Loremaster - Blogs http://www.loremaster.org/blog.php en Fri, 18 May 2012 02:13:03 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.loremaster.org/images/misc/rss.jpg Loremaster - Blogs http://www.loremaster.org/blog.php The Rise and Fall of Norrin the Barbarian http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/66-The-Rise-and-Fall-of-Norrin-the-Barbarian Thu, 10 May 2012 03:40:16 GMT And now for something completely uncontroversial.

On June 30, the Gamers' Syndicate will be hosting a Brief Tour of the History of D&D. This is an idea that sprung from the mind of Syndicate member, Brett Abbott -- be afraid; be very afraid. It's a four-part adventure, with each 2-hour session being played in a different edition of D&D. The game will use pre-generated characters, because it's a lot to expect of players to come to the game with four PCs each in a different edition of the game. As soon as the writing assignments were doled out, I let Brett know, as author of the AD&D part, that he absolutely had to include Norrin the Barbarian as a pre-generated character.

On Christmas of 1977, I received the D&D "blue box," or at least that's what I think I received. It's this one. I don’t care what everyone else calls it because, frankly, I can’t keep track of all the "sub-editions." As many of you know, that set included the adventure, B1: In Search of the Unknown. Norrin was one of the pre-generated characters for that adventure. His statistics were as follows:

Quote Originally Posted by Mike Carr
Norrin the Barbarian, Fighter, Str 15, Int 8, Wis 10, Con 14, Dex 9, Cha 9
The reason I bring this up is that Norrin was my first PC . . . sort of. When I played the game (either as a player or DM), the players almost always ran multiple characters, so I played three in my first game. Norrin was one of my first three, and the only one that found a place in my long-term memory. I never forgot him even though I picked up B1 for the first time in 25 years to write this blog post. Now that I’ve gone back through the adventure, Presto the Elf, Eggo of the Holy Brotherhood, and others ring a bell, but clearly Norrin mattered most.

When I chose Norrin from the list, I did so because I thought that both his name and status (i.e., barbarian) sounded cool. At age 43, I still think it sounds cool. For some reason, I always latched onto this image as that of Norrin bending some bars, which is hardly unreasonable considering the image comes from page 13 of the adventure. (I'm pretty sure the halfling could easily just squeeze through but was too frightened to do so. I hate halflings) As an aside, I never heard of Conan the Barbarian until the 1982 movie came out, so it had nothing to do with that.

I don't remember the actual adventure encounter in which Norrin died, but I remember quite clearly how it happened. We were fighting a wizard, and the wizard had a web spell. My brother interpreted the web spell to be a save-or-die spell (i.e., he didn’t read the spell description; he just saw this image and thought that’s what it did). I explained to him that I thought that was a bit rough. (To put some perspective on this, this isn’t rough, as in, "AD&D is a high-fatality game." This is rough, as in, "In the Dark Sun Encounters season, it's mathematically impossible to avoid a TPK in week 3," or whatever week that was.) My brother was so happy to see me visibly upset that he said, "It's just a game."

My brother remains an asshole to this day.

So, I'm happy to know that Norrin the Barbarian lives on, and many of you will have the pleasure of playing him. I hope you fare better than I did.

On second thought, I want you all to have the authentic AD&D experience, so I hope he dies for you, too. :) ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/66-The-Rise-and-Fall-of-Norrin-the-Barbarian <![CDATA[Why I Don't Have High Expectations for D&D Next]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/65-Why-I-Don-t-Have-High-Expectations-for-D-amp-D-Next Thu, 26 Apr 2012 03:32:05 GMT This one was intended to be quick, but I was writing it while watching... This one was intended to be quick, but I was writing it while watching my Caps' game 7, overtime win against the Bruins (screw you, Moquin!), so it was composed as an email. When I got home, it wasn't so small. Still, this is really just a very long tweet, expanding on what I tweeted earlier this evening but couldn't do justice in 140 characters.

The primary mechanical reason I believe D&D Next will not serve the 4e segment of the community is that the base system is essentially a 1e/3e hybrid, onto which they plan to layer a "4e module" (among others, we assume) to allow a customized feel to play. At best, this will be awkward and feel like a module designed to shut us up and get our money anyway. At worst, the modularity idea will fail completely. Either way, either sooner or later, we'll give up on trying to play 4e characters in D&D Next, leaving us with a system we don't fully enjoy. This would be bad for both WotC's bottom line and our community, so it's a concern neither they nor we should ignore.

Making matters worse, the reason I believe WotC is willing to give us (i.e., players that prefer 4e) the short end of the stick is that they believe we're less prone to complain if our game is changed radically. After all, we didn't complain when 4e was released, and that system contained major changes. Some said, "This isn't real D&D!", and the rest said, "No kidding! It's better!" My post from earlier today demonstrates that this might not be true, and 4e players are going to unreasonably complain they're being "abandoned," but regardless of whether that plays out, it appears to be WotC's approach to how to deal with us.

Okay, so what should WotC do? I suspect the only way to make the modular approach work is for the system to be much more generic than it currently is. Thus, we shouldn't be able to say, "Gee, this game plays just like #e." Instead, it should be as basic as what the developers use to design, for example, classes, providing us guidelines on how to build our characters at their most basic level, then provide modules to layer on top of that basic character, which will give the character the feel we individually want. Being based on the same, generic system, the characters can at least in theory be balanced, so they can be played together, but they'll each feel the way the player wants them to feel. In other words, give us the tools to build the game we want to play. Isn't that exactly what they claim they're trying to do?

Of course, the problem with this suggestion is that the developers want to hide their formulae for those sorts of things. Without copyright or (almost certainly) patent protection for their system, all they have is trade secret law to make themselves needed. (See, it really is always about IP law!) :-) If they give us the means to build our own game, we might not buy their products anymore. Sure enough, as I was writing this, some tweeters were complaining with how secretive WotC is, as if it's fair to expect them to give away internal information. It doesn't even make sense to do so. However, by promising us modularity, they're essentially putting themselves in a position where they have to do so. When they don't, they won't properly deliver modularity. They're wanting their cake and eating it too, and in the end will piss off everyone.

