When do you roll?

There was a thread on the Redbrick LLC forums a few weeks back talking about “cooperative actions” and how they should be handled in Earthdawn — using an airship captain as one of the examples. Rather than have each individual sailor roll, the poster wanted to know how to apply the crew as a bonus to the captain’s roll. Earthdawn doesn’t really have any kind of default method of handling things like this — something the original poster felt was a shortcoming.

As I was exploring the idea and how I would handle it, I kept coming back to the question of why you need to come up with a general rule for a situation that varies depending on the circumstances. Personally, the way I would handle it would depend on what was going on at the time, and what the roll is trying to accomplish.

Which brings me to a more fundamental question. When do you roll?

If you’ve spent any time in the role-playing game community, you will probably have come across a couple of different schools of thought on this question. Personally, I think that rolling should generally be reserved for times when the outcome of a particular action is in doubt and the results have potential that affect or be affected by the player characters.

This second part, I think, is the most important. The player characters are the most important characters in the game, and the only part of the game world the gamemaster does not have control of. One of the main purposes of an RPG rules system is to define (and limit) the interactions of the shared play-space. The amount of influence the rules have can (and frequently does) vary from group to group, session to session, and even within the session — combat, for example, generally has a much larger rules influence than any other  part of the game.

When the outcome is not in doubt, there is no need for a roll. When the outcome has no effect on the PCs, or cannot be affected by the PCs, there is no need for a roll. These are pretty straightforward, and I don’t think anybody would argue with them. Combat typically has a large degree of uncertainty, and the outcome can have a significant — potentially fatal — effect on the player characters, so rolls make a lot of sense.

It’s the edge cases that are interesting, and where you are likely to find the most range of opinions (exactly where the edge falls is another point of debate). Let’s take a look at an example from an old Earthdawn adventure — Terror in the Skies. At one point during the adventure, the player characters are riding an airship to Talon Kaer, and there are strong winds and nasty weather to contend with.

When do you roll?

Do you make rolls for the large airship approach? The smaller airboat heading toward the cave entrance? Setting aside what the adventure itself presents, the decisions of when to roll say a lot about the individual play style of the person (and group) making the call.

I don’t have a solid answer — and that’s the whole point. But it is a question that any GM worth the title needs to keep in mind when planning their game — and during the game itself.

New section – Articles

If you take a look at the very top of the page, you’ll see a new “Articles” link. This will give you a drop-down menu where you can go to a page where I have written a more full-fledged article about something or other. Right now there is only one article, Step by Step — an article that looks at the underlying mechanics of Earthdawn’s Step System. The original article appeared on the old RedBrick forums, but since they moved, the article hasn’t been available online.

Check it out, and I will add more articles to the archive as I continue to work on the site.

The Campaign: First Session

Last night was my first night running a tabletop game in… three years? It has all faded into the B.C. mists — the time “Before Children”.

Wait, that’s not entirely accurate. I did try running a D&D (third edition) game at one point, and we didn’t get more than a session or two into it.

This was my first time running Earthdawn in about three years.

Boy was I rusty.

I think the session went well, all things considered. I kicked things off with a group of ork bandits attacking an inn which the PCs had to defend. Nobody died (well, none of the player characters… maybe I’m losing my touch), though it was a tough fight and the two melee heavy-hitters came away with a bunch of damage and a wound each.

I am reminded, however, how I do not like brand new characters in the Earthdawn system. The mechanics with low steps can get kind of frustrating if the dice happen to be going against you. This is made even tougher in the first session, when players do not have much karma to help offset the low average numbers. Armor is also pretty powerful at low circles, because armor defeating hits are rare, and the average damage can have a hard time getting through chain mail and shield — even the troll Swordmaster with his two-handed axe was having trouble doing significant damage.

Still, we had fun, and it is good to be behind the screen again.

Legend Points are not real!

