Thursday, December 18, 2008
Work update!
For those interested: I'm currently working on a number of maps for Rogue Games' Colonial Gothic line. Yay cartography!
D&D 3.5: Edited for Homebrew use.
I've always loved D&D. I started in 1983 with 1st Ed AD&D (orange binding) and have played every version so far. D&D has a lot of things that I enjoy as far as flavor goes. Vancian magic, named spells, certain monsters and the way some things have always worked.
Now I also prefer the rules to be light. 1st Ed AD&D was pretty simple. The THAC0 thing was a little cumbersome, but otherwise it was pretty straightforward. Still had all the bits of D&D I love.
2nd ED was largely the same, though it did start adding a lot of optional rules which IMO kind of muddied the waters as far as simplicity goes, but the core of it was largely the same as 1st Ed.
3rd Ed (and 3.5) introduced some serious alterations to the game. Most of the original flavor was there, but there was a definite shift towards a balance between Player and GM. Lots of new toys for the players to tweak and adjust their characters. Some of those changes though I have always chafed at.
Largely...the Attack of Opportunity. Tied to the AoO is the grid and movement in squares...which has always brought me to an uncomfortable cross between minis game and RPG.
I love minis. I have several minis games. That said, I use minis in RPGs only in a very limited sense. I don't use squares, measurements are approximated and physical representations with minis are just for a vague overall impression of the scene.
Not using a grid eliminates the AoO and a dozen feats.
The reasoning for this is that use of the grid, 5-foot steps, measurements, really takes away from what I'm trying to achieve in a game that I'm running. I don't want a minis game...I want a fast and lean fight (when it comes up) with as little system interaction as possible. I want the focus to be on "I slide under the ogre's legs and stab him in the jimmy!" not I make a tumble check, I have mobility so I'm not incurring an AoO, and I have a bonus to my attack because of X, Y and Z.
Do AoO happen? Sure. I keep it as a tool for GM use when PCs do something cool or stupid, roll well or botch really badly.
"Ooh, the orc charges over the table (clatter of dice) and ooof, he trips, landing at your feet, sword flying away...you get a free shot at him!".
Out of the original 3.5 List of Feats, I've edited a total of 14. most are regarding AoO. A couple are regarding Dodge, which I've always thought was kind of ridiculous (Dodge is something anyone should be able to do IMO).
Another area of editing was in the area of Actions in combat.
Largely it's the same, but I handle it a bit more simply and "hand-wavy". In a nutshell you can move and act in your action. Some things like loading a crossbow or casting spells take all your effort to do, so you forgo one of the two. That's about it. I hate getting bogged down in "you can take a move-equivalent action, a normal action, and oh, you have that quickened so that's a Move equivalent too...bah!" screw that. [wave hands] Good enough, move on.
Other than that D&D 3.5 is intact. Metamagic feats are a bit cumbersome, but if someone ants to use them, so be it.
I know, these edits a lot of folks won't dig. That's cool. Welcome to my homebrew!
Now I also prefer the rules to be light. 1st Ed AD&D was pretty simple. The THAC0 thing was a little cumbersome, but otherwise it was pretty straightforward. Still had all the bits of D&D I love.
2nd ED was largely the same, though it did start adding a lot of optional rules which IMO kind of muddied the waters as far as simplicity goes, but the core of it was largely the same as 1st Ed.
3rd Ed (and 3.5) introduced some serious alterations to the game. Most of the original flavor was there, but there was a definite shift towards a balance between Player and GM. Lots of new toys for the players to tweak and adjust their characters. Some of those changes though I have always chafed at.
Largely...the Attack of Opportunity. Tied to the AoO is the grid and movement in squares...which has always brought me to an uncomfortable cross between minis game and RPG.
I love minis. I have several minis games. That said, I use minis in RPGs only in a very limited sense. I don't use squares, measurements are approximated and physical representations with minis are just for a vague overall impression of the scene.
Not using a grid eliminates the AoO and a dozen feats.
