Random vs Designed

This week Will started his campaign at the school club. Or at least he got us rolling up characters.

We're playing Imagine and he has outlined that we have travelled by boat down-river to a port city on the edge of the kingdom of Albion.

There are three players and it's up to us how our characters came to be there.

First step... create characters.

"I fancy a Mage"

So, here's the thing. I fancied playing a Gray Elf Mage. I rolled crappy. I am now playing a Civilised Human Priest. How did that happen?

Don't get me wrong: this is not a complaint. It's just an observation: I'm not playing my character. 

I'm playing a character that fits the group's game. It came about largely by chance and mixed only a little bit of choice. 

Oh, and it was my third choice.

Rolling Up

I never used to really think much about the age-old tradition of "rolling up" a hero. You know, roll the dice for each attribute and see what you get. Maybe that's because, when playing D&D (for example) the GM would let us roll the six stats and then assign the numbers to whichever ability we wanted.

Imagine defaults to a rolled attribute system. You roll multiples of d4 to discover each of the stats, removing lowest dice from several of individual rolls. It's very simple but totally emphasises luck. While there is a Points Buy system in the GM's Guide, our newbie GM wasn't using it. 

For me, the process was fun but it also destroyed my plan to play a Mage. The problem was further compounded when, shortly after quietly discussing (with the GM) the possibility of playing an Assassin, another player bellowed, "Hey, I'm gonna play an assassin!"

In the end, given my collection of scores, I decided to play the Priest. The party has a Mage and an Assassin. Neither of them is played by me. 

Is Random Wrong?

Random isn't wrong. It's just wrong for me. 

When we began to write UbiquitousRPG I chose to emphasise my own feeling that characters should be designed, not randomly rolled. We use a simple "spread the points around" system which lets players customise the attributes to fit their character idea. 

The downside of design, as opposed to random rolls, is that players can min-max the numbers. That's already happening in our Tikhon campaign, especially as (due to frequent rules changes) I have permitted massaging the numbers after the first few sessions. 

Yet... at least the guys are playing the characters they chose to play.

What do you think?

It Lives! Almost...

The week has been a pretty intense ride of writing, editing and discussion.

Having made the promise that we would write up the rules stuff we've been working on, I was pretty keen not to let down the guys who come to Friday Roleplay Night.

As of this afternoon, I'm about six miracles and a chunk of editing away from a finished draft. That's a really cool thing to have achieved together!

Publishing Tikhon

"Tikhon" started as a collection of rulings made to facilitate play within our own fantasy world but, at nearly 200 pages, has grown up to become a set of game rules in its own right. 

While our game has roots in the Old School Renaissance (OSR), and was developed through mashing up several sub-systems from existing games along with our own take on roleplaying, it has really become something... different. After all the work, it would be a shame not to publish it while we continue to play with it. If nothing else, it gives everyone involved a "standard" rules reference to work from.

Team Effort

The best thing, though, is that both the game and the setting has been developed openly through player contribution. Week by week, session by session, the players have been making suggestions and adding on details which have brought the world to life. As I write, I'm still waiting for the latest submissions for me to edit prior to publication. 

The big upside of this team approach has been that we are experiencing player (and GM) engagement at a very high level. Each player has spoken to me alone to feed back a similar message: this is one of the coolest gaming things we've ever done. That is the real reward for all of the effort.

As we come to the end of this initial writing phase, ready to continue our campaign in earnest from September, it looks like there will be a steady stream of new submissions ready for the future. It's really pretty exciting to bring the efforts of the whole group into sharp focus.

Reflecting...

Looking back, I think the big learning so far has been two-fold:

1. Don't be afraid to mash-up your own game.
2. Don't be afraid to say "yes" to player contributions.

While I love that there's an "industry" of roleplaying game designers, none of them plays or thinks quite like we do. By mashing up our own rules (and fitting it to our setting), we've unleashed a whole bucket of fun. On top of that, saying "yes" to players suggestions has poured fuel on the creative fire... and we have something exciting as a consequence.

The plan is to produce the booklet of rules through Lulu within the next week or so. It'll be a low-key thing, but it does allow us to hold the fruit of all our labour in our hands... and not lose as many loose-leaf pages as we might if we just ploughed it through a laser printer.

For me, it's simply great to be almost there with the rules and ready to focus back on the campaign.

Game on!

More UbiquitousFantasy

+10% XP for wearing costume...

About a month ago I wrote about the decision I took to draft my own house rules modifications, which I entitled "UbiquitousFantasy". These were a mash-up of ideas derived largely from taking the existing Castles & Crusades rules we were playing and colliding them with some ideas in Monsters & Magic. The result had me feeling nervous... you can read why in the original article.

Friday night's game arrived with me feeling nervous. Although I had "published" my ideas to the group, and received some generally upbeat feedback, the group's attendance had stalled due to good British weather and holidays. With a month having elapsed since we last played, I was worried that the proposal of change would scare off my players.

I was, of course, wrong to worry.

What happened next?

The guys arrived, spent some time chatting and, eventually, settled down to convert their characters from C&C to UbiFantasy. The process involved altering Attribute bonuses, choosing some Traits from their new Role (aka Class), rolling up some Fatigue, and slotting into the new card-based Initiative. Within 30 minutes we were ready to play.

There was some annoyance from one player who, looking at things on paper, felt he wasn't as good as he was... and that my vision of his Role was contrary to his own. Things improved when I allowed a simple switch of two Attribute values. Giving clear reasons for the setting decisions he was uncertain of also seemed to help. Once we were playing, however, it was clear that his misgivings were unfounded: the heroes are all slightly more capable than before.

What surprised me was that many potentially far-reaching changes were just happily accepted - such as the need for the Cleric to roll when summoning Miracles (aka casting Clerical spells)... and things went fine when, first time out, he failed his roll. I was amazed that they didn't end up unhappy.

At the end of the session the feedback was generally positive. We had generated a raft of ideas and suggestions too... which I decided to accept on one condition: each suggestion needs to be typed up and sent in to me for consideration; this is to free me from the need to interrupt play with writing down random suggestions - I want those suggestions but I want them when they really matter to the players.

What did I learn?

Well... I learned a lot about the way UbiquitousFantasy will play and what I need to tweak from the GM's point of view. I need to adjust creature and GMC* Armour Class values (adding their Level) in the same way the heroes have been altered, for example. 

I also learned that there is real, powerful and genuine value in the stuff I wrote about last week. The level of player involvement generated on Friday was higher than anything I have ever experienced. Period.

My players suggested and talked about some ten to fifteen new Traits for their characters. How many of these ideas will make it to the game is not important: the point is that, playing in a game that suddenly places no outer limits to their imagination, the guys were inspired to make suggestions. 

Examples include the anti-magickal Witchhunter who wants to explore the idea of "sucking powers out of Mages" and "using their power against them"; we also talked about a kind of "Improved Initiative type Trait which opens up stepped-upgrades at higher Levels". Marvellous!

Right there, in game, when the Priest of the Lightbringer asked, "What is my Holy Weapon then?" and I answered, "Erm... you're the Priest of the Lightbringer... you tell me"... THAT was marvellous! When he said, "Right. It's a Lucerne Hammer then" we created a new detail for the setting. 

That's when I learned what player engagement means. Big grins all round!

What's next?

More details need writing up. I need to get my teeth into how Mages work, for example. We don't have one in the party but they are set-up to hunt and kill magickal GMCs*, so I need to sort that out for next session.

