Retrospective on 2e style & Blogger
I’ve been doing research lately, and happened to stumble
over one of my old comments that I had made. I didn’t always play the way that
I do today, I am a 2er, and that reflected in my style. The meta-plot and me
were close companions, and I would get frustrated writing because everything
was so specific, but that was the way that it was supposed to be. Players
wanted a story!
2nd Edition had a specific style, players were
some times expected to do the bidding of NPCs, and then at the end, the NPC
would complete the task and you’d just get to watch as these world changing
events unfolded. That was actually the formula for the perfect game! We enjoyed
doing that. We also enjoyed playing games were we really didn’t have any
influence on the plot what so ever. We’d go to famous places and experience
stuff. Granted, some of these games were actually quite good, even by today’s
standards, it can be fun trying to stay alive while a couple of gods are locked
in combat! But, I wasn’t ever really happy with them. It can be over done, and
a party that consisted of excellent players will often find themselves escaping
the module, which I couldn’t handle because it would ruin the rest of the plot,
so I had to railroad them back on track, or even stop the game and explain to
them that they are doing it wrong.
2e storytelling was very ridged, and domineering, and I
wasn’t always happy with the results that I got. I’d put too much importance to
a specific PC and ignore the others, and god forbid that they didn’t show up
for game day because then I’d have to play their character for them, else we’d
have nothing to do that day.
In those days, I protected my NPCs to the point that they
were gods. I ignored all of the signs that players weren’t happy and would just
tell them to stay with me, because the ending is awesome. This is what we did.
I spoke to other DMs at the time and they played the same way. Protect your
characters, the DM is the storyteller, the players are just along for the ride,
and a successful DM is one who can tell amazing stories. Character involvement
meant that you followed the script. We ignored dice, ran multiple DM PCs, and
generally played very badly and had no idea.
I formed this blog to defend my ideals during the edition
wars. I was right in the middle of the storm too! You had the 4ers vs.
old-school and the one thing that they both agreed on was that 2e sucked. I had
no idea how others played the game, and reading some of the blogs at the time
was eye opening! Thankfully guys like James Maliszewski from Grognardia, and James
Edward Raggi IV of Lamentations of the Flame Princess, among others, though none
so influential than those two. Both took time out of their day to explain a new
way of playing, with advice and the reasons behind it. At first I was arguing
with them, but it is hard to argue with a sound idea, so instead of fighting, I
started asking questions and they were answering. Everything that they did was
different then what I did, but it sounded so interesting, so I began play-testing
it. My players at first kind of rejected the idea off hand, they were used to
having a sense of clear direction in my games, and I was taking that net away
and allowing them to fail. At the end of the night we sat around and talked
about what we had done, and we were very happy with the results. I could put
together an original campaign much faster and easier with this method, I didn’t
have to sit at my computer for months on end writing the thing, and instead
just let it flow naturally and see where it goes.
I contacted Maliszewki and told him what had happened, that
the players were really excited, more excited than they had ever been! He
recommended a list of old-school modules that I should play, which I hid into
my current campaign. They were written in a way that amazed me, these weren’t
the bossy NPC dependant stories which I was used to, I could drop them in any
thing! However this briefness and lack of detail kind of spooked me, there
wasn’t any direction and I’d whine to James and he’d say how that was why they
were so good. Add my own details, but don’t write anything down. The result
was, literally, a game changer. The old modules taught me teaching points which
were never provided in modules again.
Eventually I decided to try it. A full sandbox! I used the
module “Isle of Dread” which would provide a great backdrop to what we were
doing at the time, which wasn’t even true fantasy D&D but a heavily
modified setting set in 1890’s earth, and that module still worked! Now I
stumbled and fell on my face during it, but Raggi saw where I was going wrong
and made it his mission to help me fix it and get back on track.
That turned out to be the greatest, and most rewarding
campaign that I had ever ran. My style is even stronger now, my players are
excited to play again, and I am a total convert, all because I spoke up and
said something, and because I listened. Today I am more apt to try new things,
and go into different directions. I’m not a tyrant at the table . . . well, not
as much of one anyway. It is funny to see an old comment that I made years ago,
and smile at it because I had no idea when I made it, how different I would
become because of it.
