I recently posted a set of guidelines for non-tactical, mapless combat for Felltower. I wanted to get down in one place all of the rules I'd made to supplement the rules in GURPS Basic Set: Characters for my own play. I also wanted to mention the Retreat ruling and the range bands.
All of this, except for the Retreat rules, has been seen in play already.
Before 2020, we played in person. We did mostly mapped combats for anything that was confusing, but also did a lot of mapless combat. All mapless combat used those rules, except that instead of formal range bands I'd just state a reasonable-sounding range based on the map and go from there. Come 2020, though, we had quarantine. We couldn't game together. We swapped first to the Roll20 and then to Foundry based on a Forge server. Suddenly, almost 100% of combats were mapped. Unless it was against a tiny amount of foes - one pudding, two spiders and some swarms, a single giant, etc. - we did everything on the battle map. The fact that we need icons on a map to roll against pushed us even more towards that.
But over the past year or so, I've tried to push here and there for mapless fights when I felt they'd be fast enough and small enough that no one would complain. When I did so, those were the rules I used, except for the "Retreat" ruling and the Reach ruling. I even used Range Bands. I didn't say I was using range bands, but the range penalties I'd offer up were straight from there. No one complained.
It's with that in mind that I decided to push a little more for mapless combat. My players are willing to give it a try. It'll be interesting to see how people react to formal, visible rules for something I ran informally (but almost identically) and with hidden rules determining the rulings.
The goal? More combats resolved in less time. Big set pieces are fun, but 1-2 hour fights for nothing really special just because someone really wants to make sure they clip as many people as possible with their area attack or get a +1 to Parry when they Retreat isn't really worth the cost in gaming time.
Let's see how it goes next week.
Sunday, April 27, 2025
Friday, April 25, 2025
Friday Links for 4/25/2025
Made it most of the way through the week. What random stuff is on my mind?
- I like wargames with clever rules. This one, Race to Berlin, is a two-player game, the Allies vs. Russia. How do you handle the Germans? The Allies play the eastern front Germans, the Russians play the western front Germans. This prevents the old issue with 3-way games, which is the losing player deciding to play kingmaker and throw in with one side to let them win. In this case, that can't happen. Nice. Clever.
- I finally broke down and bought Battle Brothers. So far, it's a lot of fun. I expect to get my money's worth in the long run. I didn't sprint for any DLC but it came with one free one that adds a monster and a banner, IIRC. I'm playing my first game on easy for everything except combat, which is on Expert. It's fine and doesn't feel unfair or especially difficult to this point. I do get the occasional issue of not really having a clear idea of what to do next. Whatever. For now, the Cheat Commandos ride across the lands of whatever this land is called.
Enjoyable game, and I finally had some time . . . and it clearly wasn't going on sale for less than $14.99 so what the hell.
- Under Tenkar's Tavern, for levels 1-3. I love it.
- I like wargames with clever rules. This one, Race to Berlin, is a two-player game, the Allies vs. Russia. How do you handle the Germans? The Allies play the eastern front Germans, the Russians play the western front Germans. This prevents the old issue with 3-way games, which is the losing player deciding to play kingmaker and throw in with one side to let them win. In this case, that can't happen. Nice. Clever.
- I finally broke down and bought Battle Brothers. So far, it's a lot of fun. I expect to get my money's worth in the long run. I didn't sprint for any DLC but it came with one free one that adds a monster and a banner, IIRC. I'm playing my first game on easy for everything except combat, which is on Expert. It's fine and doesn't feel unfair or especially difficult to this point. I do get the occasional issue of not really having a clear idea of what to do next. Whatever. For now, the Cheat Commandos ride across the lands of whatever this land is called.
Enjoyable game, and I finally had some time . . . and it clearly wasn't going on sale for less than $14.99 so what the hell.
- Under Tenkar's Tavern, for levels 1-3. I love it.
Sunday, April 20, 2025
Felltower - Loot, Exploration, and Combat, in that order?
What is Felltower about?
"Felltower is all about safety." - Ulf
Well, that, and loot, exploration, and combat, in that order. The XP system rewards loot heavily, exploration second, and combat not at all. Combat is inherently set up in the game as an obstacle to gaining loot and exploration.
PC builds, though, are about combat, almost purely. Some of that is inherent in the game - Sean Punch made these templates combat machines for the most part. In a game where combat can end your paper man, players are incentivized to put their points into combat. That can leave a party a little less able to deal with anything that isn't combat.
Evaluating loot? Can't do that without surviving combat, so that's often set aside.
Finding hidden loot? 1-5 total points in this, if that. If See Secrets and Search rolls with a couple points in the skill don't do it, too bad, that's what we've got. Seek Earth is standard.
Exploration? Cartography gets an investment, sometimes, but not always. Otherwise, exploration is treated purely as a player-facing exercise.