So, they could provide modularity, but I'd be surprised if they actually did, and that's a PR nightmare waiting to happen. For the reasons stated above, I'm guessing they'll choose the path of appeasing the squeaky wheels (as well as fair-minded 3e fans), and gamers like me will have to make some tough choices. I say it's a tough choice because, assuming I'm terribly unhappy with the eventual outcome, I'd still prefer to stick it out and support WotC (and by extension, the industry and community as a whole), which is ultimately the reason they're not concerned with meeting my needs.

Robert E. Bodine, Esq. practices real estate and intellectual property law in Virginia. He is one of the founding members of the Gamers’ Syndicate, a Washington, DC-based gaming club, and part owner of synDCon, a table-top gaming convention. He authors the article series on Loremaster.org, Protection from Chaos, dealing with intellectual property law matters as they relate to the gaming industry. You can follow him on Twitter @RobertEBodine for legal matters, @GSLLC for gaming matters, and if you’re a sports fan, @MMADork. ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/65-Why-I-Don-t-Have-High-Expectations-for-D-amp-D-Next <![CDATA[D&D Next and the Edition Wars: Don’t Become Your Own Worst Enemy]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/64-D-amp-D-Next-and-the-Edition-Wars-Don’t-Become-Your-Own-Worst-Enemy Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:04:47 GMT For the past several years, many of us in the 4th edition camp have been complaining about the edition warriors that railed against the announcement... For the past several years, many of us in the 4th edition camp have been complaining about the edition warriors that railed against the announcement of 4th edition. These people complained about 4th edition before they had even seen it, thus demonstrating that they'll always complain unless they get exactly what they want, and often what they want has nothing to do with game mechanics. Now, we find ourselves potentially in the same position, having many legitimate complaints against D&D Next.

I'm one of the ones complaining. I hate almost everything I've seen of D&D Next so far, and even more troubling is how discouraged I am by almost everything I've heard the designers say, showing that their direction is a clear 180 degrees from the direction I'd like to see. I'm entitled to that opinion and should express it to the developers in order to maximize the chances that D&D Next will be a game I'll play. However, I've seen some alarming hypocrisy among my fellow 4e enthusiasts. This blog post is intended to serve as a warning not to become our own worst enemy. Approach it with an open mind, as it's sometimes hard to examine one's own behavior objectively.

What Is an Edition Warrior?

I've been told that edition warriors have been around since the conversion from OD&D to AD&D. I started with AD&D (what I believe is called the "blue box"), and I left the game in 1981 well before 2nd edition was released. Ergo, the 3.5e to 4e conversion was the only opportunity I had to experience the atrocities of an edition war, and the only one that affected me personally. Though your definitions might vary, I define an edition warrior as someone who isn't satisfied being able to play the edition they prefer, but arrogantly and selfishly insists that the rest of us are forced to play that edition as well. This in turn means that the relevant game designer has no 'right' to produce a game that doesn't suit the edition warrior's subjective needs. Such a person squarely falls within the definition of, "asshole," and clearly deserves the stigma associated with the pejorative, "edition warrior."

Notice, however, whom that doesn't include: Someone that prefers the older edition and merely continues playing it without bothering anyone about it. Those people might downright hate a particular edition, and if asked will tell you that, but that's a matter of preference, not poor manners or selfish behavior. Games are about having fun, period; nothing more, nothing less. Always adhere to the motto, "Play what you like; don't play what you don't like." People who honestly prefer another edition should be left to their own devices, and it shouldn't matter to others one bit that they're playing something else. There are plenty of gamers out there, so you should always be able to find a group playing the game (and edition) that suits you. Isn't that, after all, what we've been telling edition warriors for all these years?

Are We Becoming Edition Warriors?

Looking at D&D Next with a critical eye, pointing out its flaws, and suggesting its direction is not per se edition warring. I don't want anyone to come away from this thinking I’m telling you not to criticize the product as is. (I know you'd do so even if I told you not to do so; I just don’t want you to think I’m an idiot.) I simply remind you to be constructive. Your purpose should never be to tear down the process, but rather lift it. I've seen many statements recently that are highly critical, but in a "I give up on this crap" way, and that doesn't bode well for the future of the hobby.

For obvious reasons, I'm not going to single out any particular person's statements. I'm also making these statements myself, and I don't consider myself to be destructive. This is a matter of line-drawing, and I simply ask that you mindful of your own behavior. (You might not even intend to be destructive, but because of the nature of online media, come across that way.) If D&D Next even delivers on 10% of its promise of modularity (i.e., allowing differing gaming mechanics at the same gaming table), this will strengthen the community more than anything since the community was created. That should be your goal, and you won’t reach it by viewing "differing" opinions as "objectively inferior."

The Worst Case Scenario

In the worst case scenario, D&D Next turns out to be a disaster for us (i.e., 4e players), reinstating all the mistakes that 4th edition corrected, all to appease squeaky wheels that won't buy the new product anyway because it'll be a clone of an old edition they already own. Even if that worst case scenario plays out, then each of us needs to follow the advice that we gave 3e players when 4th edition arrived: Just keep playing the edition you like, and leave everyone else alone. Just like 3e, the 4e library is rich enough to support our gaming for the rest of our lives. We don't need any more crunch, and fluff can be used regardless of the edition for which it was written. Taking the opposite approach creates fractures in the community, which helps nobody, and represents hypocrisy on the part of all of us that criticized that approach during the current edition wars. Remember, this is the worst case scenario, but there's no reason this has to be the likely scenario.

If push comes to shove, just roll with it.

EDIT: As I was posting the link to this entry on Twitter, I saw an announcement that Monte Cook has left the D&D Next project. There's a thread on ENWorld here. I'm no friend of Monte Cook's approach, but again this isn't about my singular, anecdotal opinion. Monte Cook represents the interests of a lot of gamers, and I hope he's replaced with someone that can see to the needs of those gamers.

