Campaign Mastery helps tabletop RPG GMs knock their players' socks off through tips, how-to articles, and GMing tricks that build memorable campaigns from start to finish.

A Zocolo Premise: AetherCon is coming!


AetherCon is coming!

(As any viewer of Babylon-5 knows, a Zocolo is a marketplace or gathering place).

The unusually observant may have noticed a new link in our right-hand Navigation. AetherCon is an idea that has arrived at exactly the right time – just as the required technologies and their distribution intersect with the realm of possibility that is required to make it work.

So what is AetherCon, exactly?

AetherCon is the first example (that I’m aware of) of a new (to me) concept: the virtual convention – a gaming convention that is held purely and completely over the internet.

Just like any other convention, it will have a huckster’s area, an art show, games and tournaments, areas for con “attendees” to mingle and chatter and meet one another, and so on. The only difference is that it will take place entirely within cyberspace.

Many of the building blocks for such a convention have been in existence for a while now, waiting for someone to assemble and package them in the right way. People have played RPGs in chat rooms before, for example, and there have been podcasts and streamed interviews, which are virtually the same thing as an online “Panel”. E-commerce has been around for years. Twitter’s been around for a while, and Tweetchat can turn Twitter into a virtual chatroom within a chatroom using the magic of hashtags. One such regular “virtual chatroom” that’s been around for a while is #RPGChat; I’ve only had the opportunity to participate in one, but gained some new friends and followers from the experience, and picked up a couple of new ideas for my trouble. It was quite rewarding :)

But playing games in this way is somehow less stimulating than the genuine tabletop experience with its interactivity. What will make AetherCon really work is a new piece of virtual tabletop software, currently in Beta test, Roll20.

AetherCon is scheduled to take place on the weekend of November 16-18, 2012.

And here’s the best part: It’s absolutely Free!. No registration fees. No registration QUEUS. No sudden rushing from one room to another after a panel is relocated.

Distributed Conventioneering

One of the big reasons why I expect AetherCon to be very successful, and why Campaign Mastery is so happy to be associated with it, is the fact that attendance is distributed all over the planet. It has the potential, therefore, to become the biggest convention in the world. This first effort is the first raindrop of a monsoon.

Furthermore, with GMs scattered around the globe in different time zones, with a little scheduling effort and the right volunteers, a virtual convention could operate 24 hours a day, with GMs and administrators in one country taking up the baton from those in another. Even if were a convention you had to pay for, that means that attendees would get more value for their dollar – and however much it costs to line up sufficient servers to run the convention, I am quite sure that the cost per attendee would be far less than a ‘conventional’ con, which has to worry about renting facilities, refreshments, insurance, and so on. That’s a savings that can be passed on to the customer – and it also means that virtual conventions would be more easily profitable.

The advantages just keep adding up. Have you ever missed a convention panel you were interested in because it was scheduled back-to-back with another one that you also wanted to attend? A streamed convention panel can be recorded, and a text-based one can be automatically transcribed – and both can be downloaded for “attending” at a later time, just like a podcast.

Guest fees are almost certainly going to be less, because there is no need to pay for transport and accommodation. That’s either more guests or even lower prices! Because guest commitments can be smaller – they can attend from home, or from wherever else they happen to be – guests should also be easier to find and organize. What do you need – ten bucks for a webcam and twenty towards internet fees and electricity?

At some conventions, guests are paid hundreds or even thousands of dollars, and justifiably so – they have a lot of demands on their time, and a convention can be a big commitment. Add security and other overheads, and the total can be staggering. The virtual convention undercuts all these requirements, all these expenses.

And finally, there is the international appeal. I live in Australia – for an American or European guest to attend a convention here, the air fares are thousands of dollars, the time commitments are much greater (call it a couple of days spent travelling), the guest is often jetlagged. It not only makes it much more expensive to have such guests, making cons more expensive and less profitable, you have far fewer guests when you do organize a convention. The virtual convention internationalizes attendance. It doesn’t matter much where the convention is being based, or where the guest lives, or even if they are working – on a movie, TV show, or whatever. It would be a lot easier to get Peter Jackson on a webcam for a panel for an hour than to get him to physically attend a con, especially if he was in the middle of editing or shooting his next movie. Does anyone seriously think he wouldn’t be a popular guest at a gaming con? It just hasn’t been practical in the past. It still might not be easy, but it’s suddenly not out of the realm of possibility!

