Space Wars

So the Seahawks season is over and, despite yet another close win (against a 4-13 halfling team...big whoop), the orks are out of the playoffs (*sigh*). I may discuss that in later post (or the playoffs in general), but at the moment I'm not in the mood for Blood Bowl.

[not that Blood Bowl hasn't been on the mind a bit...the kids have been clamoring for it in recent days and are in the process of painting up a couple BB teams (wood elves and amazons; Christmas gifts from last year, if I remember correctly)]

It should come as little surprise that in MY household, there's been plenty of game playing that's been going the last couple weeks (during the holiday vacation season). What might be surprising is that almost none of it has been D&D related. Instead, it's been card games, board games, and war games...specifically a new war game that was on the boy's Christmas list: Star Wars Legion. Prior to New Year's eve (when we had to clean the table for a dinner party) our dining room was dominated by battlefield detritus and unpainted models. Now...well, the battlefield hasn't returned (yet) but the table is once again dominated by scores of miniatures...primed miniatures that are in the process of being painted.

Since it IS game related and it's been the main thing occupying my attention lately (at least, the bandwidth I reserve for gaming), I figured I might as well write something about it.

Under the tree this year.

Star Wars Legion is a miniature war game; the core box set comes in two varieties Republic vs. Separatist or Empire vs. Rebels. The rules for both are the same, but the models included in the box are different. We, of course, have the latter set because...duh. 

I find the game VERY reminiscent of 2nd edition Warhammer 40,000. Not necessarily in game play (initiative and turn procedure is NOT 40K-esque, and the thing uses custom dice rather than standard d6s), but in terms of army construction and general paradigm. Each player picks up a faction. Unit types are given "rank" categories, which limits how many of each type can be included in the army list. There are normal generals and whatnot or "special" (Unique) figures based on film characters. There are "upgrade" cards that can purchased for specific points...very much like 40K's "war gear" and "psychic power" cards. And just like 2E 40K, the special characters, can punch above their point value, absolutely dominating the battlefield...something that the 40K designers endeavored to rectify between 2E and 3E.

[when it comes to 40K, I logged the most "game time" playing 2E, though I spent more years collecting & building 3E and/or 4E, before chucking the thing around the time of 5E]

Which is FINE...it is very Star Wars. Luke Skywalker should be able to carve his way through a unit of stormtroopers. Vader should be a big, menacing presence on the moving (slowly) about the battlefield. Mandalorians with jetpacks should be highly mobile, elite units. Etc.

The game has a LOT of fiddle to it: a lot of special rules and spot mechanics and tokens, reminiscent of Magic cards...a fairly obvious influence on the design of Star Wars Legion. But I like the game...a lot. For a NUMBER of reasons:

1) Star Wars is fun. Star Wars as a war game (stormtroopers vs. rebels) is a blast. The models are all recognizable by anyone with even a passing knowledge of the films, and their capabilities are well-modeled by the game mechanics.

2) Really quality components (easily stored in a nice box) and fairly straightforward rules that, after a couple play-throughs, are fairly easy to grok. No issues for the 12 year old, despite being for ages 14+.

3) Dirt-cheap investment. Anyone familiar with GW stuff knows how much money can be spent on the miniatures hobby. I remember when a single rhino tank was $35 or a landraider was an "outrageous" $50ish. Just checking Amazon this morning, the prices on these are up to $89 and $140. 

Holy. Crap. 

Star Wars Legion, by contrast, are cheaper to buy BUT (more importantly) have an 800 point structure limit. The core box provides two forces of circa 500 points...you can customize a legal army with the purchase of 2-3 extra units, probably with less than $70ish total in extra expenditure.  They're cheap enough you can outfit multiple "800 point armies" of the same faction for little money (the core box is currently available on-line for $95...compare that to 40K!). I bought myself a late Christmas present of the "Blizzard" box: three snowtrooper units (21 models), 2 speeder bike units (4 models), another Vader, and an AT-ST (!!) all with associated cards, upgrades, and extra tokens. Total price: $105. Scheduled to arrive tomorrow. One of these days I'll throw down the extra $13 to buy General Veers, and my "Hoth assault" army will be complete. 

[never mind...just took 2 minutes to place the order. It's still only $15 with tax...arrives tomorrow, too]

Arriving tomorrow.

Back in 1996 I paid $18 a pop for each two-pack of space marine terminators. I got six (total), all with thunder hammers and painted them up to be Khorne berserkers. Less than a year later, they were outlawed by 40Ks new rule set and (so far as I know) have never since been a legal 40K unit. Screw you, Games Workshop.

4) Easy assembly. The kids have been doing (most of) the cutting and gluing...I just do all the priming, out in the garage (to save on their young lungs). Even the really fiddly models (the AT-RT, the Mandalorians)...the kid put them together no problem, without adult help.

5) Lego compatible. Over the years, my kids have acquired quite the collection of Lego sets, many of which are Star Wars themed. While these have been used for plenty of "Lego wars" in the past, they are pretty close to the same scale as Star Wars Legion...which means that we have ready-made "terrain" for our battlefield. Who needs plastic forests and spray-painted "hills" when you can battle in the Tattooine cantina? Plus, I just like repurposing toys...or anything...in ways that make it useful. 

6) Fast gameplay. The game plays quite fast...once you get a handle on how each unit's special rules and instructions work. That part is kind of a pain, as each unit generally has at least 1-2 special rules associated with it (even before adding various "upgrade" cards), and you're bound to make mistakes in the first battle or two (we did). However, the limited NUMBER of units (that 800 points is only enough for 6-7 groups), combined with fast turn sequence means you get ramped up pretty quick. The whole "issuing orders" phase (a card drawing mechanic that takes the place of initiative rolling) allows for interesting tactical maneuvering, and the quick attrition means game play speeds up substantially as the game goes. Six turns (again: memories of 2E 40K) goes VERY fast, but battles are tight right to the end. We dig it.

7) With regard to rules, I'm generally fine. Yes, Luke is a beast. He's also been shot to death in every battle we've played. Same with Vader. The only mechanical issue that bugs (or that I'm not used to) is that troop models cannot be screened by other troop models. So, even though the stormtroopers advance in front of DV (because Darth is Sooo Slooow), rebel forces can ignore the troopers, focusing fire on the commander behind. In practice it hasn't been a big deal...but it does feel odd.

Anyway. War gaming is fun. War gaming in spaaaace is also quite fun. Even the nine year old is into it (she's currently painting her Amazon team, but has a Chewbacca and Leia for SWL and plans to get in on the next battle). The kids are getting to an age when I can fo this kind of thing with them...an age where I can unpack my old crates of 40K minis and not worry about them smashing them crazily, or pitching one in a tantrum of frustration (always a possibility with young or immature players). 

But I'm kind of over 40K. I mean, there's a lot of sly Star Wars references in the original 40K game (which I own, but have never played), and I'm tempted to run some first edition 40K using the SWL miniatures in place of GW stuff (now that would be a hoot!). I thought about introducing them to 40K proper, but even though I've got the stuff for it...what edition would I teach them? I mean...how many editions are there now? Eight? Nine? I've got rule books for the first four (five? Maybe) editions. But do I have a favorite? Not really. It's such a simple system, but there are changes to every version that changes the game in significant ways. 

Nah. I think I'll stick with the new Star Wars game for a bit. I'm sure 40K will still be around in ten years...in a twelfth edition with $300 tank models...if the kids want to try it out.

*** EDIT: Sorry, almost forgot: Go Dawgs! ***

"Everyone Has A Gimmick"

This is a bit of a "throwaway post," but I feel like I've got to get something down on Ye Old Blog, and I've just had a hard time writing anything lately. Oh, I've started a couple-three things...I've got a post titled "Time Warp," one called "Down Rabbit Holes," and a third called something like "World Without End." Oh yeah...something-something about encumbrance. But I really don't have the mental brain sweat at the moment to address all these potentially O-So-Profound subjects with the requisite gravitas they so richly deserve. 

So F it.

Instead, I'm going to hearken back to someone else's blog post of yesteryear, specifically this little doozie from Necropraxis called Only Ten from back in 2012. For some reason I've had this old post open on some random tab of my laptop for I-don't-know-how-long and I don't even remember why I was looking at it (let alone what I was thinking saving it). Maybe it came up when I was doing some search for Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play? I don't know...really I don't.

