Writing Adventures

I got back into Seattle on Tuesday. My grandmother passed away yesterday (Wednesday); I got the call at the same time I was placing flowers on my mother's gravestone, one week after her burial.

Life goes on.

***

In addition to all the "real world" stuff I've got on my plate at the moment, I'm currently engaged in a crap-ton of adventure writing. I mean, a LOT.

The re-write/re-purposing of the I3-I5 Desert of Desolation series has been temporarily suspended. Not because it's not a great idea (I mean...I love it), that it's really not suitable (even as an open region of my campaign world) for exploration by characters under 3rd level or so.  And all my players are about to start over (Friday afternoon) with brand-spanking new 1st level characters.

TPKs have a way of resetting things.

SO, I need some low-level stuff to get them up to snuff. Because I've been busy, and because I needed a breath of fresh air, I took the time to comb through the racks and a game shop near my grandmother's house in Missoula. Shout out to Retrofit Games, which had an absolutely beautiful store and friendly/helpful staff, who were able to get me something sufficient for my needs (as well as great recommendation for a cheeseburger in town: Frugal's. Get "the Classic Fix"). 

What I got, was a 20 page DCC Lankhmar adventure module written by Michael Curtis called Grave Matters. I am on record as a "non-fan" of the DCC system (which I've played before, multiple times), but it's close enough to B/X...which is close enough to AD&D...that I can make it function with minimal work.

And I mean minimal. Curtis knows his stuff ("Duh," says all the people who own Stonehell Dungeon, etc. However, this is my first product of his so far as I know). For a measly $10, I got a book with TWO adventures (Grave Matters and Madhouse Meet), neither of which suck, and perfectly suitable for PCs of 1st and 2nd level. The treasure counts are even (well, almost) correct, which is the usual thing you find lacking in OSR games.

SO...yeah, Lankhmar-esque adventure is perfectly fine for my Bandit Kingdom Boise. And with a little x.p. under their belts, it should be a simple matter of slipping the group a treasure map to get them out into the desert...probably a nice way to leave behind past shenanigans.

But campaign stuff isn't the only thing for which I'm writing. Turns out I'm going to a game convention this year...my first since the pandemic...and even though it's not till October, I plan to be well-prepped for the three game slots I'm slated for. The con is called Cauldron, "the OSR EuroCon" and it's supposed to be a celebration of 1st edition AD&D that will play out over three days in Hessen, Germany. Fortunately, it is an international affair and so games will be run in English (the international language of tourists). 

Room and board...and beer...appears to all be included in the ticket price, but you have to bring your own books and dice, and I'm cognizant of my responsibility to represent the USA well (currently, I'm the only Ugly American on the docket). Because I am old and lazy, and because it is one of my most beloved adventure modules, I am re-writing I1: Dwellers of the Forbidden City into something suitable for a three-part, con-style adventure series that...um...doesn't suck(?) too much (??). 

Con games are tricky: you have a few hours to get down to business, and (hopefully) provide a fair amount of game play, with a satisfying (or conclusive) end. Cauldron also has the additional challenge of being run with ADDKON rules (Germany's version of the FLAILSNAILS conventions)...which for me means that I'm not running these as one-offs but as adventures that will impact the PCs even after I've left their schönes Land (und bier) behind. No apocalyptic party-nuking scenarios, just good clean AD&D.

ANYway. It should be great, but I want to play-test those, too. And ideally, that will mean getting my current group up to 5th & 6th level by the end of the summer. Doable...but a tall order nevertheless.

Especially considering Prince of Nothing just announced his (third) annual NoArt-Punk contest. And, of course, I want to enter (again). And, of course, I want to put forth a good showing and build on what I learned in the last two NAP events. And THIS year, the theme is "high level" D&D, something that holds a special place in my heart. My last two entries (one of which was a finalist and got a place in the book) were both written for parties of 10th-14th level. I'm thinking this year's will be more in the 9th-12th level range, but I already have an idea for it and it's a little on the ambitious side: something on the scale of 60-some encounters instead of my normal 30ish. Which (to give you some perspective) would be around 50% larger than all three scenarios I'm writing for Cauldron combined. No small feat, especially considering I need to draw the maps and I suck at maps.

But NAP III isn't due till November 30th. Prince suggested I write it on the long flight back from Germany to Seattle. We'll see.

Yeah: a lot of adventure cobbling going on at the moment, some of it fairly ambitious. But working with monsters and traps and treasures and fantasy scenarios is a welcome respite from dealing with all the other "stuff" that's going on in my life at the moment. And these respites help keep me...mm...stable? Not sure the word I'm looking for ("grounded" ain't it). D&D helps let the pressure off; it's the valve that keeps the steam from blowing the kettle. I'm not sure if my life would function better (or differently) without it, but for right now I'm glad to have it.

Later, Gators.

The New "Heartbreakers"

I am extremely tired, a result of staying up till after 1am the last few nights watching Olympics coverage and then getting up early-early-early (today was 4:30…beagles!). It’s all good stuff with a ton o compelling stories (natch), but my brain is doing a bit of a swimmy thing right now, so just bear with me as I meander a bit.

Spent much of the morning reading on-line reviews for two different RPGs: Adventurer-Conquerer-King System (ACKS) and Old School Hack (OSH). I don’t own either of these games (I don’t think…I might have downloaded OSH a while back, but if I did I don’t remember), and haven’t personally read ‘em (or have forgotten what I read), so you’ll have to take anything I say on either with a heaping grain of salt.

Both of these games could be considered part and parcel to what I call “D&D Mine” – that is, they’re new versions of old edition D&D games, deconstructed and rebuilt (not just re-flavored) by individuals who aren’t buying into the WotC program, understand the limitations of Old School D&D, and aren’t afraid to divorce themselves from standard D&D tropes. Unlike most Fantasy Heartbreakers (to which they certainly bear a certain resemblance) they seem built off a B/X or BECMI base foundation (including race-as-class design preference), though often borrowing mechanics from later editions (including 3rd & 4th edition). Also different from heartbreakers (at least as described by Ron Edwards) they make no great claims to innovations, but instead claim to ape, emulate, or conjure “Old School” flavor or values through the use of 21st century game design…in other words, bringing a post-modern sensibility to contribute to the old school “fun” of the game.

Dungeon Crawl Classics (DCC) also falls into this category, as far as I’m concerned, and possibly Lamentations of the Flame Princess (LotFP). As with ACKS and OSH (wow, quite a proliferation of acronyms, huh?) I have yet to purchase either of these books…though I’ve read (and played) the Beta version of DCC and perused (briefly) the text of LotFP.

The question I suppose I’m circling around, deciding how to parse is this: just what do I think of this development?

NOT “what do I think of these games specifically?” because, as I said, I really haven’t taken a close enough look at any of ‘em (well, I did play the DCC beta for several weeks and my views were decidedly mixed and, in the end, more to the negative side). But rather what do I think of the tact of these publishers? What do I think of the idea as a CONCEPT?

And just to be clear, here’s the concept I’m talking about:

- Take B/X (or the early stages of BECMI/RC).
- Manipulate the rules to taste using 21st century sensibilities and old school attitude.
- Self-publish in an extremely polished, beautiful packaged form.

Do you see the difference between this and a “fantasy heartbreaker?” These games are not shy about paying tribute to their roots (even, one presumes, including boilerplate OGL language “just in case”). However, they are very different from retro-clones, which attempt to emulate their original editions as best as possible while a) filing off serial numbers, and b) correcting “over-sights” based on existing edition rules (see S&W and LL’s AEC for examples of what I mean).

So what do I think about the concept? Um…does it say something that I haven’t purchased any of ‘em?

On the one hand, they face the same challenge to their business model as an actual fantasy heartbreaker. Heck, they may be more challenged, since their target demographic isn’t newbies, but rather Old School aficionados who already have their favorite edition, retro-clone, or personal heartbreaker for use. On the other hand, the OSR as a group feels much more kind-hearted and open-minded and seem ready to regularly purchase books from their compatriots if only to support designers, steal ideas, and keep the movement going. It IS heady, inspiring stuff…not just the ease with which people can create and publish their games, but the sheer amount of creativity being shared around.

However, I still can’t help but feel that…well, shit…I don’t really know what I want to say here. Let me talk about each of these games in turn:

DCC: I’ve played this game and there’s a lot to like, especially some of the new ideas and concepts included in the game. Unfortunately, I dislike the execution of most of ‘em. For me, having played the game I will probably never buy it, despite the fantastic appearance of the book: it’s too big, too random, too bulky for the kind of game I like to run these days.