Other ways of interacting with the world are all tertiary to this. If a spell doesn't kill, heal, or help you move in combat . . . it's basically considered a wasted point in a prereq.
I think because the game system gives you so many ways to deal with combat, it's also the way you most want to deal with the environment. Negotiation won't always work but combat always results in combat, so again, combat power gets emphasized.
I am not sure where I am going with this, just thinking that, even if the rewards system heavily prioritizes the results of an expedition over the how, a completely non-rewarded and costly method can dominate how you get there. Phase 1: Maximize combat power. Phase 3: Profit! It's not clear how you could go about changing the desire for combat (and the explantions, both totally correct and heavily rationalized, that drive it.) Putting XP on it sure didn't help D&D become about loot and exploration, and taking XP away for it would likely be counterproductive and unfair, at best. So how to make sure the game spends more time on exploration to find loot instead of combat to find loot?
I still don't know the answer to that.
"Felltower is all about safety." - Ulf
Well, that, and loot, exploration, and combat, in that order. The XP system rewards loot heavily, exploration second, and combat not at all. Combat is inherently set up in the game as an obstacle to gaining loot and exploration.
PC builds, though, are about combat, almost purely. Some of that is inherent in the game - Sean Punch made these templates combat machines for the most part. In a game where combat can end your paper man, players are incentivized to put their points into combat. That can leave a party a little less able to deal with anything that isn't combat.
Evaluating loot? Can't do that without surviving combat, so that's often set aside.
Finding hidden loot? 1-5 total points in this, if that. If See Secrets and Search rolls with a couple points in the skill don't do it, too bad, that's what we've got. Seek Earth is standard.
Exploration? Cartography gets an investment, sometimes, but not always. Otherwise, exploration is treated purely as a player-facing exercise.
Other ways of interacting with the world are all tertiary to this. If a spell doesn't kill, heal, or help you move in combat . . . it's basically considered a wasted point in a prereq.
I think because the game system gives you so many ways to deal with combat, it's also the way you most want to deal with the environment. Negotiation won't always work but combat always results in combat, so again, combat power gets emphasized.
I am not sure where I am going with this, just thinking that, even if the rewards system heavily prioritizes the results of an expedition over the how, a completely non-rewarded and costly method can dominate how you get there. Phase 1: Maximize combat power. Phase 3: Profit! It's not clear how you could go about changing the desire for combat (and the explantions, both totally correct and heavily rationalized, that drive it.) Putting XP on it sure didn't help D&D become about loot and exploration, and taking XP away for it would likely be counterproductive and unfair, at best. So how to make sure the game spends more time on exploration to find loot instead of combat to find loot?
I still don't know the answer to that.
Friday, April 18, 2025
Friday Post Roundup
A few posts of interest for the week or so.
- Grognardia has a brief look at the Victory Games James Bond RPG Q-Manual. A great supplement back in the day, for your Lotus and Aston Martin driving Bond days.
- I love this picture, although it's very RPG and not terribly realistic. Still makes me want to game ASAP.
- Zero traction so far on my Felltower to do list. Everything on there was my entry. Hopefully I get a bite on this from my players, so "What is there to do?" becomes less of a challenge in play.
- Grognardia has a brief look at the Victory Games James Bond RPG Q-Manual. A great supplement back in the day, for your Lotus and Aston Martin driving Bond days.
- I love this picture, although it's very RPG and not terribly realistic. Still makes me want to game ASAP.
- Zero traction so far on my Felltower to do list. Everything on there was my entry. Hopefully I get a bite on this from my players, so "What is there to do?" becomes less of a challenge in play.
Thursday, April 17, 2025
Possible Mapless Combat approach for DF Felltower
I'm trying to do more mapless combat in my DF Felltower game, especially because it's hard to get a combat map of every place in Felltower up for the PCs to fight in.
In order to make mapless combat work quickly, but also to avoid player demands to used mapped to not lose out on perceived advantages of their characters, I am thinking of the following rules.
In these rules, the term "narrative reason" is used a few times. Only the GM will decide if there is a narrative reason for an exception to occur.
Melee
Mapless combat will assume that fights are in a rough melee, with multiple combatants able to engage one another more-or-less freely. If narrative reasons dictate it's more of a series of small duels, that will occur instead.
Flanks, Back shots, and Runarounds
These only occur if a GM-ruled narrative reason explains them. Exception: Backstabs work normally, but require the appropriate rolls and situational prerequisites.
Retreat
Each character can Retreat once per turn, unless it is prevented by some GM-ruled narrative reason that prevents it (backed into a corner, especially tight formation, etc.) or rule that disallows it (Grappled, Rooted Feet, took a Maneuver that forbids it, etc.). No actual "movement" takes place.
