no memory of where he went.
30-31 = Gaz appears in a puff of smoke to fight alongside the wizard. Gaz has a +15 to hit, his action dice are 1d20 + 1d20, his saves are all +7, and he has 120 hit points. He attacks with a broad battleaxe and inflicts 2d6+3 damage, and his crit die is 2d20/V. Gaz will disappear into a cloud of smoke if he is reduced to 0 hit points or after a number of rounds equal to twice the wizard's level pass.
32+ = The Drake appears out of a crashing thunderbolt to fight alongside the wizard. Use the stats for a Cloud Giant on page 414. The Drake will disappear in another loud thunderbolt if he is reduced to 0 hit points or after a number of rounds equal to twice the wizard's level pass.
Patron Taint: Gaz and the Drake
Gaz and the Drake are kinder to wizards than a lot of other patrons, provided the wizards are thrillseekers and daredevils. Those who Invoke Patron at times when Gaz believes they don't require aid find themselves suffering from the Drake's powerful magics. When patron taint is indicated, roll 1d6 on the table below. When a caster has excised all six taints at all levels of effect, there is no need to continue rolling any more. Additionally, the caster is freed from all future corruption rolls.
1 = The caster gains 25 lbs. of excess fat. This counts against encumbrance and slows the character by 5'. Movement will not be slowed if this result is rolled a second or third time, but after the third roll the caster's Stamina can no longer be used for Spellburn.
2 = One arm becomes bigger than the other. The wizard's Strength is increased by 1, but his spell checks suffer a -1 penalty due to the uneven sizes of his hands. If the result is rolled a second time, the arm becomes bigger and any use of the arm inflicts a -1 penalty due to it's unwieldy size and girth, this includes melee attack rolls as well as spell checks. If the result is rolled a third time, the arm becomes gigantic further complicating the wizard's life. He walks with a hunch, bent over in the direction of the arm, and he can no longer use his Strength to fuel Spellburn.
3 = Disfigurement! The first time this is rolled the wizard's body becomes covered in thick, ragged scars. Personality is permanently reduced by 1 and natural AC is increased by 1. Magical healing does nothing to remove the scar tissue. The second time this is rolled the wizard's grows coarse, long hair from every part of his body. It never grows longer than an inch or two, and shaving it off causes it to grow back within an hour. Personality is permanently reduced by 1, but natural AC is increased by 1. The third and final time this is rolled the wizard's teeth turn black and all of his fingernails and toenails permanently fall out, and Personality can no longer be used to fuel Spellburn.
4 = The wizard will begin to perceive challenges everywhere. He will attempt to make things more difficult for himself, and pride himself in defeating his opponents and outdoing his companions in similar feats. Gambling also becomes a primary passtime. This arrogant confidence can be resisted with a DC 15 Will save, but the save must be attempted every time he tries to resist his new emotional urges. If the result is rolled a second time, the caster's emotions become stronger and the DC increases to 20. If the result is rolled a third time, a DC 25 Will save permits the caster to ignore his emotional urges.
5 = The first time this is rolled, the caster is overwhelmed with a restlessness. He can't stay in one town or city for very long, and will need to travel to a new location to rest at least once every week. If he doesn't submit to this restlessness, the wizard does not heal ability points lost to spellburn, nor does he recover hit points through natural healing. The second time this result is rolled the restlessness becomes more severe and the wizard cannot sleep in the same bed two nights in a row. The third time this result is rolled, the wizard becomes obsessed with traveling economically and efficiently. He sells virtually everything he owns and will only keep what he can carry in a single bag.
6 = The wizard begins to show signs of arrogance and begins to believe that he's invulnerable. He will start fights, or never back down from a challenge, and generally puts himself into the way of physical harm daily. The caster should make a DC 15 Willpower save to avoid engaging in any reckless activity. The second time this result is rolled the caster stops wearing armor or using magical armor of any kind. During fights he will stop trying to dodge attacks, which translates into a -2 penalty to Reflex saving throws. The Willpower DC for avoiding reckless behavior increases to 20. The third time this result is rolled, the caster truly believes he is invulnerable and nothing can stop him. The Willpower DC for avoiding reckless behavior increases to 25, and during combat the wizard stops moving at all except to get a better view, he can no longer receive any AC benefit from Agility and another -2 penalty is applied to Reflex saving throws. Finally, Agility can no longer be used to fuel Spellburn.
Next Up: Patron Spells
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG
I wrote a review for the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG which appears over at British Fantasy Society The highlights: It's smart, absorbing, fun, refreshing, and nostalgic. I don't think it will appeal to everyone, but I think anybody who gives it a chance will find this game to be a lot of wild and dark fun. I begrudgingly gave it a chance and fell in love with it!
Dungeon Crawl Classics published by Goodman Games, $39.99
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
I just picked up the Dungeon Crawl Classics Role-Playing Game last week and I have to say that I fucking love it! I'll write an actual review which will be forthcoming.
For now, I've just finished reading through the whole thing and I can say that my desire to modify the game via house rule is minimal. Apart from letting PCs start their 0-level characters with maximum Hit Points, I think wizards should start with the Invoke Patron and Patron Bond spells. These, and other spells their Patron may bestow upon the wizard, would never count against the wizard's maximum number of known spells.
I'm currently GMing a Saturday group (Stars Without Number) and playing in a Sunday group (about to start Call of Cthulhu 6th edition), but whenever I get my next chance to GM a fresh game, DCC RPG is what I'll be running.
For now, I've just finished reading through the whole thing and I can say that my desire to modify the game via house rule is minimal. Apart from letting PCs start their 0-level characters with maximum Hit Points, I think wizards should start with the Invoke Patron and Patron Bond spells. These, and other spells their Patron may bestow upon the wizard, would never count against the wizard's maximum number of known spells.
I'm currently GMing a Saturday group (Stars Without Number) and playing in a Sunday group (about to start Call of Cthulhu 6th edition), but whenever I get my next chance to GM a fresh game, DCC RPG is what I'll be running.
Friday, June 22, 2012
Character Creation: Traveller
The classic Traveller role-playing game, published in 1977, uses a system of character creation that is not only 100% random, but it's the only system I know of where the character can die during creation. There's an optional rule that allows a PC to finish the creation process with an injury, and I must assume that most people must have used this rule when creating a character. The part of this system that I find fascinating is the complete randomness of it, yet it only uses one or two six-sided dice for every score and table.
