Viole Falushe on refereeing

The Palace of Love

The Palace of Love (source)

Viole Falushe, the Demon Prince, speaks:

Artists before me have conveyed their assertions by abstract symbology; the spectators or audience has always been passive. I use a more poignant symbology, essentially abstract but palpable, visible and audible–in short a symbology of events and environments. There are no spectators, no audience, no passivity. There are only participants.

— Jack Vance, The Palace of Love (1967)

Chaos Engines

When using a magic item, roll 2d6, add one half relevant class level (round up) and any item level (use enchantment bonus if it has one, or make a ruling). Then consult the table below.

Enchanted Device (2d6)
2d6 Result
2 or less Destroyed (item ruined, triggers chaos surge)
3, 4, 5 Warped (does not function, chaotic energies twist device)
6, 7, 8 Undermined (functions, but not quite as expected, device left unchanged)
9, 10, 11 Consistent (device functions without surprises)
12 or more Augmented (functions, chaos embues the device with a new permanent ability)

For example, a magic-user deploying a staff would get the class bonus, but a fighter would not. natural 2 and natural 12 should always override any modifiers, just like how nat 1 and nat 20 are often interpreted. If you wanted it to be more swingy, you could only apply item level (and ignore character level). That would also decrease the load on referee creativity (by not requiring the invention of new permanent abilities quite as frequently).

Perhaps especially useful for handling magic items in FLAILSNAILS games.

A great question from Eric B. on Google Plus: Would there be ITEMS OF CHAOS with negative item levels?

To which I responded: yeah, that sounds like a good way to operationalize curses. “Most of the time this wand will just make problems for you, but once in a blue moon it will level the evil overlord’s fortress.”

Monster XP as treasure

Most versions of D&D provide XP values for monsters, usually awarded for defeating the monsters in combat. The Third Edition (and Pathfinder) manuals also give explicit prices in gold pieces for every enchanted item. Here is an idea for modifying how advancement is handled using those numbers. XP value specified per monster is converted into GP. This is the value of the monster’s treasure (and equipment). XP is given for GP spent, as I have been doing in my Vaults of Pahvelorn game. Additionally, magic items can be purchased as is commonly expected (I think) in many Third Edition games.

In a game like this, I still wouldn’t make magic item shops common. Instead, I would put together some sort of system to rate sellers of enchanted items (cunning folk, wizards, specialist merchants, demonic patrons, and so forth). The rating could either be a flat GP threshold (this NPC can sell magic items of up to 1000 GP value) or it could be something like an inventory saving throw (this wizard has a stock number of 11 — roll 1d20 against that target number, modified by desired magic item level). This is somewhat similar to an idea I had for rating sages, which I should probably also write a post about. This creates a motivation to quest for NPCs that are better able to provide powerful items. Particular famous items of power might be the purview of specific individuals.

The entire advancement system could even be replaced by item acquisition, for a slightly lower power game. So, for example, fighters wouldn’t ever get attack bonuses, they would just get more powerful weapons. Wizards wouldn’t prepare spells, they would buy (or create) scrolls and other enchanted devices.

The interesting aspect of this proposal is that it maintains most of the expectations of the 3E/Pathfinder advancement system (assuming that standard class progression is also maintained) while only modifying the specific action incentive. The standard benefits of XP for GP are preserved (rewarding clever planning as opposed to straightforward combat). Obviously, this system would result in a setting with more common magic, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

Hyphenation

If you are laying out text with narrow columns, using full justification without hyphenation is unlikely to result in an attractive document. Very narrow columns are most commonly the result of wrapping text around images. Consider the following unhyphenated and fully justified example:

Unhyphenated Fully Justified Text

Unhyphenated Fully Justified Text

Pretty ugly, right?

Compare that to a hyphenated version:

Hyphenated Fully Justified Text

Hyphenated Fully Justified Text

The hyphenated example above is still not perfect, but I suspect most readers will agree with me that it looks better than the unhyphenated example. These cases were created with a standard word processor (Mac Pages) by a person who is not a layout expert (me). A professional using real typesetting or layout software could undoubtedly do much better.

