Untimately

Caves of Chaos Player Map

2012-05-28T08:52:00.000-04:00

Here is a player handout I put together for The Caves of Chaos. I couldn't find one with the concealed caves unmarked, so I made my own.

CLICK HERE for a PDF version.

Some other nice Caves of Chaos resources:

The Yaqqothl Grimoire - B2 Player Handouts
The Weem - High-Def Caves of Chaos
D&D With Porn Stars - Caves of Chaos is a One-Page Dungeon

5E Preliminary Notes

2012-05-27T20:10:00.001-04:00

I'm running the play test Caves of Chaos tomorrow for my group, so I thought I'd put down my pre-play thoughts beforehand and then compare them to how it goes. My group is pretty diverse (a few very casual players, some who are primarily video gamers, some 4E fans, and one player with mostly 3E experience; none of them are very active in the online tabletop RPG community), so it will be interesting to see what they think.

I've mentioned previously that I like the idea of backgrounds and themes, and I still like the idea after seeing a few actual examples on the pregen character sheets. I'm not crazy about all of the abilities, but the underlying concept is solid, and a huge improvement over the raw skills and feats available in Third and Fourth. Backgrounds as presented are a slightly more elaborated version of the original "secondary skill" systems present in 1E and 2E. The backgrounds are a nice way to add some detail to a character without wasting time on extensive backstory that (let's face it) rarely gets read by anyone other than the writer. Put the list of backgrounds on a random table and that would make a pretty good character creation tool (compare to the recent Before First Level posts over at The Dungeon Dozen). The backgrounds as given by the pregens are knight, priest, soldier, commoner, and sage.

First Edition Secondary Skills (AKA "backgrounds")

Themes I see as select class features factored out of classes. For example, the backstab/sneak attack ability is not associated with the rogue class, but rather the lurker theme. So you can create a fighter with the lurker theme and that is a pretty good assassin. The magic-user theme grants the use of several cantrips, so a rogue character with the magic-user theme is a pretty good approximation of The Gray Mouser, who knew a few spells from his time as a wizard's apprentice. Conan? A fighter with some sort of barbaric background and a theme like slayer or lurker. This is better than multi-classing, in my opinion. I would much rather see a limited number of classes with more themes than a huge number of classes. Unfortunately, many of the non-core classes are sacred cows (ranger, paladin, barbarian, etc) and so are likely to be full classes despite just being slight variations on the fighter. The themes as given are magic-user, lurker, slayer, healer, and guardian.

One of the problems I noticed is the lack of support for games that focus on resource management. The at-will light cantrip is the biggest offender, but there are several other problematic abilities. Detect magic is also an at-will cantrip, and dwarves have a racial ability called stonecunning which allows them to unerringly retrace their steps while underground; this makes mapping less critical. These features are fine, but should be available modularly, not as defaults within the core races and classes. To paraphrase Jeff Rients from a G+ conversation, I respect the right of anyone to play Omega Level asskickers, but I don't see why there can't be room for low rent bastardry at first level, and such play relies on resource management. Also, if you want the game to be about anything other than killing monsters, combat can't be the first resort (in other words, the game has to be more deadly, at least optionally).

From a high level design point of view, a shift to a lower power curve is by far the most promising aspect of the new system. This might even have advantages for old school play over some early editions of D&D. Consider the escalating power levels of classes in AD&D, for example. A high-level AD&D fighter can pretty much hit anything that does not have an absurd AC. It is hard to get a full picture of how this might look from the play test materials, since they only go up to third level, but it is notable that not a single class gets any increase in base attack bonus over that period of time. There are a couple bonuses to damage here and there (presumably to compensate), but I think that will have much less of an effect on the way the game plays. Even the advantage and disadvantage mechanics are designed around avoiding bonus inflation by using a d20 version of 2DTH (roll two dice, take highest or lowest). For an example of how this is used, consider penalties for wearing armor. Armor causes disadvantage to several kinds of rolls (stealth, saving throws when not proficient, etc). I love this mechanic, so this makes me happy.

Gone will hopefully be the nonsense of 4E scaled defenses. Such scaling results in absurdities like a first level pixie having a 15 reflex and a 20th level ogre having a reflex of 30 (I made those numbers up, but they are representative). Some people have described these play test materials as "3E lite," but I just don't see it. Pretty much the only point of comparison is the listing of task DCs, and as far as I can tell the whole point of flattening the power curve is diametrically opposed to the reality of Third Edition, which is by far the edition with the steepest power curve (4E starts out more powerful, but advances less steeply).

I love the idea of ability scores as saving throws, despite the fact that it might fight against 3d6 in order (because ability scores will be so potent that players will always want them to be high). That said, the benefits are many, and include avoiding some of the skill tax problems of perception and allowing the simplicity of 3E saving throws without needing separate numbers on the character sheet. This also means, however, that saving throws will not get better as levels increase (one of the few aspects of level-based inflation that I like, because it allows players to earn survivability through smart play rather than optimization). Does this mean that ability scores themselves will inflate as levels progress? Or maybe there will be separate saving throw bonuses? We will have to wait for more details before that will be clear. Also, this means no evocative saving throw types like the save versus death ray.

The Caves of Chaos adventure is almost a primer to old school gaming. Specifically, it gives the following advice:

No single storyline
PC motivations are not assumed
There are no plot points and encounters are not ordered
Dynamic dungeons; PCs not just expected to clear the site
No balanced encounters
PCs may go where they want and pick their battles
Monsters are supposed to be played strategically
Make up monster ability scores if desired

In other words, this is pretty much the Caves of Chaos as imagined by Gary Gygax. There are several suggestions about how to avoid killing PCs if they are in over their heads, but even Gary had suggestions in the original about ransoming PCs. The only significant modification from the original is that DCs are given for avoiding hazards and finding things like secret doors. However, there is also language about how a player must indicate, for example, the correct place to search in order to have any chance at all, and that the referee can always award success based on good description with dice rolls. In other words, player skill. This might seem like schizophrenia, but one might also read it as a license to make the game your own.

There are still lots of important things missing. XP award guidelines, for example. From the materials, it seems like you only get XP for defeating monsters, and that will not encourage the kind of careful play that the original module expected. There are no mentions of retainers. There is not variable monster reaction system, which will probably lead referees to assume hostility. Given that this is not supposed to be a complete game, I am willing to withhold judgment about those omissions for now. Also, the solutions they propose to fill those gaps need not necessarily be clones of OD&D or B/X to be successful. But the function of those original systems needs to be understood.

Varying Mortality and Lethality

2012-05-26T15:07:00.000-04:00

The current D&D Next play test rules for lethality and dying are way too soft for games that I would like to run. I want there to be a greater threat of death, for a number of reasons, but not least because I don't want combat to be the first resort of PCs. Mike Mearls has already said that HP is likely to come down, but I don't think that is enough. The dying rules also have to be addressed.