Robert E. Bodine, Esq. practices real estate and intellectual property law in Virginia. He is one of the founding members of the Gamers’ Syndicate, a Washington, DC-based gaming club, and part owner of synDCon, a table-top gaming convention. He authors the article series on Loremaster.org, Protection from Chaos, dealing with intellectual property law matters as they relate to the gaming industry. You can follow him on Twitter @RobertEBodine for legal matters, @GSLLC for gaming matters, and if you’re a sports fan, @MMADork. ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/64-D-amp-D-Next-and-the-Edition-Wars-Don’t-Become-Your-Own-Worst-Enemy Bestiary, Wrath of the Titans, Part I http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/63-Bestiary-Wrath-of-the-Titans-Part-I Mon, 09 Apr 2012 22:40:42 GMT In 2010, Wizards of the Coast published Dragon 178, and in it was an article that provided 4th Edition material for the creatures that appeared in the remake of Clash of the Titans. With the release of the sequel, Wrath of the Titans, it’s time for a new article. Despite near-universal criticism of the movie, most viewers seem to agree that the visual effects are stunning, so these creatures can easily serve as inspiration for a campaign. This article contains the stat blocks for the creatures that appeared in the movie. Part II will provide the artifacts that appeared in the movie: Zeus’s Thunderbolt, Hades’ Pitchfork, Poseidon’s Trident, and the Spear of Triam, as well as the supreme titan, Kronos.

These creatures are built based in large part on how they were portrayed in the movie. Obviously, the movie took (far too many) liberties with the legends, and at times the legends themselves contradict, so don’t expect a perfect match between the creatures here and your personal understanding of their legendary counterparts.

The world of the movie differs from that of D&D, so it was difficult to decide whether to make these challenges paragon or epic. The movie doesn't assume the existence of other planes, so the conflict with the gods themselves could easily be seen as epic in scope. One could also look at the events as affecting the world on a worldwide scale, which is the definition of paragon. Granted, the world is the entire multiverse, so I compromised. These creatures follow a transition from high-paragon to low-epic. The creatures as written will get the most play without requiring DM modification, while requiring epic-shy gamers to dive just barely into those waters.

FYI, a third movie is planned. May Zeus have mercy on our souls.

The Chthonic Cyclopes of Hephaestus

Hephaestus guarded himself with three Cyclopes, a father and his two sons. These giants aren’t by any means evil, but as brutes, they tend to fire, ready, and aim in that order. They represent a good test of character for PCs that might take the same approach. Sometimes tact is the best weapon you have.

Lore

Arcana 37: Chthonic Cyclopes are master blacksmiths that aid Hephaestus in his work. Though not inherently evil, they’re territorial and fiercely protective of their master. They will attack first and ask questions later, but they will certainly bow down before Poseidon's Trident.

Encounters

The Chthonic Cyclops is the epitome of a brute, charging into battle against any sentient creature daring to intrude upon Hephaestus’s island sanctuary. For lower-level characters, they represent an opportunity to negotiate a truce in the heat of battle by way of a skill challenge. For higher-level characters, they represent a good test of character for PCs that might be inclined to immediately attack. If diplomacy fails, they’ll never attack someone wielding Poseidon’s Trident.

Click here for the stat block of the Chthonic Cyclops.

Tactics

A Chthonic Cyclops will use Hurl Foliage to toss tree trunks at its opponents until it has entered melee range, then switching to Sweeping Club to lay waste to its enemies. They will fight until dead or until an enemy draws Poseidon’s Trident. They’ll never attack someone wielding Poseidon’s Trident.

Wolf-Chimera

Unlike their better-known, worldly cousins, these creatures have only two heads, both of which are that of wolves that can spew ignited venom. Additionally, their tails end in serpent’s head that packs a poisonous bite.

Lore

Religion 32: Residents of the underworld, these immortal beasts serve Hades as a reminder of the order of things. Their master, god of the Underworld, Hades, relies upon the fear of mortals to feed his divinity, and uses Wolf-Chimeras as a source of that fear. Hades occasionally sends these creatures to the World to random places at random times, leaving its residents in constant state of fear. The resultant carnage can weaken a city’s resources, or forever wipe remote villages from the World.

Encounters

Wolf-Chimeras are used by gods of the underworld to strike the occasional chord of fear. However, they occasionally serve as an initial wave of attack in a war against humanity, serving as a harbinger of much worse things to come.

Click here for the stat block of the Wolf-Chimera.

Tactics

A Wolf-Chimera begins combat by closing the gap with Ferocious Leap. The Wolf-Chimera will use Flaming Venom whenever available, but will otherwise use double attack to do as much damage as possible.

The Tartaran Minotaur

The greatest of minotaurs guards the greatest of mazes. With a spirit-filled maze, Tarterus, as its domain, this already fearsome creature knows exactly how to strike fear into the hearts of its enemies, then tears them to pieces with his natural weapons.

Lore

Religion 35: When Zeus, Hades, and Poseidon commissioned Hephaestus to create the prison-maze of Tartarus, the architect knew that a guardian was needed. Knowing of the affinity minotaurs have for mazes, Hephaestus chose from among their greatest warriors the honor of immortality, all for the small price of eternal damnation. It took very little time for the guardian’s rage to cross into the realm of insanity, but his insanity didn’t stand in the way of complete mastery of his domain. He uses its effects to full advantage.

Encounters

The great maze of Tartarus houses the souls of those who lived treacherous lives. These souls find little solace in their eternal existence and savor the rare opportunity to feed off the fear of the living that pass through their prison. They accomplish this feat by uncovering the greatest fear from within the minds of their targets and enhancing it. The Tartaran Minotaur takes full advantage of the crippling effect this causes.

Click here for the stat block of the Tartaran Minotaur.

Click here for the stat block of the Souls of the Treacherous.

Tactics

The Tartaran Minotaur attacks with its bare hands and horns. It attempts to gain surprise -- a feat made relatively easy by its surroundings and at-will invisibility -- and attack an unsuspecting target with its Teleporting Slam. Once isolated with its prey, the Tartaran Minotaur stays hidden the shadows, slipping in and out of invisibility, and doing extra damage from the resulting combat advantage.

Soldier of Kronos

When Kronos formally launches his war against humanity, he will be preceded into battle by the damned souls of long-dead soldiers, some of whom are fused into a single being.