The reasoning for this is that use of the grid, 5-foot steps, measurements, really takes away from what I'm trying to achieve in a game that I'm running. I don't want a minis game...I want a fast and lean fight (when it comes up) with as little system interaction as possible. I want the focus to be on "I slide under the ogre's legs and stab him in the jimmy!" not I make a tumble check, I have mobility so I'm not incurring an AoO, and I have a bonus to my attack because of X, Y and Z.
Do AoO happen? Sure. I keep it as a tool for GM use when PCs do something cool or stupid, roll well or botch really badly.
"Ooh, the orc charges over the table (clatter of dice) and ooof, he trips, landing at your feet, sword flying away...you get a free shot at him!".
Out of the original 3.5 List of Feats, I've edited a total of 14. most are regarding AoO. A couple are regarding Dodge, which I've always thought was kind of ridiculous (Dodge is something anyone should be able to do IMO).
Another area of editing was in the area of Actions in combat.
Largely it's the same, but I handle it a bit more simply and "hand-wavy". In a nutshell you can move and act in your action. Some things like loading a crossbow or casting spells take all your effort to do, so you forgo one of the two. That's about it. I hate getting bogged down in "you can take a move-equivalent action, a normal action, and oh, you have that quickened so that's a Move equivalent too...bah!" screw that. [wave hands] Good enough, move on.
Other than that D&D 3.5 is intact. Metamagic feats are a bit cumbersome, but if someone ants to use them, so be it.
I know, these edits a lot of folks won't dig. That's cool. Welcome to my homebrew!
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Killing PCs
When I run a game, I admit, I am hesitant to kill PCs.
Usually part of this is due to the fact that I want the players to really dig their characters, put a lot of effort in to them, love playing them. They're NOT just a piece of paper or a pawn on a chessboard.
That said, I want their experience to be fun, scary, with a constant threat of danger and possibly even mortality.
If a PC is to die, I really want it to happen in a meaningful way if at all possible (though in a grim Dark Heresy-kind of game, it's perfectly understandable for even a PC to die in a meaningless way...it's the nature of the grim future).
I tend to build up NPCs and get the PCs close to them, but I also have a tendency to sacrifice them for the sake of a dramatic scene.
PCs though, unless they are patently stupid and doing what they know will likely result in death...I probably won't let them die.
Part of this is that in my games, I hate the idea of protagonists and antagonists fighting to the death every time a weapon is drawn. It's just ridiculous. When things look grim for the antagonists I'll secretly roll to see if they cut and run. Live to fight another day. Recurring bad guys. Unless the antagonist is mindless like a zombie or skeleton or something...it'll think twice about staying in the fight after half his buddies get smeared all over the room.
I expect the PCs to consider this as well. Not every encounter is designed to be "won". Sometimes the PCs wander in to the Bad Guy Home Base and realize they are woefully outgunned and need to RETREAT!
I guess it comes down to choice.
I try and give my players and their characters lots of choices, and with this comes a lot of rope to hang themselves. I try to be really up-front about what characters notice: give them plenty of chances to realize what the situation is and if/ when they get in over their heads.
They set the stakes and if they choose to bid high, or go "all in" then they CAN die and I won't be as forgiving with the rolls. I won't however sneak up on them and blindside them with situations they will not be able to get out of. They might get snuck up on with a situation out of their league, forcing a retreat...but they have plenty of "outs".
In order to do this...sometimes I fudge rolls.
It's true.
I also roll my dice all the time out of habit, so only half the time it's for a purpose. I also call for lots of random rolls that mean absolutely nothing. Especially good or bad rolls on either side of the screen can have an impact somewhere.
So how do you guys do it? What are your thoughts on killing PCs and fudging die rolls?
Usually part of this is due to the fact that I want the players to really dig their characters, put a lot of effort in to them, love playing them. They're NOT just a piece of paper or a pawn on a chessboard.
That said, I want their experience to be fun, scary, with a constant threat of danger and possibly even mortality.
If a PC is to die, I really want it to happen in a meaningful way if at all possible (though in a grim Dark Heresy-kind of game, it's perfectly understandable for even a PC to die in a meaningless way...it's the nature of the grim future).
I tend to build up NPCs and get the PCs close to them, but I also have a tendency to sacrifice them for the sake of a dramatic scene.
