tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-42926583954006264262024-03-14T06:56:29.900-04:00Game TheoryA blog for all things game.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.comBlogger150125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-71740045626785296812014-06-10T18:04:00.000-04:002014-06-10T18:04:03.521-04:00Some thoughts about Shadow, Sword and SpellShadow, Sword and Spell is a fun game. Or at least I had a
fun time playing a recent two adventure mini campaign. Though I will say that I really enjoy
playing games and I find that in many instances the actual game being played is
secondary. Get some decent
players, let them do what they want and see where it goes. Generally a pretty good recipe for a
fun night. But every system
certainly brings new things to the table and enables different styles of
gaming. SS&S is designed to
emulate pulp fantasy, the world of down and out heroes and low magic. And it does those things pretty
well. Having just finished up this
short game I have some recent thoughts about everything.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The best thing about the game are the character Hooks. At<a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/shadow-sword-and-spell-character.html"> creation each character</a> writes down
five hooks that are essentially mottos or backstories or convictions or
whatever that guide the character and also allow them more success when the
player can tie it into the story.
SS&S is a game of grayish morality, I sort of assume that every
character fits into what would be a traditionally neutral alignment. Not to say that that no one is good or
evil, but in pulp fantasy characters usually fall into a lifestyle of
supporting their own agenda. So
without the need for alignment Hooks serve as a way to ground the characters in
some sort of belief or goal and keep them consistent. And the fact that it can have an actual impact on gameplay
(by providing bonuses and rerolls) is really great. It’s a functional, fun and flavorful replacement for
alignment and I think it’s great.
Truthfully, when I play D&D I usually exempt characters from having
an alignment (except for clerics) because it’s pointless. But the hooks are awesome, especially
when the player announces they are using one in a dramatic voice. Which is
something that should always be required.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Action Points are the other part of the game that I like a
lot. Each character starts the
game with a certain number of Action Points which can be used to increase the
chance of success on any sort of a roll, or to “edit” the story to their
advantage. It’s the editing that I
find most interesting. Being a GM
isn’t always the easiest and most rewarding profession and sometimes we don’t
always come up with the best stuff.
So with an Action Point a player can jump in and add something to the
world that makes the game better. I am totally into this. It can’t be something earth shattering,
but the devil is in the details and so is most of the fun. I also really like the idea of trusting
players to fiddle with the world I created and insert something into it. It’s bad enough that players never do
what you want them to do, but now they have a game mechanic to veto me! How
exciting. In the game we just played the Assassin type character wanted to
investigate a merchant who was sleeping on the third floor of an inn. I had assumed that he would sneak into
the place, pick a lock, do all of those normal skullduggery types of
things. But no, turns out some
stone masons had been doing some repair work across the street and had left out
their scaffolding, which was just the right height to look into the merchants
open window. Come on, that’s
pretty cool for a player to be able to do that. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While I admire the effort of creating a new type of system,
the 12 Degrees system is just sort of odd. It’s a basic rolling for a Target Number concept, but
success is measured in degrees of success. If the target number is an 18 and you roll a 14 you have
four degrees of success and will perform the action better than someone who
only got two degrees of success.
For starters, with just about every roll it’s favorable to roll
low. There is something counter
intuitive that just feels wrong about rolling 2d12 and hoping for two 1’s. It’s fun to roll big numbers! I do like the idea that success and
failure is measured in degrees rather than just the typical binary style of
pass/fail that is present in most games.
But it needs work. For one,
rolling 2d12 produces a ton of rolls in the 9-15 range of numbers. So the result is that a character who
has a +23 on their melee roll (which is about as good as it gets) isn’t really
that much better than a character that has a +20. In essence it pays to be really good at things, but probably
not worth the investment to be legendarily great at something. It’s a minor point certainly, but it
got to me. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Perhaps the strangest component of the rules of SS&S is
the economy of actions as it relates to combat. In most games characters can usually do a single thing in a
round of combat, with this increasing as characters gain more power and thus
more skill at combat. Makes
sense. In SS&S it seems as if
a character can take as many actions as they want in a given turn! Crazy! Of
course it comes at a cost, but the cost, honestly, doesn’t seem all that
high. For each additional action
that a character makes the target number lowers by 2, which in turn makes it
harder to succeed. I suppose the
catch here is that defending oneself is considered an action so if a character
decides to make four attacks on their turn when it comes time to defend against
the enemy’s axe they will be making that roll at -10 (since it’s their 5<sup>th</sup>
action of that round). Okay, I see
why you wouldn’t go crazy. Or do
I? See, since defending is an
action by continuing to attack you are essentially crippling your opponents
ability to counterattack by making them spend all of their actions to protect
themselves. Or they choose not to
defend and most likely get killed.
This system seems particularly awful when someone is outnumbered since
the larger group can just keep spamming their actions and killing the ability
of the defender to do anything.
It’s just odd. Why would
someone be able to attack that many times? It also greatly increases the value of initiative since the
person who attacks first sort of gets to dictate the terms of combat. In some ways it make sense but it also
goes a long way to make combat totally bizarre. Role playing games don’t need to be an accurate simulation
of how melee combat should work, it needs to make the game work and I think
that the combat system in SS&S does not work. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another issue with the game that does warrant mentioning is
that the rulebook is wildly inconsistent and does not do a good job of
explaining a lot of stuff. There
are mistakes in it, contradictions aplenty, and it sort of feels incomplete. The version I have may be an older one
so it’s possible that this issue has been corrected since I originally bought
it, but some of the mistakes are really obvious and probably should have been
caught by someone before going to print.
It is worth mentioning that I’ve emailed Rogue Games about some
clarifying some of these questions and Richard Iorio (the game’s creator) has
gotten back to me almost immediately with an answer. That’s very nice of
him. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Magic system in the game feels more like an obligation
for a fantasy game than something that actually fits into the game. For one, the cost of having some magic
ability and knowing a spell or two is so prohibitive that it severely limits a
characters ability to really do much else. (In the game that I just ran I did make a sorcerer style
character but I tweaked the rules a bit so that they would be able to do
something other than just cast two spells.) And two, casting spells costs Vitality which makes them
sometimes as lethal to the caster as they are to the victim! And none of them
are really all that good. I
understand that magic is not a big part of the Pulp world (and is actually one
of the reasons why I like Pulp so much) and I wish that the game just didn’t
include it, or at least limited it to demons and other weird shit like
that. But can a fantasy RPG not
have magic? I suppose it could, especially for the audience that wants this
type of game. And if it wasn’t
available to PC’s it would be so much scarier and more menacing when it was
encountered since it would be so foreign to the party. And the game would have to change it's name to just Shadow and Sword. Which isn't all that bad. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I would feel weird if I didn’t mention the premade adventure
that comes with the basic guidebook.
It’s fine, if a bit complex for a starter adventure. In a nutshell people are being poisoned
and the party has to figure out why.
Turns out it is in the wine that everyone is drinking, The name of the adventure? It’s In the Wine. That’s weak. Make sure the players don’t
even know the name of the adventure you are playing. And strangely, there is also an adventure for the system
about poisoned stew. The name of
that adventure? The Stew. Apparently the world of Shadow, Sword
and Spell is lacking a competent Food and Drug Administration. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This doesn’t sound like a glowing review of Shadow, Sword
and Spell but I do think that the game is a lot of fun, mainly due to the
hooks, actions points and the theme of the world. Rules are very fungible as far as I am concerned. I
frequently add and drop things from games all the time so it’s easy for me to
look past the clunkiness of the 12 degree system. If you, or the people you play with, are rules lawyers then
I suspect that you will either become frustrated with SS&S or break the
rules and find all sorts of loopholes in creating powerhouses. But if you just want to have a fun
gaming experience you could do way worse than this game. Have fun!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-11569643443387183762014-05-27T15:24:00.001-04:002014-05-27T15:24:26.097-04:00Shadow, Sword and Spell character creationA couple of years ago I discovered <a href="http://rogue-games.net/games/SSS/">Shadow, Sword and Spell</a>,
a pulp fantasy RPG from Rogue games.
I’ve only had the chance to play it once, but I am going to be running a
short, two adventure game of it this week so I thought I’d take the chance to
capture some of my thoughts on it.
Since it is only going to be a two week game I made up several
characters for the players to choose from so that we could get right down to
it, especially since none of the players have any experience with it. Character
creation is fun and all, but it can also be time consuming, especially when you
need to teach everyone an entirely new ruleset. Which SS&S has, something that only uses a d12. A d12!
The most neglected of all dice. At
first I assumed that the game would be nothing other than rolling for Barbarain
Hit Die and damage from a greataxe, but it turns out there are other things
that you can do with a d12.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I wanted to walk through character creation and sort of start
to check out the rules that way.
In general I found making a character to be pretty easy, but the
characters that you wind up with are sort of odd. There is no rolling for attributes or skills (its not
preferred for me but I am fine with it) but there is a selection of a Culture
and a Modifier which can result in some strange traits for a character. Culture gives a character a couple of
skills, usually at a high level of aptitude. The Modifier gives a bonus (and
maybe a penalty) to a couple of skills. Let’s take a look at the Assassin type
character I made up for the group.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I wasn’t trying to do anything crazy, just a pretty
straightforward killer in the night.
My guy would need to be sneaky, have some thief type skills, fight a
little bit and be able to make poison. That seems doable in most games. There are four different Cultures to
choose from and they have a pretty significant impact on what your character is
going to look like. They are Primitive, Barbarian, Civilized and Advanced. By default I went with Civilized just
because the others seemed so off base for a character that I picture being from
an urban environment with a penchant for murder. The problem was that by choosing Civilized it gave my
Assassin proficiency in Bureaucracy and Diplomacy, two areas of focus that I
just didn’t have on his radar. By
contrast if I had chosen Barbarian he would have been given Athletics and Melee
(both of which fit this character pretty well), but he is not at all a
barbarian. I suppose that I could just take Barbarian and call it something
else but I am trying to stick to the rules so I will instead have some sort of
bureaucratic killer. For the
Modifier I chose Tolerant, which isn’t about the character but rather the
society that they come from. So he’s not a tolerant Assassin, just that all of
his neighbors seem to tolerate his murder. It gives him a bonus to Diplomacy
and Empathy. The Empathy I like, the Diplomacy I can once again do without. I
chose Tolerant because it seemed the most neutral, the others are all regional
(Southern, Northern) or much more extreme (Sorcerous, Pious). </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are five attributes; Brawn, Quickness, Toughness, Wits
and Will. Anyone who has played an RPG can sort of figure out what they do so I
won’t get into too much detail, but this Assassin was focused on Wits, Will,
and Quickness and light on the physical stuff. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So here is where it starts to get weird. Each skill is tied to an attribute and
in order to buy that skill a character must purchase it at the Base Rank, which
is equal to the level of the attribute it is linked to. For example: Melee is linked to Brawn,
this Assassin has a Brawn of 5. In order to purchase Melee at level 5 it costs
five points. Characters begin the game with 45 points to spend on skills. The problem is when a character has an
attribute at a high level and there is no option to purchase a lesser level of
the skill for fewer skill points.
Another example: I wanted this guy to have Alchemy so that he can make
poisons, the Alchemy skill is linked to Wits. Since Wits is the cunning attribute I gave him a 9, which
means it costs nine points for me to purchase it. I only have 45 to start so I
had to spend 20% of my point budget to make some poisons. But the result is that he is very good
at making poisons, though I would have been fine with just being okay at making
poisons (he is just getting started on his “adventuring” career after
all). Ultimately I was only able
to purchase a couple of skills and some others that would have really filled
out the character I was unable to get, such as Bargain (which is the bluff
skill). I don’t find the system to
be difficult to understand, I just find it to be a little quirky and creates
characters that do a couple of things really well as opposed to being competent
a bunch of stuff. And I know that
mastery of a few things is generally the preferred way to build a strong
character but it is nice to have the option of going the other way. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Getting back to the initial selection of Culture also wound
up making my Assassin have some unforeseen skills. Due to hailing from a
Civilized culture he started the game with a +9 Bureaucracy and a +9
Diplomacy. For comparison +9 is
the highest that he has in any single skill. Which to me means that he is far
too good to just ignore them when it comes to picturing what type of character
he is. So he has to be an Assassin that operates in the realm of politics,
business, government, etc…And with that level of Diplomacy he is not one to
hide in the shadows, he is out there doing the talking. Throwing this all in a pot creates a
character I had not intended.
Instead of being an urban stalker he is more of a liaison and diplomat
that uses access to get close to his victims. Interesting. So
maybe I can ditch Athletics (which I pictured him using to climb walls, jump
over roofs, etc…) and focus more on Socialize or Bargain? I’m not sure, but it
strikes me as odd as I was sort of railroaded into making a certain type of
character. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Aside from getting equipment the final piece of character
creation is creating hooks for your character. Hooks are basically little mottos, statements, sayings,
etc…about the character that allow them to get some bonuses in certain
situations. I really like the idea of this. If you decide to pick “My faith is stronger than any armor”
as a hook then you could get a bonus in a situation where your religion is
involved. I like it because it really shows that a character can be fueled by
adrenalin, get caught up in the moment, come up when they really need to. It
lends itself to good storytelling and for players sticking to what their
characters are. This is what I
chose for the Assassin: “A knife in the back is worth three in the chest”, “Here,
why don’t you have a drink?”, “Others fear shadows, I live in them”, “No, that
wasn’t me you saw. You must be mistaken”, and “I was forced into a life of
bureaucracy and diplomacy”. Okay, that last one I didn’t really choose, but you
get the idea. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For what it’s worth not every character suffered from these
issues. The Nomadic Barbarian was just as advertised and seems like he will
kick some ass and be a physical beast.
Which is exactly what I intended.
