The opening screen roll of the Star Wars franchise is a classic serials trope -- Flash Gordon used it to wonderful effect -- that conveys background information in an attractive manner. Add to that the John Williams score, and you have sheer film making pleasure.
As you know, I am pretty excited about George Strayton's upcoming Legends & Labyrinths game. So excited, that I'm giving it a Star Wars lead in...
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Gaming*Mirth: Dragon Pranks -- Pranking Prince Charming
For the past month, my wife Jody has been providing me with fantasy and gaming inspired cartoons that channel the old cartoons that used to be so prominent in gaming magazines like Dragon and The Space Gamer. This week's entry is the first that will be in color.
I'm happy to see that in the weeks since I have started these posts that Wizard's of the Coast has decided to start including cartoons on their website. I don't think I had any influence on their decision, but it is nice to see we are thinking in the same nostalgic way.
I'm happy to see that in the weeks since I have started these posts that Wizard's of the Coast has decided to start including cartoons on their website. I don't think I had any influence on their decision, but it is nice to see we are thinking in the same nostalgic way.
Monday, May 30, 2011
G4 Unboxes "Conquest of Nerath"
I am really looking forward to the release of Wizards of the Coast's next board game Conquest of Nerath later this month. I am not only a fan of big box Axis and Allies style board games, but I want to see the "points of light" setting for the D&D 4th Edition game become more developed -- and it looks like this board game will continue Wizards' recent exercise of adding depth to that world.
One of the biggest mistakes that Wizards made with the release of 4e was the lack of focus on a setting with sufficient depth to form a meaningful connection with players. The reported reason for the vagueness of the setting was that it would allow DMs to create more of their own worlds and use the open "points of light" setting as a sandbox. In reality this concept may have appealed to a few gamers, but I believe it cost Wizards greatly. Recently, they have begun to increase the richness of the setting.
First, in the excellent Tiefling and Dragonborn sourcebooks -- products that weren't particularly successful in the market in part due to the fact that DMs had no way of knowing how much rich fluff these products were offering. This is especially true given the relative lightness of fluff in early core products.
Second, in the growing series of books based in the "points of light" setting. The books suffer from a lack of being able to draw on a rich setting, but each book adds more depth to the setting. As I mentioned earlier, reading the books is like watching world building in progress.
Third, products like the upcoming Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale are filled with rich narrative details -- the kinds of details that should have been in the game from the beginning.
One of the key reasons players enjoy sandboxing around Paizo's Golarion is because the setting has a rich, deep, and strong IP in which to play around. Wizards is finally making the "points of light" setting a richer place.
The G4 box opening makes the game look good, and I'm even more excited about the product itself. I saw a d12 being used and anything that uses d12s automatically gets a boost in my book, which is one reason why I own all the Rogue Games stuff.
You can ignore the last minute of the video where the staff of G4 pretend to play the game.
One of the biggest mistakes that Wizards made with the release of 4e was the lack of focus on a setting with sufficient depth to form a meaningful connection with players. The reported reason for the vagueness of the setting was that it would allow DMs to create more of their own worlds and use the open "points of light" setting as a sandbox. In reality this concept may have appealed to a few gamers, but I believe it cost Wizards greatly. Recently, they have begun to increase the richness of the setting.
First, in the excellent Tiefling and Dragonborn sourcebooks -- products that weren't particularly successful in the market in part due to the fact that DMs had no way of knowing how much rich fluff these products were offering. This is especially true given the relative lightness of fluff in early core products.
Second, in the growing series of books based in the "points of light" setting. The books suffer from a lack of being able to draw on a rich setting, but each book adds more depth to the setting. As I mentioned earlier, reading the books is like watching world building in progress.
Third, products like the upcoming Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale are filled with rich narrative details -- the kinds of details that should have been in the game from the beginning.
One of the key reasons players enjoy sandboxing around Paizo's Golarion is because the setting has a rich, deep, and strong IP in which to play around. Wizards is finally making the "points of light" setting a richer place.
The G4 box opening makes the game look good, and I'm even more excited about the product itself. I saw a d12 being used and anything that uses d12s automatically gets a boost in my book, which is one reason why I own all the Rogue Games stuff.
You can ignore the last minute of the video where the staff of G4 pretend to play the game.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Legends & Labyrinths Are In My Future
As always the Gen Con festival will mark the release of several exciting new role playing games. Among those set to be released this year is a little game called Legends and Labyrinths that will be published by a group of upstart whippersnappers who plan on setting the role playing game world on fire!
The game combines the wonder, excitement, and flexibility of Old School style games with some of the narrative design elements that are coming to the forefront of modern RPG design. It's Old School play without the rules interpretation arguments. George Strayton, the man behind the project, has incorporated some very innovative rules and infused the project with a level of excitement rarely seen outside the Savage Worlds game boards.
At first glance, you might be thinking this is just another player entering the Old School Renaissance game market -- an already flooded market that already has its high production value products -- but you would be wrong.
Trust me when I say that the release of L&L will be bigger than you imagine.
Wizards, Warriors, and Wedding Anniversaries
Jody drew this image a couple of years ago for a wedding anniversary card she made me. Last year, I used Cafe Press to put this image on mugs and a wall tile as an anniversary present for her.
Quick Review -- "The Temple of Yellow Skulls" by Don Bassingthwaite
Bassingthwaite's Eberron books are among the best examples of how to balance good storytelling while making a work of media tie-in fiction reflect its origins. Bassingthwaite had a way of incorporating the tone of the Eberron setting and the mechanics of D&D into the narrative without the game mechanics getting in the way of the mechanics of good storytelling. His Dragon Below series is among the best D&D media tie-in fiction written to date.
I had high hopes for The Temple of Yellow Skulls -- and the Abyssal Plague series of stories -- because Bassingthwaite's involvement in the project. Sadly, the shallow world design of the "Points of Light" setting (and the Nentir Vale in general) were a little too much for Bassingthwaite's talents to overcome. Don wasn't given the same kind of rich background he had available in his earlier work, and he wasn't given the same freedom to create characters within the story, and the book suffers as a consequence. The characters that Bassingthwaite introduced in "Skulls" are well developed and engaging, but the writing on the carryover characters seems a bit pro forma.
