RPG Design: Initiative

Last month, I discussed the importance of encounters in tabletop role-playing games.  This week, I wanted to focus on an important part of designing a rules set for encounters, Initiative:

As the term is used in role-playing games, "Initiative" simply means that an encounter has devolved into combat and signals Initiative when during combat each participant may act.  In many RPGs, beating your opponent at Initiative (i.e., attacking before your opponent) is, unsurprisingly, highly significant.  Consequently, rules for Initiative are a popular topic for discussion and analysis.

Most  Old School games use them to structure combat as turn-based play.  For example, in B/X Dungeons & Dragons (1981) uses 1d6 by side each combat round.  More specifically, each ‘side’ in the encounter rolls a single six sided die. Whoever wins the roll is allowed to take their actions first, along with everyone else on their side. Once the winner’s turn is over, the other side takes their turn.  If the combat continues for another round, rinse and repeat.

Original Dungeons & Dragons (1974) DOESN'T ACTUALLY PROVIDE rules for Initiative!  However, it's implied that one is supposed to follow the rules in Chainmail (1971), which also uses 1d6 by side each combat round.

Of course, 1st edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons uses ridiculously incomprehensible and overly complex rules for initiative (set forth in the Dungeon Masters Guide on page 61), with way too many special case rules.  In practice, most tables get around these difficulties with house rules (including the late author, Gary Gygax).

However, there are many ways that Initiative can be handled, such as Savage Worlds' (2003) non-standard resolution, using a deck of cards instead of dice.  Players and NPCs all draw a card from a standard 52 card deck. Initiative is then decided from high value to low, with ties being resolved by reverse alphabetical order of the card suit, such that spades beat clubs, etc.

This is a big problem if one doesn't have a deck of cards.

Perhaps the most interesting Initiative system I've seen in a Traditional role-playing game is the one used in the One Roll Engine, which splits the declaration and resolution of actions.  Declaration goes in reverse order of Sense ability score (i.e., the highest Sense score gets to listen to what everyone else is doing before making their declaration).  Then speed of resolution is determined by the "width" of a roll (i.e., the number of successes).

w00t!

However, Initiative gets weird when a game gets rid of the turn-based assumption, as is the case in some New School games such as Dungeon World (2012).   Dungeon World DOESN'T ACTUALLY PROVIDE rules for Initiative... but, unlike Original Dungeons & Dragons, this is on purpose...

In the *World games, players just take actions WHENEVER THEY FEEL LIKE IT!  These means that players can take multiple actions in a row, if they want.  Furthermore, because there's no initiative system, nobody is guaranteed a chance to act.  Consequently, if there are shy players in a group, they'll get pushed out of the picture by the more aggressive/outgoing players. 

This changes the role of GM from referee to that of babysitter.

Anyway, for my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, I adopted a variant of B/X's approach.  Quick, simple, and with enough variance to keep things interesting.

What's not to love?

Movie Review: Gladiator (2000)

This week, I wanted to take a look at the film that's kicked off the latest round of Historical Epic and Sword & Sandal romps, "Gladiator":

First of all, I want to state up front that calling this movie "historical" has to be taken with a gigantic asteroid of salt!  Anyway, "Gladiator" follows the rise and fall... and rise of the fictional Maximus Decimus Meridius as he transitions from general to slave to the titular gladiator.

The film begins with the final battle of the Marcomannic Wars, which ends with a decisive Roman victory by Maximus while Emperor Marcus Aurelius watches.  Afterward, Marcus Aurelius declares to his son, Commodus, that the latter will not be Emperor (NB- this didn't happen in real life) because the former wants to dissolve the Empire and to restore the Roman Republic (NB- this didn't happen in real life).  However, rather than enjoying his much longed for peace, the Emperor instead enjoys being smothered to death by Commodus (NB- this didn't happen in real life).

Maximus is not down with this regime change and attempts a coup d'etat.  However, wily Commodus  remains one step ahead and Maximus ends up a slave after his family is murdered.  The former general is sold and trained as a gladiator and proves to be unstoppable!

Meanwhile, Commodus decides to host a massive and hugely expensive series of gladiatorial fights to distract the populace from the failings of his rule.  As the A #1 hotshot, Maximus and his friends are off to Rome.  This sets up a collision course between the two men that can only be settled with cold steel on the hot sand of the Colosseum!

While it won Best Picture at the Academy Awards (robbing Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon IMHO), "Gladiator" basically just a fun popcorn flick.  The movie has excellent action scenes, high production values and a wonderful score.  Additionally, it deserves credit for reinvigorating the Historical Epic and Sword & Sandal genres and increasing the public's interest in history generally.