I am also a more entertaining DM now, I received the tools
and the advice that I needed to really push the game into the direction in
which it was intended, I can’t stress enough how important that that little
comment window is to this game. It allows us to see past ourselves and what we
are doing, through it we can strengthen our own games and look at others. It
also allows us to help others, not just those that comment, but those who will
read those comments in the years to come. Maliszewki & Raggi never once got
hostile with me, they never said, “You’re doing it wrong”. They just told me
what they do, and what works for them, and why they do it that way. They
reinforced a method of play which allowed me to better express myself, to look
at what I was doing and keep the story telling elements but keep them in check.
They were the loudest voices of their time, and I miss what they had to offer.
You don’t see that much in the loud talking heads of today. Today it is about
shocking the reader, and berating ideas. They offer very little of anything
else, which is sad.
As far as I’m concerned, the Edition Wars are over, and we all
won, and the people who complained so loudly about 2e sucking weren’t really
complaining about the rules, but how TSR taught us how to use them, which did
suck.
Sunday, January 31, 2016 | Labels: rants | 8 Comments
Writing Lore: Who really owns that sword?
I have been really pushing the mechanical aspects of the
game, so for today I’d like to address something that is more lore related.
Creating lore is probably the most rewarding aspect of Dungeon Mastering, with
the growing dependency upon modules, this aspect is being forgotten. In worlds
such as Forgotten Realms, people are so obsessed with canon lore that they
spend more time looking for somebody else’s work than just sitting down for a
moment and writing it on their own. The more WE know about the world, and how
it works the better, and players appreciate a unique spin (or even a stolen
one) on an old idea. The problem is that people are at a loss when they are
staring into the abyss of a blank page, how does a DM create something from
seemingly nothing? That answer is simple, we ask ourselves questions.
So the fighter has a magic sword. Typically this is as far
as the idea goes, unless the DM adds stuff to it, which he should! A Sword+3 is
kind of like calling the gal who works at the tavern “Serving Wench #4”, but I
am going to assume that you know all of this already. We can add an adventure
seed by asking one simple question, who owns this? Chances are, especially with
a powerful item, it ISN’T the PC.
I suppose this question leads us to define the weapon even
further, who constructed it? In my worlds, once in a while a very skilled
craftsman can create a +1 weapon; a king can gather the finest materials in the
land and have a weapon constructed that is capable of great things! There are
always exceptions to the rules, but for the most part, magical weapons are
relics of a lost civilization, or the fantastic creations of the great fantasy
races, the dwarves and elves. In this case, as they are longer living races,
perhaps they see ownership and lending differently than humans do?
Is it a far reach for a fighter to defeat a powerful enemy
and claim his sword as his own? We all know that the enemy was one dubious
fellow who deserved what he got, but where did he get the sword+4 from? Maybe
it was looted and stolen from the crypt of a great hero of men, and the sword
had been gifted to this hero by the elves, who allowed the sword to be buried
with him. Now, how do you think that they will react when they see the PC
carrying it around?
In the land of Dwarves, they have long memories and have
lost much of their culture, are they going to look kindly upon a man finding a
relic that had been lost and who refuses to return it to them?
Now I am guessing that this is going to create some drama at
the table, because PCs aren’t willing to drop torches and store bought junk
never the less a cool magic sword that they righteously feel that they had
earned. How they keep it is up to them and you, perhaps the dwarves will allow
it to stay with the character if they perform a brave act which furthers their
cause?
Elves are a secretive race, the player characters will no
doubt be arrested while a long drawn out discussion may eventually turn into a
trial, assuming that they are cooperative, which probably won’t happen. Maybe the
players will escape with the sword, maybe they won’t? Being forced into a
situation that they don’t want to be is fun! Do they engage in combat with the
elves, further convincing them that the party is evil, or do they find some
other means of resolving the situation nonviolently?
Do you hear the voices? Perhaps the sword itself can
communicate to the loremaster what had happened, that the PC had saved it from
committing vile deeds? The weapon need not be intelligent as defined in the
DMG, but it can still have a voice that speaks to those who know how to listen.
Maybe there is even a hidden power in it? The sky is the limit! And stories
like this make an item more than just a string of numbers on the Character
sheet.
Perhaps the lore master charges the player to return the
sword to its dead owner who is terrorizing the countryside in the form of an
undead creature? Perhaps the loremaster is full of beans, and though he says
that it should be returned, using the sword to slay the previous owner is
enough to quiet the creature as it sees that the blade has betrayed it . . .
then again, maybe it will refuse to betray it.