Range Bands
Characters in melee will be treated as using the Melee ranged band with one another. Characters outside of Melee are at Short range to the Melee, and either Short or Medium to foes also outside of melee depending on the GM-ruled narrative situation.
Movement
It takes a Move or Move and Attack to close from the back ranks into Melee, or from Melee to the back ranks. You can't move "partway" in order to reduce spell penalties; penalties are fixed by range band.
Reach
Weapon reach is essentially a non-factor. You cannot use your longer reach weapon to keep a foe at bay or "step" in order to keep reach. Neither can your opponents. You're just in melee and able to strike at will. Close combat still works as written, for attackers and weapons that require it. Optionally, there can be no Close Combat unless you're grappled, but I'm concerned this creates a big difference between mapped and mapless resolution results for attackers that depend on CC.
I think as an accepted basis of the game, this can work. You can't get flanked. You don't have to worry about "leaving room to Retreat" becuase you just get that bonus once per turn. It should just work, especially for fights that can't be easily mapped. My approach would be to use this by default, and used mapped for cases where it seems like a big potential set-to.
I'll see what my players think of this and try to give it a formal go during our next game.
In order to make mapless combat work quickly, but also to avoid player demands to used mapped to not lose out on perceived advantages of their characters, I am thinking of the following rules.
In these rules, the term "narrative reason" is used a few times. Only the GM will decide if there is a narrative reason for an exception to occur.
Melee
Mapless combat will assume that fights are in a rough melee, with multiple combatants able to engage one another more-or-less freely. If narrative reasons dictate it's more of a series of small duels, that will occur instead.
Flanks, Back shots, and Runarounds
These only occur if a GM-ruled narrative reason explains them. Exception: Backstabs work normally, but require the appropriate rolls and situational prerequisites.
Retreat
Each character can Retreat once per turn, unless it is prevented by some GM-ruled narrative reason that prevents it (backed into a corner, especially tight formation, etc.) or rule that disallows it (Grappled, Rooted Feet, took a Maneuver that forbids it, etc.). No actual "movement" takes place.
Range Bands
Characters in melee will be treated as using the Melee ranged band with one another. Characters outside of Melee are at Short range to the Melee, and either Short or Medium to foes also outside of melee depending on the GM-ruled narrative situation.
Movement
It takes a Move or Move and Attack to close from the back ranks into Melee, or from Melee to the back ranks. You can't move "partway" in order to reduce spell penalties; penalties are fixed by range band.
Reach
Weapon reach is essentially a non-factor. You cannot use your longer reach weapon to keep a foe at bay or "step" in order to keep reach. Neither can your opponents. You're just in melee and able to strike at will. Close combat still works as written, for attackers and weapons that require it. Optionally, there can be no Close Combat unless you're grappled, but I'm concerned this creates a big difference between mapped and mapless resolution results for attackers that depend on CC.
I think as an accepted basis of the game, this can work. You can't get flanked. You don't have to worry about "leaving room to Retreat" becuase you just get that bonus once per turn. It should just work, especially for fights that can't be easily mapped. My approach would be to use this by default, and used mapped for cases where it seems like a big potential set-to.
I'll see what my players think of this and try to give it a formal go during our next game.
Monday, April 14, 2025
Skald: Against the Black Priory - Finished
I finished up Skald yesterday.
It's a fun game - well worth the ~$10 I paid for it. It's a low-res retro-style game. I found the low-res part annoying. I can't make out most of the images of gear to tell you what was what. But the text was readable enough and the gameplay solid. The run game well on my laptop and I actually left the music on the whole game. I tend to turn ambient music off right away but the music in the game is pretty charming at its best and non-annoying at its worst. The game, in generally, is a lot of fun. Better than it appeared from some of the early reviews I saw.
I hit 93% achievents in my first playthrough on Normal difficulty. Also, I went back today to an earlier save game to try a different approach in one encounter, which netted me the sole remaining Achievement left - so I have 100% achievements. Total play time was just under 25 hours, and that includes a bit of play with a new character.
It's kind of tempting to play it again on a harder mode, but probably not. It's not like it was too easy or too hard, so I didn't feel a lot of frustration and generally felt a good level of challenge.
The only bits were, as always, I ended the game with a pile of unused resources. A LOT of ingredients for potions I never found recipes for, food items without recipes to use them, lots of prepared food - days and days and days worth - that I didn't need . . . the usual. Oh, and more gold than I could spend if I played again with it in my pocket from the start. And so many potions, that despite my aggressively using them all over the place I had dozens of extras of most of the basic ones at the end. My only big issue with the game were arrows - I couldn't fletch that many, and in the end I shot off every single arrow I found and bought in the game. My two bow-centric characters at the end were in melee because I'd long since shot off every arrow I could get. I didn't expect to run totally out of ammo. If I played again, I'd aggressively buy every single arrow in the game, even the cruddy ones and overly expensive ones, so I would have ammo at the end.
