May 31st, 2015
Weather: Varied (mix of clear and some rain)
Characters (in the dungeon): (approximate net point total)
Adventuring:
Asher Crest-Fallen, human holy warrior (279 points)
Koric, human guard (~70 points)
Orrie, human guard (~70 points)
Bjorn Felmanson, human barbarian (256 points)
Dave, human knight (250 points)
El Murik, dwarven cleric (269 points)
Gerald Tarrant, human wizard (262 points)
Hannibal the Flammable, human wizard (264 points)
Rahtnar the Vegan, dwarven martial artist (265 points)
In Swampsedge:
Galoob Jah, goblin thief (256 points)
We started in Swampedge, as usual. The group gathered rumors - including ones about denizens to the far south, one about swamp trolls (water breathing trolls), and that the leaping leeches are starting to multiply and swarm. Some local residents told Hannibal that maybe since the bandits were gone now, maybe they should leave well enough alone?
The rolls for potions and paut came up empty, so we realized it was the annual Crone Convention and Young Crone Hazel was taken her broom and gone off to attend. It also turned out that Old Crazy William was gone, and people had heard screaming a few weeks back from down by his hit. Did they confirm what the screams were? Yeah, of course, the villagers were in a huge hurry to run down and check on screams from by the madman's hut near the edge of the monster-infested swamp.
With that, they set off. Bjorn was late (player was late getting into town), but he came on his own boat later with Koric and Orrie. Rahtnar joined much later, also on his own boat.
Old School informed GURPS Dungeon Fantasy gaming. Basically killing owlbears and taking their stuff, but with 3d6.
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Cold Fens today, with possible new player
We've got another session of the Cold Fens portion of our actually quite long Felltower DF game going today.
It looks like we'll have a trial player, running a Knight. It's his first character build, but as another of my players said, it's hard to mess up a DF template. Even odd choices result in a capable character.
I'm looking forward to it. Hopefully, his first session won't be a stare-at-secret-doors-and-argue session. But if they can figure out how to get those doors open, it should get interesting . . .
Now I have to quickly find a mini to match his probable loadout!
It looks like we'll have a trial player, running a Knight. It's his first character build, but as another of my players said, it's hard to mess up a DF template. Even odd choices result in a capable character.
I'm looking forward to it. Hopefully, his first session won't be a stare-at-secret-doors-and-argue session. But if they can figure out how to get those doors open, it should get interesting . . .
Now I have to quickly find a mini to match his probable loadout!
Saturday, May 30, 2015
Show them the map
Probably the best wilderness adventure advice I found in Dungeon Fantasy 16: Wilderness Adventures was pretty simple:
Show them the map.
I put down a map of the swamp of the Cold Fens (at least the wet, everglades-y waterways portion they are in) and cover up the bits they can't see. Then I move and reveal it as they go. I leave it revealed from then on, so exploration always widens their (wholly accurate) map.
All they know is, they can still get lost (from bad rolls or bad decisions), they still don't know what happens in any given spot on the map if they go there. They still don't have fully actionable knowledge about the entirety of the map. But they have enough to make clear decisions.
It makes it easier to run as the GM, almost as easy as (actually maybe easier than) dungeon adventuring. It's also exciting. The players get into it more. They are more active in marking the map and making decisions. Everyone can see at a glance just how nasty the surroundings are, and decide based on it. The only thing that could make it better is if I could draw pictures of the swamp I see in my head when I'm describing the place.
You can see this in Delta's sandbox games, too. Having the whole map in front of you means choosing your path with more clarity, but it doesn't reduce the mystery of what is to come.
I highly recommend doing this with wildness adventures - show them the map. Let them find out as they go what's in the dark places and ruins on it, but spare yourself and them the hassle of describing a wilderness.
Show them the map.
I put down a map of the swamp of the Cold Fens (at least the wet, everglades-y waterways portion they are in) and cover up the bits they can't see. Then I move and reveal it as they go. I leave it revealed from then on, so exploration always widens their (wholly accurate) map.