However, director Ridley Scott again shows his inability to elevate source material: when he has a great script, he can produce a great movie (e.g., Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Black Hawk Down, The Martian).  When the scripts are not great, his films are stylish and visually stunning but not much else.  This is the case here, as "Gladiator" is ultimately a vapid tale filled with forgettable characters. 

So, if you're looking for a ripping Sword & Sandal yarn, this movie is just fine.  But if you're looking for a somewhat more historical take on ancient Rome, the HBO television series is much, much better in every other category.

Thirteen!

RPG Game Play: Encounters

This week, I wanted to discuss an issue that is both the centerpiece and the bread and butter for most tabletop role-playing games: Encounters.

"When a party descends into a dungeon for the first time, they must be ready to deal with the strange creatures they will meet: some foul, some fair, some intelligent, some not; the variety is endless. Such a meeting is called an encounter." - D&D Basic Rulebook (Moldvay) (1981)

To expand upon Messr Moldvay's description, by “encounter,” I mean the meeting of two or more non-allied groups.  I know that some GMs equate “encounter” with “combat,” with their adventures boiling down to a series of fights, this is not the only way to play RPGs.  Indeed, in the Old School idiom, combat is often deadly and only to be resorted to when one has a significant advantage or one has no other options.

Thus, it is important to remember that “encounter” doesn’t necessarily mean “combat”.  While some NPCs can be assumed to be immediately hostile (e.g., undead, cultists), others may have different but not necessarily conflicting agendas with the PCs.  For example, in the photo above from the all-time great film "Conan the Barbarian" (1982), Conan and Subotai bump into Valeria whilst robbing the temple.  Instead of fighting each other, the three thieves team up and shenanigans ensue!

An often overlooked aspect of encounters in Dungeons & Dragons (and other games) that reinforce the notion that “encounter” =/= “combat” are reaction checks.  In 1st edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, reaction checks are purely mechanistic:

"ENCOUNTER REACTIONS

Any intelligent creature which can be conversed with will react in some way to the character thot is speaking. Reaction is determined by rolling percentile dice, adjusting the score for charisma and applicable loyalty adjustment as if the creature were o henchman of the character speaking, and the modified score of the percentile dice is compared to the table below" - Dungeon Master's Guide (1979)

On the other hand, I prefer B/X's more flexible approach:

"MONSTER ACTIONS: Some monsters always act in the same way (such as zombies, who always attack). However, the reactions of most monsters are not always the same. The DM can always choose the monster's reactions to fit the dungeon, but if he decides not to do this, a DM may use the reaction table below to determine the monster's reactions" - D&D Basic Rulebook (Moldvay) (1981)

Thus, many NPCs, even hostile ones, can be reasoned with or bargained with- these are potential role-playing opportunities for the players!  The GM should provide sufficient information and clues that players can reasonably deduce whether situations are beyond them.

Probably outgunned...

The ability to improvise as a GM is also important here, since the players may have their characters act in ways that you don't expect.  Furthermore, don’t be afraid to call a bathroom break if you need a few minutes to gather your thoughts or even to end a session early if you need to plan out or rework the next part of the campaign!

Movie Review: The Sword and the Sorcerer (1982)

Sometimes, when I revisit a fondly remembered film from my youth, said film holds up despite the passage of time.  Sometimes, it doesn't.  The Sword and the Sorcerer falls into the latter category.

Not having seen The Sword and the Sorcerer in decades, I was hoping that this would be a masterwork, ala Conan the Barbarian (1982), even thought all I really remembered was Talon's *THREE* bladed sword, whose parallel blades shoot off!  Woo-hoo!  Seriously, at the time, I thought this sword was one of the coolest things ever.

However, on the re-watch, I found that the poor fight choreography, the preponderance of clichés, the special effects that haven't aged well and the easily correctable script problems were off-putting: For example, it's not spelled out, but Talon banging Princess Alana was probably incest.

Still, to be fair, The Sword and the Sorcerer is certainly not a poor Sword & Sorcery yarn.  I mean, there's a sword (with *THREE* blades!?!) and a sorcerer, can't be much more Sword & Sorcery than that, right?  Plus, it's got a hot princess (the super lovely Kathleen Beller), the requisite gore, violence and nudity for a Hard "R" and a story that zips along and that remains interesting, if sometimes goofy, throughout.

In The Sword and the Sorcerer, evil King Cromwell seeks to conquer the known world by resurrecting Xusia of Delos, an evil archmagus.  Team Evil's path to global domination begins by knocking over the peaceful Kingdom of Ehdan and murdering all of the Ehdanian royal family except for the youngest son, Talon, who gets away with the *THREE* bladed sword.  Then, Cromwell makes the smart play of trying to assassinate Xusia before the sorcerer inevitably turns on him.