Lore

Religion 31: When a great soldier dies, he becomes a leader in Hades’ army. When a mediocre soldier dies, his life force is joined to another in the hopes that together they will serve competently as foot soldiers in that army. Accordingly, these dual-torso soldiers serve as the first line of attack in the war waged upon residents of the World by the god of the underworld.

Encounters

Soldiers of Kronos protect Kronos from harm while he remains imprisoned. As Kronos emerges from the underworld to begin his war against humanity, he hurls Soldiers of Kronos onto the battlefield before him, where they weaken his enemy’s forces by literally slicing through their ranks.

Click here for the stat block of the Soldier Of Kronos.

Tactics

The Soldier of Kronos is thrown onto the battlefield by Kronos. Upon landing, it uses Cinder Strike to burn all in its range, then immediately hurls itself into battle using Rain of Steel. It constantly moves across the battlefield, attacking a different target each round. It focuses on a single target only if no other targets remain.

Stay tuned for part II in which I provide the stat block for Kronos and the artifacts that appear in the movie.

Robert E. Bodine, Esq. practices law in Virginia. He is one of the founding members of the Gamers’ Syndicate and synDCon. He authors the article series, Protection from Chaos, on IP law and gaming. Follow him on Twitter @GSLLC. ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/63-Bestiary-Wrath-of-the-Titans-Part-I <![CDATA[baldur's gate.com]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/62-baldur-s-gate-com Thu, 01 Mar 2012 12:54:22 GMT
Quote Originally Posted by Steelfiredragon View Post
http://baldursgate.com/


the site's supposedly been redone.....




interesting...
This site shall rise from the ashes like a pheonix and be reborn anew! eventually. ]]> shauno http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/62-baldur-s-gate-com Gaming Clubs Are the Future http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/61-Gaming-Clubs-Are-the-Future Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:42:39 GMT Retail gaming stores are a dying breed. Amazom.com, et al. are killing them for reasons too numerous to list, but most (or all) of which you’re... Retail gaming stores are a dying breed. Amazom.com, et al. are killing them for reasons too numerous to list, but most (or all) of which you’re well-aware. At this point, some metropolitan areas don’t have retail gaming stores serving them (“unserved areas”), while areas with gaming stores (“served areas”) see them going out of business. The DC area is fortunate to have six stores servings the area, though even we have seen some attrition with the closing of the Woodbridge Game Parlor. (The stores are Dream Wizards, Game Parlor, Labyrinth Game Shop, the Family Game Store, Curio Cavern, and the Game Vault.)

Gamers in unserved areas are clamoring for the same support given to served areas, but WotC is unwilling to do so because they need a “brick and mortar” location to which to send the materials. Otherwise, they’re just sending adventures to their customers at home without charging them. That’s not a good business model for a company that makes money by selling those products to their customers.

Unfortunately, there’s a reason areas are unserved. Opening a retail gaming store is tough. Even Borders went bankrupt, and they had a broader product line, which in turn leads to a broader customer base, and as a result they had the advantage of being able to sell in bulk due to a larger inventory. If you plan to opening a more focused shop that serves only a small segment of the overall population, and your metropolitan area is small, you should file for bankruptcy the next day. It just can’t work in the digital age.

Gaming Clubs Are the Future

Unlike retail stores, the existence of gaming clubs is in no way dependent on retail sales. Gaming clubs aren’t usually profit-bearing operations, and meeting their rent can be as simple as charging modest dues or establishing a pay-per-play system. Some might be lucky enough to find free space to organize their games at a church, community center, etc. In short, they can survive the move into the digital age despite a smaller “client” base and focused set of products and services.

Show Me the Money

Quote Originally Posted by WotC
But Rob, you don’t know our budget. How can you possibly ask us to send you money or product?
When I brought up the issue with a couple of WotC folk at DDXP, they both asked the same question: “What do you want from us?” The real question, is what do they want from us, but if their answer is, “Nothing; we’re good,” then they’re dropping the ball in a serious way. Gaming clubs aren’t just an opportunity to grow the hobby in small areas; they’re bound to be the only opportunity to grow the hobby in any areas. If WotC feels that D&D Encounters and Living Forgotten Realms are effective marketing tools – and they must considering how much money they’ve invested in them in the past and present – then they’re going to need a vehicle to support it long after the retail stores close.

Nevertheless, I answered the question, admittedly in a crude, simplistic way, just to keep the conversation going. I suggested that, without spending one more dime then they’re already spending on their website, WotC could put a link to the Gamers’ Syndicate on their homepage as the "gaming club of the month." Imagine the publicity that would provide us. We’d have more members, and a new influx of GMs qualified to run both D&D and other games. We’d get bigger, and people would buy more product. Moreover, it would inspire other gamers to start their own gaming clubs, knowing that doing so might get them front-page exposure. This would have a snowball effect on the national scale, and in a way that isn’t impacted negatively by the move to the digital age.

As a side note, for areas like Washington, DC, a gaming club program shouldn’t encourage gamers to operate out of non-retail space. Supporting retail gaming stores is still the best way to serve the community and surest way to assure the programs accomplish their goals, so as long as an area is a served area, the programs should still operate through those stores. I’ll leave it to the game publishers to determine the details.

Conclusion

Clearly, I’m placing this burden on WotC, because, regardless of how you feel about them, they’re the industry leader, both financially and in terms of vision. They’ve supported multiple living campaigns over the years, they’ve provided a program for new players (i.e., D&D Encounters) with top-notch production values, and they’ve provided a suite of digital tools that, despite criticism, is like nothing else provided by any other company in the industry. If this idea is to take off, it will do so because WotC proves it works. Considering my ideas don’t have the costs associated with D&D Encounters and DDI, I’d expect that proof would inspire other companies to follow suit. Remember, this idea isn’t designed to get us free stuff – we’re the paying customers. Instead, it’s (ultimately) designed to improve game publishers’ sales, which in turn provides us with the gaming opportunities to which we’ve grown accustomed and for which we’re more than willing to pay.

Exactly who loses in that situation?