The thing that frustrates me about this discourse is that it is not an either/or proposition. It is easy to build several possible play styles into the core. First, you can always start at higher level. Some people object to this because higher level is also higher complexity, so you are really affecting more than one aspect of character design (though I'll also note that a first level 4E character feels about as complicated to me as a 5th level traditional D&D character). Including options for different play styles does not take anything away from anyone else.

The various editions have already given us a plethora of death rules. All that is needed for 5E in this regard is for them to pick several possibilities that address different play styles and present them, along with pros and cons, in whatever becomes the referee guide. For lethality, three natural options jump out at me. For a lethal game, dead at 0 HP (perhaps with a constitution saving throw to be incapacitated rather than killed). Other options would be dead at negative 10 (or negative constitution) HP, and the current playtest version that is reminiscent of 4E (with all those fiddly death saving throws) could also be retained as an option.

Here is a proposal for supporting different levels of lethality. Vary starting hit dice. This has the advantage of not increasing complexity for other character aspects. Also, First Edition play falls out as a natural corollary (the 1 hit die variation). One die of self healing is also very close to common binding wounds and liquid courage old school house rules. Bump the starting hit dice up to, say, 4 or 5 and you will have a game that feels much closer to fourth edition; starting hit points will be greater, and PCs will have more hit dice available for spontaneous healing.

The other major aspect of lethality that is potentially problematic in Fifth Edition is the recovery provided by a long rest. In the play test rules, a long rest restores all HP and hit dice. This should be another part of the game with a menu of options. I would suggest Recovery of one hit die for an old school feel (which would then need to be spent for any healing to occur), recovery of all hit dice for a less deadly but still random feel, and recovery of all hit dice and HP for a super-hero feel.

Skill Taxes and Ability Scores

2012-05-25T17:47:00.000-04:00

As has been mentioned several times previously on this blog, a skill tax is some feature that a player feels compelled to take, not because they are interested in the skill itself, but because someone in the party should have the skill for the good of the group. Perception is such a skill, because you only need one character to be able to notice things (with perhaps one backup if the primary goes down). This is usually considered a bad thing, because the player that takes the skill is down one resource slot compared to all the other players. The same kind of dynamic can arise for things other than just skills (for example, the thief as trap finder and the cleric as healer).

I was thinking about this when reading the 5E playtest materials, which boil down skill-like checks and saving throws to ability scores. This is not a new thing, as people have been making ability checks (and even ability saving throws) for a long time. And I gather other systems (like Castles & Crusades) do something similar. But it does institutionalize and generalize a system that is already rather well understood and well liked.

What is the connection to skill taxes here? If wisdom is perception (one example from the playtest materials) then you also get all the other benefits of a high wisdom when taking it for the boost to perception (never mind for now all the problems with perception systems; my point is about features that players feel obligated to take). And, running this system using 3d6 in order (which will presumably be one of the character creation options in the final product) will help avoid excessive optimization potential.

Elric by P. Craig Russell

2012-05-23T08:06:00.000-04:00

Due to a G+ comment by this guy, I ordered a copy of a P. Craig Russell Elric graphic novel. The art is gorgeous, especially the color work. The story is nothing special (and I like Elric), but just paging through it makes me happy. Here are a few bad pictures I took. Check it out.

Faerie Level Limits

2012-05-22T13:11:00.000-04:00

Here is a quick justification for why elves (and perhaps other faerie demi-humans) are limited in level progression. Elves are otherworldly creatures that are not completely at home in the mundane world of humanity. Their essence (and magic) comes from a connection to their mystical home, Elf-Land (or the Feywild, or whatever you want to call it). After a time, long for a human but short for an elf, curiosity wanes and an adventuring elf must return home or be diminished.

Elf-Land could be another plane, but I prefer to think of it more in terms of mythic geography, though perhaps with some physical laws warped or changed. Like, as you go deeper into the elder forests things get weird and alien. This is closer to how people conceived magic before the great disenchantment. Somewhat related, I also love the idea in DCC RPG of elves being unable to tolerate equipment of iron (obviously also derived from folk tales). Elves begin with mithril equipment, but replacing lost equipment is difficult (a nice trade-off for their fighter/magic-user flexibility).

At the discretion of the referee, perhaps elves must periodically return to Elf-Land or start to lose magic abilities. An elf that stays to long in the world of humans will actually become mortal (in game terms, a fighter) and probably begin to forget their past existence. And maybe the opposite is true as well? Humans that stay too long in Elf-Land are also changed? Perhaps this is one source of changelings. And time, of course, also flows differently in Elf-Land.

The Seven Secret Crafts

2012-05-20T17:56:00.000-04:00

They are:

The Masters of Alchemy
The Masters of Dragons
The Masters of the Elements
The Masters of Illusions
The Masters of Necromancy
The Masters of the Runes
The Mistresses of Witchcraft

In Glantri, these are each secret societies that exist beneath the surface of the wizard-ruled realm. Hidden guilds, essentially. They are detailed on pages 69 through 76 of GAZ3 The Principalities of Glantri. This was one of the books I took along on my recent vacation, and though I didn't read it cover to cover, I did manage to take in most of it. The supplement in its entirety careens unevenly between excellent and absurd ideas, and is burdened by much the the "gazetteer" portion being presented diegetically (or, less charitably, as fan fiction). But the good parts are so good. And all the interior art is black and white by Stephen Fabian (one of my favorite fantasy artists; see this gallery).

The secret crafts make up one of the best specialist magic systems I have yet come across. They work somewhat like prestige classes, each having five circles (much like levels) which require XP, GP, and training time (not to mention an NPC teacher). A craft specialist learns abilities, which are powers which are usable either daily, weekly, or monthly (depending on the circle), and sometimes have component costs as well. It sounds rather complicated when presented concisely like this, but is quite clear in the text, and I love how there are so many adventure hooks built into the progressions (it's not at all like level up, choose a power). Each circle also has a minimum wizard level prerequisite. So, for example, you can't become a master of the first circle until 5th level, and mastery of the fifth (final) circle requires first reaching 20th level as a magic-user. The powers are also not entirely reliable (requiring a percentile roll, with fumbles occurring on rolls of 01).