Those criticisms stated, Bassingthwaite tells an entertaining tale that has some genuinely enjoyable moments and the "Points of Light" setting -- and the Nentir Vale -- have more depth as a setting after this book than they did before it. I have been impressed with the way that the authors of this new "Points of Light" series of D&D books have begun to fill in the massive gaps in the setting to create a world. Reading these books is like watching world building in action. This book would have been better if the setting itself had either been flushed out, or the author given more freedom in world building, but the book was a fun way to spend an afternoon.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Combat Maneuvers in 4th Edition D&D
One of the chief innovations of the 3rd Edition of the Dungeons & Dragons role playing game was the incorporation of robust mechanics for combat maneuvers. Earlier editions of D&D had vague rules for parrying blows, but little to no guidance with regard to how your character could disarm an opponent or trip a foe. To be fair, some products featured what I would call "patchwork" fixes that allowed for these activities (case in point the D&D "Master's Set" for the Mentzer edition), but the mechanics didn't seem organic to the system. With 3rd edition, this changed. The maneuvers weren't always easy to accomplish for all characters, and often contained a "feat tax" to perform them without consequences, but they were clearly defined and articulated.
Paizo's Pathfinder role playing game took the basic mechanics of the combat maneuvers in 3.5 and expanded them, clarified them, and aided Gamemasters by adding listings for "Combat Maneuver Defense" and "Combat Maneuver Bonus" which helped to speed up calculations during play. They also made some small adjustments to the system.
The combat maneuvers -- other than basic strikes -- that 3.x and Pathfinder presented mechanics for include: Bull Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Overrun, Sunder, Trip, and Feint. Each of these can add some narrative dynamics to combat that empower players to control the "story" of how combat takes place and they add to the excitement of the combat experience.
A chief complaint is that 4th Edition is that the system lacks a robust system like that presented in 3.x -- in fact it is one of the complaints I hear most frequently about 4e. The typical response to those who make this complaint is that the "basic combat maneuvers" of 3.x and Pathfinder are difficult to achieve without appropriate feats and that 4e "solved this" by incorporating the effects of most of these maneuvers into the "powers/maneuvers" of the classes for which these maneuvers are appropriate. After all, the line of argument goes, making a grappling mage in 3.x/Pathfinder isn't an easy thing to do -- the feat tax "trap" and the method of calculating basic attacks -- meant that it was primarily Fighters who were good at these maneuvers.
Both the complaint and the answer are deeply flawed and don't accurately represent the problem or solution. The problem isn't that the system lacks a robust system for using these maneuvers, nor is the solution that they've incorporated the maneuvers into powers/exploits of the various classes. The problem is that 4e does have the mechanics, and they even show you how to use them on page 42 of the Dungeon Master's Guide, but that they only clearly articulate the rules for a couple of them and expect that DMs will follow the advice on page 42 for the remaining maneuvers -- or extrapolate them from the information contained in the rule books.
This is a problem of rule book drafting philosophy. As role playing games have grown as a hobby, many rules systems have become more specific in how combat maneuvers and abilities are expressed. In a manner of speaking, the mechanics of the game systems have become more like computer program subroutines and have become less subject to "DM interpretations" that may differ from group to group. The pinnacle of this style of mechanical subroutine presentation are the Hero System and GURPS, but 3.5 wasn't far behind. A key advantage to these systems is that groups can do narrative combat actions using the Rules As Written (RAW) rather than the Rules As Intended or even the Rules As Interpreted. This kind of design doesn't end rules arguments at gaming tables, but it does lessen them from the days of "rulings rather than rules." Neither the "rulings instead of rules" or "rules instead of rulings" philosophies are superior to the other, but each has its advocates and 3.x was pretty heavily on the "rules instead of rulings" side.
Surprisingly, to those who might think otherwise, 4e has a heavy "rules instead of rulings" philosophy. So much so that some gamers think of 4e as a board game or miniatures war game more than a role playing game. But the game also has a heavy -- and deep -- "rulings instead of rules" philosophy. The game tried to have the best of both worlds. It wanted the rules stability, balance, and statistical predictability of a game like Feng Shui -- where the "average" result of a character's action against a difficulty number is equal to their skill/ability score -- but they also wanted the narrative flow of a game like The Burning Wheel or Savage Worlds. In fact, once you understand the underlying math of the game it can be played entirely using the "Skill Challenge" system without ever using the combat rules -- but that is another post entirely.
The 4th Edition of D&D has a great deal of advice for playing with RAW, but they have moved beyond "Rules as Intended" or "Rules as Interpreted" and have many "Rules as Possible" which are a combination of written and interpreted rules that allow for DMs to recreate the maneuvers from the prior edition without ever creating new rules systems. To do it well, a DM does need to understand the underlying math of combat, but 4e has a pretty simple and a very static (from level to level) system. This is the game's greatest strength -- it makes designing balanced encounters easy -- and its greatest weakness.
The game provides specific examples for how Bull Rush and Grapple work in 4e, and they provide the mechanics for the rest -- but they never construct those remaining maneuvers. Page 42 of the Dungeon Master's Guide gives specific guidance on how to construct the maneuvers, but the specifics are left to the DM to construct.
The basic 4e combat math is as follows. Monsters will have an Armor Class equal to approximately 14 + level -- 15 for a Level 1 monster -- with some slight variation for the monster's "role." Monsters will have a base to hit bonus vs. Armor Class of 5 + Level -- +6 for a Level 1 monster -- and will attack other defenses at 3 + Level -- +4 for a Level 1 Monster. A Player Character will have between a 16 + Level and 20 + Level Armor Class -- depending on "role" -- and will have between a 5 + Level to 8 + bonus to hit an opponent's AC (2 less versus NADs). There is some variation of this, but these are fairly good baseline assumptions.
This means that a Monster -- attacking AC -- will be +6 vs. an AC of 17 to 21 thus hitting 30% to 50% of the time, while players will hit between 60% to 75% of the time. Tactics will modify both of these numbers upward with some roles ("Strikers") hitting 90% of the time. These percentages remain the same -- with very little variation -- throughout a character's "career." The game's progression is relatively level so that challenges have a similar character risk regardless of level, though the growth of Encounter and Daily Powers make the dynamics of combat change as the levels progress.
These assumptions are quite different than the underlying mathematical assumptions of 3.x/Pathfinder. 3.x combats are a little harder to balance, as the combat atop the Belltower in Paizo's first Adventure Path can attest, but they can be quite exciting. While high level threats in 4e might be as challenging to characters as threats were at low levels, they are still relatively narrow in tactical options -- each monster is only expected to live a certain number of rounds so there are only so many attack options given to each opponent -- whereas 3.x/Pathfinder opponents can become quite complex in their tactical offerings in later levels. Anyone who has stated up high level NPC or Dragons knows how detailed these characters can be. This level of granularity is refreshing to many players, and as an old Hero grognard I have a deep appreciation of it. This difference of granularity could be a post in and of itself, just let it be said that 4e characters are always at the same risk of death as they were at low levels and that 3.x characters encounter more tactically diverse (within a single opponent) challenges.