LotFP: Knowing what this game is all about and having read a couple of Raggi’s adventures, it would be difficult for me to purchase this one (except for the killer artwork), because I will probably never run it/play it. I’m just not that into the weird/horror genre as far as gaming goes. I mean, I love weird horror having grown up with Lovecraft and the Swamp Thing and those eerie Golden Key comics and Weird Tales and horror comics and such. But I’ve yet to find the game system that does the genre credit (No, Call of Cthulhu does not. No, World of Darkness does not. No, all those various zombie games on the market do not. No, just providing instruction to the GM as to how to set the mood is NOT enough). For Raggi, this is probably a fantastic system, facilitating him in the type of games he’d run anyway using a (tweaked) D&D system. For me, it’s not enough.

OSH: I’ll probably have to search my hard drive at home and see if I already have this, but jeez, I’m just not feeling the “awesome” that people dig on this game. I’m NOT really about the free-wheeling style, and so the central feature of the game (the “awesome” mechanic) doesn’t appeal to me much…just as the Feng Shui RPG doesn’t really do it for me. I already tried some similar ideas a while back but, well, my experience is that not all players ARE “awesome.” I’d rather provide players with CHOICES to make than wide-open metagame mechanics.

ACKS: ACKS, oh ACKS. I remember now (after reading half a dozen detailed reviews) why I didn’t pick this game up. Too depressing. From what I’ve read, it sounds A LOT like what my first stab at D&D Mine was going to look like: compressing BXC (including my B/X Companion) into the 14 levels of B/X and using tiers to distinguish different stages of development. There are other similarities, too (including high level “ritual magic” and undead that only go up to vampire), but this isn’t what bums me out. 270 pages. That’s just so…ugh. Not that I think my version of D&D Mine is going to be fitting into 64 pages (and that’s by design…I’d rather emulate the LBB format with the work I’m currently penning), but I really don’t expect it to be over 100 pages.

Is it fair to downgrade a product for a high page count? I don’t know…what I feel is that it’s pretty weird for these types of games to run to the length of ACKS or DCC or Hackmaster Basic. I know the page count gives the publisher the ability to include more art and a bigger font and longer, more detailed examples of play, etc. I know there’s precious little “padding” in these games and a book should include “just as many rules as it needs” to run an effective game.

And anyway, I’m rambling now (tired, right?). Like I said, I don’t know what I feel about these games. Except this: none of them really excite me. Not enough to make me want to play ‘em, let alone buy ‘em…but that’s not saying a whole lot. It’s been awhile since the last time I came across a game that really excited me (one of the reasons I keep writing my own); certainly I would not discourage someone from writing and publishing these games.

Do I think it’s a lost cause to do so? No. And I mean that on a number of levels: it’s a good mental exercise. While you may not make a living doing it, you can certainly make SOME money. And these games ARE fun (for some folks) to play…if only the games’ authors (which is why I call this concept “D&D Mine”). On the contrary, I want to see MORE of these things. Where’s Urutsk for goodness sake?

[that’s rhetorical…it is apparently in an editing phase at the moment]

Writing is a good thing. Sharing one’s creativity with others is a good thing. Supporting another’s art is a good thing. Playing games with others is (generally) a good thing. Building an open-minded, inspired and creative community is a good thing.

But excitement helps.

You know what? This is a stupid post. It’s obvious I need to get some sleep.

Free RPG Day - The Haul

Happy Father's Day to all the dads, step-dads, grandfathers, etc. out there! Without our fathers...um, pretty much none of us would be here. We should all feel grateful for that.

On the other hand, being as this is my second Father's Day as a father, I feel most grateful for my own son, who allows me to celebrate the day as a "dude of honor." He's just such a joy!

Taking a break from my magical musings for the nonce...yesterday was Free RPG Day and I was down at Gary's Games bright and early (9am) to pick up the latest-greatest. Skipped the Pathfinder and 4E offerings as I'm totally uninterested in those games (to put it mildly). Here's what I DID get:

ConspiracyX Introductory Game Kit (think of a mash-up between Men In Black and the X-Files): if you're into alien conspiracies as entertainment, this might be an RPG to check out. If you're not whole hog on the idea, the pedestrian plot and fairly boring mechanics might not be enough to juice you on it. I found the ESP mechanics/concept to be the most noteworthy think in the kit; definitely an interesting and cool design choice.

Battletech: A Time of War Quick-Start Rules: This appears to be Catalyst Games' attempt at remaking Mechwarrior (the original outside-the-mech RPG of the BT universe. As far as I'm aware, this would be the first official remake of MW since FASA's original went out-of-print. The mechanics are a little jazzed up (i.e. "more complex") as might be expected as they are based on the latest version of BT: Total War, and yet some things (like the damage monitor) seems stream-lined (no hit locations) even as they add a separate "fatigue track" (something I've always found problematic in practice with multiple RPGs). I don't know...I liked MW but could never get around to playing it because, well, if you're playing BattleTech then you generally want to be stomping around in giant robots. However, I will say A) the mechanics are fairly close to the original (which is a plus), B) the "Edge" mechanic (an additional attribute that acts as a drainable "luck" resource pool) is cool, and C) all the sample characters are neat and look like fun to play, i.e. role-play. The adventure's kind of neat, too, as a one-off.

Shadowrun Quick-Start Rules (on the reverse side of the Battletech QSR): Since I've heard nothing about Shadowrun coming out with yet another edition, all I can figure is this a promotion for the current (4th Edition) game from Catalyst...something to get the word out, and get people to come on board. So it's pretty much the same-old-same-old with the addition of "complex actions" versus "simple actions" and yadda-yadda with a lot of recycled art (all stuff from the basic book or prior adventure supplements). For me, the most interesting thing about the QSR is its length: 19 pages (not counting a 6-page adventure and 8 pages of pre-gen archetypes). I wrote whole game dealing with a lot of the same subject matter with little more than 3x that many pages.

Cosmic Patrol Quick-Start Rules: The Kahn Protocol (also, surprisingly, from Catalyst): Cosmic Patrol actually has all the look and flavor of an indie-game, in that it is whimsical (1930-60s pulp sci-fi...you know, bubble helmets, rocketships, Martian axe-women, etc.) and story oriented. Traditional GM duties are shared between all players in a rotating "Lead Narrator" role, the game works in rounds (my term) where everyone contributes to the story at hand while attempting to hit plot points and accomplish mission objectives to create a coherent narrative. At the same time, the game can't get away from "standard" RPG tropes: each player has a character, with standard attributes (brawn, brains, fighting, luck), health points, weapons, armor points, and equipment (though that last one is actually more of a metagame mechanic than actual "gear").

The funny thing about Cosmic Patrol is it is extremely similar to my first attempts at a "story now" game, even down to the subject matter (spaceship crew), when I was first introduced to the concept a few years back. As with so many of my projects, this one never quite achieved "lift-off" and part of the reason was difficulty finding a way to reconcile a narratavist agenda with typical RPG systems. I'm not sure Cosmic Patrol pulls this off (in many ways, it reminds me more of a story-telling game say, like Once Upon A Time, than an actual RPG), but it's pretty ambitious that they'd put this together, and I wouldn't mind giving it a whirl and seeing how it works.

Only War: Eleventh Hour (an intro to Fantasy Flight's latest WH40K-themed RPG): This appears to be the game I thought Deathwatch was supposed to be...basically, the 40K version of WHFRP but with non-space marines. I don't know...maybe that's what it is. The pre-gens are Catachan Jungle Fighters and Ogryn (i.e. Imperial Guard troop types for those who know WH40K) with all the usual ability scores (including Fellowship) plus skills. Yay, skills. In all seriousness, I know I have a hard time being impartial with games like this because I love the idea of playing military sci-fi RPGs...but I could only wish the character profiles looked a little simpler to put together, as I would hope that any 40K RPG makes it exceptionally easy for PCs to meet horrifying, messy, and/or grimly amusing death. Look, the armies of the 40K universe are terrifying warmongers...as individuals, they're even less "heroic" than an old school D&D adventurer. That doesn't mean they can't attempt...or even succeed...at missions of "heroic" proportion. But let there be no tears shed for the fallen members of the Imperial Guard...and certainly no tears shed by players forced to go through a drawn-out chargen process to create a new Guardsman.

Dungeon Crawl Classics (that's the title of the Free RPG Day offering, but it's not the RPG itself): This is a pair of single-session adventures for use with the DCC system, plus an adventure design competition (and a chance to win some money). The adventures are titled The Undulating Corruption and The Jeweler that Dealt in Stardust and I've yet to read either (my playtesting of the DCC Beta convinced me that DCC isn't a game I'm interested in playing). So why bother picking up a copy? Actually, I picked up TWO - first because, though I don't like the DCC system, I love the game's style and themes (very pulp sword & sorcery) and want to see if anything here could or should be translated into my D&D Mine system (which I hope to run in a very S&S fashion myself...once it's at the point of running anything). Secondly, a buddy who was in Eastern Washington over the weekend asked me to pick him up a copy since he wasn't able to make it to the shop.