Classic Traveller was intended as a generic science fiction role-playing game that could accommodate any specific setting or genre of play. Over the years demand for details of an 'official' campaign led to the Imperium, but similar to Greyhawk's development many regions of space seemed to be randomly generated and just shoved together, with explanations for their interactions determined later.
So let's get started.
The Game: Traveller (sometimes referred to as Classic Traveller)
The Publisher: Game Designers' Workshop
Familiarity: Never played, but have read through the books many times.
Books Required: Book 1 - Characters and Combat (there are supplemental books for expanding characters of specific services but they aren't required and I don't own copies of those anyway)
The first step of character creation is to roll basic characteristics using 2d6, applying the roles to the characteristics in the order rolled:
Strength 6
Dexterity 6
Endurance 9
Intelligence 10
Education 4
Social Standing 6
We can already see that this is guy is very smart and resilient, but otherwise average. He probably grew up on a poor but rugged world, or perhaps he lived a very rural life, which would explain why he hasn't received a lot of education. If I had any say in what skills he might get I would definitely give him something related to wilderness survival or hunting. For now I am just going to give this man a name, Sten Laurent.
The next step is acquiring skills, this is accomplished by joining a service. Most services are of a military nature but there are rules for joining nefarious or less reputable organizations as well. Even if Sten doesn't successfully enlist into the service of his choice, he can potentially get drafted into the same service. The most difficult service to join is the Marines, but I feel like Sten would know he hasn't received a proper education and he would choose a service that might give him better training than he received on his homeworld. The best service for that would be the Navy or the Scouts, and since the Navy is harder to get into Sten goes after them first. I need to roll 8 or higher on 2d6 to get in, but Sten gets a +1 to the roll due to his high Intelligence. I roll a 5 and he doesn't get in, now he must submit to the draft which is another roll. I roll a 4 which leads to Sten getting drafted into the Scouts, he considers himself lucky since that was his second choice.
For my character's background, I envision Sten having some foreknowledge about getting drafted into the Scouts and he doesn't have a problem with that, but he tries out for the Navy anyway because he thinks their benefits are better. When he doesn't get in perhaps somebody pulled some strings to make sure he would get into the Scouts, like an overbearing family member or a rival with connections in the Navy. This would be something I would leave open for a GM to bring up as a plot hook later.
Every term of enlistment in a service lasts for four years, and at the end of every term you get one random skill, but you must also make a survival check to see if you die in the line of duty (or get injured and are forced out of the service). At the end of every term you can get promoted (which requires a roll) and then reenlist (another roll) or you can muster out and receive a commission (more rolls). Characters who are drafted don't get commission bonuses for their first term. Without going into the minutia of the rolling mechanics I'm simply going to sum up Sten's career in the Scout Service.
Basic training in the Scouts involves learning how to fly a starship (Pilot 1) and Sten ends up taking a broad range of classes (+1 Int, Jack-of-All-Trades 1). During his second term he begins taking on more physically strenuous duties (+1 Str) and begins learning technical expertise (Mechanical 1). During his third term he's broadened his technical expertise (Electronics 1) and manages to pick up some rudimentary firearms skill (Revolver 1), he's injured however and is forced to muster out at the age of 26. During his time with the Scout Service he managed to get more schooling (+2 Education) and has saved a sizable chunk of money (20,000 Credits).
Instead of getting physically injured, I would suggest to my GM that Sten was caught in a firefight that forced him to kill several pirates but not before seeing a few close friends in the Scout Service get killed. This has left him with a bad case of panic attacks whenever he is forced into very stressful environment, which is why he was forced to leave the Scout Service.
The rules suggest using abbreviations for characters and they refer to these brief 6-digit codes as UPP (universal personality profile). A ten is expressed as an A, an eleven as a B, etc. Sten's characteristics according to this code would be 769B66. This method of expressing a character smacks of computer code, which makes me assume that Marc Millar and Loren Wiseman were programmers during their day jobs.
The way I would write the character is like this:
Sten Laurent, age 26
Strength 7, Dexterity 6, Endurance 9
Intelligence 11, Education 6, Social Standing 6
Electronics 1, Jack-of-All-Trades 1, Mechanical 1, Pilot 1, Revolver 1
20,000 Credits
Sten is a fairly average spacefarer who is smarter than his background and experiences might suggest on the surface. And now I would be free to purchase equipment, but that's boring so I'm going to skip it.
Classic Traveller was intended as a generic science fiction role-playing game that could accommodate any specific setting or genre of play. Over the years demand for details of an 'official' campaign led to the Imperium, but similar to Greyhawk's development many regions of space seemed to be randomly generated and just shoved together, with explanations for their interactions determined later.
So let's get started.
The Game: Traveller (sometimes referred to as Classic Traveller)
The Publisher: Game Designers' Workshop
Familiarity: Never played, but have read through the books many times.
Books Required: Book 1 - Characters and Combat (there are supplemental books for expanding characters of specific services but they aren't required and I don't own copies of those anyway)
The first step of character creation is to roll basic characteristics using 2d6, applying the roles to the characteristics in the order rolled:
Strength 6
Dexterity 6
Endurance 9
Intelligence 10
Education 4
Social Standing 6
We can already see that this is guy is very smart and resilient, but otherwise average. He probably grew up on a poor but rugged world, or perhaps he lived a very rural life, which would explain why he hasn't received a lot of education. If I had any say in what skills he might get I would definitely give him something related to wilderness survival or hunting. For now I am just going to give this man a name, Sten Laurent.
The next step is acquiring skills, this is accomplished by joining a service. Most services are of a military nature but there are rules for joining nefarious or less reputable organizations as well. Even if Sten doesn't successfully enlist into the service of his choice, he can potentially get drafted into the same service. The most difficult service to join is the Marines, but I feel like Sten would know he hasn't received a proper education and he would choose a service that might give him better training than he received on his homeworld. The best service for that would be the Navy or the Scouts, and since the Navy is harder to get into Sten goes after them first. I need to roll 8 or higher on 2d6 to get in, but Sten gets a +1 to the roll due to his high Intelligence. I roll a 5 and he doesn't get in, now he must submit to the draft which is another roll. I roll a 4 which leads to Sten getting drafted into the Scouts, he considers himself lucky since that was his second choice.
For my character's background, I envision Sten having some foreknowledge about getting drafted into the Scouts and he doesn't have a problem with that, but he tries out for the Navy anyway because he thinks their benefits are better. When he doesn't get in perhaps somebody pulled some strings to make sure he would get into the Scouts, like an overbearing family member or a rival with connections in the Navy. This would be something I would leave open for a GM to bring up as a plot hook later.