Many people prefer fully justified text, because it provides a veneer of profesionalism (since most books use fully justified text). However, fully justified is not the only option. Ragged text is a totally legitimate alternative. Ragged vs. hyphenated-and-fully-justified is a taste thing, but full justification without hyphenation (especially in a context of narrow columns, as shown here) should probably just be avoided.

Given that I have found myself giving this feedback several times now, I figured it merited a page that I could just reference. (And now you can too, if you come across egregious layouts and agree with my document aesthetics.)

Ragged right example

Ragged Right Example

Example images and text taken from the Wikipedia page on Necromancy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necromancy

Hexenbracken

Hexenbracken Original

Hexenbracken Original

Not that I’m under the delusion that anyone that reads my blog doesn’t also read Zak’s, but I still feel compelled to post about this. Zak found this old hex map I put up but never used. I created it using the procedures from Victor Raymond‘s Wilderness Architect (which can also be found as a pair of articles in Fight On!, issues two and three).

He then prompted arbitrary people on Google Plus to stock it, democratic-like. The result can be found here (Google Docs spreadsheet) thanks, I gather, to Random Wizard. That’s right, almost every single hex has something interesting (that’s more than 600 keyed hexes).

From Zak’s summary post:

The Hexenbracken was created hex-by-hex over the last few days by a ton of people on Google + and Despite a certain amount of democratic noise that you’d expect from anything like this, I can say with my hand on my heart that it has a smaller percentage of stupid things in it than any other hexcrawl product I can think of.

The map, by the way, is in the public domain.

Hexenbracken with Gygaxian Democracy

Hexenbracken with Gygaxian Democracy — key

Doors of Edinburgh

James Maliszewski has mentioned before that staircases are evocative for him of adventure. For me, it’s doors. So, during my recent trip to the UK, I made a point of taking pictures of interesting doors. Here are some from Edinburgh.

IMG_3731 door

IMG_3591 door

IMG_3917 1 door

IMG_3761 door

IMG_3733 door

IMG_3685-1 rotated door

IMG_3667 door

IMG_3659 door

IMG_3641 door

IMG_3633 door

IMG_3616 edinburgh castle door

IMG_3568 door

IMG_3545 door

IMG_3541 door

1d12

1d12LS has a post up about using 1d12 to determine weather randomly. That’s a cool idea (I do something similar by making weather a sort of reaction roll with the cosmos, which I may have gotten originally from Talysman).

But I don’t want to talk about weather here, I want to talk about using 1d12 as a general resolution system. It has a reasonably large set of possibilities, and is also quite pleasant to roll. As LS points out, though 1d12 is not as common in the real world as 2d6, it does have the advantage of not requiring any addition. So how does it stack up for a five-fold result space? (All percentile probabilities are rounded, and so may not sum to 100%.)

1d12 Fivefold Probabilities (LS version)
Result 1 2–3 4–9 10–11 12
Chance (%) 8 17 50 17 8
1d12 Fivefold Probabilities (alternate)
Result 1 2–4 5–8 9–11 12
Chance (%) 8 25 33 25 8
2d6 Summed Probabilities
Result 2 3–5 6–8 9–11 12
Chance (%) 3 25 44 25 3

Neither of the 1d12 possibilities matches up exactly, and bonuses affect the result slightly differently than with 2d6, but it’s probably “good enough” to use with the same kind of probability curve (not quite a bell curve, but a big middle with small tails). I prefer the LS distribution; the alternate is just presented for comparison.

For a “1d12 only” game, you could use ability modifiers rather than full stats, and all action resolution could be done using the 1d12 simulation of 2d6 fivefold results. Rather than 3d6 in order, there would be 1d12 in order…

Rolling For Ability Scores (1d12)
Result 1 2–3 4–9 10–11 12
Modifier -2 -1 0 +1 +2
Chance (%) 8 17 50 17 8

Ragemoor

From the blurb:

Born of the stars, nurtured on pagan blood, Castle Ragemoor exerts its will over any hapless mortal who dares set foot within its living walls! Fortress … sentinel … guardian … prison! Those who oppose it, it kills! Those it would enslave, it drives insane!