The crafts are not necessarily as you might imagine them from their names. For example, alchemists are closer to Jack Vance vat wizards than they are to simple potion brewers (though they do that too); the fourth and fifth circle abilities are "transcend energy" and "mutate lifeform" (these are exactly as cool as they sound). The illusionists are not just crafters of phantasms, but rather they tap into the dimension of nightmares, and can build a stronghold there upon mastery of the fifth circle. The rune masters are concerned with true names, and they have probably the most flexible of all powers, able to shape aspects of reality based on the names they know, but also some of the worst kinds of feedback upon fumbles (essentially, reality storms). The dragon wizards are the least interesting in terms of flavor (most of their powers being rather boring attacks), but even they could add to a campaign, particularly their warding abilities, and their final dragon metamorphosis (which could be reminiscent of Dark Sun if played well).

Let me focus briefly on the masters of necromancy in detail, as necromancers have always been my favorite specialist type. The necromancers have only one ability per circle, and the abilities are (with prerequisite levels in parentheses): protection from undead (5th), control undead (7th), create undead (10th), raise dead (15th), and attain lichdom (20th). Here is the fumble (roll of 01) for the create undead ability:

A roll of 01 causes the necromancer's life-force to be partially drained, his attempt failing lamentably. He suffers 1d6 points of damage per HD of undead he attempted to create, plus 5 for each asterisk (no save). If the necromancer dies, he immediately becomes an undead of the type he attempted to create.

The control undead (second circle) ability can also be used as turn undead, though it "does not require a religious symbol, but only a few gestures and ritual words." Beware though, a roll of 01 makes the necromancer a pawn of the most powerful undead creature in his presence.

So, what about the bad parts? Well, I'll just quote two brief fiction segments out of context:

"No sweat, I got it covered. The toughest part is to get back to the hideout faster than the constables' gondolas--and that I know how to do. I have this new gondola: two rapid-fire magic missile rods mounted on swivels, eight water-elementals in a V, reinforced cabin, magically silenced, and as black as the night... a beauty! Nobody can catch us. Once at the hideout, we can teleport the goods to this place I have in Nyra."

And:

"Freeze! Glantri Vice!" comes the shout. A heavily-armored gondola loaded with constables slowly sways in their direction. "You are surrounded! Drop your wands and come out with you hands on your mouth!"

Pages 9 and 12. Apparently the mafia is quite active in Glantri.

Despite all its flaws, I can't recommend this supplement highly enough. The bad parts are easy enough to ignore, and the good parts are really, really good. And this is without mentioning the ancient nuclear reactor buried beneath the city that can turn magic-users into radiation liches. Even the maps alone are excellent. They include a full poster map of a canal city and details by district in the booklet at a scale absolutely perfect for gaming (unlike the absurdly complicated maps I have seen for cities like Waterdeep). This really makes me want to check out the other Mystara Gazetteers, despite my dislike for settings with extensive canon and my dislike for magic as a substitute for technology. Unfortunately, they are quite expensive on the secondary market.

Desiderata

2012-05-19T10:18:00.001-04:00

Things that I think would be fun to play, in no particular order.

Mystara (Rules Cyclopedia D&D)
Vecna Lives! module with pregens (Second Edition)
The Old World (Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, obviously)
Dragonlance Taladas (some TSR edition of D&D)
Hyboria (D&D or Iron Heroes maybe)
Pathfinder Beginner Box as a complete E5 game
Something using the Grindhouse Edition
Something using 3LBB OD&D

I find the idea of trying to run some of these rule systems by the book (at least to begin with) particularly attractive right now for some reason. Maybe it's because I've been running my 4E hack now for so long.

This is a short post because I am flying back home today.

Constraint & Creativity

2012-05-18T11:46:00.000-04:00

As anyone who has engaged in creative endeavors probably knows, boundless freedom is often not an aid to creativity. Instead, limits and strictures seem to help channel ideas from chaos into some semblance of meaning and potential newness. Paradoxically, censorship is even a form of constraint which can foster creativity (especially clever ways of communicating that which is prohibited). This expands on my previous post about persistent settings, where I touched on the idea of constraint briefly.

I think constraints function in two main ways to help facilitate creativity. The first is that constraints often give you a place to start, helping to bypass the blank sheet problem. The second is that the task at hand is narrowed down to reconciliation of desired effect with particular limits. These properties should be familiar to people who have studied productivity techniques; methods to get started (getting past the blank page) and methods to break larger, complex tasks into smaller, simpler tasks.

Mixing results from random tables is thus a method of introducing constraints. How are these disparate results reconciled? How does it make sense that there are berserkers in the first room and goblins in the second room? Why is a dragon encountered only six miles from a town? Is it perhaps the hidden servant (or master) of the town mayor? Why is there a desert right next to the sea? How does the isolated town support itself? Matt Finch calls this process deep design in his Tome of Adventure Design (one of my favorite RPG books; I have not spent nearly enough time with it).

Some other ideas for limitations:

Limit yourself to a core rulebook or boxed set. I'm leaning towards using the OD&D 3 LBBs (I already have a basic alignment-based taxonomy to use as an organizing principle).
Only take monsters from one (non-standard) bestiary (there has been some blog discussion about this over the past few months regarding the Fiend Folio).
Only use certain tools during creation. Scott Driver is doing this with his Dwarf-Land setting by using a typewriter. One could also hand-write everything.

Persistent Campaign Settings

2012-05-17T09:21:00.000-04:00

I've been thinking recently about settings that grow, not just over the course of a single campaign, but over the course of many campaigns, perhaps with multiple groups. This, as I understand it, was how Greyhawk and Blackmoor were run, to some approximation. I don't know how Gary or Dave managed their setting timelines, or even if they cared about things at that level of detail. It seems like Jeff runs Wessex in a somewhat similar way, with various groups of people on G+ and in real life. Rob Conley's Majestic Wilderlands is perhaps another example.

Obviously, there could be some logistical complications with this. What if multiple groups are playing at the same time and affect each other? What if one group plays in "the past" with regard to other groups? It seems like temporal paradox could potentially be a problem, though realistically I don't think it would be difficult to avoid.

Another potential issue is that such a setting could become too important. That is, a referee might be more cautious with trying new things, and might also become more sensitive to players that don't take the setting seriously. I don't think this would be a problem for me (I love to see what kind of mischief players can get up to), but I can see it being an issue for some. It is probably best to not go overboard on setting background (though this is easier said than done).

Certain kinds of games seem like they would work better with this kind of setting than others. It should probably be generic enough to appeal to casual players (though this need not be a requirement, depending on the players you have access to). At the very least, you don't want barriers to entry to be too high. Adventures that begin and end in town and can be completed in a single session would be the easiest to run, but are not required (and you don't want to dissuade players from trying things that might make an impact on the setting, like establishing a stronghold). But maybe these things are just good setting design guidelines in general, and not tied particularly to the kind of persistent play I am gesturing toward. I'm not sure.