Anyway, for the disinterested, the gist of Necro's subject was the following question: if you could only keep 10 printed RPG books, which would make the cut?  Now I'm not sure about my lovely readers, but I happen to be a middle-aged dude who's been playing (and collecting) RPG material for close to 40 years, and while much of it has been sold, lost, or stolen over the years, I still hang on to a substantial amount of printed material. Enough to fill a bookshelf and a half plus a cupboard, and (perhaps) a large plastic crate or two.  And that's just the printed material. That's a LOT of books to pare down to just 10...and a particularly tall order for a packrat like myself.

Still, while I'm glad I don't actually have to burn the bulk of my library, it's an interesting thought exercise. And it's one I went through in my head earlier today: just what would I keep? Strangely enough, B/X didn't make the cut (due partly to me having memorized most of it, and partly having purchased PDFs from DriveThru...when I absolutely have to look something up these days, B/X is quite searchable on the ol' laptop). Mainly I was thinking of games that would allow me to play (or recreate) multiple genres of fantasy, interesting systems, or thoughtful design. Here's  my list at the moment (in no particular order of priority):

1. AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide
2. AD&D Players Handbook
3. AD&D Monster Manual
4. Heroes Unlimited
5. Maelstrom
6. Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader
7. Sorcerer
8. Vampire the Masquerade (1st edition)
9. Hollow Earth Expedition

I can't really bring myself to choose a 10th book...there are a few that could make the cut. The Fiend Folio, of course (and almost certainly would be). Deities & Demigods (the original) makes a strong case if only for its official ability score tables up to 25 and discussions on clerics, worship, and divine ascension. Beyond the Supernatural, Rifts, Gamma World, Deadlands could all go in there...even Ars Magica (1e), Orkworld, ElfQuest, or Over the Edge. And I hardly need not be mentioned how much I love both Ken St. Andre's Stormbringer (1e) and Marc Miller's Classic Traveller (I have the core book compilation from GDW)...that last one (Traveller) might even be able to edge out HEX in the #9 spot. 

Ugh...I completely forgot Twilight 2000. But it's box set technically consists of multiple books. If the original system had a single hardcover, it would leapfrog several of the "possibles" for the #10 slot. It just has a wonderful system for near-future post-apocalyptic games. 

The thing is, MANY of the games I own would be simple enough to recreate, and many could stand a rewrite using a different, more convenient system. Such was definitely the case with Shadowrun (my B/X style knockoff Cry Dark Future is a testament to that). Beyond the Supernatural or Gamma World could both be remade quite easily using B/X (see Mutant Future for an example of the latter). I've run great Top Secret games using the Story Engine system (first published with the Maelstrom RPG)...it can easily be used for other genres asking for "rules-light-story-heavy" mechanics. Of course, OD&D is easy enough to make out of AD&D...if one wanted...

Some may find it curious that 40K makes the list when it's not really an RPG. What can I say other than it provides exactly the kind of science fiction I want...one day, far in the future, I'll completely rewrite both it and HEX (Hollow Earth Expedition) using a different system from what they've been given. But I find their books to be incredibly imaginative and inspirational, as is. Nice art, too.

Folks might note there are no "supplements" making my list. I generally can write my own supplemental material (that's kind of what I do). That being said, I love Ron Edwards's Sorcerer supplements, especially Sorcerer & Sword. Unfortunately, Sorcerer makes the list because of its elegant design principles (and diabolic themes) more than because it's a game I play a lot (I don't). It's an inspirational reference, especially for its narrative sensibilities, and I like it better than other story driven games like Fiasco, Polaris, and Capes.

The real odd duck on the list though is (duh) Palladium's Heroes Unlimited, an RPG I've written enough of in the past. You'll note the cop out above where I don't pick any single particular edition of the game...there are a plethora of differences between 1e, "revised," and 2e HU, enough so as to really alter game play for the participants. 1e was the best written, but "revised's" tweaks to certain classes are really welcome (including the addition of the magical power set) and I would probably go with that. 2e is just a tad over-the-top...although if you want to include uber-powerful characters (equivalent to Thor or the Hulk) you really need to check out the "mega-hero" option in 2e. It's rather beastly, though nothing one couldn't work out for their own campaign (my buddies' long-running HU campaign in high school created their own "mega-powers" list using only the revised rules...long before the advent of a 2nd edition).

And, yeah, for those who hadn't already guessed, this is all just a rambling preamble to talk about superhero stuff.

As I wrote in my last post, my in-laws have been in town, and were supposed to fly back to Mexico on...mmm, Tuesday? Yeah, Tuesday last. But after our last road trip with them, the kids discovered that abuelo (their grandpa) hadn't watched any of the Marvel movies (The Avengers, etc.) and so decided to embark on an epic marathon of film watching...basically one movie per night for 2+ weeks (in chronological order), culminating in Avengers Endgame the night before they were supposed to leave town. And since it's summer time, and we still have things going on during the days and evenings (and we don't watch movies during dinner) this has meant starting 2-3 hour films around 10pm every night and not getting to bed till near 1am.  Um...yeah. And I still get up around 6:30 to take care of the one beagle I have left.

Consequently, I've been in something of a fugue state with a mind inundated by cinematic superheroics for much of the last month. Makes it a little hard to focus.

[hmm...wonder if that's had anything to do with my lack of a "will to write" lately. Certainly can't help]

Anyway: I am NOT about to start dipping back into designing superhero RPGs (again) as happened last April (wow! A month long tangent that started with this post!)...I've just got too many D&D irons in the fire at the moment (and little enough time for juggling those). But that Necropraxis article made me consider long and hard which hero game I'd bring with me to a desert island and I was, well, a little surprised at my own answer. Despite having written on or about the subject a thousand times in the past.

But in consideration for having the MCU force-shoved into my brain lately...well, sometimes I have to do something to spew the excess waste material from my cranium. Here are my current (as in, today, this morning) thoughts on the subject of superhero role-playing games (SRPGs):

• an SRPG should be run in real time, as much as possible. Day 1 of the campaign should start on a real world date (even if heroes/villains have been "training" or whatever for years). 
• an SRPG should be grounded in as much "reality" as possible (no picking up buildings by the corner, or flying faster than the speed of light). Super-technology can make impossible things possible, within reason, but shouldn't be readily accessible/understood by Earth humans (so as not to disrupt what passes for "daily life" in the real world)...at least when starting the campaign. Magic falls under the category of a "super-technology" (with the same stipulations).
• the campaign world should be set in the real world. Imaginary cities/countries (Metropolis, Atlantis, Wakanda) should be avoided. Extraterrestrial and extradimensional entities are okay, which can explain mythological-type beings (Thor or whatever).
• the campaign world should be allowed to spin out of control based on the occurrences of the game.
• all heroes/villains should start as "unknowns" to the general public, i.e. they have no reputation for being "super-anythings" before the start of play. Actions taken by characters will determine public perception.
• Day 1 marks the first appearance of super individuals in the campaign world
• an SRPG should be generally "free-wheeling" with logical consequences to follow
• no weapon fetishes: make and model of firearms and caliber of ammunition should have near zero impact on game play.
• experience increases effectiveness of characters. Active superpowers (things that turn on-and-off) either increase in scope/impact, or ability of character to use. Experience is gained through play. Time spent not playing will not result in experience.
• an SRPG is not a comic book. There is no plot immunity for characters.
• an SRPG is not a film. There are no guaranteed happy endings.
• an SRPG is a game about super (i.e. "greater than human") individuals in a human scale world and those individuals impact on the world. The PCs may become champions of the people or conquerors of the world. 
• The referee's job is to establish challenges for the PCs. For villainous PCs, these challenges can take the forms of law enforcement, task forces, and heroic super teams. Challenges should be commensurate with the scale of the PCs' abilities. Scale is determined by sphere of operation as mutually decided by the referee and the players.
• All PCs have a drive that allows them to push beyond the boundaries of ordinary humans.
• All PCs have a flaw that can be exploited by adversaries.
• All PCs have enough humanity to allow players (including the referee) to relate to the character. Thus, no artificial beings or alien creatures lacking human emotions, feelings, etc. The game is not about how well a player can portray a plant thing, inhuman monster, or celestial/infernal being. Likewise all PCs must be sentients of at least minimal intelligence for operating on planet Earth (the campaign setting); the game is not a comedy of errors based on an ignorance of cultural norms.
• There should be at least some randomness in determining a PCs particular "power set;" players are neither allowed, nor expected to come to the table with a fully formed character concept.