PCs though, unless they are patently stupid and doing what they know will likely result in death...I probably won't let them die.
Part of this is that in my games, I hate the idea of protagonists and antagonists fighting to the death every time a weapon is drawn. It's just ridiculous. When things look grim for the antagonists I'll secretly roll to see if they cut and run. Live to fight another day. Recurring bad guys. Unless the antagonist is mindless like a zombie or skeleton or something...it'll think twice about staying in the fight after half his buddies get smeared all over the room.
I expect the PCs to consider this as well. Not every encounter is designed to be "won". Sometimes the PCs wander in to the Bad Guy Home Base and realize they are woefully outgunned and need to RETREAT!
I guess it comes down to choice.
I try and give my players and their characters lots of choices, and with this comes a lot of rope to hang themselves. I try to be really up-front about what characters notice: give them plenty of chances to realize what the situation is and if/ when they get in over their heads.
They set the stakes and if they choose to bid high, or go "all in" then they CAN die and I won't be as forgiving with the rolls. I won't however sneak up on them and blindside them with situations they will not be able to get out of. They might get snuck up on with a situation out of their league, forcing a retreat...but they have plenty of "outs".
In order to do this...sometimes I fudge rolls.
It's true.
I also roll my dice all the time out of habit, so only half the time it's for a purpose. I also call for lots of random rolls that mean absolutely nothing. Especially good or bad rolls on either side of the screen can have an impact somewhere.
So how do you guys do it? What are your thoughts on killing PCs and fudging die rolls?
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Art Techniques: bits and bobs.
This thread I'm using to compile bits and bobs for the artists for S&W.
Bits on sketching, pencils, inking, as well as composition and life drawing.
http://drawsketch.about.com/library/blinktexture.htm
http://drawsketch.about.com/od/drawingt ... e-Library/
http://drawsketch.about.com/od/penandin ... shwall.htm
http://drawsketch.about.com/cs/figuredr ... ortion.htm
One thing strongly recommend is surfing the web for references.
If you like a certain artists inking style, find some pages of his work and print em out, that way you can look at the details of his style and techniques.
"How on earth do I draw water like that?" Well...find drawn images of water and pick the one you like the best and print it out. Pay close attention to how the piece was done: crosshatching, use of negative space, etc.
Have references handy.
Unless you're in that top 1% of artists, you don't know how to draw everything. Not from memory at least. Your hands aren't trained for it yet.
One of the main things that stop amateur artists from improving is ego and attitude towards using tools.
Photo-references and well...any references are simply tools. Same goes with the smudge tool on Photoshop and using certain pens and markers.
Once you're an uber-artists who can do anything and everything and are the Michelangelo of the 21st century, then you can have the ego to be an elitist and not use every tool and trick in the industry. Until then...you're in the trenches with the rest of us trying to improve, using every tool and trick available to do a good job.
Bits on sketching, pencils, inking, as well as composition and life drawing.
http://drawsketch.about.com/library/blinktexture.htm
http://drawsketch.about.com/od/drawingt ... e-Library/
http://drawsketch.about.com/od/penandin ... shwall.htm
http://drawsketch.about.com/cs/figuredr ... ortion.htm
One thing strongly recommend is surfing the web for references.
If you like a certain artists inking style, find some pages of his work and print em out, that way you can look at the details of his style and techniques.
"How on earth do I draw water like that?" Well...find drawn images of water and pick the one you like the best and print it out. Pay close attention to how the piece was done: crosshatching, use of negative space, etc.
Have references handy.
Unless you're in that top 1% of artists, you don't know how to draw everything. Not from memory at least. Your hands aren't trained for it yet.
One of the main things that stop amateur artists from improving is ego and attitude towards using tools.
Photo-references and well...any references are simply tools. Same goes with the smudge tool on Photoshop and using certain pens and markers.
Once you're an uber-artists who can do anything and everything and are the Michelangelo of the 21st century, then you can have the ego to be an elitist and not use every tool and trick in the industry. Until then...you're in the trenches with the rest of us trying to improve, using every tool and trick available to do a good job.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)