Every term of enlistment in a service lasts for four years, and at the end of every term you get one random skill, but you must also make a survival check to see if you die in the line of duty (or get injured and are forced out of the service). At the end of every term you can get promoted (which requires a roll) and then reenlist (another roll) or you can muster out and receive a commission (more rolls). Characters who are drafted don't get commission bonuses for their first term. Without going into the minutia of the rolling mechanics I'm simply going to sum up Sten's career in the Scout Service.
Basic training in the Scouts involves learning how to fly a starship (Pilot 1) and Sten ends up taking a broad range of classes (+1 Int, Jack-of-All-Trades 1). During his second term he begins taking on more physically strenuous duties (+1 Str) and begins learning technical expertise (Mechanical 1). During his third term he's broadened his technical expertise (Electronics 1) and manages to pick up some rudimentary firearms skill (Revolver 1), he's injured however and is forced to muster out at the age of 26. During his time with the Scout Service he managed to get more schooling (+2 Education) and has saved a sizable chunk of money (20,000 Credits).
Instead of getting physically injured, I would suggest to my GM that Sten was caught in a firefight that forced him to kill several pirates but not before seeing a few close friends in the Scout Service get killed. This has left him with a bad case of panic attacks whenever he is forced into very stressful environment, which is why he was forced to leave the Scout Service.
The rules suggest using abbreviations for characters and they refer to these brief 6-digit codes as UPP (universal personality profile). A ten is expressed as an A, an eleven as a B, etc. Sten's characteristics according to this code would be 769B66. This method of expressing a character smacks of computer code, which makes me assume that Marc Millar and Loren Wiseman were programmers during their day jobs.
The way I would write the character is like this:
Sten Laurent, age 26
Strength 7, Dexterity 6, Endurance 9
Intelligence 11, Education 6, Social Standing 6
Electronics 1, Jack-of-All-Trades 1, Mechanical 1, Pilot 1, Revolver 1
20,000 Credits
Sten is a fairly average spacefarer who is smarter than his background and experiences might suggest on the surface. And now I would be free to purchase equipment, but that's boring so I'm going to skip it.
Friday, June 8, 2012
dice and math
Because I've been going through so many role-playing rules lately, I've been looking at dice mechanics and probability and sizing up which systems are simplest. Not which systems are best, because best is subjective. The basic differences in systems can always just be boiled down to percentages. The average to hit roll for an average human against another average human varies from system to system, but each variance can be expressed as a percentage which illustrates how each system is different.
In d20 (and most versions of D&D) the base roll is a d20 against a 10. Each number on a d20 can be expressed as 5% of a whole. Needing to roll a 10 or higher translates to 55% chance of success.
In World of Darkness the base roll might be a dice pool of four d10s against an average Defense of 2, which lowers the pool to 2d10. To get one success then would translate to 51% chance of success.
There is no average in GURPS since it's a point-buy system. Assuming a character with a DX of 10 and no combat skills, you can brawl without a skill but the character doesn't do as much damage, and the percentage chance to hit is 50%. But in GURPS your opponent can dodge the attack, and assuming a similarly unskilled character with a Dodge of 8, they have a 26% chance of evading that attack. Which means that an average character only has a 38% chance of successfully hitting another average character.
In Deadlands... forget it. It's too chaotic.
I've been tinkering a lot with 2d6 and 3d6 lately so just for fun, if you assume you need to roll 8 or higher on 2d6 the chance of success is 41%.
Extreme results have differing percentages as well. Assume you need to roll the highest number possible, and on a d20 it's a 5% chance, on 2d10 it's 1%, and on 3d6 it's less than 1%. On 2d6 it's 2.78%
Which then begs the question: Why don't people judge their games by the percentages? The more I crunch the numbers the more attractive 2d6 becomes to me. Yet most games, and probably most gamers too, shy away from using 2d6 because it's too plain or generic. There's a combat system waiting to be born out of 2d6 that nobody has adequately explored yet, or maybe they have and I've just never seen it.
In d20 (and most versions of D&D) the base roll is a d20 against a 10. Each number on a d20 can be expressed as 5% of a whole. Needing to roll a 10 or higher translates to 55% chance of success.
In World of Darkness the base roll might be a dice pool of four d10s against an average Defense of 2, which lowers the pool to 2d10. To get one success then would translate to 51% chance of success.
There is no average in GURPS since it's a point-buy system. Assuming a character with a DX of 10 and no combat skills, you can brawl without a skill but the character doesn't do as much damage, and the percentage chance to hit is 50%. But in GURPS your opponent can dodge the attack, and assuming a similarly unskilled character with a Dodge of 8, they have a 26% chance of evading that attack. Which means that an average character only has a 38% chance of successfully hitting another average character.
In Deadlands... forget it. It's too chaotic.
I've been tinkering a lot with 2d6 and 3d6 lately so just for fun, if you assume you need to roll 8 or higher on 2d6 the chance of success is 41%.
Extreme results have differing percentages as well. Assume you need to roll the highest number possible, and on a d20 it's a 5% chance, on 2d10 it's 1%, and on 3d6 it's less than 1%. On 2d6 it's 2.78%
Which then begs the question: Why don't people judge their games by the percentages? The more I crunch the numbers the more attractive 2d6 becomes to me. Yet most games, and probably most gamers too, shy away from using 2d6 because it's too plain or generic. There's a combat system waiting to be born out of 2d6 that nobody has adequately explored yet, or maybe they have and I've just never seen it.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
face punching and hand holding
A topic that springs up regarding video games from time to time is how modern video games are relatively easy compared to the initial video games of yesteryear. Frequently, commentators point to the fact that modern games have no relative penalties for dying within a game, that many times you simply respawn or have the equivalent of unlimited lives, but I think that is an obvious example compared to how video games grow more and more like a digital game of whack-a-mole. This apt analogy was made last year by Kirk Hamilton when he urged gamers to turn off their mini-map in Grand Theft Auto IV.
I have found drastic changes over the way games of today are cakewalks compared to the kicks to the groin I received in years previous. Most games these days have scalable difficulty settings, but this usually just determines how much damage you take from enemies and how much damage you deal out in combat, overall it doesn't affect the rest of the game. And instead of getting stumped on puzzles, the internet makes looking up solutions as easy as typing a sentence, when the puzzle hasn't been reduced to color matching or a game of connect the dots.
DANGER: Mathematics approaching!