All of this from one question, who REALLY owns the item? Once
you start with a seed, and ponder its implications the lore will flow from you,
and I guarantee you that your stories will be better than anything that Wizards
of the Coasts will ever publish.
Monday, January 25, 2016 | Labels: campaign ideas, encounters, races, Treasure | 6 Comments
INVASION OF THE SUPER ELF
Munchkin power-gamers always go right to the elf, and
considering that in most of our DM worlds, the Elf is getting pushed out by
men, in a death heavy campaign you’d think that eventually you’ll have all of
the elves accounted for in the world. In my opinion, those that choose to
power-game with the elf are never role-playing them, and just chose them for
the crazy amount of bonuses that they get.
Elves were in the original CHAINMAIL rules, and have stayed
with us through every edition of the game. In the early rules there was a nice
restriction placed upon them which defined them not as a race, but as a class.
Say what you will, as a mechanic this works! At the start of a gaming session, a
PC elf could choose to be either a fighting man or a magic-user, this was
changed in later updates: More powers were granted to the race, and the
disadvantages were minimized. In the 2e rules, the only mechanical
disadvantages are class restrictions (which honestly don’t effect them much),
and level restrictions (which also aren’t very restrictive, as not many
campaigns even get to high levels of play). In later editions, even these small
restrictions were lifted, completely removing any incentive to play humans who
are supposed to be the dominant race.
What do humans get in 2e? Humans can advance 5-8 levels
higher than elves, and humans can be “Duel Classed” instead of the multi-classed
options given to demi-humans. Duel Classing is a very strange rule, and one
that most tables choose to ignore because it is confusing. A human cleric can
choose to become another class, but he can not use any cleric abilities until
his new class is higher than his previous, and he can never go back and improve
his cleric abilities. There is a strategy to creating a Mage/Fighter, but WOW
does that take a long time! I would be interested to hear from folks who have
actually done it. I tried once but found the whole process to be frustrating;
but I’ll probably touch on this in later posts.
The goal of this article is to “Fix” the elf, and balance it
out. The danger with this is obvious, it will affect the NPC elves and the
Monstrous Manual: We don’t want to over-correct, but as things sit, the elf is
just too imbalanced for me.
MORE DM CONTROL
Sub-races of elf are within the domain of DM control. We are
the ones that place them, thus the easiest method of controlling the over-balance
is to keep them where they belong, and don’t let them stray away. If your
adventure is started 8,000 miles away from the nearest elf village, PC elves
are not possible.
The problem with this is that players might get mad, and the
other demi-human races would suffer as well, however the other demi-humans do
enjoy more trade with the humans than elves do.
Another possibility is to have those that really want to
play elves create a very good back-story and be subject to very critical Role-playing
judgments. This would require a Dungeon Master being very precise as to how the
Elf sees his world and what his function is within it. It would also be desired
to have better control over the elf’s alignment.
DISTRIBUTION OF
POWERS
Player may pick a few special abilities from the list of
bonuses given to elves. This of course would alter the NPC elves if you let it.
Probably the preferred method would be to equally distribute the abilities
between the sub-races of elves. Drow would get infravision, wood elf a bonus to
bow, high elf an automatic chance of finding hidden doors . . . etc.
ALTER THE XP SYSTEM
We can create an alternative XP system for elves which
dramatically slows them down. I’d say that it would be fair to double or triple
the XP needed to gain a level. This would be harsh if an elf is multi-classed,
so perhaps the best fix would be to force all elves to multi-class and just run
it that way.
LOWER THE LEVEL
RESTRICTIONS
This is another possibility. I know that many DMs have
allowed high ability scores to affect the level that an elf can max out at, if
we lower the level limit to 9 and allow a system of ability to raise the number
fairly, this would keep the elf in check.
NON-WEAPON PROFICIENCY PENALTIES
Demi-humans must pay for bonus abilities by taking specific
non-weapon proficiencies, such as cooking, singing, instruments, etc. Alternatively,
the DM can create a list of NWP that are only available to elf races; strip all
powers away and add them as NWP so that a player must spend his slots on them.
Or, we can go the other way, Humans get bonus proficiency
slots or alternatively, their available proficiency slots can equal 3, non-elf
demi-humans count as 2, and elves only count as 1; this wouldn’t give more
bonus proficiency slots, they just count as more when checking them during
play.
