Player character

You are currently browsing articles tagged Player character.

Yahoo! The Summer 2010 issue of Kobold Quarterly is overflowing with chewy gaming goodness. And if you’re just in the mood for some amazing art, cover to cover is full of spectacular full color and black and white art, starting with “The Paladin’s Treasure” on the front cover. We all knew Paladins were adventuring for something other than the mythical dragon hoard… but don’t tell that to the dragon!

Just in time for Gen Con this summer, the Kobolds were busy bringing theory and practice together to provide inspiration for gamemasters and players alike. But if you’re looking for loot, there’s plenty of that too. As Wolfgang Baur, Kobold-in-Chief, explains in his Editorial – generosity is not an optional quality for good leaders. Viking jarls knew better than to not treat their berserker hordes to good meals, handfuls of gold, and public recognition for great deeds. Wolfgang and his own talented horde do that in each issue of Kobold Quarterly, so I doubt his audience will turn on him any time soon…

I was intrigued in this issue by the wide array of articles – from a detailed description of how to play an Aasimar (angel avatars used to fight evil in mortal realms) from Kolja Raven Liquette to an intriguing ecology article from R. William Thomposon about the Tengu I had no idea were as civilized as they seem to be. The Tengu have intrigued me ever since college when we ran into a few in a session, but now I might have to play one as an NPC!

→ Read More at Game Knight Reviews here...

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

PC Therapy?

A concept came up in discussion a couple of weeks ago about how to resolve inter-party issues. We’re not going to try it ourselves, but I wanted to write about it a bit to share it and ponder the idea a bit.

It’s simple really…

For each other character in the group, a player will write down in a few sentences what their character thinks of them. So if you have four PCs in a group, character A will write about B, C, and D. Character B will write about A, C, and D, and so on.

And if you really want to make things interesting, you can also ask for feedback on what the players think about their character and the others in the group.

The GM would then gather these little summaries and… then what?

That’s really where the idea stopped. What would the GM do with these little snippets of information? Would they distribute them to the players after sanitizing the text a bit to protect the players? Perhaps come up with the top 3-5 things for each character and distribute that?

But how does that information help the player? Once a character is created, it’s tough to change their personality or how they behave towards other PCs or NPCs.

Would this technique be more useful to a group just starting out or a group of more experienced roleplayers?

I think in our case, this technique would be very interesting, but ultimately self destructive. I’m not sure any of us would be prepared for what might come to the surface.

Any thoughts?

–Fitz

Enhanced by Zemanta
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Yes, I’m probably going out on a limb here by asking you to talk to a fictional character – which can be further construed as asking you to talk to yourself. (Though recent articles say that talking to yourself isn’t necessarily a bad thing – see here.)

Characters are rarely just numbers and words on a page. There’s more to them than that more often than not.

So why not ask your character, on paper or out loud, a bit about themselves? Consider it an interview. I’ve done it for characters in my pale attempts at writing fiction (had a long talk with a serial killer once that unnerved me a bit). But what do you ask?

There’s the usual stuff psychobabble stuff like:

  • What was your mother like?
  • Where did you grow up?
  • Who were your friends? Your enemies?
  • How was your relationship with your father?
  • When did you realize you wanted more for yourself than an average life? (Most characters lead extraordinary lives.)
  • Why are you here?

But how about some not so obvious questions… A recent article by Alicia Rasley at WritersDigest.com brought up 9 interesting questions to ask… Here’s a few from that article…

  • When you walk into a party, what do you notice first? The mood? The people? The decorations? The things that need to be fixed? The background music? The food on the buffet table? Whether or not you fit in?
  • Do you usually notice problems around you? What is your response? Do you write an angry letter to the editor? Shrug and move on? Analyze what’s wrong and how to fix it? Take it as evidence that the world is falling apart? What about problems within yourself?
  • Are you more interested in the past, the future or living in the now?Are you one to keep holiday traditions? If you had to move tomorrow, how long would it take you to make new friends?
  • How do you decide if you can trust someone? By experience with this person? First impressions? Intuition? Do you test the person somehow? Or are you just generally disposed to trust or not to trust?
  • Are you a deliberate, careful speaker, or do you talk without thinking first? Do you use slang, or do you use diction your old English teacher would approve?