Due to my recent forays into the Fallout wiki I've been noticing the trend even more. Let's just compare Stimpaks from the original Fallout to the modern Fallout 3. In the original, when a Stimpak was used it gave a variable amount of hit points back, between 12 and 20. In Fallout 3 a Stimpak gives a specific amount of hit points based on your skill in Medicine, but the smallest amount of hit points you can receive is 30, and the largest is 106.
My first conclusion from this is that the player is being handed a much better boon in FO3 compared to FO1, but the skeptic in me says "What about hit point totals?" If a character has more hit points in FO3 than the bigger boost makes sense. Hit points are a derived stat in both games, and an average character in FO1 will start with 30 hit points, while an average character in FO3 starts with 190. So, Stimpaks are 30-60% effective in FO1 compared to FO3 where they are 16% effective.
That's quite a difference in both HP totals and overall effectiveness of Stimpaks, but it doesn't paint a complete picture. In FO3, Stimpaks are not the only way to heal hit point loss, in fact simply drinking water will restore hit points, but in FO1 there are very few (and relatively uncommon) ways of healing up besides using Stimpaks.
Mathematics departing!
This stark contrast between hard "old school" games versus modern games can be seen easily in the differences between Fallout 1 and Fallout 3, and I think that using the two versions of Fallout as proxies for the two eras is appropriate. It's very easy to break Fallout 3, and I know because I have broken it on my own without the help of a wiki or a faq. In Fallout 1, I'm still scared of getting into a fight with super mutants while using cheat codes! That really says something.
I'm remembering my struggles playing through Fallout 1 and there were times when I was playing Fallout 1 that I felt I might have screwed over my character by making too many mistakes and I would end up weighing my options about starting over with a new character, the penalties of having limbs crippled from fights that turned ugly or accidentally killing a vital NPC were permanent and not easily fixed. In Fallout 3 any mistake made can be fixed, and vital NPCs are impossible to kill. There is quite simply no penalty for taking risks or being reckless in Fallout 3, and the newer version is an exercise in mouse-clicking and loot-grabbing compared to the original.
The video games of yesteryear were very good at punching you in the face and dropping you into a thorn bush for being stupid or irresponsible, but the video games of today seem to be like overly cautious parents holding your hand through a labyrinth made of cotton candy.
I don't long to return to the days of one-hit kills or mind-crushingly difficult gameplay, but there is definitely a difference between hardcore difficult games and simply being a challenge. A game can feel like a challenge but not actually offer any penalties for losing, like Uncharted or Arkham Asylum. Even the "hardcore" mode in Fallout: New Vegas is not much of a challenge.
The only game I can think of in recent years that offered penalties for dying and thus seemed like an actual challenge with an appropriate risk-reward system is Red Dead Redemption, but it also constantly auto-saves so provided you've been following the storyline you're not going to miss out on much if you die.
I'm trying to think of games that offer actual challenges in the way of gameplay without just being super hard, and the only one that comes to mind is Shadow of the Colossus.
I have found drastic changes over the way games of today are cakewalks compared to the kicks to the groin I received in years previous. Most games these days have scalable difficulty settings, but this usually just determines how much damage you take from enemies and how much damage you deal out in combat, overall it doesn't affect the rest of the game. And instead of getting stumped on puzzles, the internet makes looking up solutions as easy as typing a sentence, when the puzzle hasn't been reduced to color matching or a game of connect the dots.
DANGER: Mathematics approaching!
Due to my recent forays into the Fallout wiki I've been noticing the trend even more. Let's just compare Stimpaks from the original Fallout to the modern Fallout 3. In the original, when a Stimpak was used it gave a variable amount of hit points back, between 12 and 20. In Fallout 3 a Stimpak gives a specific amount of hit points based on your skill in Medicine, but the smallest amount of hit points you can receive is 30, and the largest is 106.
My first conclusion from this is that the player is being handed a much better boon in FO3 compared to FO1, but the skeptic in me says "What about hit point totals?" If a character has more hit points in FO3 than the bigger boost makes sense. Hit points are a derived stat in both games, and an average character in FO1 will start with 30 hit points, while an average character in FO3 starts with 190. So, Stimpaks are 30-60% effective in FO1 compared to FO3 where they are 16% effective.
That's quite a difference in both HP totals and overall effectiveness of Stimpaks, but it doesn't paint a complete picture. In FO3, Stimpaks are not the only way to heal hit point loss, in fact simply drinking water will restore hit points, but in FO1 there are very few (and relatively uncommon) ways of healing up besides using Stimpaks.
Mathematics departing!
This stark contrast between hard "old school" games versus modern games can be seen easily in the differences between Fallout 1 and Fallout 3, and I think that using the two versions of Fallout as proxies for the two eras is appropriate. It's very easy to break Fallout 3, and I know because I have broken it on my own without the help of a wiki or a faq. In Fallout 1, I'm still scared of getting into a fight with super mutants while using cheat codes! That really says something.
I'm remembering my struggles playing through Fallout 1 and there were times when I was playing Fallout 1 that I felt I might have screwed over my character by making too many mistakes and I would end up weighing my options about starting over with a new character, the penalties of having limbs crippled from fights that turned ugly or accidentally killing a vital NPC were permanent and not easily fixed. In Fallout 3 any mistake made can be fixed, and vital NPCs are impossible to kill. There is quite simply no penalty for taking risks or being reckless in Fallout 3, and the newer version is an exercise in mouse-clicking and loot-grabbing compared to the original.
The video games of yesteryear were very good at punching you in the face and dropping you into a thorn bush for being stupid or irresponsible, but the video games of today seem to be like overly cautious parents holding your hand through a labyrinth made of cotton candy.
I don't long to return to the days of one-hit kills or mind-crushingly difficult gameplay, but there is definitely a difference between hardcore difficult games and simply being a challenge. A game can feel like a challenge but not actually offer any penalties for losing, like Uncharted or Arkham Asylum. Even the "hardcore" mode in Fallout: New Vegas is not much of a challenge.
The only game I can think of in recent years that offered penalties for dying and thus seemed like an actual challenge with an appropriate risk-reward system is Red Dead Redemption, but it also constantly auto-saves so provided you've been following the storyline you're not going to miss out on much if you die.
I'm trying to think of games that offer actual challenges in the way of gameplay without just being super hard, and the only one that comes to mind is Shadow of the Colossus.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Kickstarted
I've been funding a lot of kickstarter projects lately. Which is a weird concept in and of itself, it's a bit like investing but so many people are pooling small amounts of money together it's more apt to call it micro-investing. The mediaverse has been referring to it as crowdfunding and that's just as good of a description as any. I'm beginning to inwardly call it "casting the 'Mass Beg' spell"
So... shit!A lot of kickstarters I backed have successfully ended, which means I've spent a lot of money recently on things I won't get for months. Or a year.