*Whew!*  Aaand...that's about it. I've decided that I'm no longer all that interested in forcing players to act cooperatively or assign them to super-powered task forces...I'm not even (particularly) interested in them acting as "heroes." Instead, I'd rather just offer them opportunities...multiple...just as one might with, say, an AD&D campaign setting. Being a planet such as we have, it's not like the PCs couldn't hop a plane and be most anywhere in less than 24 hours, so lot of possibilities for adventures are possible...and "story arcs" have nothing to do with any of it.

It's a little different from how I've thought about SRPGs in the past. 

A is for Archduke Stefan III

[over the course of the month of April, I shall be posting a topic for each letter of the alphabet, sequentially, for every day of the week except Sunday. Our topic for this year's #AtoZchallenge? Revamping the Grand Duchy of Karameikos in a way that doesn't disregard it's B/X roots]

A is for Archduke Stefan III. Yeah, that guy. Best to start at the top.

The much beloved archduke (later king in the 2nd Edition AD&D setting, following events in the Wrath of the Immortals box set), has his history described in detail beginning with Allston's setting Gazeteer for the Grand Duchy. In brief, Stefan was a Thyatian nobleman who traded his ancestral lands to the Emperor of Thyatis in exchange for independent rulership of the "undeveloped" Traladara territory (Traladara having been conquered and claimed by Thyatis some 70 years before). Taking its main city (Specularum) for his capitol, the 22 year old Stefan renames the land for himself (Karameikos) and puts down the armed insurrection that follows. Over the next 30 years, the now-Archduke parcels out land to his (Thyatian) followers, builds roads and a strong military, and works to establish his Grand Duchy as a maritime power and resource rich exporter, while uniting the mixed Thyatian and Traladaran people in a shared "Karameikan" identity. He does this by using his natural charisma, being an "exemplary leader," recognized throughout the region for his "fairness and honor" and while there is some resentment to his rule (and some outright plotting against him by certain nobles), he is generally considered an "even-handed," "stern but fair ruler" whose main flaw is being "baffled by raw evil" (like his cousin Ludwig von Hendriks). In game terms he is Lawful and good, caring most for his family, his people, and his legacy...in about that order.

Sheesh.

Let's talk a bit about conquered people, shall we? Historically, folks are pretty averse to being conquered and ruled by a foreign power, especially when there's any perceived social injustice like, for example, the invaders being in the nobility and the indigenous folks being stripped of their lands. It's not something that a people with any type of national identity (say, a shared language, religion, and/or cultural values) gets over easily. One might say, well it's been a hundred years since the Thyatian Empire first marched into Marilnev (the regions main community) and renamed it Specularum...that's four or five generations to get used to Thyatian (i.e. fantasy Roman) supremacy, yeah?  Sure...and I can see the Palestinians being okay with this whole Israeli state thing one day, too, huh?

You can see how well that kind of thinking worked in Latin America and Africa and Asia over the centuries. India was effectively ruled by the British from the 18th century until achieving independence in 1947....they never really "got used to it." I'd imagine there are still plenty of "north Irish" who would rather just be Irish, just as there are still Scottish folks who would prefer to be their own country. I have good friends in the Basque region of Spain who absolutely hate being associated in any way with Spain (who they see as attempting cultural genocide) and still hope someday...and work toward...having an independent Basque country. And the Basque region was annexed in the 15th century!

Are folks familiar with Maximillian I of Mexico? He was an Austrian nobleman who gave up his lands and titles in Europe to become Emperor of Mexico. This was with the help of the French (and Napoleon's army) in the 19th century.

["Cinco de Mayo" commemorates the Battle of Puebla (where all Volkswagons in North America are manufactured) when the Mexicans won a small victory against the French forces during this time period]

Historians write that Maximillian genuinely cared for the Mexican people, helped institute reforms to help the people, enacted institutions to help the poor, abolished child labor, broke monopolies held by the wealthy, and worked to make a strong, modern Mexico. He was fought tooth-and-nail by a people who had already thrown off the yoke of Spain in their war of independence, and after "reigning" for about three years, he was overthrown captured, and executed by firing squad. Mexico has only been ruled by Mexicans ever since.

Duke Stefan, per GAZ1, survived a single armed revolt and a single assassination attempt and then...nothing. For thirty years (forty, if you count the 2nd edition material). Just schemers working behind the scenes to undermine Stefan's authority.

Doesn't really wash for me. Even if Stefan was the "bestest ruler in the world" it's hard to see a conquered people (even one that's not particularly "oppressed" - though what constitutes "oppression" is probably a matter of opinion) celebrating Stefan's rule or simply content to go quietly into the night. The Traladarans are supposed to have a proud history, legends of being enslaved by "beast men" and of eventually throwing off that slavery to become free, independent people. And now they're just going to go about their business? With Thyatians in their castles, taking the bounty of the land? It's not like Stefan has been systematically exterminating them and pushing them onto tiny reservations...they should be taking advantage of his (written) naiveté to arm themselves and organize!

[maybe it's just that archduke has the indiginous demihumans on his side...but why? Were there centuries of antagonism between the demihumans and Traladarans before the coming of Thyatis?]

It's important to note that the character of Stefan Karameikos, his personality and background, changed substantially with the advent of 1987's GAZ1 (the Gazeteer detailing the Grand Duchy of Karameikos). Very little, in fact, was said of the archduke (even in B6, the adventure module detailing Specularum); until the publication of GAZ1, he seemed to be nothing more than a high level fighter who had carved out his own dominion. Even Aaron Allston's own adventure module X12: Skarda's Mirror (published just prior to GAZ1), paints a different portrait of the character:

"A distinguished military commander and adventurer by the age of 20, he was offered a baronial title if he settled in and developed the unclaimed wilderness west of Thyatis.

"Stefan Karameikos III built himself a seacoast town, a village which he named Specularum, and began settling his followers all through the region. Eventually the region became the Barony of Karameikos, then the County, and finally the Duchy. Now, 30 years after the initial landfall, the Duchy is flourishing, and the Duke is a powerful and well-liked ruler, the father of strong heirs."

See? That's a perfectly acceptable elaboration on the character's original portrayal in the Cook Expert rulebook. There's no conquered peoples, no political machinations, no Thyatian noble-class ruling over displaced Traladarans. At this point, "Traldarans" were only a primitive, degenerate human subspecies fighting endless battles against the Hutaakan beast-men (to be discussed later) in a lost valley (see B10: Night's Dark Terror). The earlier, pre-GAZ Stefan was just an adventurer made good...just one of us, you know?

Which is how I prefer it, mainly because it's "more B/X." Still, things are not all rosy in Karameikos. There are still ravening hordes of humanoids (goblins, gnolls, frost giants(!), etc.) to contend with throughout the area. And then there's that darn Black Eagle Barony over on the western border about which the Duke seems wholly unconcerned. What's up with that exactly?

Welp, as with the good Baron Ludwig, I can think of a number of different ways to "re-skin" Duke Stefan explaining his lack of progress after a couple-three decades sitting on the throne. Here's a few of them for your enjoyment:

Couldn't find a good
pic of Duke Avan.

Archduke as Absentee Adventurer: Duke Avan Astran of old Hrolmyr is a good example of an adventuring noble of the most doomed sort; of course, most (all) folks who travel with Elric of Melnibone are doomed to a horrible end eventually.

Archduke Stefan as Duke Avan is a fairly easy re-skin: the explorer/adventurer who just can't settle down, even after a life of achievement. He keeps getting on that damn boat and setting sail, looking for lost cities, legendary shorelines. and forbidden knowledge...all when he should be back minding his duchy. Instead, he is gone more often than not on a life of perilous adventure, leaving his dominion to be ruled by henchmen and underlings while his noble wife tries to raise/shape children grown restless with an absentee father. Perhaps, the player characters will end up accompanying him on some random quest or other; more likely he'll disappear and they'll be tasked with finding his remains. Lots of possible adventures in a land left un-ruled by a glory hound and thrill seeker.