I think these are interesting questions to ponder on a quiet evening or afternoon. Any extra tidbits you learn about your character makes it more interesting to play in my book. It’s those little things that sometimes make a huge difference.

Where does all this lead? Hard to say. You might write up a small biography for your character that you can pass along to your GM. You might simply compile a list of adjectives to remind yourself about your character’s personality and quirks. This could even be useful for a GM trying to further define the party’s arch nemesis or discover the motivations behind a local lord who thinks the PCs should be tossed out of town on their rumps…

What do you think? Have you spoken with your characters recently?

–Fitz

Enhanced by Zemanta
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Odd topic, but power is a funny thing. In real life, those who have it typically want more. Those without want some. And it’s not always what you think.

In a roleplaying game, you’d think the GM held most of the power. And to a point, you’re right. But without players, what good is a GM? Players hold the other half of the power in a campaign or one-shot adventure. It’s a give and take between both sides. Don’t kid yourself that there aren’t two sides to the game table though. However, they’re not always in direct opposition.

For me, it’s not (always) a competition between GM and player. Sure, sometimes it’s literally a competition such as a jousting tournament or a game of chance played in the game. But for the most part, the GM is there to keep the world in motion to give the players opportunities for action.

But I digress…

So obviously the GM has some power… but it’s spread thinly between NPCs, monsters, and plots afoot in the realm of his or her control. A fair GM doesn’t let the power of the dice corrupt him or her unfairly. A fudge here or there on behalf of the players is a choice GMs always have, but in the vast majority of cases I have to believe it’s not used against the players or player characters to hasten their demise. So in my view, no GM has absolute power over their domain if they’re playing fairly.

And the players have power to exercise on behalf of their in-game characters… Choices that may benefit the player or the group at large exist in great quantities usually. And it’s easy to see when players step out of bounds through metagaming or by doing something to harm another player, for the GM or other players may rise to the occasion and combat such inequities.

But in the best cases of gaming, it’s a symbiotic relationship between players and their GM. When the relationship becomes one-sided, it ceases to be fun for the other side and bad things may occur. Hard feelings, bad decisions, and things said in anger may result in the downfall of a group and the temporary or permanent harm to friendships between members.

Has anyone seen the demise of a gaming group like this? It’s not pretty.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Hi all…

Yes, it seems that nearly every time I post anything these days, it’s asking a question. But before I ask, let me provide some context…

We have a very small group (currently 2 or 3 players depending on the week and a GM) playing a D&D 3.5e adventure set in one of the Paizo Pathfinder adventures (Second Darkness). The GM (Mike) and I have been discussing the fact that, like every other module-driven adventure either of us has played or run, it seems very linear. And, dare I say it, a bit boring for those of us playing who prefer story and emotional depth over combat.

Sure there are a few mysteries left. We only play once a month or so and sometimes not even that, so getting through significant parts of the adventure is iffy at best. And it probably doesn’t help that the two PCs in our group that are supposed to know and like each other are drifting apart (but that’s a tale for another day), so that’s not helping us move forward much either.

But here’s the issue… if the GM lacks the time to spin off his own ideas to make the setting more lively and engaging for the PCs and the PCs can’t stay together, how do we make the game more enjoyable across the board?

I suspect that if Mike as GM can find some nuggets of creativity in the module to build on, that’s one way to do it. And as a player, I can try and invest myself more in the world as well – perhaps going so far as to define NPC “friends” he may have met during spelunking beneath the city, in the wilds, or while avoiding the less natural parts of town (he’s a druid who’s probably swinging from neutral good to true neutral soon after some experiences he’s had in the campaign).

What do you do, as a player or GM, to make campaigns based around pre-written modules seem more lively? Or what do you do to revive fading campaigns when the enthusiasm starts to die?

Mike and I are both curious what others who have faced similar issues have done to help the situation… And not just what worked, but what didn’t… So we don’t unwittingly step in land mines trying something that probably was a bad idea from the get-go.