So, let’s talk about AetherCon

AetherCon, as befits any prototype, is not organized on a scale to match these grandiose visions, but it’s still impressive. AetherCon is a free to attend, free to partake, non-profit initiative.

It will feature tabletop RPGs of all genres throughout the weekend, highlighted by four three-day tournaments of Pathfinder, Call of Cthulhu, Savage Worlds, and Shadowrun. Game tables will be run on the Roll20 browser-based virtual tabletop. There will be Roll20 tutorials and a Roll20 Live Stream. The Roll20 program will allow GMs and players alike to simply click on a link in our Gaming or Tourney Halls and enter the playing area as opposed to needing to download and install the software to participate.

Game publishers confirmed as taking part in AetherCon either through prize support, supplying guests, or taking a vendors booth include Battlefield Press, Catalyst Game Labs, Chaosium, Chronicles of the Void, Flying Buffalo Inc., Immersion Studios, Imperfekt Games, Kenzer and Company, Paizo, Pinnacle Entertainment Group, Scrying Eye Games, Skirmisher Publishing LLC, Stardust Publications, Sundered Epoch, The Design Mechanism, Third Eye Games, and Vigilance Press.

Confirmed guests to date are Wedge Smith and Doug Bush (Chronicles of the Void), Steven ‘Bull’ Ratkovich (CGL), James Sutter (Paizo), and Lawrence Whittaker and Pete Nash (The Design Mechanism).

Current Members of the Artists Enclave include Paul Abrams (TSR, Shadowrun); Alex E. Alonso Bravo (DC Comics, Pixar, AEG); Brent Chumley (AEG); John L Kaufmann (Shadowrun); Eric Lofgren; (Paizo, White Wolf, Mongoose Publishing), Chris Malidore (Fantasy Flight Games, PEG), Patrick McAvoy (WotC, AEG, Fantasy Flight Games), Brad McDevitt (Chaosium, CGL, Battlefield Press), Jesse Mead (Fantasy Flight Games), Aaron B. Miller (WotC, AEG, Open Design), and Stanley Morrison (AEG) – among other up and comers in the field. Some of the work by these artists is available as computer wallpapers for free download from the AetherCon website, and Convention attendees will have the opportunity to purchase prints of these and other works as well as attend live tutorials by those artists during AetherCon.

Confirmed games now include:

  • All Flesh Must Be Eaten
  • A Thousand and One Nights
  • Atomic Highway
  • Call of Cthulhu
  • Castles & Crusades
  • Dark Heresy
  • Eclipse Phase
  • Fantasy Craft
  • Labyrinth Lord
  • Legend of the Five Rings
  • Leverage
  • Mouse Guard
  • Mutants & Masterminds
  • Paranoia
  • Pathfinder
  • Pathfinder Society
  • RIFTs
  • Savage Worlds
  • Serenity
  • Shadowrun
  • Time Lord
  • Star Wars WEG D6
  • Swords and Wizardry

…with more to come.

How to participate

If you’d like to play in a game use AetherCon’s Player Pre-Registration Tool to register.

If you’d like to run a game use their GM Pre-Registration Tool.

If you don’t see your game in their lineup, would like to lend a hand, or need to inquire for any other reason, they encourage potential attendees to feel free to use their ‘Contact Us’ page.

Be sure to visit their website and show your support for AetherCon via Facebook, Google+, and Twitter:

The Shape Of Things To Come

I’m proud that Campaign Mastery is a supporter of AetherCon and wish the organizers every success. I’ll be updating this post regularly in response to releases from the convention website, and I’ll post a comment each time I do. So if you want to use Campaign Mastery to stay informed, post a comment to this post and tick the box to subscribe to further comments.

Voting for the ENnies has opened! Cast your vote at http://www.ennie-awards.com/vote!

If you should happen to vote for us for Best Blog, Thank You Very Much. And if you don’t, no hard feelings – it’s an honor just to be nominated!