So I’m not sure if the Culture thing needs to be scrapped altogether, or
have more options inside of it, but it doesn’t quite work all of the time. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It seems like I’m very down on the game, when actually the
opposite is true. I’m very excited
to play the game <i>despite </i>the weird
issues of character creation. What
I do really like is a game centered around more of a pulp, low fantasy type of
game. I tend to run campaigns like that anyway and when characters start to get
to the higher levels the abilities of the characters start to clash with the
functionality of the world. SS&S doesn’t seem to have that issue. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I also really like the use of Action Points in the game,
especially the ability of the players to “edit” what is happening. I’m excited
to see what kind of stuff the players will come up with. I suspect it will keep
me on my toes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-54929567348407746572014-05-13T13:17:00.000-04:002014-05-13T13:17:43.255-04:00A Monstrous QuizWhile recently playing through the Ghost Tower of Inverness,
the brave adventurers turned a corner in the long abandoned dungeon and
encountered (rolls on the wandering monster chart)…a leucrotta! Yes, the feared
leucrotta. Bane of adventurers and haunter of nightmares. It’s description is…well, I actually don’t
know. I am going to be honest for a moment, I’ve never heard of a leucrotta. In
all of my many years of playing D&D I have somehow managed to not come
across this creature of legend. And if I had it has left absolutely zero
impression on me. I had to look it
up in the Monster Manual to learn that it is the strange cross breed of two
otherwise very normal creatures.
It got me thinking about all of the bizarre monsters out there that are
nothing other than the physical qualities of several others merged into one
very awkward beast. It strikes me as
a very Gygaxian concept, just sort of fill up the pages of the Monster Manual
by coming up with a weird name and mashing animals together. What else is out there? Is the
leucrotta the king of the haphazardly assembled jungle?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I should also note that some of these creatures may actually
stem from mythology and I’m just not familiar to them, but as the author of the
original Monster Manual I am attributing Gary Gygax with their existence. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I decided to put together this quiz of strange monsters from
the lore of D&D. Lets see how you do. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
1) This chaotic evil creature has the head and antlers of a
deer atop the body of a giant eagle. And for some reason it seems to cast the
shadow of a human as opposed to that of an eagle mixed with a deer. It also requires
the heart of another creature to reproduce, which must make sex very
awkward. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
2) What do you get when you mix a monkey, camel, lion and
eagle? Some sort of awkward desert dwelling, friendly creature that is known
for it’s practical jokes and good natured teasing! And who could ever forget
it’s gaze power, called sun sparkles. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjA6N3NKdYZS-wI3uwRo3jWJJg2GKbhGiO8eGCArtn9WQIv68Kw7NabaLa9-3s8SxJNvSUNZjBJ7OUWp8r-i6cmoWBvaTi_9pJ3U8X2Nl3AiZR8wsRxANWnTWRvcFsSQkCW7JjBlm8tsMz-/s1600/leucrota.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjA6N3NKdYZS-wI3uwRo3jWJJg2GKbhGiO8eGCArtn9WQIv68Kw7NabaLa9-3s8SxJNvSUNZjBJ7OUWp8r-i6cmoWBvaTi_9pJ3U8X2Nl3AiZR8wsRxANWnTWRvcFsSQkCW7JjBlm8tsMz-/s1600/leucrota.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Check out my boney ridges.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
3) This creature combines the body of a stag, a lion’s tail
and the fearsome head of a giant badger! Rather than teeth it has “jagged boney
ridges”. (I’m no dentist, but I’m pretty sure that’s sort of what teeth are
anyway.) They are also able to imitate the voice of a man with uncanny skill
despite living a miserable solitary life far away from the world of man. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
4) Oh, those mad wizards! Always getting mixed up in secret magical
experiments that create creatures like this mix of a snapping turtle and
armadillo infused with demons’ ichor.
I wonder if the wizard’s intention was to create a constantly hungry,
fearless creature that loves to eat Halflings, or if that was just something
that sort of happened?</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEga8mau7hseM2cWyA_glf-JiNm-KrYPW14XlpBDEelZUnUiIseYv2NQdisMydIej_ITqWWgMGT2NzS6tZxWtmQJFRbv4e64FORkWchGn2jRsEV4KwJ4bY_OMxFvllkaWV_DBUmlDiJ5D68q/s1600/bulette.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEga8mau7hseM2cWyA_glf-JiNm-KrYPW14XlpBDEelZUnUiIseYv2NQdisMydIej_ITqWWgMGT2NzS6tZxWtmQJFRbv4e64FORkWchGn2jRsEV4KwJ4bY_OMxFvllkaWV_DBUmlDiJ5D68q/s1600/bulette.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Demon Ichor makes me want to climb trees!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
5) This aquatic animal possesses the head and torso of a
horse and the lower half of a fish. All of it’s limbs end in fins and it’s body
is covered in scales. It is also
super lame and speaks a language that no one cares to learn. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So what are these great creatures that fit easily into any
campaign?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1)<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span><!--[endif]-->Peryton</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2)<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span><!--[endif]-->Opinicus</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->3)<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span><!--[endif]-->Leucrotta</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->4)<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span><!--[endif]-->Bulette</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->5)<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt;">
</span><!--[endif]-->Hippocampus</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--EndFragment--><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-31820192970825559552014-05-12T17:34:00.003-04:002014-05-12T17:36:56.977-04:001st Edition, The Ghost Tower of Inverness and premade adventuresI was feeling a bit nostalgic lately and sort of really
wanted to play some old school 1<sup>st</sup> edition Advanced Dungeons and
Dragons. There are so many retro
style D&D clones out there these days, but I don’t think that they really
interest me. Most of them are just
a stripped down easy to learn fantasy game, but lack the personality and daring
that truly define the early versions of D&D. So I decided to go back to the
source and run a one shot adventure using a module. I didn’t want to start up a
new campaign (I have a Shadowrun game going on currently and I certainly don’t
need two games a week in my life right now) and I didn’t want to spend a lot of
time writing an adventure so this seemed like a great way to dip into the game
and then jump right back out. After much searching through all of my old
modules I settled on the classic C2, The Ghost Tower of Inverness.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEsbea7VxifSXR6f9M7rD_YDyzdRF3llo1Q_b-wjTxtRrNquYJHpzSDhyphenhyphenk83AApXmXqS83-lcbyZEYqzpJqBEM3m57kNnr3GC1vN7hfcR0g7Yb9KWO_0AXXCwQ4RoqtM_g66GPv4Urnc8h/s1600/ghosttower.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEsbea7VxifSXR6f9M7rD_YDyzdRF3llo1Q_b-wjTxtRrNquYJHpzSDhyphenhyphenk83AApXmXqS83-lcbyZEYqzpJqBEM3m57kNnr3GC1vN7hfcR0g7Yb9KWO_0AXXCwQ4RoqtM_g66GPv4Urnc8h/s1600/ghosttower.jpg" height="320" width="247" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/why-i-hate-dungeons-or-you-cant-spell.html">I’ve written before about my general dislike of dungeoncrawls</a> so I won’t go into the reasons why, but the Ghost Tower seemed
workable. For starters, the
dungeons of the adventure are so absurd that it’s easy to throw plausibility
out the window and just accept it for what it is. I’ve seen it referred to as a “funhouse” adventure and that
makes total sense. The premise is
that the PC’s are all the prisoners of some Duke and he frees them from his
dungeons in order to have them retrieve the fabled Soul Gem and bring it to him
in exchange for freedom. The Gem
was the possession of some wizard who constructed an insane tower filled with
monsters and traps to protect the Gem. Eventually the wizard disappeared but
the Gem remains! Alright, that’s not too bad. I suppose one could ask some questions about why the Duke
(who has tons of resources at his disposal) is choosing this motley crew of
vagabonds to undertake this important quest, but whatever. If I start asking
questions now I’ll be at a million words by the time I reach the underground
chessboard that electrocutes people when they make a wrong step. Ghost Tower
was originally a tournament module run at Wintercon VIII in 1979 and featured
five characters, so I rounded up five players to fulfill the roles of Lembu,
Discinque, Hodar, Li Hon and Zinethar the Wise. And we’re off…</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
My initial thoughts on the experience are twofold. One, 1<sup>st</sup>
edition AD&D is legitimately awesome. It’s easy to play and very clear cut.
For as many bizarre rules and charts exist, there really isn’t all that much
that the characters can do so just about everything is left to the imagination
of the players and the whims of the DM. That’s fine with me. And secondly, dungeons are just as
horrible as I remember them being. And what’s maybe even worse are wandering
monsters. Where do these things
come from? Are they really wandering? Or do they have a destination that we
just don’t know about? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As far as the actual adventure goes the Ghost Tower is
pretty good for a packaged romp, but the lack of roleplaying inherent in a
dungeon crawl limits what it can do.
It consists of two main components, a dungeon in which the characters
need to locate four parts of a key and use them to unlock the second section; a
tower in which the Soul Gem is located.
The initial dungeon is really four separate sections that each has some
sort of gimmick room that the key is in. As a DM I never design puzzles as an
encounter because I just don’t think that they are very fun, most of the time
they come off as a yes/no type of proposition in which the players either get
it or they don’t. So the result winds up as something that is easily bypassed
or completely frustrating. A good
example of this is the bizarre bead curtain that is waiting for the characters
in one of the many ten foot wide corridors. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On one level of the dungeon the passage is blocked by what
appears to be a curtain of beads. This is the not the entrance into the lair of
stoner teenagers or gypsy fortune tellers, but rather an immoveable obstacle
for the PC’s to surmount. Pushing
against it does nothing, nor does any sort of damage inflicted on it. The only way to pass through it is to
either cast Dispel Magic (which seems the most logical), cast Knock twice on it
(I can’t imagine anyone has ever done that. If Knock doesn’t work the first
time, why would you cast it again?), or to run into it at full speed and make a
successful Open Doors check on it.
The running part seem weird to me.
Why doesn’t pushing work? Why does it have to be running? In yesterdays game the party eventually
decided to rest up and have the cleric memorize Dispel Magic in order to make
it through. It was a thoroughly boring encounter that ultimately tested no part
of the party. It was sort of just
filler. Which is a bit of a
problem because the adventure takes a really long time to get through. I had picked the Ghost Tower because it
seemed like it was something that we could get through in a single session. I
allotted most of a Sunday for this game and we still didn’t get through it,
having called it quits around the five hour mark with the party just entering
into the second part of the adventure.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I was bummed that we didn’t get further along but it was
getting late and people do have to spend time in the real world, not just the
fantasy land of Wintercon VIII.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Which also brings me back to the wandering monster issue. A lot of the
dungeon level is filled with long corridors and rooms that literally have
nothing in them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When the party
was entering into a space I felt compelled to have something happen; an
encounter, a description, really anything to break up the monotony of the ten
foot wide passage. It’s not fun to open a door and find nothing in a room.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s boring and breeds the bad kind of
paranoia that ultimately just wastes everyones time. So in true first edition
style, I leaned heavily on the wandering monster chart.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Turns out that this long forgotten
tower isn’t all that forgotten.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The corridors are populated by giant ants, giant badgers, giant
centipedes, and other giant pains in the ass.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Some of them were actually very challenging encounters (such
as the Horned Devil and, shockingly, the giant badgers) but ultimately they
were like the bead curtain.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Boring,
mainly because they just didn’t mean anything outside of the damage they
inflicted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I grew up playing 1<sup>st</sup>
edition D&D modules and it’s the perfect game for kids getting together after
school and on the weekends. You kill a bunch of shit and then bicker over who
gets what treasure as you tally up your experience points and watch your
character grow in power. As a teen I wasn’t interested in being anything other
than chaotic and getting more magical equipement than I could possibly carry. But
as I’ve gotten older I want a lot more out of my roleplaying games, especially
as a DM. I don’t get to have a character that levels up and acquires a Robe of
the Magi so I would much rather be really invested in a story that is
compelling and interesting as opposed to a linear walk around interrupted by
some fights and some puzzles.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It really
has nothing to do with the edition, like I said I really like 1<sup>st</sup> Edition
and think it’s wonderful, but premade adventures just aren’t all that
good.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They are great for stealing
some ideas and kickstarting the imagination but not really for good adventures.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-32920738020532777522014-03-17T17:03:00.001-04:002014-03-17T18:20:36.720-04:00Call of Cthulhu and the challenge of fantasy gaming in a normal worldA couple of weeks ago I ran my first session of Call of
Cthulhu.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It did not go well for a
variety of reasons. But I think that the crux of it was the inherent clash of
playing a fantasy game but one that is so firmly rooted in a real, actual
world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Cthulhu is a horror game
and a substantial portion of that horror is generated by the knowledge that you
as a normal person are pretty much entirely powerless against the strange
things in the world that you find yourself in pursuit of.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That degree in Accounting? Not going to
help against one of the Elder Gods, nor is your buddy’s ability to use a
library going to fend off Dimensional Shambler.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That’s a frightening thought, the notion that the closer
that you get to the thing you are seeking the more danger you are putting
yourself into. I planned on using this basic struggle of everyday normalcy
versus the unknown as the basis for the building horror that would ultimately
drive the investigators to the precipice of insanity and fear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Turns out the players preferred
normalcy in their fantasy life and I can’t say that I blame them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Our Cthulhu game was meant to be nothing more than a two or
three week interlude between campaigns of D&D and Shadowrun. I had played a
little as a player but never ran a game before and I was looking forward to it,
though I really did imagine it being a challenge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The game just seems so mood dependent and in my experience
that is one of the hardest things to really establish and maintain, especially
in a casual weeknight game that features a lot of bourbon.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The structure of the game is also a
little intimidating in the sense that so much of what the players are doing is
asking questions in the form of investigating. That’s a lot of answers for the
Keeper to have (Keeper=DM=GM).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So
I decided to run a premade scenario to save myself the legwork of creating all
of those answers and after much searching around I settled on Mr. Corbitt from
the Mansions of Madness book.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
seemed like a pretty straightforward urban adventure and would be easy for
everyone to get into.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The plot is
basically that one of the players has a neighbor that is up to some creepy shit
that the investigators get exposed to.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The more they dig into it the more they realize that something totally
insane is going on with the neighbor, his house, and his unhealthy obsession
with an Indian deity and his vile offspring.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But guess what? The players had no interest in digging into
the business of their neighbor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Nobody likes a nosy neighbor, who wants to be that guy? At first I was
bummed that it was obvious that the adventure was going nowhere, but the more I
thought about it the more sense it made.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The party consisted of a Catholic Priest, a 70 year old
parapsychologist, and an author of books about animals (our current fourth was
unavailable for a couple of weeks). Realistically do those three individuals
have any business snooping around and sneaking into a neighbor’s house?