What is key here is that 3.x/Pathfinder is slightly harder to balance for as its combat system is looser. I'm going to use 3.x as a reference for constructing 4e versions of
So how do we bring Bull Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Overrun, Sunder, Trip, and Feint to the 4e table without actually creating new rules? How do we use the existing rules set to bring in more tactical options? Will it break the balance of the game?
I'll answer the last question first. Adding these maneuvers as powers will not break the game. There are already a number of classes, the two Essentials Rangers for example, who have "trip" effects as part of damaging powers, and the Essentials Knight has a Bull Rush capability added to one of its powers. Additionally, 4e does allow anyone to use Bull Rush and Grapple as maneuvers. We'll be using those mechanics to establish our guidelines. This leaves only Disarm, Overrun, Sunder, Trip, and Feint for us to create maneuvers for.
First, let's take Trip. Given that there are currently classes that -- at 1st level -- can Trip as a part of a normal attack action, it isn't game breaking to create a Trip Maneuver. Additionally, being knocked prone in 4e -- while bad -- isn't as horrible as being knocked prone in 3.x/Pathfinder.
TRIP
Essentially, Trip is an attack based on your combatant's Strength against your opponent's Reflex defense. If you hit, then you knock the opponent prone. No damage, just a prone opponent.
You might add a "Trip Training" feat that allows characters to use other statistics as the basis for tripping, just as the game has Combat Training to allow Basic Attacks to be based on alternate stats. I recommend doing so, and making it an Heroic feat.
I also recommend creating a "Sweeping Trip" power that can only be used by those who have the feat -- which I recommend be a Paragon level feat. This feat will allow a combatant to Trip anyone in a Blast 1.
It might also be wise to create feats that allow characters to used certain weapons with Trip attacks, thus gaining the proficiency bonus for those attacks. Weapons like Pole Arms and Staffs should have a "Trip Weapon Proficiency" feat, that lets you use their "Trip Weapon" feature.
Disarm is a little trickier, but not much. Given that damage for monsters is based on level, and not on weapon, a disarm attack's effect isn't just the removal of the weapon it also has an impact on damage dealt.
TRIPI would represent this through the Weakened condition, which halves the damage done by character, that can be ended by spending a move action to pick up a weapon. In essence, the monster must choose between spending an action to pick up a weapon -- or doing less damage. I would also make the attack a little more difficult than a normal melee attack and give a -2 penalty to attack rolls. Given 4e's tendency to have Non-AC Defenses 2 lower than AC, and most weapons provide a Proficiency bonus of +2, this works nicely.
Feint could easily be represented as a Weapon Attack using Strength - 2 vs. Reflex attack that grants the next attack Combat Advantage. Given that there are feats that grant Combat Advantage in easy situations, and that Doppelgangers have a Minor Action that does just this effect, it seems in line with the game's intent.
Sunder would be a Strength vs. Reflex -2 attack that specifically targeted the opponent's weapon or shield. I will give this its own post, as calculating the HP and DC of the attack requires me to look through the Essential DM's book.
Overrun is also easy, but I'd like to give it its own post as well.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
New "John Carter of Mars" Anthology to Be Released in 2012
It would not be an understatement to say that Edgar Rice Burroughs is the reason I read as voraciously as I do today. My introduction to SF/F were the Fairy Tales of Hans Christian Anderson. My first glimpse into modern Fantasy was Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. The author who came to define the genre for me was Michael Moorcock. But it was Edgar Rice Burroughs who showed me all that SF/F can be. His fiction had everything. If I wanted to read "lost worlds" fiction, Burroughs was there. Historical fiction that bordered on Fantasy? Burroughs was there. Wild visions of other worlds that combined soap operatic romance with pulse pounding action? Burroughs was there. Westerns? Cave men? Dinosaurs? Bizarre Aliens? Post Apocalyptic adventure?
Burrough's imagination has always seemed limitless to me. His writing style was workmanlike and efficient in delivering its tale, and finding poetic beauty in one of his tales isn't always an easy task, but the story telling and the ideas are truly remarkable. He arguably created the genre of Planetary Romance with his John Carter stories (though they become formulaic at times), a genre that Leigh Brackett then mastered, but Burroughs returned to the genre in his Venus adventures and did a little post-modern deconstruction of the genre.
Burroughs showed me that written stories were the best tool to open up the imagination. He showed me in ways that a less prolific author, or a better writer, never could have. My mind filled in the details of the gaps in his writing, and it wondered what new genre Burroughs would be introducing me to in the next book I picked up.
What made Burroughs great, and why he inspired me to be a voracious reader, was that he wrote essentially every genre. My love for one author made me a lover of stories. Not a lover of stories of a particular genre, but of stories in the broader sense. It's the reason I'll read anything, and it's also the reason I'm able to talk with people about Gossip Girl, Hellcats, and uncountable Romantic Comedies. I love story, and I have Burroughs to thank for that.
I mention that Burroughs created my love of story because it was just announced that Simon and Schuster books will be releasing a new anthology of John Carter stories written by many of today's leading authors. The book is being edited by one of my favorite anthology editors, John Joseph Adams, and is scheduled to be released just before the new John Carter movie next year.
But it wasn't just the announcement that made me think about why I love Burroughs was the list of authors who will be contributing to the tome. If you were to ask me to create a list of authors "I would select" who would write in a publication featuring new tales of John Carter, it might look like the following:
1) Michael Moorcock
2) Lois McMaster Bujold
3) James Enge
4) Chris Roberson
5) Howard Andrew Jones
6) Ursula K. LeGuin
7) George R. R. Martin
8) Mike Resnick
9) C.J. Cherryh
10) Michael Chabon
Those would be the "big names" I would include off the top of my head. Some of these authors would be chosen for their own confessed love of Burroughs, and others to see what they would do with Burroughs' characters. I'm particularly interested in what Bujold would do.
Surprisingly, not one of those authors is listed as a writer in the upcoming publication. I actually find the lack of Moorcock and Roberson shocking...shocking I tell you.