Any and all feedback would be greatly appreciated. I’ll try and sum it up in a separate post so others can benefit from the combined wisdom.

Thanks!
–Fitz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I’m coming late to the RPG Blog Carnival this month, but better late than never, right?

Superman II
Image via Wikipedia

NPCs are an area where I either go very deep or very shallow. For example, a common theme I have in running a game is putting an Inn/Tavern in every town and there always happens to be an old man or woman at the desk or available when someone rings the bell.

This old person inevitably was a) cranky, b) hard of hearing, and c) difficult to deal with. So whenever the PCs would try and find a room for the night, they’d have to verbally spar with the desk jockey.

Desk clerk (DC): “Eh?”
PC: “We’d like a room for the night.”
DC: “A broom for flight?”
PC: [speaking up] “A ROOM FOR THE NIGHT.”
DC: “You don’t have to yell… I’m not deaf you know… I have a couple of rooms with one bed in them, but all 5 of you might have to draw straws… or there’s the [mumbles] common room…”

Yes, I like to torment my players. It’s part of the fun of being a GM.

On the flip side of the coin are characters like Lady Dagor, the female knight in charge of the Order of St. Greggor – a group of knights seeking the destruction of all demons in the world of Immortals’ Wake.

In her case, I always had a mental image of Sarah Douglas as Ursa (Zod’s second in command) in Superman II, but a bit shorter and wearing a combination of chain and plate mail. She buries her contempt for civilians well, but holds them somewhere above pond scum in the order of things.

Dagor focuses on two things. Firstly, she studies all the battles between the knights of her order and the Changed demons who control raw elemental energies. She feels she has a better understanding of how her enemy operates than they do in many cases and far more knowledge than many of the organizations also studying the demons (including other church members, the House of the Magus (mages), and the Chasers). This feeling of superior knowledge is both a good and a bad thing.

Secondly, she focuses on strategies for capturing, testing, and killing demons. Using her knowledge of how they operate and many of their tactics, she finds weaknesses to exploit and is constantly instructing those under her command to test such weaknesses vigorously in the field.

Lady Dagor is a stern task master and a good soldier, but also knows how to play the political game. As the first woman in charge of the militant order of the Church of the Mother, she knows she is empowered to do just about anything in the name of the Church. But even with this knowledge, she obeys the letter of the law and will rarely break with church doctrine.

It was her laugh that I settled on first. A haughty, full-bodied laugh that has been practiced and perfected over the years to throw off allies and enemies alike. She has few friends, and only “befriends” people if it is politically or strategically necessary.

But at the bottom of this superiority complex and the haughtiness, she devoutly believes in the teachings of the Mother. What she is doing is right on every level and that gives her the strength to do what she must. Is she evil? Not from her perspective.  But from other people’s perspectives? Yeah, probably.

Some NPCs, like Athena from Zeus’s head, come fully formed in my mind when they appear. Others sneak up on me. And others just pop up like that damn innkeeper. “Eh?”

–Fitz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hi all…

{{en|}}
Image via Wikipedia

Chuck and Mike have thrown a few good comments my way that I’ve been pondering a bit since my last Starting Over… article, so I thought I’d address them before moving on…

A couple of things came to light, including:

  • The need for a more static or passive defense number instead of an always active defense.
  • Damage and how armor affects it needs some work

Fair enough on both parts. Since we’re going for light, quick, and playable, we want something straightforward to use and evidently the whole Quality of Success vs. Quality of Failure argument doesn’t hold much water (or holds water, but seems to be full of holes like a sieve)…

So to answer both questions a bit, it comes down to something like the old Armor Class idea for D&D. Not only does the armor have a certain value, but the PC‘s ability to move and dodge out of the way comes into play as well.

Chuck, you mentioned a static defense of something like (Attribute + Skill)/2.

How about if I counter the argument and say that it’s (Body + Armor’s Absorption Rate)/2. For example, a Chain suit has an AR of 6, vs. Leather armor has an AR of 3. Armor in the MARPG system is broken into a couple of broad categories – how much damage can it absorb from a single blow before you go through to hit points (HP) and how many total points of damage the armor can take before it’s useless.

