DragonQuest Combat houserule

I got a comment on my last post, mentioning playing DragonQuest without a battle map. Personally I have nothing against miniatures with my rpg, unless it slows down play. If you count hexes or squares it will slow down play is my experience. Playing online I find it a bit fiddly. So, I always look if I can do without them.

Thinking a bit about DQ I realized that the big thing is if you are engaged or not, and if you can get engaged after doing a half move. With that in mind, and inspired by the classic Traveller rang band system for combat I present the following:

The dividing line down the middle is separating Team A from Team B, or Attackers from Defenders. Well, you get the idea.

All placed in the green fields are Engaged and play according to those rules for initiative and if you can Trip, Disarm and so on. If you are in the blue fields you are disengaged and far away. Here you can only do ranged attacks, and you need more than half of your TMR to engage. In the areas in between you only need to do a half move to be Engaged.

That sheet can be printed and laminated and you can write on it, or you can use actual pretty miniatures. But, you skip the analysis-paralysis of counting hexes.

I think this i how I would try to run DQ if I did run it online.

If you have any ideas or response, I'm all ears!

Old D&D editions and clones - Tunnels & Trolls 1st ed.

Now, some of you might object to that title. Surely T&T is not a clone of D&D, and it surely isn't an old D&D edition!? No, it is not, but it is the first published game inspired by D&D and it fits right in here in the series about how much the old games inspire and engage today.

Those of you who have read or played later editions of T&T should really take a peek at this edition if you get the opportunity! I own the 2013 reprint, which might be available yet. I do not know. Anyway. What's interesting about this game are two things, how it differs from later T&T editions and how it differs from D&D.

I found it interesting that on the first page you get a short summary of how to run a game as a GM, how to play it as a player and even the point of sitting around the table talking get across well. I like it a lot. This little section is actually a fairly good primer of what it's all about. Fun details is that the caller is mentioned, as the "Voicer".

There are many fun small idiosyncrasies in this game, but most of it is in the presentation that is extremely colloquial. Ken even jokes about the illustrations right beside the current paragraph. The rules are fairly easy and smooth and there are not multiple odd subsystems.

I like some of the advice for how to run the game, like the emphasize on house ruling, "this is not my game". It is a hack of another game that grew into its own and it is paying its dues. Then there's the suggestion to put in lot of stuff in the dungeons, since "Nobody likes to mess around in a dull dungeon". Here I think Ken is onto something. The big empty dungeon is something I feel have been overvalued in the OSR conversations. I'm not so sure it was a regular feature of the Old Ways even.  Ken goes on with some other good advice suggesting that all the threats in the dungeon should be avoidable or be possible to nullify by smart players.

Much of the rules is as you'd expect, with the suggestion you start with a horisontal cut away fo your multi level dungeon, and there are rules for reaction rolls and capturing monsters. I also love the fact that there are names to the character levels. A Veteran is someone who has reached 3rd level, by the way. Not first.

Comparing this to modern versions of T&T and there are some differences. Armour is ablative, Saving Rolls are mainly done on Luck and you get XP for gold and deepest dungeon level penetrated.

I would actually gladly pick up those for all editions, liking them a lot. In general, I like this edition a lot. Expanding Saving Rolls into the "meta mechanic" it got later on and I feel you've almost hit the sweet spot for T&T rules. There's a rawness to the rules, but it's brimming with enthusiasm and small snippets of the life in the Phoenix campaign, like how they all have 3-15 characters per player! For me the rules feels like a big smiling invitation to just roll some dice and dive in the deep end. This is another winner. I really want to play this game!

Some extra rules for BRP - autofire and initiative

I've been very much in love with BRP lately. It's a game system I've played since I began this hobby, and it still feels like it can do anything. When Savage Worlds and FATE come and go as the "go to" systems for setting conversion, I always feel BRP could do it.

There are some oddities in the rules, though. Like almost every other rules set out there, it's more inspired by action movies than real life. I shall not try to bring up the dreaded "realism" argument, but sometimes you want to tone down the action hero aspects for a grittier game.

Autofire is one of those things I'd live to tweak. I've been thinking on this a while, and also been reading people's tweaks. This is my presents thoughts, archived. If you have any input I'm quite interested to hear it. I might still change things up a bit until I actually try these ideas out

Autofire

On of the oddities about autofire is that it's no harder to hit regardless how many bullets you put in the air. Recoil is abstracted out, and the amount of bullets that hit have no relation to your skill. I'd like to change that.