"More wine! And where's
my armor stretcher?!"

Archduke as the Life of the Party: who doesn't like a little wining, wenching, and feasting? Robert Baratheon is a great possibility as an archduke resting on his (ever expanding) laurels.

Once a formidable warrior, years of the good life has allowed those muscles to atrophy and those jowls to drop. But it's not a bad life. Who needs to worry when you've got that Black Eagle fellow shoring up your western border? And the elves and gnomes to your north? And that...well, there is a haunted and mysterious forest to the east, but there are hardly ever any monsters popping their ugly mugs out of it. Besides, young adventurers are always happy to go on a quest, and knighthoods are cheap to grant. Maybe they'll take some of my (illegitimate) kids with 'em...show 'em the ropes.

Sure wish the duchy wasn't in so much debt...

"What of it?"

Archduke as the Scheming Legacy Builder: or maybe your debt is just a means to an end. Tywin Lannister is a different kind of warlord: one who is ambitious, ruthless, and utterly dedicated to furthering the fortunes of his family and ensuring its legacy.

Stefan as Tywin would be perfectly happy to allow an equally ruthless warlord to rule the western marches...so long as the tool could be sufficiently controlled. Of more importance would be growing his own family, ensuring his own estates were secure, and building political alliances with other, rival nations. The infrastructure of the interior? Low priority compared to keeping up appearance in duchy's capital. A powerful naval force. Plate armored cavalry and perfectly drilled infantry. Evidence of pacified natives. And an open invitation to extra-nationals seeking to exploit the rich resources of the territory's interior.

No petty baron would do as a marriage partner for the ducal offspring; the archduke's children would be yet another resource to exploit and sell and help build the family's dominion and legacy.

"My followers were chosen as carefully
as the disciples of Christ."

Archduke as Bloody Handed Conquistador: But perhaps we'd like to use the native Traladarans...or some sort of indigenous prior inhabitants. Duke Stefan as Hernan Cortes could still be a B/X style adventurer...just one not conflicted about carving an empire out of an existing civilization.

This could be an archduke motivate by religion (slaying or converting the heathen pagans), riches (harvesting timber, mining precious metals), glory (etching his name on history), or bloody savagery (an excuse to kill). Truth is Cortes was a little bit of all those things, and while I've never met or read anything that ever praised the man or his actions, the fact remains that he made an indelible impression on the history of Mexico...and his descendants survive (comfortably) to this day.

Archduke as Chaos Cultist: AKA "Something Rotten in Specularum." Last one, and then I'll get this posted (man, I'm hopeful the next post in this series will be shorter!). Here's a quote direct from the 1st edition of Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness...though with some [words] replaced:

"[Stefan] was regarded as the finest military commander that the [Empire of Thyatis] had produced. His abilities were faultless, and eventually the Emperor granted him the title of [Archduke]. This was a high honor...

"Before [Stefan] could travel to [the Thyatian capital] to receive [additional reward] he fell ill [in] the [primitive territory] of [Traldara]. This was his undoing. During his convalescence [in Specularum] he was inducted into a secret warrior's lodge, which proved to be little more than a coven. A change of character became evident in the [archduke] - he had been possessed by a Daemon. [Stefan's] membership of the secret lodge was not unusual; Imperial soldiers were often encouraged to join warrior societies of this type..."

Late stage cultist Stefan.

Stefan Karameikos as Warmaster Horus may seem a bit of a stretch, but individuals in the Warhammer Fantasy setting fall prey to Chaos worship for all sorts of reasons (though, sure, it's usually tied to some sort of lust for power). Here's the great thing about it though: Chaos cultists usually strive with all their might to keep their allegiance secret. No one's going to pay taxes or follow the laws of a mutant scion of evil! And in a feudal society with a rigorously enforced social caste system, it's actually fairly easy to hide such worship...at least until your arm turns into a tentacle (then out will come the witch-hunters and the torches). See Shadows over Bogenhafen, etc. Anyway, the point is, an archduke that's fallen to Chaos has a lot more things to worry about then whether or not the roads are getting built...

All right, that's enough. More tomorrow!

[EDIT: I promise I'll come back and polish this post at a future date...when I have more time!]

Re-Tooling Combat (for FUN!)

Another "thought exercise;" AKA Putting Off The Taxes.

Part of the problem with addressing a single element of RPG combat (like the form and function of armor mechanics) is that you're messing with a complex system that's elements have been designed to work in tandem. At best, it's a "patch" that (often) causes other problems to raise their head, not the least of which might be an impact on that all important playability (making a system clunkier in play, reducing the overall "fun level"). At worse, a change in a single element might cause the whole system to fall apart, and/or wreck playability to a point where it's more fun to not play (or play something different).

"Ooo, how melodramatic, JB." Look, folks...I'm not saying you can't tinker. But I'd guess there are other folks out there (like myself) who have tried other RPGs and simply found they disliked their mechanics for one reason or another, and have set aside a system completely because of it. In fact, I know there are, judging by the blog posts I've read around the internet of people adapting specific game settings to their own favorite system rather than use the system intended by a game's designer. Sometimes a "patch" just doesn't work...and people have different preferences when it comes to the games they play. It happens.

ANYway...when it comes to a complex game system (like combat), tinkering with important elements of said system simply to match your "world view" can have problematic consequences. To really make your system work, sometimes you've got to go for a complete rebuild...if only to ensure that all the different interconnected elements are working together.

FOR EXAMPLE: say you're using the standard D&D combat chassis. You roll a D20 and compare the result to your probability of hitting based on two parts: your character's class/level, and the defender's "armor class." Simple enough, right? But if you restructure "armor" to act as a form of damage reduction (as many game systems do), then what are you rolling against? A reduced "AC" based solely on dexterity and/or magical bonuses? As the alternate rules in Dawn of the Emperors points out, this will result in "a lot more hitting" with less damage being inflicted (at least against armored types). Perhaps this will appeal to some folks ("hey, I whiff less often!"), but it feels like it would simply draw out a fairly simple (often uninteresting) combat system.

There are other alternatives: Saga Star Wars bases a target's AC (I think it might be called "defensive class") on the defender's level of experience (higher level characters are harder to hit), and something like that might be adapted. Games where combat rolls are unopposed skill checks (like Chaosium's base system) only tracks the attacker's proficiency ("If I roll under 75% I hit, and then your armor reduces damage!"), but doesn't account for the defensive ability of the opponent except as an additional system (parry skill, dodge skill) made to resist. Palladium kind of splits the difference: melee rolls use a D20 and any roll over 5 "hits" (yay!), but then needs to exceed a defender's defensive roll (parry/dodge) IF the defender chooses to do so, and THEN perhaps another roll to reduce damage (roll with blow), before finding out how armor reduces damage (which is dependent on the initial roll and the armor's Armor Rating and Structural Damage Capacity).

Palladium system's are over on the extreme side of granularity in combat (though I'd argue against them modeling any type of "reality") but they're certainly not the MOST granular. That distinction belongs to The Riddle of Steel, whose system I won't bother to detail here, as it's system mastery requirements are a bit outside the pay range of myself and most of the dudes I play with.

Instead, let's just stick with D&D for the moment. What's nice about D&D (for me) is it's ABSTRACT nature. In a ten second round, my mind's eye imagines two combatants attacking back and forth and the success of their attacks can all be boiled down to a couple D20 rolls. Still, though, there are aspects that bug me: should a 1st level cleric really have the same chance to damage a 3rd level fighter, given that they're both wearing plate-&-mail and they're weapons do D6 damage? Should a wizard really be wicked in a knife fight? I had the chance to watch a midnight showing of The Revenant last Friday (need to write about THAT), and the whole climactic battle I'm thinking, who the hell thought it was a good idea to make the dagger the go-to weapon of a spindly academic?

SO (just to keep going with the thought exercise), if we take armor out of the equation, and we decide we want to leave combat abstract (unlike the multiple maneuver monstrosity of TROS), how can we determine if a character's attack is successful? Well, just looking at man-to-man...er, human-to-human combat for the moment, let's consider perhaps the concept that (given both individuals are aware of each other and fight-worthy) the chance of inflicting mortal injury comes down to your own combat ability in relation to your opponent. In other words, if you're a better fighter than your opponent, you'll have an easier time, and if not, you'll have a harder time.