1.
The first one was 'Double Fine Adventure' - www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adventure - it was trending on every video game site I visit and, though I had never played Psychonauts or Grim Fandango or virtually anything else he's made, Tim Schafer's reputation as a visionary was enough for me to be interested enough in pledging money to this project.
2-5.
After backing Tim Schafer's project, I got a little kckstarter crazy and backed a couple of projects that had already met their goals, but with the intention that I would definitely get the swag offered for a minimum bid.
'This Is Not A Conspiracy Theory' documentary series, which was being created by the same guy who made the brilliant 'Everything Is A Remix' web documentary series.
'Return of the Deck of the Living Dead' which I backed out of sheer exuberance since I was about to start GMing a Deadlands game that week.
And then there was 'Farmaggedon' which I misunderstood the premise of at first, but didn't take my pledge away as the idea sounded good and I wanted to see the final product. He met some of his overfunding goals as well, so I'll end up with the base game plus an expansion for it when it finally gets published.
6.
The next kickstarter I baked on the first day it started. 'Dwimmermount: An Old School Fantasy RPG Megadungeon'. I read James Maliszewski's gaming blog because I enjoy his insights into old school D&Ding, despite the fact that he's kind of rude and never answers e-mails regarding typos in his work. I enjoyed reading his last game and wanted to help pitch in for his next project, plus if his megadungeon had been available as a digital download I probably would have purchased it already.
7-9.
A series of indie video games followed in Tim Schafer's footsteps, but none of them got the same level of media coverage that Double Fine Adventure received. As soon as I heard about them I would either go to the kickstarter page and pledge money with very little hesitation, or else I would dismiss the idea without hardly thinking about it.
'Wasteland 2' put together by Brian Fargo, the mastermind behind the original Fallout.
'The Banner Saga' is not the sort of game I might usually play, but it stuck out to me. It evoked the 1970s Ralph Bakshi era of adult cartoon movies, and I had been hearing snippets of news about it's development before kickstarter was becoming common news in the video games industry. I pledged enough to get my own banner crest in the game because I thought that was a really cool reward!
And finally, there is 'Shadowrun Returns' which is set to wrap up the storylines of previous Shadowrun video games, while also giving a throwback to turn-based strategy games like X-Com using the setting and characters from a Shadowrun world. How could I not give them some of my money? And by the way...
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-returns
10.
I vowed two weeks ago to stop pledging money to kickstarter campaigns. It's too easy to get really excited for something and then spend money and be forced to wait, and wait, and wait. I haven't seen any returns yet for any of these kickstarters because the earliest one isn't set to deliver until May. And then there's 'curse the darkness - a roleplaying game'
Matthew McFarland is the man responsible for this little gem. I met him randomly via LJ a few years ago while he was offering to sell used gaming books. I bought a couple of titles from him and we befriended each other over similar interests. It was only a month or two later that I realized he was one of the hired authors at White Wolf Studios, which then left me with the constant anxiety that he might think that was the only reason I was "friends" with him.
For quite some time now he's been posting sparse details about this role-playing game he's been working on, and always made these entries with the words "curse the darkness" and they were intriguing. I was always curious to learn more about the setting, and looked forward to his entries despite how cryptic or confusing they might end up being.
Today he created a kickstarter to fund his project and I'm proud to say I made an exception to not spending any money and pledged enough money to get an example character named after myself (or named by me) in the rulebook. The project won't end for 40 days, but waiting for the rulebook to arrive will be the really agonizing bit.
So... shit!
1.
The first one was 'Double Fine Adventure' - www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adventure - it was trending on every video game site I visit and, though I had never played Psychonauts or Grim Fandango or virtually anything else he's made, Tim Schafer's reputation as a visionary was enough for me to be interested enough in pledging money to this project.
2-5.
After backing Tim Schafer's project, I got a little kckstarter crazy and backed a couple of projects that had already met their goals, but with the intention that I would definitely get the swag offered for a minimum bid.
'This Is Not A Conspiracy Theory' documentary series, which was being created by the same guy who made the brilliant 'Everything Is A Remix' web documentary series.
'Return of the Deck of the Living Dead' which I backed out of sheer exuberance since I was about to start GMing a Deadlands game that week.
And then there was 'Farmaggedon' which I misunderstood the premise of at first, but didn't take my pledge away as the idea sounded good and I wanted to see the final product. He met some of his overfunding goals as well, so I'll end up with the base game plus an expansion for it when it finally gets published.
6.
The next kickstarter I baked on the first day it started. 'Dwimmermount: An Old School Fantasy RPG Megadungeon'. I read James Maliszewski's gaming blog because I enjoy his insights into old school D&Ding, despite the fact that he's kind of rude and never answers e-mails regarding typos in his work. I enjoyed reading his last game and wanted to help pitch in for his next project, plus if his megadungeon had been available as a digital download I probably would have purchased it already.
7-9.
A series of indie video games followed in Tim Schafer's footsteps, but none of them got the same level of media coverage that Double Fine Adventure received. As soon as I heard about them I would either go to the kickstarter page and pledge money with very little hesitation, or else I would dismiss the idea without hardly thinking about it.
'Wasteland 2' put together by Brian Fargo, the mastermind behind the original Fallout.
'The Banner Saga' is not the sort of game I might usually play, but it stuck out to me. It evoked the 1970s Ralph Bakshi era of adult cartoon movies, and I had been hearing snippets of news about it's development before kickstarter was becoming common news in the video games industry. I pledged enough to get my own banner crest in the game because I thought that was a really cool reward!
And finally, there is 'Shadowrun Returns' which is set to wrap up the storylines of previous Shadowrun video games, while also giving a throwback to turn-based strategy games like X-Com using the setting and characters from a Shadowrun world. How could I not give them some of my money? And by the way...
'Shadowrun Returns' ends in 3 days!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-returns
10.
I vowed two weeks ago to stop pledging money to kickstarter campaigns. It's too easy to get really excited for something and then spend money and be forced to wait, and wait, and wait. I haven't seen any returns yet for any of these kickstarters because the earliest one isn't set to deliver until May. And then there's 'curse the darkness - a roleplaying game'
Matthew McFarland is the man responsible for this little gem. I met him randomly via LJ a few years ago while he was offering to sell used gaming books. I bought a couple of titles from him and we befriended each other over similar interests. It was only a month or two later that I realized he was one of the hired authors at White Wolf Studios, which then left me with the constant anxiety that he might think that was the only reason I was "friends" with him.