Aaaaand that's about it. Gary's took the opportunity of Free RPG Day to clear some shelf space and so I was able to pick up a copies of Agent X (free) and Coyote Trail (half price), but those are full RPGs that I haven't had the chance to read; if I have anything useful to say about 'em later I will, though I believe both are out-of-print as of this date. It was quite a pile of goodies I brought back from the store Saturday...a good way to kick off the weekend and Solstice.

Have a good week, folks!

; )

Taking the Initiative

I will be somewhere in Yakima at the time this is being posted. Hopefully…if not, it means we got to our hotel Friday evening and there’s no internet access. That’s not very likely, but, hey, it’s Yakima (Washingtonians know what I mean).

As I write this, though, I am still in Seattle, taking a break from my regular work day and munching on beef jerky (just getting ready for Yakima, I guess…) and I realized something today:

I HATE individual intitiative.

Is “hate” too strong a word? Maybe…Lord knows I’m given to hyperbole at times, but I was mulling things over today and had a frigging epiphany regarding this, and if “hate” is NOT the right word…well, it’s pretty close. For me, individual initiative is a bunch of garbage.

I’ll walk you through my train of thought.

For the last couple years, I’ve been playing B/X and loving it for the most part. One think about it that I like a LOT is the fantastic, speedy, abstract combat system. No, it doesn’t have the bells and whistles of some RPGs, but it WORKS and it’s quick even when working with large numbers of players.

And shouldn’t combat be quick? I think so. It’s an exciting part of the game and demands a quick pacing to keep folks engaged and the game itself moving.

For most RPGs, though, combat is where “imaginary gameplay” often grinds to an f’ing halt. Even when all the players on the ball, for MOST RPGs as soon as the game enters “combat phase” everyone is buckling down for a long, tactical exercise, often lasting close to an hour (or longer) for even a small encounter.

Many games skew their systems towards a “Ninja Turtle” style of encounter because of this. The classic set-piece combat of the TMNT comics features four ninja turtles facing a single, powerful adversary (Shredder, for example). Each turtle gets to show off a few moves, working as a team to take down a single, tough “boss” who is too strong for any single character.

But in non-comic book mediums (like film and novels), this is the most boring thing to watch or read about. In film, it’s cool to see bunches of guys flying around against bunches of adversaries. Even reading allows you to "see" this in your mind’s eye. But facing handfuls of NPC opponents in an RPG gets tougher to run/manage the more specialized their abilities and the more chunkiness to the rules. Trying to run a game where each character (or antagonist “type”) receives their own “initiative rank” just grinds the speed down to a crawl.

Last night we played DCC again (no, there was no clamor to try my dinosaur game…more on that in a future post) and we ended up in three monster encounters. And things were sloooow, or felt slow to me…I often felt like I was constantly waiting for my turn to come up, even when I did not have the lowest number in the initiative order. You see, despite being produced by an “old school” company, DCC has some decidedly “new school” sensibilities, including with regard to combat, and one of its D20 hold-overs is the initiative system: each individual rolls D20 then adds (or subtracts) modifiers to determine the order of battle.

I can see why this is appealing, especially to designers:

1. The opportunity to provide distinction between characters (class bonuses to initiative, or feat bonuses or similar, rewarding player choice with a “better initiative” value).
2. Ways of modeling extra attacks (like when you see…in a movie, say…some character strike two or three times before anyone can touch him).
3. Placing “power” in the hands of ALL players (no one can complain that one person rolled low; you are responsible/accountable for your own die roll, and sometimes allowed a “yippee!” moment because of it).
4. A method of “heightening drama” as characters have to wait for their turn to come around.
5. Potential for additional gamist tactical play (should you “hold your action” or “reset/refocus” at a higher initiative order level, etc.?).

In all three of the game designs I’ve been working recently (well, except the dinosaur one), I include individual initiative myself for one or more of these reasons. In my fantasy heartbreaker, it gives me the ability to model the effects of class, level, and equipment. In my space game it makes Jedis and Han Solo types “faster.” In my Shadowrun knock-off, it gives me a way to use wired reflexes and magically boosted reaction times. All things I thought were features that added to game play.

See? I’m just as dumb as everyone else.

In practice…i.e. in ACTUAL PLAY…it doesn’t add that much to the game compared to what it costs. My FHB would be somewhat similar to DCC (with less bonuses/adjustments over-all) and I can tell you from experience that it is a total pain in the ass. When playing the Shadowrun game, the wonky individual initiative led to quite a few complaints (especially from the players whose characters were less “wired up” than others).

And it SLOWS things down. You call someone’s number, they hem and haw and dither a bit about what to do...NOT because they’re a simpleton or ignorant of the rules, but because THEY HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR EVERY INDIVIDUAL ACTION THAT HAS OCCURRED. For example:

Player A goes
Player B goes (reacting to the result of player A)
Player C goes (reacting to the result of players A and B)
Monsters go (reacting to players A-C and anticipating players D-F)
Player D goes (see above)
Etc.

Even in B/X…a very SIMPLIFIED game…an individual character has several options in combat: moving, attacking (melee? missile?), retreating, withdrawing, sometimes casting a spell…and of course, attacking or spell casting requires a choice of target as well. That’s a lot of decision making one needs to do each round, just for B/X.

However in B/X all characters act at the same point in time; that cuts down on a lot of dithering. The DM asks everyone what they’re doing. Folks give answers. Actions are resolved. Done.

The only time PCs aren't acting at the same time is when characters with two-handed weapons are forced to strike last...but even so you never have more than three ranks of "go:" Party-Monster-2Handers or Monster-Party-2Handers.

[okay, sure, you have FOUR ranks if a mixed monster group includes zombies. Zombies ALWAYS strike last, after everyone]

Today, I spent a bit of time reflecting on last night's DCC game...what worked for me and what didn't. Not because I want to tinker with the game rules (I'm not running the game) or because I have an on-going interest in critiquing the system (Goodman's not paying me for that), but because I'm interested in game design for my own purposes and I readily steal from anything and everything, mixing and matching and trying to add my own stuff, too.

And the game (i.e. DCC) just isn't all that good. I mean...I've already written about some of the things it does VERY right in my book. But then it still drags at times. Even when we have a smaller, more manageable group at the table (last night was 1 GM and 5 players, as opposed to the usual nine). It's not the GM's fault: Luke is brisk about calling for initiative rolls and counting down the order. It's the system itself, individual initiative, that slows the shit down. It's what made my Shadowrun combats suck unless I separated characters from the rest of the party so that 1 player faced 1 monster group. I can see this now in hindsight...and it makes me want to shred and retool from scratch all three combat systems I've been writing.

I can see now why Moldvay made the whole "individual initiative" thing OPTIONAL in the Basic game; he was one sharp dude, ol' Tommy.

[edit: yes, we made it to Yakima just fine]

Hand-Waving Rewards

I realize that several of my regular Thursday night table-mates read my blog, so I need to preface this post a bit. I’ve got some harsh words…or at least “potentially inflammatory” ones…regarding our recent forays into the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG, and most of these are going to be directed at the style of our GM, Luke, because it illustrates something I want to write about. I want to be clear that I do not mean this post as an indictment of Luke’s GM skills or his ability to run a fun game; I’ve been having fun along with the rest of you, and I wouldn’t bother showing up if I thought his game was total garbage.

That being said, I’m going to be blunt here and, anyway, Luke’s a big boy.

All right, let’s get down to it.

Thursday night’s game had the usual cast of DCC miscreants at the table. I had missed last week (being in Montana), but I wasn’t the only one. As with the last two sessions that I attended we started in town. Luke (our GM) asked who wanted to “carouse” (a random roll that spends money and has the potential to earn you XP…though there’s a better than average chance of an interesting “mishap” occurring). This particular game mechanism is one Luke first adopted a couple weeks back. As I did previously, I chose to abstain from carousal; though this time I was doing so due to a lack of funds (in the earlier session, I spent my cash instead on a suit of chain mail…go figure).

A couple members of our party suffered misfortune due to their carousal checks, earning the enmity of a local cult. To atone for their sins, they were tasked with stomping out a slave ring at a rival temple. They in turn got the rest of the party involved; we invaded the place, and kicked everyone’s ass. A couple of PCs were knocked out in the process, but all ofthe character’s survived.

At the end of the session, the evil shrine had been all but cleaned out and our charming of the high priestess ensured we took every available scrap of treasure. Luke said he didn’t want to bother adding up all the treasure in the module and simply ruled we each received 100 gold pieces worth of treasure. He then awarded XP and informed us we each had earned 200xp for the evening.

This was not an unusual evening as far as rewards go. Luke always hands out XP at the end of a session, and the amount we have received has always been some flat, arbitrary number. This was the 2nd time I had used this particular character (since he became 1st level). In my prior session he had received 300xp.

Arbitrary, flat numbers. Regardless of character action.