I think it has been much more common recently to make campaign settings more disposable. I blame this partly on an embarrassment of riches; there are so many published RPGs and settings out there, and many look like they would be fun to try. Thus the dreaded "gamer ADD" of bouncing around between different options rather than sticking with one and letting it develop. Personally, I've had a number of settings that are (or were) "mine," but I've never stuck with any single setting long enough for it really to develop any kind of depth. Constraint breeds creativity, so maybe stricter guidelines about how you are allowed to add detail to the setting might help. Only as preparation for specific sessions, perhaps?

The aspect of this that most intrigues me is how the remnants of one campaign (or group of players) could affecting other, future campaigns. I can imagine setting down enough information for a beginning campaign, writing down a fantasy date (year, month, day), and starting the first set of players out, recording what happens, and incrementing the dates as necessary. Then, the next group would start out at the last marked date, and so forth. It would be like maintaining a "fantasy present" so that you would always know when it is whenever you sit down to play, and what happened recently. Those Oriental Adventures event tables might be interesting, and also see this post by Zak (though his example is explicitly not an in-game day-by-day calendar).

Do any of you have a setting that keeps developing as specified above? If so, did you start with a published setting, or did you start from scratch? How many campaigns or groups has your setting supported? Have you progressed through multiple historical or technological eras? I'm talking about actual play here, not just writing campaign history. What about multiple game systems? Have you ever "upgraded" (or downgraded)? Do you think the diversity of products available now makes such fidelity unrealistic? Are there any techniques that you use to record campaign developments?

The Gods are Fickle

2012-05-16T08:44:00.000-04:00

Jack over at TOTGAD recently reminded me of his cleric spell preparation house rule: the referee chooses half (or all) of a cleric's prepared spells every day. Here is his original post on gothic character classes. I think that I would like to try out something similar: random spell determination for clerics. This would represent the incomprehensible and mysterious nature of the gods. In terms of game play, this would also differentiate the feel of the cleric from the magic-user even more. Intuition versus reason.

The only downside that I can see is that some players might feel best served by just waiting several days until they get the spells that they want. To make this work in general, strict time records must be kept. But we're all good Gygaxians, so that's already a given, right?

5E Wizards

2012-05-15T11:07:00.001-04:00

Mike Mearls has a design column up talking about Wizards. There are a few interesting things here, and also a few possibilities that I don't think would suit the kinds of games I like to run. But before I talk about those things, let me observe that there seem to be an awfully large number of things that are still up in the air considering that the first public play test is in just over a week.

The aspect that is potentially most problematic from an old school point of view is the treatment of cantrips (basically, at-will powers by another name). This is because having unlimited uses is fundamentally at odds with the resource management that is core to low-level traditional D&D. It is possible to make this work, but the cantrip powers have to be chosen very carefully. For example, there can be no light cantrip. I'm not 100% opposed to something like an at-will attack power (for example, see this post about cantrip scrolls) but an at-will attack does fight against the perception magic as strange and special. This ultimately comes down to a setting question: high magic or low magic?

Traditionally, D&D magic is reliable (with the possible exception of spell interruption). Dangerous magic (spell fumbles, insanity systems, etc) is flavorful and fits much fantasy literature and mythology, but can be hard to model for a game about problem solving. I think both of these styles can work well, but I'm not sure how they can coexist. It seems like a decision needs to be made here. Maybe dangerous magic should be saved for another class such as the warlock?

There are a few points that I am fully on board with. For example, I have never much liked enhancement spells (stoneskin, haste, etc) because in my experience they lead to excessive preparation before any possible conflict. The casting of such spells does not represent interesting strategic or tactical planning. It's just finding a way to stack bonuses. Once these bonus spells start to feel mandatory, something is wrong.

I like what Mr. Mearls has to say about the creative use of spells (for example, using grease to help a rogue escape). This comes back to the idea of associated or disassociated mechanics and fluff as crunch. That is, in the design process does the effect of the spell come first or the meaning of the spell come first? (Tangentially, I usually hate the terms fluff and crunch, but that roles/rules post also implicitly shows why those words can be so harmful to game design.)

The other possibility that I like is a decrease in the number of spell slots, especially for higher level wizards. Just in terms of practicality, tracking all those spells and deciding which to prepare per adventure is a lot of work. A smaller number of slots makes consumable magic items more valuable as well. Also, having too many slots doesn't fit either Vancian or mythological literature very well; magic is more often portrayed as more limited. Having many spell slots also doesn't fit much recent fantasy (like the One Power of The Wheel of Time or the Force in Star Wars). Those types of magic would probably be better served by a mana point system (which I have no problem with as a supplemental class, just not for the core wizard).

Thulsa Doom is Skeletor

2012-05-13T18:26:00.000-04:00

While reading the excellent Del Rey Kull collection, I came across this passage in the story The Cat and the Skull (page 114):

Kull tore the veil away with one motion and recoiled with a gasp. Delcardes screamed and her knees gave way; the councillors pressed backward, faces white and the guard released their grasp and shrank horror-struck away.
The face of the man was a bare white skull, in whose eye sockets flamed livid fire!
"Thulsa Doom!"
"Aye, I guessed as much!" exclaimed Ka-nu.
"Aye, Thulsa Doom, fools!" the voice echoed cavernously and hollowly. "The greatest of all wizards and your eternal foe, Kull of Atlantis. You have won this tilt but, beware, there shall be others."

Totally Skeletor. The Del Rey edition is filled with art by Justin Sweet (like, one every few pages). Here is the one illustrating the scene above:

Somewhat related, these are the reading materials I took along for vacation reading (not including the three lifetimes worth of digital material I have on my tablet). Still reading Warhammer too, but I decided to leave that massive book at home.

In case that picture is not clear, those are WMLP No. 1, Coercion, Capital, and European States: AD 990 - 1992, the old D&D Gazetteer GAZ3 The Principalities of Glantri, Changeling: The Dreaming (for some faerie inspiration), and the aforementioned Kull collection.

Chaotic Henchmen and WMLP

2012-05-11T22:05:00.000-04:00

Some good stuff arrived earlier this week. Both of Guy Fullerton's modules (F1 The Fane of Poisoned Prophecies and F3 Many Gates of the Gann) and the Wizards Mutants Laser Pistols zine. I have started reading F1, and am loving it so far. Both have sweet covers (by Mullen and Poag). The second in the series is not out yet, but is supposed to be at least partly set on the moon (as I understand it, they are related but not sequential).

I haven't had time to more than page through the WMLP zine yet, but already I can tell that I am going to like the included dungeon. I was also hoping my copy of DCC RPG would arrive before I have to leave, but alas it was not to be. I ordered the gold foil one, and the pictures I have seen from others look amazing.