When you autofire, roll to hit as usual. But, do not add +5% per bullet! If you hit, take a note of your margin of success. A successful hit mean one bullet hit, and one more bullet per 5% of margin of success. But, regardless of success level, mark of all those bullets fired.

That will mean skill matters, and recoil is kind of factored in by removing the extra +5%. Optionally: subtract -5% per bullet fired if you really want to make recoil matter.

Another effect of autofire is to make people keep their heads down. To make that happen, I'm thinking of adopting a concept found in some games from GDW, namely Coolness Under Fire.

Coolness Under Fire

I'm not sure yet if this should be a derived ability, or a skill. The latter makes it easy to slot in among the other abilities. But, it's only partly something trained so I'm unsure if that makes sense, but also what to derive it from! Average POW and INT? Is low INT maybe a benefit? For now I'll treat it as a skill.

CuF is a skill, with a base chance of your POW. You can put skill points into it, just like any other skill. When you'd normally call for initiative rolls, instead roll CuF. For every 10% of your margin of success you get a +1 bonus to your DEX rank for initiative. Those who succeeded then act like usual in DEX order.

Those who fail their roll must take cover at once, and may not attack. Each round you make another roll to try to get to act.

Optional: For every bullet fired towards your area you take a -5% penalty to your CuF roll. That way autofire is very useful to lay down covering fire.

Final thoughs

The big problem with this will probably be for those players who fail their CuF, and get to sit there and do nothing. I guess that's why the rules are like they are in the book, but I have played enough conflict simulation games to appreciate the idea of having a field of combat a little less ordered and with a little less control.  I mean, RPGs are not like chess, right?

The other big thing is if CuF should be a skill at all. I'm still not sure about that, and change my mind every day. I'll put this out there as a working draft of my ideas. Hopefully I get to try them out when I've decided on something.

My JackerCon experience - playing FATE

This last weekend there was an online convention being organized among the fans and friends of the Happyjacks RPG podcast. It was all happening on g+, after you signed up on the events posted in timeslots in the podcast forums. Luckily for me, some people scheduled events at a time when it was not in the middle of the night here in Sweden. So, jumped in and played a session in a g+ hangout.

First I had to setup a laptop with a webcam, which I did not have on my main machine. Then I actually did a test hangout with my wife just to understand how it worked. It felt like I had never used a computer before. Finally, I was ready. I can say from the start that it worked quite well, even though it felt a bit awkward to switch from the Roll20 window to the Hangout window to actually see the person speaking. But, all in all I think this marks the beginning of more online play on my part, if I can only manage to get all the duck in a row in the messy world of international gamerdom and timezones.

The game was a secret, only to be revealed when we "sat down at the table" so to speak. Had I known more about the source material I might have been able to immerse myself even more. We played gummi bears. Yes, from the children's cartoon. Silly but funny.

Our GM had decided to run the game using Fate Accelerated Edition, a slimmer version of the recently concluded FATE Core rules release. I have not played FATE before in modern times, and it was great to get the opportunity to try out a new game system. I own the FATE books, but sometimes you get a better perspective on the game not by reading, but by playing it with someone who have ironed out the kinks, and can show how it's done. I love that aspect of convention play, and I'm a bit sad it doesn't seem to be done much in these parts where freeform play is popular in the convention arena.

How did it work? Quite well! We had an aspect that defined our character, a bit like the class define who you are in D&D. Then we had an aspect defined as a trait that would get us into trouble, either with the setting or another character. In general that is a great idea, I think. There were some other abilities, but those were the ones I fixated on. We went nuts and acted like cartoon characters for a couple of hours and laughed a lot. Thanks a lot to the organizers and to our GM Mike!

One thing I though you could grab from FAE, and maybe import into other games. In contrast to FATE Core, you don't have skills but instead have something called Approaches. Since older editions of D&D don't have skills, many have pondered the question of whether that is a feature, or a indication that something is missing. I wont take a firm stand on that question, but for your edification I will tell you something about how Approaches work, and you can decide for yourself if you like to maybe include something like that in your D&D game.

Approaches are basically words that describe how you do things. They are Forceful, Quick, Careful, Clever, Sneaky, and Flashy. So, if you want to bypass a door, you can do it sneakily or forcefully. I guess you see what those two options entail. I think the way you do it in FAE, add your rating in that Approach to your diceroll, might be borrowed to other games. Maybe you have a few points to spread around, or decide one Approach is dominant and the other recessive. It could be a cool way to differentiate that 1 in 6 roll to intimidate someone if you choose to do it your favoured Forceful way, or the Clever way instead. If you roll under your stat with a d20 or 3d6 a bigger bonus than +1/-1 might be used depending on how much you want those Approached to influence play. I think there are interesting possibilities in this system! Fool around with it, and if you try it out, I'd love to hear how it went.