But overall it's good - the story is good, the gameplay is solid, and the engine apparantly can be used for mods . . . so I find ones I like I can potentially play more games on this chassis. Time well spent.
It's a fun game - well worth the ~$10 I paid for it. It's a low-res retro-style game. I found the low-res part annoying. I can't make out most of the images of gear to tell you what was what. But the text was readable enough and the gameplay solid. The run game well on my laptop and I actually left the music on the whole game. I tend to turn ambient music off right away but the music in the game is pretty charming at its best and non-annoying at its worst. The game, in generally, is a lot of fun. Better than it appeared from some of the early reviews I saw.
I hit 93% achievents in my first playthrough on Normal difficulty. Also, I went back today to an earlier save game to try a different approach in one encounter, which netted me the sole remaining Achievement left - so I have 100% achievements. Total play time was just under 25 hours, and that includes a bit of play with a new character.
It's kind of tempting to play it again on a harder mode, but probably not. It's not like it was too easy or too hard, so I didn't feel a lot of frustration and generally felt a good level of challenge.
The only bits were, as always, I ended the game with a pile of unused resources. A LOT of ingredients for potions I never found recipes for, food items without recipes to use them, lots of prepared food - days and days and days worth - that I didn't need . . . the usual. Oh, and more gold than I could spend if I played again with it in my pocket from the start. And so many potions, that despite my aggressively using them all over the place I had dozens of extras of most of the basic ones at the end. My only big issue with the game were arrows - I couldn't fletch that many, and in the end I shot off every single arrow I found and bought in the game. My two bow-centric characters at the end were in melee because I'd long since shot off every arrow I could get. I didn't expect to run totally out of ammo. If I played again, I'd aggressively buy every single arrow in the game, even the cruddy ones and overly expensive ones, so I would have ammo at the end.
But overall it's good - the story is good, the gameplay is solid, and the engine apparantly can be used for mods . . . so I find ones I like I can potentially play more games on this chassis. Time well spent.
Sunday, April 13, 2025
DF Felltower, Foundry, and Foundry Modules
Inspired by the same post for Arden Vul, here is what we run DF Felltower with.
Host: Forge
Pricing is quite reasonable - for a year, they charge less than I can make net in a couple hours of work, and hosting would take more than those hours. Win/win.
Core VTT software:
Foundry VTT version 12
Latest stable version; I upgrade as they come along. With the length of DF Felltower's play I need to keep updating to the current, stable release. It's $50 for the license.
System:
GURPS 4e Game Aid (GGA)
You need this to run GURPS. It's generally a very good package. It's free, but I'd pay for a better version. It just upgraded to 0.17.19.
Modules:
I will admit right out, I run a bunch of these because Vic suggested I do so based on his own use. I'm reluctant to just disable or change them because I don't want to mess up what's actually working, but I'd like to kick out what's not useful or helping anymore. I'll add details as I note what's actually helpful about each one.
About Face
Changelogs & Conflicts
CodeMirror
Covered Token Rescue HUD-GURPS
We need this for close combat, but I'll give Z Scatter a look.
Dungeon Draw
I put this one on to help me draw maps, but I honestly haven't found it sufficient to do the whole job.
Gaming Ballistic's GURPS Quick Reference Character Sheet
Hide GM Rolls
Illandril's Token HUD Scaler
libWrapper
Math.js
Monk's Bloodsplats
Monk's Combat Details
Monk's Combat Marker
Monk's Hotbar Expansion
Monk's Wall Enhancement
Nightmare Fuel Bestiaries
Ownership Viewer
PnP - Pointer and Pings! (BETA)
PopOut!
socketlib
SortableJS
Tidy UI - Game Settings
Token Actiob HUD Classic
Toen Border Supplements
Token Mold
Token Tooltip Alt
Universal Battlemap Importer
Host: Forge
Pricing is quite reasonable - for a year, they charge less than I can make net in a couple hours of work, and hosting would take more than those hours. Win/win.
Core VTT software:
Foundry VTT version 12
Latest stable version; I upgrade as they come along. With the length of DF Felltower's play I need to keep updating to the current, stable release. It's $50 for the license.
System:
GURPS 4e Game Aid (GGA)
You need this to run GURPS. It's generally a very good package. It's free, but I'd pay for a better version. It just upgraded to 0.17.19.
Modules:
I will admit right out, I run a bunch of these because Vic suggested I do so based on his own use. I'm reluctant to just disable or change them because I don't want to mess up what's actually working, but I'd like to kick out what's not useful or helping anymore. I'll add details as I note what's actually helpful about each one.