Unfortunately, Cromwell mucks up the assassination and Xusia escapes.  Years later, both the surviving wizard and the surviving prince, now a famous mercenary leader, return to Ehdan to seek their vengeance.  The movie ends pretty much as you would expect.

Where The Sword and the Sorcerer is more impressive is how it differs from the host of other post-Conan fantasy action films: drawing much from Errol Flynn swashbucklers, the film laced with humor and Talon is as likely to fire off a quip as swing his sword.  Also, the double villain structure allows for some clever treachery and backstabbing.  And, the princess shows more spunk than the typical helpless damsel, using the patented knee to the balls technique.

Plus, Lee Horsely is a much, much, much better actor than Arnold Schwarzenegger.  For example, Messr Horsely plays Talon with easy wit and good comedic timing.  And director Albert Pyun isn't afraid to go after the laughs either: after the rousing "let's go save our leader" speech in the brothel, the movie immediately jump cuts to the would-be rescuers in the dungeon.  Hi*LAR*ious!

If you're looking for a fun, campy pulp action film and are willing to relax your brain, The Sword and the Sorcerer isn't a bad choice.  Alternately, if you want to see a sword with *THREE* blades, this is the movie for you!

RPG Focus: 6th Edition Call of Cthulhu (2004)

"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn."

This week, I want to take an Olde School look back on a terrifying classic, Call of Cthulhu, the seminal work in the field of Horror RPGs.

Named after H. P. Lovecraft's story of the same name and drawing upon the eponymous Cthulhu Mythos, Call of Cthulhu (or "CoC" for short) is mostly true to the source material as the PCs (aka "Investigators") take on the role of ordinary people struggling against various dark forces.  I love this setup, as the power level of the game presents real opportunities for true horror, as well as true (if potentially bleak) heroism.

While this discussion specifically covers the 6th Edition, Call of Cthulhu, published by Chaosium and powered by the Basic Role-Playing (BRP) game engine, has remained mostly unchanged over the years since the publication of the 1st Edition of Call of Cthulhu in 1981, which is a testament to the solidity of the BRP ruleset.  Indeed, CoC is one of the best and most influential of the second generation of roleplaying games.

Compared to the contemporaneous AD&D 1E, Call of Cthulhu is faster and simpler game.  It's not quite as streamlined as a modern design, but still easily playable and has a quick learning curve.  In true Olde School tradition, stats are randomly generated, though then there's a point distribution element, based on an Investigator's Intelligence and Education, for skills.  As you might expect, using the RAW some Investigators can have far more skill points than others, so for my own CoC games, I house rule that all Investigators start with the same number of skill points, regardless of Intelligence and Education scores.

With a good Game Master  (aka "Keeper"), the gameplay can be evocative, tense and terrifying as the Investigators explore the mysteries and face the challenges of the Cthulhu Mythos.  As I mentioned above, PCs are fragile (both mentally and physically) and I really like that this leads to more of a Sneak-and-Peak approach, rather than Search-and-Destroy.  This has influenced my campaigns such that the PCs' typical backup plan for any genre is to run away.

The book itself is filled with good advice and, unlike AD&D 1E, isn't written in High Gygaxian, so the writing is clear and to the point.  The book also has lots of neat tidbits to add color and atmosphere (such as a timeline of weird events), as well as random fun things.

So, if you're a roleplaying fan of Lovecraft or Horror generally, I'd suggest taking a look at this tried and true classic!

Movie Review: "Princess Mononoke (もののけ姫)" (1997)

This week, I wanted to give a shout out to a masterwork from Miyazaki Hayao (宮崎 駿), the greatest animated film director of all time, the amazing Princess Mononoke:

One of the most popular animated films in its native Japan, "Princess Mononoke" is an epic low fantasy jidaigeki (period drama) set in the Muromachi period.  Developed from Miyazaki's idea from the 1970s of a girl living in the woods with a monster, this film follows Ashitaka, the last Emishi prince, who slays a demon in order to protect his people but ends up cursed as a result.  The curse gives Ashitaka supernatural powers, but will spread through his body and eventually kill him.

Now, Ashitaka must voyage far to the west to discover where the demon came from and to face his destiny.  The young wanderer finds a land filled with chaos and becomes embroiled in a sinister and deadly conflict between gods, monsters, men and the Emperor.  With all sides out for blood, the prince must somehow "see with eyes unclouded by hate."