All they know is, they can still get lost (from bad rolls or bad decisions), they still don't know what happens in any given spot on the map if they go there. They still don't have fully actionable knowledge about the entirety of the map. But they have enough to make clear decisions.
It makes it easier to run as the GM, almost as easy as (actually maybe easier than) dungeon adventuring. It's also exciting. The players get into it more. They are more active in marking the map and making decisions. Everyone can see at a glance just how nasty the surroundings are, and decide based on it. The only thing that could make it better is if I could draw pictures of the swamp I see in my head when I'm describing the place.
You can see this in Delta's sandbox games, too. Having the whole map in front of you means choosing your path with more clarity, but it doesn't reduce the mystery of what is to come.
I highly recommend doing this with wildness adventures - show them the map. Let them find out as they go what's in the dark places and ruins on it, but spare yourself and them the hassle of describing a wilderness.
Friday, May 29, 2015
Animate Shadow edited
I edited in some answers to questions from my players about Animate Shadow.
Corporate Sponsorship for Adventurers
Joking around in the comments, Vic aka Bjorn said he'd donate to charity for each decapitation he pulls off. Or seek a sponsor.
I mentioned Boris the Half-Ogre, run by Borriz Borrizman's player Aaron, wielder of the throwbar and the genius behind the insight into the origins of dungeon dwellers. He had a large selections of cheap-quality weapons to start with. So much so we started joking that he was sponsored by Cheap(tm) brand weapons, and would do commercials for them, have "Cheap!" logos on his shield, etc. Like our Corporate Car Wars days, only with less clones and linked VMGs and more Resurrection spells and broadswords.
I have to wonder, has anyone ever gone as far as to have corporate sponsors for fantasy adventurers? Either in a joking fashion like we have, or a more serious?
I'm not talking, "tasked by the crown to expunge the evil of (whatever of where ever)" but rather "Talroc's fireballs are brought to you by BW's Bat Guano. BW, when your fireball really counts."
The amusement value alone might make this worth putting some serious thought into. Plus, you'd get some great adventuring behavior. "Kill it with fire!" "I can't, my sponsor is Frost-eez Liquid Ice Grenades! They'd cut off my funding!"
I mentioned Boris the Half-Ogre, run by Borriz Borrizman's player Aaron, wielder of the throwbar and the genius behind the insight into the origins of dungeon dwellers. He had a large selections of cheap-quality weapons to start with. So much so we started joking that he was sponsored by Cheap(tm) brand weapons, and would do commercials for them, have "Cheap!" logos on his shield, etc. Like our Corporate Car Wars days, only with less clones and linked VMGs and more Resurrection spells and broadswords.
I have to wonder, has anyone ever gone as far as to have corporate sponsors for fantasy adventurers? Either in a joking fashion like we have, or a more serious?
I'm not talking, "tasked by the crown to expunge the evil of (whatever of where ever)" but rather "Talroc's fireballs are brought to you by BW's Bat Guano. BW, when your fireball really counts."
The amusement value alone might make this worth putting some serious thought into. Plus, you'd get some great adventuring behavior. "Kill it with fire!" "I can't, my sponsor is Frost-eez Liquid Ice Grenades! They'd cut off my funding!"
Thursday, May 28, 2015
Revised GURPS Magic: Animate Shadow (VH)
The necromancer in my current DF game is looking at Animate Shadow, GURPS Magic p. 154, so naturally I had to, too.
Much like Phantom, the spell has some unbalanced upsides - such as, the animated shadow having DX equal to the caster's skill. Again, like Phantom, that's fine when skill 15 is solid, 18 is high, and 20-25 is a master of the arts. Not when 20+ is pretty much baseline for a really serious PC mage.
Also, I think some of the effects are a little . . . undramatic. Like how you can parry or block, but only if you had those items on you when the spell was cast. Eh, I am a huge fan of people grabbing some random weapon to fight with or getting tossed a friend's weapon or shield to fight with, and I don't want to ensconce an exception to that kind of awesomeness.