About Face
Changelogs & Conflicts
CodeMirror
Covered Token Rescue HUD-GURPS
We need this for close combat, but I'll give Z Scatter a look.
Dungeon Draw
I put this one on to help me draw maps, but I honestly haven't found it sufficient to do the whole job.
Gaming Ballistic's GURPS Quick Reference Character Sheet
Hide GM Rolls
Illandril's Token HUD Scaler
libWrapper
Math.js
Monk's Bloodsplats
Monk's Combat Details
Monk's Combat Marker
Monk's Hotbar Expansion
Monk's Wall Enhancement
Nightmare Fuel Bestiaries
Ownership Viewer
PnP - Pointer and Pings! (BETA)
PopOut!
socketlib
SortableJS
Tidy UI - Game Settings
Token Actiob HUD Classic
Toen Border Supplements
Token Mold
Token Tooltip Alt
Universal Battlemap Importer
Friday, April 11, 2025
Friday Roundup 4/11/2025
What caught my eye this week?
- Tactics in Adventure Gaming. I liked this look at tactical combat and mapless combat.
- My blog is in the top 90 RPG blogs.
- This list of modules for a GURPS-based Foundry VTT game is very helpful for me. I will have to put up my own list - maybe Sunday - and try one of them myself.
- Next game is in May, so expect lots of little housekeeping posts from me and no big summaries. Interesting discussion in my telephone game post, too. I'm still wondering what I can do to improve things.
- Tactics in Adventure Gaming. I liked this look at tactical combat and mapless combat.
- My blog is in the top 90 RPG blogs.
- This list of modules for a GURPS-based Foundry VTT game is very helpful for me. I will have to put up my own list - maybe Sunday - and try one of them myself.
- Next game is in May, so expect lots of little housekeeping posts from me and no big summaries. Interesting discussion in my telephone game post, too. I'm still wondering what I can do to improve things.
Wednesday, April 9, 2025
I can't complain, but sometimes I still do
Overall, my Felltower campaign has been a success. A solid group of core players, some coming and some going in and around the core, for what will be 14 years this year. I haven't needed to do too much mapping of the main dungeon after my initial waves. A few more side areas than I expected to need - the Cold Fens, the Lost City, and the Brotherhood Complex, instead of just the Caves of Chaos - but not as many as I might have. Lots of great games. Lots of fun. Many, many stories.
So my posts where I pretty much complain about my game is going? The Joe Walsh quote that titles this sums it up pretty well. Our game is good. I really enjoy getting to GM it, more often than not. I feel rewarded for the work I put it. I complain because I'd like it to be better, more enjoyable, more eventful, more rewarding to play in. But it's not because it's bad. If it was bad, I could complain much more rightfully but I'd also need to just end the game or totally overhaul it. It doesn't need those . . . it just needs some effort. I think I can make it easier for people to see the big picture of things left undone . . . and do a bit more to make it obvious how to get the answers they want. After that, if still the game feels stalled or limited, then perhaps it's time to set it aside. It's not that time. Felltower's been good to me so far.
So my posts where I pretty much complain about my game is going? The Joe Walsh quote that titles this sums it up pretty well. Our game is good. I really enjoy getting to GM it, more often than not. I feel rewarded for the work I put it. I complain because I'd like it to be better, more enjoyable, more eventful, more rewarding to play in. But it's not because it's bad. If it was bad, I could complain much more rightfully but I'd also need to just end the game or totally overhaul it. It doesn't need those . . . it just needs some effort. I think I can make it easier for people to see the big picture of things left undone . . . and do a bit more to make it obvious how to get the answers they want. After that, if still the game feels stalled or limited, then perhaps it's time to set it aside. It's not that time. Felltower's been good to me so far.
Monday, April 7, 2025
The Mysteries of Felltower - Status
I will attempt to keep an ongoing list of solved and unsolved puzzles, mysteries, and oddities in Felltower.
Some of these aren't really that mysterious. Some of these puzzles aren't actually puzzles. Some are, kind of. A few had clues to "solve" them - or at least understand them - that were destroyed through PCs actions.
I will mark as solved those things that, as a GM, I've confirmed were resolved. They aren't mysteries anymore and are effectively resolved. Creative players may find a further use for them but they are basically done. When I get time, I will update this, and I'll add links relevant to the mystery in question.
Solved or Resolved
Rotating Statues. Revealed a treasury, long since looted.
Golden Fish & Pool of Water. Fish was sold for 50K.
Sterick's Tomb. Sterick slain and the magical doors opened permanently.
Twinned Temple. The secondary temple is gone permanently.
Stone Altar on Felltower Level 2. Effects largely known, limited to one touch for beneficial effects.
Unsolved or Unresolved
Orichalcum Doors. One key is still in the possession of PCs.