Sound good? Well, I'm going with it anyway. Exactly what determines "combat ability" is pretty easy with respect to humans: training and experience (i.e. class and level) with fitness/athleticism (ability bonuses) playing some part, too...perhaps as a bonus or penalty. It would be a ridiculous exercise in "clunk" for me to do up tables cross-referencing every level of every class against every other level of every class, so what I need is some sort of short-hand for cross-referencing. For example, what level of experience would a cleric need to be to have the same combat ability as a 4th level fighter? 7th? 9th? In B/X a cleric of levels 5-8 have the same attack abilities of a fighter of levels 4-6, and while I may not agree with the scale of B/X, I do agree that when determining combat proficiency, there should be tiers of ability, with each tier containing a range of levels. It's not just as simple as "gain a level, earn a +1 base attack bonus."

[of course, that's my own bias when it comes to modeling. For me, there just shouldn't be much difference between a 4th level fighter and a 6th level fighter when it comes to attack ability...we tend to learn in stages and have sudden "leaps" of realization. In my experience fencing, I can easily take apart someone who has little or no experience, but would be hard-pressed against people of equal experience unless I had some advantage in athleticism (not bloody likely). Meanwhile, I might score a few touches against an opponent with a couple more years of experience, but would be hard pressed to win...and against my old instructor (only a few years older than myself) I probably wouldn't score even a point. And he wasn't even in the same league as individuals who pursue the sport on a national or international level...]

So, strike bands (as in bandwidth)...that's what I'm calling my "tiers of combat ability." Consider a range of about five bands (labeled A-E), with A being your average "normal, non-combatant trying to fight" and E being reserved for truly legendary fighters (and non-fighters being limited to D as their maximum ability). Strike bands would be cross referenced to find the target number needed for an attack to succeed, with two opponents of equal ability having a 50% of succeeding on an attack and success being adjusted upwards (and downwards) from that baseline.

It's not really a new concept...very similar to Warhammer (the war-game's) comparison of WS versus WS in melee combat to determine the number needed on a D6 (WS stands for "weapon skill" and represents hand-to-hand ability). My initial thought would be to have the percentages scale like: 95% (the maximum...for an attacker with 3+ strike bands more than the opponent), then 85%, 75%, 50% (even ability), 25%, 15%, 5% (the minimum...against a defender with 3+ strike ranks more than the attacker).

[there is a degree of diminishing returns. I would fare no better against an Olympic-level fencer than I would against my instructor (at least, back when we were both in our primes)...but I'd fare no worse, either. I mean, how do you do worse than "losing quickly and embarrassingly?"]

The neat thing about the strike band idea is that it's fairly easy to slide them up or down to account for  specific circumstances. A fighter using a shield increases her strike band by one when defending (for example). A magic weapon increases a strike band by one (when attacking). Characters using missile weapons would simply use strike band A, and then range would be considered for defense (with A, B, and C corresponding to short, medium, and long). Specialist marksmen could increase their missile strike band to B. Cover could increase range by one step (to a maximum of D).

Monsters would be assigned strike bands based on their size, speed, and general ferocity. I can see something like:

A: used for creatures who are small (kobolds) or slow (skeletons and zombies)
B: used for man-killers (orcs, tigers, etc.)
C: used for exceptionally large monsters (ogres, trolls, etc.)
D: used for incredibly fast, strong critters (dragons, bloodthirsters, tyrannosaurus rex, etc.)

You could even combine it with 5E's advantage/disadvantage mechanic. A (slow) giant might use strike band D with disadvantage, while super heroic types (vampires, wraiths) might use strike band C with advantage. Ability bonuses (for strength and dexterity) would still add to the D20 roll (yes, I'd change those percentages into D20 target numbers) rather than shifting strike bands.

Anyway...that's just one idea. I'm sure there are others. Now, I really need to get back to my taxes.

+1 Strike Band (offense AND defense)
when attacking unmounted opponents

Comes Chaos

OKAY. I spent a bit of time at lunch today getting a little stinky-drinky and writing more bad JuJu about Paraguayan ignorance (and drawing parallels with certain presidential campaigns in the home country)...but I'm almost 100% certain that no one wants to read more of that kind of nonsense.

So let's talk about B/X-related nonsense. And, no, not superheroes.

Waaaaaay back in January, I mentioned I was going to get in on this whole B/X Campaign Challenge thing, set up by Mr. James V. West. I also said I figured I could knock-out a 64 page supplement in about 64 days, giving myself (approximately) till the end of March to get it done. Seeing as how it's been seven days since the last time I worked on the thing (just checked...March 4th) people may be wondering how is the project progressing?

Pretty good. I'm at 53 pages (formatted)...a bit more than 36,000 words without counting headers and page numbers. Since I'm aiming for about 58-60 (to make room for illustrations, a cover leaf, and table of contents), I'm pretty close to completion.

It's always that last bit that's the bitch, ain't it?

Actually, that's NOT why I've stalled. For a "campaign book," I started to find there was surprisingly little campaign to the thing...mainly a collection of rules and notes about how to inject a little crazy into one's standard B/X game. I started to think maybe I needed a bit more setting, a bit less system. And then, of course, I got distracted with other brainstorms...

But I'm digressing. As I wrote back on the 22nd (when I was first considering the challenge), the idea I had was an incredibly derivative one, and it still is....specifically, I am adapting the old Warhammer Realm of Chaos books (Slaves to Darkness and The Lost and the Damned) to the B/X game system, an idea that I once thought was pretty ridiculous. Also, not a terribly original idea, considering folks like Steven A. Cook have already done similar work (his Hordes of Chaos is a nice little "monster manual" designed for use with Labyrinth Lord).

But whatever...it's only a 64 page book. It's specifically designed for use with B/X (which everyone loves and now has access to, thanks to the release of the PDFs). It files all the serial numbers off anything that might be considered IP by other game companies. And it's written for a B/X system...for a game of exploration and treasure hunting...not a war-game.

And it does have a setting...one that could easily be expanded with additional books, if I was so inclined.

Slaves to Darkness.
So good, I own two copies.

The fact of the matter is Slaves to Darkness and The Lost and the Damned are damn masterworks. They have terrible, disgusting, magnificent, tragic themes. They are well-designed (for their time and their purpose) and are filled with beautiful, terrible, horrible, awesome artwork. They are classics that most buffs of dark fantasy (and dark fantasy games) should have on their shelves. I own physical copies of both, having paid an exorbitant price for one after many years of searching.

They are also fairly unplayable as they are. While the fluff from the books have penetrated the Warhammer universe for nearly three decades (Slaves was written in 1988 and last time I checked a 40K Chaos Codex they were STILL recycling quotes from its most excellent pages), the Warhammer game long ago dropped the systems found within their pages, keeping only the themes. Mordheim's chaos war band was a pretty poor substitute for a champion-led retinue of miscreants and mutants.

SO, because I love these books...their themes (which simply emphasize the dark spaces in the human heart to terrible extremes) and their mutants and their monsters and their madness...because I do love them, I've adapted them to a system that I love (B/X) so that they can see play at the table. They deserve to see play at the table.

And I find the setting I've designed (that I'm thinking I might want to detail in greater depth) so intriguing that I'd really like to run a campaign set in it, despite having voiced (only a few months ago) a longing to try a Holmes-style campaign. B/X...sucking me back in! Seducing me to the darkest of dark sides!

Anyhoo, it's almost done and my intention is to do my own artwork for it (not sure how that's going to go...) and sell it for a pittance in electronic form. That's my intention; we'll see what happens. But regardless, I've got to finish the writing first.

Hopefully by the end of the month.
; )

Playing With Traveller

Or rather, "Playing Around With Traveller."

The last couple-three days I've been ditzing around with Classic Traveller (i.e. the original Little Black Books), a game I haven't played since...hmm, high school? Probably. This is one of those games I played with my buddy, Rob, who really wasn't into AD&D.