Instead, this is the list of authors:
1) Joe R. Lansdale
2) Jonathan Maberry
3) David Barr Kirtley
4) Peter S. Beagle
5) Tobias S. Buckell
6) Robin Wasserman
7) Theodora Goss
8) Genevieve Valentine
9) L. E. Modesitt, Jr.
10) Garth Nix
11) Chris Claremont
12) S. M. Stirling
13) Catherynne M. Valente
14) Austin Grossman
There are many talented authors on the list, as well as a few I've never read. What sets this list apart from the list I wrote earlier, is that I wonder what exactly a John Carter story would look like from each of these authors. I have a good idea of what a Moorcock one would look like -- he did do his own Mars planetary romance series after all -- but I have no idea what Theodora Goss' version of planetary romance is. These authors come from across the speculative fiction spectrum. The list includes authors who write Young Adult Fiction, Horror, Short Fiction, Comic Books, "Literary" SF/F, and Classic Fantasy.
I excitedly await the volume and will be investigating the fiction of some of its authors -- the ones I haven't read yet -- to get a glimpse of what Adams has in store for us as Burroughs fans.
Burrough's imagination has always seemed limitless to me. His writing style was workmanlike and efficient in delivering its tale, and finding poetic beauty in one of his tales isn't always an easy task, but the story telling and the ideas are truly remarkable. He arguably created the genre of Planetary Romance with his John Carter stories (though they become formulaic at times), a genre that Leigh Brackett then mastered, but Burroughs returned to the genre in his Venus adventures and did a little post-modern deconstruction of the genre.
Burroughs showed me that written stories were the best tool to open up the imagination. He showed me in ways that a less prolific author, or a better writer, never could have. My mind filled in the details of the gaps in his writing, and it wondered what new genre Burroughs would be introducing me to in the next book I picked up.
What made Burroughs great, and why he inspired me to be a voracious reader, was that he wrote essentially every genre. My love for one author made me a lover of stories. Not a lover of stories of a particular genre, but of stories in the broader sense. It's the reason I'll read anything, and it's also the reason I'm able to talk with people about Gossip Girl, Hellcats, and uncountable Romantic Comedies. I love story, and I have Burroughs to thank for that.
I mention that Burroughs created my love of story because it was just announced that Simon and Schuster books will be releasing a new anthology of John Carter stories written by many of today's leading authors. The book is being edited by one of my favorite anthology editors, John Joseph Adams, and is scheduled to be released just before the new John Carter movie next year.
But it wasn't just the announcement that made me think about why I love Burroughs was the list of authors who will be contributing to the tome. If you were to ask me to create a list of authors "I would select" who would write in a publication featuring new tales of John Carter, it might look like the following:
1) Michael Moorcock
2) Lois McMaster Bujold
3) James Enge
4) Chris Roberson
5) Howard Andrew Jones
6) Ursula K. LeGuin
7) George R. R. Martin
8) Mike Resnick
9) C.J. Cherryh
10) Michael Chabon
Those would be the "big names" I would include off the top of my head. Some of these authors would be chosen for their own confessed love of Burroughs, and others to see what they would do with Burroughs' characters. I'm particularly interested in what Bujold would do.
Surprisingly, not one of those authors is listed as a writer in the upcoming publication. I actually find the lack of Moorcock and Roberson shocking...shocking I tell you.
Instead, this is the list of authors:
1) Joe R. Lansdale
2) Jonathan Maberry
3) David Barr Kirtley
4) Peter S. Beagle
5) Tobias S. Buckell
6) Robin Wasserman
7) Theodora Goss
8) Genevieve Valentine
9) L. E. Modesitt, Jr.
10) Garth Nix
11) Chris Claremont
12) S. M. Stirling
13) Catherynne M. Valente
14) Austin Grossman
There are many talented authors on the list, as well as a few I've never read. What sets this list apart from the list I wrote earlier, is that I wonder what exactly a John Carter story would look like from each of these authors. I have a good idea of what a Moorcock one would look like -- he did do his own Mars planetary romance series after all -- but I have no idea what Theodora Goss' version of planetary romance is. These authors come from across the speculative fiction spectrum. The list includes authors who write Young Adult Fiction, Horror, Short Fiction, Comic Books, "Literary" SF/F, and Classic Fantasy.
I excitedly await the volume and will be investigating the fiction of some of its authors -- the ones I haven't read yet -- to get a glimpse of what Adams has in store for us as Burroughs fans.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
I'm Tired of Edition Wars -- An Open Letter to Gamers
Dear Gamers on the Internet,
Every now and then I like to visit the various websites associated with the companies who manufacture and produce role playing games that I enjoy. These companies, and companies that no longer exist, have provided me with over 20 years of entertainment. The companies are filled with hard working employees who care about the hobby, participate in the hobby themselves, and who believe that roleplaying games are something valuable enough to make a career out of. Given the size of most of these companies, and the ratio of dollars profit to hours of labor of most rpg product, I hold them in pretty high esteem.
I also firmly believe that every single one of them wants to entertain us with an engaging quality product.
I am sick of reading screeds on the message boards of company x about how company x has betrayed the gaming tradition and how company y's came is the real version of company x's product. I am sick of visiting company y's boards and reading comments by fans of company x's products who troll around slamming on the hard work of the employees and fans of company y. Stop it. It is irritating to those of us in the hobby who love both company x and company y, and who realize that these companies have shared staff from time to time. A certain staffer at company x wrote a heck of a lot of the content about a certain "Shackled City." He seems to be a stand up guy.
These comments apply to all those in the "indie" and "retro rpg" movements as well. These communities are creating wonderful gaming products that are influencing the design decisions of the bigger companies. These communities are invaluable to the gaming hobby as they spawn innovation and are some of the best sources of new players. But I am sick of them attempting parricide on older and newer games/editions. You make the hobby better, but so do those other games.
There is no perfect game, and no perfect edition. I would even go so far as to argue that there are only a few truly awful roleplaying games in existence. In fact, I believe that there are more high quality roleplaying games and game adventures than I will ever be able to play in my lifetime. They are already out there. When I found a copy of Dennis Sustare's Swordbearer, I was blown away by how awesome that forgotten game was. When I cracked open Heroes of Shadow for D&D 4e, I was impressed with some of the design decisions which went in directions I never would have chosen -- yet they still seemed to work. When I began reading the most recent Paizo Adventure Path, the "Hammer Studios" fan in me got giddy.