These things won’t make munchkins happy, but they might even
the playing field a bit. The core rules didn’t specify too much in regards to
their place in the world, which leaves this job up to the DM, to develop them in
a more advanced way that reflects their cultural differences. One thing that is
evident, or implied, is that the elves of today are mere shadows of what the
race used to be. It was probably them that had built much of the advanced
technology, which is evident in the ruins, but was lost from unknown tragedy.
Elves aren’t just humans who don’t need sleep and can see in the dark; they
demand to be role-played differently, with more power comes more difficulty in
playing that individual, and it isn’t cool for munchkins to refuse to role-play
them. If players are capable of running them as they were intended to be ran,
and the DM treats them as elves instead of just another adventurer, then there
probably isn’t any problem with the system as written, but alas, if only we
lived in a perfect world.
Some things don’t make all that much sense when we look at
it, though much of that could have something to do with the old Appendix: N, but
this would imply that we are playing like Gygax, which we might not be. Perhaps
we want to play elves as more Tolkien flavored, or play a breed that is more
fairy in nature? While the rules over elves are considered as CORE, there is
nothing stopping us from modifying them and asking exactly why a mechanic is
there.
I’m not going to go through the entire list, just some of
the things that glare at me.
INFRAVISION
While I can see a Drow needing this ability, as well as
dwarves, and other demi-humans that prefer living underground, the normal elf
lives above ground and doesn’t care too much for the confinement of the
underdark, so why would he be able to see in the dark? Elves get a bonus
against being surprised, and an auto-bonus to find hidden and secret doors; I think
that it is safe to say that we can remove this power from his innate abilities.
MAGIC RESISTANCE TO
CHARM AND SLEEP SPELLS
This is a hold-over from Chainmail rules that people have
just kept putting in there over and over. It isn’t even a true MR so we can get
rid of that too.
+1 While Using A Bow
Why is this even here? The elf should have to buy specialization
like everybody else, no free-bees, this one can go too, or at least give all
elves the ability to spend weapon proficiency slots on specializing if they
wish, but only for the bow.
OVERVIEW
If we remove these abilities (or even just a couple of them),
then the elf becomes more balanced with the rest of the races, but one can also
look at the other races and make them more or less appealing as your campaign
world dictates. Perhaps the problem isn’t that the elf is over-powered at all,
but the rest of the races are under-powered?
Further Reading:
Tuesday, January 19, 2016 | Labels: Mechanic Series, pc classes, Proficiencies, races | 11 Comments
Mechanic Series: Critical Hits
In the AD&D THAC0 system, a natural 20 is always a hit.
What this means is that even if you have a THAC0 of 20, you can still hit a
negative AC, such as AC -1. It’s a 5% chance to hit, but it’s still a chance. Many
players wanted more, some theories consider a natural 20 to be a true hit,
which instantly breaks the system. We don’t really know what hit points are,
sometimes a hit really is a hit, and sometimes it isn’t. Since one can go
insane trying to pin down what hp are, it is just easier to consider them to be
a mechanic of the game kept to the background, and leave it at that; even
though, sometimes it isn’t.
Critical Hits is a supplemental rule: however, players and DMs were
going to use it anyway, even if the rule isn’t in there. Critical Hits is
actually a mechanic first introduced as core to D&D’s very first competitor
back in 1975 in a game called Empire of the Petal Throne; now, it wasn’t
called “Critical Hit” that term came about later, but it is credited with
creating the mechanic which simulated a “Lucky Hit”. Prior to Empire including
it, I have no doubt that DMs introduced it into their own loose OD&D games,
and it has stood the test of time, but my question is: Is it Fair?
At this point it is also worth mentioning that all d20s are
not created equal. You know this, and I know this; but it isn’t something that can be
proved. Players will sit there and roll a d20 and find one that doesn’t
generate random numbers because of a small imperfection in the die, weirdly
enough, this imperfection typically causes a die to roll a 20 more often
than 5% out of 100 rolls. It probably has something to do with how the die is
manufactured, and its shape; but since the number 20 is the most affected, this tells
us that the manufacturer is aware of the problem, and has known about it for a
very long time and has been unable to fix it. What is funny about it is that it
does balance itself out at the table because all of the other times that you
roll a d20, with the exception of the attack roll, you want low numbers. A
natural 20 usually signifies an automatic failure, but people still insist on using
that d20 that rolls lots of 20s anyhow.