There are new rules to propose introducing. One example is Hargrave's take on Hit Points designed to stop the heroes having more HP than a Dragon. I like these rules... but then I need to tweak a few other things to make levelling up even more interesting.

Finally, there are tweaks to make to what I've already written. Little stuff, like a limit on how many Traits they can invoke in one test. Minor tweaks but important.

Oh... and I need to ride the wave of enthusiasm that their play and encouragement gave to me. Getting a full draft of UbiquitousFantasy written over the summer would feel really cool. 

Let me know if you want to join the party and take a look at what we're doing. It's all house rule stuff... but if peering under the hood will help your game, please feel free to ask.

Game on!

*GMC = Game Master Character

Inspired by Hargrave

Don't judge a book by the cover... gems within!

"Well you can't please everyone, nor do I try to do so any longer." - David A. Hargrave, Arduin Trilogy (p12), on the topic of his new Hit Point system.

I really like this quotation. I discovered it just the other day while perusing the Arduin Trilogy from Emperor's Choice Games. It's one of many little gems that sit within the chaotic collection of suggestions that David A. Hargrave offered back in the 70's and 80's. 

The thing that I really like about that quotation is that it sums up the general attitude of this legendary GM towards the attitudes of others. He happily ran a very successful series of campaign set within his own created multiverse (note: not a single world, but a whole multiverse) which is now known as Arduin. His fans loved him... and he published his ideas in the spirit of sharing and recommendation. I am sure that, if he lived today, he'd have a cult following for any blog he wrote. Yet... he had detractors.

Hargrave doesn't seem to have allowed negative comments to phase him. He was running his own game, derived from D&D but very much customised to his own tastes... and those of his gaming group. He was supremely confident (at least in print) that his ideas were good. And, looking at them 30 years later, I am inclined to agree with him.

"Take a Troll To Lunch"

"As far as my multiverse is concerned..." - David A. Hargrave, Arduin Trilogy (p13), on the topic of languages.

I've long been aware that, as a GM, you are encouraged to customise your game. This is a given in roleplaying circles. Except that it's actually rather rare.

"In my Traveller universe..." has long been something that I have understood and dreamed of implementing fully. Hargrave's approach to fantasy gaming goes further - he utterly customised the game to suit his own style, evolving a new game to fit his own new setting.

A couple of weeks ago I also took the first step in this direction. When I drafted up UbiquitousFantasy, a derived but modified blend of OSR rules, I was initially trying to widen the scope of my own homebrew game. Yesterday, however, I read this:

"Don't be lonely, take a Troll to lunch. The world is a smaller place, but it is smaller still in relationship to the myriad worlds of the entire Alternity (alternative eternities). Do not be a small player from a small world. Embrace the whole Almanity, and give the different types [of character options] a chance. I think you will find that the world your game is in will become a lot more fun if you do." - David A. Hargrave, Arduin Trilogy (p10), on the topic of his new player character types (or classes).

Having spent time customising our campaign world in include, among other things, a Witchfinder based on the specific setting details that my players had suggested in-game... well, you can imagine how liberating that encouragement to try new things would feel.

It's your game. It's your rules. Even if it's not your world, it's still your version of that world.
Go play.
Take a Troll to lunch.

Heading Out Deeper

Have you ever considered how much your players would enjoy finding themselves playing in a truly unique and personalised game? Certainly we tend to like to use a recognisable set of rules when we first play... but, once a group forms, isn't there an argument that whatever happens at your table is really your business?

Think about it: once a group forms, you are under house rules from the get-go. Once a game is running, we tend to make small tweaks to even the slickest system. Why not be brave and go further, incrementally moulding not only the setting but also your rules to fit your own, unique group? I wonder if that might not be a more rewarding outcome for everyone.

Here's a thought:

"Please try some of the rules that you have doubts about in game situations and game play. Only through actual play testing can a rule or situation be fully explored. We have been doing that for years now. Anyone can pontificate on rules and worlds that they have never tried, and can never be proved wrong because the proof is only in the play." - David A. Hargrave, Arduin Trilogy (p35), on the topic of rules questions.

Can we be brave? Who's up for taking that Troll to lunch?

Game on!

UbiquitousFantasy

This week two elements have collided and produced a whole new adaptation of an OSR-style game. 

On the one hand, inspired by my desire to blend the best elements of Castles & Crusades with Monsters & Magic, I found the time to draft the basis of something new: UbiquitousFantasy. 

On the other hand, inspired by the emails of one of my keen players, I've been seeking to further develop the fantasy world that we're currently playing in. Taken together, with a big dose of effort on my part, I've managed to put together something that excites... and which I hope will excite my players.

UbiquitousFantasy

We've been playing Castles & Crusades for a few months now. It's great: easy to play, easy to learn, lots of good and solid material. We like. Except that, having upgraded to Level 2 and being well on the way to Level 3, my players commented that there are really very few benefits from levelling up: in other words, it's a bit bland. That got me nervous about the longevity of playing this system.

Plus there's that pesky d20. Regular readers will probably realise that I don't like the randomness of rolling one die for action tests. For a long, long time I've fancied trying out 2d10 instead of 1d20... so yesterday, in a fit of creative energy, I wrote that into our house rules. That was how it started.

While I was in the process of writing house rules, I thought, why not introduce some of the other things that I've been mulling over for a while... and solve that blandness problem to boot? Inspired by Sarah Newton's ideas about Traits, I've modified the way adding the Level bonus works: in short, you get it when you invoke a Trait from your Race, Class or Personal Background. 

Taking things further, and inspired by the conversations with players, I also decided to re-write the classes to fit this change... and to introduce some Specialised Classes (or, to use another term, some Sub-Classes) which are customised to our fantasy setting. It was easy to do... and a lot of fun! Now we have options for a Lightbringer Paladin, a Ranger of the Wild, a Brotherhood Assassin and a Lightbringer Witchhunter. Each blends elements from both the C&C and M&M classes into something... different.

Finally, at least for now, I decided to adopt the idea of an Invocation Test for the Clerical Miracles (my new words for, "making a magic test to cast a clerical spell"). This forms the basis for a cool rule on organising Rituals with many participants and miracles which are upgraded by particularly high Invocation rolls.

Tikhon

Tikhon is a popular saintly name in the Russian Orthodox Church, meaning "hitting the mark". As the setting we're playing in has been doing just that with the group, it seemed a cool name for the world. Welcome, therefore, to Tikhon. 

On top of this, working with the players on their character backgrounds, I've been gathering more and more detailed material for the world. As the players work with me on creating the setting, it is long overdue to codify what we have so far. Thus, this weekend, I'm beginning just that process - typing up the notes.

What's cool is that their ideas, as players, are fuelling my creative process... in truly collaborative style we are producing something far more interesting than might have been expected. Combining this creativity with a desire to customise the game to fit the setting, rather than forcing the setting into a generic rule set, is not necessarily innovative... but it is something that I've never managed to do before. I've even gone as far as to commission a map for the area we've been playing in.

Being Bold

There's a massive risk involved in all of this: it might not work as well as we hope. The challenge, at least for me, is to be brave and bold. If past gaming failures have taught me anything it's that you can't keep doing the same things over and over, hoping that something will click. 

What has made the one-off Hunt for Gerulf adventure turn into the birth of the World of Tikhon has been boldness: a decision to wing a game off of a one sentence premise gave us Mortenburg and Gerulf's Raiders; another decision to introduce clues to the Moon Gate led to the birth of a conspiracy tale. The courage to listen to the players is leading me into a brand new and exciting setting, played with some customised house rules.