Some of the PCs have a LOT more experience points (for those who don’t already know, in DCC you earn XP in order to go up in level, just like in D&D). The guy sitting next to me had 1300 by the end of the night…close to three times my character’s total. Part of this has to do with his character being present for an extra session or two compared to mine. Part of this has to do with him “hitting it big” on the carousal table and earning an extra couple-three hundred XP (or more).

Um…what exactly is our goal here?

Hmm…perhaps the question isn’t really specific enough. How about this:

What is our motivation for playing this game? What is the objective of play? In-game, what the hell are we trying to do?

Reward systems influence behavior. That’s not up for debate; if you don’t agree with it, you’re probably reading the wrong blog. Systems of REWARD in a game INFLUENCE BEHAVIOR. Period. If your game provides “reward mechanics” it is going to have an influence on player behavior, i.e. the actions they take within a game.

For me, good game design includes system mechanics that reward behavior meeting the designer’s objectives of play (JB's Axiom #3 of good game design…remember those?). The reason why it’s “good” game design? Because the reward will influence behavior, and if that behavior enforces the game designer’s objectives, then you have designed a system that will get people to play the way you (the designer) want it to be played.

In Old School D&D, the reward players play for is increased effectiveness. Characters go up in level and gain the ability of having more dramatic impact on the imaginary game environment. While the acquisition of magical equipment often provides increased effectiveness, such acquisition is generally left at the (arbitrary) mercy of the DM’s generosity/stinginess. However, ALL players can count on LEVEL improving their characters’ effectiveness, and they know the way to gain level: by earning experience points through the accumulation of monetary treasure and the defeat of opponents. Gaining XP is a non-subjective means of earning reward: if I acquire 2000 gold pieces, then I acquire 2000 experience points, and if I am a fighter, that will mean I advance to second level.

So what does that compel me to do? Fight monsters and look for treasure of course!

Now if I simply receive X amount of experience for showing up and sitting down, what does that compel me to do? Show up and sit down, sure. What does it compel me to do in the GAME, though?

Not a goddamn thing.

Why bother formulating plans or carrying on elaborate manipulations of a charmed enemy if the GM is simply going to award you a set amount of gold? Why bother taking risks, or doing ANYthing interesting/courageous if the GM is going to award the same amount of XP to you as the guy who holds the torch and fires his crossbow every other round?

Right now, my character has absolutely ZERO motivation to take any kind of bold action, or attempt anything particularly clever. Hell, right now, the MAIN things I can choose to do (as a player) to increase my character’s effectiveness is A) make sure I show up (and survive) every single week, and B) spend as much money as possible on carousal rolls and hope I get lucky. These are the only two things that will bring my character the promised reward of increased in-game effectiveness.

Not that you really need “in-game effectiveness” when your main actions alternate between drinking/whoring and cowering in the back of the party.

[actually, I believe character level IS added to the carousal roll meaning you party better as you go up in level, and extra hit points DO mean extra survivability while cowering…still, that's not exactly what I call “adventure”]

What a bunch of horseshit.

Now, it may sound like I’m railing against good ol’ Luke’s style of reward allocation (and I am) but this is not the first time I’ve heard of this…only the first time I’ve experienced it. Many times I’ve read posted (both on my blog and elsewhere) with ideas of XP allocation for similar non-merit play. Ideas like:

• “I just level PCs up after a certain number of sessions,” or
• “I just hand out X number of experience points per hour,” or
• “I just reward PCs for the completion of missions (sometimes the same amount whether they succeed or fail!).”

Every time I read one of these suggestions, I cringed inwardly at the thought off what it would do to the game play experience. Now, though, I’ve actually had a chance to experience this style of reward system and I can tell you exactly how it makes me feel:

Pretty irritable.

Not outright angered perhaps, but definitely annoyed. And it has nothing to do with an anti-commie agenda or anything…it doesn’t piss me off that everyone receives the same reward regardless of action and/or merit. That doesn’t irritate me…in fact, if you’re handing out arbitrary rewards, I think you’d BETTER do it consistently.

What does irritate me is this: my actions make no goddamn difference.

Regardless of whether I play smart or stupid or cautious or reckless or brilliant or bonehead. Regardless of whether I crit every roll or fumble every roll. Regardless of whether or not I play in alignment or whether or not I even play cooperatively with my fellow players…or instead try to stab them all in the back. Regardless of ANYthing…

Flat 200xp. Thanks for showing up.

Galling is what it is. The whole bonus-XP-for-random-carousal-die-roll is hardly worth mentioning in light of the main issue. At least with THAT you can make a statement about your character by whether or not you choose to participate.

I suppose for some people, the idea of hanging out with their buddies, rolling dice, laughing, and drinking beer is enough…that the fun of the game is NOT in any imaginary objective, but in imagining you are a big strong warrior, or a furtive thief, or a mutated sorcerer, or whatever. I suppose that there is enjoyment to be had in “playing pretend” with likeminded adults in a safe, non-judgmental environment, and that the game mechanics are present simply to provide some structure for what would otherwise certainly devolve into something sordid…or worse, “zany.”

Hell, what am I saying? “Suppose?” OF COURSE, there is enjoyment to be found in exactly these things…that’s why I still enjoy showing up to the game despite the overall pointlessness of the exercise! But even so, I find myself wanting more from my game (otherwise I wouldn’t bother venting my complaints across the blog-o-sphere!). I mean, if all I want to do is drink and blow off steam and shout obscenities and make off-color jokes, I could do that over a game of pool or darts or in a karaoke bar. If all I wanted to do was imagine myself as a strapping fighter, I could daydream or write short stories with myself as the hero.

Getting handed a couple hundred XP after a moment’s reflection from the GM makes me think, “why bother?” It feels condescending. To me, it’s pretty f’ing lame.

*sigh* I’m sure I’m going to catch flak for this post.

[by the way, one thing I didn’t point out is that the DCC RPG…at least in its Beta form…does NOT have any type of reward “system” built-in. It has levels, it has XP needed to earn levels, but it has no rules on how that XP is acquired. Luke’s decision to hand out flat amounts of XP per session is a perfectly valid choice…as I said at the beginning of this post, this is not meant to be an indictment of him. What I AM trying to indict is the whole “play for pay” idea and what an irritating concept it is. I say this having experienced it firsthand…I think it SUCKS and believe that any reward given without merit or deed is a pretty damn paltry reward]

Embracing Chaotic Evil

The thing I really like about games like B/X or DCC is that you have the freedom to play any character class you WANT to play, regardless of the random dice rolls for abilities. And yes, this is a plus because I REALLY LIKE random dice rolls for ability scores:

A) It speeds character creation
B) It models the inherent “randomness” of genetic selection
C) It prevents min-maxing munchkinism

Now sure, with both B/X and DCC there are some limitations with regard to demihuman characters; B/X requires (fairly easy) minimum ability scores and DCC requires the proper 0-level background career. But as far as the main human classes go, it is wide open: you can play a human fighter with a Strength of 7 or wizard with an Intelligence of 4 and it ain’t a problem. In other fantasy games with random chargen, this isn’t the case, either because of explicit rule (AD&D chargen) or emphasis on ability scores (D20 and later). For both B/X and DCC, a character’s CLASS and LEVEL are the most important factors with regard to in-game character effectiveness.

So, yeah…I like it, and not just because I’m a dude who values his own independence and personal freedom of choice. I especially enjoy it because of what that freedom reveals about the players at the table.

After all, if you have the freedom to choose any character class, aren’t you going to take the one that sings for you?

Maybe not…perhaps you’re still going to take a cleric simply because you rolled a high Wisdom score. This in and of itself may reveal something about a player (either he’s a “gamer” concerned mainly with maximizing his traits, or perhaps he lacks a certain amount of imagination).

For me, it allows me to indulge my own primal fantasies of traipsing around a fantasy countryside, acting especially loud and obnoxious, and hitting things with an axe whenever I have the opportunity. My current DCC character has a Strength of 10 and an Agility of 8 (out of a 3-18 range)…the guy does NOT have the archetypal stats one would expect to find in, say, a D&D barbarian (of any edition). And yet, my character insists on walking point, kicking in doors, and getting “stuck in” at every opportunity. The “warrior” class abilities of DCC insure an ample chance for surviving this style of play (initiative bonus, attack/damage bonus, “mighty deeds” ability, etc.) and if I wasn’t so enamored with the battle axe, I could optimize my character even more with a long sword and shield.

But sword-and-board doesn’t suit my personality.

I also seem to have gravitated towards a “chaotic evil” style of play in this game. I’m not sure why, exactly…unless it has something to do with the “reward system” of the game (haha…that’s an in-joke…wait till you see my next post). Certainly, when I’ve played other games…like Spirit of the Century or Risus, just to name a couple recent ones…I haven’t played all “gung-ho,” nor been so quick to dive into the local slave trade.

Something about DCC seems to bring out my inner demonic self.