Crystal Mirrors aka Crystal Lenses. Use unknown.
Circular Rooms Beyond the Repelling Doors. Use as yet unknown. Method to bypass the repelling doors is known.
Optical Illusion of additional stairs on the first GFS.
Green Gemstone Zombies.
Room of Pools. Some of the pools are still an unknown, but all have been heavily investigated.
Headless Busts / Aka Saints of Felltower. Some are still headless.
Chained Doors. Twin giant chained doors on the Gate level, near the Olympus Gate.
Brotherhood Complex Tapestry that detects as Gate magic.
Unopenable Door on the 2nd floor of the first GFS.
Map found in this session. A sage who saw a "X"-free copy of the map made by Vlad was unable to determine where the island is, as the map is too vague.(from VL)
Map found with the golden swordsmen. (from VL)
Some of these aren't really that mysterious. Some of these puzzles aren't actually puzzles. Some are, kind of. A few had clues to "solve" them - or at least understand them - that were destroyed through PCs actions.
I will mark as solved those things that, as a GM, I've confirmed were resolved. They aren't mysteries anymore and are effectively resolved. Creative players may find a further use for them but they are basically done. When I get time, I will update this, and I'll add links relevant to the mystery in question.
Solved or Resolved
Rotating Statues. Revealed a treasury, long since looted.
Golden Fish & Pool of Water. Fish was sold for 50K.
Sterick's Tomb. Sterick slain and the magical doors opened permanently.
Twinned Temple. The secondary temple is gone permanently.
Stone Altar on Felltower Level 2. Effects largely known, limited to one touch for beneficial effects.
Unsolved or Unresolved
Orichalcum Doors. One key is still in the possession of PCs.
Crystal Mirrors aka Crystal Lenses. Use unknown.
Circular Rooms Beyond the Repelling Doors. Use as yet unknown. Method to bypass the repelling doors is known.
Optical Illusion of additional stairs on the first GFS.
Green Gemstone Zombies.
Room of Pools. Some of the pools are still an unknown, but all have been heavily investigated.
Headless Busts / Aka Saints of Felltower. Some are still headless.
Chained Doors. Twin giant chained doors on the Gate level, near the Olympus Gate.
Brotherhood Complex Tapestry that detects as Gate magic.
Unopenable Door on the 2nd floor of the first GFS.
Map found in this session. A sage who saw a "X"-free copy of the map made by Vlad was unable to determine where the island is, as the map is too vague.(from VL)
Map found with the golden swordsmen. (from VL)
Sunday, April 6, 2025
The Telephone Game & Felltower
Last game session, we got to enjoy the telephone game - I mentioned this Friday, but it's worth repeating here.
"The telephone game is alive and well. One of my players suggested getting some arrows of dragon slaying, because Puissance +3 is cheap on arrows and any weapon with Puissance +3 is Slaying. So, almost none of that is actually true. But half-remembered rules and events get passed along and become, to paraphrase Phillip J. Fry, widely-believed facts.
You have to wonder how many things in Felltower are regarded differently than they actually are thanks to similar half-remembered details passed along, morphed, and then re-remembered. I'm half curious but mostly I deliberately tune out the player discussions to avoid giving away what I actually think."
It got me thinking about Felltower and the "played out" nature of it. It's been voiced repeatedly by my players, old and new, that Felltower really has no more easy areas and only near-certain death areas. You need to be X points to survive what's ahead, no one is X points, and getting those points requires new exploration or loot and that's all played out in the survivable areas. How true is that?
There are a good number of "unsolvable" encounters, auto-death locations, places that need special abilities to usefully interact with, and so on. But are they always what they seem?
There are a few places that newer players - and some vets alike - would like to go and deal with. But they're shot down when suggested because they are rejected by a sufficient number of players (a plurality, in general, of nos vs. a minority each of yesses and agnostic.) I think some of them are a variation of the telephone game. You get player memories of events their previous PC enountered, accounts written down by me after the game session, and what people remember being told second hand. It creates a stew of uncertainty.* My players are, to a degree, willing to risk their PCs in a fight, but only if they know it is winnable and has a reward. But what gets defined as "winnable" is colored heavily by the telephone game.
More than once I've heard people bring up an idea, and have it shot down for reasons I know are, at best, oversold. This can be a big downside to a megadungeon or any other repeat-play area. Because you can find out things now to make tasks easier later, there is a reluctance to take a jump into the unknown, and a strong reluctance to try where group memory says something is hard.
I am not really sure what a solution is for this problem. It remains one of the big issues of Felltower right now - people have combed over the "easy" stuff again and again and again, and take a shot at the risky stuff only when there is no choice. Or not even then. Sometimes they're right to do so . . . but other times, it's just a case of misinformation becoming common sense. How to resolve this? I don't actually know.