One of my pet peeves when it comes to the Earthdawn system is the idea that Legend Points (Earthdawn’s equivalent of Experience Points) are real within the context of the game setting. This is, I believe, largely the result of so many other abstract concepts from other RPGs (like levels, classes, and so forth) given in-game reality (Circles, Disciplines, etc), as well as a system called “Legendary Status” that uses a character’s Legend Point total as a measure of how famous (or infamous) they are.

Here is an example from RPGnet:

And all of this ties (sorry for the pun) directly to how fame and XP are interconnected. A famous weapon (like Nioku’s Bow) is powerful because it’s famous. And it’s famous because Nioku was famous, and did legendary things with her bow. You tieing your personal pattern (via threads) to the pattern of a famous weapon make both of you more potent via the fact that both of you have fame. As you make legends with an item both you and it become more potent.

Don’t get me wrong, one of my favorite things about Earthdawn is how it gives in-game reasons for a lot of the common fantasy RPG tropes. But the idea that a character’s power is the result of his fame is putting the cart before the horse.

If you think about the idea of Legend Points as an in-game thing, it leads to some interesting (and problematic) places. If you can earn ‘experience’ by telling stories, does that mean an individual can become a great swordsman by telling stories about being a great swordsman?  If an adept kills a horror in the forest, and he doesn’t tell anybody, does he earn the Legend Points? Neither of these really make any sense.

Take a look at the Awarding Legend Points section of the Earthdawn Gamemaster’s Guide (it starts on page 97). There are several elements that result in Legend Awards for characters:

  • Completing goals (session and adventure)
  • Conflicts
  • Gathering Magical Treasure
  • Individual Deeds
  • Roleplaying

In other words, a character earns a Legend Award for doing stuff. Telling tales (aka ‘building your legend’) certainly qualifies as doing something, but it doesn’t have its own category (depending on your play style, it could be counted as either an individual deed or roleplaying).

Legend Points are a character advancement mechanic. They are a way to model a character’s experience, placing that in a mechanical framework. They are not “real” in the setting of Earthdawn. A character may talk about their ‘legend’ but there is no in-game quantification of this — unlike “Third Circle” or “Warrior Discipline” which do have an in-game reality.

If an adept kills a horror in the forest, he has an experience that teaches him something that allows him to advance in the practice of his Discipline. It doesn’t matter if he tells anybody or not he still has the experience and would, in game mechanical terms, earn Legend Points.

Legend has a thematic importance to Earthdawn because of the post-apocalyptic nature of the setting, highlighting the importance of discovering that which was lost, it is a real thing — the history and oral traditions of the setting. Legend Points are not a quantifiable thing to the people of Barsaive, and these two things should not be conflated.

Nioku’s bow is famous because it has a lot of magical power. It doesn’t have a lot of magical power because it is famous. The last line in the post I quoted is true — as you make legends with an item both you and the item become more potent but that power is because you are doing things and those things you have done lead to legends.

 

Campaign Design: Wonderful players

Preparation continues for my upcoming Earthdawn campaign. Tonight my players came over and we made characters. I’m a GM that likes to have some idea of what characters I am going to have, because then I can tailor particular aspects of the game to suit them. This leads me to a subject near and dear to my twisted gamemaster heart — a player who is willing to give me rope to (potentially) hoist him in the air, twisting in the wind. At my table, this player is Doug. Every game should have a Doug.

As I’ve mentioned in my past entries about this game, I am going to be setting it (at least initially) in the area around Landis, Cara Fahd, and the Twilight Peaks. Doug handed me a gift by making an ork Sky Raider.

I’ll take that intake of breath as a sign you know what that means. Still, for those of you not as familiar with how this character is a gift, Cara Fahd is the newly (re-)formed ork nation in the southwestern corner of Barsaive. Having an ork means that I have an interesting “in” for any kind of stories I may want to pursue relating to politics relating to the ork nation. The nearby Twilight Peaks are home to a large concentration of troll Sky Raiders — who have a tradition of capturing individuals on their raids and having them serve in their clanholds.