More freeform magic - Savage Worlds

Just as I wondered about alternative system for the freeform kind of magic of Mage, I suddenly find multiple alternatives! This is just as much a reminder and place holder for myself as it is a tips you you out there. Check out Clint Black's rules for improvised magic for Savage Worlds. They look quite usuable.

I guess Savage Worlds have a reputation for quite pulpy and cinematic action, but looking at how WoD games seems to be played I think it could fit. Personal horror or not, they can't get any less of that by Savaging them, in my opinion.

Freeform Mage system - in BRP?

As I'm presently stressed out, and slightly exasperated by the possibilities of getting a gaming group to schedule a session, I'm dreaming up new cool projects.

I used to think that the first edition of that wild and crazy game Mage had something. The setting was black and white to a fault, and the usual "class system" really created game groups where everyone was an oddball and nothing but metagaming would ever keep that group together.

But, the idea of magic as something as the whole basis of ontology and conscience was mindbogglingly cool. Suddenly everything was magic, and you could totally explore the modern world from that perspective. Except you were supposed to play conservative/reactionary people stuck in a superstitious world view. At least that was how it felt, when it painted the technomancers as the bad guys.

Now I picked up the big time about the Technocracy, and started to read it as if we would start playing those guys instead. I began to see interesting option. But, I was vary of the rules.

So, how about using BRP instead? You could just grab the standard Call of Cthulhu skill list and just add the spheres of magic, couldn't you? Imagine you have skill ratings in the spheres just like any other BRP skill. Then maybe you'll have another skill for actual spell casting and if you wanted to do something you'd allocate percentiles up until you reach your rating in that sphere, and if you want to do something more powerful you'll get Paradox. I have long been thinking it would be cool with a system where you would "bet" your chance of success against your character's limitations, and that would be an interesting way to make that happen.

I will probably never do anything with it, but suddenly I have some weird system hackery to occupy my mind with. Maybe I'll even feel tempted to toss some words into an search engine to find out if someone beat me to it. Maybe. It is more fun to just dream up systems, right?

Material components, taking a cue from Mage

I have more than once felt that the game Mage: The Ascension could be really cool, if I just figured out how. The rules are a bit too vague, and the setting cool but unfocused. Sadly, it felt later editions limited it to become the same kind of superhero games Vampire and Werewolf was.

Now I've started thinking about the really interesting bad guys in the setting, the Nephandi, I decided I needed to read the Guide to the Technocracy. That power group was presented as the main evil in the early editions, but I have picked up this book in order to find a more positive slant on them. There are multiple shades of bad in this setting, and I felt Nephandi would be more interesting as bad guys, and the technos as misguided good guys. It's after all a game about belief, and even the kind who seems abhorrent to you has to be investigated for what they are.

One thing this books talks about at length is the magic foci used to cast technological spells. The magic in Mage is very free form, and based upon some basic spheres of knowledge. You can pick whatever sphere you like and by manipulating that get magical effects of that kind. In GttT the "mages" use implements, like a calculator, mirrorshades, guns and other technological gadgets which both channels and "hides" the reality wracking effects. For example, in order to cast a spell of perception, you put on those shades and the spell take effect. The implements are not just like a magic wand you wave about, it's a thing that related to the magic action being taken. This made me think of material components.

In some editions of D&D, you have to have a spell component to cast some spells. If the component is verbal it is easy to just say your character chants or shouts or whatever. That pesky bat guano or black pearl is more complicated. How often do you need to stock up? How do you track usage? Is that really fun? And so on...

Maybe you could use implements like in Mage instead? It would take magic back to how it worked in the Blackmoor campaign. Dave Arneson had a very tangible kind of magic in his campaign, that much can be gleamed from what he have said, and written in the FFC. It can't get any more old school than that, eh?

I would think it would have to be components of a lasting nature. One problem with the material components rules as they are in e.g. AD&D is that it's unclear how to manage the logistics. If you instead always have your item around, it solves that problem. I do like the idea of being able to improvise and take whatever item that suits the effect you are trying to achieve. Since there are no dice rolls involved in classic D&D spell casting, you could say spells cast without implements take one additional time increment to cast, a segement, round or whatever.

I'll file away this idea for the future. Right now it looks like I'll have few possibilities to actually test it, but if you do feel free to post your experiences!

Using weapon speed factors as recoil

In Mongoose Traveller, some weapons have a recoil number. I like that implementation, since it allows you to fire a big gun and then that recoil number adds to your initiative next turn. Simple, and effective. Now imagine if there was an easy way to use those pesky weapon speed factors from 1st edition AD&D? Maybe there is.