Especially if there might actually be danger inside? No! Not at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What happened was that they saw that
the neighbor (Mr, Corbitt) dropped what appeared to be the bloody arm of a
child one night while coming home.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>They asked him if everything was alright and he said that it was, and
they basically left it at that.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I
considered railroading them a bit into the plot but then I reminded myself that
this was Philadelphia in 1921, not some ork filled fantasy world where
Adventurer is an acceptable professions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>These were just three guys with jobs who were having an adult dinner
party in the time of Prohibition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The last thing that they would really do would be to get mixed up in
some weird shit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(The scenario
notes offer a suggestion if the party does not pursue the matter with the
neighbor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It says to have Corbitt
come over and ask the neighbor to water his garden while he is out of town for
a couple of days.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He also gives
them a give basket of poisoned food as a thank you.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Both of those seem like horrible ways to keep yourself low
key and avoid drawing attention when you are summoning demons in your creepy
sub basement.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I decided to pass on
this suggestion,)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, I think that’s the big flaw of Cthulhu.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It’s by no means a bad game, it’s
actually pretty awesome and I know lots of people love it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But there is a weird disconnect between
setting the game in the “real world” and then expecting players to behave in a
manner that is actually inconsistent with how a normal person would act.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Which way are we supposed to be play
this? I suppose that once a character is exposed to these unseen horrors of the
world that they are more likely to get involved in a scenario knowing that
there may be some truth behind it, no matter how ridiculous it seems.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But what about that initial hook? I
guess I could have had the party witness some straight up insane Lovecraftian
madness right at the beginning, but that sort of defeats the purpose of the slow
burn and the impending doom, which is what this game is really designed to do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If you give it up right away, what’s
the point? And also seeing that sort of craziness is likely to make a player
run really far away from whatever it is.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Not look further into it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The other thing is, why wouldn’t the players just call the
cops? If I thought that the person that lived next door to me was some sort of
murderer and I was in danger I wouldn’t try to thwart his plans myself. This
isn’t Scooby Doo. I would call the police. Especially if I was a 70 year
parapsychologist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-73284067892745746912013-07-08T15:59:00.001-04:002013-07-08T15:59:19.098-04:00Survivor Style Dunegons and DragonsThe D&D campaign that we just finished up last week featured a significant amount of character death in the last several sessions. The entire campaign went for about 20 sessions or so, and in the last third of that there were four PC’s killed (in a party of five players). (That doesn’t include the final session in which four of the five characters were killed when they acted like cowards with a red dragon around.) I’m not a stranger to character <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/dm-theory-total-party-kill.html">death</a>, but I’d be lying if I said it didn’t take it’s toll on the narrative arc of the campaign. Parties embark on certain paths that are determined by the characters involved and they put into motion story lines that have to do with those decisions and motives. Which is great. And then those characters die and are suddenly replaced by new ones that may not have the same agenda. It creates a problem. So what’s a DM to do in that situation?<br />
<br />
There are a lot of options that I am not going to get into right now, though I would like to explore them in the future. But I did dream up with something the other day that sort of got me thinking about what to do in this situation. What’s even worse than having a character die? How about having your character die and then not being allowed to make a new character and join the game again! I know, it’s totally rotten, but I would like to play around with this idea of a knockout/survivor type of campaign. Essentially when you character dies you are out of the game. “Sorry buddy, we’ll call you in a couple of weeks.” Obviously everyone would need to know this ahead of time and be on board with it, but it could be a nice change of pace for everyone involved. And as a strange side effect it also allows a player to sort of “win” dungeons and dragons. Which, as far as I know, is otherwise impossible.<br />
<br />
So how would this work? For starters, it would need to be setup to be a shorter term game since the number of players would be growing less and less with each session. And I don’t think it makes sense to play until everyone is dead, that has a certain Sisyphean quality to it that seems overly morbid. No, the goal here is to survive and that denotes that there can be an actual ending to it. Similarly, the game would need to start with a larger number of players than what one would typically run a game for. For me the sweet spot of players is usually four, but for this I think that starting with six or seven makes sense. And yes, I know that the primary rule of roleplaying is that the game is supposed to be fun for everyone involved over everything else, and this sort of flies in the face of that. Yeah, well, fuck that. This could be sort of fun for a little bit. I mean, we’re not talking about life and death here. Okay, we are. But it’s make believe life and death.<br />
<br />
The first thing that came to mind when I thought of this is that characters would generally act like cowards for fear of getting killed. No one will want to be the first one through the door or to open up the trapped chest. But at the same time this is supposed to be a “heroic” group of people who have chosen adventuring, one of the most dangerous professions in all of the world. They can’t actually be cowards, it doesn’t make any sense. So I think the driving force behind this needs to be individual rewards. Experience points won’t be divided evenly among all survivors and treasure needs to be disbursed in a different manner. Bravery really needs to count for something since the result of character death is a little more severe than in other games. If your rogue just wants to hang out in the back and play it safe, they are not going to be as rewarded as well as the barbarian that charges into battle knowing fully well that the ogre with an enormous club could easily swat him down. Same thing with weapons and other treasure. If you charge into battle and strike down the enemy with a gutsy move, then maybe that sword of yours just became magical. I think this could work! The same would apply to roleplaying at the sake of one’s own survival. The first example that comes to mind is a cleric and their cure spells. Common sense says they should horde those spells for themselves, but if you actually spread the wealth and help some people out there should be a reward in it for you.<br />
<br />
Normally I am very against this, but for this style of game I would also advocate that all dice rolling be done out in the open. It just seems more fair this way. A game like this would naturally lend itself to a competitive environment among the players and it does seem fair that everything should be on the up and up. I’m not saying that as a DM I’ve cheated, but I’ve certainly misread the dice a couple of times for the sake of the story or just because I thought it made sense at the time. I think it would actually be somewhat liberating in a game like this to be freed of the burden of secrecy when it comes to the dice.<br />
<br />
I suppose that a game like this isn’t without precedence either. In a lot of ways it’s like a tournament style game in which players do receive points for surmounting obstacles and making it to the end. And in a short game, like a tournament, dying once usually means the end of your day anyway.<br />
<br />
I guess the big question about all of this is why. Why set up a game in this manner? In a way it’s sort of a strange, meta way of running a game. There is some inherent knowledge that we possess as players that our characters can never really know, essentially that they are just pawns in our elaborate game of tabletop fantasy. As characters, death should always be treated as something to be avoided at all costs. After all, it is death and that’s sort of the end of everything. But as players we know that’s not the case. We know that at the end of a bad roll or a tough break is a brand new set of dice and attributes waiting to find stats. But what if there wasn’t? What if the game ended and you lost? If you knew that the game went on and you weren’t going to be a part of it, would it change everything about how your character acted? How would you feel if you could actually win dungeons and dragons? Would you go for it?
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-62098367864392363552013-06-13T21:38:00.000-04:002013-06-13T21:38:18.190-04:00Strip Incan GoldI’ve written before about my immense love of <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/incan-gold-review.html">Incan Gold</a>, I truly think it’s one of the best quick play games around. Well, I’ve decided to take my love of it to a new level. A risqué, adult level. I’ve created some rules for Strip Incan Gold, which is bound to be a huge hit with gamers who like to mix some real world excitement and nudity with their board games.<br />
<br />
<i>The Setup</i>: You are a member of a group of archeologists, exploring a series of Incan ruins in what is now modern day Peru. Legends exist of massive temples filled with long abandoned stone passages containing gems haphazardly left in piles on the ground. Unfortunately, your exploration of the tunnels has also awakened Iitsatitti, the decadent Incan god of lust! Iitsatitti demands tribute from each person who seeks to plunder his riches! Are you brave enough to bare all and search for untold riches? Or will you seek the cover and shelter of your tented camp?<br />
<br />
<i>Gameplay</i>: Strip Incan Gold follows the same basic gameplay as the actual Incan Gold, however there are several differences that result in a much more enjoyable and adult game. Due to the awakened prescence of Iitsatitti each player is forced to pay tribute to the god at the end of each of the five rounds of exploration. And there are only two things that can appease the god’s hunger: gems and clothing. When each round ends every player is required to pay a fixed amount of earned gems to Iitsatitti (the gems can just go back into the pot). At the end of rounds one and two, each player must pay five gems. After rounds three, four, and five the tribute is ten gems.<br />
<br />
What’s that? You don’t have enough gems stashed under your little tent? Haha (that’s Iitsatitti howling with delight)! Any player unable to pay the tribute must instead remove a piece of clothing and pay that to the lust god as an offering to his insatiable appetite for flesh. An article of clothing is worth five gems. In the later rounds it is possible that a player must pay multiple articles of clothing to appease the increasingly perverted and aroused god. A player is not required to pay gems, they can choose to instead sacrifice clothing even if they could otherwise afford the tribute. It is a good practice for each player to start with the same amount of articles of clothing.
At the end of the fifth round the player with the most gems remaining is declared the winner! Strip Incan Gold is best played over several games in succession. If that’s the case, the winner should get to take back a piece of clothing as a reward.<br />
<br />
The five treasure cards in Strip Incan Gold are acquired in the same manner as in the regular game, however rather than having a value in gems each one instead confers some sort of special effect on the owner. Each treasure is usable only once. For a more exciting game shuffle all five treasures into the deck at the beginning of the game instead of adding one each turn.<br />
<i> </i><br />
<i>“Trip Nip”</i>- Every player other than the owner of Trip Nip must show their nipples to the other players. If you are already topless, you must deliberately point them at the owner of Trip Nip.<br />
<i> </i><br />
<i>That Painful Looking Necklace</i>- The necklace can be used at any time to recover a piece of clothing that has been donated to Iitsatitti. No one likes this necklace.
<i> </i><br />
<br />
<i>The Cup</i>- The owner of the cup may take five gems from any other player at any time. Sucks for them.
<i> </i><br />
<br />
<i>Weird Block Man</i>- The strange block man can be given to Iitsatitti as sufficient tribute at the end of any round. No one knows what he does with the Weird Block Man, but he seems to be real into it.<br />
<br />
<i>One Headed Man</i>- The owner of the One Handed Man can force all of the other players to get up and walk around the table at any time. What a creep, that One Headed Man.<br />
<br />
<i>Variants</i>: It is easy to adjust Strip Incan Gold to suit the needs of your game playing group. For a more conservative game, decrease the value of the tribute paid each round. Likewise, for a sleazier game increase the value of the tribute to near impossible levels and everyone will be completely nude within a matter of minutes.
The above rules are designed for a game of four players. For proper game balance you should adjust the tribute levels to fit the number of players. For fewer players increase the tribute, and decrease it for larger groups.
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-45783521542012776572013-06-10T11:42:00.000-04:002013-06-10T12:01:45.984-04:00We Hardly Knew Ye: Laughing Skull<i>(One in a series about adventurers who were better off staying at home.)</i>
<i> </i><br />
<i>Who was he?</i> Laughing Skull was the last member of his barbarian tribe, the rest of his clan was wiped out by a gang of marauding slavers. Left with no connection to his homeland, Laughing Skull wandered off in search of adventure and excitement. And maybe some revenge. Alone in the woods, he came across a pissed off owlbear and prepared to battle it in the way of his people. It probably would have worked out pretty poorly for him if not for the group of adventurers who just so happened to be cutting through that section of the wilderness. Though strangers, they fought together and the mighty owlbear was slain! A trusty alliance was formed and Laughing Skull traveled with his new companions to the slaver stronghold city of Klausberg.<br />
<br />
In a relatively short time Laughing Skull adopted to the ways of the city, changing his appearance and his name (to Dirge) and even his skill set (he took a level in Rogue). He was remaking himself as a new man with a new future. That future wound up being bleak and short.
<i> </i><br />
<i>What happened?</i> The Leap Attack/Power Attack combo is truly one of the most fearsome moves in the toolbox of the martial combatant. Unfortunately for Laughing Skull he was on the receiving end of it, rather than the deliverer. While attempting to forcibly board a ship with his party, Laughing Skull was sliced in half by the fiendish orc slaver warlord Shabazz Spine-Splitter. Shabazz was taken out by his friends, but it was far too late for poor Laughing Skull.
Laughing Skull was a little banged up before getting into this combat, but even if he was at full hit points I’m not sure that it would have made a difference.<br />
<br />
The bigger lesson here is that a decent battle plan is required before heading into a serious combat. Players can sort of coast through a lot of combat, but some fights require some advance planning from the PC’s to tilt the odds in their favor. This was one of those combats. Shabazz was painted as a pretty formidable warrior and they had been hearing about him for a couple of adventurers. (That’s DM code language for a tough battle.) The two sides in the combat were fairly closely matched, so it makes sense that there would be some casualties for each group.
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-1326841396887022972013-05-13T21:16:00.001-04:002013-05-13T21:33:42.905-04:00DM Theory: Does Someone Really Have To Be a Cleric? Thoughts on party composition. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Does someone really always have to be a cleric?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sometimes it’s a drag to always have a
priest around.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What if everyone
wants to be a wizard? Will they all just hide behind one another whenever
danger appears? Or, God forbid, what if the entire party is a bunch of
Fighters?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How will they ever win?