For quite some time now he's been posting sparse details about this role-playing game he's been working on, and always made these entries with the words "curse the darkness" and they were intriguing. I was always curious to learn more about the setting, and looked forward to his entries despite how cryptic or confusing they might end up being.
Today he created a kickstarter to fund his project and I'm proud to say I made an exception to not spending any money and pledged enough money to get an example character named after myself (or named by me) in the rulebook. The project won't end for 40 days, but waiting for the rulebook to arrive will be the really agonizing bit.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
not complaining about Mass Effect 3
Now that I've finished playing Mass Effect 3, I can finally read all of the essays and watch all of the videos about the ending. Fair warning: THERE BE SPOILERS HERE! so stop reading and don't watch any of the videos if you haven't played ME3 yet.
There's an essay on the Penny Arcade Report which breaks down the common complaints of the ending and rebukes them, and I quite like it.
http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/why-the-ending-of-mass-effect-3-was-satifying-and-worthy-of-the-series-mass
My favorite video has to be this one, which lays out a really good explanation for the main character suffering from the effects of the Reapers' indoctrination ability. I really like this explanation for the ending, not just because it makes sense (with one slight hiccup) but because it means my Shepard got indoctrinated. Tragedy is awesome!
Then there's this episode of the Jimquisition where he points out that so many people being upset about the ending legitimizes video games as a modern adult artform. Very good stuff here.
And that's pretty much it. After talking about the ending with Jake, and then reading/watching these essays/videos I am firmly convinced that the ending of the game is a hallucination and that I lost to the Reapers. And if Bioware changes that interpretation with their "extended ending DLC" later this summer, then I'm just going to ignore them because they obviously lost sight of what they were doing: telling an awesome story. AND TRAGEDY IS AWESOME!
There's an essay on the Penny Arcade Report which breaks down the common complaints of the ending and rebukes them, and I quite like it.
http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/why-the-ending-of-mass-effect-3-was-satifying-and-worthy-of-the-series-mass
My favorite video has to be this one, which lays out a really good explanation for the main character suffering from the effects of the Reapers' indoctrination ability. I really like this explanation for the ending, not just because it makes sense (with one slight hiccup) but because it means my Shepard got indoctrinated. Tragedy is awesome!
Then there's this episode of the Jimquisition where he points out that so many people being upset about the ending legitimizes video games as a modern adult artform. Very good stuff here.
And that's pretty much it. After talking about the ending with Jake, and then reading/watching these essays/videos I am firmly convinced that the ending of the game is a hallucination and that I lost to the Reapers. And if Bioware changes that interpretation with their "extended ending DLC" later this summer, then I'm just going to ignore them because they obviously lost sight of what they were doing: telling an awesome story. AND TRAGEDY IS AWESOME!
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
complaining about Mass Effect 3
I have to say that I am pretty disappointed with Mass Effect 3, and I haven't even gotten to the hugely controversial ending that I have done very well to not spoil for myself. But now I'm going to spoil a few things about the game for you, so stop reading if you plan on playing this game in the near future.
My most recent save places me in the final battle, I think. My squad is in the no man's land between Alliance forces and the Reaper tower-light beam-transport whatever. They never show the fucking thing except for transparent holograms so I have no idea what it is that I'm trying to travel to. It's some place that will take me to the Citadel so I can hook up the Crucible, our death weapon, which will presumably transfer energy throughout the relays and disrupt the Reaper forces throughout the galaxy. The Crucible is technology older than the Protheans, that has been improved upon and refined over the millenia and passed down cycle to cycle in the hopes that the next species will use it to destroy the Reapers.
THIS IS THE PLOT AS IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED THROUGH CHARACTER DIALOGUE!
It's the stupidest resolution not only because it effectively uses magic to overcome the final enemy but also because not a single character within the game shows the slightest hint of skepticism that the Crucible might actually be a part of the Reapers' plans. From the very first moment the weapon was explained I thought "This is too convenient." And then later on we learn that the secret to using the Crucible is to hook it up to the Citadel? Right, I don't buy it.
In the first game, the Citadel was the key to Reaper forces invading the galaxy and harvesting humanity, but now in this third game the Citadel has been completely ignored by the Reapers while they've sat themselves on every other planet. That is a plot hole, a HUGE FUCKING PLOT HOLE bigger than a semi-truck, it's the size of the Reaper army that plot hole is.
Then there's the combat. It's not fun. I am bored with having to kill so many enemies over and over and over again. Combat feels less tactical and more of a slog through an endless mire of bodies.
Once I'm done playing through the ending I'll update this entry with my final thoughts, but I can predict right now that the game ends for me once I return the Quarians to their homeworld. It's the only plotline I was emotionally invested in, and the way I see it, having Reaper-enhanced geth as a military ally should be enough to turn the tide of the war.
After playing all three games in quick succession, I have to say I like the interface of the 3rd, the combat of the 1st, and story of the 2nd. Too bad there was never one solid game in the series that outshone the rest. From what I've read, most gamers consider the 2nd one the best. For me, the 1st one is the best. That's the only one that evoked the excitement of an epic space opera saga and when I was done playing, it left me wanting more.
UPDATE: Just finished playing. The ending is dumb. Apparently magic fixes everything.
My most recent save places me in the final battle, I think. My squad is in the no man's land between Alliance forces and the Reaper tower-light beam-transport whatever. They never show the fucking thing except for transparent holograms so I have no idea what it is that I'm trying to travel to. It's some place that will take me to the Citadel so I can hook up the Crucible, our death weapon, which will presumably transfer energy throughout the relays and disrupt the Reaper forces throughout the galaxy. The Crucible is technology older than the Protheans, that has been improved upon and refined over the millenia and passed down cycle to cycle in the hopes that the next species will use it to destroy the Reapers.
THIS IS THE PLOT AS IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED THROUGH CHARACTER DIALOGUE!
It's the stupidest resolution not only because it effectively uses magic to overcome the final enemy but also because not a single character within the game shows the slightest hint of skepticism that the Crucible might actually be a part of the Reapers' plans. From the very first moment the weapon was explained I thought "This is too convenient." And then later on we learn that the secret to using the Crucible is to hook it up to the Citadel? Right, I don't buy it.
In the first game, the Citadel was the key to Reaper forces invading the galaxy and harvesting humanity, but now in this third game the Citadel has been completely ignored by the Reapers while they've sat themselves on every other planet. That is a plot hole, a HUGE FUCKING PLOT HOLE bigger than a semi-truck, it's the size of the Reaper army that plot hole is.