I'm going to be on vacation next week, so who knows how much blogging I will do. Probably much less or much more, I'm not sure which is more likely. So if I disappear for the next while, don't worry, I'll be back soon enough.

Quag Keep

2012-05-10T12:33:00.001-04:00

The plot of Quag Keep is terrible. TERRIBLE. Yes, so bad it's worth the caps. So let's just get that out of the way at the beginning. This book is interesting because it is one of the first (if not the first) published novels that is literally based on D&D and it is copyright 1978. It is set in Greyhawk. Gary Gygax is thanked explicitly in the beginning.

Why is the plot so bad? The main characters are under a wizard's geas for the entire story. The text explains several times how they don't have any choice about what they are doing. It's like an explicit transcription of the worst kind of railroad plot. Further, there is a not entirely explained conceit that the characters are actually PCs being controlled by players in another world (that's not a spoiler, there are hints about that on the first few pages, and the story begins in the "real world"). The party members all have magic bracelets with dice on them that spin when the characters encounter danger (and they can seemingly improve their odds by concentrating on the dice). From page 27:

"Those dice shall spin and their readings will control your movements--even as when you gamed. Your life, your death, your success, your failure, all shall be governed by their spin." ... "If you concentrate on the dice when they begin to spin, it is my belief that you will be able to change the score which will follow--though perhaps only by a fraction."

There are a few things that can be salvaged though. The depiction of bard magic is good. The bard in the story really does pull out his harp and start strumming during combat (chapter 9 is titled "Harp Magic"). I think that a well designed bard class really needs its own mechanic instead of just being able to cast Vancian spells. Rather than being "fire and forget" spells, the bard's songs are described more like sustained actions which provide continuing bonuses or penalties. From page 96:

There came a trilling of sound. At first Milo thought it isssued from the enemy, yet there was something in the sound that strengthened his courage, instead of increasing his doubts.
Wymarc had unbagged his harp. Now, as he swept his fingers back and forth across the strings, their mounts stood rock still. Music--against those!
...
Now there were no manlike bodies, only once more dark pools that heaved in a losing battle against what the bard had launched. Those pools flowed, joined. A single manifestation half arose. It formed no quasi-human body--rather suggested some monstrous shape. A toad head lifted for a moment, but could not hold, dissolving back into the mass. Yet the shadow thing continued to struggle, bringing forth a tentacle here--a taloned foot there. Then the heaving ceased. The pool of dark lay quiescent.
Wymarc lifted his hand from the harp strings. The pulsation of pain eased in his listeners. Milo heard Naile's voice.
"Well done, songsmith! And how long will that spell hold? Or is the thing dead?"
"Do not grant me too much power, comrade. Like any spell, this has its limitations. We had better ride."

And here is another (non-combat) example (page 99):

"You have shown us one magic, bard. But I do not think that is the limit of what you carry. Can you play 'The Song of Far wings'?"
Wymarc's hand went out to touch the harp bag which he kept ever within reach.
"I can. But to what purpose, ranger?"
"When we climb to the West Pass," Ingrge returned, "we mist have a guide beyond if we seek Lichis. He has the will and power to hide himself from both men and elf; we cannot find him without some aid. It has been many years since any have hunted him. But he will feel our thoughts and strengthen his guard-spell unless we come to him by some way he has left unmarked, a way the feathered ones know."

That is, a song to summon giant eagles for assistance. I kind of like the idea of bards wandering around adventuring in order to collect songs of power.

My favorite part is the portrayal of Gulth the lizardman. Somehow Norton is able to make him endearing without really anthropomorphizing him. He really feels alien. He's a swamp lizardman, so he is continuously drying out, and the other party members have to find ways to keep him damp, even when they venture out onto a dust sea with snow shoes. Tangent: perhaps this dust sea is a partial inspiration for the silt sea of Athas? Yes, I know, a sea of dust sound pretty cool, but even that is not enough to save this story. There is a nice frontispiece illustration of Gulth.

Gulth the Lizardman

Out of context bad quite from page 189:

The stranger was shaking his head. "You needn't try to threaten me--you aren't real, don't you understand that? I'm the game master, the referee. I call the action! Oh--" He raised one had and rubbed his forehead. "This is ridiculous. Why do I argue with something--someone who does not really exist?"

Reading that gives me the same feeling as when I hear a really bad pun. It's kind of fun to see the D&D classes explicitly in a story though (including a druid as monster). There party members include the elven ranger Ingrge, the wereboar berserker Naile Fangtooth (with pseudo-dragon pet), the previously mentioned lizardman Gulth, the "battlemaid" Yevele, the cleric Deav Dyne, the bard Wymarc, and the main character Milo Jagon (a human fighter). There was actually some mention of class level within the story as well, though I can't find it right now.

At the very least, this novel also provided me with a nice name for a campaign world region: Quagland.

Mapping to the Battlemat

2012-05-09T19:30:00.000-04:00

As you probably know, miniatures and a grid are generally assumed by Fourth Edition. They are not strictly speaking required for playing a 4E game (it is possible to run 4E combat entirely using imagination), but my players seem to like using the battle mat. Using miniatures is relatively new for me, as we never used minis back in the 90s when I played Second Edition. Everything was imagination and description, with the occasional sketch for clarification.

I currently use a Paizo GameMastery Flip-Mat. This is a dry-erase battle mat with dimensions of 24 x 30 inches. Now that I think about it, it seems like I would save myself some time if I used these same dimensions on my one page dungeons. I suppose this should be one of those self-evident things, but took me 9 months to realize (I my defense I've also been running lots of converted modules written for other systems). Defaulting to this size doesn't restrict the overall size much, though it does place some constraints on individual rooms and encounter areas, as 5 foot squares results in 120 x 150 feet. This is really not that large of an area.

One danger of mapping to the mat is that players might figure out that maps tend to have these dimensions, and thus engage in metagame reasoning ("we should turn left here because that side of the mat is unexplored"). While I don't consider metagame reasoning to be inherently bad, I do think it can take away from immersion in some cases, especially if it is happening during play (as opposed to deciding which feat to take or something like that). To combat this, one should periodically make partial battle mat maps. Keeping the overall dimensions in mind is still useful though, even in this case.

I have had two other ideas recently regarding handling the battle mat and miniatures in play. The first idea is to delegate the mat drawing duty to a player rather than doing it myself. I think this might speed things up and also increase player engagement. They would need to create the tactical map from my verbal description, though I could of course correct obvious inaccuracies. This also reminds me of how James from Grognardia has his players assist with creating models of dungeon areas while he is engaged in verbal description.