D&D is not just a role playing game, but also a game of well defined roles
among the party.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Each character
meshes with those around him to form a perfect combination that is well suited
to wreak havoc on their environment. Sort of like Voltron. But what if the
players just make the characters that they want to make and some essential
aspect of party cohesion gets over looked? Well, it’s certainly not the end of
the world. And as a DM I actually really like when traditional class roles
break down and the party is forced to be creative to circumvent a problem that
is tailored for a class that they may not have.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Watching a group of Fighters try to deal with a locked door
is generally a lot of fun.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Or some
negotiating when no one has a Charisma above eight. </span></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since it’s inception, D&D has sort of had the iconic
four character party as the ideal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The brutish warrior, the sneaky and clever thief, the cleric that
patches everything up and the aloof wizard that saves the day when everyone
else is overmatched.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And that’s
all well and good, but it gets old and can be boring.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And divvying up the treasure is always far too peaceful.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Whenever we are starting up a new game
and it’s character creation day I do my best to encourage players to make the
character that they want to play, not the one that they think that the party
needs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Realistically, these
characters were born and raised totally independent of one another so it seems
highly unlikely that a group of strangers will have perfectly complementary
abilities and skills. It’s fine if two characters both have Knowledge (Nature),
it’s a good skill. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I’m currently DMing for a group of five players that has a
party composition that leaves plenty to be desired.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They consist of a ranger, fighter, barbarian, monk, and
dragon shaman. You’ve probably noticed that they have no arcane magic, no
divine magic, and really no thieving skills (the monk and ranger can sneak
around, but they ain’t getting in places without the key). So what have I done
to make sure that this party isn’t chewed up by a world that expects certain
attributes from it’s adventurers? Nothing. I have done absolutely nothing
differently to cater to them. Why would I? Just because none of them wanted to
be a rogue, it doesn’t mean that everyone in town forgets to lock their
doors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Or that treasure hoards
don’t have wands.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For me, it’s
very enjoyable watching them try to figure out how to deal with a problem that
could easily be solved if they had a different type of character with
them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A recent example of this is
a locked metal box that the Ranger found in the cabin of a ship that they had
stolen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He had no way to open it
and was afraid to bring it to a locksmith for fear that it would be recognized
and he would be caught with stolen goods.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Instead, he held onto it for about seven adventures and waited until the
Dragon Shaman could breathe acid and melt the lock.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course, he then had to split the treasure with the Dragon
Shaman, but that’s the way it goes. Teamwork! </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">It’s also interesting to watch the party begin to evolve and
understand what their strengths and weaknesses are, and then try to set up
situations to take advantage of what they are good it and to also hide their
deficiencies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When they do it well
(which, admittedly, doesn’t happen too often) it’s awesome to watch and
rewarding for everyone involved. In a way it’s a very advanced form of gaming
because they need to think slightly long term and not just about what is in
front of them. In a traditional party the group can sort of walk into any
scenario and feel confident that they have what is needed to handles things
because they can do almost everything.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Not so with this group.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The other upside here is that it seems to be more fun for
the players since they get to be the character that they actually want to
be.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have noticed that there is a
pretty noticeable lack of clerics in games that I run. <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/dm-theory-total-party-kill.html">That's sort of too bad</a>. </span></span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-25488535121737189222013-03-10T20:13:00.000-04:002013-03-10T20:13:42.814-04:00Why I Hate Dungeons; or You Can't Spell Dungeon Without DungI have a confession to make. I probably shouldn’t admit this, but the truth of the matter is that I hate dungeons. Endless poorly lit corridors with random encounters, challenges that get tougher the deeper underground that you go. I want no part of it. Can not stand them. Probably the last place I want to take a group of adventurers. Please don’t take my d20 away for this. I can deal with some caves, an underground passage that leads somewhere interesting, and maybe even some mines if something halfway decent is going on in them and they don’t follow some sort of monotonous layout for hours. But a real dungeon filled with T intersections, wall sconces, and bags of rotted things? No thanks. I don’t see the fun of placing player characters into an environment that is so one sided and thoughtless. There just doesn’t seem to be much to do other than walk from room to room and kill whatever you find. And take the treasure after wiping the blood off of it. Right? Even the classic dungeon crawls in the annals of D&D bore me. Tomb of Horrors? Really, what the fuck is that supposed to be? That’s fun? Queen of the Demonweb Pits? Come on, look at that <a href="http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic1121606_md.png&imgrefurl=http://rpggeek.com/thread/713458/into-the-abyss&h=309&w=500&sz=813&tbnid=LDbhhU5EO5C5ZM:&tbnh=75&tbnw=122&zoom=1&usg=__o7l2OxSaz6AMUimWbTUFnPepkMk=&docid=mdVe_kHuoV8mmM&sa=X&ei=EyE9UdWjCerM0wGf24CQBQ&ved=0CDsQ9QEwAQ&dur=1115">map</a>! Aside from being absolute nonsense (granted, I realize that it does exist on some sort of plane of chaos…) it is nothing but an exercise in rolling dice and hoping that the ones you roll come out better than the ones that your opponents roll. And we’ll ignore the fact that Lolth lives on a weird pirate ship, I suspect that some people think there is something cool about that. I am not one of those people.<br />
<br />
Perhaps if I understood the general ecology of the dungeon better I would appreciate them more. But as it stands, they really make no sense to me in terms of how they actually exist. Some of these fantasy dungeons really are very impressive feats of engineering; traps all over the place, incredible architecture, secret passages cleverly hidden into the stones of some well carved walls, enchanted statues that animate and kill people unless the proper words are spoken. This is some serious shit going on. But that’s actually the part that really infuriates me. You mean to tell me that the same evil genius lich that had the chutzpah to put this entire operation together, is the same dude that sits in a tiny alcove all day hoarding some fantastic magic items (but not actually using them) and doing nothing proactively to stop the adventurers that are rampaging through his lair and killing all his minions one by one? It just seems inconsistent. And none of these monsters are smart enough to decide, “Hey, maybe we should all work together to kill these guys before we are all slaughtered one at a time.” That never occurred to them? They would rather play a card game behind a closed door and wait until it gets kicked down and a horde of murdering lunatics storm into the area and annihilate them? It just seems to me that all of these danger filled dungeons exist solely to be a foil to adventurers. What if the adventurers never arrive? Did the dungeon really even exist? I understand that a lot of them have some sort of flimsy backstory to explain their existence, but I’m not buying it. I like realism in my fantasy!<br />
<br />
The point of all of this is that I have been thinking a lot about urban settings in fantasy worlds, and mainly about how much I like them. It’s true that they are much more challenging to run from the DM/GM/ZM/Keeper/Referee standpoint because of all the options that are available to the players, but that’s what makes them come to life and feel like you are actually having an open adventure as opposed to a semi-scripted jaunt through a dungeon. There are only so many decisions that you make at an intersection. And the worst part is that a slog through a dungeon generally reduces a character to nothing more than their stat sheet, they are usually only worth whatever they bring to combat and trapfinding. Come on, let’s be honest. Dungeons are lame and lazy on the part of the DM. I don’t think I have ever seen players get real excited about the prospect of trekking through the subterranean darkness in the way that they light up when learning some juicy information from a well placed NPC or in slaughtering the adversary that had been hanging around town and taunting them. Towns and cities have structure and laws, whereas a dungeon really has neither of those things. Having laws, customs, and structure forces players to think about their actions and to balance risk versus reward, as opposed to operating inside of the pseudo vacuum that is the Dungeon of Evil Wizard. Who cares what you do in there? I guess that I am just at the point in my roleplaying career in which I have seen every monster, given out every piece of treasure, and watched players die in every sort of horrid manner that there is. I want more than that and I don’t think I will be finding it inside of a dungeon.
I like creating and designing cities for PC’s to run through. Coming up with an unusual shopkeeper or a tavern with a weird theme is fun for me, finding ways to work interesting combat situations into an urban environment is a rewarding challenge. Generally I homebrew all of this stuff, but there are lots of sources that I have drawn on over the years for both inspiration and examples of how this information should run and look. I’ve talked about my love for the <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/hall-of-fame-city-of-greyhawk-boxed-set.html">City of Greyhawk</a> boxed set before, but over the next couple of posts I am going to look at some of the other urban fantasy sourcebooks that I have used in the past.
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-49263061930385837492013-02-11T13:32:00.005-05:002013-02-11T19:28:54.037-05:00Top 5 Weirdest Charts in the DMG<div class="MsoNormal">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
</style></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Gary Gygax was nothing if not thorough. Recently I revisited the 1<sup>st</sup>
Edition Dungeon Master’s Guide (Right up there with the Bill James Historical
Baseball Abstract as the key books of my formative years) and I was blown away
by the massive amount of charts and tables that occupy a substantial portion of
the book’s 240 content crammed pages.
There seems to be a numerical representation of just about anything that
one could imagine. Fortunately for us, Gygax thought of it first and saved us
the headache about wondering on this stuff. Of course, the important stats like
Attack Charts and Saving Throws are in there, but I am much more interested
with some of the more odd content in there. Has some of this stuff ever been used? Was Gary trying to micromanage every
game of D&D played around the world by having a hand in seemingly every
event that occurred everywhere? Was he worried that some bizarre situation
would arise and the DM would have no idea what to do? </span></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I went through the book and chose my favorites. Here are the Top Five Weirdest Charts
in the 1<sup>st</sup> Edition DMG:</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">5) <b>Type of Harlot</b>. There is a section in the back of the
book that contains numerous charts for randomly determining NPC’s that the
party may come across in an urban setting. Okay, I’m with you here, there is
some purpose to that and it could be fun.
A nighttime roll of 44-50 means the party has come across a Harlot!
Sounds <span style="font-size: small;">exciting</span>! The odd thing is that
the Harlot roll further yields a secondary roll that goes into more detail for
the specific type of harlot. (Along with Drunk it’s the only NPC type that gets
a roll for more info. That’s odd. And telling.) Among the Harlot subtypes
available for perusal are the Slovenly Trull, Brazen Strumpet, Saucy Tart, and
Aged Madam. That’s quite a list! And I am also slightly suspicious of Mr.
Gygax’s vast knowledge of the world’s oldest profession. I guess adventurers need to do
something to blow off steam after all those lethal dungeons crawls. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">4) <b>Maximum Height of Opponent that Can be Stunned by a
Monk</b>. The poor Monk, as if it’s d4
Hit Die and bizarre set of abilities isn’t rough enough (not to mention that at
high levels Monks are required to fight one another to the death in order to
keep advancing), now there is a set in stone guideline for how tall someone can
be if they are going to be stunned.
Considering the types of giants and heavyweight monsters out there, it’s
not all that good. A monk needs to
be 10<sup>th</sup> level to stun someone that is 8 feet tall. Which pretty much
includes any type of giant, troll, dragon, ogre, etc…</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">3)<b>Spy Failure Table</b>. I’m not sure I understand this section
of the DMG at all. There is a
chart showing an Assassin’s chance to successfully spy on something based on
level and difficulty. But the
better chart is the one that shows what happens to the spy if they fail. If they are caught and a roll of 81-95
turns up the spy is caught with proof of their spying and then they are
tortured. This then leads to
another chart that details the torturing of the worthless spy (1-2 dead, 3-4
reveals everything, 5-6 turncoat). Of course there is an additional note
stating that if they spy was fanatical he will just kill himself instead. I don’t know about any of this. Isn’t
that an adventure? Shouldn’t all this stuff be roleplayed out? Where can I hire
a fanatical spy? </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">2) <b>Unexplained Sounds and Weird Noises</b>. This is located in the Dungeon Dressing
section of the DMG, just some details to spice up an otherwise randomly built
dungeon. I do feel that this chart
is a bit of an oxymoron. I mean,
the title says that they are Unexplained Sounds, but then it goes on to explain
what they are. Okay, let’s see how
this works. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">DM: You are walking down the dimly lit stone passage and you
hear a noise.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Player: (worried)<nervous> What does the noise sound like? </nervous></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">DM: (rolls dice)<rolling> A gong. </rolling></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Player: What sort of gong?</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">At this point the DM would then consult the type of gong chart
located on the next page. I’m
kidding about that, it’s actually located in the DMGII.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The entire Dungeon Dressing section is absolutely bizarre
and remarkable in it’s thoroughness.
There is a chart that describes the Air Currents in the dungeons. Yes, 15 different types of Air Currents
are detailed including such diverse items as “Breeze, slight” and “Breeze,
slight, damp”. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">1)<b>Damage Taken by Lycanthropes During Transformation Due to
Armor Worn</b>. Wow. I don’t know what to say about
this. Does it matter? Does a DM
really need to consult a chart for this? Is it important to know that a
were-tiger will take 2-5 points of damage if they are wearing splint mail when
they begin to transform? I really hope that somewhere in the long annals of
D&D a character has died from this damage. That would be the ultimate tribute to Gygax, for both his
legendary lethality and his superhuman attention to detail. </span></span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-86910420036496644892013-02-04T18:37:00.001-05:002013-02-04T18:40:07.187-05:002nd Edition Fighter revisited<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Having recently written about the <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2013/01/pathfinder-fighter.html">Pathfinder changes to the3.5 version of the Fighter</a> class, it got me thinking about how these character
classes evolve over time. RPG’s
seem to be constantly changing in both theme and mechanics, to the point that
there is even a semi recent trend of retro style games. Have the martial
classes always been outclassed by the magic users? Has the Fighter ever been
anything other than a guy in armor, or was he originally imagined to be more?
So I decided to go back and check in on the 2<sup>nd</sup> edition version of
the Fighter and see what the signature armed combatant of the D&D world
looked like in the late 80’s/early 90’s, back when I started gaming. And what I
found was a class that fills the melee role better than the later versions
does. </span></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Like all 2<sup>nd</sup> edition characters, the Fighter has
a lot less going on than it’s 3<sup>rd</sup> edition successors. The entire entry in the PHB is barely a
page, and the vast majority of it is a chart that shows the types of followers
that they can attract when they become 9<sup>th</sup> level (a “Lord”). The
main benefit of the class is the ability to use any weapon and armor and some
additional weapon proficiencies. I
like that just because the Fighter is allowed to use all the weapons, that they
don’t automatically know how to wield every instrument of death that there
is. This is a 1<sup>st</sup> level
character, they probably haven’t had the opportunity to use military picks, all
swords, as well as the guisarme-glaive and man-catcher. The amount of weapon knowledge that
characters have in 3.5 has always seemed a bit ridiculous. A young rogue off the street is trained
to use well over a dozen weapons effectively. That seems unlikely. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Reflective of their martial nature, all Warriors (which
includes Fighters) have the most favorable THAC0 progression in the game and
also have percentile Strength (with an 18 they get bonuses above what a
non-warrior receives) and a better hit point bonus from a high Con. I’m fine with all of this. Does it make
sense that a Cleric can never be as strong as the strongest Fighters? Not
really, but lots of things in fantasy roleplaying don’t make sense, like monks
falling from ridiculous heights but not taking damage if they are sort of close
to a wall. I really don’t know what
that is about. I feel that hurting
things through brute force is the domain of the warriors of the game and they
should excel at it. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The thing that really sets the Fighter apart from just any
old person with a bastard sword is Weapon Specialization, an ability that I
feel makes the 2<sup>nd</sup> edition Fighter superior to the versions in the
other incarnations of the game.