How about you do the same thing? Sure, initiative is a very different beast in AD&D but considering how many hacks of that system there is, yet another wont make much of a difference.

So, roll 1d10 for initiative. Then add that weapon speed, and count up from 1. You could probably use it both with individual and with group initiative. One size fits all, eh?

Let me know if you try it, or have already tried it out. I think is sounds neat, on paper at least.

A reflection on Rolemaster - tweakablility

Having been in a conversation about Burning Wheel, a game built very tightly to a specific specification, I think back on how amazingly modular Rolemaster is.

Anyone who have seen the long series of companions published for the system probably know what I mean. Almost any part of the system can be tweaked, added to or subtracted from. It would still be Rolemaster! I think I have at least four different initiative systems in my collection, and that not counting the fan made stuff free on the internet!

I think that was the same thing that made me a fan of GURPS back in the day. Take the parts you like and the core is still the same. Learn some basics and then you know the game, but there's more flavour if you need it.

Contrast that with modern iterations of D&D.

Do you remember how convoluted, complex and contradictory the 3rd ed D&D rules became when you started hacking them with all the splat books that came out?

I still look favourably on Rolemaster, and even though I don't expect to play it again soon I almost always start make up new and exciting rules tweaks as soon as I start to read it. I like that quality in a game.

A Rolemaster combat variant

Way back in the days, Rolemaster was one of those big systems used in fantasy campaigns all over the place. Then the company who published it, I.C.E. suffered some setbacks and eventually folded. Through all this a few new iterations of the game saw the light of day, and being an old fan of the system, having started my GM career with MERP, I own more than a few of these books.

Now the company is back again, and it's time for consolidation and a new edition of the rules. Will it be viable in today's marketplace? I have my doubts, but for old times sake I took a peek at the play test documents.

One thing I never liked was how every weapon in the system had its own attack table. If for nothing but logistical reasons, it was unwieldy. But, it also made no sense. While the difference between getting hit by a small piece of sharpened metal and a bigger one might might be significant, the steps in between were just way too fine grained. It was often lauded as realistic, but in reality that was a simulationist dream. But, in MERP and in RMFRP they did something else.

In those variants of the rules (I consider them all to be kind of the same, even HARP), you had groups of weapons, like one handed edged weapons. It was easier to handle, and kept a level of verisimilitude. Today, considering the effects of what this about to model, I came upon an idea of how to present this even more concisely.

The individual hit points matter little in RM. What kills you is the critical hits, which are divided into levels of severity. So, I thought why not boil it down to those crits? Since a critical shows up in the upper level on the hit charts, you can see how big a percentage of the hits are of a specific level. Those percentages could be rolled in tandem with the attack roll, skipping the roll on the hit table. If you beat your opponents roll, add the overlap to the crit roll and see what level of crit you inflicted. It will make a bunch of simplifications to the RM system, but keeps some of the flavour. The obvious thing missing is of course the difference against different kinds of armour. Maybe I can shoe horn that back in somehow as well, given some time.

I wont be able to do a proper play test, since I'm lacking a group to test with. But, I felt like throwing it out there for anyone who happen to see it, and for my own archival purposes. Enjoy.

Talents - character traits in T&T

It seems I write more on T&T than I've done in a while. Today's post can be fitted to D&D as well if you like, though. You will have to expand your game with rolls against the stats Dave Arneson's style, though. I will probably write more upon that at a later stage.

One new addition to the game with the 7th ed. is Talents. 5th ed. diehards do without, but those of us who have embraced 7th ed. feel it's an innovation that have some merits. I'm going to talk about how I think the idea can be used and even improved upon.

Talents are defining skills, the abilities that make you the special individual you are. They can be narrow like "Playing Cards", or more broad like "Gambling". Those are two examples from the rules. According to the rules all new characters get a Talent. Then, as they go up in level, they may add another. Simple enough.

There are some problems with this, of course. While this all makes sense, the fact that some character types gets Talents as part of their class abilities is written in a way which makes it unclear if it is in addition to the Talent eveyone gets or not. In the specific case of the Rogue, the example character of Zam the Bony (p.32-33) is awarded a Talent of Thievery while there's no mention of a Roguery Talent.

Just like in OD&D, the Thief breaks the mould and creates problems. I suggest the following way to handle Talents, and the special case of the Rogue.

Every character gets one Talent when created, regardless if high stats rolled makes you start the game on a higher level than one. The Talent is written as Stat + Bonus, and the initial bonus is rolled on 1d6.