Then there's the combat. It's not fun. I am bored with having to kill so many enemies over and over and over again. Combat feels less tactical and more of a slog through an endless mire of bodies.
Once I'm done playing through the ending I'll update this entry with my final thoughts, but I can predict right now that the game ends for me once I return the Quarians to their homeworld. It's the only plotline I was emotionally invested in, and the way I see it, having Reaper-enhanced geth as a military ally should be enough to turn the tide of the war.
After playing all three games in quick succession, I have to say I like the interface of the 3rd, the combat of the 1st, and story of the 2nd. Too bad there was never one solid game in the series that outshone the rest. From what I've read, most gamers consider the 2nd one the best. For me, the 1st one is the best. That's the only one that evoked the excitement of an epic space opera saga and when I was done playing, it left me wanting more.
UPDATE: Just finished playing. The ending is dumb. Apparently magic fixes everything.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Skyrim "quest markers"
I drew some Skyrim quest markers in MS Paint then printed them off and put them up on the front door of my apartment.
No matter what side of the front door you're standing on, it will look like your quest ends on the other side. I like to call it a glitch that hasn't been patched yet.
No matter what side of the front door you're standing on, it will look like your quest ends on the other side. I like to call it a glitch that hasn't been patched yet.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
retirement
He became the Arch-Mage for the College in Winterhold.
He defeated Alduin, the world-eater.
He restored law and order by putting down the Stormcloak rebellion.
He discovered every Word Wall so that he might know every Dragon Shout.
Most importantly, he searched for every dragon priest lich in the land and single-handedly defeated each of them, taking their magical masks as trophies.
He returned to his home in Whiterun and I saved one final time. Nelra Olim is retired. He was 73rd level.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
more Skyrim musings
I was disappointed that the new Elder Scrolls game didn't have a Hardcore difficulty setting to activate. This means that I attempted to play the game with my own self-imposed restrictions. I never used the fast travel ability to select an already-visited location and magically teleport there. I tried to sleep at regular intervals, even though dungeon delving sometimes meant that I wasn't keeping track of the world clock. I tried to eat food items regularly, whenever I found a leg of roast goat or a slice of cheese I would consume it, regardless of whether I would recover health from it or not.
These self-imposed restrictions extended to my extra characters as well. In fact, I constructed my third character believing that I would be making the game incredibly more difficult for myself, and I ended up stumbling upon the most powerful way of playing a character.
This is Nelra Olim, an Altmer (the Tamriel word for high elf) from the country of Cyrodiil. His primary goal is to join the College of Magic in Winterhold. He is loyal to the Empire despite it's rather impersonal bureaucracy, and upon entering Skyrim he is quickly caught up in local politics by being mistaken for a rebel during a nighttime skirmish. Almost executed at Helgen keep, he is freed by an Imperial soldier named Hadvar when a dragon attacks the town, and is led to the town of Riverwood where Hadvar's uncle gives him food, shelter and a lesson in leatherworking.
Annoyed by the rebels he was almost executed with, Nelra decides to use his magic to support the Imperial Legion in quelling the Stormcloak rebellion and heads off to Whiterun, the Hold capital. Along the way he spies a giant attacking a farmstead and quickly rushes the field to assist the few armed souls fighting it off. As the frosty chill of his magic defrosts off the corpse of the giant, their leader compliments his deft fighting ability and tells him to seek out the Companions, a guild of honorable mercenaries. Nelra politely declines and continues on to the court of Whiterun.
In the hall of Jarl Balgruuf, Nelra explains the dragon attack at Helgen and asks for aid at the town of Riverwood. The Jarl senses Nelra's good intentions and asks him to assist his court wizard, Farengar Secret-Fire, with a special task that might help them understand where this dragon came from, and why.
Farengar explains that there is a stone tablet in Bleak Falls Barrow that he believes contains a map of ancient dragon burial sites. He hopes this will help him understand how and why dragons are returning to Tamriel. He is reluctant to send a soldier after such a precious artifact and is pleased that he is sending somebody with an apparent interest and competence with magic. After using Farengar's Arcane Enchanter as much as he is able, Nelra purchases a room at the local inn and sets off for Bleak Falls Barrow early the next morning.
Along the way he encounters another giant on the road, this one seems lonely and contemplative, like he's looking for something, and Nelra wonders if this giant is looking for the one he helped slay the previous day.
Though the giant doesn't seem hostile, Nelra moves quickly along and puts as much distance between them as he can. As he climbs higher into the mountains it begins to snow, and soon he can see the tower on the bluff just below Bleak Falls Barrow. He crouches to help conceal himself in the flurry of wind and snow, and spies movement amidst the tower. He readies a spell and unslings his long bow, and slowly begins to crouch forward. His adventure is only just beginning...
I had just finished playing through the game with an orc who never read any books, only used a Flames spell twice in all of his travels, and had nearly perfected his skills in hand-to-hand combat. In other words, a pure fighter. Because of this playthrough experience I believed beforehand that making a character who would "only use magic" would be harder. I worried a little that I might not be able to finish some of the bigger fights later in the game. In truth, being a pure wizard means I kill opponents faster but simply level up my skills slower.
There are a few challenges. Dragons are considerably tougher, I'm quaffing potions during tense combats like never before, and beginning a new combat is sometimes disorienting depending on what spells I last had active. Overall, the challenges aren't greater but they're certainly different. It's more fun this time around, and I'm enjoying playing through as Nelra Olim more than my previous characters.
These self-imposed restrictions extended to my extra characters as well. In fact, I constructed my third character believing that I would be making the game incredibly more difficult for myself, and I ended up stumbling upon the most powerful way of playing a character.
This is Nelra Olim, an Altmer (the Tamriel word for high elf) from the country of Cyrodiil. His primary goal is to join the College of Magic in Winterhold. He is loyal to the Empire despite it's rather impersonal bureaucracy, and upon entering Skyrim he is quickly caught up in local politics by being mistaken for a rebel during a nighttime skirmish. Almost executed at Helgen keep, he is freed by an Imperial soldier named Hadvar when a dragon attacks the town, and is led to the town of Riverwood where Hadvar's uncle gives him food, shelter and a lesson in leatherworking.