I suppose it’s really just a bit of pro-active role-playing…the game doesn’t offer anything in the way of real, in-game objectives (what? Yeah, you heard me) and consequently, one only gets out of it as much as one puts in. My over-the-top actions are a defense against waiting around, stagnant, for the next opportunity to “roll the dice.” And the whole campaign setting seems pretty dark and twisted to me…starting up a charity organization for the local widows and orphans just doesn’t seem to be the right course of action in this particular game world.

Anyway, I’ll post more about my “wallowing in decadence" in the future (perhaps); right now, I need to watch my boy. After that, I intend to vent a complaint or two regarding my recent role-playing experiences, and that I'm afraid will require a separate post entirely.

Old School? Really?

Another good time at the Mox last night. It’s always a good night when you don’t get fragged by your fellow player characters (well, truth be told, it’s often a pretty good night when you ARE fragged by your fellows…so long as you get in on some of the fragging yourself!).

However, good time or not, I am starting to get disenchanted with DCC.

I think Luke (our game master) is doing a good job of moderating/ref’ing the game, but it’s just not wowing me as a game. And I can point to a couple reasons why (gripes I don’t think I’ve aired till now):

1. Too many random tables.

Not only does the sheer bulk of tables cut down on the search & handling time of the game (i.e. it makes game play slower), it feels so, well, random at times. Now understand there are benefits to random tables, and I can think of several good reasons for a designer to include them:

• It prevents “boring” same-old-same-old game play by changing up the possible result of any given action.
• It provides the impartiality of a random roll, as opposed to leaving the craziness of low rolls or “fumbles” up to GM fiat (the latter of which might lead to hurt feelings).
• It provides real surprises (both good and bad).
• It showcases the designers’ creativity.

But it’s still too much random for my taste. Everything in moderation, right?

There are very few random tables I use in my own games. Um…like none really (really? Yeah, I guess not). Even the placement of treasure and monsters is done “by hand;” I suppose I do use tables for wandering monsters on occasion (it’s rare that I use wandering monsters at all, actually), but that’s about it. My random dice rolls are left for the frenzy of combat, the resolution of negotiation, and the riskiness of saving throws.

Everything else is pretty un-random in my games.

Sure, character generation has its random elements, and I’ve made my own random tables to aid in quick-building characters (random hats and peer associations for example). However, character creation is (generally speaking) PRE-play activity; once we call Game On, there won’t be a random roll until we need to check surprise.

With DCC, you roll randomly every time you cast a spell, or fumble, or crit, or invoke a clerical ability. Hell, we had to roll randomly for how well we CAROUSED last night…apparently, some of the characters party better than others.

Even if it wasn’t distracting looking up tables in the rules, I think “random” still gets tired pretty quickly.

2. Too much fiddly.

At what point does a game go from being Old School with D20 sensibilities to simply “D20 Light?” Is DCC supposed to be Old School just because it has some random tables and dwarf is a class instead of a race?

Maybe it’s supposed to be Old School because it has the terms “Dungeon Crawl” and “Classic” in the title?

I don’t know, man. But here’s what the blurb at Goodman Games says:

"Blah-blah-blah…your character is a treasure hunting rogue, etc...THEN:

Return to the glory days of fantasy with the Dungeon Crawl Classics Role Playing Game. Adventure as 1974 intended you to, with modern rules grounded in the origins of sword & sorcery. Fast play, cryptic secrets, and a mysterious past await you: turn the page…"

Okay, let’s take that 2nd paragraph apart a piece at a time.

“Return to the glory days of fantasy…”

Not sure which glory days Goodman is referencing, but I note that it says glory days of fantasy, not glory days of fantasy role-playing. That’s a fairly important difference.

“Adventure as 1974 intended you to…”

Again, what does this mean? When I first glossed over it in my reading I thought, “oh, it’s some kind of return to OD&D, right?” But maybe what they are really referring to is fantasy in the year 1974 and not fantasy role-playing.

Why? Because I can’t for the life of me how they figure OD&D intended people to adventure like THIS.

I’ve been rereading my Little Brown Books a bit lately…they’re a solid reference for anyone designing fantasy heartbreaker…and they look a LOT different from DCC. They are incredibly abstract, often incomplete, certainly open-ended. If they “intend” anything, it would seem they intend people to design and adventure in their own fantasy world with little to guide them but the roughest of rule outlines.

DCC is full of specific fiddly bits as well as specific systems for doing things…even if those systems are nothing more than “roll on this random table.” I mean, wow, it took a long ass time for the guy next to me to write up his 1st level elf (even with me helping) just because there are so many BITS. Action dice, attack dice, crit range, crit table, crit dice, initiative modifier, ability modifiers, saving throws, luck modifiers, luck type, luck dice, spells known, spells manifestation, mercurial magic, blah, blah, blah.

In 1974 you would have rolled six ability scores, picked a class, rolled gold and chose equipment, and then given your dude a name and alignment. I don’t think anyone could claim the game designers in 1974 intended the chargen (or game play) to be this specific.

“…with modern rules grounded in the origins of sword & sorcery.”

I think THIS may be the key part of the blurb. Modern rules (read “D20” or post-WotC certainly) coupled with the dark, weird, pulpy fantasy of the original literature: Smith, Leiber, Howard, Lovecraft. The choice of literary background/flavor is great and very different from the usual heroic inspirations: Dragonlance, Eberon, Forgotten Realms, whatever. And maybe it is this inspirational source material that requires the extensive use of randomness (in order to mimic the psychedelic craziness of old school S&S).

Then again, didn’t Raggi manage a “weird” version of D&D while still using a true Old School chassis for his game?

“Fast play, cryptic secrets, and a mysterious past await you…”

I really, really don’t know what this is supposed to mean. I mean, is it totally disingenuous or what? Play is fastER than D20, capable of handling 7-8 players without slowing to a glacial pace. But I certainly wouldn’t call it “fast.” We spent a long hour (plus) on our single combat encounter last night, and the battle included both area effect spells and truly weak-sauce opponents (scrap-metal automatons).

“Cryptic secrets?” The only real secret is how XP is supposed to be doled out…well, that and what the actual page count for spells will be in the final version (the Beta uses a single page for each spell…it spends 33 pages and only covers 1st level spells. Could the full book have 150+ pages for 5 levels of spells?!).

“Mysterious past?” My character last week was a pig herder. Any mystery was added by Yours Truly. This week’s character was a former indentured servant-turned-warrior. I suppose it’s mysterious how he became skilled with all weapons just a couple days after being barely proficient with a cudgel.

“Turn the page…”

I assume this means the reader is supposed to close the chapter on other games (like Pathfinder and 4th Edition D&D) and start a new one with DCC? Personally, I don’t mind the pretention and DCC isn’t terrible…especially when compared to the fiddlyness of PF and 4E.

But, man, after three weeks of play-testing, I am pretty sure DCC won’t be replacing B/X for me. It feels like it wants to be fun in a beer & pretzels kind of way, but just like HackMaster it’s a little too mentally intensive to allow that kind of play. Even cutting down the number of characters-to-players (none of us brought more than one this week), even having a couple-three weeks of practice with the rules (four weeks for some players), even with each of us having our own copy of the Beta rules right at hand (many having it on their eBooks)…even with ALL that AND a GM who was completely sober, even then…

*sigh*

I guess I just have mixed feelings. We (*I*) did have a lot of fun, BUT a lot of that was the company and the chemistry and, let’s face it, the constant flow of the liquid libation. And when you’re having fun, you can have a lot of patience for the failings of a game.

Until you run out of patience, I guess.

Terribly Distracted

Sorry for the lack of posts...it's just been awfully busy around my neck o the woods and my mind's been elsewhere (well, other than the nagging worry that I should be throwing something up on my blog...). That being said, posting will still probably be minimal over the next week or two as I work on some other stuff.

HA. "Work?" I'll be honest: I've just been enjoying the summertime weather. And vegging out with Seattle sports on TV when I'm not out enjoying the sunshine. The Sounders are playing well, the Seahawks are playing like crap (but O So many interesting storylines there), and the Mariners, while completely out of any playoff hunt months ago, have at least found some offense so they're fun to watch. Especially while enjoying a beer at the pub with the doors open to let in the sunshine, etc.

But my own (real life) job has been a bear of late, and I just haven't gotten around to buying any lottery tickets so it looks like it will be awhile before I can quite and just blog/game full-time. The downtime (and long walks) have been exceptionally necessary to recharge my batteries and keep me sane and mellow. Besides, with Luke handling the GMing on Thursday nights the pressure has been "eased off" for the constant creativity on my end.

Not that I haven't had time to do some stuff "off-stage"...

But I'll blog about that more later. I DO want to get down some thoughts from last week's DCC session while I have the opportunity (currently hanging outside a local coffee shop with my infant asleep in the stroller next to me). Let's see, where to start:

As I mentioned before, Luke's using the Anomalous Subsurface Environment megadungeon as our adventure. This is one I don't own and with which I am completely unfamiliar save for a review or two I've read. Still, it's plenty cool and I'm digging it.