We do have dice that do roll random numbers, but players
typically refuse to use these as they are deemed “unlucky”, but whatever; my
favorite dice are just as bad as theirs are, so it is all good. But, back to
Critical Hits: For years the most preferred method of handling the situation, and the
one that is considered core to the optional system, is double damage.
I have two issues with this, first being that there are
instances where a weapon automatically gives you double damage anyway. That
should be a function of that particular weapon. Other weapons make it a point
that if one does roll a 20, than it always does double damage, which implies
that this is unique to that weapon, and we should strive to keep it that way.
The second issue that I have with double damage involves
math. Lets take a look at what happens when we roll an 8 for damage, and this
gets doubled to 16. That one roll takes out more than 1HD from a fighter, 2HD from
a Cleric, over 2HD from a Rogue, and 4HD from a Mage. These numbers just imply
what happens to characters who were able to roll their Max hp each time, so the
real numbers during play are even worse. That, to me, is unbalanced.
Actually, the double damage thing technically isn’t 2e core,
but that is how people play it. The true method of handling double damage is to
roll 2 damage dice, such as 2d8 which gives you a much fairer number, yes the
max damage would still be 16, however that would be a very lucky hit indeed!
Method #2
A natural 20 signifies a bonus attack. It gives your
characters (and monsters) a chance of causing extra damage without guaranteeing success.
That does present its own problems, slower and more powerful weapons may not be
logically compatible with this method such as a musket or a crossbow which
takes time to load. While it is still more balanced than instant doubling of
the damage die, it isn’t something that really appeals to me, nor is it a
universal fix: If one is charging with a lance, a twenty already signifies
double damage, and the character charges through the opponents front line; a
second attack would mean that he’d be able to turn the horse around and . . .
well, you see where I’m going with this. Some weapons only get one attack, and
they should only get one attack.
There are some alternatives worth talking about, that aren’t
core, but are certainly more balanced and developed.
Method #3
Max Damage
Nothing game breaking about that! Lots of players will go
for it as well, as even with the broken double damage rule there is a chance of
dealing 2 points of damage, which takes the wind out of your critical hit sails
real fast.
Method #4
Roll 2 damage dice, keep the highest
Again, no over-powered death-dealing here, just a simple
mechanic that is fast and universal, it doesn’t promise mass damage, but there
is a better chance of achieving a more valuable number than normal.
Method #5
Implementing a Critical Hit Chart
These things break the game, and are totally unfair to the
players. With a 5% chance of a crit on fair dice, those things might be fun for
screwing around but they make long term campaigning impossible.
The typical Hit Chart does damage to a character's stats,
and since we don’t fully stat our monsters, this effects only PCs, not even to
mention that this mechanic only serves to slow down combat. If you are that
bored with your game that you think that you need to implement this kind of
stuff to “make things interesting” it is probably time for you to sit down and
really evaluate how you play.
Of course, there are times when one does want to implement this
kind of system, such as when two fighters meet in one-on-one combat and they
really hate each other; a second element of true danger during a very epic
level confrontation could be desired by both combatants so that they can just
destroy each other. For cases like this, I would suggest temporarily incorporating
the system in the Player’s Option: Combat & Tactics handbook which
has an exhaustive, and very thorough table system that isn’t fit for every day
play, but very appropriate for special cases. It is also worth noting that the
Combat & Tactics rulebook has incorporated it’s own definition of critical
hits, because when we are dealing with duels like that, we do want to know what
each blow is doing; but like I said: It is a system all to itself and should
only be used for specific situations; such as the final fight where if the PC
wins the duel, he’ll probably retire the character at its conclusion anyway.
Overview
I’m sure that there are lots of other methods out there; if
you do something different, put it in the comments! We’ll take a look at it. I
know in the past I have banned this mechanic from my game, but I am going to implement
it again as I’m tired of looking into those sad eyes filled with longing when a
20 is rolled. When we don’t use it, players kind of feel that they are missing
an opportunity, which is understandable.
FURTHER READING:
Awesome Dice Blog: d20 Dice Randomness Test; Chessex vs. Gamescience
So it isn't just me . . .