Seriously, a comic about a living castle drawn by the great Richard Corben that is equal parts Gormenghast and Lovecraft? Get out of my head! Do I really need to write anything further? I want to write up a mega-dungeon inspired by this and run it right now.

Note that Corben’s art is wonderfully adult-oriented (that is, potentially NSFW).

I read the hardcover compilation of the first four issues, which I believe encompasses the entire story (I don’t think more issues are coming). It is a quick read, and I’m sure I will return to it many times.

Ragemoor

Ragemoor — preview image from darkhorse.com

Petitions

James Tissot - Noah's Sacrifice

James Tissot – Noah’s Sacrifice (source)

This is an extension and refinement (I hope) of some recent ideas regarding cleric magic. It has some atmosphere that I like, but I worry that it is A) too complicated and B) overpowered. Opinions on both of those aspects would be appreciated.

There are four categories of cleric magic, called petitions. All require calling upon holy power, and thus are subject to mysterious divine whims. The four categories are commands, prayers, rituals, and abjurations. The first three types of cleric powers map to the three game timescales: combat rounds, dungeon exploration turns, and days (the turn unit for wilderness exploration). A petition requires the given amount of time to attempt, at the end of which a petition check is made (see below). Thus, commands are the only petitions that can be used during combat since they only require a round. No petitions need to be prepared beforehand, with the exception of abjurations.

The petition check uses 2d6 and works much like a reaction roll. Half level (round up) is added as a bonus. An unmodified 2 is always a failure and an unmodified 12 is always a success. An abjuration petition check of 2 ends the abjuration. Thus, if you roll a 2 for turn undead, your deity has deserted you. A vial of holy water may be used for a +1 bonus to the petition check (holy water is encumbering, may be used no more than once per check, and is consumed when used in this way). Petition checks for commands and abjurations are opposed (penalized) by enemy hit dice. Other petition checks have a difficulty numer (equivalent to the old spell level ranking) which is listed in the table of petitions below (in parentheses).

Petition Roll
2d6 Result
2 or less Abandoned (given petition no longer available this session, abjuration ends)
3, 4, 5 Spurned (further attempting this petition is at -1)
6, 7, 8 Ignored (failure, may try again with no penalties)
9, 10, 11 Answered (standard success)
12 or more Rewarded (double effect, demons or undead destroyed, etc)

Abjurations are defensive magics, and only one can be active at any given time. The player must decide which before the session starts. They function like rituals in that they require a day of preparation, but they then remain active during the entire following day. Petition checks are used when the abjuration is challenged rather than when the ritual is performed. So, for example, if a demon attempts to touch a cleric that has protection from evil active, then the player rolls a petition check (penalized by the demon’s HD) to see if the demon is able to overcome the holy protection. Abjurations also have their dangers: in some situations, they may function as beacons.

Cleric Petitions
Level Command Prayer Ritual Abjuration
1 turn undead
2 cure light wounds (1)
detect evil (1)
detect magic (1)
light (1)
purify food & water (1) protection from evil
3
4 hold person speak with animals (2)
find traps (2)
bless
5
6 sticks to snakes neutralize poison (4)
cure serious wounds (4)
speak with plants (4)
remove curse (3)
cure disease (3)
locate object (3)
protection from evil, 10’r (4)
create water (4)
continual light
7 dispel evil
quest
raise dead (5)
commune (5)
insect plague (5)
create food (5)

The metaconcept of spell level has been discarded (though you can still see some of the spell levels show up as difficulty numbers), and the various petitions have been bound to character level directly. The levels that various powers are gained at is the same as in the 3 LBBs. I’m pretty sure this is not the best arrangement; the various powers should probably be more evenly distributed around the levels (that’s probably a task for a future post). It is particularly odd that the level 3 and 4 spells both become available at cleric level 6 in the original rules. It may seem like cleric levels 3 and 5 are “dead,” but this is actually not the case as the “half level” (competency) bonus is incremented at both of those levels.

Some specific spell interpretations using this system. Cure spells may not be used more than once per character per encounter (and may cause aging). Continual light is a ward against shadows, functions as sunlight, penalizes or prevents hide in shadows (depending on situation) and moves with the person of the cleric. Purify food & water is not usable offensively against water weirds unless you can force them to sit still for a long time.