Though it seems a bit of a waste to use it with DCC. Admittedly, this is a personal gripe: I would like to PLAY B/X not just run it, and ASE was designed for use with the B/X retro-clone Labyrinth Lord. What an opportunity! For me (I mean)! But Luke has said often enough that there are many parts of the BX/LL system he does not enjoy and that he prefers some of the more fiddly bits of D20...for him, DCC is a nice little hybrid of the two and I don't fault him for wanting to use it.

And as I said in my last post on the subject, there are a LOT of very cool things about DCC.

This session, we went into the game with newly advanced PCs; those that survived the first outing were advanced to 1st level. Since I only had one survivor, I chose to bring along my 4th 0-level character ("Derrick the Blue") as a henchman/servant of my dwarf, Yorin the Young, now re-Christened Yorin Steeltoe. We made our way to the adventure site, fought a couple/three bears (black and degenerated by radiation sickness, they weren't much of a fight), found some secret doors, broke up some aggressive robots...the usual, ya' know?

ANYway, as 1st level characters, we got to experience some of the frills of the system. As a dwarf, this meant trying out "Mighty Deeds" (a semi-narrative game mechanic attached to the random attack roll)...not to mention sniffing for precious gold, seeing in the dark (much improved "infravision"), and generally acting as a tough guy with my 12 hit points. For other characters, it meant seeing spells and corruption in action, as well as "thief skills."

Hoo-boy.

So thief skills first ('cause it's the shortest): the thief didn't use any skills. As with standard D&D, assigning low percentages to actually accomplishing anything makes it ill-advised to act as a thief. Fortunately, Itchy Blackburn started his career as a 0-level minstrel, and he was able to play us a jaunty marching tune on his banjo while we were exploring.

Now magic: hmmm.

I mentioned before that I've been bit with the bug to design a fantasy heartbreaker of my own. This still holds true, and I've been jotting down notes on the game for the last few days. But I've come to a serious roadblock in the design process: designing magic systems is TOUGH. I mean, if you are trying to do something non-derivative. Not just "non-Vancian" but non-Stormbringer, non-Ars Magica, non-"Spell Points." It's tough.

The boys playing spell-casters in DCC found a lot that they liked. Which is a GOOD thing.

There was also more than a couple brushes with serious corruption (open lesions/sores, and manifestations of certain spells that made them more-or-less un-castable). The final analysis: plusses and minuses both.

But I'll have to write more specifically about that later. As I said, I've been terribly distracted as of late, and right now I've got some errands to run (specifically, a wife to pick up from work and a son who's awake and in need of holding). I'll write more later, folks.

Um...hopefully.

; )

More Thoughts on DCC

The more I read through the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG (beta), the more things I see that I like.

I’m not talking about artwork…God no!...presentation is a secondary consideration IF THAT. There are plenty of games with great artwork, inspiring artwork, that are complete duds as far as I’m concerned. And there are other games (Boot Hill for example) that are well designed (both from a game standpoint and practical layout) that may have less-than-stellar graphic presentation.

And everything in between, of course. However, I’ve seen more than one review that praised DCC on its artistic merits and that’s probably the LAST thing on my mind right now.

[for what it’s worth, I find the illustrations in the pdf to be a mixed bag]

No, when I say I’m seeing things I like, I’m talking about in-depth rules delving. There are more than a few things that I’m really digging.

Not that the game is perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Of course not…it’s still in the playtesting stage! And the game is, at its foundation, a “fantasy heartbreaker,” much as was HackMaster Basic, and that is just a no-go.

Or is it? I’ll come back to that in a minute.

Maybe I should talk about what I LIKE first…you know, start on a positive note? It’s just so hard when there are so many things that irritate me. Hmm…better get THOSE out of the way, first:

D20 Sensibilities: Look, I know a lot of people like Pathfinder/D20. That’s fine and dandy. Doing a variation of it…even a “slimmed down” version…is making a heartbreaker of a heartbreaker. To me, DCC misses an opportunity by using D20isms (like initiative, skill checks, and ascending AC).

Over-Use of Random Tables: Um…that’s it.

Over-Complicated Combat: See the first two along with the addition of crits and fumbles (especially varying by class-level-equipment).

Minor Issues with Character Creation: Discussed in a prior post.

ALSO: Certain class-related issues, specifically specificity of character background based on intersection of class and alignment, certain skills (notably thieves), certain conceits (dwarves’ “sword and board”) and certain holdovers from old school editions (like infravision). I haven’t read through the spell caster stuff yet, so I can’t speak to my feelings on clerics and wizards or the magic system.

[by the way, there are some aspects of DCC I can’t discuss due to their absence from the pdf…notably advancement systems, awarding of XP, GM information/direction, etc.]

So, yeah, you’re probably asking what does JB like considering all of the above?

Quite a few things actually:

CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

This is by far the biggest food-for-thought area in DCC. I consider my own (not-yet-published) “B/X knockoff” games to be fairly innovative in this regard, but DCC does an excellent job even within the confines of the usual OS dungeon crawl model of “collect XP, level up.”

I absolutely LOVE the “start as Normal Human” requirement of the game. I’ve written before that 1st level characters should be respected individuals in the game world, but forcing characters to start at 0-level REALLY drives this point home. I’ve got a 1st level character that doesn’t have a single ability over 11, and let me tell YOU he could wipe the floor with half-a-dozen 0-level characters (at least!). It is so damn inspiring to see your hit points rocket up from 2 to 12 (not to mention, picking up armor and a two-handed sword), that you don’t care some other guy rolled a 17 strength for his 0-level farmer. Yeah, try to hit me with your cudgel, buddy!

I even went out and bought a new miniature for my (otherwise fairly pathetic) character.

When I played Rifts, my absolute favorite OCC (after the doomed/tragic Juicer) was the Vagabond…the Palladium equivalent of the 0-level nobody, complete with trucker cap and maybe a knife for defense. I always saw so much potential in this class…after all, it’s not like he can’t later “borg-up” or get kidnapped by spluggortha and tattooed with magic powers. I even forced my brother to play a vagabond in my original Rifts game, and he DID end up with a bionic leg…after I burned off his flesh one with a Wilke’s laser pistol.

Point is, there is something very satisfying in the idea of the “normal dude becoming heroic” model. It may be why I dig Harlan Ellison’s writings (recently watched Dreams with Sharp Teeth, and one of Ellison’s critics talks about his knack for showing the dignity of the everyday person by throwing said person into the cauldron). DCC does this in a very simple, very practical way.

AND unlike, say, a White Wolf game, this is done IN PLAY. What do I mean? Well, let’s look at WW…say Aberrant (superhero game) or Vampire (Goth superhero game): in either one, part of the chargen process involves doing a “prologue;” figuring out what your character was BEFORE he acquired “great powers” in hopes that background will give you some grist to grind in-play (angst or backstory or whatever). DCC has the Normal Humans go through their prologue in-play (the first session), which instills in the player’s mind what their urchin or pig-farmer really was like before he became badass.

[side note to DCC designers: I recommend making the “level 1” after session 1 a hard-and-fast rule. It jibes with B/X (“normal humans that gain ANY experience points become 1st level characters”), AND it allows players to get to the badassery in the 2nd session]

So, yeah…Normal Humans. That might not even be a bad house rule for B/X (making players start at 0-level). I’m not 100% there on the way chargen is handled, and I think the number of PCs each player has should be based on the number of players in the group. But it’s an excellent start.

And that’s not the end of what I like in character development. The max level 5 thing is excellent. I don’t know if the final version of DCC will have more (or unlimited) levels but I think a practical limit of 5 or 6 isn’t a bad thing at all. Do fighters need three-four attacks per round when they can do Mighty Deeds of Arms? I don’t think so. Do PCs need dozens or scores of hit points? Probably not. As I said, my 1st level dwarf is sooo head and shoulders above the Normal Human it’s sick…but I’d suspect a dragon would take him down in a chomp or two regardless (and that should apply even up to 3rd level). I’ve been enamored of the “low max level” thing ever since someone suggested using the Holmes Basic Edition as a complete game by itself (where characters only go to 3rd level).

I dislike most of the level titles they’ve come up with, but I applaud the fact they use level titles at all. If made non-alignment-specific it would cut down the number to an easily remembered number, making class descriptions useful forms of identifying badass individuals by title.

CLASS DISTINCTION

You can see the B/X roots in DCC’s inclusion of “The Great Seven” classes, though this in itself isn’t worthy of praise. I mean, it’s already been done…if my only concern is fewer archetypal classifications and “race-as-class,” I can still play B/X (or Labyrinth Lord), right?

What IS of note is the distinctions between the classes. Wow.