If a character with a Body of 8 is wearing Chain, it would deflect (8 + 6) / 2 = 7 points of damage by default. If the same character is wearing Leather, it would deflect (8 + 3) / 2 = 5.5 = 6 (always round up) points of damage.

That doesn’t seem right, does it?

Though a character with less Body would get hurt more quickly, even in Chain. Let’s take a character with a Body of 4. In Chain, he’d deflect (4 + 6) / 2 = 5 points and in Leather he’d deflect (4 + 3) / 2 = 3.5 = 4 points. Obviously the wimpier character would die more quickly.

The question then becomes a matter of where does the damage go… If the armor, say Chain, can absorb 48 points of damage 6 points at a time, an opponent swinging a mean axe doing 10 points a swing will do 6 points to armor each hit and 4 points to Hit Points. Ouch. It gets worse for the poor slob in Leather (absorption rate of 3) with the lower Body score. It would be 3 points going to armor and the remaining 7 going to HP. He wouldn’t be long for this world.

Should combat be this vicious? I tend to think yes. It makes characters think twice about getting into combat without preparation and backup.

And characters can also actively parry with a weapon or shield to avoid damage all together. For example, if our buff Chain-mail wearing character has a long sword and a shield, he can attack with the long sword and parry with the shield doing an opposed roll.

Ok, this is starting to sound better. Active vs. Passive Defense. Coolio.

Thoughts? Ideas?

–Fitz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Just like the rest of life, sometimes it’s time for a do-over. Thus begins a new chapter in the life of Moebius Adventures (MARPG) games.

Dice for various games, especially for rolepla...
Image via Wikipedia

Here’s the scoop. We have a streamlined system. It needs to be tested seriously. So who better to take a look at some of the mechanics than… you! That’s right, it’s time YOU got into the act here.

First, I want to welcome you (back) into the fold. The next series of articles will focus on some core mechanics, character creation, and then how to apply those bits to various genres. After all, MARPG is a cross-genre, universal roleplaying game. Tough to tell that when all we’ve seen so far are examples for fantasy settings.

I WANT your feedback. If you think this sucks and is too difficult, let me know. I’m looking for frank opinions with suggestions on how to make things better. The goal here is to create a solid base mechanic for a variety of settings so gaming groups can pick up the system and play just as easily in a cyberpunk setting as they can in a low-magic fantasy setting. Or if they want to do epic space battles such as in Star Wars or Star Trek or make more intimate “cowboys in space” games like with Firefly, it moves quickly with them.

Like in all roleplaying games, your MARPG character is a set of properties – characteristic values (Mind, Body, Soul), derived characteristic values (Hit Points, Luck Points, Reality Check, and so on), and skills with ranks. All these values do is provide a framework for behaviors, abilities, and experience. They’re just numbers on a page. It’s up to the player and GM to bring the player (PC) and non-player characters (NPCs) represented by those numbers to life.

As a player or GM, in addition to a PC or NPC, you’ll need two d10s. We’re not talking huge sets of dice here.

The basic mechanic is the same for all skill checks, characteristic checks, and combat rolls. You have a target number you have to roll below with 2d10 and modifiers.

The target number comes from the character himself for most actions, with modifiers from the GM for things like weather, fatigue, item quality, etc. In the case of opposed actions, it becomes a battle between the quality of success or failure between opponents.

Bird tracks on a frozen lake
Image by Paul Williams (Iron Ammonite) via Flickr

For example, if a tracker is looking for animal signs and tracks in the woods, it’s a simple skill check. The GM may make the attempt more difficult or easier based on conditions such as how recent the tracks were made, if there was fresh snow, if snow or leaves covered the tracks, and so on.

Let’s say the Tracker has a Tracking skill of 3 ranks. Tracking relies on knowing what to look for and how perceptive the character is, so it’s a Mind-based skill. Let’s say the Tracker has a Mind of 7. By default, without any modifiers from the GM, the target number is 10.

To determine success or failure, you roll 2d10, add modifiers, and compare the total to the target.