My gaming group recently decided to add "one shot" sessions playing games we've never played before into our normal mix of play, and it has been wonderful. Some of these one shots will be of forgotten, or smaller press, games, but other sessions will be of prior editions of existing games. I'd love to have four to six one shots that go through the evolution of GURPS from The Fantasy Trip to present. We've already done a couple of "Moldvay/Cook" sessions and will likely do more, but that will have to wait for sessions of Boot Hill and even the old Fantasy Games Unlimited Flash Gordon rpg.
These are all wonderful games, and I believe that every edition of the "most popular role playing game in history" are excellent.
As much as I want to say that edition wars are bad because every edition is good -- and I do believe that -- this isn't the real reason that edition wars are bad. Edition wars are bad because they scare away new players. Imagine if you will to people heatedly arguing about some subject that you have little -- or only a passing -- interest in, let's say this subject is programming on The CW Network. As the conversation progresses, the passion of the speakers might pique your interest a little. "These shows must have something to them if they inspire such passion," you might say to yourself. But as the conversations progress and the passion quickly escalates to violate Godwin's Law, your interest might quickly wane. You will no longer care if Supernatural is a better show than Vampire Diaries, and you may not even turn on the one that most matches your viewing preferences. You might miss something you would really like.
The desire to avoid the product associated with people suffering from a kind of IFWS is stronger with the gaming hobby than with other products because the potential new player must ask him/herself, "are these the kind of people I want to spend 4-8 hours a week hanging out with?"
I'll tell you what. I don't want to spend most of my gaming time hanging around people who have to insult other games to build up their own game play. I want to hang around with people who care about the hobby, and who want to have fun. Let's all have fun!
Every now and then I like to visit the various websites associated with the companies who manufacture and produce role playing games that I enjoy. These companies, and companies that no longer exist, have provided me with over 20 years of entertainment. The companies are filled with hard working employees who care about the hobby, participate in the hobby themselves, and who believe that roleplaying games are something valuable enough to make a career out of. Given the size of most of these companies, and the ratio of dollars profit to hours of labor of most rpg product, I hold them in pretty high esteem.
I also firmly believe that every single one of them wants to entertain us with an engaging quality product.
I am sick of reading screeds on the message boards of company x about how company x has betrayed the gaming tradition and how company y's came is the real version of company x's product. I am sick of visiting company y's boards and reading comments by fans of company x's products who troll around slamming on the hard work of the employees and fans of company y. Stop it. It is irritating to those of us in the hobby who love both company x and company y, and who realize that these companies have shared staff from time to time. A certain staffer at company x wrote a heck of a lot of the content about a certain "Shackled City." He seems to be a stand up guy.
These comments apply to all those in the "indie" and "retro rpg" movements as well. These communities are creating wonderful gaming products that are influencing the design decisions of the bigger companies. These communities are invaluable to the gaming hobby as they spawn innovation and are some of the best sources of new players. But I am sick of them attempting parricide on older and newer games/editions. You make the hobby better, but so do those other games.
There is no perfect game, and no perfect edition. I would even go so far as to argue that there are only a few truly awful roleplaying games in existence. In fact, I believe that there are more high quality roleplaying games and game adventures than I will ever be able to play in my lifetime. They are already out there. When I found a copy of Dennis Sustare's Swordbearer, I was blown away by how awesome that forgotten game was. When I cracked open Heroes of Shadow for D&D 4e, I was impressed with some of the design decisions which went in directions I never would have chosen -- yet they still seemed to work. When I began reading the most recent Paizo Adventure Path, the "Hammer Studios" fan in me got giddy.
My gaming group recently decided to add "one shot" sessions playing games we've never played before into our normal mix of play, and it has been wonderful. Some of these one shots will be of forgotten, or smaller press, games, but other sessions will be of prior editions of existing games. I'd love to have four to six one shots that go through the evolution of GURPS from The Fantasy Trip to present. We've already done a couple of "Moldvay/Cook" sessions and will likely do more, but that will have to wait for sessions of Boot Hill and even the old Fantasy Games Unlimited Flash Gordon rpg.
These are all wonderful games, and I believe that every edition of the "most popular role playing game in history" are excellent.
As much as I want to say that edition wars are bad because every edition is good -- and I do believe that -- this isn't the real reason that edition wars are bad. Edition wars are bad because they scare away new players. Imagine if you will to people heatedly arguing about some subject that you have little -- or only a passing -- interest in, let's say this subject is programming on The CW Network. As the conversation progresses, the passion of the speakers might pique your interest a little. "These shows must have something to them if they inspire such passion," you might say to yourself. But as the conversations progress and the passion quickly escalates to violate Godwin's Law, your interest might quickly wane. You will no longer care if Supernatural is a better show than Vampire Diaries, and you may not even turn on the one that most matches your viewing preferences. You might miss something you would really like.
The desire to avoid the product associated with people suffering from a kind of IFWS is stronger with the gaming hobby than with other products because the potential new player must ask him/herself, "are these the kind of people I want to spend 4-8 hours a week hanging out with?"
I'll tell you what. I don't want to spend most of my gaming time hanging around people who have to insult other games to build up their own game play. I want to hang around with people who care about the hobby, and who want to have fun. Let's all have fun!
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Friday, May 06, 2011
Meet The Crusaders -- The Archangel Gabriel
In the 90s, I ran a DC Heroes campaign for a close knit group of friends that lasted for a couple of years. The players all made characters who were supposed to be around "Justice League" power level, but they could make heroes based on any concept they desired. While I was using the DC Heroes rules set for the campaign, the characters were equally likely to be facing Magneto or Doctor Polaris in combat as I incorporated characters from both the Marvel and DC universes.
For a short period during the campaign, my wife made some short cartoon strips based on the role playing adventures of the team members. Some of the results were quite amusing. One of my favorite characters in the game was the Archangel Gabriel. My dear friend Matt York came up with the character concept. You see, Gabriel is an immensely powerful super powered being who believes that he is an Archangel in the service of the Lord. His power and righteousness might lead one to believe he is correct in this opinion, but his stint in an insane asylum and his interesting interpretation of what merits swift retributions might make you rethink the issue.
Click on Image for Larger Version
Click on Image for Larger Version
The third panel in the Origin strip refers to a time during our DC Heroes campaign where Gabriel was in battle with Ares in the European Theater of Operations during a time travel story. Gabriel used his Aura of Fear power in an attempt to intimidate the God of War and give the rest of the Crusaders some benefit during the combat -- Herakles wanted to "bestow upon Ares 'the Gift.'" Matt rolled his attack, which he had already pumped up with hero points to make more effective, and it came up doubles, so he rolled again and added that result to his prior result, but he had rolled doubles again. ...and so on, and so on. He rolled doubles more times than I can remember and his result was literally off the charts. The massive Aura of Fear, which now extended over the entire continent of Europe, not only cowed Ares, but sent put the fear of God into every person in the ETO.