On top of that, it's not clear why:
- it should do either thrusting or swinging damage for what's ultimately an insubstantial touch attack.
- if it has any DR.
- it dies at 0 HP instead of -1xHP like other Fragile (Unnatural) things.
- it doesn't specify if it gets DR or not. A shadow generally shouldn't, but it also gets shadowy weapons and shields.
- it is resisted by HT. Doesn't Will seem more appropriate for wrenching someone's shadow away from them and making it attack them? The physically weak are easier prey than the weak of Will? Seems odd for a Necromantic spell attacking an insubstantial aspect of someone.
Even so, it's got a lot of HP, it's hard to hurt. It's got a very short duration (5 seconds), and a solid cost for the effect (4 FP, same to maintain).
Here are the changes to Animate Shadow (VH):
- Resisted by Will.
- the shadow has DX 15 and Speed equal to the subject.
- the shadow has HP equal to the subject.
- Attacks do thrusting FP damage. Attacks can be Parried, Blocked, or Dodged by the subject only.
- the shadow has any Injury Tolerances of the subject.
- the shadow has the Body of Shadow advantage (short version = half damage from physical attacks.)
- shadow is destroyed at -1xHP.
- the shadow has 0 DR, even if the subject has DR.
- effects of FP loss is per the rules on p. B426.
- shadow disappears automatically if the subject falls unconscious from reach FP 0 or below.
- it will only ever attack the subject; however, it can be affected by outside attacks (and defends normally against them.)
- Reach is per weapon type; the shadow can use any weapon the subject had on him at the time of casting!
- Shadow has active defenses equal to the subject and Dodge based on its unencumbered Speed.
- Shadow has all movement modes of the subject; the subject only has Ground move the shadow can only walk but is unaffected by bad footing, won't fall into pits, etc. - treat it as having Walk on Air for most purposes.
(Editing 1/25/2016: ST of the shadow is equal to the caster's skill in the spell)
For example, cast on a ST 20, DX 11, Move 6 Ogre the shadow would be ST 20, DX 15, HP 20, Move 6, and do 2d-1 FP damage per strike. It would have 20 HP and die at -20 HP automatically. Cast on a ST 13, DX 13, Move 5 man it would have ST 15, HP 13, and do 1d+1 FP damage per strike. On average you'd need to inflict 52 physical injury to get rid of the thing before 5 seconds have elapsed!
(Editing later: ST of the Ogre would be equal to the caster's skill - the example still holds if the caster has Animate Shadow-20)
All in all, this seems like a more interesting, more complete, but also more balanced. It lasts all of five seconds but it can do a lot in that time.
Some questions from my players I answered:
Can you cast spells on the shadow? No. It's a spell effect, not a character.
Who runs the shadow? The GM. It's a spell effect. The GM runs spell effects and summoned creatures.
Does the shadow get weapon skills? No, it just attacks at a flat 15.
Is the shadow affected by shock, stunning, crippling, etc.? No, none of those affect it at all.
Does the shadow benefit from the buffs on the subject at the time of the casting? No, base stats only.
Does the shadow benefit from special characteristics of the subject's weapons? No. It just does flat FP damage.
For more spells I've changed, check out my Revised GURPS Magic for DF page.
Much like Phantom, the spell has some unbalanced upsides - such as, the animated shadow having DX equal to the caster's skill. Again, like Phantom, that's fine when skill 15 is solid, 18 is high, and 20-25 is a master of the arts. Not when 20+ is pretty much baseline for a really serious PC mage.
Also, I think some of the effects are a little . . . undramatic. Like how you can parry or block, but only if you had those items on you when the spell was cast. Eh, I am a huge fan of people grabbing some random weapon to fight with or getting tossed a friend's weapon or shield to fight with, and I don't want to ensconce an exception to that kind of awesomeness.