Weapon Specialization allows the Fighter to be a legit expert with a
specific weapon type (it costs two proficiencies, so the Fighter can continue
to add to this list as they gain proficiencies, there is no limit to their
mastery). It’s also an ability that is only available to Fighters, not their
brethren in the Warrior group (Rangers and Paladins). Specialization with a weapon gives the Fighter +1 to attack,
+2 to damage, and a significant increase in the number of attacks with the
given weapon. Additionally,
specializing in a bow also grants the use of a Point Blank category that gives
another +2 to hit on close ranged attacks. For example, a 1<sup>st</sup> level Fighter with a 16
Strength specializing in the long sword is going to have a +1 to attack and a
+3 to damage, and also attack three times every two rounds. Chances are that
none of the non-warriors in the party are going to have any damage bonuses (in
2<sup>nd</sup> edition a 16 is needed in Str to get any sort of bonus), nor can
they attack more than once a round. This long sword wielder is going to be
doing significantly more damage in melee than anyone else. It definitely serves to more clearly
define the role of each character type. It you want to have a pretty consistent
damage dealer in melee, the Fighter is going to be your man. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I think it would sadden the 2<sup>nd</sup> edition Fighter
to see what became of him in the 3<sup>rd</sup> edition. In an effort to streamline rules and
make multiclassing and customization more accessible, the Fighter lost the edge
that he had. (Sure, there is still
Weapon Specialization in 3<sup>rd</sup> but it sort of sucks.) And I’m not even one of those people
that feels that the Fighter in 3<sup>rd</sup> edition is horrible. But because
of all the crazy spell options, the rogues sneak attack, classes like the
Duskblade and even the Barbarian, the Fighter somehow lost his way as the
master of combat and instead became a foot soldier better served to be cutdown
by a PC, rather than a warrior of legend.
In 2<sup>nd</sup> edition you can still see the badass that he was meant
to be. Or at least a warrior that isn't overshadowed by those around him. </span></span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-1560823670396278242013-01-06T19:42:00.000-05:002013-02-04T18:38:11.509-05:00Pathfinder Fighter<div class="MsoNormal">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
</style></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The 3.5 Fighter has taken a lot of flack for essentially
failing at the one thing that it is supposed to do. Fight. I agree
with this in theory. Yes, it’s totally possible to build a better warrior with
just about any other class, but it is also completely realistic that a fighter
can be the best damage dealer in most non-uber powered games and a player can
enjoy the class. I’m not too
concerned about it. Fighter,
you’ll always have a spot in my game.
However, I’ve recently had the chance to check out the Pathfinder
Fighter and I must say that I really like the small changes that they’ve made
to the class. A couple minor
tweaks have made the Fighter feel like more of a skilled warrior, which is what
they should be. </span></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Most of the basics of the class remain the same. Base Attack, saves, skill points, and
hit die all remain unchanged. The
skill list has changed a bit. They
have Knowledge (Dungeoneering) and Knowledge (Engineering) as class skills! Who
knew that the Fighter could actually know something? What a remarkable
development. Still no Perception
(Spot/Listen) though, which is sort of silly. All that time spent reading engineering books has left them
with their head in the clouds, apparently. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Achilles heel of the fighter (especially in theoretical
matchups on internet message boards) has always been their low Will save. Coupled with a (most likely) low
wisdom, they are easy targets for spellcasters. Well, the Will save has not
improved, but with the 2<sup>nd</sup> level ability Bravery they now get a Will
bonus against fear effects! I guess that’s cool. It’s better than not having it. I feel like every other character class has a bonus of
immunity to fear, so at least the Fighter won’t feel so left out. Though with all of these immunities
flying around, why would any casters bother using fear spells? </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Armor Training is a nice ability, maybe my favorite of the
new stuff. It begins at 1 and
gradually gets up to 4 (at 17<sup>th</sup> level). Each point of it reduces the
armor check penalty and increases the max dex of worn armor by that
amount. I like it because it
allows the fighter a little bit of diversity and the chance to take advantage
of some skills. Fighters always have
high strength, but none of them are ever any good at climbing or jumping
because the plate mail ruins it for them. This helps with that a little bit.
I’d actually like to see the number get a little higher, but it’s something. In
3.5 if you want to make a lightly armed combatant you are most likely to be
anything other than a fighter, maybe a two level dip for some feats. Armor Training lets you put on the
chain shirt and still be able to jump and climb a bit, but have all the combat
resources of the fighter. If this ability also applies to shields it is even
better (the rules are a bit vague on this).</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Weapon Training is the new signature ability for the
Fighter. It allows the Fighter to
select a weapon group (Bows, Heavy Blades, etc…) and gain a +1 to attack and
damage with any weapon in that group.
It begins at 5<sup>th</sup> level and every fourth level they can add a
new group and the previous bonuses increase by another +1. Not bad. It’s nice that the bonus applies to an entire grouping of
weapons and not just a single one, that’s always been the problem with Weapon
Specialization. “I decided at 4<sup>th</sup>
level that I was all about great axes, but then I found this really awesome
magical flail. Oh well, I guess I just have to waste one of the few resources
that I actually have.” My favorite grouping is definitely the Close group, it
contains the sap, punching dagger, spiked shield, and several other awesome
choices. I assume it’s the most
popular among players, easily outdistancing Heavy Blades and Axes. The cool thing is that it shows that
the Fighter, more so than any other class, really knows weapons. And they
should! These are the mercenaries, soldiers, and gladiators of the world. They
know how to excel with more than just a longsword. I really like the idea that a medium level Fighter can pick
up a bunch of different weapons and not just know how to use it, but to really
kick ass with it. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">There are also two high level powers that the Fighter
obtains at 19<sup>th</sup> and 20<sup>th</sup> level, they are Armor Mastery
and Weapon Mastery. Armor Mastery
is simply damage reduction 5/- whenever the Fighter wears armor (which I assume
is going to be all the time, everyone knows that adventurers sleep in their
armor). I do think it’s odd that
this is not a gradual ability that starts lower in the Fighter’s progression,
but something that just appears at a pretty high level. Personally I’d like to see this power
just rolled into the Armor Training ability, it’s all sort of the same subject
matter of using armor well. Weapon Mastery is the final bit of expertise that
the Fighter will get. At 20<sup>th</sup>
level they can choose a single weapon type (not group) and with that weapon
they automatically confirm critical hits, the critical multiplier increases by
one, and they can never be disarmed while wielding this weapon type. The disarm stuff is mediocre, but the
critical aspect is pretty badass.
Is it a reason to take 20 levels of Fighter rather than multiclassing?
Probably not, but it’s nice to see that there is something waiting at the end
of the long road of battle. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Pathfinder version of the Fighter is certainly a more
fearsome opponent than the 3.5 version, though I suspect it still lags behind a
bit in overall power level compared to other characters. (It seems like
everyone got a bump up with Pathfinder). I do like what they’ve done with
it. Before this the Fighter
literally did not get a single class feature other than bonus feats, and with
the very small exception of some Fighter-only feats there was really nothing
that these guys could claim as their own.
Now they’ve got Bravery! Joking aside, this seems like the framework of
what could be a very component martial combatant with a large range of options
and looks. I dig it. </span></span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-39428429289481041162012-12-28T15:51:00.000-05:002012-12-28T15:53:33.037-05:00Dungeon Lords is the best game ever, or The Emperor Has No Clothes<div class="MsoNormal">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman";
panose-1:0 2 2 6 3 5 4 5 2 3;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:50331648 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-parent:"";
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
</style></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/45315/dungeon-lords">Dungeon Lords</a> is the most interesting, engaging, rewarding
and fun board game that there has ever been. It has pathos and irony, plays great with two, three, or
four players, the art is wonderful, and it makes you a better person with a
deeper understanding of life when you play it. Of course, I just sort of have to take your word for it
because I actually can’t figure out how to play it. But everyone says it’s awesome! It has a really high ranking
on BoardGameGeek (currently 69<sup>th</sup>)! It must be the best!
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEildCxMXfVwFQCW_7iFJCGoJL9kCcI_3nUZ7qVr_G_SVqB7qs-qwv-9BAY1EHPLvZ1styrrtclMs5rAdJvdtrzRZN78vune3dk9ITnb4NrGX_Q2pCEUo6fqLOrNVUZrxXj8baSKFJm9pa7V/s1600/DungeonLords.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEildCxMXfVwFQCW_7iFJCGoJL9kCcI_3nUZ7qVr_G_SVqB7qs-qwv-9BAY1EHPLvZ1styrrtclMs5rAdJvdtrzRZN78vune3dk9ITnb4NrGX_Q2pCEUo6fqLOrNVUZrxXj8baSKFJm9pa7V/s320/DungeonLords.JPG" width="239" /></a></span></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;">Doesn't this look fun? </span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">At what point is a game not worth playing due to the rules
being so complex that the balance of time put into it is not worth the return
of “fun” that I am getting out of it?
I’ll let you in on a secret. I play board games because I like them and
I find them to be really enjoyable. Enjoyable in the actual moment of gameplay,
not because I want to blog about them or to endorse the most obscure game that
I can find. So here’s the deal
with Dungeon Lords. I just can’t make sense of it, the game is apparently over
my head. The rule book is 24 pages with all sorts of pictures and snarky
commentary from monsters! It comes with special boards that have the sole
purpose of helping you learn how to play! (So clearly I’m not the only person
who has struggled with this.) I’ve
had Dungeon Lords for about two years and not once have we actually played a
game through to completion. It’s just too obtuse and far removed from what I
want in a game. I know that this
is a personal thing, I’m not damning the entire thing, it’s just not for
me. Actually, I think I might be
damning the whole thing. Who wants
to play this? Is it really fun? </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">I assume that the counter argument here is that once you
learn how to play it’s a really great game. It’s an acquired taste. But I have so many other games that I really like, so why
would I struggle with something in the hopes that one day it will maybe be as
fun Ticket to Ride or King of Tokyo? I suspect that Dungeon Lords is actually a
great idea more than a great board game.
The concept is awesome. You
take on the role of a monster that owns a dungeon. It is your responsibility to
stock the dungeon with traps and monsters, and then adventurers show up and try
to take your shit. And you try to
kill them. Clever and just the
sort of role reversal, meta gaming that I really dig. Except that that the execution of it actually sucks. There are so many counters and tokens
to keep track of, all sorts of different phases to the game that all have their
own rules, and the game just seems to move really slow. Of course, when you have no idea what
is really happening it tends to draw your interest away from the actual
game. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: small;">After two years I need to admit that Dungeon Lords is just a
sunk cost, I will never get anything even close to the $50 that I spent on it
back in enjoyment. I think I may
be writing this blog just so I can get some use out of it. Currently, there is a stack of games on
top of Dungeon Lords, it has literally been buried by just about every other game that I
have. </span></div>
Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-19347718540980333312012-09-03T16:55:00.000-04:002012-09-03T16:56:08.734-04:00Animal Lord prestige classThe relationship between D&D characters and animals is well established in many parts of the game; there are animal companions for druids and rangers, wild shape, handle animal skills, nature summoning spells, and lots more. It all makes sense since there is a long history of this type of relationship existing in fantasy stories and lore. But for some characters it’s not enough to merely be friends with animals and summon them to do their bidding. No, other characters really intend to take it too far and cross some sort of line and maybe become an animal. Kind of? And it is for these characters that the Animal Lord was born! The Animal Lord is similar to other prestige classes in that a character gives up progressing in their previous class, however it differs because it also seems like you get nothing in return for it. Seriously, unless your idea of a new power is a claw attack that does 1d4 damage or the ability to detect horses. And if it is, then this is totally the class for you. <br />
<br />
The thing I like most about the Animal Lord is the great degree of variety that you can find in them. There are eight different Animal Lords listed (each one connected to a specific animal type) and the requirements are pretty wide open, so all sorts of builds can get into them. Generally, any sort of warrior type makes the most sense. The majority of Lords will be rangers and barbarians. So really any character can wind up as a Horselord as long as they take Run as a feat. Fifth level is the earliest point of entry. <br />
<br />
As I understand it, Animal Lords are essentially animals in their soul but were unfortunately born into some sort of humanoid form. The prestige class is a way for them to get closer to who they feel that they really are. In a way that’s really sad. I feel bad for them, they just want to be accepted by their animal brethren. I feel even worse for them when they begin to acquire the shitty abilities that go with their search for identity. At first level they get the ability to Detect Animals at will, but limited to the type that they are connected to. I guess this is how they make friends in the animal world, especially when coupled with the Animal Bond that they have with the animal type as well (giving them a bonus to handle animal). A 4th level they can Speak with Animals, but only once a day so I don’t think they are going to form any lasting friendships. It just seems so desperate. They need to use magic to make friends. Who would want to adventure with one of these weirdos?<br />
<br />
The definitive trait of the class comes at third level and is called Wild Aspect, which is when the Lord actually begins to take on characteristics of their animal type. Specific to each animal type, the abilities are an all around plethora of actual garbage. Now, these are characters that are at a minimum eight level. You know what’s really useless for that character? A claw attack that does 1d4 damage. Its cool to fight like an animal, except that these characters can actually use weapons. Do you think that a cat chooses to use his claws because they are awesome? No, it’s because they can’t hold a sword. If they could they would happily abandon their claws for it. (Maybe there is a Human Lord prestige class available to animals?) The sample character presented in the book is a barbarian/Apelord with the following attacks listed in it’s stat block: +14 melee (1d12+7/x3 with a greataxe) or +13 melee (1d4+5 with a claw). Hmm...which should I attack with? <br />
<br />
And these crappy powers aren’t even active all the time! They start off at once a day for a minute a level. I get it, having that claw attack all the time is way too powerful. The wizard would definitely get jealous. Other examples are the Sharklord’s 1d8 bite attack, the Horselord runs faster, and the Snakelord gets a weak poison bite. <br />
<br />
Fifth level’s Summon Animal is probably the only ability that is actually good. The Lord can summon some animals to help him out, or maybe to just bullshit and have a conversation for a couple of minutes. There are some decent options like a polar bear or a dire lion. <br />
<br />
There is also a bonus feat at sixth level and an attribute increase (+2!) at tenth level, but that’s about it. The bonus feat is predetermined and features such stellar options as Trample for the Horselord. The winner has got to be the Apelord’s Brachiation, one of the weirdest feats in the game. It’s actually pretty cool, but I’m not sure how good it is. <br />
<br />