Comments (6)

The Butler Did It: Mystery Plotlines in RPGs



I was running an adventure this weekend from a module that I had downloaded from the net. Central to the plotline was a mystery, a political situation in a small town, stories of an ancient Curse, all calculated to drive the PCs to an above-ground dungeon which could also be called a Mansion.

While the content that was provided was excellent, the author had ignored a couple of plot holes – or plot opportunities – as large as the mansion that was the central feature. Specifically, a historical mention of a drought and a plague of snakes, and the arrival virtually simultaneously with those events of a band of Druids who had set up shop in a grove outside of town. To anyone except the author of the module, it would seem obvious that these events are possibly linked, and that investigating the Druids was a rational step in solving the mystery.

The problem was that no details useful in roleplaying the Druids had been supplied. There was no statement as to what information they could contribute if their cooperation was won over, no suggestion as to what fees & services they might demand in exchange for their assistance – in fact, beyond the fact of their existence, and that they had converted one-quarter of the locals to their theology, there was virtually nothing about them.

Since I had already been preparing to write an article on how to do Mysteries in RPGs, the failures of this adventure in this department struck home all the more forcefully. So, what should the author have done? I’ll get to that a little later. Let’s start by looking at the taxonomy of mysteries and laying some groundwork…

The Elements Of A Mystery

Anytime you have a question that needs answering in an RPG, you have a mystery on your hands. It might be a small-scale puzzle whose solution only requires asking the right person the right question, or it might be quagmire of lies and deception that will require substantial investigation.

The Focus

Mysteries all start with a Focus. In a crime-style mystery, this is the victim; in other kinds of mysteries, it may be some unexpected scientific outcome or unexpected event or surprising decision or action. In other words, it’s always “X did something” or “Something happened to X”, and the question to be answered is always, “Why?”.

From the circumstances and conditions, clues are gathered and a list of potential suspects – theories – is formed. These are then investigated, hopefully leading to other clues, eliminating suspects until only one remains, and all clues have been tied to this person or cause with none remaining to be investigated.

cell1 topleft 'who' cell2 topright 'why' cell3 bottom 'how when where'

The Suspect Triangle

At it’s heart, a mystery – any mystery – can be summed up, “Who did what, why, how, when, and where?”. These elements are summed up in the Suspect Triangle. The top half of this inverted triangle covers Motive, subdivided into Who and Why, while the bottom half deals with Means & Opportunity in the shape of the questions How, When, and Where.

All three areas of the triangle need to be filled with something that is uncontradicted and undisputed before you can consider someone a genuine suspect, and only if you have eliminated all other suspect triangles can guilt be confirmed and the mystery be considered solved.

Of course, that’s a very crime-oriented approach; but substituting “What” for “Who” covers all the other types of mystery which may be encountered.

The Clue Process

Each clue is subject to a three-step process, without fail.

  • Detection, in which the presence of a possible clue is identified;
  • Analysis, in which the specifics of the clue are determined; and
  • Interpretation, in which the meaning and significance of the clue with respect to one or more suspect triangles is determined.

Each clue adds an item to one or more of the areas of the suspect triangle for some suspects, while demonstrating that one or more other suspects could not be responsible.

The Investigation Procedure

This relationship between clue and suspect triangle is depicted in the graphic showing The Ideal Situation. Ask the right questions – and each question-and-answer constitutes a single clue – and you will only be left with a single suspect, the guilty party.
one truthful clue eliminates several suspects

when all innocents are eliminated, only the guilty remains

This question-answer-meaning trio corresponds with the structure of a clue. The trio can be taken literally, where each question is asked of a witness to the event being investigated or to part of the circumstances surrounding it, or metaphorically, where the question can relate to physical evidence, historical relationships, financial information, and so on.

The Lie

Mysteries would be easy to solve if everyone told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They don’t.

One person in particular – the guilty party – has every reason in the world to lie. This is so axiomatic that discovery of a lie is tantamount to elevating the liar to the status of Prime Suspect.

A lie works as depicted in the illustration: by shifting apparent guilt or by contradicting part of the suspect triangle to show that the guilty party could not have committed the crime. In this case, a truthful statement would have led directly to the first suspect (the one on the left), but the lie makes it seem like the second suspect is guilty rather than the first, or makes it appear that the guilty party could not have been responsible because he no longer had one or more of means, motive, or opportunity.