I also wanted to add these as hotlinks from the comments below:
Castles & Chimeras: Six "20" between 19 and 21 an old-school take on d20 to hit mechanics
Fabio Milito Pagliara has his fix to simulate matrix-style mechanics while using a THAC0 system.
Castles & Chimeras: OSR Critical Hit Based on Armor
Fabio also has a nice article on how armor type can effect the critical hit system.
FURTHER READING:
Awesome Dice Blog: d20 Dice Randomness Test; Chessex vs. Gamescience
So it isn't just me . . .
I also wanted to add these as hotlinks from the comments below:
Castles & Chimeras: Six "20" between 19 and 21 an old-school take on d20 to hit mechanics
Fabio Milito Pagliara has his fix to simulate matrix-style mechanics while using a THAC0 system.
Castles & Chimeras: OSR Critical Hit Based on Armor
Fabio also has a nice article on how armor type can effect the critical hit system.
Thursday, January 14, 2016 | Labels: combat, Mechanic Series | 16 Comments
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
- campaign ideas
- NPC's
- combat
- Miscellany
- encounters
- rants
- Ripper's Gaming Sessions
- monsters
- money and equipment
- Reviews
- pc classes
- magic
- Proficiencies
- Treasure
- Time and Movement
- Sunday Supplemental
- experience
- campaign add-ins
- Alignment
- races
- Mechanic Series
- vision and light
- Ability Scores
- wizard spells
- Supplemental
- priest spells
My Blog List
-
-
Ho provato Pasión de las Pasiones! - Salve, Ieri sera ci siamo trovati a giocare Pasión de las Pasiones. Si tratta di un gioco di ruolo che ha lo scopo di riprodurre un copione delle teleno...1 week ago
-
Play as Sculpture, Play as Prism - Watching my eldest child and friends engaging in imaginative play, I'm often struck by the fact that what seems to excite them is deciding who gets to be...1 week ago
-
The Light Dawns - THIS!!! Yes, a thousand times, this! Back in the day, I referred to this as “neo-classicalgaming,” which is to say, the sorts of games that came ou...3 weeks ago
-
Daggerheart vs. the MCDM RPG vs. D&D: A Playtest Comparison - If games to suit every play style and new games bringing fresh ideas makes a golden age, then the best time for gamers is now. In the past weeks, I’ve play...3 weeks ago
-
MASSIVE GEEKOUT With David Finn Of Signal Of Doom – Episode 275 – 3/29/2024 - Shane Plays Geek Talk Episode #275 – 3/29/2024 A wide-ranging geekout with David Finn of the Signal of Doom podcast. Lots of comic book and MCU chat (lik...3 weeks ago
-
Protect your Gamemasters (and don't call it "fudging") - *November last year I went to check out X. I had heard lots of promissing things about the changes there, and the possibilities that come with them. Gott...1 month ago
-
Attronarch's Athenaeum - Over at the forum El Borak mentioned Attronarch in his thread Hirelings, loyalty, and morale which you should take a look at. Attronarch has a website Att...1 month ago
-
Xandering, Jaquaysing, or Arneson-ing the Dungeon? - Yet another gamer firestorm arose shortly after the passing of Janelle Jaquays when it was noted that Justin Alexander had changed a rather well known p...2 months ago
-
Last move - to self-hosting! - As my vote regarding Substack in the “marketplace of ideas”, I’m moving to self-hosting. I’m now at (and hopefully staying for a long time at) Blog: ht...3 months ago
-
Sex-Crazed Falling Stars, Free Weather Magic, and Adventures: News of the Hill Cantons - *Grandma Gaya, the Rav-Witch of High Kezmarok*, seeks the stout of limb and humble of mind in the *obtaining of fallen stars* from an upcoming prophesied ...3 months ago
-
Thanks for your comments, friends! - Dear friends and followers of the blog, Thanks for all your comments over the years. When Google+ opened, I decided to jump on board. Everything got coupl...8 months ago
-
GUARDIANS OSR Superhero RPG- DC Heroics House Rules - It's been a rough year with sickness. But here I am. Let's go. Guardians is a fun little game from Night Owl Workshop games. They have a lot of fun OS...10 months ago