It was a great moment from a great character.
For a short period during the campaign, my wife made some short cartoon strips based on the role playing adventures of the team members. Some of the results were quite amusing. One of my favorite characters in the game was the Archangel Gabriel. My dear friend Matt York came up with the character concept. You see, Gabriel is an immensely powerful super powered being who believes that he is an Archangel in the service of the Lord. His power and righteousness might lead one to believe he is correct in this opinion, but his stint in an insane asylum and his interesting interpretation of what merits swift retributions might make you rethink the issue.
Click on Image for Larger Version
Click on Image for Larger VersionThe third panel in the Origin strip refers to a time during our DC Heroes campaign where Gabriel was in battle with Ares in the European Theater of Operations during a time travel story. Gabriel used his Aura of Fear power in an attempt to intimidate the God of War and give the rest of the Crusaders some benefit during the combat -- Herakles wanted to "bestow upon Ares 'the Gift.'" Matt rolled his attack, which he had already pumped up with hero points to make more effective, and it came up doubles, so he rolled again and added that result to his prior result, but he had rolled doubles again. ...and so on, and so on. He rolled doubles more times than I can remember and his result was literally off the charts. The massive Aura of Fear, which now extended over the entire continent of Europe, not only cowed Ares, but sent put the fear of God into every person in the ETO.
It was a great moment from a great character.
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Fantasy Humor
One of my favorite features of the old Dragon magazine was the DragonMirth cartoons section. Jody and I were discussing them a while back, and she kindly drew a couple of DragonMirth-esque single panel cartoons of her own.
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
K is for Kung Fu 2100
For its first 26 issues, the storied Space Gamer magazine was a house organ owned and published by Metagaming Concepts. Metagaming used the magazine to promote their upcoming products, and included some -- but not much -- coverage of products by other companies. This all changed after the magazine changed publishers. Starting with issue 27, The Space Gamer was published by the upstart Steve Jackson Games and continued to be published by them for another five years. The Steve Jackson Games run of The Space Gamer is one of the best runs of any gaming magazine in the history of the hobby. James Maliszewski has recently waxed nostalgic about the title and by I talked about the magazine here when SJG started offering their issues as pdfs for sale at their e23 webstore (they are a steal at $2.99 each).
In addition to publishing news and articles reviewing/supporting existing games on the market, the Steve Jackson era of the magazine included a number of classic minigames. Some -- like Allen Varney's Globbo where humorous in nature -- and others -- like Battlesuit -- were games that were inspired by other Steve Jackson products. Most of these games were quite good, but one struck a particular chord with me when I first encountered it as a wee tyke. That game was Dennis Sustare's Kung Fu 2100. The game had everything -- martial artists, secret laboratories run by evil scientists, and transhuman clones.
Dennis Sustare is not a well known game designer today, but he designed some very good micro-games in the 80s. His Star Smuggler game is an entertaining solo game where the player takes on the role of a Han Solo-esque freetrader, and his Intruder is a playful combination of A.E. Van Vogt's Black Destroyer and Ridley Scott's Alien that plays like Star Trek meets John Carpenter's: The Thing. This is likely because both Alien and Star Trek were inspired by the adventures of Van Vogt's Space Beagle, and Sustare's game captures the anxiety of a crew of scientists dealing with an otherworldly threat.
Kung Fu 2100 was inspired by this illustration in the first SJG issue of The Space Gamer:
Issue 27 asked readers to describe what was going on in the above image. Readers could present a game idea or write a short piece of fiction. Sustare did both and the his winning submission became the complete game insert for issue 30.
Kung Fu 2100 was eventually published in three different formats. The first was as the insert game in issue 30 of The Space Gamer for which you will need issue 31 to get the errata to the game -- there are a couple of errors. The second version was a minigame enclosed in a ziplock bag, and the final version was identical to the second except that it was now packaged in SJG's signature minigame box. In the end, the game got nice packaging and provided hours of fun at an inexpensive price.
The premise of Kung Fu 2100 was a combination Logan's Run and James Ryan's Kill or Be Killed. To quote the copy on the game:
The game features an interesting combat system where kung fu maneuvers are selected in secret and later revealed as combat occurs simultaneously. The game uses an interesting alternating movement system in order to maintain game balance. The Terminators are tougher than their opponents, but they are badly outnumbered and only the right combination of stealth and skill selection will help them defeat the dreaded CloneMaster.
The components of the game have never been nothing special, you have to hand cut out the counters, but I have always wanted to make a project of making a "home play edition" of the game. I'd replace the small counters used to represent maneuvers and replace them with small eurogame sized cards. The Terminators, Jellies, and CloneMaster would be represented by stand up paper minis -- likely from the Cardboard Heroes line by SJG. I'd also make a more modern looking map. I'll get around to it some day, but that day will have to wait.
As it is now, you can get a copy of the game for $2.99 by buying issue 30 of The Space Gamer, printing out the proper pages, and getting down to having a good time. You might want to buy that copy of issue 31 for the errata, but that issue is worth the purchase for the reviews alone.
Before I forget, one of the most interesting things about the game is that the Terminators are a part of the Cult of Thanatos. The reason they despise the CloneMasters so much isn't entirely due to the tyranny of CloneMaster rule. The Terminators are far more upset that the CloneMasters seek immortality. The Terminators are part of a cult that glorifies death, and seeks to bring destruction to those who are avoiding the inevitability of death.
In addition to publishing news and articles reviewing/supporting existing games on the market, the Steve Jackson era of the magazine included a number of classic minigames. Some -- like Allen Varney's Globbo where humorous in nature -- and others -- like Battlesuit -- were games that were inspired by other Steve Jackson products. Most of these games were quite good, but one struck a particular chord with me when I first encountered it as a wee tyke. That game was Dennis Sustare's Kung Fu 2100. The game had everything -- martial artists, secret laboratories run by evil scientists, and transhuman clones.
Dennis Sustare is not a well known game designer today, but he designed some very good micro-games in the 80s. His Star Smuggler game is an entertaining solo game where the player takes on the role of a Han Solo-esque freetrader, and his Intruder is a playful combination of A.E. Van Vogt's Black Destroyer and Ridley Scott's Alien that plays like Star Trek meets John Carpenter's: The Thing. This is likely because both Alien and Star Trek were inspired by the adventures of Van Vogt's Space Beagle, and Sustare's game captures the anxiety of a crew of scientists dealing with an otherworldly threat.