Robert E. Bodine, Esq. practices real estate and intellectual property law in Virginia. He is one of the founding members of the Gamers’ Syndicate, a Washington, DC-based gaming club, and part owner of synDCon, a table-top gaming convention. He authors the article series on Loremaster.org, Protection from Chaos, dealing with intellectual property law matters as they relate to the gaming industry. You can follow him on Twitter @RobertEBodine for legal matters, @GSLLC for gaming matters, and if you’re a sports fan, @MMADork. ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/61-Gaming-Clubs-Are-the-Future This should be an interesting ride. http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/59-This-should-be-an-interesting-ride Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:53:52 GMT Right. 5e is a go.

I can't really be mad at this news. I wanted to be, believe me. I just purchased Essentials, reluctantly, a few months ago, and there's already a new version being discussed. My book shelf is filled completely with RPG books, and half of them carry the D&D brand on them, across many editions. I'm tired of the buy in, I'm tired of the retreads. And I'm not going to lie: I feel a little irked, since I felt like 4e still had so much ground to cover.

But 4E also has warts, big warts that I can't ignore when I look it in the face anymore. We've all heard these discussed time and time again: Character creation becomes a bit heavy on the paper work. Combat encounters are quite lengthy. Powers seem to distract opportunities for creative maneuvers in combat. The math starts to buckle in higher level play, so on and so forth.
Tack this on with errata after errata, and tons of cool concepts that seem to get neglected (rituals, character themes, etc.)

Yeah, it feels like this engine has been pushed a bit hard off the tracks.

Cautious Optimism

I can't gripe about 5e, at least not yet. The approaches and design goals they want are exactly something I want to see. A modular system, intended for the DM to check list what's in and what's out for his campaign. As an RPG tinker gnome, this sounds right up my alley. Hell, the game I've been working on has turned towards a modular "plug and play" design, so how can I bitch about this?

And of course, the open play testing and community feedback. If they really take advantage of this, it could do wonders of actually tuning a system that incorporates the best of old school and new school play. And for all those peeps lambasting WoTC for "copying Paizo"....get real. There's nothing wrong for copying a design approach when it's proven to work with flying colors. Also, remember that Paizo is currently making a name off a modified version of WoTC's baby.....turn about is fair play.

That said, I am going into all of this with a 10' Pole and constantly checking for traps.

Echoing a Plea

Many of said it, and I'm going to echo it:

If, at any point in your life, you were passionate about D&D, if the game to you is more than a branding but an experience and fond memories, then sign up for the damn Open Playtest.

Give feedback. Be constructive. Regardless of which edition was your favorite; tell them what you love, what you hate, and what you would like to see. The worst that happens is that 5e turns out suck, and we go back to either older editions, retro clones, homebrewed hacks or, hell, a whole different system entirely. But, there is a chance that maybe we'll finally get an edition of the game that feels complete, and we can all sit down at the table for it again. ]]> Rev. Lazaro http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/59-This-should-be-an-interesting-ride spelljammer needed http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/58-spelljammer-needed Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:06:21 GMT I miss spelljammer. I enjoyed playing on ships and exploring around worlds and taking on pirates. One of the reasons I left D&D and played StarWars was the space fights and ship customization. I even played Warhamer 4000 because of this. With 5e in the works and Forgotten Realms as anchor campaign, I hope the remember Spelljammer too. ]]> shauno http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/58-spelljammer-needed new edition http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/57-new-edition Mon, 09 Jan 2012 18:06:01 GMT I hope that whatever direction they take with this new edition, they go back to the old ways of storytelling. The lack of storytelling is why I left... I hope that whatever direction they take with this new edition, they go back to the old ways of storytelling. The lack of storytelling is why I left D&D in the first plce to play StarWars Saga edition.:cool: ]]> shauno http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/57-new-edition <![CDATA[Article: New Edition of D&D is announced]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/56-Article-New-Edition-of-D-amp-D-is-announced Mon, 09 Jan 2012 18:00:19 GMT
Quote Originally Posted by Matt James View Post
You can view the page at http://loremaster.org/content.php/25...D-is-announced

---------- Post added at 09:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:03 AM ----------

Here is the related L&L article that Mike Mearls put up: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.a...d/4ll/20120109
]]> shauno http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/56-Article-New-Edition-of-D-amp-D-is-announced Would you like to see a Lineage of Cormyr’s rulers in print? http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/55-Would-you-like-to-see-a-Lineage-of-Cormyr’s-rulers-in-print Sun, 08 Jan 2012 19:37:47 GMT
Quote Originally Posted by Sanishiver View Post
As I understand it Brian Cortijo has been working for quite some time on a lineage of Cormyr’s rulers. I don’t know how in depth or extensive it is but it’s something I would like to see find its way into Dragon or (more likely) Dungeon Magazine.

Would you like to see something like this in print?

If yes, how do we convince WotC to put it in print? Obviously statements of fan interest are key (Brian outlines the best ways to do that here--see bottom of page 1 of the thread), but I wonder if the lineage itself can’t be expanded on or made more appealing to WotC to begin with?

My thinking is that if the lineage is just an extensive list of names and dates, that’s something a Realmslore fan would be interested in, but it may not be all that useful for Average Joe Dungeon Master.

So I’m wondering if there are possible Character Themes that could be written up in tandem with the Lineage article that could appear in Dragon Magazine? Maybe a character theme built around a Cormyrean noble family who comes to believe their bloodline is not only intermixed with the Obarskyrs, but actually contains more living descendants of Obarskyr blood than the current ruling family? Perhaps this leads them to think they should rule as the “true” Obarskyrs and the character spend time adventuring to discover how deep the family lineage is? That sort of thing?

Any ideas and advice are most welcome.

Edit: I posted some questions about the lineage to Brian on the WotC forums. Hope to get some info from him about the Lineage to maybe spawn good ideas for other material based off of it.

---------- Post added at 07:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:08 PM ----------

Haha did Brian ever come through!

Here's his description of what the Lineage is comprised of: What it is, in its current form, is a 31,000+ word document chronicling the entire history of Cormyr's royal house (it was a bit longer, but the Swords of State article was actually formed from the end portions of the Lineage). It deals with more than 120 different persons of the Obarskyr line, the royal magicians, and various related individuals. It talks about some key events and enemies of the realm, but for the most part, it's a Who's Who of Cormyrean royal history, and the key events of each of their lives, descriptions of personality, and for what (if anything) they are now remembered.