What's next? Well, next week's session is looming... will this all pay off? Fingers crossed... but you can't go through life wondering what might have been, can you? I reckon it's much more fun to risk failure on the opportunity of creating something really cool.

Game on!

Of Monsters & Magic

Because of the way the game felt on Friday night, I was feeling rather despondent about our fantasy campaign. I wasn't feeling at all happy with the game I'd run. 

Weirdly, however, some thoughts and reflection have opened up some fresh ideas that I wanted to share with you... and it's mostly inspired by a woman I've never met...

Meet Sarah Newton

I'd never heard of +Sarah Newton until about a week or so ago. She's an author and gamer, the founder of Mindjammer Press. What grabbed my attention was a G+ post about her game, Monsters & Magic. 

Having read a preview article or two on the website, I was tempted enough to download the .PDF of the game. I am hugely glad that I did... not least because it has inspired a whole raft of thoughts that I hope will be inspiring improvements in my fantasy and SF roleplaying experience.

Monsters & Magic

Sarah's game takes the OSR material from classic D&D and makes it possible to adapt any addition (whether past or present) to a more modern style of play. She describes it as, "combining the atmosphere of classic fantasy games with modern RPG mechanics."

Last weekend, having begun to read Monsters & Magic, I was inspired! What struck me so keenly has been the encouragement to take Sarah's game engine and customise it to suit my own fantasy worlds... nay, even my SF ones! 

What's so inspiring?

In truth, everything and nothing.

There are three things that I like about Monsters & Magic:

• Replacement of the d20 with 3d6... but retaining the same old familiar stat values.
• Addition of her innovative new "Effect Engine", in which new RPG mechanics meet old.
• Encouragement to customise and personalise your fantasy experience without breaking the game.

On top of those, I really like the fact that she wrote the game with only about four experience levels of play in mind. Right there, on page 4, lay the things that really set my mind to wondering:

"While Monsters & Magic is a standalone game, we anticipate you’ll use it with your favourite classic fantasy RPG books — bestiaries, spell books, equipment, magic items, and adventures. So, we’ve provided enough spells, monsters, equipment, and magic to take you to roughly the 4th level of play — but assume you’ll also incorporate material from your favourite classic fantasy resources to support your game."

And also:

"Monsters & Magic is a modular ruleset. You don’t have to use all the rules: if you have a favourite old school rule you want to use instead (say, different experience levels, or rules for treasure), then go ahead and use it — you won’t break the game."

The game actively encourages that which most RPG publishers avoid: take stuff from wherever you like, fit it into this game system, and make it your own.

That's the thing that set me to thinking...

Generic Doom

Most D&D derivatives (including Monsters & Magic) are generic: they present a framework for playing exciting fantasy roleplaying games in a broadly medieval style setting. The assumption is that the GM will make the game their own and colour the world in their own shades. In my experience, however, this is usually done in the most cursory manner.

When we began playing Castles & Crusades, the system we decided to use for our current fantasy game, the appeal was simplicity and ease. Having just run a playtest of the new Rolemaster, my guys were hankering for an easy-play Friday night escape game. Realising that you have to run the game the players want to play, I opted to keep it simple.

Things had been going well: four or five sessions under the belt, the birth of a new homebrew fantasy setting, and highly engaged players. The combination of the advice from Brian Jamison's "Gamemastering" and the simple rules from C&C were a great starting point.

What has gone wrong, however, is that I've been labouring to run another D&D derivative generic setting. Having limited time, I've not really begun to really tailor our game to my own tastes as well as those of the players. Gloomy and bored, I approached Friday feeling that something was missing... and it was noticable.

Customised Encouragement

Sarah's game reminded me that, no matter what I play, I need to be able to customise it. Monsters & Magic is the game that, although built to support whichever generic fantasy you want to play, actively encourages (nay, requires) you to customise. Thanks, Sarah - because otherwise, it's fair to say, I think our campaign would wither and die.

Here are three things that Sarah has inspired:

1. Customised Sub-classes: Ian plays an "Assassin". I want to give him a buzz and offer him rules for the "Witchfinder" that he is actually playing, designed just for our game.
2. Customised Traits: Mark plays a Cleric. I want to give him some specific abilities that reflect his role as a "Priest of Helles, the Lightbringer". 
3. Customised Setting: We're playing in our world. I want to import ideas from several other OSR games, blending in materials that will make this our own.

All of this is possible with Monsters & Magic. Heck, all of it is possible with Castles & Crusades... but I don't really know how much that'll affect the balance of things. 

With Sarah's game, well... "you won't break the game." 

If you've not yet had a look at it, I recommend it... right now, it's a $10 download.

Game on!

Of Traveller and Shadowrun

People who know me, or at least who read this blog, will realise that I consider myself to be first and foremost an SF roleplayer. Truth is, however, that the last time I played in or ran an SF session was several years ago. But I digress already...

As an SF roleplayer (at least in theory) I have been wondering why it is that I have always focused on hard-SF or serious-SF games, such as Traveller, and never played Shadowrun.

With a new edition of Shadowrun in production (see Catalyst Games' website: http://www.shadowruntabletop.com) and due in the Summer, I've been delving into the system a little more than I have previously.

Shadowrun 5

Yes, there's a new edition of the game coming out. There's also a tabletop skirmish game, a card game and a computer game coming - the Year of Shadowrun. With some curiousity, having bought the 4th Edition back in 2004/5, I have been reading the Preview Files - there are 3 out at present, and they are free to download.

Shadowrun 4 didn't resonate with me. At the time I wasn't interested in a fantasy-meets-cyberpunk setting. The art was too cartoon-like and seemed to not treat the idea of urban fantasy seriously enough for my taste. Nine years on my attitudes have obviously changed.

Shadowrun 5 seems to resonate. Why?

Fantasy versus Science-Fiction?

For me the two genres have been separate in my mind. I have used terms like "Star Fantasy" or "Urban Fantasy" to talk about the kinds of games that I want to play... and ignored Shadowrun's blend of SF. 

That seems odd, when I think about it.

Yet, when I read Traveller5 I felt disappointed by two things: 1) the dodgy nature of melee combat; 2) the lack of a decent Psi / Magic system. I never expected Marc Miller to include a magic system... but I was deeply offended by his dismissive and offhand treatment of Psi. Offended? YES! 

You see, in recent years I have come to regard the position of scientific supremacy as questionable. I have at the same time been having a lot of fun with fantasy elements in my gaming. When you bring together my doubt in the Scientific Priesthood with my love of a good fantastic yarn, you get something that isn't Traveller. It's something that looks more like Shadowrun.

A review, attributed (spuriously) to "Joe Chummer" on amazon.com, begins:

Shadowrun can be distilled into three important words: "Magic cyberpunk noir."

I like this description. It appeals to me... and it makes me want to grab a character sheet, a handgun and a spell book. Magic cyberpunk noir.

What do I want in my SF?

It's weird. I started writing Serene Dawn recently and I included magic, angels, demons and conspiracy in my top five elements... the fifth was an "alternate future".