Every time a character gains a level through AP expended on raising a stat, another Talent may be added to the character. The bonus for that Talent is rolled on 1d6.

and

Rogues may at character creation, since they rely so much upon their smarts and good fortune, add their level to the bonus to their first level Talent. This is a set bonus, and does not increase at the Rogue gain levels.

This is a clear set of rules which unifies the mechanic, and gives the Rogue that extra flexibility with going totally over board with a Talent with a potential +6 usable for multiple SRs!

I hope you like that, or voice your disagreement. This probably they way I'll play the game from now on.

T&T hacks - Savage Worlds

There was a time when you couldn't read the forums at Big Purple (AKA rpg.net) without it every day serving you another thread where people talked about how to convert this or that setting to a new rules set, most often Savage Worlds. I read many of those, and do think it is a great fit for many settings. I own the rules and follow podcasts and bloggers who cover it, and to some extent it has entered into my mind as a "go to" system. One of the cool things with it is the bennies.
In SW you get three "bennies" and the start. When you do something impressive, cool, fun or impressive in character you might be rewarded by another one. These can be used for re-rolls.

Naturally, having the ability to re-roll makes for a more high octane style of gaming. Many "savages" talk about "pulp gaming" as if it was a genre. In fact, it was a description of the cheap paper the lurid "two fisted tales" from the twenties to the forties were printed on. I find it kind of curious that it has become a genre of gaming. There is actually a game for that kind of gaming, namely Daredevils from FGU. But, I can see why Savage Worlds have become popular for it, since it lends itself very easily to fast and furious action. Let's see how to port that to T&T.

Every player start the game with 3 bennies. The GM start with one for each player, plus one. Use poker chips, coloured stones , pennies or whatever you have handy. When someone does something exceedingly cool or makes everyone laugh, hand them another one. To use the bennies, say that you want a re-roll, hand the token to the GM and roll again. If you don't like the result, use the first one you rolled instead. You can use bennies to re-roll any Saving Throw, i.e. a roll based on a trait. In combat you need to attempt those stunts to be able to use bennies to re-roll. At the end of the session, hand in the unused tokens. Next session, everyone start with 3 new bennies.

Option 1: If you don't mind the bookkeeping, make a note of every bennie earned, and cache them in for 50 AP each after an extended downtime from adventuring.

Option 2: The GM can only use bennies for named NPCs or major antagonists.

Option 3: If you as a player want to support another player character, you might use your own bennies to chip in. Only one bennie per roll may be added, though.

Option 4: You may use as many bennies as you like, re-rolling until satisfied. Note that this makes for a very high powered game!

I hope you think these hacks sounds interesting and inspire you to try them, or your own variant thereof, in your next T&T game.
Fight on!

T&T hacks - Rolemaster

This is the second post in this series, and today we are going to take a look at Rolemaster from I.C.E., which happens to be an old favourite of mine.

The first thing I remember when I think of Rolemaster is the tables. There are tables for spells, attacks, fumbles and crits. I loved those. 

I guess everyone who has played Rolemaster remember the critical hits tables. Let's see if we can hack T&T to get something with a similar feel.

So, did you managed to get any Spite dice on your attack? Congratulations. Now, did you also manage to get any doubles? Now we get into crit/fumble territory.

But, just like in RM there should be continuous effects. Those spite points are now bleeding, and you take that amount of damage, every round. Now, let's get on with the crits and fumbles.

Count the numbers of dice that are the same, that's the level of your crit/fumble. If the doubles where ones, it was a fumble and any other kind of number is a crit.

For crits, roll a SR on CON on the level of your crit. For fumbles, roll a SR on LK on the level of your fumble. As you understand, this means lvl 2-6. If you fail your SR, this is what happens.

Critical hits
Lvl 2 - roll 2 to more dice of damage
Lvl 3 - stunned, you loose your next action
Lvl 4 - you fall unconscious
Lvl 5 - random limb is now useless
Lvl 6 - save or die

The level of SR is the extra points of damage you take (regardless if you make your save), and that's spite damage folks! Don't forget the bleeding.

Fumbles
Lvl 2 - drop your weapon
Lvl 3 - your weapon break
Lvl 4 - damage random ally
Lvl 5 - damage yourself
Lvl 6 - damage yourself, and you roll one more die. That number is the crit level you just inflicted, on yourself.

Do you think it hurts enough yet? I think in this system you can probably get the same kind of feel as in RM, where a lucky schmuck can kill himself if he is "lucky" enough.