One of the greatest and most famous animated films of all time, "Princess Mononoke" was a huge critical and commercial success (briefly the highest-grossing film of all time in Japan, until overtaken by "Titanic") and greatly expanded the profile of Studio Ghibli in the West.  In addition to the gorgeously animated and eye popping visuals (approximately 144,000 cels were used in the film, of which Messr Miyazaki redrew parts of an estimated 80,000 cels!), "Princess Mononoke" stands out because of its imaginative, intricate and complex story.  Whilst the main plot covers the struggle between the protectors of an ancient forest and the humans who consume its resources, there are multiple factions with their own agendas.

However, what makes the film's story really stand out is that the story is not a simplistic tale of good and evil but contains many shades of grey as each faction fights for control of the future.  For example, Lady Eboshi, the presumptive villain of the piece, has liberated and given a new life to dozens of prostitutes and lepers.  Moreover, she genuinely cares about her people and wants the forest's resources to secure their wellbeing.

Many other characters are well realized and three dimensional too, even relatively minor ones.  This gives the places in the film a more grounded and lived in feeling.

Yet another thing that makes "Princess Mononoke" special is that, in an era where computer-generated imagery (CGI) is becoming dominant in animation, this film is a throwback to Old school Japanese style anime that is mostly traditional hand drawn animation.  Messr Miyazaki insisted that CGI be limited to 10% of the film.  Moreover, the computer animated parts are designed to blend in and support the traditional animation, and are mainly used to give the film a more live action feel, using images consisting of a mixture of CGI and traditional drawing.

Friends urged Messr Miyazaki to make "Princess Mononoke" before his health prevented him from making an action film and boy did the master deliver!  From the brisk opening scene through multiple battles and the thrilling climax, the action is crisp, clever and superbly choreographed.  And, more often than not, fights end in unexpected ways.

So, if you are a fan of Old School Japanese animation, low fantasy, Japanese history and/or interesting and outstanding stories, you owe it to yourself to watch the master at the top of his game in this film!

RPG Design: Artwork

This week, I wanted to discussed a hugely important but sometimes overlooked or skimped on element of creating tabletop role-playing games, Artwork:

While it is, of course, hugely fun to muse about game mechanics or other aspects of a rule set, if a game is to be more than just a thought experiment or a creative outlet, it needs to be played by people other than just the designer's own group.  However, with the advent of the internet and of desktop publishing, in addition to commercial products, there are literally thousands of FREE rule sets available nowadays!  Moreover, learning a new tabletop role-playing game is usually a pretty big ask, since it requires a significant investment of time and energy.

So, how to make some noise on the teh interwebs and to convince people to bother to take a look at a new rules set?  Like finding players, this problem is really about marketing, and perhaps the effective way to make a game stand out for a casual viewer is by adding good artwork to the game.

Of course, the definition of "good artwork" depends heavily both on a particular game and on personal taste but, at a fundamental level, IMHO "good artwork" must at least: 

• Be an artistic style that fits the intended flavor of the game, and
• Capture the spirit/mood of the genre/playstyle of the game.

On the artwork meter, I also award bonus points for a game having a distinctive artistic style, such as the amazing and evocative work by Kevin Long in early Rifts/Palladium products.

Unfortunately,  quality artwork is usually expensive, so unless one is an artist oneself or one has generous artist friends, there's a temptation to skimp.  There are sources of low cost (e.g., stock art) or no cost artwork (e.g, public domain), but such works may not fit the rest of the game's art style, mood, genre, etc.  In addition, excessive use of low cost or no cost artwork can make the entire game come off as amateurish.

However, even lesser quality artwork is often better than no artwork.   Pages upon pages of unmitigated text can quickly become a chore for the reader, greatly decreasing the chance to hook a potential player.

Tables, sidebars and the like can help to break up text walls and improve readability, but usually are not much help from a marketing point of view.  Perhaps the only example of a hugely successful no artwork RPG is "Traveller" (1977), which used a sleek minimalist look, superb writing and excellent production design:

Some RPG designers have been able to use Kickstarter or other crowdfunding strategies to good effect to address the cost of good artwork.  The most effective crowdfunded RPG projects usually have the text of the game mostly or completely written before beginning.  The rewards and perils of Kickstarter or other crowdfunding are complex enough that they are best addressed in another blog post but, suffice to say, one should not embark on that particular voyage without sufficient knowledge and preparation!

A great tabletop role-playing game is something that can be owned and used for decades, so good artwork often becomes part of the fun and experience of looking at the same document many, many times.  In addition, good artwork not only adds value but is synergistic, though it doesn't have to track with the written words.  I'm personally fond of old school RPG artwork that doesn't push any particular narrative/playstyle, because, when done properly, it can inspire all kinds of play that's only limited by one's own imagination.