I'm not so sure about Elves and Orcs with guns and cybertech... but, so Joe Chummer assures me, Shadowrun will suit my tastes:

If you're looking for a sci-fi RPG you can really sink your teeth into, this is the one. Shadowrun is quite possibly the richest, most detailed, and most beloved sci-fi RPG setting I have ever played. The way the rules and fiction are presented in this rulebook quickly dispels the "cyberpunk with namby-pamby elves" stigma (which usually originates from people who write off the game without really knowing anything about it). On the contrary, this book makes Shadowrun's world of magic and technology come alive.

What's odd to me is that this change has taken me around 30 years to notice. In fact, looking back, it's not really a change of taste... just of attitude.

When I was playing Star Frontiers back in the 1980s I was indulging in pulp SF. It's not too big a leap to my position today, really. It's just that my attitude to mixing fantasy with science-fiction has finally let me accept the concept without sneering.

This lends me to think about my intellectual snobbery once again: why have I, for so long, seen fantasy gaming as a secondary and less serious indulgence than playing SF games? They are both made up, imaginary... dare I say it, fantastic?!

Is the scientific illusion so ingrained? Not any longer, it seems.

Thank you, Shadowrun 5! You've opened up my eyes to something fun!

Can you Imagine?

Two hobby projects have been gestating this week. The first, Serene Dawn (the SF setting), hit two road blocks which, although largely temporary, put a dampener on my spirits. The second, my ongoing quest for getting fantasy right, opened up new vistas when I re-discovered Imagine.

Legends of the Unknown

This week the fifth book in the Imagine RPG series arrived at my home: Legends of the Unknown. That in itself was an exciting event, given that the subject matter includes adding watery adventures to the game - think pirates and stuff to do with travelling across the oceans, and you've captured my mindset.

The book itself, however, was only the spark for me. The main attraction was to crack open the main rules of Imagine and once again remember both why I love the game... and why I've never been able to get a game with it.

Time to Imagine

Back at the turn of the century, when the world was falling under the spell of D&D 3rd edition and the d20 system was new and magic... there was Imagine.

Looking back I see in the creation of this game a proto-movement for what was to become the Old School Renaissance... with a difference.

It began with the very cool merchandising decision to publish a poster:

Seeing this, I tracked down the website and bought the game. Reading the rules, I smiled at the irony that the combat roll used a d20... just in a very different way.

At the core, Imagine is a d100 game which uses d20 during a fight. The heart of the game, however, really appealed to me... and still does: the game includes a LOT of detail running over a very simple set of core rules. The GM is encouraged to be imaginative and creative, being given all the tools they need (via the GM Guide) to alter or design any element in the game - spells, creatures, classes, items... whatever. The players are also challenged to be creative, but in the way they describe and interact with the world they are playing in.

What I discovered was a game which harped back to the feeling I had experienced in the early days of gaming with more crunchy systems but with infinitely more freedom as a GM.

Imagine was the first game system I came across which genuinely encouraged me to create a unique world, not just another generic fantasy location.

Anti-D&D?

To label Imagine as a reaction to D&D is, however, a mistake. It's also a mistake to lump it in with the Old School Renaissance which (for the most part) has taken things back to an earlier form of D&D. For me, Imagine offers Old School Evolved... or, at least, Evolving.

Imagine suggests that, while it's helpful to have classes and levels to map out character power and progress, these things should not be limits to what you can do with the hero. It blends the best aspects of skill-based gaming with the best aspects of level-based gaming... and adds something to the mix. It's not really anti-D&D... it's actually suggesting that you take the game a step further by using your imagination.

Imagine

Imagine makes me pause. It makes me want to try it out. The only problem is that it makes me worry that my players won't like it. 

It's a game that will take you ages to create a character for but, once complete, will leave you to get on with playing. For my action-orientated group this means it really benefits from a speeding-up tool, like the rough-and-ready character generator on the game's website. What it really needs is a Hero Lab build.

It's a game that utilises one of the most innovative combat systems I've ever read. You actually describe what you want to do with that weapon and translate it into an attack roll designed to see if you achieve it. Slashing over arm to hit the Goblins head? Imagine it striking the head if you hit... but striking the shoulder if you narrowly miss! You are not only encouraged to describe (or even act out) your attack but you are rewarded for being clever: how about striking at the throat with your spear, or knocking a sideways swinging blow with your club to sweep the foe's legs out from under him?

Imagine is a game which offers real customisation as you grow your hero in whichever of the myriad of class choices you decide to follow. Class is a choice of pathway in adventure... but never a straight-jacket. 

The only downside is, given all of the choices, the game appears to be pretty complicated. 

Is Imagine complex?

That depends on what you mean.

Under the hood the game is actually simple: 

• Skills and Saving Throws are rolled on d100, roll-low, with a few optional modifiers.
• Attack rolls are d20, with modifiers.
• You gain XP to go achieve Goals (sub-levels) and Titles (levels).
• Mages cast spells using Aura (read: spell points).
• Priests cast spells freely but with limits on casts between prayers.

Imagine draws on the traditions of fantasy roleplaying. It feels a lot like D&D's spirit infused into a d100 system. Looking at it post-Arduin, I can see an awful lot of David Hargrave in the game... not in mechanics but in spirit. Imaginative ideas, encouragement to create and customise, and alternative ways of doing things are all core to Imagine. 

On the other hand, on a first reading at least, the game looks like it has some clunky aspects: the second-by-second combat system, for example, seems alien to most roleplayers... unless they've played the new Hackmaster or GURPS 4e.

Do I want a game where I need to track the second-by-second moves of the characters? That depends on my desired level of detail: I am sure that some GMs might be tempted to run the game with rounds based on the now-standard idea of a 6- or 10-second round with one action and one move. But if you bother to try out the more detailed system you discover that you don't need to add much more effort to gain a lot more tactical enjoyment... assuming you're into tactical play.

Here are two excellent quotes from Imagine creator and CEO, Michael (posted on the forum) in response to me asking, "How do I demo this to newbies?"

"For the ease of combat I break [the 10-second round] down into the first three seconds, the second three seconds and the last four seconds...So when the guy who got a -6 [for initiative] goes I ask him what would you like to do? He tells me I'd like to engage this opponent. So I check his movement and see that he has to go from walk, jog to run to get to his opponent in the third second. Lets say he has a 4-second weapon (long sword adjusted). I saw normally it would take you four seconds to swing but you are engaging the guy and you get to him on the 3rd second so that's when your first attack happens."

"Tell me how you want to hit the guy. I ask him to either describe or pantomime how he wants to hit. I show him the back of the sheet where we have already pre-calcuated his bonuses to hit and tell him to roll a d20, then add the bonus I have just shown him. Then we see how he hit. Let's say he hit right and said he was going to over head swing at the head. I tell him okay you didn't hit the head but you hit to the right tapping either his shoulder or mine to show and then he and everyone else can really visualize it. We roll damage by the weapon and I ask him what he wants to do next..."

For me, the added appeal is in the detailed description: I can imagine the movement and strike clearly for the trade-off of using a second-by-second, real-time counting system. It's not really complicated... just more detailed. 

Which is better? "I hit him!" [roll], or "I swing my sword down in a slashing move aiming for his neck!" [roll]. The second description is better, right? But what if that description also matters in the game? Cutting into the guy's neck should be very much more worrying for the guy being hit than just taking another generic dose of hit point damage. 

Which is more desirable? That is the real question: it is worth the effort to gain that detail? I feel that it might be... but I worry that my players won't agree.

Newbies

Which brings me to the question of newbies. The default assumption is that newbies need simple, for which we often substitute simplified (or, regrettably, simplistic). I have run games of Pathfinder, for example, which use the simplified "Beginner's Box" to intro the game.