What did you say? Is the math wonky? It probably is, I have not tested this, and am not that great at crafting mathematically sound rules. But, take it and run with it! Let me know what you think.

T&T hacks - Burning Wheel

As the first post in this new series, I'm going to take a cue from Luke Crane's game Burning Wheel.

In BW you have these psychological traits called Beliefs. They are things your character are all about. It's things that define your character, and things that you can not miss or ignore when interacting with that character. In short, it's a great way to tell your GM what kind of game you want to play.

The second thing is Instincts. These are stylish markers for how your PC behaves. They are things that will work great for colour, but also short cut some of the "grind" actions you'll want to do. 

Let's show some examples. There's a great one in the BW rules about Beliefs, let's look at that. "People feel better when lied to". How about that? It makes it clear that your PC is somewhat of a cynic, and that you want to lie a lot. Excellent role playing tag, and a hint to the GM that you want to interact with people and lie to them.

To incorporate this into your T&T game, do just like in BW. Pick at least one, and up to three, and write them on your character sheet.

Next, let's look at Instincts.

An Instinct is a if < this > then < that > kind of routine. They will help your character stand out, and also help you not forget to do that thing, which might be a life saver. Again, let's look at an example. "I always use a glove when opening a door". There you go, it makes you look cool and it might save your hide when you encounter a contact poison. The GM could even allow you to make a SR after the fact to notice the odd powder or smell on your glove, telling you what you just evaded. Maximum game fun.

To incorporate this into your T&T game, list one or up to three Instincts on your sheet.

I guess I managed to convey the value of the Instincts, but what about the Beliefs? Well, in Burning Wheel they have many different flavours of what we call Adventure Points in T&T. I think the simplest way is to just say that every time your character in game acts upon one of her Beliefs, you gain 100 AP. It pays to practice what you preach, if you see what I mean?

If you feel a Belief has run it's course, save up 1000 AP and buy it off, exchanging it for something new. Don't make Beliefs something cheap. It will cost you to turn your back on something that defined your character!

I hope you think these hacks sounds interesting and inspire you to try them, or your own variant thereof, in your next T&T game.

Fight on!

Action/Drama/Fate points and player engagement

I was replying in a comment on this post, and realized it was turning into a post of its own. I'll expand all my thoughts below.

The idea was that points which players can use to change probabilities and/or change the game world is bad in a old school game. The perceived threat was that of eliminating the deadliness of the system. Here are some direct feedback on that, and some further thought on the matter.

There are multiple kind of systems for giving the players a way out, and for changing the fact of the game world. I have played multiple systems using those and have some experiences to share.

First, in Warhammer FRP there are something called Fate Points. Those can be used to "save the character from certain death". Suggestions are mitigating the effects of a fall from a cliff, or a critical hit. But, and it's an important but. Once they are gone, they are gone! In a game like WHFRP, which is quite deadly, this is literally a life saver. Will it rob the game of something? Well. I have played with quite a few characters in WHFRP and I tell you that I sweat every time my character takes a hit! Fate points or not. Too see those few points dwindle just reinforce how close to death I just came.

Secondly I want to mention the Drama Dice of 7th Sea. In that system you roll dice depending on your stat and your skill, as a pool. But, you only keep as many as your stat's value. Using the Drama Dice, you basically get more dice to choose from to keep. So, using this mechanic you make it likelier that your character succeeds. These Drama Dice you get for acting in a heroic and swashbuckling manner, i.e. it reinforce the theme of the game. It's a reward mechanic. When I was running 7th Sea, I noticed that the psychological effect of getting a physical token (poker chips in our case), and comparing the amount to the guy sitting next to you, made it work really well to reinforce the theme of the game. Sure, sometimes people chucked in token after token (you can commit them after the fact) on a roll they really wanted to succeed at, but it mostly worked as a prod to act thematically correct.

Thirdly, and finally, I'm coming to Type IV D&D. I played in a campaign up to "Paragon Tier"?  See, I have already managed to dismiss the jargon from my head. Anyway, up to what used to be called Name Level. I remember that I once in a while used a Action Point when I wanted to do something, but in that game the "respawn time" of powers was dominating the game so much that yet another mechanic, like getting "blooded" and triggering new effects, made it down in the general noise of game mechanics. Basically, I barely noted those points and they never affected our actions as far as I could see. They surely never did mine.