In the case of the Tracker, let’s say he rolls a 13. He failed the attempt, so he’s unable to find his quarry.

Roll two 1′s and you have a critical success. Roll two 10′s and you have a critical failure. Compare the total to the target number to determine the Quality of Success (QoS) or Failure (QoF). If your total was above or below the target, your QoS (if below) or QoF (if above) is the difference between the target and the total. If your total is equal to the target, the GM can decide whether the act was directly opposed and it was a draw or if the act was unopposed and it was a success.

QoS = Target Number – Total Die Roll
QoF = Total Die Roll – Target Number

For the Tracker, his QoF was 3. He missed the target by 3 (Total Die Roll 12 – Target Number 10 = QoF 3).

Let’s say he rolled a 3 on 2d10. That would mean he succeeded in finding tracks. In that case, his QoS was 7. He made it by 7 (Target Number 10 – Total Die Roll 3 = QoS 7).

Now let’s say the Tracker is looking for someone deliberately trying to obscure signs of their passing. The Tracker’s opponent uses her Tracking skill at rank 4 and her Mind characteristic value of 5 for an unmodified Target Number of 9. The GM rolls 2d10 and gets a 5, for a QoS of 4. This makes the Tracker’s job harder.

The Tracker’s unmodified Target Number is 10. But since it’s opposed, the QoS becomes a modifier on the skill check making it more difficult. Now the Tracker’s Target Number is 6 (Target Number 10 – opponent QoS = 6). The Tracker would have to make a great roll to get a six or less.

* on the left: German Reitschwert, circa 1530,...
Image via Wikipedia

Let’s add another wrinkle. The Tracker finds the woman he’s been searching for in the woods and a battle begins. Each opponent has a sword and some ranks in the Swordsmanship skill.

The Tracker surprised his quarry and gets to attack first. His quarry can only Parry with her sword or Dodge to get out of the way. The Tracker’s Swords is at 4 ranks and his Body is a 5, for an unmodified Target of 9. His quarry has Swords at 6 ranks and a Body of 5 for an unmodified Target of 11. Both opponents roll 2d10.

The Tracker rolls a 5, for a QoS of 4 (Target Number 9 – Total Die Roll 5 = QoS 4). His quarry has a -4 modifier to her Target to make it a 7. The GM rolls a 9 for a QoF of 2 and the woman takes 2 points of damage…

This pattern of comparing QoS and QoF is repeated throughout the system now for skill checks, characteristic checks, and combat. One mechanic simplifies the rules greatly, while still providing the flexibility and uniqueness of character strengths and weaknesses to appear in sometimes unexpected ways.

In the next article, we’ll talk about character creation and the flexibility available for quickly creating PCs and NPCs for any campaign.

What do you think? Leave me comments here on the blog entry or send me e-mail directly at fitz (at) moebiusadventures (dot) com. I’m looking for negative and positive feedback here – so let ‘er rip!

–Fitz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I had an interesting conversation with my GM last week. We somehow got onto the topic of how evil he was as a gamemaster. Honestly I don’t see him as evil, but I ran with it for the sake of ignoring some other things I really didn’t want to work on. :)

yinyangBetween the alignments of Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, or Chaotic Evil, we decided that he was a Neutral Evil GM with some Chaotic tendencies.

A Lawful Evil GM is a rules lawyer and typically more interested in enforcing the letter of the law as spelled out in whatever game he is entranced with at the time. Mike definitely doesn’t fall into this category. I don’t think I even fell into this category when I was GMing either – I’m far more likely to either make a ruling and go with it on the spot or stop the game to get into a philosophical debate about why it was phrased the way it was. (Occupational hazard when you’re the one who wrote the game.)

A Neutral Evil GM is more interested in game balance than the rules persay. Mike tries to be very balanced and err on the side of roleplaying and story more than focusing on either making sure the PCs get their butts handed to them regularly. I’d like to think I fall into this category myself, but I know better.