Thinking back to my own gaming journey, however, I began with RuneQuest and Traveller plus Star Frontiers and D&D. I quickly graduated to Rolemaster. These were not simple games... especially given the appalling quality of explanatory writing in evidence in those early days. 

Roleplaying games are not simple to learn to play. They require a certain desire to tell stories and a preparedness to learn some reasonably challenging rules. Most young kids are actually playing much more complex games on their consoles... they just don't have to do the maths because the computer does it for them. But the tactical challenges of the games are quite large... and the more complex the game, generally, the more kids (especially boys) enjoy it.

The barrier is their confidence with what they are learning. As with all learning, you need to have the process staged and built in small steps. There's no point introducing all of the rules at once (which I tend to do, even with experienced roleplayers) because you just confuse people and turn them off. Instead, even with roleplayers who have played a lot of games, you need to step-up the learning through play. Enter the demo.

Demo

Here's where I share a newly developing idea for how to intro a new game: you run a demo.

Option 1, probably best for total newbies to a game, is to pre-generate the characters and allow them to pick-up-and-play. 

Option 2, open to more experienced gamers trying a new game, is to use a quick character generation system to speed them into playing.

Either way, you set up some basic situations which allow the players to learn how to use the game to emulate their decisions. The key point here is this: you ask them what they want to do... then you (as GM) model it into the game rules. That's what Michael's post (excerpts above) basically encourages and, from experience, I realise that this is the key.

Don't run a huge combat with 20 combatants. Run a quick fight with a couple of easy-to-defeat opponents aimed at teaching the guys how to play. They will learn the basics and get the flush of victory... making them hungry for more. Remember: they're going to win the fight... because the fight is designed to allow them to learn, not to try and challenge the heroes.

Run a series of situations which require them to use some skills. The aim, again, is just about helping players to learn how to roll the dice to emulate their actions. Throw in some Saving Throws, sure... this adds spice and danger... and teaches them how to make Saving Throws.

Give them choices to make as the story unfolds. Don't write a linear scenario... set up an open situation and allow the players to feel their way through to a conclusion. I'm imagining a house break-in, or a simple cave exploration, or a short street-based investigation with thugs getting in the way.

Make it a short session - 2 hours perhaps - and then take them through "levelling up". Allow them to customise their heroes ready for next time. And then invite them to come again... and again... and again... each time, increasing their understanding of the game with a few new details.

Even the most complex system, broken down into bite-sized learning experiences, will become accessible over time. The question is whether you're patient enough to create those experiences.

In conclusion...

I'm going to try an run some folk through games using Imagine. 

I'm going to design a beginner's scenario set in the world my main group is currently playing in too, just to make the setting stuff easy on me whilst adding to my other GMing commitments. Adding details to the world we're playing in means that, no matter how successful or not my efforts are, they are always useful to my main efforts.

I might invite my regular group to test the demo: it's a side-adventure in the setting they are already invested in, so it adds to the background of the stories we're telling... and it allows me to tweak my teaching efforts. Come the big day with the newbies, I'll be all-the-more prepared for how players might react.

I'm going to be brave and try to bridge the gap between the detail I desire in my gaming and the apparent complexity it implies. I just hope I can make it work.

Game on!

Experiences on Experience

XP: the means by which most RPGs confer improvements upon the characters, earned through their achievements in play. Experience Points (XP) are given at regular intervals to reward the players for taking part in the game. We're all, I think, familiar with the idea.

The question has always been, "What's the best way to go about awarding XP?"

The answer lies in what you want to achieve. If you want to encourage any given behaviour then that is what you reward. Thus, if you give XP for killing monsters and finding treasure you'll focus the players on those two activities.

There is no right or wrong way to reward players in your game. There are simply more or less effective ways to encourage the behaviours that you want to see. For example, seeking to encourage more "roleplay", i.e. acting in role, instead of the more common descriptive style of play, I've introduced suggestions for XP multipliers. Taken straight from "Gamemastery", these bonuses have had a dramatic effect on the behaviours of the players and the quality of the game.

Experience from Fantasy

My current Fantasy-genre game is being currently played using the default rules of Castles & Crusades. The guys are enjoying themselves, although there have been rumblings for one or two tweaks, such as with the combat rules. 

From my perspective, however, the real challenge has been calibrating the XP system. C&C uses a very slow progression rate and encourages the GM to add in delays between levelling up processes too: one week of training (expensive) per level gained, e.g. going to Level 3... well that's 3 weeks training, dude.

With staggered level-up points for each different class, low-value awards for combat, and low-encouragement to give other awards... well, I found myself unwittingly starving my players of XP. Following the default rules was making them jittery because they wanted to get to Level 2 and 3 quickly. Remembering Wick's Law that you should "run the game the player's want to play", I knew that they needed a boost.

Step One was to add in the following XP multipliers to encourage role-playing over roll-playing:

Step Two has been to adjust the amount of XP per creature overcome. My players want an action-game where monster kills are valuable, in the Old School tradition, so I will give it to them. I've decided to make the monster-kill XP a per-hero total instead of being divided between them. Thus, when my 5 heroes kill 10 Goblins, worth around 100XP they get 100 each, not 20 each. 

Step Three has been to add in larger bonuses for completing non-fighting goals. These are largely improvised but a rough scale exists in my head: 

• 50-100XP for a small personal goal or small achievement, such as thinking to record something important or prepare something useful. In the last session, one player got 50XP for thinking of making 2 torches from some wood and rotten rags off a looted creature; another got 100XP for recording the details of runes on a doorway.
• 100-250XP for completing a short-term personal goal, such as found on the player's Roleplaying Sheet, or a story goal in the current adventure.
• 250XP+ for longer-term personal goal or a major story goal, such as something that would have taken multiple adventures to achieve.

I also took the expedience of giving everyone a 300XP boost at the end of the first adventure to allow them, after four sessions, to level-up. Oh, and I have dumped the training for this event.

Musings for Beta

Beta RPG is the system I'm developing for my own gaming pleasure. Right now it's very embryonic but it does have the basics in place.

One thing Beta does lack, however, is an XP system. I've not finalised anything yet but I am leaning towards a couple of things based on the experiences of giving XP to my group.

Firstly, they like big numbers. Increments of "1000XP = a reward" sounds nice and feel good. Perhaps each 1000XP total will unlock an upgrade, allowing for some chunky XP awards depending on the genre of play.

That's a good second point too: different genres and styles of play will warrant different XP awards. Fantasy gaming will probably reward creature kills where modern gaming may not... unless it's a monster-hunt game. Thus XP calibration advice to GMs needs to outline how different awards will affect play.

Thirdly, the roleplaying multipliers will probably become a default element of the XP system, encouraging good quality play.

Lastly, the system should draw fair-sized rewards from the Roleplaying (RP) Sheet, which needs to be a part of the character creation process... perhaps similar to the bonuses I mentioned above.

And finally...

The process of XP awards needs to be flexible. It needs to reward the behaviours you want in your game.

I still want to go back and check out the Rolemaster XP system again. Years ago I used the system outlined in the GM book from RMFRP and found it to be really useful. There are all-manner of useful ideas for XP bonuses in there, despite my memory failing me right now. I need to be able to drop in some new rewards ideas if they prove useful.