[ugh...Blogger's acting wonky today...hopefully, this post will stick]

I picked up the original three books (as PDFs) off Drive-Thru RPG as well as Book 4 Mercenary because A) I wanted to own these classic books, B) I wanted to take a look at how they were put together (their design and format and whatnot), C) I wanted to "explore the nostalgia," and D) I wanted to see if I could make them work for me...either on their own or as the basis for another project of mine. The "ditzing" (which I'll come back to in a moment) has actually been in lieu of working on the design for the new game...I just had to take a break and a breather.

[yes, it's a "space" game; no, I'm not ready to talk about it yet; yes, I like how it's developing and will hopefully get down to some serious work on it starting next week. Except that I might be doing this United Nations presentation thang (in English) for the Paraguayan government...we'll see if that happens and how much time THAT ends up taking]

SO...as sometimes happens when I need a breather, my mind starts wandering to the Space Wolves.

For those who aren't familiar with the game WH40K, the Space Wolves are one of the traditional space marine chapters that have been a part of the game "fluff" since its inception. They're kind of "space vikings" in power armor (you can see how that kind of thing would appeal to Yours Truly). While my own 40K armies have, for the most part, been on the side of Chaos (usually Khorne, sometimes Nurgle), in recent years my stance on the Wolves has softened. They're a lot less prone to cheesiness (army-wise) than they were back in the 2nd edition days.

Anyway, even though I stopped playing 40K back around 4th (3rd?) edition, I still have a couple codices for the Space Wolves lying around, both of which I took to Paraguay in the thought that there may be a fun little game to make out of a squad of "battle brethren." But I've been busy, and while my mind has often turned to the idea, it was only the last couple days I started considering possible systems as a starting point for a scratch side-project. And Classic Traveller was one of them.

[this really would be a lark, folks. I've written before that it would be difficult to do this kind of thing as a long-term RPG. More on the subject later]

I personally love the LBB format.

Hence the reason for picking up Mercenary (which includes systems for large-scale ground battles and such).

Welp, I spent a couple days reading the rules in Book 1 and Book 3 (not yet terribly interested in the starship thing) and was really liking what I saw. Seemed pretty clear, pretty well thought-out, pretty easy to use. Sometimes, first edition games are designed better and work better than later editions (I say this as someone who own Mongoose Traveller and thinks its pretty well done). So today, I started ditzing around with the random tables creating characters and systems/planets.

What an exercise in frustration!

Wow. I don't know how I managed to get such a competent character with Mongoose when the systems are so similar. That guy didn't exactly match my "concept" expectations, but he didn't suck rocks either. The dudes I've been creating using CT...even the ones with the expanded chargen system of Book 4...just aren't even in the same realm. It's not even like they're dying (well, my scout died...but that's the scout service for you)...they're just getting kicked from service long before they've developed into anything resembling competence.

I don't actually have a copy of Mongoose with me (back in Seattle), but if memory serves, the wild discrepancy between the chargen systems comes down to two main points:

#1 if you fail to reenlist in Mongoose you have the option of going into a different career (and possibly reinventing yourself. Kind of like real life (at least in the 21st century). Fifty years ago (perhaps), people might have changed jobs during their lives, but perhaps not careers (at least, not as frequently). To be fair, CT career paths are limited to "adventuring" types: armed forces, scouts, space merchants, and "other" (which seems to be the catch-all for criminal elements). I would hardly expect the marines to accept my enlistment at the ripe young age of 41 either! But in a universe of anti-aging drugs and technological enhancements, shouldn't there be a little less age discrimination?

[on the other hand, in a universe with trillions of inhabitants, perhaps Classic Traveller envisions a more disposable society where warm bodies are exceptionally easy to replace]

#2 in Mongoose, your character receives a number of bonus skills from a variety of sources. PCs receive skills from both their home world and from the GM depending on the style of campaign they intend to play. Also, random "life events" hep develop characters in a number of different ways (I believe both good and bad, but my memory is a bit hazy).

The half dozen characters I rolled up this morning could have benefitted greatly from either of these Mongoose additions. My "criminal" character (from the Other category) ended up with two terms of service, most of UPP under 7, and a single skill (Bribery 1) to show for his career. Blah! That was the point I decided to stop, after half a dozen likewise disappointing PCs.

The planets (I created a random "home world" for each of my PC attempts) were equally disappointing. For whatever reason, I ended up with a lot of low tech water worlds sporting small populations and a conspicuous lack of star ports, and where a population of hundreds ends up with "rival competing governments" (the neighborhood watch groups are drawing up sides!). I don't know...there's some sort of weird, cascading effect when creating planets where a particular number rolled for one planetary stat skews the roll for the next...and yet the modifiers for tech levels are strangely affected.

[my criminal's planet? It was yet another water world with a dense, tainted atmosphere. Its population was smaller than Asuncion, had a law level of 0 ("no prohibitions"), a government level of 0 ("no government structures; family bonds predominate") and a tech level of 13. Grav craft, powered battle armor, maxed out computers, etc. -- all on a tiny barbarian planet of floating "tribes." Not sure which hut-raft they're using to manufacture the star drives]

If you can't tell from the tenor of the post, I'm disappointed. The system...which seems perfectly set-up to help players/GMs and even facilitate "solo play" (something you really don't see much of anymore)...leaves more than a bit to be desired. It's own randomness, while intriguing, seems to beg for "fudging," both to help develop characters for play and to develop a setting worth playing in.

Yes, yes...some folks will say I'm terribly unimaginative regarding the setting stuff, and others will point out that Miller points out Referees are free to use these tables as an aid, retaining the freedom to  invent one's own worlds as desired. Got it. That still doesn't help with the lousy character creation. I can understand that it may certainly fit with the setting that my 22 year old marine was kicked to the curb with nothing but skill level 1 in gun combat and "recruiting." Fine. Let's start our adventuring career now...my character is young, ambitious, and full of fire. Unfortunately, there are no rules in CT for my 22 year old to acquire any more skills or abilities. I maxed out my career at 22? Okay...but I maxed out my LIFE, too? Give me a break!

[maybe this is the reason for the prevalence of psionics in CT's human population?]

I was quite at ease with Mongoose Traveller's lack of progression/advancement for characters (it has a couple spot rules about studying or something with a bunch of time and money), mainly because the ease of staying in the chargen process made it easy to develop a competent character. The real restriction was age limits (how old and decrepit do you want to allow yourself to get before striking off in your Free Trader?). But Classic Traveller is a hard one. It really is. Playing it "as written" would be at least on par with some of those Old School games that are classically considered to be "tough" on new players: like 1st edition Stormbringer and Holmes Basic D&D or (Revised) Heroes Unlimited with random power type determination. It's interesting, and challenging (which is good) but has the potential to be really frustrating, too.

I was frustrated just playing around with it.

A Model Wargame

Recently I've had the chance to encounter Chirine's Workbench, a blog by a war gamer and modeling aficionado who happens to have discovered Empire of the Petal Throne and Professor Barker a couple-three decades ago, and has been gaming in Tekumel ever since. Chirine describes himself as a modeler first and foremost, and was first tasked with painting and creating miniatures for the Prof's EPT games "back in the day" before becoming enamored with the world setting; now he continues to play (and model) using the richly detailed setting along with a home-brew rule set that combines EPT with pieces of OD&D and Chainmail.

Watching videos of his recent mini-skirmish campaign (posted to YouTube here), a couple thoughts strike me, besides the obvious comparisons to Mordheim and its (online, unofficial) expansion, Lustria: Cities of Gold.

A) With regard to D&D (and all its variations, everything from EPT to my own Five Ancient Kingdoms), we just don't give enough consideration to the game's wargaming roots. So many things about the game...what might be called, I suppose, "D&Disms" are based in and on the needs and wants of the wargaming subculture. 3rd editions five foot squares are a poor substitution for the games originals inches and scales (from a war gamer's standpoint) yet is an attempt to make sense of the need for ranges and scales anyway. Personally, I have never worried all that much about whether or not a person was shooting their short bow at long range or short range...or the radius of light sources...or even (usually) the f'ing diameter of a fireball spell! Instead, I'm just "roll to hit with your bow" (assuming the character's not engaged in melee) or "you see the monsters" or "you're going to launch that thing underground into a tiny chamber? What exactly are you hoping to occur?"