I’ve only seen one actual Animal Lord in play, a strange Cat Lord (<a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/we-hardly-knew-ye-siron-ellysanea.html">read more about his untimely demise here</a>), but I think that’s enough. There just isn’t really anything going on with them. If you really like birds you can still dress up like one and act like one if thats what your character wants to do. The best of the bunch is the Wolflord, which is halfway decent though still subpar. It gets scent and Improved Trip, but that’s not much for the level investment. I think that any character is better off staying with their original class. Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-22630457222977077742012-03-05T12:30:00.000-05:002013-01-06T19:46:38.826-05:00Suel Arcanamach prestige classThe world of Dungeons and Dragons certainly has no shortage of character classes that blend magic and melee. The <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/abjurant-champion.html">Abjurant Champion</a>, Eldritch Knight, and Spellsword are just a few of the many masters of the martial and magical mixture. However, only one of this archetype is good at jumping, tumbling, and speaking some strange language that is the D&D equivalent of ancient Latin. That’s right, the somewhat odd, but actually really cool Suel Arcanamach. The prestige class has it’s roots in the World of Greyhawk campaign setting, where the Suel are some sort of something or other. Honestly, I’m not sure and I don’t think it’s all that relevant. Not because I don’t like the fluff of the character (I actually really like it) but because I usually just don’t really care about the history of fantasy worlds. I like to live in the present of made up worlds. All that being said, the Suel Arcanamach is an interesting class and a real good approach to the fighting spellcaster concept, but an even more interesting approach to prestige classes in general. <br />
<br />
See, the unique thing about the class is that they are a spellcasting prestige class that does not need to know how to cast spells to get into the class. It’s probably a waste if your character can already sling spells, actually. The entry requirements for the Arcanamach (I’m making it campaign setting neutral and dropping the Suel) are a decent bunch, but more than anything they take an approach to prestige classes that I rarely see. One of the major problems that I have with a lot of classes is that you just fill some random requirements and then, suddenly, your character begins to develop an entirely new set of abilities. The same is also true of multiclassing into a new base class. Wait, how did my rogue learn to spontaneously cast Grease? But the Arcanamach actually resembles a character that is learning something, that is breaking away from just being a martial character and moving in the direction of acquiring some new skills. <br />
<br />
They need a +6 Base Attack, proficiency with at least four martial weapons, four ranks in tumble and jump, and Iron Will. That seems like a somewhat standard, mobile combat build to me. However, they also need (and this is where is gets interesting) Combat Casting, five ranks in concentration and spellcraft, be able to speak Ancient Suloise, and must have read the Grimoire Arcanamacha or studied with someone who knows it really well. Remember, this is not a spellcaster to begin with. You’ve got to take Combat Casting without being able to cast spells! Awesome. Speaking some weird ancient language is sort of a throwaway for flavor, it’s not like it costs a feat, it’s just a language. And since most D&D characters seem to have ability to be tri-lingual or so, it’s not that big of a deal. The spellcraft ranks are a bit tough to swallow for a lot of martial characters, it’s just that very few of them have it as a class skill. And since it will probably be cross class it will also slow down the entry into the class by a level or two.<br />
<br />
So what martial class makes the best Arcanamach? The natural assumption is that a character that already has some magic would be the best, something like the Hexblade or Duskblade. The catch is that the Arcanamach does not advance casting the way that most prestige classes do, but rather has it’s own spell list. Therefore, the mediocre casting of the Hex-and Dusk-blades will never get any better. The character that seems to make the most sense, to me, is the Swashbuckler. It has good fighting, doesn’t use heavy armor (which will interfere with the Arcanamach spellcasting), access to some Charisma skills, and also those physical skills that the class needs. The problem is that the Swashbuckler sucks after three levels, so what to fill those other levels before qualifying? This is where the Hexblade comes in. <br />
<br />
Swashbuckler 3/Hexblade 3 makes a real good entry into the Arcanamach. For one it can easily meet all of the requirements by 6th level, allowing access to the class at 7th level. But more than that I see this combo making sense. A physical, swashbuckling character adventures for a little while and gets exposed to some of the more magical aspects of the world and begins to develop a taste for magic (i.e. he becomes a Hexblade). Some magical abilities begin to develop but it isn’t until he discovers an ancient tome that teaches him to blend magic and melee that he actually learns the skill himself. And if you wanted to take it one more level in Hexblade you could get a familiar and some first level spells. Not a bad option. <br />
<br />
Okay, you’ve finally found a logical way to get your character to be an Arcanamach. After all this, was it worth it? D8 Hit die, medium base attack, two good saves, and 4+ skill points are a nice start. They also receive Charisma based spontaneous casting that advances slightly quicker than a normal progression, which is a good way to make up for the late entry. The spells they get come from the wizard list, but are restricted to Abjuration, Divination, Illusion, and Transmutation. It’s not everything, but there are plenty of awesome options contained within those schools. After a couple of levels your Arcanamach can be casting Shield, True Strike, Protection from Arrows, Blur, Haste, and many others. <br />
<br />
They also get a handful of other abilities, none of which are great but all have their uses. Some extended spells, dispelling strikes, and the ability to reduce spell failure in armor. <br />
<br />
At the end of the day the Arcanamach lags behind classes like the Abjurant Champion and the Duskblade in terms of power. But it is so much cooler than those, because it actually makes sense as an example of a character growing into a new type of power, which is what prestige classes should be. It’s not overpowered, it lets a character do something that a base class build can’t do, and the requirements mean that you actually need to commit to the build by making some not so great choices. I also really like classes that are self reliant and can actually do the things that they are supposed to do, as opposed to relying on magical items and the party cleric to buff them up. The backstory of the Arcanamach is that they originally started off as bodyguards and assassins, particularly ones that were experts at killing mages. This class seems capable of doing those duties.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-60386623172185116552011-11-14T11:03:00.000-05:002012-09-03T16:56:29.603-04:00The Sinister Secret of SaltmarshI haven’t had much time lately to concoct compelling fantasy role playing universes, so in order to get my role playing back on track I decided to dig into some published modules and source material (which I have oodles of around the house). The first adventure that I decided to run was the classic Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh (U1), one of the favorites of my youth. It tells the story of a spooky haunted house and what is really going on inside of the abandoned manor on the outskirts of the remote fishing village, Saltmarsh. Originally published for 1st edition, I decided to run it for 3.5 since that is the version that most of the players know the best. I saw that there were some 3.5 conversions of it out there but I figured I know enough about D&D to convert it on the fly. And besides, the whole point of a module was to save myself some time. Additionally the 3.5 Dungeons Masters Guide II has an example of a premade city, which just so happens to be Saltmarsh. So plenty of stuff for me to draw on. <br />
<span id="goog_13550848"></span><span id="goog_13550849"></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiUxMH3cjFwVLiCHpk6_vDmvyS8lMk8ITkY7daIw5VQ4vVIEctCkhPZrL2brDOynTh3kIvLrglaRC2Hg7Wl1bddoLndHw_b7m2Nlf1Q6AwkmUICPY6HFoKehNtmsAoKKgxhc55ZR9QwK3j/s1600/U1ModuleCover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiUxMH3cjFwVLiCHpk6_vDmvyS8lMk8ITkY7daIw5VQ4vVIEctCkhPZrL2brDOynTh3kIvLrglaRC2Hg7Wl1bddoLndHw_b7m2Nlf1Q6AwkmUICPY6HFoKehNtmsAoKKgxhc55ZR9QwK3j/s1600/U1ModuleCover.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The main reason that I am generally not into modules is that they require the players to follow a somewhat linear path, which is not really the way that I enjoy playing the most. Sure, I will lure the players in with hooks but I really like when they just sort of pursue the agenda that they are most into, which is usually killing things, rejecting authority, and then looting all the corpses that they have left behind. And yes, I actually play with adults. But it’s a lot of fun. So my hesitation in running a module is that they would break from it right away. But the Sinister Secret is a well thought out adventure and I though that they would be into it. And they were. At least the first half of it. <br />
<br />
The Sinister Secret is actually the first in a series of three related modules (the U series of old D&D) but I planned from the beginning that I only wanted to run the first. The following two (Danger at Dunwater and The Final Enemy) are a little too heavy on dungeon crawling and require the party to act nobly in order to progress the story and I knew that was not going to happen. So I modified some of the background info and made the haunted house of Saltmarsh stand on it’s own as an adventure. For example; the smugglers are working closely with a merchant in town rather than selling weapons to lizardmen or sahaugins or whatever it is that they are doing in the published module. This way it can all wrap up neatly and the party can move on. <br />
<br />
The module is broken up into two sections; the first is the investigation of the “haunted house” and subsequent uncovering of the smuggling ring; the second part is the taking of the smugglers boat with the help of some townsfolk, ultimately smashing the smuggling ring for good. The party that I played with had zero interest in the second half of the adventure. They knew that the boat was out there, but did not seem to care about it one way or the other. In fact, they never even told anyone in town that the house was actually filled with smugglers and not ghosts! Instead, they came back to town with some gold and confirmed that yes, the house was haunted and the townsfolk should continue to stay away from it. Hmm, I did not expect that. What it came down to was a desire to head off to a bigger city or a place with more opportunity. They came out of the house with some strange, and valuable, items like a skull made of solid gold and an apple that was also solid gold. They knew they couldn’t get good value for them in the small fishing village so they were on their way to greener pastures. <br />
<br />
It has been a long time since I have run a 1st edition module and some things really jumped out at me as to how the game has evolved over the years. One of the most interesting involves the nefarious waghalter, Ned Shakeshaft. Ned is planted in the house to slow down the party, ideally he joins the party under the guise of being a thief that was waylaid when he came into the house and at some point attacks the party after earning their trust. Now, the way that the module is written makes it so that there is really no way for the party to prove that he is up to no good. Which I thought to be really odd and strange. First off, what sort of adventurers are not going to suspicious of this guy? His story sort of adds up, but come on? The text of the module says, “...it will not be possible for the party to unmask Ned simply.” He is well prepared to answer their questions and has a somewhat plausible story to tell them. Ultimately it comes down to what the party wants to believe and how they want to act towards him. It is sort of forcing the party into a metagaming role, I think. Basically, there is no mechanic to determine if he is lying or not, nor is there one to represent Ned’s obvious skill in weaving a tale to tell. Now, of course, 3.5 D&D has a mechanic for this. Sense Motive vs. Bluff is all about this. As it happens one of the party has a very high Sense Motive and used it in this situation (unfortunately for them Ned had a high Bluff and the party wound up buying his fishy story). I think I prefer this way. One of the other characters firmly believed that Ned was up to no good, but sort of fell in line when the investigator character said that Ned was on the up and up. This is a more accurate reflection of a character’s in game skills than just letting the player’s decide what is happening. I think it also encourages better roleplaying in the sense that the party will then have to play along with their perceived view of Ned, even if it is what they, as players, do not believe. <br />
<br />
The adventure is designed for character levels 1-3, which is really nice. There seems to be a dearth of cool, low level modules that provide a decent challenge. However, it is also written for 5-10 players! Wow. That’s a lot of players. Again, it’s a reflection of the early days of D&D when a much larger group would gather for the game and probably play for an entire day. I’ve done the big group thing and I’m not much of a fan of it, but it was easy to alter it for a smaller group (four players). I do like the premade characters in the back of the book, especially Megaron the Bold and Gerald the Seeker. Who would name their character Gerald? Also strange is Caine the Despised, the Cleric/Magic User with a 17 strength and 10 intelligence. I see why he is despised. <br />
<br />
One other aspect of the module that was top notch was the artwork. It wasn’t just generic fantasy work pulled from a neutral source, but actually detailed drawings of what was happening in the module. I thought that it was great and actually helped me understand the setting better since I could actually see what it was supposed to look like. An excellent inclusion.<br />
<br />
The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh is a really solid adventure. The plot is well thought out and makes a lot of sense. It is not just a group of bad guys hiding out and stocking up on magic items, waiting to be killed by adventurers and looted of their booty. It is through no fault of the module that the party did not follow it through to the end, they just had a different agenda. Which is really the beauty of D&D. The players can go anywhere and do whatever they want. And on that note, it’s on to <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/hall-of-fame-city-of-greyhawk-boxed-set.html">Greyhawk</a>! Which I am totally geeked about.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-29122928107468807732011-05-05T15:37:00.001-04:002011-05-05T15:38:45.198-04:00We Hardly Knew Ye: Newport the Goblin<i>(One in a series about adventurers who were better off staying at home.)</i><i> </i><br />
<br />
<i>Who was he?</i> Newport was a third level goblin rogue. A sneaky little fellow with excellent lockpicking skills and some opportune sneak attacks, he endeared himself to his fellow party members with his brutal style of cold hearted murder, most exemplified by his savage killing of a town magistrate that wanted the party dead. Newport snuck into his house and waited outside of the nursery of the man’s child. When he exited the room Newport (along with his hobgoblin partner, Thatcher) ran him through with a sneak attack that quickly took out the adversary before he even had a chance to react. The party rejoiced. Previously, Newport had showed off his quick reflexes by grabbing a falling wine bottle in the cellar of the magistrate’s house, thus preserving the party’s under cover status as they snuck into the house. <br />
<br />
Newport was a member of a society of somewhat civilized monstrous humanoids. One day while out hunting, they returned to find that their entire clan had been killed by adventurers! No good adventurers. Killed everyone they knew, took all of their possessions and then left the area. The party was on a revenge mission. Unfortunately for Newport, he will never get that satisfaction. <br />
<br />
<i>What happened?</i> A bit overeager, Newport may have bitten off more than he could chew by foolishly charging into a fort occupied by some rangers. Generally it’s not a very good idea to have the rogue with eight hit points (he was wounded) be the first one into the melee, and this example just further supports that somewhat sound theory. Waiting for him was the Forest Warden, a burly fellow with a great axe who just so happened to have Goblin as his favored enemy. Newport may as well have been a pinata. He wound up killed with a single shot, a clean slice across his chest that left him chopped into two pieces. This spurned numerous Newport:Dead Without Pleasure comments from the players at the table. <br />
<br />
It probably would have made more sense for the orc barbarian to charge in first, but no one ever said that these monsters were genuises. The orc happen to be outside lighting the fort on fire. The fort that Newport had just charged into. In defense of the orc he had just been introduced to the exciting world of burning down the homes of humans (it started with the Magistrate) and was clearly excited by the prospect of another arson. <br />
<br />