Do you want them to investigate? Then give XP for each clue found and a big reward for solving the mystery. Do you want them to stop killing like psychos? Then don't reward monster kills with XP.

That said... remember: "You have to run the game the players want to play".

Game on!

Descent: Journeys in the Dark

This week my wife bought a copy of Descent: Journeys in the Dark, Second Edition.

This short review outlines the generally positive feeling that the game gave me (at least as Overlord) and one or two concerns that arose from the other player's reactions.

This is a high-quality board game from Fantasy Flight Games. It draws inspiration from the classical dungeon adventure of D&D fame, pitting a team of adventurers against the denizens of various short quests. 

The biggest break with roleplaying, however, lies with the fact that the Hero players (who play an adventurer) are in direct competition with the Overload player (who has all the critters and lots of power). 

This makes Descent a board game, not a roleplaying experience.

Components

Costing around £50-55, what do you get for your money? Impressively, quite a bit. 

Firstly there are 39 miniatures, of which 8 are heroes and the rest are groups of monsters. Chunky dragons and elementals rub shoulders with Goblins and zombies. These are in a reasonably detailed plastic which provides three colours  - grey for heroes, white for basic monsters, and red for "Master" monsters (aka bosses). No assembly was required, although I was slightly disappointed that my Master Zombie model had become bent in the box, leaving him perpetually leaning back (as if drunk) despite attempts to bend him upright.

Next is all the card. Hard-stock board sections, each numbered and double-sided. Lots of chunky counters from the same cardstock. Very little wastage from the frames. The boards are all marked with squares for movement, although my colour-blind eyes found seeing the lines awkward on some sections. 

There are also a myriad of playing-card sized reference cards and various decks for use in play. From the Overlord Deck (with which I am becoming familiar) through to the Monsters Cards, these are all beautifully illustrated. There is also a smaller-sized card used for Condition Cards and other, smaller decks. At first we were worried at the volume of card types but, with play, realised that relatively few are in use at any given time: you will be swapping Act I decks for Act II decks later in the campaign (should you use it) and you don't need everything all of the time.

There are eight heroes (archetypes), 8 character classes (two per hero archetype) and many choices to be made should you want to play through a campaign.

Mention of the campaign means it's worth mentioning that, in addition to a very easy-to-read and well-constructed rulebook, you also receive a Quest Book. This contains 20 quests, of which 16 are useable as one-off games. Together the 20 quests comprise a campaign, playing 9 of the quests in a sequence through which the outcome of each quest affects the later events in the campaign.

Of note is also the fact that the cards come pre-sorted in ziploc bags. We liked this. Oh, and there are special custom dice.

Game Play

It's simple. Heroes go first, in any order the players choose. Then the Overlord goes.

Heroes and monsters get two actions per turn. Heroes can repeat actions (including Attack) but monsters can only Attack once. You can move, attack, use skills and abilities, help injured friends and many other useful options exist. You roll dice to resolve most actions.

Each quest is a mini-mission. A couple of quests only have one encounter but most have two. You play through the encounters and seek to achieve your goals - Heroes and Overlord have different objectives each time. In the first game, for example, the Overlord needed to get 5 Goblins to escape the evil Heroes... while the Heroes were seeking to kill the Ettin... which they did very quickly in our case. 

You can play at a basic level, treating each quest as a one-off game. You can play one-offs but increase the power-level of the game by one or two notches. Or you can play the campaign.

This is a fast, easy-to-run and well-ordered system of play. We liked it.

Campaign

After one game we decided we wanted to keep the heroes and develop their powers. The campaign was obviously the way to go.

After each quest there is a brief Campaign phase. The heroes return to the town, gain experience points to spend on improving their abilities (all chosen from their Class deck), spend cash earned in the Shop (all from a card deck), and choose their next quest. The Overlord also gains XP and can upgrade their own Overlord Deck, choosing from both universal cards and those belonging to one of three Overlord Classes.

Once prepped, the heroes travel to their next quest. There is a map with travel encounters possible (again, through the use of a deck of cards). This took but a minute to resolve when we played and is very slick.

Once arrived, the heroes enter the next quest's first encounter. You set up, place the models and set to. It's quite easy and the Quest book gives the Overlord a lot of choices to consider.

Overall

We had a good session with two quests, for a total of three encounters, played over around 4 hours. The campaign promises some 20+ hours of game time over multiple sittings.

What impresses me is the combinations of play which means that there is considerable re-playability for the campaign. Each of the eight heroes has two classes to choose from; the Class Cards can't all be bought over the 9 quests that form the campaign, so you have to make choices; the Overlord is customising their own deck and choosing different monsters each time they run a quest; and so on. There are enough choices and random elements to guarantee that no two quests will play the same way.

Tactically the game is challenging. Players have to work together and decide how to tackle each part of the quest. The Overlord gets to throw spanners into their plans. Playing cards from the Overlord Deck essentially either boosts the monsters or disrupts the heroes. My favourite card is "Tripwire".

Of concern for one player was the sense that the game favours the Overlord somewhat. I think that, if this perception is correct (and it might not be) that would be acceptable because the game should be challenging for the Heroes... especially as they form a team with ever-growing powers. But then, I would say that... I played the Overlord.

Is there enough variety in the monsters? Probably. There aren't too many different types but they do upgrade in Act II of the campaign, and there are basic versions as well as bosses. In a way, too many monster choices might make for fiddly play. As Overlord I had enough choices and variety in our first two quests... and the Heroes quickly worked out how to defeat them.

My largest disappointment is that the Lieutenants, special characters used by the Overlord in some missions, didn't come with miniatures. They are represented by tokens. I know that eight or so extra models would be expensive but it did detract from the high-quality of the rest of the creatures. It would be nice to be able to place them as miniatures, just like everyone else.

Overall... well, I was impressed. My wife and friends seemed to have a good time. We are a competitive bunch, though, so the Overlord versus Heroes vibe did get intense... which is not always a good thing. 

It's a high-quality board game which, for me, rivals Warhammer Quest (one of the greatest games ever designed) but doesn't quite pip it. Descent is very, very playable and a game that I hope to be coming back to sooner rather than later.

Game on!

Better Gamemastering

Friday night was the third session in our ongoing first adventure "The Hunt for Gerulf", played with Castles & Crusades and supported by the techniques in Gamemastering. Today's post is a reflection on the three key things that I have noticed from these games.

Simple = Invisible

Firstly, our games have been a lot easier to run and much more flowing using Castles & Crusades. I'm not sure that this is because C&C is the "perfect game" or anything so crass, but rather because it is simple enough to become largely invisible.

Last session the only times I had to pick up the rules were to check on spell descriptions. This is because I'm the only one with the rules. At the end of the session, the third successful games night in a row, the players voiced the desire to access the rules for themselves - the guy with the Cleric stated that it was time to get the rules so he could learn the spell descriptions.

The system wasn't invisible in the first two sessions though. There is a learning curve with any game and there is a need for us to get our heads around the specifics through play. That's ok as long as the learning period is short and doesn't get in the way of the session. I believe the success of C&C for us (so far) has to do with it being familiar to anyone who has played D&D or any d20-system game.

The weird thing is that I wasn't entirely sure that I'd enjoy the system. I was positive about C&C because it has an Old School, stripped down, no messing around kind of feel. Yet, as anyone who reads this column knows, I like my detail and complexity. If there's one thing I have learned, however, it's that detail and complexity is only going to work in a game if you can remember it and use it easily. When it comes down to playing games, it's a lot more fun to just roll with a simpler game and enjoy the show.

