12 June 2008
4th Edition: Unit Combat
I've put together what I think is a pretty good looking PDF that uses 4th Edition swarm-monster design for making swarms of humanoids - combat units! It should be similar enough to 4E that it doesn't distract from gameplay or feel like a separate system, but interesting enough to give large-scale conflict an interesting flavor when it comes up. Enjoy!
05 June 2008
Law of the (Fantasy) Land
Your party has entered a small harbor town of your own design for a homebrew campaign. Right away that chaotic rogue gets everyone in trouble. The militia show up to the inn and shout, "Open up! We have a warrant for your arrest!" The rogue wants to know if he has the right to one long-distance telepathic collect call with A. (for Arthur!) Wizard (for Sorceror). Something strikes me as less than awesome about how this situation is being handled!
And it's a gross exaggeration of the point of this post: know your setting(s). While few people, at least in a semi-serious session, would tolerate such a modern (and nonsensical) spin on their fantasy setting, you may have a developed or developing republic. If that's the case, it doesn't make much sense to, later on (and in the same country), have people accept tyrannical oppression as a way of life or express loyalty to or admiration for the divinity of their leaders. Conversely, if the rogue is judged by a magistrate that expresses pride in having been appointed by the king, it's a risky idea to have NPCs (openly) complain about the un-democratic, rights-trampling tactics of the court; chances are, those NPCs don't have any rights to speech, either!
This isn't just about maintaining consistency, but about setting the tone for your setting. What do you want authority to represent? What are peoples' expectations regarding their rights? Is power a corrupting force, or can the common man aspire to it and do great things?
You may think these are dangerous subjects to cover in your game, and if you had your players actively developing the setting with you I'd agree. But until the players start playing, they don't have to know what kind of world they're being dropped into, and chances are they'll take whatever challenges you throw at them - whether it's toppling a military dictatorship or protecting the throne.
Just because they didn't sit up with you all night slaving away over the spiral notebook, designing the world, doesn't mean they still can't shape it. Once their characters are playing in the world they can become a driving force to hijack the setting and take it in the direction that they (and hopefully their characters) want it to go in. Take note of what the players do, and try to figure out why they do it. Are they uncomfortable with a dominantly evil setting? Do they just think all evil is meant to be vanquished? Will this become a limiting factor in future sessions involving similar themes? The foundation of your game's conflicts and the quality of their delivery hinge on these things.
And it's a gross exaggeration of the point of this post: know your setting(s). While few people, at least in a semi-serious session, would tolerate such a modern (and nonsensical) spin on their fantasy setting, you may have a developed or developing republic. If that's the case, it doesn't make much sense to, later on (and in the same country), have people accept tyrannical oppression as a way of life or express loyalty to or admiration for the divinity of their leaders. Conversely, if the rogue is judged by a magistrate that expresses pride in having been appointed by the king, it's a risky idea to have NPCs (openly) complain about the un-democratic, rights-trampling tactics of the court; chances are, those NPCs don't have any rights to speech, either!
This isn't just about maintaining consistency, but about setting the tone for your setting. What do you want authority to represent? What are peoples' expectations regarding their rights? Is power a corrupting force, or can the common man aspire to it and do great things?
You may think these are dangerous subjects to cover in your game, and if you had your players actively developing the setting with you I'd agree. But until the players start playing, they don't have to know what kind of world they're being dropped into, and chances are they'll take whatever challenges you throw at them - whether it's toppling a military dictatorship or protecting the throne.
Just because they didn't sit up with you all night slaving away over the spiral notebook, designing the world, doesn't mean they still can't shape it. Once their characters are playing in the world they can become a driving force to hijack the setting and take it in the direction that they (and hopefully their characters) want it to go in.
04 June 2008
Welcome, Zeefer!
That's right, anxious readers, I've added a new author, Chris K. from Zeefer Madness. Artist, cook and fellow gamer, I'm sure we're all looking forward to his nougats of wisdom.
In other news, I'll have the minimum weekly theme post tomorrow at 11am sharp. You almost get the feeling I have all these articles written up already in a vault somewhere, scheduled to be published even if I wake up dead in a ditch somewhere over the course of the next few minutes.
In other news, I'll have the minimum weekly theme post tomorrow at 11am sharp. You almost get the feeling I have all these articles written up already in a vault somewhere, scheduled to be published even if I wake up dead in a ditch somewhere over the course of the next few minutes.
28 May 2008
The Name of the Game
I originally thought I had until the first week of June to get this out, but some stores have jumped the gun and delivered/shelved early, and the internet is saturated with pirated copies. You know what I'm talking about. Dungeons & Dragons. 4th Edition.
With 4E on the horizon, the choice to switch or stick with 3.x (or even AD&D!) has been brought to many game tables. The argument has been raging for over a year on forums around the world, with each new snippet of official information being released sparking a dozen new debates on each board. Some people praise the mechanics; others condemn its redesigned themes. What's important is to remember that it's a game, and that means it should be about fun.
And that means it's going to be as fun as you let it. After all, finding a stick that looks like a gun can be fun; there aren't many things you can mechanically do with a stick, and its implied "themes" (when it's just a stick) are fairly limited. But it's a tool in your imaginative hands, for doing whatever you want.