So, what am I trying to say? I'm saying that having some kind of points or game mechanic to "save your bacon" can work out in many different ways. I would claim, with some emphasis, that the brittleness of characters is not the defining factor of old school play, and that there are more than one way to skin a cat. The cat in this case being giving those points to players. Compare getting xp for gold to the Drama Dice in 7th Sea. Those are both reward mechanics. Also, having dwindling resources can in fact give the game an even tenser feel, and reinforce the dread. If that's what you're after. But, when you add something like a new mechanic to the game, make sure you are not conflicting with other systems in the game, making the effect lessened by it being forgotten or drowned!

I am vary of the idea of giving more spells to neophyte magic users. It change the tone of the game, but I don't think a scarce resource like the Fate Points in WHFRP does. Is it a valid comparison? I don't know.

Save or Die - Randall said it well

I just read what Randall wrote on his blog on save or die effects. While I think sometimes there is a masochistic streak in some favouring the Old Ways, his solution and great arguments allow us all to have the cake and east it too.

My only problem with that post is I wish I had thought of it first! Cheap to only link and not write something yourself? Well, he said it best.

A generic extended conflict system for LL, S&W etc.

I was reading the Savage Worlds fanzine Shark Bytes, and in there was an article on more uses of the mass combat system. Since I have a soft spot for the Burning Wheel and its "social combat" system Duel of Wits (which I still haven't tried!), I of course was charmed. Maybe this could be ported to other games? Some people like mini games like this, and some hate it. I'm not a great rules writer, but these are some basic ideas. It could probably be improved or slimmed down.

Let's imagine this being for a game like Labyrinth Lord, Swords & Wizardry or a similar very popular fantasy rpg.

When you want to have a cooking competition, argument or another conflict not covered by the combat system, do like this. Decide who is "attacking" whom, and exactly what is the expected outcome of anyone winning. Then decide which stat you are going to start to use in the conflict. Divide the stat by two, this is the amount of points or tokens you start with. Use dice or poker chips, or write it down.

Now, explain to the GM what you are doing this round, role play as much as you like. (Option: if you and your players like to act it out, you might now give a small bonus, -2 at the most, to the roll). Roll 1d20 below the stat you have chosen, both of you. Since the "attacker" and defender might want to use very different stats, work out a way for it to make sense in the game world. Now pick and action, and bet any amount of your tokens. There are four different actions you can choose. For most effect, choose secretly and then reveal.

1. attack +1 to the roll
2. defend -1 to the roll
3. probe you don't loose anything
4. all out defence loose one less, -1 to roll
5. all out attack gain one extra, +1 to roll

You can also do an All In, and then the opponent must match your bet and the winner takes it all.

The results then. If you fail, you loose your bet. If you succeed and the opponent loose, you gain the lost bet. If you crit, i.e. roll below 3, you gain another token in addition to any other effect. First player to loose all tokes loose the conflict.

Will it be very cumbersome? Maybe. Will it be fun? Well, it seemed to work in Savage Worlds.

I imagine it could be used for prolonged conflicts, where each turn is hours, days or even longer stretches of time. Also, I guess it could be used for almost anything, mass combat or court intrigue.

One of these days, I'm testing it. Let me know if you have tried something similar (like the rules in Shark Bytes), or even test this set of rules.

A small Rolemaster hack

I am running a Call of Cthulhu campaign, just generated a character for a 3rd ed D&D game, have a play by post S&W character kind of still in play and an active play by mail De Profundis character. Guess what? I know had my brain bounce unto another game. Gamer ADD...

Savage Worlds is a game where they explicitly in the book tell you not to invent new stuff for it when adapting it to another setting. Since I have been there myself (WH40k, for those who are curious), I can confirm that that is sound advice. The stats are the same in all settings, the skills are the same and most of the Edges and Hindrances are the same. What do differentiates are the so called Trappings, and some specific setting and flavour enhancing Edges. I kind of like this idea, and I guess it makes sense for most people who had played a bunch of D&D characters who actually differed very slightly from the others within the same class and level.

So, I know that I never managed to feel comfortable with the skill list in Rolemaster 2nd ed. It was something like 15 skills, and they were very general. You did have the optional so called Secondary Skills, which on the other hand in some cases was ridiculously specialized. I guess the line developers thought something similar when they developed 3rd ed which had something more like a 100 skills! Maybe you could combine old school Rolemaster with the Savage Worlds way of thinking?

What I'm thinking of is to make each of the Professions in RM each give you a few of those Secondary Skills and differentiators, just like the setting specific Edge in a Savage Worlds game makes that character with the same skills different from another character in another setting. It is the same line of thinking that lies behind the old school feats suggestion (which might or might not be a popular idea. I got many visitors to the blog that day, but few comments...) of making two level 2 fighters be different somehow.

The question is of course if I managed to develop the idea before I get interested in another game...