[alternatively, I'll just say, "ok" and roll saving throws for the bad guys]

The micromanaging of ammo and light and rations and encumbrance and ranges, etc. is just so low down on my priority list, it just often slips through the cracks of my games (I'm writing this as a DM or "referee"). It's just not IMPORTANT...and yet we still pay dutiful attention to it when noting movement rates and tracking how many arrows are left in the quiver. This attention to detail during the game (to be clear, shopping for high, soft boots or short, hard boots during character creation can give you a distinct image of the PC you are playing), slows the pacing of the game...and when you are trying to keep a group of players engaged and enthralled in your imaginary world, it's important not to disrupt that pacing.

Having said that, I have played and enjoyed war-games in the past and my personal preference is to have those games move along at a good pace, too. An over-abundance of "realism" can make a long, slow game even longer and slower...which I detest (yes, I realize that this stance is anathema to many die-hard war-game fanatics). I don't know...maybe I just have a problem with opponents taking a shit-long time to maneuver and measuring every measly half and quarter inch when my assumptions of battle are that they tend to be kind of fast-paced and (at times) sloppy.

I will say this: Chirine's skirmish/battle was a lot quicker paced than some war-games I've seen, and faster than many (recent) edition D&D games, despite maneuvering several teams of miniatures for each player, and using two different playing surfaces.

B) Models are cool.

That's something I keep forgetting or letting slip from my mind, and not in the way I do with "D&D's wargaming roots" (the latter is something I always know "intellectually" but simply fail to process or consider or give weight to). I remember models from when I was a kid...and here I'm talking painted miniatures that represent characters/monsters...models that were owned by older players I knew but with whom I never gamed. They did not have the fantastic, realistic paint jobs you see in those Golden Demon award winners or anything, but they were still so cool...they inspired me, made me want to play a game that used them. I can see the same glow in my son's eyes when we see miniatures in a game shop...he wants to have them and hold them and play games with them. I saw it with the teenagers that I introduced to Warhammer back in the day, too.

I don't know what it is about gaming minis...they're not dolls (or "action figures") that have posable limbs for play. But their sheer static nature makes one want to fill the void...the lack of movement...with story and imagination. "This is my adventurer X; here's what he's going to do." Anyone ever see that old Henry Thomas movie, Cloak & Dagger? It's about a kid that talks to his imaginary friend, personified in an RPG miniature (from a secret agent game) that he carries around with him.

I love miniatures, love to paint them, sometimes even love to modify 'em. Here's the thing though: few of us (outside the truly dedicated) have the time and money to really go whole hog with the miniature thing. Certainly, I could never afford them as a kid...I shoplifted one once (as a pre-teen), but didn't have any paints or tools or knowledge and so did nothing with it. We never used minis in our games as kids anyway...using those stand-up cardboard cut-outs and "area maps" in Marvel Superheroes was a novelty for us (and one that we eventually dispensed with).

As an adult, I found myself (for a time) with an excess of both money and time, and became a collector and painter of minis. Since then, the money has receded somewhat (kids, dogs, mortgages, debts) and the time has dwindled to almost nothing (kids). I still have plenty of unpainted (or half-finished) minis, just no time to paint. As for modeling...wood-working and sculpting set-pieces...well, I'm fairly hopeless with anything requiring much "hands-on" creativity. Comes from being 1) a perfectionist (stopping before I start) and 2) never wanting to 'get messy.' Just beginning to paint minis in the first place (circa 1997) represented a bit of a breakthrough for me.

[and, yes, improvement does come with practice]

Killed some PCs with a very similar model.

However, using "found objects" for models (as Chirine does at times) or re-purposing other things for minis/models (like rubber frogs, plastic animals/monsters, those giant packs of generic zombies, etc.) IS something I can do...and something I experimented with good results, back when I was still running a B/X game down at the Baranof. It was a lot of fun to use minis in a game...but it sure was a pain in the ass hauling all the props and whatnot to the venue (something that really hit home when I was transporting my gear to last summer's Dragonflight convention). If you have the stereotypical basement or garage or unfinished concrete bunker in which to play with your buddies, that's certainly ideal...though I'd imagine enticing new players down to your "lair" might be tough (ugh!).

ANYway...those were my main thoughts when watching Chirine's videos. It's after 3am here, so I better hit the hay.

[oh, yeah...go USA!]

The Lost And The Damned

A strange thing about having children...to make family life work (at least in a sane and effective fashion), you really appear to need one more parent than the number of children you possess. Just for the "rotational value" of "getting stuff done," I mean. As I've said before, my hat goes off to any single parents out there...how you cope is quite beyond me. But giving attention to two kids AND getting housework done and whatnot is just tough...and neither my wife nor I are going into work at the moment! Since the mother-in-law left the building, small snatches of free time have been divided between catching up on sleep and doing those chores that absolutely need doing; it IS possible, of course, just not (as I said) particularly efficient/effective, and certainly not easy.

But whatever: that's just me giving a lame excuse for not blogging more. Sure I could have written something a couple mornings ago when D and his mama were sleeping and I was in charge of the slumbering baby, but I chose to watch the Norwegian-fake-documentary "Troll Hunter" instead. See, it's really all about priorities.

Priorities, yeah. Last week, I spent most of the week doing wedding stuff for my buddy, Steve-O (congrats Steve!) as I was acting as both his Best Man and his Confirmation sponsor (he's "all in" on the Catholic church these days). It got me out of the house five out of seven days, but I'm not sure the free booze at the reception was really enough to compensate for the energy expended [well, maybe]. Next week, the family will be concentrating on getting our return trip to Paraguay organized (buying all that shit you can't get in South America and packing it), and no compensatory hootch on the horizon...well, not the free kind, anyway.

[*sigh*]

Despite the lack of time for writing and the closing of my local game shop (denying me easy access to gaming product), I have managed to score a book I've been wanting in the collection for over a decade: Games Workshop's old (out-of-print) Realm of Chaos: The Lost And The Damned.

$200? Better than selling one's soul!

Well "score" probably isn't the right term...I bit the bullet and found a guy selling a copy on Amazon for close to $200 and sent him the money before I had the chance to second-guess my action. But these days my patience for delaying gratification is just razor-thin...like I said, I've been looking for a copy in used bookstores for more than a decade, and have been kicking myself for not buying it for fifteen years.

[why didn't I buy it back in 1990 when there were stacks and stacks of it at the local game shop? Because I'd already missed the boat on getting Volume 1 of the the two volume series and figured Volume 2 by itself would be a waste of money. However, a few years later I was able to get not one but two good, used copies of Volume 1 (Slaves to Darkness) and have never again seen The Lost and The Damned available for purchase]

The copy was near mint condition and I'm quite satisfied with the purchase, as it packs all the info/content I was hoping for and more. At the same time, I find myself disappointed with the book: The Lost And The Damned introduces the whole concept of the WH40K Emperor being some sort of All-Wise benevolent Messiah and the primarchs as genetically engineered "superheroes" specially-crafted to fight the evil of the Warp. I hate this storyline, and (previously) had always thought this radical departure from the Rogue Trader setting had taken place in the 2nd Edition of the game. After all, Slaves to Darkness first introduces us to the Horus Heresy when the Warmaster is nothing more (nor less) than the Emperor's greatest soldier-general...not some vat-grown Superman used to spawn a bunch of mutated freakazoid space marines. Sorry...outside of the superhero genre, I've always preferred my protagonists to be human, even though they may be the toughest of the tough and the bravest of the brave.

[I mean, why would you need bionics if you can just give them extra organs/glands and incredible regenerative power? I, of course, prefer bionic replacement of lost human bits]

But that complaint will probably only make sense to long-time 40K fluff-readers like myself. The book is still quite enjoyable and despite my reservations back in 2009 my first, near obsessive thought is to do a conversion of the Realm of Chaos books...or of their basic themes anyway...as a B/X supplement. Yes, yes, I'm still in the middle of doing several other projects, but this one really calls to me (*ahem*).

On the other hand, if you don't want to wait to add the antagonists of Chaos to your B/X or LL or other old school D&D game, might I strongly recommend a great compilation-conversion by Steven Cook (the Prismatic DM) posted to his Borderlands blog. You can get his Fortnight of Chaos Hordes PDF here. It's pretty good. My own project has a slightly different focus and will be a bit more B/X-specific (and a bit more "serial numbers filed off").

: )

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!