Kung Fu 2100 was inspired by this illustration in the first SJG issue of The Space Gamer:
Issue 27 asked readers to describe what was going on in the above image. Readers could present a game idea or write a short piece of fiction. Sustare did both and the his winning submission became the complete game insert for issue 30.
Kung Fu 2100 was eventually published in three different formats. The first was as the insert game in issue 30 of The Space Gamer for which you will need issue 31 to get the errata to the game -- there are a couple of errors. The second version was a minigame enclosed in a ziplock bag, and the final version was identical to the second except that it was now packaged in SJG's signature minigame box. In the end, the game got nice packaging and provided hours of fun at an inexpensive price.
The premise of Kung Fu 2100 was a combination Logan's Run and James Ryan's Kill or Be Killed. To quote the copy on the game:
IRON FISTS...
For years the CloneMasters have ruled the world. Their only foes are the Terminators -- trained from birth in the martial arts. Now you are a Terminator. Your mission: smash your way into the CloneMaster's fortress...chop through his defenses...and destroy him forever.
But his guards are many and loyal. Like you, they can kill with a single blow. And time is against you...
The game features an interesting combat system where kung fu maneuvers are selected in secret and later revealed as combat occurs simultaneously. The game uses an interesting alternating movement system in order to maintain game balance. The Terminators are tougher than their opponents, but they are badly outnumbered and only the right combination of stealth and skill selection will help them defeat the dreaded CloneMaster.
The components of the game have never been nothing special, you have to hand cut out the counters, but I have always wanted to make a project of making a "home play edition" of the game. I'd replace the small counters used to represent maneuvers and replace them with small eurogame sized cards. The Terminators, Jellies, and CloneMaster would be represented by stand up paper minis -- likely from the Cardboard Heroes line by SJG. I'd also make a more modern looking map. I'll get around to it some day, but that day will have to wait.
As it is now, you can get a copy of the game for $2.99 by buying issue 30 of The Space Gamer, printing out the proper pages, and getting down to having a good time. You might want to buy that copy of issue 31 for the errata, but that issue is worth the purchase for the reviews alone.
Before I forget, one of the most interesting things about the game is that the Terminators are a part of the Cult of Thanatos. The reason they despise the CloneMasters so much isn't entirely due to the tyranny of CloneMaster rule. The Terminators are far more upset that the CloneMasters seek immortality. The Terminators are part of a cult that glorifies death, and seeks to bring destruction to those who are avoiding the inevitability of death.
Monday, May 02, 2011
Friday, April 29, 2011
S is for Steampunk
Yes, I know I skipped a couple of letters -- I will get to them -- but I just wanted to share this small piece of joy my wife drew up for me.
Monday, April 25, 2011
J is for Justice Inc. and James Bond
Two of the -- about 6 -- game designers that I credit with helping to lift role playing games out of the ghetto of the dungeon crawl and into the world of narrative play are Aaron Allston and Greg Gorden. To this day, I still love a good dungeon crawl, but it was designers like Allston and Gorden who showed me that role playing games could be an immersive, interactive, narrative experience that would last for years. They did this by designing games that provided excellent advice for game masters and designing mechanics that fostered/supported narrative play.
I mentioned that Allston was one of the first people to review the Champions role playing game in my H is for Hero System entry. Allston was a quick convert to the system, but he also became one of its biggest promoters and one of Hero Games' better freelance game designers. His Strike Force sourcebook is one of the best super hero game campaign guides ever written, and its advice for running gaming sessions/campaigns are valuable for game masters running any gaming system. In 1984, Aaron Allston and Mike Stackpole (who had also worked on Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes) joined the staff at Hero Games to design a role playing game that would allow players to experience the pulse pounding action of the pulp stories of the early 20th century. The book is nearly flawless in its presentation and design. The mechanics are clearly presented and are able to simulate the wide array of stories that were featured in the pulps.
But the greatest asset of Justice Inc. isn't the rules, it is the Justice Inc. Campaign Book. This booklet is a fantastic collection of essays that discuss how to run a role playing game campaign. The book covers everything from Crimefighting, Espionage, Action and Horror to Spicy Stories and Science Fiction. It truly covers the pulps as a whole and doesn't get caught up in the erroneous mindset that pulp only equals "The Shadow" or "The Spider." Those are great characters, to be sure, but the pulps include Robert E. Howard, C.L. Moore, H.P. Lovecraft and others. The stories run the gamut of genre, and Allston and Stackpole know their stuff. The advice in this 80 page book belongs in any game master's library.
Especially useful are the "Secrets of Successful Gamemastering" listed on pages 6 and 7. The list is short, but it cuts right to the point. The list is as follows:
1) A Gamemaster is an entertainer.
2) Be fair.
3) Be firm and consistent.
4) Be flexible.
5) Use dramatic license.
It was the first rule on that list which was mind-blowing to me when I first read it. It was a direct argument against the "DM is God" mentality that was prevalent during the early era of role playing games. It put the onus on the GM not to just "challenge" the players, or to crush them at a whim, but instead to make sure that the players are having fun. To quote the discussion after the rule, "The thrill of discover, the heart-pounding moments of suspense, and the laughs from humor beat the hell out of the drudgeries of constant warfare and treasure harvesting." It is a mantra that I have tried to live up to for years. Sometimes -- as is the case with some of my 4e sessions -- I fail, but I think that my Eberron players have had some pretty good times and have some stories to share.
Rising up from the ashes of the acquisition of SPI by TSR in the early 1980s, Victory Games -- made up of former SPI employees -- released the James Bond 007 role playing game in 1983. After TSR had purchased SPI, TSR largely ignored SPI titles and it seemed that the acquisition had more to do with limiting competition than acquiring useful IP. Ironically, it was the Lorraine Williams era of TSR that re-released a lot of the neglected SPI titles. But if TSR had never purchased SPI, then Victory Games would never have been created and it is possible -- just possible -- that the James Bond 007 game would never have been designed and that would be a shame.
Gerard Christopher Klug is credited with "Game Design, Development, and Project Coordination," but anyone who is familiar with the old SPI/Avalon Hill system of designing games knows that it is likely Gregory Gorden and Neil Randall (credited as "system development") who did the bulk of the innovative work on this project. Those who are familiar with Greg Gorden's other work -- DC Heroes, Deadlands, Torg, Star Wars and a host of other games -- can see his influence all over the place.