-
Coming Fast! 50th Anniversary of OD&D January 2024 (OGL comments) (& how Wizbro is stupid) - The 50th Anniversary, the 50th Birthday of OD&D is approaching and will be here in January 2024. Wizards of the Coast, instead of preparing for something s...1 year ago
-
Original Dungeons & Dragons Has Its 50th Anniversary In January 2024 (Feb 2023) - The countdown to the 50th Anniversary of the Original Dungeons and Dragons in January 2024 continues. Give the drama with Wizards during January 2023, it...1 year ago
-
I'm In!! The monthly posting challenge leadup to the 50th Anniversary of OD&D in 2024 - I am inspired by this post found here, to be part of the monthly posting during 2023 and 2024 to highlight the 50th Anniversary of OD&D. We were challeng...1 year ago
-
It's been a decade, now... - This is a tough time of year for me. So, with your indulgence, here's this link to a post I did a decade ago... EDIT: I have no idea why it didn't take. S...2 years ago
-
This Blog is now on Indefinite Hiatus - Greetings, I haven’t been able to post except sporadically for a while. I just found out I will need to find a new place to live within the next few months...2 years ago
-
Ind of the Year - The Colors of Magic - On December 1st, there will be a nice bundle of small, indie itch RPGs from around the world called the *Ind of the Year Bundle 2020* that includes *The Co...3 years ago
-
Be The DM, 1 - OK, I've run plenty of games and I've talked with and read the thoughts of many other DM's. One thing is certain; No two DM's are the same. I have seen ...3 years ago
-
The Crowning of King Harold - Here is a spooky story that comes from my latest novel, Lions Red and Gold, available now in digital and dead tree only on Amazon. I post it here in ho...3 years ago
-
MIDLANDS CHARACTER GENERATION - Character development (of Player via imagined formative experiences) in my dog in DMing. Placyer character development is a huge part of my sandbox. I use ...3 years ago
-
Lake Geneva Original RPG Campaign: Merlynd the Magician: A Remembrance of Don Kaye, ... - Lake Geneva Original RPG Campaign: Merlynd the Magician: A Remembrance of Don Kaye, ...: LINK to Description and Ordering: https://www.tlbgames.com/colle...4 years ago
-
Character Concepts: Planescape pt 3 - Part 1 Part 2 Continuing my series on oddball Planescape Faction Personalities... Harmonium Sidby the Stick (LG/halfling/fighter) - Sidby's a good enough b...4 years ago
-
D&D Sling Damage vs. Large Targets - In many early editions of D&D, weapons were assigned two damage values: one for small/medium targets (i.e. man-sized) and one for large targets (giants and...4 years ago
-
Announcing the Contest Winner! (Plus Some Interesting US Coin Facts) - The third semi-annual Save Versus All Wands contest - What is the Value of this Coin Hoard - is over. $1,000 was the winning guess, only a bit below the ...5 years ago
Statcounter
Contact me at Ripx187@gmail.com
Search This Blog
Blog Archive
-
►
2018
(5)
- ► October 2018 (1)
- ► September 2018 (1)
- ► April 2018 (1)
- ► February 2018 (1)
- ► January 2018 (1)
-
►
2017
(39)
- ► November 2017 (1)
- ► September 2017 (3)
- ► August 2017 (2)
- ► April 2017 (6)
- ► March 2017 (5)
- ► February 2017 (5)
- ► January 2017 (4)
-
▼
2016
(58)
- ► December 2016 (4)
- ► November 2016 (6)
- ► October 2016 (5)
- ► September 2016 (4)
- ► August 2016 (4)
- ► April 2016 (4)
- ► March 2016 (4)
- ► February 2016 (4)
-
►
2015
(24)
- ► December 2015 (6)
- ► November 2015 (7)
- ► October 2015 (7)
- ► September 2015 (4)
-
►
2010
(14)
- ► March 2010 (5)
- ► February 2010 (5)
- ► January 2010 (4)
-
►
2009
(123)
- ► December 2009 (3)
- ► November 2009 (4)
- ► October 2009 (6)
- ► September 2009 (4)
- ► August 2009 (13)
- ► April 2009 (15)
- ► March 2009 (14)
- ► February 2009 (5)
- ► January 2009 (10)
-
►
2008
(73)
- ► December 2008 (3)
- ► November 2008 (4)
- ► October 2008 (5)
- ► September 2008 (4)
- ► August 2008 (4)
- ► April 2008 (18)
- ► March 2008 (5)