That sounds totally awesome to me.
]]> shauno http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/55-Would-you-like-to-see-a-Lineage-of-Cormyr’s-rulers-in-print Figmentia attacks - Insomnia Parries http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/54-Figmentia-attacks-Insomnia-Parries Mon, 19 Dec 2011 01:27:40 GMT I've always been a fan of miniatures, even before I bought my first Grenadier Boxed Set in the early 80's. Since then my "collection" has just continued to grow. Some (my wife) might call it an obsession, though my time being able to do anything with them has continued to diminish. My friends just call it what it is, figmentia. Go ahead look it up, I'll wait.

So it has been with great despair that in the last couple of months I've had very little time to dedicate to my "stuff"; gaming and miniatures. This has lead to great periods of wackiness, as I can't get my gaming fix. When I don't game I feel like Tyrone Biggums...

But honestly, I can quit whenever I want to... :D

One of the side effects of figmentia is that you are either painting, or modifying miniatures at all times. Other's minds might think about how great a miniature looks, but in your mind you've already cut off both arms, repositioned them, and sculpted something on top.

My foray into sculpting has been slow, but fun. It started several years ago when a friend of mine, Frylock, started describing his character during one of our gaming sessions. Since we are such "serious" role-players we immediately concentrated on the description, and renamed him Frolock because of his big Kid-n-Play Afro Hairstyle. Hey, it was his description not mine.

This description gave me an idea, and several months later I presented him with his own custom made version of Frolock, Afro and all. It was made by converting a Warhammer Wizard, and sculpting a new head, and hair. Unfortunately, I didn't take a picture of the miniature at the time to demonstrate my newly found sculpting powers.

Sculpting is fun, but time consuming. So in the last few years I've only really made time to sculpt a few times.

Like most DMs would do, I quickly turned my new-found powers to "evil." The first "monster" I sculpted was used for one of my long running 3.5 campaigns. I needed something creepy for this thing. I had no miniature that would do it justice, so I decided to sculpt it. In the end only one of my players ever recognized the actual creature. Which meant that the sculpt wasn't so bad as to be completely unrecognizable. See if you can identify this 3.X era monster:



My second sculpt was done as a sculpting challenge on ENWorld (sorry can't find the thread). A group of us, suffering from figmentia, decided to do a one month challenge in which we'd sculpt something having to do with Wizards. One of the guys running the challenge was going to cast, in pewter, a copy for each participant's entry, and distribute to all. This was an interesting challenge and my entry was this Warforged Wizard, and a bunch of small wizard laboratory pieces. The lab pieces were simply too small to gravity cast, so they remained uncast. The wizard came out well enough that one of my very talented painting friends did it more justice than I would have by painting it.







Since then my sculpting has been way too sporadic, or limited to very small pieces for conversion. I want to sculpt more, it's that sometimes I just don't feel like it.

As is usually customary, last night I was up at 3:00AM, don't ask insomnia is a bitch. Without much to do, and not able to go back to sleep, I sauntered in a dreamless stupor into my basement. Sitting there, beckoning me was a block of Sculpey at my table. For some reason inspiration struck me. I normally don't use Sculpey for sculpting because IME it is much harder to "push putty" using it. But what I was going to sculpt was large enough that I didn't want to waste "green stuff" on it. All in all I think it came out pretty well, except for the left eye that simply reminds me of Marty Feldman . So the next step will be to paint it green and put it in front of my players so they can haphazardly explore the nothingness contained in the mouth. Let's see how that goes.



So it's at times like this that insomnia is not such a bad thing. The fact that I barely get 4 hours of sleep on good days means that there are times when it's 3:00AM, I can't get any sleep, and I have an idle mind. Some have said that an idle mind is the devil's playground. So I think that from now on when the insomnia strikes, the figmentia will be fed, one way or another.

I think my next project will be something equally recognizable, a certain idol with large gem eyes. ]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/54-Figmentia-attacks-Insomnia-Parries <![CDATA[My Harkenwold - Stealin', the DM advantage]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/53-My-Harkenwold-Stealin-the-DM-advantage Sun, 06 Nov 2011 18:02:39 GMT The well runs dry
There are days when the creative juices are just not flowing. As a DM there are simply days when you run out of ideas. Like spice* the ideas must flow, if you are to have a fulfilling game. Thankfully, unless you are publishing your works, you always have a backup - steal from any available sources, profusely.

Not so long ago I was going through one of those creative slumps. I had a new campaign starting and didn't know where to go with it, specially as the last campaign had ended with a great Epic conclusion. Now the players are starting a new game in a world which their previous characters helped save. This was a daunting task, as some of the information I might have given them earlier is now clashing with my new ideas. So I decided to "move" the campaign to an area none of the players had ever explored. The problem was that I had no such area.

Larceny to the rescue
You see, I've been running this home brewed world for a very long time. Baledar started as the world for my Basic D&D game in late 1979. This was way before I'd ever heard anything about "world-building." The world started as a small village near a river and a swamp. In that swamp was an unnamed city lost in time. That was the extent of my writeup for the first few games. Adventures for the first campaign happened all around this small village of Hoch, as I pulled ideas from any possible source. A lot of the first few adventures where gonzo affairs with all kinds of creatures pulled directly from the monster manual, simply because they looked cool.

The Keep on the Borderlands and Caves of Chaos were just a few days travel away. As new adventures started to take form, they were always placed in relation to that initial village. The entire campaign saw the players find out about the cult that was building at the "Caves of Chaos", the players fought the slavers, visited Averoigne and met the Ambervilles, found the Temple of Elemental Evil, and even challenged the giants.

Over time our "brand" of D&D was a hodge-podge of rules from both the Basic/Expert game and AD&D. We had a psionicist monk (AD&D), played in the same group as a halfling (rogue - D&D), and an elf (fighter/magic user - D&D), a dwarf fighter (AD&D), a human ranger(AD&D), a human fighter(AD&D), and a Human Wizard (AD&D). We didn't care about rules, we just cared about how much fun we were having. We didn't care about being exclusive either, at one time I had 14 players playing at one table, ranging in age from 10 years old to mid 30's. All this with a 16 year old DM.