The second idea is switching to a gridless battle mat. I think there is good value in being able to see spacial relationships. What I'm less sold on is the numerical calculation that comes with counting movement squares and areas. I feel like this is the part of grid play that can potentially hurt immersion and game flow. It allows a sense of certainty that should not be present in a combat situation. For example, if you know the enemy has a move of 6 and you are 7 squares away. Now, one could always break the rules and vary NPC movement rates (or really anything) but I don't like doing that. I'd rather have a bit of uncertainly built into the basic experience, and I think using a gridless mat might help with that (using common sense for things like movement distances and effect areas).

Morale, Cool, and Sanity

2012-05-08T18:58:00.000-04:00

It struck me when reading Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay that the Cool stat really has a very similar role to morale in D&D. Description of cool (WFRP page 13):

This characteristic represents a creature's ability to remain calm, collected - even sane - under severe psychological stress. Some of the creatures that inhabit the Old World are truly frightening, and may be confronted safely only by characters with a high Cl value. Cl is expressed as a percentage of 01-100%.

This stat is used when monsters can cause fear or terror. A failed check against fear basically means that a character may not take actions until they overcome the fear (one check possible per round, like a Fourth Edition saving throw). A failed check against terror sends the character to the fetal position for the rest of the encounter and grants an insanity point, which can lead to other bad things (like various types of madness). See pages 68 and 72 of WFRP for more details if you have access to the first edition.

Here is the morale text from Men & Magic (page 13):

Non-player characters and men-at-arms will have to make morale checks (using the above reaction table or "Chainmail") whenever a highly dangerous or un-nerving situation arises. Poor morale will mean that those in question will not perform as expected.

One method to work a sanity system into D&D while cleaving to the traditional mechanics would be to start all PCs off with a morale of 12. This would represent naive young adventurers brimming with confidence and perhaps in some cases an iron will. Every time a character witnesses a sanity-threatening event (this would be campaign dependent, but could include encounters with undead, certain kinds of black magic, watching a companion die, etc) a fear saving throw would be required (probably a save versus spells). Failure would indicate loosing a point of morale, and open up the possibility of failing a morale check. I like this idea because it doesn't require any new rules.

There have been several other recent D&D approaches to sanity. In Barrowmaze there is an optional fear rule where PCs accumulate points when they encounter undead and go insane when their total equals or exceeds their wisdom score. These points can be removed by spending time in civilization. Akrasia also has a wisdom-based sanity system. If you haven't read his Swords & Sorcery house rules, get to it. It's one of the best free OSR supplements out there (a free PDF is available). The free TOTGAD Compendium (now available in hard copy too) has terror, horror, and madness rules. The TOTGAD systems also rely on saving throws and have tables of possible outcomes for failed saves. I recently used his madness table for Death Frost Doom and it worked very nicely.

Halfling Magic-Users

2012-05-07T09:23:00.000-04:00

The original hobbit race in OD&D (if limited to the rules from the 3 LBBs) is objectively less powerful and has less potential (in terms of game mechanics) than other races. Hobbits can only be fighting-men and are limited to fourth level. Their only benefits were: "magic-resistance equal to dwarves (add four levels for saving throws), and they will have deadly accuracy with missiles as detailed in CHAINMAIL" (Men & Magic page 8).

What I have gathered from reading various bits online is that Gary likely added hobbits for players who wished to emulate Tolkien (though please take this as hearsay). Having hobbits be weaker actually fit the source material (hobbits as humble if diligent creatures), and there was no particular desire to balance classes back then (especially since parties would often be of mixed level anyways). Thus, one can think of playing a hobbit as "hard mode" D&D.

Bilbo was described as a burglar, but he was nothing like the inspirations for the original thief class (the Gray Mouser or Cugel). Frodo even less so. Despite that, in Supplement I: Greyhawk, Hobbits were allowed unlimited progression in the thief class. From there, the thief evolved into the ninja-like rogue class and the halfling race (due to several mechanical benefits) was often considered the best choice for a rogue. The PC in my current 4E hack game that consistently does the most damage is a halfling rogue.

Now, I love ninjas as much as the next guy, but that archetype is not generally what I associate with halflings. For another take, Final Fantasy did the "cute little guy" in a way would also work pretty well as a tabletop RPG character: the black mage. I know halflings are described as not making very good wizards in most settings, but maybe this would be an interesting fact to change (or allow PCs to play against type). It does seem like magic might be a natural fit for an ambitious halfling that wanted to make it in a world full of tall people.

Veigar: "I am evil, stop laughing!"

Final Fantasy Black Mage

Orco from He-Man

Vivi from Final Fantasy 9

Veigar from League of Legends

Confined Zombie Horde

2012-05-06T21:40:00.001-04:00

Image from Wikipedia

The players in my current campaign are deep in the crypts of Death Frost Doom. They have woken the dead, and spurned the friendship of one creature that might have been able to help them. I've heard the players talk about wading into the undead horde and attempting to cut their way to the surface, so I decided I needed to know how I would handle that in game mechanical terms. The basic idea that I settled on is to treat the entire horde as a single creature with a huge number of HP and a variable number of attacks depending on the disposition of the undead horde front lines.

Assuming Moldvay stats for zombies, the horde will have 2 HD (9 HP on average) times the number of undead in total. The undead are shoulder to shoulder, approximately 2.5 per five feet of front (round up). So if a horde was surging up a corridor 10 feet wide, the front would be 5 zombies wide. Putting down an HP total of zombies equal to the front line of undead will push back the horde five feet and create terrain difficult for PCs (movement rate is halved), though the terrain is not considered difficult for the horde. The horde will advance 15 feet per round.

The horde will surge as one toward any source of life and flesh. Due to the close nature of the horde, it will take extra damage from area attack or grenade-like weapons, as they are more likely to catch more undead within their blast radius. The horde should be considered to automatically fail any saving throw associated with such an attack, and any damage is doubled. Examples of such attacks are flaming oil, explosives, and fireballs. The confined zombie horde should only be treated like a single monster while it is confined; if it breaks out into the open for whatever reason, encounters should again be run as with individual undead.

Horde attacks:

The horde front line gets six attacks against any adventurer foolhardy enough to engage in melee. This number of attacks increases as the horde advances around the character. For example, 10 attacks if the throng advances five feet, 16 once the character is surrounded.
Surge and trample: if at least two front line attacks hit, the enemy is knocked prone and pulled under the horde. On the next turn the monsters will advance over the character as if the area was unoccupied, and the horde will make nine attacks against the overwhelmed target. These attacks are in addition to the standard attacks made by the horde front lines against any other targets.
Jumper: once per round, optionally, 1d4 zombies (adjust for situational logic) from the rear ranks will clamber over the shoulders of the front lines and fling themselves at any living creature nearby. Range is 20 feet, and if the attack hits it will do double damage.
Any PCs overcome and reduced to 0 HP by the horde will be torn apart and eaten, and thus the PC corpse will not be recoverable.