; )

Nuance

A subtle or slight variation, as in meaning, color, or quality; a graduation

- The American Heritage Dictionary

[I’m not writing dictionary meanings to seem intellectual…I’m doing it ‘cause I had to look up the word this morning to make sure I was using the term correctly. I wasn’t an English major and I screw up terms and definitions all the time; putting the meaning at the top of the post keeps me focused]

NUANCE. Slight or subtle variation. This, to me, is a good way to label the difference between most editions of Dungeons & Dragons…even those that don’t carry the name “Dungeons & Dragons.”

I was reading through my copies of Labyrinth Lord this morning in preparation for Randy’s new game Thursday (Randy, who I’ve mentioned before on this blog, is new to the DM hot-seat, but he is an exceptionally creative, smart, and funny individual and many of us have been looking forward to him running a game). Fortunately, I am still being allowed at the table (though with the stipulation I play a gnome due to the persona non grata status I’ve recently acquired) and so I wanted to brush up on the LL rules because there are nuances the distinguish it from the B/X game.

I LIKE Labyrinth Lord. There’s a lot about it I like: the presentation, the artwork, the motivation behind it and its adherence to the original B/X rules. But there are also things about it that really irritate the hell out of me. Because they are so few, I’m going to just enumerate ‘em:

- Clerics receiving a spell at 1st level. I understand why some folks like this; I know the reasons why this is preferable for some players. My reason for not liking it is two-fold: #1 I think the class is stylistically stronger to have to work for that 1st level spell (though I know many players don’t give a rat’s ass about “style”), #2 I think it immediately puts a clerical player in a position of “oh, you’re the medic (as opposed to an armored, righteous butt-kicker with a secret weapon against the undead).” Personally, when I’ve played a cleric I don’t like being placed in that role…but I probably have a poor temperament for the class in general (I know a lot of cleric players ENJOY the support role, and the extra spell is quite welcome).

- Unlimited class levels. Big whoop, right? Few campaigns were going to get up to the B/X-stipulated level 36 anyway, so who cares if classes go to 100 or 1000 or infinity? But it just makes the demihuman classes look even more undesirable…I would have preferred changing the human classes to a maximum of level 14 (the end of B/X) or even stopping at level 20 (where the LL class tables end) rather than going on “forever.” Again, this is simply a matter of taste.

- The combat matrix for player characters.

- The increased costs for armor. Why should plate mail be unaffordable for a 1st level character? Because it’s more “realistic?” There aren’t any 1st level youngsters that have inherited a suit of plate from their knightly parent? If you want to limit the amount of plate (and other heavy armor) allowed into the game simply say PCs can’t spend more than half their starting gold on any single piece of equipment; hell, set the 50% limit and stipulate they need to retain 10-20% of their starting wealth as coinage…this will limit plate mail to characters who roll a 13+ for starting gold (upper class types) and 10+ for chain mail (middle class warriors).

But that’s it…and THAT’s just nit-picking (you’ll note I didn’t list my complaints for the combat matrix; my reasoning is just a little too esoteric for this particular post). Four complaints over-all ain’t bad; the rest of the book, including all other differences from B/X (of which there are few) are things I can totally live with. And I don’t have ANY issues at all with the Advanced Edition Companion as a complement to LL (I was reading that last night, too, but I think I’ll be picking up a print copy today).If one wants to use AD&D in a B/X fashion, AEC is the way to go (sorry, Barrataria).

And ALL those complaints I’d put firmly in the category of nuance. And I can live with nuance.

Same with BECMI, an edition I have derided many times, here and elsewhere. The difference between B/X and the first two volumes of Mentzer’s opus for the most part is simply one of color…Mentzer’s book is aimed for a younger audience. Why that’s so irritating to me (now) is a matter of my own silly foibles…I’ve played BECMI before and enjoyed it, especially at low levels (we found it a bit tougher to adapt to some of the “CMI” deviations at higher levels).

Sometimes these nuances are important differences; they can have major impact on the face of the game. When the paladin class was first introduced (in the first OD&D supplement, Greyhawk) it was simply a sub-class, open to any fighter with a Lawful alignment and a 17 Charisma that was willing to live by the paladin’s rather strict requirements (never act evil, give all your wealth to the poor, limit yourself to a handful of magic items). Meet those prerequisites and you reaped the benefits of the sub-class.

Since the fighter class (or “fighting man” as it is called in OD&D) is one that's open to all PC races, one can infer that paladin status could be conferred on ANY character that met the requirements: dwarf, elf, and halfling included. Maybe I missed something in the text, but I re-read Supplement I a couple times looking for anything indicating paladins were limited to the human race and couldn’t find anything. It’s only in the AD&D Players Handbook that the paladin is prohibited to any race but human.

I actually like the OD&D paladin quite well (and THAT’s a feeling I’ve never had for the paladin class in any other edition). Compared to later versions with its spell acquisition and clerical abilities, I feel this character is well-balanced, and restricted enough (for the minor bonuses) that there’s no need to “beef up” the fighter class with weapon specializations and what-not. Plus, why shouldn’t the class be open to all who are willing to devote themselves to righteous service and duty? Why limit it to humans?

I wonder what players of dwarf paladins thought when they picked up a copy of the PHB for the first time. Probably the same way I feel every time Games Workshop comes out with a new edition of WH40K that renders my army officially unplayable.

[and, hey, if anyone sees where I missed the page in Greyhawk proscribing paladins from any race but human, please point it out to me]

But even with THAT change from one edition (OD&D+) to another (AD&D), it’s still just a nuance: a slight variation (if not a particularly subtle one). There are still paladins in both versions. The paladins have the same, basic requirements. The paladins have (mostly) the same special abilities. And what HASN’T changed is the role the class takes in the game. When you meet “Fred the Paladin,” regardless of the edition, you’ll probably be able to pin a few expectations on how he’s going to act in various circumstances, due to the behavioral requirements of the class. The slight changes in rules are just that: slight changes.

Luke, one of the guys I play with down at the Mox, has pointed out that part of the fun in playing these games (and playing different games) is achieving mastery of a game’s particular nuances. Learning the rules so as to have a higher level of play (whatever that means to you). I tend to agree with him…at least for the “gamist-types” out there (and I definitely fall into that category).

But for others who don’t care overly much about specific rules…for instance, people who just want to play a halfling thief, but don’t spend a lot of time mastering the 5’ maneuvers, flat-footed catching, attacks of opportunity, etc. that makes the rogue class strong in 3rd Edition…for the people who don’t CARE about rule "mastery," the STRENGTH of the Dungeons & Dragons line IS that the differences are simply ones of nuance. I can sit down at a table that’s using LL or B/X or AD&D or some hybrid (like Heron’s game which uses Labyrinth Lord’s AEC Illusionists but no Halflings, for example), and with very minor input I can start playing. I don’t have to learn elaborate dice pools or bidding systems or rules for “scene resolution” (not that any of these are “bad things,” mind you…just saying I don’t have to LEARN any of them) to play a game of “Dungeons & Dragons.”

Even D20 with its additional complexities is very much the same game. Classes, hit points, saving throws, attack rolls, initiative, XP, level, spell books, monsters. It’s hard to say the difference is simply one of nuance, especially when the game play is so slow and “clunky” compared to earlier, easier editions. But for the most part, the essentials (that which makes the game “D&D”) hasn’t changed. Barring a magic spell or potion, your character is still dead if you take more damage than you have hit points, and you’re going to be rolling another set of six ability scores.

For me, the nuances are important to which edition or version or variation of the game I prefer. But, as I said, I can live with nuance (well, with most nuance). And the more I play (and play different editions/variations), the more I begin to really appreciate the game of D&D and its nuances.

Not from a design standpoint…as a designer, this kind of variation and constant change and craziness makes me want to cringe at least or go play something better designed at worst. But from the perspective of a game player, there is a real power in this variation and inelegance. It allows players to play across boundaries with pretty minimal fuss, AND it shows players that the rules are NOT sacrosanct and freely customizable and here, take half a dozen different editions and cobble together something that works for YOU.

There is a lot to be said for consistency and elegance in design. And then there’s this heaping, steaming pile of Dungeons & Dragons. Much as I prefer the former, I seem to keep coming back to the latter. Maybe by being as messy as it is, it’s more true to life.

Just my thoughts of the day.