Personally, I enjoyed Newport and was a bit sorry to see him go. It is somewhat ironic that the player had just told me the day before that he was really enjoying Newport and looking forward to seeing how he developed. Not going to happen now.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-32283052122551335552011-04-10T19:32:00.000-04:002011-04-10T19:32:49.482-04:00Master's Gallery reviewI’ve really enjoyed both <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Incan%20Gold">Incan Gold</a> and <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/search/label/High%20Society">High Society</a> from the Gryphon Games bookshelf series, so I though that I would give Master’s Gallery a shot, which is another game in the series of quick playing games. At first I was intrigued by what I thought was a pretty clever game mechanic and I enjoyed the quick play. However, subsequent games have left me a little bit disillusioned and feeling like the game actually lacks much strategy and that playing it is sort of like running through the motions without having to think very much. I know, it sounds like a real blast. <br />
<br />
Master’s Gallery is a card game for two to five players played over four rounds. There is a deck of 95 Masterpiece cards, each of which is a painting from one of five famous artists; Van Gogh, Monet, Degas, Vermeer, and Renoir. Players take turns placing a card in front of them on their turn, once a single artist has six cards out on the table (five in a two player game) from all of the players combined the round ends and the players score for that round. The artist with the most cards gets a three placed on their artist card, the second most gets a two, and the third gets a one. The other two artists do not score for this round. So, If I have three Van Goghs out when the round ends and each Van Gogh is worth two points I wind up with six points for them. Very easy. Almost too easy, actually. The scoring tokens earned each round stay with the artists for the entire game. Next round each Van Gogh card is already worth two points, plus whatever it may earn on each round. Because of this game mechanic cards are worth much more in the latter rounds of the game since they have been accumulating tokens from the previous rounds, which seems like it should matter a ton but I’m not sure that it does. <br />
<br />
The problem is that every time I have played it the game seems to sort of go the same way. Something like this: Player A plays a Renoir, Player B plays a Vermeer, Player C plays another Renoir. It’s now my turn. I have a couple of Van Goghs in my hand that I would like to play, but it’s not really worth it since they will probably wind up with little value. However, if I play a Renoir it is all but assured of being the high valued artist for that round and I want my cards to be worth the most. So I play a Renoir. On the next turn A and C follow suit with another Renoir, as do I and then the turn ends (if it even makes it back to me) and we all share in the wealth of the high valued Renoir. Why wouldn’t I play a Renoir? So I can put down a single Van Gogh and get one point for it, when a Renoir is going to be worth three? It’s just sort of a system that doesn’t reward anything other than joining with the masses and trying to get in on the big score before the round ends. And it will continue each round because Renoir cards are already worth three points, so keep playing whatever Renoir cards that you have! <br />
<br />
There are some cards that have an additional action attached to them when they are played, such as playing another card or putting an extra point token on an artist. These make the game even less interesting in a way because they seem to really determine who wins the game. Using the above example let’s say that on his first turn Player A played a Renoir with a symbol on it that allows him to immediately play another card of the same artist. So he has two Renoirs out now. This is just letting Player A end the turn even quicker and score even more points. I have played multiple rounds where one or two players only get to go once before it ends and wind up with practically no points, whereas some players have four cards down thanks to some special powers that they happened to come by randomly. I guess my complaint is that it’s just not very fun and frustrating, and not even in a good way because it made me think hard about strategy. But frustrating because I think I’m playing the game the same way that my cat would play, and that’s not a knock on my cat or myself. <br />
<br />
One thing that I really didn’t like about this game is that the description of the game says that the players are art dealers and gallery owners involved with valuing the Old Masters. I didn’t feel that way at all. I just felt like I was putting cards on a table, the thematic implications of those actions were so removed from the game that I didn’t even think about it. Would it have been too much to give each player a sheet that looks like a gallery wall with empty frames? Maybe then I would have at least have had an idea of who I was and what I was doing, rather than just numbly placing paintings on the table. I mean, the word is gallery is even in the title of the game. In comparison Incan Gold is also a rather simple card game, but it tells a nice story and contains a narrative as you go. I felt none of that in Master’s Gallery. <br />
<br />
I can’t really complain about the art in this game considering that it is done by some of the great painters in history. I’m not a real big fan of Impressionism, but I can’t really argue with Monet and Degas. Thematically the art is the focal point of the game, which is actually pretty cool. Honestly though, I find myself barely looking at the actual paintings, my focus rarely going beyond the colored border and the symbol that may be in the corner. <br />
<br />
In the end Master’s Gallery falls short of being a good game. There just doesn’t seem to be much reason to play. It does only take about 20 minutes to play a game, so I suspect that it will find it’s way onto our gaming table from time to time just because we can play an entire game quickly. When a game’s best quality is that it ends quickly it probably isn’t all that good to begin with.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-65515812483635190802011-04-02T19:29:00.000-04:002011-04-02T19:29:34.299-04:00High Society reviewOnce, deeded lands and blue blood were required to be among society’s elite, but now you can just buy your way into the upper crust! In High Society players compete to see who can squander their newly found riches the fastest by amassing a collection of expensive and ostentatious items. Gems! Yachts! A carriage! Okay, so the carriage isn’t quite as exciting but you do need some way to transport all of your new stuff I suppose. Obtain the most gaudy and frivolous wealth and you win! High Society is a quick playing card game for three to five players. The whole thing takes about 20 minutes to play. <br />
<br />
Gameplay is very simple. Every player begins with a bundle of cash in a bunch of different denominations. At the beginning of each turn an item comes up for auction and the players take turns bidding on it, with the high bidder eventually winning the stained glass window or the champion thoroughbred. Each of the ten items is valued at somewhere from one to ten (the carriage is worth one, while the chateau on the lake is the most valuable). At the end the player whose items total the most in value wins. It isn’t quite that simple because there are some catches to how you can bid and score.<br />
<br />
The real strategy comes in how you bid and spend your money. Each player has eleven money cards to spend, each of a different value from 2 million to 25 million. Once you bid on an item you can’t pull that particular bill from the table, you can only add to it. For example; if you bid 4 million on a painting and then your opponent bids 8 million, you are not allowed to replace your 4 million with a 10 million. You can add a 6 million to it for a bigger bid but that 4 million stays in place. It matters because you may find that you have used up all your small bills when you want some towards the end of the game. It may make sense to lead with a big bill and try to scare the other nouveau riche away from the bidding altogether. <br />
<br />
The other tricky things are the negative cards that come up for auction. I’m not sure what sort of auction house allows a Mansion Fire to go up for bid, but unfortunately it is a reality of your situation. The negative cards totally suck for everyone. You are either going to wind up with something that really crushes your final score or you are going to spend a lot to not have to take it. Essentially players are paying to not have the negative event effect you. I actually think that this might be the best part of the game. And it’s also why you need to hang onto some of those small bills, so you can maybe get out of the negative auction without having to throw down some massive dollar amount. Wouldn’t you rather spend it on a castle? <br />
<br />
The final twist comes when the game ends. The player that has the smallest amount of cash left in their hand immediately loses. It’s as if the crocodile from <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Cleopatra%20and%20the%20Society%20of%20Architects">Cleopatra</a> wandered over to 19th century America for a snack. So make sure you keep some cash in the bank or all of your worldly possessions mean nothing. The remaining players then add up their total value and adjust for whatever negative cards they have. Someone wins. I’ve seen players win with a single luxury item, often the big spenders find themselves eliminated in the crocodile round. <br />
<br />
In some ways High Society has the same pitfalls as <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Incan%20Gold">Incan Gold</a> in that the art is sort of crummy. I would be way more impressed with the castle and inclined to spend millions on it if it just looked a little more extravagant. The game is really simple, which is why I think it could use a little boost from the art in the game. Don’t get me wrong, the art is not dreadful. But I do think that a game like this is fun when people get into the feel of the game and actually want the items. Which would be easier to do if they actually looked awesome. I like High Society. The best thing about it is that is quick and really easy, but that’s not a knock on it at all. The world needs game like this because sometimes you only have a half hour and still want to enjoy a game.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-22674234936949167422011-03-28T15:33:00.001-04:002011-03-28T15:35:09.206-04:00Castle Panic's Master Slayer, or Throwing the Baby Out with the Bath WaterI had always sort of disregarded the Master Slayer aspect of <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/castle-panic-review.html">Castle Panic</a>, thinking of it as something of a novelty in an otherwise straightforward cooperative game. I now see that it’s actually the entire point of the game. Defending the castle becomes secondary because everyone suddenly has no interest in helping each other, only in collecting orc and troll skulls. I’ve mentioned before that I find the game fun, but exceedingly easy. This seems to solve that issue since you are once again pitted against other people, rather than some sort of easily defeated game mechanic. <br />
<br />
Playing with the Master Slayer (which is actually the way that the game should be played, the more cooperative game is an alternative to it) gives points to the players for killing monsters. Tougher monsters are worth more points. Makes sense. But the game is really structured so that players trade cards and help one another out by planning together. The cards are even played face up on the table, the game presents the illusion that we are all actually working together to save this castle. Which now seems sort of ridiculous since everyone is in constant competition, hell bent on killing the Troll Mage. The thing that makes it odd is that the game is very short sighted. If you offer me a card for a Blue Archer I know exactly what you are going to do with it. You are going to shoot the goblin in the blue zone. I don’t want to help you kill that goblin. I suppose if you offered me a Green Knight that I needed it would be, at best, a zero sum exchange as we both get something that we need. And what’s really the point of that? In a game like Settlers of Catan or Bohnanza trading is a big part of the game, but you don’t necessarily know the extent that you are helping your opponent and can always tell yourself that you are getting the better end of the trade. In Castle Panic the entire board and all of the player’s cards are on display. <br />
<br />
The real catch comes with what is now the possible game endings; either one of the players wins or nobody does. That’s interesting. The game ceases to be cooperative. Sure, you could look at it as somewhat of a victory if you successfully defend the castle but one of your partners is the Master Slayer, but who feels that way? Who wants to sort of win, when someone else wins a little bit better? The last time that we played I fell behind pretty early on in the game. The cards I had just weren’t matching up to anything good, and the other players were racking up the kills. At that point it was really in my best interest to let the castle be destroyed so that we would all lose. It wasn’t coming from a point of bitterness, but why would I help someone beat me? Three of us played this afternoon and within a couple of turns the castle was in shambles, orcs and trolls having caused numerous breaches in our walls. No one was looking to trade anyone a brick so that they could be a new wall for it, we were too busy reloading our crossbows. It certainly becomes much more difficult to actually win. <br />
<br />
Well, the Master Slayer has addressed what I found to be the biggest fault with Castle Panic. That is, that the game is too easy. I guess I was wrong in writing the game off so quickly and probably should have played the game the way that the designers had really intended it to be played.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-13647490473070784572011-03-21T18:07:00.000-04:002011-03-21T18:07:24.598-04:00Grand Dames of Smallworld reviewIf there is one thing that Smallworld doesn’t need it’s probably more Races and Special Powers. A better tray to organize them perhaps, but the Races and Powers have everything pretty well covered. Of course that did not stop me from indulging in the Grand Dames of Smallworld expansion, which focuses on several new all female races to make the game that much more expanded. Or something like that. It has three new Races and two new Special Powers, all of which fit well into the game. One thing that I do like about it is that none of the Races or Powers are particularly overpowering, which is frequently a pitfall of many expansions. This one is pretty good though. I also think it's fitting that two of the Races have powers centered around going into decline, since they are all female that is probably going to happen pretty quick with no one to reproduce with. So what do we have here?<br />
<br />
The three races are the ghostly White Ladies, the pious and somewhat insulated Priestesses, and the wandering Gypsies. All of them are user generated contributions, apparently Days of Wonder had some sort of contest and got people to send ideas in to them and then made the best of them. They did a good job. The White Ladies are kind of tough to play, but can pay off in the right circumstances. Since they are ghosts they pretty much stick around forever, haunting your opponents with their ability to just sort of hang around. Their special power is that once they go into decline they become immune to conquests and powers, making them pretty much invincible. The winning combo here is Stout White Ladies to start the game. The big issue is that you only get two of them (plus the number from the power) and if they are not available early in the game they are not all that useful. But, if you can spread them out over a couple regions and then go into decline they can really pay off over the course of the game. Think about it, say you are able to conquer three or four regions over the first two turns and then go into decline. For the next six turns they will be paying out three or four coins a turn until the game ends. Not only will they pay better than any other declining race, you also don’t have to worry about defending them. But if they don’t come out early they are not all that useful. <br />
<br />
Like the White Ladies, the Priestesses have a power that is triggered when they go into decline. When they throw in the towel all the holy women gather together into a single “ivory tower” in an occupied region. Each turn they score points equal to the number that are holed up inside this temple of learning. So they are essentially digging in and relying on each other for defense. The issue that I have with them is that they are just begging to be attacked. I can’t imagine that a single region that is generating six or seven gold a round is going to last for all that long. Smallworld is sort of all about being mean to one another. This tower has a huge target painted on the side of it. Unlike the White Ladies, it has no additional defense so the Dragon could wipe it out with one move. Ha ha, that sort of cracks me up. And the thing that I don’t understand is what happens to all of them? There is probably a rule somewhere that explains it, but I assume that they are all killed rather than the typical one in a conquered region. I mean, there is nowhere for them to go? I also don’t like the look on their face. <br />
<br />
The Gypsies are my favorite of the Grand Dames. For one, sexy ladies in half shirts that are flipping knives in their hand are just sort of cool by nature. I think that we can all agree on that. And their power is original, productive, and really sticks to the stereotypical view of the vagrant gypsies. I am sure that there are many Roma out there who may take issue with them, but I think they are awesome. Every time a gypsy abandons a region they are given a coin for doing so, you just can’t reconquer it this turn. This is good on a bunch of levels. You can actually flee from superior forces, don’t need to worry about defense all that much, and can free up more forces for conquering. Winning! When they are combined with Flying they make one of the most formidable races in the game since they can abandon their area and just go to the most vulnerable spot around. They don’t work as well with powers that generate more coins for specific land types (Forest, Swamp, Hill) since by nature they will want to abandon them, but most powers work real well with them. <br />