Making deities matter

I just browsed the Players Guide for the 3rd ed setting Kingdoms of Kalamar. In the chapter on clerics it had some options I found interesting. Those who have followed me through the years know I have a soft spot for KoK, and this was something I felt could be imported to other games.

You know how clerics can turn undead? In newer editions of D&D, that it because the channel some kind of positive energy from their god. That sounds kind of iffy to me, but you can take the concept and run with it.

If your cleric is channeling power from the gods when casting spells (from a spell list that is mostly identical to all), why not take one effect that conceptualize the area of influence of that god, and make that a power of the cleric?

So, a cleric of the god of merchants should be able to channel the power of smooth talking, charming or something similar. A cleric of the god of death should be able to somehow be more deadly once in a while. A cleric of the god of love could... Well, you get the idea.

How about that?

You could make it happen on a d20 lower than the character level, on a 1 in 6 or just once every session. Scalable to every power setting. Also, if the death channeler just gets +1 dmg or kills outright is also one of those "setting dials". Even a +1 could be fun. Everyone likes to be somewhat special.

You say it sounds like those fiddly "daily" powers from my post on old school "feats"? Yeah, it will take some bookkeeping unless you make it happen just once every session. Everyone should be able to remember if they have used their power this night, unless very drunk while gaming, right?

Then you could just tweak the spell list to be unique for every god/temple/whatever. I think the power channeling idea is more fun, though.

Call of Cthulhu on rails

So, we played another session on CoC last weekend. It was the second of two sessions covering the scenario Blood on the Tracks by J. Todd Kingrea from the Pagan Publishing scenario collection Out of the Vault.

The scenario is basically a train ride on a train hijacked by a monster. The intent is to have a feeling of being locked in, of having someone around hunting you for mysterious reasons. I think it is an interesting set up. I'll do a short summary of events and then talk about what went well and what didn't.

So, our investigators left Boston for New Orleans, following the letter our intrepid reported had gotten from her old friend there. Everyone settled in and talked to the other travellers and had dinner on the train. After dinner and cigars most people retired to their rooms, some for "medical tonics for better sleep". Suddenly the peace was shattered when the priest yelled at the top of his lungs that he had seen the conductor run out from Ms Browns compartment, all bloody. The brave investigators broke down the door to the washroom and found the dead conductor.

They spent the night doing autopsies (good with a MD in the group, eh?), examining the blood trail and searching staterooms. Sooner or later the professor of anthropology they had talked to was missing and they started a search, finding him stuffed in a box in the baggage car. By now they all suspected some vampiric activity, considering the blood was missing. They did find, and open, the big crate in the baggage car. Interestingly enough, this lead to the conclusion that Sir Alexander's wife must be a vampire!

Now they had noticed that the radio was smashed and that communications with the engine was down. Our war hero decided it was time for more pulp hero antics and climbed over to the engine via the coal box! He had his big gun with him and managed to blow the two living corpses away. Then there was a fight in the railroad car with the vampire and his acolyte. They ran down the whole train and the fight ended in the baggage car with a stake through the heart of the vampire. Then they had managed to slow down the train and had a lot of explaining to do when the authorities arrived.

So, how was it? Well. I more than once used the guidelines from Unknown Armies about 30-50% being professional level and had everyone with that level automatically succeed at crucial checks like in Trail of Cthulhu. I never had anyone need to be pushed by their Drive into action. Also, I actually forgot to check if anyone's Pillar of Sanity was threatened when they rolled for SAN. The latter was a failing on my part.

Mood wise I think it worked ok. Having one after another being killed off did heighten the sense of being hunted somewhat. I think the fact that things were moving along a pace determined by the villain was a good thing. It meant that even though the investigation could inform the decisions of the players, nothing had to stop because they didn't figure it all out. In fact, I don't think they ever did. The fact that guns are so deadly in close quarters made any gunfight slightly lopsided. I rolled really bad on my part and every second (no, really!) shot fired was an impale! Maybe you need to have a mix of "gun fodder" and some nasty mythos critters to drive home how useless guns are against those.

One of my house rules that will come to matter is how I handle SAN recovery. The doctor who did the autopsies and with reckless abandon ran after the vampire with his hunting rifle did suffer. He gained a temporary insanity and how have this thing for cleanliness. It will affect his work, I gather. But, more importantly he lost 8 SAN which he will never get back. They ended up with a train filled with bloody murder, corpses and guns had been fired. No chance of plausible denial there, so no SAN recovery even though they defeated the monster. That rule will colour this campaign!

Now they will arrive in New Orleans and there are cults, murders and monsters up ahead. I can't wait.