On top of that, it's not clear why:
- it should do either thrusting or swinging damage for what's ultimately an insubstantial touch attack.
- if it has any DR.
- it dies at 0 HP instead of -1xHP like other Fragile (Unnatural) things.
- it doesn't specify if it gets DR or not. A shadow generally shouldn't, but it also gets shadowy weapons and shields.
- it is resisted by HT. Doesn't Will seem more appropriate for wrenching someone's shadow away from them and making it attack them? The physically weak are easier prey than the weak of Will? Seems odd for a Necromantic spell attacking an insubstantial aspect of someone.
Even so, it's got a lot of HP, it's hard to hurt. It's got a very short duration (5 seconds), and a solid cost for the effect (4 FP, same to maintain).
Here are the changes to Animate Shadow (VH):
- Resisted by Will.
- the shadow has DX 15 and Speed equal to the subject.
- the shadow has HP equal to the subject.
- Attacks do thrusting FP damage. Attacks can be Parried, Blocked, or Dodged by the subject only.
- the shadow has any Injury Tolerances of the subject.
- the shadow has the Body of Shadow advantage (short version = half damage from physical attacks.)
- shadow is destroyed at -1xHP.
- the shadow has 0 DR, even if the subject has DR.
- effects of FP loss is per the rules on p. B426.
- shadow disappears automatically if the subject falls unconscious from reach FP 0 or below.
- it will only ever attack the subject; however, it can be affected by outside attacks (and defends normally against them.)
- Reach is per weapon type; the shadow can use any weapon the subject had on him at the time of casting!
- Shadow has active defenses equal to the subject and Dodge based on its unencumbered Speed.
- Shadow has all movement modes of the subject; the subject only has Ground move the shadow can only walk but is unaffected by bad footing, won't fall into pits, etc. - treat it as having Walk on Air for most purposes.
(Editing 1/25/2016: ST of the shadow is equal to the caster's skill in the spell)
For example, cast on a ST 20, DX 11, Move 6 Ogre the shadow would be ST 20, DX 15, HP 20, Move 6, and do 2d-1 FP damage per strike. It would have 20 HP and die at -20 HP automatically. Cast on a ST 13, DX 13, Move 5 man it would have ST 15, HP 13, and do 1d+1 FP damage per strike. On average you'd need to inflict 52 physical injury to get rid of the thing before 5 seconds have elapsed!
(Editing later: ST of the Ogre would be equal to the caster's skill - the example still holds if the caster has Animate Shadow-20)
All in all, this seems like a more interesting, more complete, but also more balanced. It lasts all of five seconds but it can do a lot in that time.
Some questions from my players I answered:
Can you cast spells on the shadow? No. It's a spell effect, not a character.
Who runs the shadow? The GM. It's a spell effect. The GM runs spell effects and summoned creatures.
Does the shadow get weapon skills? No, it just attacks at a flat 15.
Is the shadow affected by shock, stunning, crippling, etc.? No, none of those affect it at all.
Does the shadow benefit from the buffs on the subject at the time of the casting? No, base stats only.
Does the shadow benefit from special characteristics of the subject's weapons? No. It just does flat FP damage.
For more spells I've changed, check out my Revised GURPS Magic for DF page.
Wednesday, May 27, 2015
Hit Location: More on armoring the Neck in DF
On Monday I introduced some simplified Basic Set armor compatible neck protection for a DF game. Basically, to offer more options that the current Greathelm, Mail Coif, both, or nothing choice.
There are other ways to go.
Use the 3e Rule. Basically, that rule is using Torso armor unless you have a heavy helmet.
The tricky bit here is that this implies that torso armor covers the neck - front, sides, and back. Okay so far, but then you put on a heavy helmet - they should stack if that is the case. If it stacks, this means either you waive the penalty to DX for stacked neck armor (hey, it's part of the head, in contradiction to p. B282), or you apply it. I can't see waiving it. Yes, that's simple, but your ability to freely move your head is restricted by lots of layers around the neck (especially interlocking layers). Applying the penalty means giving a -1 DX to anyone with a mail coif (or modifying it so it doesn't cover the neck anymore) and Greathelm (shades of 3e again, here.) Since the penalty is per-layer not per-location, this means those guys may as well go ahead and add another layer everywhere.