As a related thought, reading John Wick's "Play Dirty" last night, I realised the truth of another thing:

One of the not-so-dirty secrets I've learned of being a good GM is you run what the players want to play, not what you want to run. 

Seeing my players really engaged and enjoying the relatively simple and classically fantasy D&D-like game makes it really hard to want to do anything other than deliver more of what they want.

Camera, Actor, Judge

Brian Jamison's "Gamemastering" is becoming quite an influential book for me. It's not that I agree with everything he has written but more that, as I try out his techniques, I am discovering ways to more effectively engage the group of players.

The biggest change in the last two sessions has been my practising of the three modes as GM: camera, actor and judge. Although I am still not confident in actor-mode, pushing my boundaries a little more has been fun to do. I've certainly seen my players rise more to the challenge of playing in-character too - especially after I introduced XP rewards for maintaining it all session.

Most influential, however, has been camera-mode. Focusing on what I describe and making sure that description is both detailed and accurate for what the players need has been key. For example, when describing the throne room in our last session it was important to focus the camera on three features: the throne, the Shaman's possessions, and the sign on the exit door. Simply remembering not to add in details that would distract from these key elements was a major boost to the play of the group: the players were able to focus on what was important to the story while not being distracted by unnecessary red-herrings.

As Judge I realise that, with a simple system, I have less to do in-game. Most of my decisions relating to rules are being made during prep. Yet prep is becoming less intensive too. For example, when constructing the scene with a phalanx of Legionary Skeletons, it was easy to reference the relevant entry in the Monsters & Treasure book, choosing how I would modify the stats and which item I might choose as a reward.

During the game there were far fewer rulings to make because the scene was already thought through and, combined with the simpler system, we found ourselves able to focus on trying to "describe the action" rather than "game the scene".

Obstacles

The other major shift in my thinking has come from Jamison's suggestion of creating obstacles for the players to overcome:

Obstacles are the heart of the game, the fundamental structure that keeps the GM sane and the players motivated. An obstacle is one clearly spelled out challenge. An obstacle must be simple – a locked door that needs to be picked, a foe that needs to be overcome, a message that needs delivering. If you can’t explain the obstacle in such simple terms, then you probably don’t have a single obstacle.

Working my way through Chapter 7 once again (it's a chapter I keep coming back to) I realised that this is the most useful tool in Jamison's box. But it's more subtle than I initially realised.

Every experienced GM gets the idea that clearly spelled-out challenges are key. What Jamison suggests, however, is that each obstacle has three phases:

To conquer any obstacle, three stages are always involved: Information Gathering, The Challenge, and Celebrating Victory. These stages provide a sort of atomic structure for roleplaying games.

This is the thing that has begun to transform my own gaming and, most notably, my prep.

In Friday's session, for example, I provided the group with invitations to go in either of two directions in their quest: deeper into the complex via the door with a warning sign, or back out of the complex trailing the escaped Shaman. The next obstacle in the complex was to cross the Black Bridge; the obstacle outside would be to encounter the Shaman again.

One player initially wanted to follow the Shaman. The key was in the information they gathered: while the tracks showed clearly where to go to pursue the Shaman, the throne room provided the evidence they needed to decide to go deeper. Either obstacle was an option and I tried to remain calm and let the group decide. The result was all the more satisfying for both them and me because they freely chose.

What does this suggest?

GMing my group is becoming a lot more focused. 

I know that I've got an Action-orientated group which means that I can't muck around too much with initial set-up: I need to get the game rolling and add details as we go along. Last session I gave each player a small note asking one or two simple questions to clarify something on their character's RP sheet. These were little details that matter to me as GM but probably less so to the players... at least, not right now. For example: "What's the name of the innkeeper friend you mentioned?"

I am prepping using the obstacle structure and drawing on the ideas that players have suggested on their character's RP sheet. Remembering to provide information, challenge and a celebration has really improved the quality of my obstacles... and the enjoyment of the game.

I am running a simple system that gets out of the way. This means we can focus on becoming better roleplayers. Encouraging in-character interaction has really begun to sparkle: listening to the players discuss, in role, their decisions and ideas is a lot more fun for all.

And you know what? I'm enjoying it all a lot more too.

Here's to another session and another fun time!

Game on!

Beta Fantasy

Having some spare time, I've taken the opportunity to try and progress the development of my own RPG system, Beta.

As I mentioned in my last post, this is a long-overdue project and it's nice to be finally working on it in earnest.

This week has seen several small steps in the right direction:

• Beta RPG has it's own wiki space: betarpg.wikispaces.com
• The special Beta Dice have been defined
• Basic rules for taking actions have been drafted
• Combat rules have had a stab at being written
• A Character Record sheet has been designed

All of these elements mean that I'm almost ready to inflict the system on my alpha-team of players. Although anyone can access the wiki and view our progress, I'm hoping to initially set up a small game with a couple of players (probably using Roll20.net). The aim will be to see if any of this nonsense actually works.

Until then... well, let's take a look...

Beta Dice

For years, I've been wrestling with how to use Dice Pools to quickly assess the success of an action without giving myself a serious headache. I've tried with d12, d8 and d6. Each time, the problem was that no one die roll gives enough of a range to emulate the effects desired.

In truth, the breakthrough came when I realised that I could combine the concepts behind the luscious polyhedral dice mechanics of the Cortex System with the symbol-dice created for the latest Star Wars system.

Beta RPG is played using a selection of special Beta Dice. These are polyhedral dice bearing two types of symbol: wins and fails.

When making a test the player will assemble a Dice Pool to roll. This is a collection of different dice types and colours based upon the abilities of the hero. Once assembled, the dice are rolled; fails are subtracted from wins, and the final result is announced to the GM.

Find out more here: betarpg.wikispaces.com/Beta+Dice

Character Record v1

Wanting to start designing a character I realised that I needed something to record my decisions on. A couple of hours of design have resulted in the creation of the first sheet, designed to handle Attributes, Knacks, Ineptitudes and Knowledges. I'll need to expand it... but first things first, as they say.

Curious people can grab the sheet here: betarpg.wikispaces.com/Downloads

Fantasy Time

Once that lot was out of the way I decided to begin prepping for some playtesting. As a starting point for playtesting Beta RPG it makes sense to begin with a relatively simple setting.

Mykovnia is my own fantasy world. It was born some 28 or so years ago, when I was a young aspiring gamer. It was a place of dark fantasy and night terrors. 

Mykovnia is a gritty fantasy, suitable for swords-and-sorcery style play. Despite recent attempts, the world has never been accurately modelled with an RPG system because things never seemed to feel quite... right. Now is the time.

Having recently started to model a couple of characters in the setting using the RuneQuest 6th Edition rules, I decided to look at converting one of them over. Enter Darryn. You can read about his genesis in my review article for RQ6 at The Iron Tavern. 

Darryn

Darryn is a tribal hunter from a group of Humans living just south of a bitter arctic tundra. He is a somewhat dour and serious fellow, trained in the arts of the Wolf Hunt - a form of ritual - and marked as being under the gaze of the Moon Queen.

Using the draft Character Creation rules I converted him over to Beta in about 5 minutes. He still needs an Edge and a Flaw, but then I need to design some rules for those too. 

Here's what I came up with so far:

All in all, I'm really excited to be rolling hot with the system. I'm sure that my ego will crash mightily the minute that anyone reading decides to point out my glaring errors, but in the meantime it feels good to be finally writing something fresh.