Mechanics are hardly the most important thing about a game, unless they're both strict and complex. While chess would be very hard to enjoy if every piece behaved differently under variant rules, that's not the case, so everyone follows fairly similar rules, with negligible changes based on household or tournament. But Dungeons & Dragons is a wholly different animal compared to chess. Any given edition has rules that span volumes of manuals and magazines. D&D is complex. One might argue that it's more cumbersome to stick with an older edition plagued by layers of errata and third-party materials, than it is to start with a fresh set of rules, but that isn't the argument for here, and I don't think that should be the argument for your table, either.
The argument should be, "can we get something fun out of this?" If you can use the rules on Powers, if you like the way the new classes are organized, if you like the thematic elements of the new races and monsters, and your group agrees, it might be a worthwhile investment to get a group copy to pillage for ideas. The same can be said of any other roleplaying game system. Take Shadowrun, for example. Those are some involved rules! But a few of them might appeal to your or your group. While I was in the reality-survival phase of my DMing, my favorite Shadowrun concept was 10HP for all characters, no matter what. Oddly enough, a few D&D players agreed with me about that, and we adapted our rules to accomodate the HP range and played reality-survival-fantasy. (I got sick of that after both playing and running it for a little over a year, and ever since have supported straight-up fantasy, with survival elements for thematic purposes/dramatic situations only.)
One of the biggest complaints (from DMs) seems to be the 6-hour rest, at the end of which all temporary conditions are removed and all HP is restored. Some time after my bout with realism, I more or less began handwaving away whatever held my group back from continuing the adventure. They loved (1) not having to track little details across sessions that were sometimes months apart and (2) having fairly even footing at the beginning of each session. Everyone was always able to participate. Now it's in the rules. My advice if you want to slow down characters' recovery? Don't mess with the HP restoration. Add a "long-term injury" tracker. Maybe treat them like feats. "Shot in the leg" is a speed -2 penalty that lasts until three milestones are passed. "Stabbed in the lungs" is speed -1, CON -2 that lasts until six. I strongly advise against making tables for these things. Write down what injuries you make up so you can be consistent if you use that injury again, but try to improvise based on how the game is flowing. As amusing as it might be to roll a 1, consult the chart, and say, "laser enters eye, exits back of skull," you're going to lose the narrative control and future variety that improvisation provides.
By the way, it's totally an ancient egyptian laser beam in the example above.
(Third bullet in the list.)
With 4E on the horizon, the choice to switch or stick with 3.x (or even AD&D!) has been brought to many game tables. The argument has been raging for over a year on forums around the world, with each new snippet of official information being released sparking a dozen new debates on each board. Some people praise the mechanics; others condemn its redesigned themes. What's important is to remember that it's a game, and that means it should be about fun.
And that means it's going to be as fun as you let it. After all, finding a stick that looks like a gun can be fun; there aren't many things you can mechanically do with a stick, and its implied "themes" (when it's just a stick) are fairly limited. But it's a tool in your imaginative hands, for doing whatever you want.
Mechanics are hardly the most important thing about a game, unless they're both strict and complex. While chess would be very hard to enjoy if every piece behaved differently under variant rules, that's not the case, so everyone follows fairly similar rules, with negligible changes based on household or tournament. But Dungeons & Dragons is a wholly different animal compared to chess. Any given edition has rules that span volumes of manuals and magazines. D&D is complex. One might argue that it's more cumbersome to stick with an older edition plagued by layers of errata and third-party materials, than it is to start with a fresh set of rules, but that isn't the argument for here, and I don't think that should be the argument for your table, either.
The argument should be, "can we get something fun out of this?" If you can use the rules on Powers, if you like the way the new classes are organized, if you like the thematic elements of the new races and monsters, and your group agrees, it might be a worthwhile investment to get a group copy to pillage for ideas. The same can be said of any other roleplaying game system. Take Shadowrun, for example. Those are some involved rules! But a few of them might appeal to your or your group. While I was in the reality-survival phase of my DMing, my favorite Shadowrun concept was 10HP for all characters, no matter what. Oddly enough, a few D&D players agreed with me about that, and we adapted our rules to accomodate the HP range and played reality-survival-fantasy. (I got sick of that after both playing and running it for a little over a year, and ever since have supported straight-up fantasy, with survival elements for thematic purposes/dramatic situations only.)
One of the biggest complaints (from DMs) seems to be the 6-hour rest, at the end of which all temporary conditions are removed and all HP is restored. Some time after my bout with realism, I more or less began handwaving away whatever held my group back from continuing the adventure. They loved (1) not having to track little details across sessions that were sometimes months apart and (2) having fairly even footing at the beginning of each session. Everyone was always able to participate. Now it's in the rules. My advice if you want to slow down characters' recovery? Don't mess with the HP restoration. Add a "long-term injury" tracker. Maybe treat them like feats. "Shot in the leg" is a speed -2 penalty that lasts until three milestones are passed. "Stabbed in the lungs" is speed -1, CON -2 that lasts until six. I strongly advise against making tables for these things. Write down what injuries you make up so you can be consistent if you use that injury again, but try to improvise based on how the game is flowing. As amusing as it might be to roll a 1, consult the chart, and say, "laser enters eye, exits back of skull," you're going to lose the narrative control and future variety that improvisation provides.
By the way, it's totally an ancient egyptian laser beam in the example above.
(Third bullet in the list.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)