<br />
The new special powers are not as interesting as the races. Historian gives bonus coins for races that are in decline, going into decline, or when they go into decline. It is very circumstantial to be of any actual use. At most it will generate, what, five coins in a game? That doesn’t really seem to be worth it. Peace Loving goes against everything that Smallworld is about. If you go a turn without attacking an opponent you get three coins. Aside from not being fun at all, I just don’t know when this would work. How are you supposed to do anything without attacking the other rotten races that are trying to inhabit the world that is rightfully yours? No sense. Are you just supposed to sit there and occupy the same spaces all game? Apparently Days of Wonder were going to name this power Boring, but decided against it. <br />
<br />
I think that the Grand Dames are a very worthy expansion to Smallworld, however it’s not all that necessary to making it a better game. There are so many possible Race/Power combinations that one could play for a long time before seeing them all. It is very cheap though (I think that mine was ten bucks) so I certainly couldn’t argue with someone who wanted to spice up their game of Smallworld.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-53682454365476872062011-02-27T19:50:00.000-05:002011-02-27T19:50:11.152-05:00Last Night on Earth: Escape in the TruckA classic scenario. The only way out of the zombie infested town is a single old pickup truck marooned in the center of the town. Unfortunately, it has no gas in the tank and the keys are lost somewhere in the town. Such is the life for the poor survivors in the Escape in the Truck scenario for <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Last%20Night%20on%20Earth">Last Night on Earth</a>. This is definitely one of my favorite scenarios in the game. It combines a good story with a clear, obtainable objective and is generally a lot of fun. It is also one of the few scenarios that the heroes can win quickly if they get a little bit of luck. Of course, if they get no luck they will be slowly torn apart as they continue their futile search for automotive supplies. <br />
<br />
The goal is pretty straightforward in Escape in the Truck. The heroes need to find some gasoline and put fuel in the truck, then get a set of keys and two heroes into the truck and get out of dodge before the sun comes up. The challenge here for the heroes is to find the items and survive long enough, the zombies should focus on constant harassment of the heroes and be prepared for the showdown at the truck, which is when the heroes will be their most vulnerable. Like most of the scenarios in LNOE the advantage goes to the defender (in this case the zombies) but this one is a little more evenly balanced than most of the others. It is also one of the shorter scenarios, lasting only fifteen turns. So the heroes have little time to waste. <br />
<br />
One aspect of this scenario that I enjoy is that you actually get to use some of the cool pieces that the game comes with. There are tractors, meteors, evil books and all sort of other neat little game pieces that rarely see the light of day because there is no actual use for them. But here, you at least get to employ the hard working old truck. Which looks like it is from the 50’s. I have a hard time believing that this is the only functional truck in town, but I’ll suspend disbelief for the sake of the game. But yeah, having an actual truck in the middle of the board is nice. <br />
<br />
The board pieces that wind up being used don’t make a ton of difference in this game. The gas station is nice to have, but really only comes into play once you have already used the gas once. And you only need to use it once, so there. Should your gas carrier get killed (which is a possibility) it is convenient to be able to go pick up another quickly. Like any scenario that involves getting items Jake the Drifter is an ideal choice for the party to have. His ability allows him to cycle through cards twice as fast, doubling the possibility that the valuable keys and gasoline will make an appearance. The other hero that is very useful here is everyone’s favorite prom queen, Amanda. Why? Well, for a single turn one of the heroes is going to be an absolute sitting duck and she is the best choice for it. In order to gas the truck up a hero must begin the turn on the truck, sacrifice the gasoline, and do nothing else. It is literally a sign on the hero that says come and maul me to death, quickly. Which is what usually happens. But if the hero does not survive the turn the gas is lost and the truck still has no fuel. Amanda has the two wounds that is typical of the teens, but her Hide power allows her to cancel any fight with a good roll. I’ve seen her frustrate the zombies to no end with this. Make sure that she has a weapon and a hero card to help her out and she just may live to take the ride out of town. In the absence of Amanda try to get someone well armed to fuel it up. Like in most scenarios, Becky totally sucks. <br />
<br />
It also makes sense for the heroes to work in pairs. One to do the searching, the other to lure them away and take shots with some sort of gun if they have it. The fact is that if the heroes are not constantly searching they are not going to do so well. <br />
<br />
The zombie strategy should be to keep the heroes on the move, thereby not allowing them to search over and over. The more that they are on the move the less likely they are to get the stuff that they need. It’s sort of Zombie 101. The real key to this scenario is to not allow the truck to get fueled up. At some point the heroes have to go to the truck and wait out a turn there. There should be a horde of the undead waiting there for them, preferably equipped with every nasty Zombie card there is to just take apart the hero who is foolish enough to challenge them. <br />
<br />
The actual escape is much easier to accomplish because the heroes can just show up there and end the turn in the truck. As long as the have some keys they are good to go, so the play here for the zombies is the fuel up period. <br />
<br />
Last Night on Earth can be a complicated game at times. Some times the rules drag or are so obtuse that they seem counterintuitive to the rest of the game. When this is coupled with a more complicated scenario (such as Plague Carriers or Zombie Apocalypse) it can really slow things down. Escape in the Truck is simple and clean, it’s obvious what needs to be done and how to do it. The hard part is actually doing it. For the heroes it is very exciting and satisfying to see that truck pull away to victory (I wouldn’t fault you if you actually made an engine noise and physically drove the truck off the table), and the zombies should always elate in foiling the plans of the living.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-70850662205508501932011-02-14T18:18:00.003-05:002011-02-23T14:46:09.898-05:00Street Fighter prestige classIn the exciting world of medieval fantasy role playing games, players can choose to be such heroic characters as dragon slaying cavaliers, wizards that bend the very fabric of the universe, priests who literally commune with their deities, and common street thugs. Hmmm…the thug does not sound so appealing in comparison to the others, which is the part that has always thrown me off about the Street Fighter prestige class. Not to be confused with Ryu or Zangief, the Street Fighter specializes in nothing in particular. But he is always spoiling for a good fight! Preferably in the street.<br />
<br />
I like characters that are not really powerful, that’s not the issue. As long as the whole party is on board with it, it’s fun to be a group of rogues looking to run a criminal cartel. Not every party is striving to seal off extra-dimensional portals to prevent the hordes of the netherworld from overrunning a village of orphans and widows. Some people would rather extort money from those same orphans and widows. What I’m saying is that there is a place for the street fighter, I’m just not sure that they need to be a Street Fighter. <br />
<br />
The Street Fighter is essentially a Fighter/Rogue hybrid, with the emphasis being on the martial aspect of the two. D8 hit die, 4 skill points a level, full base attack and a good fortitude save. And it goes for five levels. Nothing special, but not bad either. The requirements are also pretty straightforward and allow for several types of characters. To get into this prestigious class one must have a BAB of +5, Combat Expertise, Improved Feint and five ranks of Bluff, Intimidate, and Knowledge (Local). I think that the best approach to this is some sort of Rogue and Swashbuckler combo. The Swashbuckler has those loaded early levels which make it ideal to switch out of and this class screams out to be lightly armored. I just can’t picture the thug on the corner wearing platemail. It seems a bit out of place. Swashbuckler 3/Rogue 3? That seems to work pretty well.<br />
<br />
If the class has a signature ability I suppose that it is Always Ready, because this guys is well, always ready. For mediocre combat I guess, but at least he is ready for it. Always Ready is an initiative bonus (starts at +1, goes up every other level) which certainly works well with any sneak attack, but it’s pretty weak for a key class feature. There aren’t many initiative boosting abilities so it has rarity on it’s side, and combined with a high Dex and Improved Initiative the Street Fighter can get the drop on opponents pretty regularly. At 2nd level they get Streetwise, which is nothing other than one of those feats that gives +2 to two skills. In this case Gather Information and Knowledge (Local). It is what it is.<br />
<br />
Stand Tough is one of those class features that sounds real good when you first read it, but then you think about it a little and it gets worse and worse. It’s supposed to make the character a little more resilient and street tough, and it sort of does. But not really. For starters, the name is real lame. When the Street Fighter takes physical damage they can attempt to take half the amount of non-lethal damage by making a fort save against the total damage. So, let’s see. It is usable once a day (twice a day at fourth level) so it’s the sort of thing you want to save for when you really need it. Maybe. At 8th level (around when they first get it) it’s very feasible to be dealt 30 points of damage (actually, that’s on the low end). With a base fort save of, say, +11 that still means you need to roll a 19 or higher. That’s not too good. It’s probably better used for some low damage when it will actually have a better chance of succeeding. <br />
<br />
The best thing that this class gets may actually be the +1d6 sneak attack at 4th level. Sneak attack is a great ability, but once in five levels is pretty weak. It does mesh nicely with the required Improved Feint. Uncanny Dodge at 5th level is a nice little reward for sticking it out until the end of the class.<br />
<br />
An ability that would work really well for this class is the improvised weapons skills possessed by the Drunken Master prestige class. It's more cool that powerful, so it is certainly not game breaking by any means. And what says street fighter more than swinging a bench as a club or gutting an adversary with a mead bottle? Of course, I never really understood what kind of adventurer doesn't have a weapon, but maybe they ran into one of those awful sunder based builds. <br />
<br />
The Street Fighter is not altogether useless, but it falls into the category of something that is easily replicated by a base class. Want to be a tough, street level character? Rogue with a little Fighter works great for that. The full base attack is nice for this character, it certainly makes him a little more lethal than his rogue brethren, but this guy is going to live and die by getting the drop on his adversaries not by out slugging them. I could see some uses as opponents to a party. If they can successfully Stand Tough against a PC they could at least scare them for a moment, unless the non lethal damage knocks them out anyway. Which would be very funny.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4292658395400626426.post-29913491869527534842011-02-05T12:46:00.000-05:002011-02-05T12:46:21.540-05:00Shadowrun Campaign WikiIn the past I’ve really enjoyed keeping a campaign journal for <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/campaign-journal-1-character-creation.html">D&D</a> and <a href="http://gametheoryblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/shadowrun-campaign-journal-1.html">Shadowrun</a>. I find it’s a nice way to recap, keep track and sort of analyze our game sessions. With our new Shadowrun game starting up I wanted to do something again, but not quite the same old. Truthfully, keeping a journal can be rather time consuming. On top of planning for the next week and trying to maintain a game blog it often felt like a chore to make sure that I posted each week. After talking it over with the group we decided to create a campaign wiki to document what is occurring in the alternate world of our fantasy lives. I just got it set up and I must admit that I am sort of stoked on it. It’s located <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/southphillyshadowrun/">here</a>.<br />
<br />
One aspect that I really like about the wiki is that everyone in the group can contribute to it, rather than it just being a GM dictatorship. We sit at a round table so we should all be equal. I think that is the best practice for all, it’s all of our game. It’s cool to get the point of view of everyone involved rather than just a narration of events. I imagine there being conflicting accounts of certain things, which I think is great. Shadowrun is such a morally grey universe that nothing has an absolute truth to it. It does raise the question, though, of what it is that the players should be contributing. For now I have asked them to create character bios and some background info on their contacts. I did ask them to keep everything reasonable as far as their contacts are concerned. No megacorps presidents, dragons, or super generous wealthy benefactors. In the past I have always created their contacts (after they selected them) and I sort of see this as a challenge to me because I have to use and develop these NPC’s in ways that I need, but their origins are coming from someone else. I’m into it. <br />
<br />
I am still struggling with exactly how game events will appear in the wiki. They can certainly pop up in an entry for a character and summarize their role in a certain situation, but that doesn’t really provide the big picture. I was thinking maybe anonymous Shadowland style posts about something that went down, or perhaps a media account from a third party. I was in a Shadowrun campaign years ago with a different group of players and one of the players would routinely write these newspaper style accounts of our runs and send them around. It was actually pretty cool. And I’ve already told everyone that I will be giving out karma for contributions, so that should give an incentive to put some work into it. <br />
<br />
So what is the point of this whole thing? Well, it can keep track of NPC’s, give an additional platform for the players to flesh out their characters and is another method to include all sorts of superfluous info (or maybe it’s actually really useful info). I imagine that if it’s successful the players will be able to find pertinent information in there that can aid them in game. In a way it is some sort of ultra metagaming, but it is also realistic for the world that the party is in. Why wouldn’t they turn up some info if they snoop around about their latest Johnson? They could certainly just make a skill check and get the info, but this could be a little incentive to do a little more. In this case it’s my job to drop some “Easter Egg” style info into the game and see if it turns up when we meet at the table. One example so far involves the party shaman. In her backstory is some sort of corp character that she fell in love with. That’s all that had been decided. So I created an entry for this guy, gave him a name and a story and dropped it into the wiki. Now he exists and he has never really come up in game so far. It gives the player some info if she wants to pursue that storyline and it’s something to maker her ears perk up at the table if a certain name should come up. This is also opening the door for Shadowrun to occupy even more of our time, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it. <br />
<br />
Another aspect that I like is that it gives some permanence to the game. Now I am not the most sentimental of people and I think that RPG campaigns are rather disposable in the grand scheme of things, but I actually really like the idea that this campaign can live on in the cloud of the internet. Anyone can read it, we can also reminisce about it and check in and laugh (or cry?) over these characters for years to come. Perhaps some other folks will even get some inspiration or ideas from something that they read there. Which is neat. <br />
<br />
The most surprising part of it for me is how fun it is to include pictures in the entries. I didn’t really think about that and then one of the players added a picture entry to all of the PC’s. Totally awesome to see some imagining of who these people are that we pretend to be. They are just images taken from Google and plugged in, but they are completely our characters now. We never use miniatures in our game, rarely maps as well. So this is the most visual we have ever really been with characters. <br />
<br />
I used Google Sites to set the wiki up, employing their wiki template to get started. I’m not the most tech savvy but I found it very easy to use. The appearance of the page still leaves a lot to be desired, as does the layout but these are both aspects that can be improved over time.Franhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11385454256201274393noreply@blogger.com0