These changes may grant the cleric more power. The petition check system introduces the chance of failure in any given situation and also consumes diegetic time (potentially exposing the PCs to random encounters). Despite those balancing factors, it seems like the cleric should formally become the “medium armor” adventurer (as she probably always should have been) so that heavy armor can become the purview of the fighter.

Some petition check examples:

  1. A level 6 cleric prays for speak with plants. Spend 1 dungeon exploration turn in prayer, then roll 2d6 +3 -4, which simplifies to 2d6 -1, and consult the petition roll table. If the result is a failure (but not a 2 or less), the cleric can try again if another turn is spent.
  2. A 2 HD demon attempts to challenge the protection from evil abjuration of a fifth level cleric. Player rolls 2d6 +3 -2, which simplifies to 2d6 +1, and consults the petition roll table to see if the abjuration holds the demon at bay. Even if the demon overcomes the abjuration, as long as a 2 or less is not rolled, the abjuration endures and the demon will need to overcome it again for further attacks.

The system is designed to almost guarantee success (just like how I handle thief skills) as long as enough time is spent, assuming 2 or less is not rolled.

A tale of two books

Swords & Wizardry Complete

Swords & Wizardry Complete — gorgeous Erol Otus cover

ACKS core book

ACKS core book

That is, the ACKS core book and the recently reissued Swords & Wizardry Complete. For those that are not familiar with these systems, ACKS is a second generation clone that adds proficiencies and detailed economic domain rules to a base inspired by B/X D&D. Swords & Wizardry Complete is a first generation clone of OD&D and all the supplements with a few new ideas (like a single saving throw, support for ascending AC, and a challenge rating system). But I’m not going to talk about either of the game systems here. Instead, I’m going to consider at the physical books, both of which have notable strengths and weaknesses. I find the content in these books valuable, and would recommend both texts to anyone interested in old school D&D or its simulacra.

ACKS binding flaw -- click to enlarge

ACKS binding flaw — click to enlarge

The ACKS books is nicely laid out. However, the binding is terrible. It is glued (like a perfect binding), not sewn, despite having a hard cover. My copy has never seen play or a game table, and I have only occasionally leafed through it physically (I had access to the PDF well before the hardcopy arrived, and did most of my ACKS reading digitally). Despite this very light use, the back endpapers have somehow separated along the line of the spine, and the pages have begun to pull away from the spine.

Excellent sewn Swords & Wizardry binding

Excellent sewn Swords & Wizardry binding

The binding on the Sword & Wizardry Complete book (done by Frog God Games) is excellent. It is signature sewn and feels durable. All the Frog God books I have are similarly high quality (the recently kickstarted Rappan Athuk and the Tome of Adventure Design, for example). However, some of the internal images are horribly pixelated. I’m not sure what process was used for image transfer, but I can get better results with my iphone camera and home laser printer.

These criticisms are made in a spirit of love, not malice. I like both of these systems, wish them success, and may even play them directly some time. Even in the age of deluxe original reprints, and cheap PDFs of the Basic and Expert rules, there is still a place for the simulacra, especially when they introduce innovations (such as ACKS lairs and the Swords & Wizardry single saving throw), maintain communities dedicated to older styles of play, and offer free downloads (such as the “3 LBB” version Swords & Wizardry WhiteBox). However, some of the pleasures of this hobby are the physical artifacts, both in terms of art and book quality. Especially for their price, both of these books deserve better construction. Lamentations of the Flame Princess, in comparison, with a similar customer base, has managed to put out virtually flawless books (in terms of their physical qualities, at least).

Swords & Wizardry pixelation -- compare image to text

Swords & Wizardry pixelation — compare image to text

Swords & Wizardry pixelation -- compare image to text

Swords & Wizardry pixelation — compare image to text

Swords & Wizardry pixelation -- compare image to text

Swords & Wizardry pixelation — compare image to text

Swords & Wizardry Complete -- excellent stitched binding

Swords & Wizardry Complete — excellent stitched binding

ACKS -- perfect binding pretending to be a proper hardcover

ACKS — perfect binding pretending to be a proper hardcover