* I need to stat up Stew of Uncertainty at some point. Maybe next April 1st.
"The telephone game is alive and well. One of my players suggested getting some arrows of dragon slaying, because Puissance +3 is cheap on arrows and any weapon with Puissance +3 is Slaying. So, almost none of that is actually true. But half-remembered rules and events get passed along and become, to paraphrase Phillip J. Fry, widely-believed facts.
You have to wonder how many things in Felltower are regarded differently than they actually are thanks to similar half-remembered details passed along, morphed, and then re-remembered. I'm half curious but mostly I deliberately tune out the player discussions to avoid giving away what I actually think."
It got me thinking about Felltower and the "played out" nature of it. It's been voiced repeatedly by my players, old and new, that Felltower really has no more easy areas and only near-certain death areas. You need to be X points to survive what's ahead, no one is X points, and getting those points requires new exploration or loot and that's all played out in the survivable areas. How true is that?
There are a good number of "unsolvable" encounters, auto-death locations, places that need special abilities to usefully interact with, and so on. But are they always what they seem?
There are a few places that newer players - and some vets alike - would like to go and deal with. But they're shot down when suggested because they are rejected by a sufficient number of players (a plurality, in general, of nos vs. a minority each of yesses and agnostic.) I think some of them are a variation of the telephone game. You get player memories of events their previous PC enountered, accounts written down by me after the game session, and what people remember being told second hand. It creates a stew of uncertainty.* My players are, to a degree, willing to risk their PCs in a fight, but only if they know it is winnable and has a reward. But what gets defined as "winnable" is colored heavily by the telephone game.
More than once I've heard people bring up an idea, and have it shot down for reasons I know are, at best, oversold. This can be a big downside to a megadungeon or any other repeat-play area. Because you can find out things now to make tasks easier later, there is a reluctance to take a jump into the unknown, and a strong reluctance to try where group memory says something is hard.
I am not really sure what a solution is for this problem. It remains one of the big issues of Felltower right now - people have combed over the "easy" stuff again and again and again, and take a shot at the risky stuff only when there is no choice. Or not even then. Sometimes they're right to do so . . . but other times, it's just a case of misinformation becoming common sense. How to resolve this? I don't actually know.
* I need to stat up Stew of Uncertainty at some point. Maybe next April 1st.
Friday, April 4, 2025
Friday 4/4/2025 Roundup Post
Friday roundup!
- The telephone game is alive and well. One of my players suggested getting some arrows of dragon slaying, because Puissance +3 is cheap on arrows and any weapon with Puissance +3 is Slaying. So, almost none of that is actually true. But half-remembered rules and events get passed along and become, to paraphrase Phillip J. Fry, widely-believed facts.
You have to wonder how many things in Felltower are regarded differently than they actually are thanks to similar half-remembered details passed along, morphed, and then re-remembered. I'm half curious but mostly I deliberately tune out the player discussions to avoid giving away what I actually think.
- I'm writing a new DF Felltower Questionairre. Unlike the last one, this one is entirely focused on player responses, not the PCs. My last survey did both. My goal at this point is to just figure out what things within the game and rules are working well, and what are not. It's surprisingly hard to word them in a neutral way while also eliciting the feedback I'm interested in.
- Do you kill the hobgoblin children in the Caves of Chaos? 20% of respondents, and 100% of Desmonds, do!
- This guy - Togilius the Chamberlain is pretty neat. He'd make a good NPC wizard in my game. Or a PC wizard in my game.
- The telephone game is alive and well. One of my players suggested getting some arrows of dragon slaying, because Puissance +3 is cheap on arrows and any weapon with Puissance +3 is Slaying. So, almost none of that is actually true. But half-remembered rules and events get passed along and become, to paraphrase Phillip J. Fry, widely-believed facts.
You have to wonder how many things in Felltower are regarded differently than they actually are thanks to similar half-remembered details passed along, morphed, and then re-remembered. I'm half curious but mostly I deliberately tune out the player discussions to avoid giving away what I actually think.
- I'm writing a new DF Felltower Questionairre. Unlike the last one, this one is entirely focused on player responses, not the PCs. My last survey did both. My goal at this point is to just figure out what things within the game and rules are working well, and what are not. It's surprisingly hard to word them in a neutral way while also eliciting the feedback I'm interested in.
- Do you kill the hobgoblin children in the Caves of Chaos? 20% of respondents, and 100% of Desmonds, do!
- This guy - Togilius the Chamberlain is pretty neat. He'd make a good NPC wizard in my game. Or a PC wizard in my game.
Wednesday, April 2, 2025
DF Felltower Spellstones further rulings
There are a bunch of rules about spellstones in this post - I'll duplicate them here, to save clicking around when my players search.