Holding a line against the horde is difficult to impossible, as the undead will just sacrifice their front line in order to overcome the defense (for example, zombies will impale themselves on set spears, probably disarming and spear wielders in the process). Make sure to deduct HP from the horde whenever individual undead detach themselves in addition to when the horde itself is damaged.

The Death Frost Doom horde (at least the part underground) is 9885.5 HD, or 44,484 HP (assuming the average of 4.5 HP per die). I was nice and rounded down.

What do you think, is this horrific enough to represent a zombie multitude?

Image from Wikipedia

Vaguely Fourth Edition Conversion Details

Any advance movement by the horde is considered to be shifting (that is, it does not provoke opportunity attacks). Forced movement that would move the horde away from characters is ineffective (the mass of undead behind preventing any reversal), though at the referee's discretion such forced movement may decrease the number of horde attacks during the next turn as the "fleeing" undead will act as an obstacle to other zombies. Single zombies may be pulled away from the horde as normal and should then be treated like individual creatures again until they rejoin the horde (which should be considered to happen automatically if the horde advances).

Characters enveloped by the horde are considered prone and restrained (and grant combat advantage to the horde). Zombies may also target any defense (AC, fortitude, reflex, or will) when attacking characters that have been overcome, and will generally target the most vulnerable defense. Normal attacks are +5 versus AC, and the horde defense are AC 17, fortitude 20, reflex 10, and will 15.

I consider each hit die to be worth 10-15 HP in Fourth Edition, so total horde HP is 98,855.

XP for Roleplaying

2012-05-05T13:21:00.000-04:00

Here are the Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay first edition rules for awarding XP for good roleplaying:

These points are awarded to players on an individual basis and reflect how well they portrayed their character. Was the character played in an entertaining fashion according to alignment and career? There will be times when it is obvious that players are running their characters simply as extensions of their own personality, and this need not be a bad thing, but the gamesmaster must decide whether the character's career, alignment and background mean that he or she really should be different. Give each player a rating (this is probably something you should keep to yourself), along the lines of Bad, Poor, Average, Good or Excellent, and award 0-50 EPs as a recognition of the way the character has been 'brought to life'.

When allocating experience points for role-playing, you should bear in mind the player's own conception of the character. For example, a player may have decided that his dwarf is taciturn and consequently have very little to say during role-playing encounters, but become very active during more action-orientated situations.

Generally, each player should receive 30 Experience Points per session for roleplaying, with some players gaining more and some less depending on the circumstances. Only those players who have impressed and amused you with their roleplaying should gain me maximum reward; conversely only those who have added nothing whatsoever to sessions should receive none You should avoid encouraging competition amongst the players - don't always award the largest amounts to the player with the biggest mouth!

I've never liked rules like this for a number of reasons. One, I feel uncomfortable judging and rewarding players by how well they have entertained me. Especially since this passage suggests keeping it secret from the player. If this is an incentive system, how can it function if the player does not know for what they are rewarded experience?

That being said, I do like the idea of roleplaying XP, though I know this might be criticized by fundamentalists that believe XP should only be from treasure and monsters, preferably with more coming from treasure. If there are roleplaying XP though, I think they should be less subjective. Another flaw with awarding XP as suggested by Warhammer 1E is that in my experience such as system often leads to roleplaying caricatures rather than more balanced personalities, because caricatures stick out more. For example, a depressed character will be portrayed as moping all the time.

One idea that I have been playing around with is to allow players to select some goals for their characters, the completion of which will result in XP rewards. Something like minor, substantive, and major goals which would award 100, 500, and 1000 XP respectively. A 100 XP goal might be something like getting a hellhound pelt crafted into a suit of leather armor, fashioning a hat out of a shroom head, or transcribing looted dwarven books and donating them to the library of Ioun (all actual examples from my current campaign). Some might object that that some of these things come with their own reward (like getting a suit of armor) but the same thing is true of treasure.

The best part of this is that it seems like it would reward engagement with the setting. I'm always looking for ways that I can get players to be more self-directed. Adventure paths have trained players to just go along rather than venturing out on their own. Goals would need to be negotiated beforehand, and thus would not be arbitrary. A good goal, just like in real life, should be easily measurable. It also offloads some work from the referee to the players, which is often a good thing.

Wisdom from 1986

2012-05-04T16:31:00.001-04:00

On the referee's role:

To help decide what happens the GM uses the rules of the game. While the players don't need to know the rules in order to play and enjoy the game, you must be familiar with most of them. Don't commit the entire book to memory, but you should at least know where to find the rules for any given situation. You decide whether a dice roll is necessary, which test to use (see Standard Tests below), and what the precise results of a successful or unsuccessful test will be. Mostly, though, you must rely on your imagination and common sense; the test of a good GM is not whether the rules can be recited from start to finish without looking anything up, but whether situations that may not be fully covered in the rules are dealt with in a consistent and realistic fashion. After all, in a fantasy game the Impossible happens quite regularly, and no set of rules, however large and complex, can hope to cover every possible eventuality.

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay first edition, page 63.

I love that it says the players don't need to know the rules in order to play or enjoy the game. The player's interface is assumed to just be naturalistic. No need to think about bonuses or builds or really anything other than what could be described diegetically. There's this stuff, and these things happen, what do you do? This is so different from the system mastery assumptions many games make now. It also helps that most of character generation is random (though there are some parenthetical notes about advanced players being able to choose careers).

That test for what makes a good ref is also right on. Not rules memorization, but rather flexibility and skill when adjudicating the parts of the game that are not spelled out clearly (because there will always be parts that are not handled clearly by the rules). I might add organization and note taking to the skills a good referee must possess, but that is a different topic.

Reading this rulebook is my first real exposure to Warhammer, and so far I'm really enjoying it. The art is fantastic. All the percentile dice feel like overkill, but I could probably get used to them. When I played in the 90s, the heavy use of miniatures turned me off, though even back then it had a "metal" reputation (though I'm not sure I would have considered that an unalloyed good back then; my taste was more serious and less gonzo). It is true there is some miniature shilling in the book (along with some full color photo plates of Games Workshop miniatures) but the rest of the book is so good I think I can overlook that.

Cities of Bone

2012-05-03T10:27:00.001-04:00

Cities of Bone is a minicampaign associated with the Al-Qadim setting. I just recently picked up a used copy because I have a weakness for necromancy themes. I don't own any other Al-Qadim products (though I did own Arabian Adventures at one point), so I'm not sure exactly how it fits in, but it seems somewhat self-contained. I love the idea of a desert land strewn with ruins, though if I ran this myself I would probably make it more culturally neutral rather than use all the custom classes and spells (which are mostly detailed in other products anyways).