Annoyed by the rebels he was almost executed with, Nelra decides to use his magic to support the Imperial Legion in quelling the Stormcloak rebellion and heads off to Whiterun, the Hold capital. Along the way he spies a giant attacking a farmstead and quickly rushes the field to assist the few armed souls fighting it off. As the frosty chill of his magic defrosts off the corpse of the giant, their leader compliments his deft fighting ability and tells him to seek out the Companions, a guild of honorable mercenaries. Nelra politely declines and continues on to the court of Whiterun.
In the hall of Jarl Balgruuf, Nelra explains the dragon attack at Helgen and asks for aid at the town of Riverwood. The Jarl senses Nelra's good intentions and asks him to assist his court wizard, Farengar Secret-Fire, with a special task that might help them understand where this dragon came from, and why.
Farengar explains that there is a stone tablet in Bleak Falls Barrow that he believes contains a map of ancient dragon burial sites. He hopes this will help him understand how and why dragons are returning to Tamriel. He is reluctant to send a soldier after such a precious artifact and is pleased that he is sending somebody with an apparent interest and competence with magic. After using Farengar's Arcane Enchanter as much as he is able, Nelra purchases a room at the local inn and sets off for Bleak Falls Barrow early the next morning.
Along the way he encounters another giant on the road, this one seems lonely and contemplative, like he's looking for something, and Nelra wonders if this giant is looking for the one he helped slay the previous day.
Though the giant doesn't seem hostile, Nelra moves quickly along and puts as much distance between them as he can. As he climbs higher into the mountains it begins to snow, and soon he can see the tower on the bluff just below Bleak Falls Barrow. He crouches to help conceal himself in the flurry of wind and snow, and spies movement amidst the tower. He readies a spell and unslings his long bow, and slowly begins to crouch forward. His adventure is only just beginning...
I had just finished playing through the game with an orc who never read any books, only used a Flames spell twice in all of his travels, and had nearly perfected his skills in hand-to-hand combat. In other words, a pure fighter. Because of this playthrough experience I believed beforehand that making a character who would "only use magic" would be harder. I worried a little that I might not be able to finish some of the bigger fights later in the game. In truth, being a pure wizard means I kill opponents faster but simply level up my skills slower.
There are a few challenges. Dragons are considerably tougher, I'm quaffing potions during tense combats like never before, and beginning a new combat is sometimes disorienting depending on what spells I last had active. Overall, the challenges aren't greater but they're certainly different. It's more fun this time around, and I'm enjoying playing through as Nelra Olim more than my previous characters.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
from Oblivion to Skyrim
Since my tabletop role-playing group has been stuttering along with infrequent sessions, I've been playing a lot of Skyrim, the latest entry in the Elder Scrolls series. I've adopted my friend Vince's storytelling technique of crafting my own internal story for the character I am playing within the video game, and my first character was undoubtedly a rogue.
My preferred playing style is to sneak, to backstab, to thieve. Throughout my time with Oblivion, the last Elder Scrolls game, I played an Argonian named Max who became the leader of the Thieves' Guild, took control of the Dark Brotherhood, even journeyed into one of Mehrunes Dagon's dungeons and slew his avatar in order to steal the infamous dagger, Mehrunes Razor. It became my favorite weapon. Max'es favorite weapon. And rarely was anything else used to dispatch my enemies.
When I started up Skyrim for the first time and was brought to the introductory character creation screen, I immediately fell upon the Argonian option and began tweaking the look of my character. Red scales. Smooth head. Slender body. Before I accepted my alterations I realized "I shouldn't play the same guy! I should play his descendant."
I switched the gender to female. I added feathers to the top of her head. I made her scales darker, and kept her body slender. And so Rasha, the great-granddaughter of Max, was born in a moment of frantic impulse as impromptu and clumsy as Max'es amorous encounters with Argonian women might have been. He was an assassin, after all, and not a lover.
As I played Rasha, I wondered why she was in the region of Skyrim. She never took sides in the civil war, it was of no concern to her. She consumed a dragon's soul and was called 'Dragonborn' but had no interest in such a strange and ancient power. She joined the College of Magic in Winterhold, looking for the secrets of arcane arts which constantly eluded her. She scoured the land for the Thieves' Guild, and found them lacking in strength and leadership, so she rebuilt their order in her image. She had made her own suit of armor, fashioned from the skins of the many dragons she had slain, as they seemed to follow her footsteps across Skyrim like dogs trailing for scraps. Finally, after taking so many jobs as a mercenary, after delving into so many Dwemer ruins, after recovering so many bounties on bandits, on giants, on dragons, she found what she was looking for: the dagger whom her great-grandfather had wielded so viciously, Mehrunes' Razor.
There was nothing left for her. More importantly, there was nothing left that I wanted to do. Her story was done.
So I made a new character.
My preferred playing style is to sneak, to backstab, to thieve. Throughout my time with Oblivion, the last Elder Scrolls game, I played an Argonian named Max who became the leader of the Thieves' Guild, took control of the Dark Brotherhood, even journeyed into one of Mehrunes Dagon's dungeons and slew his avatar in order to steal the infamous dagger, Mehrunes Razor. It became my favorite weapon. Max'es favorite weapon. And rarely was anything else used to dispatch my enemies.
When I started up Skyrim for the first time and was brought to the introductory character creation screen, I immediately fell upon the Argonian option and began tweaking the look of my character. Red scales. Smooth head. Slender body. Before I accepted my alterations I realized "I shouldn't play the same guy! I should play his descendant."
I switched the gender to female. I added feathers to the top of her head. I made her scales darker, and kept her body slender. And so Rasha, the great-granddaughter of Max, was born in a moment of frantic impulse as impromptu and clumsy as Max'es amorous encounters with Argonian women might have been. He was an assassin, after all, and not a lover.
As I played Rasha, I wondered why she was in the region of Skyrim. She never took sides in the civil war, it was of no concern to her. She consumed a dragon's soul and was called 'Dragonborn' but had no interest in such a strange and ancient power. She joined the College of Magic in Winterhold, looking for the secrets of arcane arts which constantly eluded her. She scoured the land for the Thieves' Guild, and found them lacking in strength and leadership, so she rebuilt their order in her image. She had made her own suit of armor, fashioned from the skins of the many dragons she had slain, as they seemed to follow her footsteps across Skyrim like dogs trailing for scraps. Finally, after taking so many jobs as a mercenary, after delving into so many Dwemer ruins, after recovering so many bounties on bandits, on giants, on dragons, she found what she was looking for: the dagger whom her great-grandfather had wielded so viciously, Mehrunes' Razor.
There was nothing left for her. More importantly, there was nothing left that I wanted to do. Her story was done.
So I made a new character.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)