Spellstones
Crushing a spellstone takes the Concentrate maneuver. However, unlike most spells, you can crush a spellstone while grappled if you have it ready and the hand holding it can potentially crush the stone given the circumstances (which is usually the case.)
You must crush it willingly to complete the spell. You must crush it with your hand and will it to activate, it can't be done accidentally.
You cannot crush more than one spellstone at a time. It takes a full second's concentration to complete the action.
You can hold them in your mouth, but remember, they're small (1-5 carats for 1-5 power). You will have issues if you're wearing hand armor beyond light (cloth or light leather) - this may require a DX roll with Ham Fisted modifiers.
You cannot learn Fast-Draw (Spellstone.) They're too small.
You cannot hold one ready in the same hand as another item unless you have the "Third Hand" perk.
You cannot use a spell stone on another person by crushing it against them. Known Exceptions: Gem of Healing, Gem of Awakening.
Only Wizardly magic can be made into spell stones, with the exception of the Awaken spell. Gems of Healing and Gems of Awakening are made by the church in some secret process, and are available for sale.
***
Here are the additional rulings/frequency asked questions:
You can't put maintenance costs into a stone. It's just a one shot, base duration spell. You are not able to, say, buy a 4-point powerstone that contains 3 rounds of maintenance for a 1-energy spell.
You can buy an Area spell with a larger than 1-hex AOE, or Missile spells with larger sizes, or Resist Fire at a higher level of flame resistance, or similar improved castings.
You cannot maintain the spell yourself, since you are not the caster.
Unlike GURPS Magic, which specifies that the spell is cast (against the Power level of the enchantment) on the turn after you activate the stone, in DF Felltower the spell takes place immediately - in other words, on the turn in which you Concentrate and activate the spellstone. That can make them more effective, but means spells that require an action to effectively use must have a duration longer than one second in order to be useful.
Finally, although the parlance in my games is to "crush a spellstone" the actual verb phrase is to "Concentrate and activate a spellstone." I understand what is meant, but a lot of the "can't I?" questions come from assuming "crushing" is the goal - can I hit it with a hammer, can I put one on the tip of a blunt arrow and shoot it at someone, can I bite one with my teeth, can I crush more than one, etc. It's more like reading a scroll or activating a wand or staff or special ability - it takes Concentration and, in this case, a specific hand action - holding a stone in the hand. A good number of FAQs are self-answerable by changing the verb phrase to the most accurate one.
Spellstones
Crushing a spellstone takes the Concentrate maneuver. However, unlike most spells, you can crush a spellstone while grappled if you have it ready and the hand holding it can potentially crush the stone given the circumstances (which is usually the case.)
You must crush it willingly to complete the spell. You must crush it with your hand and will it to activate, it can't be done accidentally.
You cannot crush more than one spellstone at a time. It takes a full second's concentration to complete the action.
You can hold them in your mouth, but remember, they're small (1-5 carats for 1-5 power). You will have issues if you're wearing hand armor beyond light (cloth or light leather) - this may require a DX roll with Ham Fisted modifiers.
You cannot learn Fast-Draw (Spellstone.) They're too small.
You cannot hold one ready in the same hand as another item unless you have the "Third Hand" perk.
You cannot use a spell stone on another person by crushing it against them. Known Exceptions: Gem of Healing, Gem of Awakening.
Only Wizardly magic can be made into spell stones, with the exception of the Awaken spell. Gems of Healing and Gems of Awakening are made by the church in some secret process, and are available for sale.
***
Here are the additional rulings/frequency asked questions:
You can't put maintenance costs into a stone. It's just a one shot, base duration spell. You are not able to, say, buy a 4-point powerstone that contains 3 rounds of maintenance for a 1-energy spell.
You can buy an Area spell with a larger than 1-hex AOE, or Missile spells with larger sizes, or Resist Fire at a higher level of flame resistance, or similar improved castings.
You cannot maintain the spell yourself, since you are not the caster.
Unlike GURPS Magic, which specifies that the spell is cast (against the Power level of the enchantment) on the turn after you activate the stone, in DF Felltower the spell takes place immediately - in other words, on the turn in which you Concentrate and activate the spellstone. That can make them more effective, but means spells that require an action to effectively use must have a duration longer than one second in order to be useful.
Finally, although the parlance in my games is to "crush a spellstone" the actual verb phrase is to "Concentrate and activate a spellstone." I understand what is meant, but a lot of the "can't I?" questions come from assuming "crushing" is the goal - can I hit it with a hammer, can I put one on the tip of a blunt arrow and shoot it at someone, can I bite one with my teeth, can I crush more than one, etc. It's more like reading a scroll or activating a wand or staff or special ability - it takes Concentration and, in this case, a specific hand action - holding a stone in the hand. A good number of FAQs are self-answerable by changing the verb phrase to the most accurate one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