The scope of the product seems almost perfect for a sandbox (see what I did there?), though the organization is poor and how the various locations tie together is not clear. There is enough material to keep players occupied for a while while still begging for referee customization. There is no pretence of Cities of Bone being a complete setting. The snippets of history and background that are provided support the adventuring sites rather than overwhelming them with trivia.

The set feels strangely unfinished, as if it was rushed out the door. The Adventure Book has no proper cover, though it looks like it should have one (it's just saddle-stapled paper, like the interior of one of the old modules with detachable covers). Despite that, the production values are relatively high, though the overland map cards do not connect (that is, they seem to be three random samples of the Zakhara map, which I only discovered by looking up a full map on the Internet).

The interior layouts are gorgeous though, using two-tone gold and black borders (I bet they just reused that work from Arabian Adventures). There are six color full page cards, and all of them have (attractively rendered) dungeon maps. There is also a poster sized map which reproduces the Jade Palace of the Necromancers and, while pretty, would be entirely useless during play. Oh, and an eight page saddle stapled Monstrous Compendium style NPC book (one NPC per page). I may not be doing a good job making it clear that I actually like this set, despite the general 2E decadence.

Second Edition products are afflicted with a fetish for standardized presentation, and Cities of Bone is no different. It feels like everything starts with an official template for required information. For example, in the Campaign Guide (32 pages), every area has the following categories: Ruler, The Court, Population, Features of the City, Major Products, Armed Forces, Major Mosques. Even if it's a ruin which is occupied by undead and obviously doesn't need such schematic presentation. Example: Ysawis, City of the Dead; Population:

More than 5,000 animated skeletons and zombies lurk in and around Ysawis. All were animated by the necromancers. The number grows continually, for each day, Sumulael and Kazerabet add 20 to 30 more to the population.

Etc. This reminds me of the Monstrous Compendium format where every page must have a magic resistance field (even if it is usually "Nil"), a special attacks field, a habit/society section, and so on. This inflexibility is a major weakness of Second Edition, but is not fatal (just slightly annoying, as it feels like everything is padded). There are some nice sections in the beginning of the Campaign Guide about the dangers of tomb robbing (diseases) and some details about tomb specific dungeon dressing.

The bulk of the product's text is in the 64 page Adventure Book, which is basically a collection of six modules that share a theme but are otherwise unconnected. None of the adventures are spectacular, but all are serviceable and have enough background to make them interesting sandbox locations. One of them punishes the PCs for recovering any treasure but provides a "story reward" of 50k XP if the party makes it in and out (there are hints about how to do this).

The longest of the adventures centers on the Jade Palace (pictured partially above) and has palace intrigue with five different powerful NPCs that players can ally with, which is pretty interesting and nonlinear (especially since it is set in a ruined city full of undead and also has a stuffed tiger zombie). As written, there are many railroad elements, but it has potential (and also seems heavily influenced by Clark Ashton Smith's Empire of the Necromancers). Overall, I can't unreservedly recommend this box in general, but it has enough elements that appeal to my sensibilities to make it worthwhile to me.

OD&D Alignment Diagram

2012-05-02T08:31:00.001-04:00

I already posted this on G+ and OD&D Discussion, but I figure it can't hurt to throw it up here too.

I like thinking about the implied setting of the 3 LBBs, so some of the info contained here is also taken from the encounter tables. For example, nixies, pixies, and dryads are not listed under the giant type, so I am assuming that they are not so much faerie creatures as manifestations of natural essence. Also, the dwarf/gnome and goblin/kobold pairings makes me think those creatures are more closely related than other monsters in the same category. Further, the divisions of the giant types into chaos/law makes me think of a unseely/seely court kind of setup.

Some info about terrain is also included (flyer, swimmer, underworld). Based on TU&WA, it seems like purple worms, minotaurs, and medusae only show up underground.

Click image to make larger.

Generative Games

2012-05-01T12:02:00.001-04:00

I've been thinking a lot lately about procedural ways to generate campaign elements. In my mind, this is significantly different than randomly generating things using some framework, which is often how computer tools work. There can also be randomness in the kind of system I am talking about, but each decision point need not be decided randomly or from some set of limited options. The ACKS guidelines for creating a campaign are kind of like this, but are perhaps a bit more free-form.

That is, the rules for such a system must be clear enough to guide you at every step, though they don't need to be algorithmic. These are, it seems to me, the same requirements for a good game, and in fact there are a number of standalone games that can be used like this. Microscope was probably the first of these kind of games that I have started to investigate recently. It is a collaborative game that designs a setting. I really like the idea of using Microscope to build a D&D campaign setting, as the resulting setting would grow from the entire group rather than just the referee. It seems like a very natural way to navigate the problems of expectation regarding genre and tone. See also the discussion of Microscope on Monsters & Manuals here and here.

How to Host a Dungeon is a game that develops a dungeon by proceeding through historical eras. There are some standard assumptions about fantasy races built in, but it should be easy to hack for other styles of setting if so desired. It is available in PDF for $5.

FrDave over at Blood of Prokopius also had a recent post about using the railroad board game Empire Builder to generate underworld settings like the one presented in D1-2 Descent into the Depths of the Earth. There are also themed versions of Empire Builder, including Martial Rails, Lunar Rails, and Iron Dragons (about "fantasy" railroads). My guess is that the original is probably fine for this purpose, as some post-processing will be needed in any case to adapt the results for use with a tabletop RPG.

I asked a question on G+ about other such games, and someone mentioned Dawn of Worlds, which is freely available in PDF. It looks somewhat similar to Microscope, but it starts with the premise that every player is a god that has a certain level on influence on the resulting world.

Several people suggested the computer game Dwarf Fortress, a text-only computer game that simulates a dwarven colony. I have never played Dwarf Fortress, but there is an interesting article about it in the New York Times. I don't have time to look into this game now, but I know it has a very devoted following and might be worth returning to at some point. I'm not sure how easy it would be to import the game result directly into a tabletop RPG, but it could still provide inspiration (and maybe maps).

I would be curious to hear if anyone knows of other games that can be used in this way, or if anyone has experiences building setting elements using games like this.

This and That

2012-04-30T16:35:00.000-04:00

My print copy of ACKS arrived last week. It's a beautiful thing. And now I don't have to wait for my PDF viewer to finish rendering the giant images when I'm looking things up. It almost feels odd being able to quickly leaf through a physical book as I had gotten so used to ACKS in PDF form.

One of my new players knows how to use glue (I apparently don't, as my Otherword Minis had been waiting for months to be assembled). So he very helpfully put them together for me and now we have more attractive minis to use.

Also, it looks like I'm going to be rather busy this week, so posts might be less frequent.