Each class gets a handful of unique abilities specific to their class, giving each class a very different play-style. Sure there is some over-lap, but not enough to make, say, dwarves feel like “short fighters with infravision.”

If I was to try my hand at a fantasy heartbreaker, THIS is definitely something I’d want to look at doing.

Don’t get me wrong, I truly do enjoy the simplicity of B/X character classes. But there is a lot of holdover from OD&D in B/X and Moldvay demihumans are, for the most part, simply fighting men with a couple bennies and a level restriction. DCC is better.

And it’s a HUGE improvement over D20 where classes are simply varied combinations of the same formula: X number of skills, Y number of bonus feats, Z hit dice…along with A base attack bonus and B saving throw bonuses. Aside from the different combinations of variables, there are very few class abilities that really distinguish PCs from each other in D20…especially once they start multi-classing.

Now REGARDING the specific class distinctions in DCC there is certainly room for improvement. However, some of them are spot-on. Adding level to warrior’s initiative (a la the Solo from Cyberpunk)? Genius (and only workable with D20 initiative, so that’s +1 for them). Advancing attack die for warriors and dwarves? VERY EXCELLENT…and makes “strength bonus” a truly secondary consideration in melee (while still being a contributing factor). Luck bonuses for thieves? Very cool AND appropriate…and same with those furry footed Halflings who (as described by Tolkien) always seem to possess such an inordinate amount.

And I really like linking so many of the class abilities (including thief skills) to ALIGNMENT. Again, here’s something I’ve done in my B/X-based games: linking alignment more mechanically to the game system to make it more of a factor. But by linking it directly to CLASS ABILITIES (as DCC does), it essentially provides multiple character archetypes where only a handful previously existed…that is NOT something I ever thought about, as I still associate “alignment” with “role-playing.”

DCC still associates alignment with role-playing, but more literally…choice of alignment determines what ROLE your character will play in the game!

AND…

That’s it for now. As I said, I’ve only just skimmed the cleric/wizard sections so I can’t make a judgment yet on whether or not I like their particular rules. However, I will be returning to DCC (and my thoughts on it) over the week, especially as my group play-tests further.

Oh, yeah…almost forgot:

This Rob Kuntz interview…along with Oddyssey’s recent musings have been bubbling in my brain along with James Raggi’s statement:

The answer to "Is there room for another...?" is always yes, as long as it's good enough

There are several billion people in the world. Even if I were to limit myself to just the literate, English-speaking folks I’m sure I’d make a ton of money if I could sell .001% of ‘em on a great fantasy game. The trick to it is two-fold:

- Make the game accessible
- Make the game fun to PLAY

It might offend some folks to say, but I think these are the two ingredients missing from the vast majority of RPGs. While B/X may well have met these criteria back in 1981, the simple fact that it is out-of-print greatly limits its accessibility. And many, many “in-print” (i.e. current RPGs) are inaccessible to the average Joe based on their presentation (huge books, RPG assumptions, poor layout interspersed with prose/fiction)...to say nothing of their actual (fun) playability.

DCC isn’t a complete game. It isn’t “finished” yet. I have no idea if it will be a runaway hit or a passing novelty people pick up for a week or two before turning back to their AD&D and retro-clones.

But I’m starting to feel that it’s fine to TRY. It’s not just tilting at windmills to take a swing at a fantasy heartbreaker. If you make a good enough game, people WILL buy it. Really.

This is how I picture dwarves...

...in our DCC game.

Maybe "Lobo" isn't exactly right, or maybe I didn't quite grok what Luke was describing regarding the appearance of demihumans in the Land of a Thousand Towers, but sue me...sometimes my imagination puts together a pastiche of various pop culture references. In fact, now that Yorin is 1st level, I'm imagining him to appear a bit more like Mr. Sinister.

But that's just me.

; )

Pretty Good Game Last Thursday

No, I’m not talking about the Seahawks game which, despite the win, saw offensive tackle Russle Okung injured yet again, Tavaris Jackson get sacked half a dozen times, and Kelly Jennings being run over, run through, and generally being beaten like a red-headed step child every play.

No, THAT game showed me the ‘Hawks have a lot o work to get through over the next three weeks.

[as a side note, how about them Tennessee Titans? Matt Hasselbeck looking pretty sharp, huh? And how ‘bout that Jake Locker kid?]

No, I’m talking about our Thursday night game in which we played the Dungeon Crawl Classics beta.

Not bad.

Very, VERY minor complaints so far, and some of these might simply be a matter of “style preference.” DCC is a strange juxtaposition of several things:

- A B/X foundation (including styling and recycled artwork from the Moldvay book)
- House rules ‘ported straight from D20 (and later) editions
- Random tables a la what might be found in the OSR blog-o-sphere and on-line publications
- Indie-style narrative tools coupled with alternative random number generation

The end result feels a bit schizophrenic to me…at least when reading it.

But we didn’t use most of the rules…Thursday we were still in the “funnel” stage. Eight players sat down to the table with a total of 22 PCs between the bunch of us…the DM also provided us with a couple of NPCs to round out the party to an even two dozen. Of the bunch, I believe all but four of us were 0-level (two of the players had played in the prior DCC try-out when I was out of Mexico) but as it was, there were too many PCs for me to get an accurate gauge of who or what everyone was (fortunately, I didn't have to GM).

Not that there’s any real difference between the characters at 0 level. Personally, I found it great to play “normal humans.” I’ve always felt that the simpler the system, the more the game becomes about your character actions and interactions. And playing the equivalent of B/X “Normal Men” still offered great opportunity for characterization…though it didn’t go quite the way I’d initially expected.

Luke, our GM, came back from GenCon with a copy of Patrick Wetmore’s Anomalous Subsurface Environment, and he’s adapted DCC to the Land of One Thousand Towers. Which put MY initial assumptions about my characters a little “off.”

For example, when I originally rolled up my two dwarf pig herders (“Old Orin” and “Young Yorin”) I figured they were a fairly peaceful pair of father-son farmers, not hardened adventurers. I mean an occupation like “dwarf herder” sounds like something they’ve done for awhile, right? If they were hardened ex-mercs they’d be a little tougher.

But that was before I learned about the goth-zombie demihumans, coupled with DCC’s own description of what the dwarf background is all about. When I first created the characters, I never bothered reviewing the classes so stopped at 0-level character creation + “Neutral alignment” (which made them feel like nature-worshipping, druidish types). Now I’m like Oh, they’re short Drow with beards, exiled to the surface world and forced to raise pigs for humans.

These guys are SPITEFUL.

My third character, Bow-Legged Bill, was originally conceived as a Lawful caravan guard…an outrider, born to the saddle (literally, based on his luck). A protector of travelers in a strange land.

Then we got introduced to our NPCs…fellow caravan guards, buddies of Bill’s, who told the story of a caravan being recently wiped out and a good load of gold being available to loot because of it. Opportunists looking for a score at the expense of the very folk they were hired to protect.

These are my character’s buddies?

They were also, inexplicably, armed and armored much better than myself with splint mail, shields and flails (as a zero level flunky, I had a short sword and a couple dozen copper pieces). As we set out on our excursion to liberate the cash of the fallen from the raiders that took it (the unfortunately named “Mock-Tards,” some kind of gnoll-like monster), I realized my initial assumptions about my characters had been way off. Bow-legged Bill was like a dirty cop…and a rookie one at that, only starting to learn how to get in on the take.

It wasn’t too long before we had our first combat encounter…a pack of hungry wild dogs. The DM tried to make us feel bad about killing DOGS but I wasn’t having any of that (I’ve been menaced by wild dogs before…in the woods in Mexico…and they’re not cool). Especially considering my characters were unarmored and only had 1 hit point apiece.

Afterwards, we found that our caravan buddies had been hiding out in their splint mail while the rest of us were fighting for our lives and decided that they weren’t deserving of their high priced gear, and it would be of more use to other party members.

So I mugged ‘em.

Well, maybe I should be a little more specific: my emo dwarves and bad seed security guard lured one of the dudes behind a copse of trees and then brutally murdered him. After that we intimidated his buddy into giving over his armor and weapon and making him walk point for the party.

This, unfortunately, did not sit well with some of my other 20 party members and payback would come later in the evening.

Let’s see, how did that go down again? Oh, yeah…we found the mock-tards’ lair and proceeded to explore it in a huge pile of people. There was some early suggestion of using my pig-sows for setting off traps, but we already had the naked caravan guard up front so I was able to put ‘em off (my pig farmers were rather attached to their pets). There was a trap door that went off at a crossroads and then a couple mock-tards and a wolf came out of the shadows and attacked. A bunch of chaos ensued due to the incredible amount of people and the D20-style initiative rules. All my characters had agility scores under 9 (short-legged dwarves and bow-legged human), so I was generally among the last to act. People died. One guy was trying to keep the trap door open rather than just writing off the guys inside and getting into the fight…I think I tried to kill him, but I was at the “back of the pack” and the GM ruled I couldn’t get up there.