Those were very fun times for me, I didn't have to tortuously abide by the rules in a book. If I thought it was cool, and the players were having fun, who cared whether the halfling was now a race, and was supposed to get a class from another book. We played to have fun, not to slave over the details of the rules.

This taught me one crucial "truth" about this game, if the idea is cool go with it. It really doesn't matter if the idea is your original creation. Plots from Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers, Conan the Barbarian, Dune, Star Wars, The Six Million Dollar Man, Marvel Comics, etc., they all found their way into some part of my adventures.

That original group of players disbanded shortly after I left for college, as there was no longer any time to meet. After having played two days a week for almost 5 years it was very sad to part, but eventually all things must come to an end.

Decades later, when 3.x rolled around, and I'd found a new group of players I decided to dust off some of those old adventures. Man were they crappy, but for that "old" group they were gold. Comedy gold, but gold nonetheless. To this day we still laugh about some of the adventures, and mishaps of those "original" heroes.

What I did find of use were some notes about Baledar, the game world. Those were the spark for a new campaign that lasted for almost 9 years. The adventures started with that same small village of Hoch. Near it was the lost city of Tendarra. The Keep on the Borderlands was still about a days travel. The world now had a growing empire, enemies at its borders, and mercantile houses. From these sparse notes grew the new campaign, and at the end the heroes had defeated the usurper god king, opened a gateway to the gods again, and ascended to a form of epic reward themselves.

What was old is new again
Now I'm starting a new campaign, and I'm going back to that world. The players for this campaign are mostly the same as for the 3.x campaign so I'm not going to thread on the same ground as before. But for this campaign, the previous campaign is "historical". I get to "steal" from myself. I will find it interesting when they reach Paragon Level and meet their "old" characters. To keep it fresh, my campaign has to "move" to a different area than before. Though they will eventually visit some of the "old haunts". I want this campaign to "feel" different. So I'm once again on the prowl for "new ideas".

I've always loved maps, and there is a huge swath of maps out there. My campaign needed a new beginning, and I found it in the village of Tharbensford. But Tharbensford is not a "published" setting, and there is no map of the village, or its surrounding area. No problem, take another map and modify it to taste. So was born the village of Tharbensford, the westernmost village in the community known as Harkenwold. This time I'm using resources I didn't have 30 years ago. So with a little bit of "work" in Campaign Cartographer 3, here's the community of Harkenwold, and the village of Tharbensford on it's western border. The original map of Harkenwold is from the 4e Dungeon Master's Kit.



It took me a bit of time to "convert" the map, but in 20 minutes I came up with a short writeup of notable NPCs, and a short list of adventures in the Harken Forest are just around the corner.

Find inspiration wherever
If as a DM, you ever feel the pressure to come up with original ideas, that is simply self imposed stress. Your players will most likely not know the difference when you file off the serial numbers of last week's episode of CSI, and use it as the basis for your game.

A month ago, the player characters all perished in the initial adventure of the campaign. So much for the myth that there are few, if ever any, deaths in 4e. This past month, the new characters were sent on an adventure to find a lost paladin. They arrived at the location. Fought the creatures, and recovered the paladin who was about to die at a sacrificial altar. As they were fighting the opposition they mentioned that this was familiar in a weird sort of way. When they finally recovered the paladin they were surprised to find one of the PCs from the first expedition (the TPK). It finally hit them that they had been fighting the exact same creatures as on the first adventure. The locale was the same, the setup was the same, the travel to the place was pretty similar, and they never knew.

So much for the myth that gamers are of above average intelligence. :p
Attached Thumbnails
]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/53-My-Harkenwold-Stealin-the-DM-advantage Meta-combat System http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/48-Meta-combat-System Wed, 26 Oct 2011 00:33:31 GMT This Thursday, I knew I was going to be running a... This Thursday, I knew I was going to be running a dungeon crawl of Ghost Tower of Inverness in only 4 hours. That’s not nearly enough time for 17 encounters, but some of the encounters I’m forced to cut are critical to the overall adventure. I was tossing around some ideas with a couple of friends on Tuesday night (Rob Oz and John), and they kept hitting me with suggestions. My goal was to create a meta-combat system where players’ choices mattered. At the same time, however, I didn’t want to create an overly complex system that would defeat its own purpose by taking too long to implement. I could easily have made something more complex and mathematically appropriate, but I chose the following system. If you have any ideas on how to improve the system that doesn’t introduce unnecessary complexity, I’d appreciate it, as this hasn’t even been tested. However, note that this meta-combat system is balanced for a dungeon crawl system in which the party should expect to lose between one and three healing surges per encounter on average.

Assessing the Encounter
  1. Every combat encounter starts with 20 points.
  2. If the encounter level differs from the average party level, take that difference/2 and add or subtract those points from the 20. For example, a party of PCs averaging level 6 faces an encounter of level 10. That encounter has 22 points.

    For the dungeon crawl system, an encounter level is determined by the average level of the NPCs/traps the party is facing.

  3. For XP-bearing trap, a minion trap is worth 1 point, a standard trap is worth 4 points, an elite trap is worth 8 points, and a solo trap is worth 20 points. If traps are part of a “mixed encounter” (i.e., NPCs combined with a trap), and the encounter is appropriately balanced, you won’t have to add points for the trap(s).


Fighting the Encounter
  1. A PC selects the power they’re going to use.
  2. A PC rolls 1d3 to determine how many points the PC eliminates in the first round.
  3. If the power used is a close blast, an ally-friendly close burst, or otherwise attacks at least two targets, add 1 to the d3 roll.
  4. If the PC is using an encounter power, add 1 to the d3 roll.
  5. If the PC is using a daily power, add 2 to the d3 roll.

    Note that these bonuses stack. A daily close blast power gives the PC a +3 to the d3 roll.

  6. Reduce the number of points from the encounter by the PC’s resulting die roll (with modifiers).
  7. If there are any remaining points for the encounter after each PC has a turn, the party loses a healing surge taken from the PC of their choice.
  8. Repeat the process until there are no more points remaining.