Ego aside, though, don't be hesitant to comment. If you spot a glaring error then it's better to bruise my fragile ego than to leave it there... glaring... staring, like the proverbial Beholder.

What's next? Well... giving Darryn an Edge and a Flaw for starters. Then it's time to create Shanna, the shaman's apprentice. And you know what I'll need to write to make her playable, right?

Game on!

Dungeoneering Revisited

This week off work has been a real blessing, despite having developed the inevitable common cold and weekend lurgy. One of the reasons for feeling so positive, apart from having my wife off work for a couple of days too, was that I've had time to really dig into my hobby.

Regular readers (yes, you hallowed few!) will know that I've been really wrestling with what it means to Gamemaster roleplaying sessions lately.

You'll also realise that I have felt considerable pull in two entirely different directions:

• On the one hand I'm seeking to develop a really engaging and engrossing SF roleplaying game for my regular group; 
• On the other hand I am wanting to immerse myself into the OSR trend towards looser games in the fantasy genre. 

This week has opened my eyes to the possibility of doing both.

Dungeons

What is it about dungeon adventures that so attracts me to want to run one again? Is it just nostalgia for a mythical style of play? Well... no, not for me.

Lately I've run a dungeon adventure for a bunch of teens and, despite two TPKs in recent weeks, they keep coming back for more. One of the reasons for their enthusiasm, however, is definitely my own enthusiasm; in short, I've really enjoyed it.

Dungeons are low-intensity and low-pressure games for me. Once I have a dungeon to use I feel very comfortable in running the players through it. The relatively constrained environs in some way open up my ability to roleplay in a more relaxed manner. It's odd but, for me at least, giving a game clear boundaries helps me to feel more free in my choices.

Writing My Own

Here's a confession: I don't think that I have written and run a dungeon adventure since I was a teenager. 

I've run other people's dungeons. I played in other people's dungeons. But I've not written one myself for more than 25 years. 

I've been asking myself why. The answer is that I am both scared and lazy.

Scared? Yes. What if I write a crappy dungeon?

Lazy? Indeed. Designing an adventure with a dedicated dungeon map is actually a lot more work than most gaming sessions.

So... why bother? Answer: It's about time to scratch that itch.

Easter Crusade

As with all projects, it's important to set a target deadline and set your goals out clearly. I've decided to invite some friends to a session during the impending Easter holidays, giving me around 5 weeks to write an adventure. 

The title comes from the combination of timescale (Easter) and my initial intention to try out the Castles & Crusades system for the game (Crusade). Of course, right now, I am really being tempted by OSRIC (essentially 1e D&D) because of the added complexity... and several other OSR titles too because of their faithful followings online.

All that aside, the main focus has been to come up with an adventure idea and turn it into a cool one-day 8-hour roleplaying session for my friends. 

Challenges so far...

What I wanted to share, however, were the challenges that I seem to face in getting this dungeon written.

Firstly, I have only the vaguest of adventure ideas running around my head: I want to feature a Paladin and a Cleric; I want to do a dungeon raid of some kind, with really clear goals; I want to run it with 3rd level characters, probably pre-gens convention-style. 

Secondly, I haven't designed a dungeon map for more than 25 years. It actually is a bit of an art to do well, so this seems daunting.

Thirdly, I don't want to set it in any pre-generated setting, either of my own or anyone else. In one sense, the adventure will be the beginning of a new setting... but also, very likely, a stand-alone event. That almost gives me too many choices.

Solutions are, however, at hand. 

A copy of The Tome of Adventure Design has proven a really positive tool to get my creative juices flowing. I'm going to review it in more detail at the end of the project, but so far it has proven a valuable mine of cool ideas and systems for dungeon-building.

I've also bought in some squared-paper, tracing paper, pencils, a pencil-sharpener and an eraser. Actually handling these items has really brought my enthusiasm to boiling point. 

It's weird but, in some way, the only thing that seems missing is the idea to get me started.

What's Next?

I guess I am just going to begin and see where this project takes me. Perhaps by sharing the process and thinking out loud with you guys I'll feel spurred to complete it. 

What do I need from you? Maybe some encouragement, advice or ideas. Oh, and if you're local to Nottingham (UK) and you fancy a game, maybe you'd like to come take a seat at the table.

Here's to my first dungeon in more than 25 years. Game on!

The Valley of the Moon King

Arising from this morning's article, about the OSR, I've had a crazy series of ideas coalesce into something that might just work.

WARNING: 
Raw, untested, undeveloped fantasy RPG ideas!

This is being posted with the hope that someone might help me refine it.

Of course, it could just as easily be simple madness.

The Set-up

The Valley of the Moon King lies somewhere in a lost wasteland of a world now plunged deep into an Ice Age. 

In former days the valley was rich and verdant, populated by an exciting and growing fantasy culture. At some point, however, the glory of the past was lost and the valley fell into darkness and icy shadow.

Yes, this is the album cover that inspired the title.

The valley is ruled by the Moon King, the consort of the Moon Queen - a cold and unforgiving Goddess. At the heart of the valley lies the Crystal City, from where the Moon King rules. All the peoples of the valley are now enslaved by his power and forced to labour for his own purposes.

There is a resistance to the Moon King. Some of the slave population have been banding together, hoping to recover the strength to rise up against this tyranny. Faithful to the now lost teachings of the True God, the rebellion is about to unleash its ultimate plan.

The Plan

The story begins as a small band of rebels locates and accesses the hidden Temple to the True God. Their aim is to find their way through the heavily defended and trapped environs, enter the central shrine, and enact the Ritual of Hero Summoning. Carrying the artefacts of former pre-darkness heroes exhumed from sacred sites all across the valley, they believe that they can summon heroes from across the cosmos to come to their aid.

The players take on the role of these newly summoned heroes. In the journey caused by the Ritual they lose their memories and awaken in the central shrine of the True God. They discover the slain bodies of the rebels who summoned them... and they must find their way out of the site and up to the surface. Then they must realise their destiny and overthrow the Moon King.

As an additional twist, the only way that heroes can "level-up" in this setting is through completing tasks. Each time the heroes overcome a challenge on the road to their destiny they access the next stage in their development. This can be envisioned as happening when they uncover a sacred artefact or knowledge, when they defeat a key henchman of the enemy, or when they serve the purposes of the True God faithfully.

The story will end when the Moon King is defeated and one of the heroes takes on the mantle of the new Servant-King of the True.

How it might pan out

What if the game begins with the players as the initial rebel raiders entering the ancient Temple of the True God? 

First they choose an iconic heroic artefact with which to summon a hero. Then they play through the multi-level dungeon adventure with their Level 0 or 1 rebel characters. As they complete the ritual, their life-force enters the spell and they can then create the heroes they summon - each based upon the artefacts they are carrying. 

What if normal XP awards were replaced with chunky level-up awards based on completing quests? 

The players have to uncover artefacts, defeat henchmen, recover lost knowledge, whatever. Each task completed leads a character to level-up. Think Highlander-style sudden power-ups. Would that be cool?

What if, at the end of the story arc, the land is restored from the Ice Age? 

At this point the heroes can begin to quest across more of the world... but not until they unfreeze those mountain passes by freeing all of the people in the valley.

Is this crazy?

I don't know if this kind of game could work. What do you think?

Obviously this is crazily raw. Let me know if you think it's worth developing.

Game on?