The melee eventually thinned out. Old Orin charged one of the mock-tards and bull-rushed it into the pit, landing his full weight on it and driving it onto the spear of one of the peons climbing out. Unfortunately, Old Orin only had 1 hit point (Stamina/CON of 3) and broke his neck in the attempt.

Bow-legged Bill used a flail on another mock-tard and brained the shit out of it, killing it. The splint mail seemed to fit just fine.

Randy’s characters decided to kill Bow-Legged Bill because he seemed a murderous loose cannon. His first character's assassination attempt resulted in fumbling and stabbing himself in the brain with his own knife. His second assassination attempt…um…I think he missed. However, his third guy, Stiles, was able to hit, and Bill was felled by foul play (he only had one hit point, too).

By this time, all the mock-tards were dead and the party was probably down to half its original size. We found a big ol’ box of treasure and some radioactive rock (identified by Young Yorin the dwarf) which we stashed in a lead box we found. For some reason, Yorin was spared from the bloody purge that claimed Bill, perhaps due to his youth and the thought that he’d been “led astray.” Sure.

Having completed our first outing, the survivors were advanced to 1st level and everyone got to pick a class. Well, everyone but the demihumans (my character’s class is Dwarf…go figure). We found enough treasure to purchase anything “up to scale mail.” Damage in DCC is variable by weapon, so it only makes gamist sense to pick up a long sword and shield. My character has gone from “assistant pig-keeper” to ShadowFell-ish Badass, in a single session…yeah, that’s kind of a weird transition, but that’s the game.

I’ll be interested to see how things go this week, and I am looking forward to another session (this time with more than 1 hit point). We'll see whether I can put paid to the trecherous Stiles or not.

“Spiteful.” That’s the word of the week.

: )

These Characters Suck

So, I was home watching my boy yesterday, and during one of his naps decided to roll up my "posse" of characters for the scheduled Thursday game of Dungeon Crawl Classics. Here's what I ended up with (and just by the way, I am naming them right now, as I am posting this...everything else was pure random roll):

Old Orin Pig-Keeper

Strength 11, Agility 6 (-1), Stamina 3 (-3), Personality 18 (+3), Intelligence 12, Luck 12

Luck: Bountiful Harvest (bonus to hit points)

Hit Points: 1

Occupation: Dwarven Herder (alignment: Neutral)

Gear: Staff, sow, 29 copper pieces

Bow-Legged Bill

Strength 9, Agility 8 (-1), Stamina 10, Personality 7 (-1), Intelligence 7 (-1), Luck 11

Luck: Conceived on Horseback (bonus to mounted combat)

Hit Points: 1

Occupation: Caravan Guard (alignment: Lawful)

Gear: Short sword, linen (1 yard), 29 copper pieces

Young Yorin Assistant Pig-Keeper

Strength 9, Agility 8 (-1), Stamina 11, Personality 9, Intelligence 8 (-1), Luck 9

Luck: Fox's Cunning (bonus to find/disable traps)

Hit Points: 2

Occupation: Dwarven Herder (alignment: Neutral)

Gear: Staff, goose, 39 copper pieces

Derrick the Blue

Strength 10, Agility 11, Stamina 14 (+1), Personality 15 (+1), Intelligence 8 (-1), Luck 5 (-2)

Luck: Raised by Wolves (bonus to unarmed attacks)

Hit Points: 3

Occupation: Indentured Servant (alignment: Chaotic)

Gear: Staff, locket, 20 copper pieces

Wow...this is definitely NOT your father's B/X! Four characters with a combined total of 7 hit points, and cumulative ability bonuses of (-1), (-3), (-2), and (-1)...I am anticipating quite the bloodbath!

; )

As I wrote earlier, I intend to be comparing the DCC rules to B/X over the next couple days/weeks due to their superficial similarity (not the least of which is DCC's recycled art from B/X). A few initial observations about the system, specifically with regard to chargen:

• The idea with funnel system is that playing multiple characters will ensure some survival over time to higher levels, where your character will no longer suck, in the process developing a background and emotional attachment to the peon that had the fortune to survive.
• Unlike B/X, initial viability of characters is NOT a concern, due to the funnel system...which means that unless one is fortunate with the random dice rolls, each individual character rolled tends to look like a walking meat puppet. Viability is thus determined "in play" (if a character is viable, it is assumed he or she will survive to 1st level).
• B/X, on the other hand, provides some basis for viability in its chargen process. Ability scores are subject to some adjustment (based on prime requisite), class (and thus prime req) is chosen by players based on those scores, and "hopeless characters" may be discarded. Two of the characters above (Bill and Yorin) would be discarded as "hopeless" under the usual terms given in B/X (all ability scores are below 12 with multiple scores in the less-than-nine range), and Orin would definitely fit the rules-given criteria as well (as a character with both a below-average agility and a 3 for stamina), though his 18 in personality might make the character a fun challenge to play as a very sickly priest.
• Even should these characters survive to 1st level, I'm not sure they would suddenly become "viable." An extra +1 or +2 hit points probably wouldn't make up for the character's other deficiencies, and if my reading of the DCC rules is correct, then Orin would be forced to become a Dwarf due to his initial occupation (dwarven herder). A dwarf with a strength of 11 and a stamina of 3? Such a stat-line would not even have the option of being a dwarf in B/X; but assuming it did, one could at least "sell down" personality to raise strength. Here the character is left with a high score in an ability that is of little use to his class, and no choice in class due to the random nature of the DCC occupation system.
• Because of this (the lack of potential viability), the game would seem to defeat its own purpose with its "funnel system;" having multiple characters is supposed to (in part) take the sting out of death and allow one to be a bit more cavalier and adventuresome with characters. Not worrying if one or two bite the dust. And yet, with only one real candidate with decent future prospects, the temptation would be to play UBER-cautious with that single fragile character, "guarding" him with the three other "meat shields."
• Even should Derrick reach 1st level, my choice of class is somewhat constrained by his ability scores; again, in B/X I have the option of adjusting the character's abilities based on Prime Requisite. If I wanted to play a fighter, I could reduce his personality score to 9 (average) and raise his strength to 13 (bonus to combat and earned XP). This is not an option in DCC...I can play a cleric, or I can choose to suck in a different class - and NOT a demihuman class, as I did not roll the required occupation type.
• With average (or less) scores in Luck, it would appear the only thing the score is good for is "burning" to gain bonuses, and the random birth aspect is of little use.

All right, as stated these are just my initial observations. I am still looking forward to play and will be interested to see how the game works in practice. Personally, I intend to play all the characters with as much skill and enthusiasm as I can muster. Already, I find "Bow-Legged Bill" is my favorite, and can only hope he survives to 1st level despite his gross limitations (I realize this is unrealistic in light of his 1 hit point but, there you have it). At first I thought Orin and Yorin might be brothers, but after careful consideration have decided they are father and son (extremely aged father, considering Orin's ability scores), and would like to see at least one of 'em survive. Despite Derrick's superficial viability, he strikes me as a bit of a jerk (any indentured servant with ability scores greater than the freemen of the group is going to be looking down his nose at them), and believe I shall have him walking "point."

: )

Star Wars!

Everyone (in the blog-o-sphere anyway) seems to be throwing in their two cents about the new, free downloadable Beta test version of Dungeon Crawl Classics. Me, I don't really want to.

For one thing most of my "reviews" of products still-in-print (or newly published) tend to be on the overly-critical negative side. Observe my review of HackMaster Basic that Kenzer was kind enough to provide me a copy. Or Stars Without Numbers. The only reason you haven't heard me say boo about Raggi's latest greatest is because I haven't got around to purchasing the damn thing (which might say something in and of itself).

But for the main thing, how can one offer an adequate review of an incomplete game? A review of a beta test? No, no...I've read the .pdf and there's nothing positive to say without seeing the whole thing (for example, the "more robust judge's section"). I'm not just going to say it's great 'cause of some pretty pictures...I'm not an art critic.

No, what I'm thinking of these days is Star Wars (again) and wishing I hadn't loaned my DVDs to this newlywed couple who are SW fanatics...I haven't had a chance to watch the prequels in months. And I'm starting to Jones for some type of SW fix. I find myself paging through graphic novels and terrible, TERRIBLE hardcovers picked up at used book stores over the last couple years. I keep looking at my Star Wars Stratego and Star Wars Epic Duels board games and wishing my son was a little older than his four-months (only at my most insane moments...most of the time I want him to remain a cute little baby forever) so that I could have someone to play with...

Ugh. Been thinking quite a bit about the space opera thing again, and man am I glad did I avoid putting shields in those rules...but, no, I'm still fairly hot-to-trot on D&D and will be maintaining pace on finishing up the present writing projects before jumping back into the Quixotic musings.

But really...I have no time for Dungeon Crawl Classics testing.