Assuming the PCs decide to use only at-will powers, this should result in a loss of between one and three healing surges depending on the rolls. Because this system is balanced for the dungeon crawl system, that’s about right. This clearly wouldn’t work for the standard system, where a party can expect to lose about three healing surges per character per encounter. For the standard system, you should be able to just subtract a static number from what I've provided here, and you have what you need.

Note well that this isn't 5th Edition D&D I'm suggesting. This obviously wouldn't work as a replacement to our existing combat system. It does, however, have the advantage of player choice still making a difference. If you're low on healing surges, use an encounter or daily power to make sure you win in the first round. If you're low on power selection, take your chances with at-wills and lose a couple of healing surges.

What do you all think? ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/48-Meta-combat-System <![CDATA[Remembering FASA's Star Trek RPG]]> http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/47-Remembering-FASA-s-Star-Trek-RPG Mon, 24 Oct 2011 04:49:20 GMT I played D&D Sunday night, and something came up that I thought I'd share with everyone. I was fondly remembering FASA's Star Trek game from my high school years. I left D&D in 1981 (not returning until 2005), but for a brief time in high school (1982 or 1983), I bought up materials from the FASA Star Trek game and played it a couple of times. I really miss that game and would like to do a 1-shot or 2-shot game. In 2007, I played the Demand of Honor adventure, which involved the Gorn, but online play was very "unsocial" and lacked the feel of true RPGing.

Can I Cook or What?

I've been very lucky to have founded a group that's open to trying other systems. We're currently in the midst of a Savage Worlds: Weird Wars campaign because we tried out that system one night (in the Deadlands setting). We've also played some Dragon Age RPG but have done nothing more than create some characters and run through a single sample encounter. Tonight, Hal Mangold of Green Ronin Publishing gave me two sourcebooks for DC Adventures, the Hero's Handbook and Heroes and Villains Vol. I, and although I've never been a comic book fan, I played a demo at GenCon run by its creator, Steve Kenson, and so it remains a candidate for our next experiment.

Still, FASA's Star Trek would be my first choice for doing something different. As the one who'd be pushing the system, I probably wouldn't get to be a player, but I love GMing as much as I do playing, so I can live with that.

What's the Big Deal?

Of all the systems I've played (admittedly, not many), none immersed me as much into the setting as the bridge combat system. The hand-to-hand combat system was good, but when dealing with inter-ship battles, I felt like I was on the bridge of a starship. It was so good that they sold the system as a separate product. It could stand on its own.

Visualize the bridge of an Original Series starship. You have the science officer at one workstation, the helmsman at another, the communications officer at yet another, and so on for navigation, engineering, weapons control (for the Original Series movies), and of course the captain's chair. Other than the captain, this is what the gaming table looks like. Everyone has their spot around a common center. The only difference is that, in a game, everyone always looks towards the center rather than occasionally.

Each of these work stations would necessarily have a different control panel on it. The science officer had a goofy sensor viewing thingy, the helm had it's own in the Original Series, navigation had a star chart, weapons control had targeting systems and what amounted to "triggers" for the weapons, and so on. For the game, each of the players had their own control panel on paper tailor-made for their handling their responsibilities and tracking the resources for which they were responsible, roughly simulating a bridge workstation. The captain would make decisions on how to proceed, then ask the relevant character to carry out the order. This would usually necessitate a skill roll on the d100 system, and not surprisingly the character was built to contribute in ways appropriate for his position on a star ship.

In other words, there was a chain of command, but it was still a cooperative game, just like 4e. Although it's certainly possible to play a 4e game without a leader, it helps if you have a healer. The same was true of Star Trek. Yeah, the captain's in charge but can't do it all. The time for the captain's hands to get dirty was when it was time to make contact with others, and captains certainly were built to be good at that.

The game also addressed technology thoroughly, from starship weaponry, to sidearms, to medical and science equipment. All of the major races were addressed, including the Caitian from the animated series. In fact, at DDXP last year, I got to play one. My Gamma World GM created pre-gens for his game, and one of them was a Catian lieutenant from the Star Trek universe who had been stranded here by the Big Mistake. (At the time, he was playing in a FASA Star Trek home game.)

The game even had an ingenious explanation for why Original Series Klingons looked so different from the movie Klingons: The ones from the Original Series were "human fusion" Klingons, genetically combined with humans to make a Klingon better suited to deal with humans. The game took this to the next logical step, introducing Romulan-fusion Klingons as well. The Imperial Klingons (from the movies) existed, but they weren't the first choice for dealing with humans, so you never saw them on the TV screen. Taking this level of detail even one step further, the game provided a ton of words from the Romulan language. This attention to detail is exactly the sort of thing a fan of the Original Series, like me, would love.

Finally, because everything was handled via the skill system, it wasn't a burden to have a long list of skills for each character. This allowed each player to customize their character. Kirk liked to ride horses, Picard had a strong background in archaeology, and Riker played the trombone. Your character had plenty of skill points to spend. If you were an optimizer, you could certainly max out your engineering, but you didn't have to do so. In fact, the game was basically built assuming some characters would be optimizers and others actors (i.e., role-players). Any character could be played by any player type, but because there was always a need for both role-playing and roll-playing, both player types could find a home somewhere on the bridge. Making sure everyone at the table is happy is a goal I've set for myself with organized play, but FASA Star Trek makes it easier.

Oh, and FASA Star Trek called them opportunity actions long before D&D had them. :-)

What If This Isn't for Me?

Obviously, feeling immersed in the setting isn't important if the setting doesn't matter to you. I'll ask my group if they're interested, but I won't beg them to do it. "Play what you like," implies, "Don't play what you don't like." This might prevent me from every playing the game again, as I might have to find a table of players willing to do so and the time to play outside my group, but there's always hope.

So Much to Do, So Little Time

Of course, there just isn't enough time to do all the things I want to do. I'm currently having trouble focusing on a few projects for the Gamers' Syndicate, and I'm essentially in a job hunt. Once successful in my job hunt, my time might become even more precious. We can't have everything we want, and I can accept that, but there's so much out there to do, I don't see how I could ever get bored.

Either way, consider (re)visiting this game if you enjoyed watching Star Trek. You shouldn't be disappointed. ]]> Frylock http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/47-Remembering-FASA-s-Star-Trek-RPG