There is a lot to like in James Bond 007. It has an easy to use rules system and some of the best adventures ever written for any game, but the contribution that altered the way that I viewed role playing games -- and informs my sentiments against "roll a skill check for everything" or "If the player doesn't know/ask it then they don't know/can't find out" mentalities of many GMs -- was their Fields of Experience mechanic. You see, in the world of James Bond, there are some things that the characters just know, and Gorden and crew came up with a system to emulate it. It isn't anything fancy, but it was revolutionary then -- and is still revolutionary as Robin Laws' Gumshoe system demonstrates for modern gamers. Put briefly, "There are no dice rolls involved when a character uses a Field of Expertise in play. He either knows the information required or how to perform the task, or he does not. A Field of Expertise will always fall into one of two categories -- information and performance." The GM notes go into even greater detail about Fields of Knowledge recommending that GMs use mechanics to step in to help when players don't ask questions.
A lot of "mystery" adventures bog down in rpgs because the players fail a roll, or fail to "look under every nook and cranny of a room." In the world of James Bond, if the character had the Forensics or Cryptography Field of Knowledge that was enough to keep the ball rolling. Give the clues. Don't interpret them for the players, but let them have the information themselves. Sometimes, their own interpretations end up being better than your original idea and can take adventures down entertaining paths. This was the kind of play recommended by James Bond 007, and it was so different from the puzzle-deathtraps -- like Tomb of Horrors -- of other games that it changed the way I play forever.
Both of these games are sadly out of print, but you can find them at fairly affordable prices on eBay. I cannot praise them highly enough.
I mentioned that Allston was one of the first people to review the Champions role playing game in my H is for Hero System entry. Allston was a quick convert to the system, but he also became one of its biggest promoters and one of Hero Games' better freelance game designers. His Strike Force sourcebook is one of the best super hero game campaign guides ever written, and its advice for running gaming sessions/campaigns are valuable for game masters running any gaming system. In 1984, Aaron Allston and Mike Stackpole (who had also worked on Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes) joined the staff at Hero Games to design a role playing game that would allow players to experience the pulse pounding action of the pulp stories of the early 20th century. The book is nearly flawless in its presentation and design. The mechanics are clearly presented and are able to simulate the wide array of stories that were featured in the pulps.
But the greatest asset of Justice Inc. isn't the rules, it is the Justice Inc. Campaign Book. This booklet is a fantastic collection of essays that discuss how to run a role playing game campaign. The book covers everything from Crimefighting, Espionage, Action and Horror to Spicy Stories and Science Fiction. It truly covers the pulps as a whole and doesn't get caught up in the erroneous mindset that pulp only equals "The Shadow" or "The Spider." Those are great characters, to be sure, but the pulps include Robert E. Howard, C.L. Moore, H.P. Lovecraft and others. The stories run the gamut of genre, and Allston and Stackpole know their stuff. The advice in this 80 page book belongs in any game master's library.
Especially useful are the "Secrets of Successful Gamemastering" listed on pages 6 and 7. The list is short, but it cuts right to the point. The list is as follows:
1) A Gamemaster is an entertainer.
2) Be fair.
3) Be firm and consistent.
4) Be flexible.
5) Use dramatic license.
It was the first rule on that list which was mind-blowing to me when I first read it. It was a direct argument against the "DM is God" mentality that was prevalent during the early era of role playing games. It put the onus on the GM not to just "challenge" the players, or to crush them at a whim, but instead to make sure that the players are having fun. To quote the discussion after the rule, "The thrill of discover, the heart-pounding moments of suspense, and the laughs from humor beat the hell out of the drudgeries of constant warfare and treasure harvesting." It is a mantra that I have tried to live up to for years. Sometimes -- as is the case with some of my 4e sessions -- I fail, but I think that my Eberron players have had some pretty good times and have some stories to share.
Rising up from the ashes of the acquisition of SPI by TSR in the early 1980s, Victory Games -- made up of former SPI employees -- released the James Bond 007 role playing game in 1983. After TSR had purchased SPI, TSR largely ignored SPI titles and it seemed that the acquisition had more to do with limiting competition than acquiring useful IP. Ironically, it was the Lorraine Williams era of TSR that re-released a lot of the neglected SPI titles. But if TSR had never purchased SPI, then Victory Games would never have been created and it is possible -- just possible -- that the James Bond 007 game would never have been designed and that would be a shame.
Gerard Christopher Klug is credited with "Game Design, Development, and Project Coordination," but anyone who is familiar with the old SPI/Avalon Hill system of designing games knows that it is likely Gregory Gorden and Neil Randall (credited as "system development") who did the bulk of the innovative work on this project. Those who are familiar with Greg Gorden's other work -- DC Heroes, Deadlands, Torg, Star Wars and a host of other games -- can see his influence all over the place.
There is a lot to like in James Bond 007. It has an easy to use rules system and some of the best adventures ever written for any game, but the contribution that altered the way that I viewed role playing games -- and informs my sentiments against "roll a skill check for everything" or "If the player doesn't know/ask it then they don't know/can't find out" mentalities of many GMs -- was their Fields of Experience mechanic. You see, in the world of James Bond, there are some things that the characters just know, and Gorden and crew came up with a system to emulate it. It isn't anything fancy, but it was revolutionary then -- and is still revolutionary as Robin Laws' Gumshoe system demonstrates for modern gamers. Put briefly, "There are no dice rolls involved when a character uses a Field of Expertise in play. He either knows the information required or how to perform the task, or he does not. A Field of Expertise will always fall into one of two categories -- information and performance." The GM notes go into even greater detail about Fields of Knowledge recommending that GMs use mechanics to step in to help when players don't ask questions.
A lot of "mystery" adventures bog down in rpgs because the players fail a roll, or fail to "look under every nook and cranny of a room." In the world of James Bond, if the character had the Forensics or Cryptography Field of Knowledge that was enough to keep the ball rolling. Give the clues. Don't interpret them for the players, but let them have the information themselves. Sometimes, their own interpretations end up being better than your original idea and can take adventures down entertaining paths. This was the kind of play recommended by James Bond 007, and it was so different from the puzzle-deathtraps -- like Tomb of Horrors -- of other games that it changed the way I play forever.
Both of these games are sadly out of print, but you can find them at fairly affordable prices on eBay. I cannot praise them highly enough.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)