And then there’s the Chaotic Evil GM. These are the guys who sometimes roll dice for no reason but to increase his players’ blood pressure. (Mike’s been guilty of doing this from time to time.) These are the GMs who decide one session they want to really teach the PCs a lesson and beat up on them and then in the next session be really nice to make up for it… And then there’s my type of chaos, where I end up GMing a sandbox game and watching the fireworks.

Each of these types of GMs should be observed in their natural habitat and not removed through the use of force, or that might backfire.

Why Evil you might ask? Honestly good and evil are in the eyes of the players most of the time, not in the eyes of the GM. So the night that your GM springs an encounter with an invisible flying creature in a cave and nearly kills all the PCs (one actually did die in that case and was raised later), he might be evil. The night he just happens to leave a magical crystal sword in a pile of loot just so your character can use it, he might be good.

Just don’t anger your GM without good reason. Then you’ll see True Evil raise its ugly head. ;)

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Hi all!

Along with many other folks, I had an opportunity to check out the Fall 2009 issue of Kobold Quarterly in October… And I’m just now getting back to writing up the review. But here I am!

I have to admit that I’d only seen one other issue of the magazine a couple of years ago and though I was impressed, I wasn’t blown away. This time it hit me more like the old Dungeon or Dragon magazines of yore and from the cover on I was hooked. Not only does it have great art to capture your attention, but the content covers everything from vampires to the myth of the Philosopher’s Stone and far beyond.

Kobold Quarterly, Fall 2009, Issue 11As with many magazines, there are quite a few ads – but I’m guessing KQ (like many other magazines) uses ad- and subscription-revenues to keep providing us great content every quarter. On the plus side, most of the ads are well designed, colorful, and definitely meant for the target audience (of which I’m definitely a member).

The issue starts off with “A Broken Mind – Sanity and Mental Disorders” by Scott Gable – and I love the idea of merging in sanity rules with D&D. Ever since I played Call of Cthulhu in college, I’ve been fascinated by usually slow (sometimes quick) slide to madness that can occasionally overcome a character. Gable’s mechanic of adding “Mind” as a 7th ability score and a pool of sanity works great to bring in the dark overtones of a world where mortals are not meant to experience everything the world might throw at them… And I just love describing a character’s sanity points as “the currency of madness”… [insert evil laughter here]

Gable’s article presents not only the base mechanic for sanity, but how to use it (and lose it) as the character reacts to the bizarre things an evil GM might throw at his or her players. Having lost my sanity in CoC long ago, I remember going Berserk and killing the rest of my party, so I was pleased to see that slip into the list of “Temporary Insanities”. And among the “Indefinite Insanities” you have things like Fear, Obsession, and Paranoia – a trifecta of mental illness sure to cause a player to stretch some roleplaying skills!

Another great article is “Howling Werebeasts – How to Play Lycanthropes as PCs” by John E. Ling, Jr., which covers a bit of the history of Lycanthropy and how to integrate it into a game. Unless you’re playing White Wolf‘s Werewolf, I think the templates covered presents both sides of the were-beast picture. As a player, you must take the bad with the good. It hurts to change. People will react to you differently. And it requires a it of work on your part. As a GM, it offers logical responses to how to work it into a game without throwing the balance off.

What I really liked about the article was how it broke the Wererat, Werewolf, and Werebear into actual, playable characters. I don’t think I want to play one soon, but it might be something to consider as a NPC should I need to throw some PCs a curve ball. And once you’ve introduced it as an NPC it’s not too much of a stretch to see your PCs get infected… [insert more evil laughter here]

The other articles in the magazine are just as good, covering the “Ecology of the Vampire,” “Uvandir: The Pride of Craftsmen” (great details about dwarven life), “Running Across the Screen (A GM Roundtable)” (great roundtable interview with 16 GMs!), and more. The book reviews were also welcome, presenting a few fantasy and science-fiction titles that might inspire GMs and Players alike.

In 82 pages you get a bit of everything, which is awesome. Be sure to check it out at KoboldQuarterly.com today!

Looks like I’m going to have to break out my wallet and purchase a subscription just in time for the holidays. :)

–Fitz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Technorati FavoritesFacebookTwitterDiggDeliciousShare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

« Older entries