What is wonderful is that Doug — like all wonderful players — is willing to write me a blank check, and go along with my ideas. He likes his characters, but doesn’t feel overly protective of them. He likes to have interesting things happen, and he trusts that I am not going to deliberately screw him over to give that to him. Part of this trust is the result of having played games with him for more than a decade — he is actually one of my oldest gaming buddies, and has been a part of almost every tabletop game I have run since I’ve known him.

The game is really starting to take shape at this point. The group has four characters: T’skrang Archer, Obsidiman Wizard, Human Warrior, and Ork Sky Raider. Our first play session is in two weeks, my next objective is to put together the framework for the first adventure, and start thinking about the larger pieces of my game and how I can tie these PCs together.

Follow-up to SOPA/PIPA

As a follow-up to yesterday’s post about SOPA/PIPA, here is a great TED talk about the bills and the associated issues. Watch and be enlightened.

SOPA/PIPA

You’ve no doubt seen the news about a number of websites that are “going dark” today in protest against the SOPA and PIPA bills working their way through congress. Google has a good summary, as do a number of other places.

I don’t have anything new to add, except the change in background in support. These bills are poorly written and could cripple the internet. Make sure you let your Senators and Representative in Congress know that they should vote against these measures.

What I’m Reading: I Am Not A Serial Killer

What I’m Reading is going to be a semi-regular feature on the site. In it, I will write about a book I just finished, and see if there is anything applicable to tabletop gaming that I can pull out of it. There will likely be variants of this — What I’m Watching for TV and movies, or What I’m Playing for video games. These posts may contain spoilers, so be warned!

I Am Not A Serial Killer by Dan WellsI Am Not A Serial Killer is the first in a trilogy about John Wayne Cleaver, a teenage sociopath and how he deals with the arrival of an apparent serial killer in his sleepy middle-america town. Some people have compared it to a young-adult Dexter, and I’ll have to take their word for it (since I haven’t read any of the books or seen the TV series). John is aware of his predilections, and has a whole bunch of rules to keep him from sliding into dangerous behaviors. In order to defeat the evil in his town he has to break his rules and let loose his inner monster.

I enjoyed the book quite a bit, and found it a quick read. John is an engaging character and the story is told first-person from his perspective. The characterization is probably the book’s greatest strength, especially when we start getting into the tension of John trying to harness his sociopathic tendencies for good, without letting it hurt those closest to him.

If you’re looking for a straight serial-killer story, you may be disappointed by the supernatural element — the killer that has come to town is a “demon” (to use John’s term) that kills people and steals their body parts to heal itself. There is no distinctly religious aspect to the book, and no sense is given of a greater supernatural world hiding behind the “real world” like a lot of urban fantasy.

When it comes to gaming, the demon is perhaps most directly applicable — something like this creature could be taken more or less whole cloth for a World of Darkness (or other modern supernatural) game. You could also include it in many fantasy settings to one degree or another (it brings to mind the Horror Nebis from Earthdawn).

But a more interesting lesson can be taken from how John finds the creature’s weakness and manages to defeat it — personal and emotional ties.  There is a school of player thought in tabletop RPGs that tries to avoid any kind of connection that the gamemaster can use against them — epitomized by the “lone wolf” archetype represented by characters like Wolverine. These characters have no family, and their only “friends” are passing acquaintances. In extreme examples, these players even have their character avoid connections with other player characters.

While a ham-fisted GM can certainly abuse this, I think personal connections are important to a game — they give player characters (and their players) a connection to the world, and frequently a reason to do what they do. It can be a weakness, certainly, but can also be a source of strength — when something you value is threatened, there is a reason to push a little harder, dig a little deeper. Without that emotional connection, what is to stop the characters from walking away if things get tough?