It also means DR on the Neck suddenly goes up for heavily armored fighters, changing it from a potential weak point into a strong point second only to the skull.
This one only sounds simple, in my opinion.
Use Torso DR. Per B282, Neck is part of body. With this rule it is assumed to be included in any Torso armor protection. This just makes it, much like Vitals, a high-damage location for certain types of attack, but otherwise no more or less armored than the torso. It's -5 for an additional +0.5x damage for crushing or cutting.
This is by far the easiest, but it makes Neck much less valuable of a location.
Use head DR. As above, but treat it as covered by head protection.
Tricky because, which head location? Skull? That means a skullcap pot-helm or cloth cap also gives neck DR. Face? Mail coif loses Neck, Greathlem loses its prime benefit of all-over protection, and Leather Helmets gain Neck. Kind of an odd problem. You could say, however, it is Skull from behind, Face from the front, and anything that says Neck already covers it from all angles.
Out of those three, "treat it as body" is probably the best. I still prefer the additional armors from my previous post, however. The neck still has value even if torso DR covers it, especially for high-damaging cutting weapons. Or against The Kurgan.
It's worth noting, of course, that DF is full of monsters that have Injury Tolerance (No Neck) or (Homogenous), ones with universal DR that isn't differentiated by location (in fact, that's the default), and threats where neck chops won't do the job even if they do damage (anything with a hit location specific Unkillable weakness.) This mostly affects PCs fighting high-skill opponents.
There are other ways to go.
Use the 3e Rule. Basically, that rule is using Torso armor unless you have a heavy helmet.
The tricky bit here is that this implies that torso armor covers the neck - front, sides, and back. Okay so far, but then you put on a heavy helmet - they should stack if that is the case. If it stacks, this means either you waive the penalty to DX for stacked neck armor (hey, it's part of the head, in contradiction to p. B282), or you apply it. I can't see waiving it. Yes, that's simple, but your ability to freely move your head is restricted by lots of layers around the neck (especially interlocking layers). Applying the penalty means giving a -1 DX to anyone with a mail coif (or modifying it so it doesn't cover the neck anymore) and Greathelm (shades of 3e again, here.) Since the penalty is per-layer not per-location, this means those guys may as well go ahead and add another layer everywhere.
It also means DR on the Neck suddenly goes up for heavily armored fighters, changing it from a potential weak point into a strong point second only to the skull.
This one only sounds simple, in my opinion.
Use Torso DR. Per B282, Neck is part of body. With this rule it is assumed to be included in any Torso armor protection. This just makes it, much like Vitals, a high-damage location for certain types of attack, but otherwise no more or less armored than the torso. It's -5 for an additional +0.5x damage for crushing or cutting.
This is by far the easiest, but it makes Neck much less valuable of a location.
Use head DR. As above, but treat it as covered by head protection.
Tricky because, which head location? Skull? That means a skullcap pot-helm or cloth cap also gives neck DR. Face? Mail coif loses Neck, Greathlem loses its prime benefit of all-over protection, and Leather Helmets gain Neck. Kind of an odd problem. You could say, however, it is Skull from behind, Face from the front, and anything that says Neck already covers it from all angles.
Out of those three, "treat it as body" is probably the best. I still prefer the additional armors from my previous post, however. The neck still has value even if torso DR covers it, especially for high-damaging cutting weapons. Or against The Kurgan.
It's worth noting, of course, that DF is full of monsters that have Injury Tolerance (No Neck) or (Homogenous), ones with universal DR that isn't differentiated by location (in fact, that's the default), and threats where neck chops won't do the job even if they do damage (anything with a hit location specific Unkillable weakness.) This mostly affects PCs fighting high-skill opponents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)