So when making a character for a game, give some thought to their personal connections, not only with the other player characters, but NPCs in the setting as well. GMs, try and use recurring characters in supporting roles to build connections for your PCs, and don’t abuse the connections too much — otherwise you will breed a party of sociopathic lone wolves that have no connection to anyone beyond themselves.

 

Dungeons & Dragons…. Fifth?

So it was recently announced in a number of places that Wizards of the Coast will be working on a new edition of the Dungeons & Dragons game.

I don’t have a lot of investment in D&D at this point. I played it a lot when I was younger, and I had a long-running game during the Third Edition of the game. I bought the Fourth Edition core books and kind of read through parts of them. While it was an interesting approach in design, I never played that edition and so don’t really have an opinion of it (since it was out during my drought of tabletop gaming).

I am curious to see what is going to come out of the new edition and the crowdsourced playtesting and feedback that was mentioned in the press release. Will I pick up or play the new edition when it comes out? I don’t know… I’ll have to see what it looks like when it comes out.

Canonicity

Canon (n) – a list of writings, esp sacred writings, officially recognized as genuine.

The issue of canon is one that can come up when fans get together (whether in person or online) and talk about their shared passion. It takes an interesting twist when applied to role-playing games. The main reason for this is because a role-playing game is really just a framework on which the group hangs their own stories and adventures — a kind of fan-fiction, if you will. There is nothing wrong with this, because that it the point of a role-playing game.

When you interact with other fans of the game, and players from other groups, having a “canon” for the game can be critical because it forms the starting point for discussion about the game. That canon, generally speaking, is the material released by the publisher — rule books, setting books, adventures, etc. But things can get thorny when you get a game that has multiple editions, sometimes with different publishers — like Earthdawn, or Dungeons & Dragons (which has had some radical changes over the years).

In preparing for my new game, I need to decide on how much of the published material is going to apply. I have an advantage in my situation — I am the most familiar with the setting. My players’ knowledge of the setting is largely drawn from their prior experience with the game, they aren’t the sort who read every book and obsessively pore over the details. It will be a lot easier for me to stray from the official setting canon because they don’t have any expectations or knowledge that I will need to take into account.

The bulk of the information about Landis is in the Cara Fahd sourcebook. There is some information on its history (mostly in relation to Cara Fahd and the conflicts between those nations before the Scourge) and a little bit of current geographic information (including references to several kaers and citadels). Outside of geography, Landis is largely a blank slate — which suits my purposes well enough.

One final thought on canon as it pertains to an individual campaign. How do you incorporate developments from later releases into an existing game? It is hard to know how easy it will be to handle this sort of thing. Here is an example from my own past experience to illustrate.

In one of the earliest Earthdawn games I ran (back in the earliest days of the game), the player characters were based out of a town I created called Riverfork. I plopped Riverfork down at the intersection of the Serpent and Caucavic rivers, and developed it as a major trading hub for the area. At the time I was running the game, this area was undeveloped in official supplements.

Then the Serpent River sourcebook was released, and a conflict appeared. According to the new sourcebook, the Cliff City of House Syrtis was a stone’s throw downriver from where I had placed Riverfork, set in the walls of the Lalai Gorge — a rather significant geographic feature that I had never mentioned in my game (since I wasn’t aware of its existence). I suddenly found the center of a major t’skrang trading house less than a day’s travel from my significant trading port — without having established any kind of significant t’skrang present there. This had the potential to cause a lot of problems.

So I ignored it. I brought some of the information from Serpent River over into that game, but it was more important that I maintain my game’s internal consistency than suddenly overthrow what I had previously established.

This taught me an important lesson when it comes to canon in a role-playing game. Each campaign develops its own canon. Once the dice come out, concerns about “official” become secondary. Recognize that there will inevitably be differences between the published material and your own game, and try not to stress about it.

That said, since my game is going to involve Landis to a fairly heavy degree, I am very curious what the upcoming Lost Dynasty supplement from RedBrick has to say about the area.