Mysteries in Media & Fiction

Making a mystery more interesting requires that things not be so clear-cut. One of the easiest ways of achieving this is the introduction of a lie for some reason other than guilt in relation to the main mystery. Blackmail, an adulterous relationship, the commission of a minor but unrelated crime or impropriety, seeking to protect someone who the liar thought was guilty, protection of social status or reputation; there are a multitude of possible reasons for such a deception. Only once this second lie has been identified and the deception penetrated can the other lie, that of the guilty party, be verified and proof of guilt obtained.

This gives us the simplest of satisfying mystery structures – the Linear Mystery. The name derives from the fact that one step follows another in logical progression, like the pages of a script or the chapters of a novel. The first clue describes the circumstances of the crime; the second represents the line of questioning that initially leads to the questioning of the guilty party. The Guilty party lies, of course. The next clue represents the questioning of everyone else except the second liar. Everything else not shown in the linear mystery is essentially irrelevant, window dressing and red herrings.

Going too far

It’s tempting to set up a mystery in which every person interviewed has a reason for deception as a way of increasing the difficulty of the puzzle. Having tried this for myself, I can state that it is definitely going too far, and ended up generating more confusion once the lies were detected than is really suitable. There are better approaches, which I will discuss in due course.

The Clever Alternative

At this point, I have to confess to a fondness for the Columbo telemovies, especially the later ones. Many of them use intelligence and cunning in place of such crude tactics as described by the linear plot. Arranging matters so that everyone can speak the truth and still be misleading is a far better solution than a linear plot. This requires a deception as to the nature of one of the lower elements of the suspect triangle – altering the apparent time of commission of the crime being investigated, for example, or the apparent whereabouts of the prime suspect at the time of commission through the use of some form of impersonation. Having everything but one small overlooked detail covered shifts the nature of the mystery to a battle of wits between the guilty party and the investigator.

Further Complications

Investigators generally have one or more additional complications to work around. These usually (but not always) take the form of legal requirements which must be met before certain clues can be accessed.

The Parallel Plot

Roleplaying Games do not proceed in a nice, neat, Linear fashion. Players are too creative, and too cynical, for any such simple structure to suffice. They are too prone to reason, “If I assume that {suspect 1] is guilty, how can I reconcile that with the evidence the GM has put before me?” They will then test the assumptions they have made, setting traps, violating strict legal practice regarding the obtaining of evidence, or doing whatever else is necessary.

The solution is the Parallel Plot. I simply take a Linear Mystery and list of possible suspects and use the player’s own techniques against them. I shortlist a group of suspects, and then determine which ‘clues’ are lies and deceptions of various types, the penetration of which will lead to the unmasking of the culprit. I then do the same for the second suspect in the shortlisted group, and then a third.

This prevents shortcutting the mystery by ensuring that the Nth approach to the puzzle is the correct one. All the lines of enquiry the Players make which precedes the Nth approach lead to dead-ends, because the correct line of enquiry is always the last one.

Practicalities

This might seem like a lot of work, but it can be achieved relatively simply if the GM, when designing the adventure, employs only a short phrase to synopsise each clue. Setting up a table like this:

column1 clue source, column2 clue summary, column3 true/false for suspect1, guilty column4 true/false for suspect 2, and so on.

makes it simple work. For each clue, you simply need to determine whether the clue is true or not, given the identity of the guilty party (shown across the top). Using this table, you can quickly identify which statements need to be prepared in more than one form (truth or lie); for each lie, you can add a notation about why the source of the clue is lying, how the lie can be penetrated, and so on. Numbering each clue in this respect and indexing by source down the left-hand column, again as shown, turns the table into a crib sheet showing all possible solutions.

The result is that you have a list of the clues (which don’t change, but whose circumstances might), and additional notes regarding them, all of which can be organised by source and by clue number. Any clues that don’t specifically lead to the guilty party are, by definition, clues pointing to a non-guilty party – a red herring or a dead-end.

Beyond The Clichés

You can wrap a mystery, created in this manner, around any genre you like, from Fantasy to Pulp to Superhero to Western to Cthulhu to Sci-Fi, because the structure doesn’t change, only the content.

Each of these genres will have its own clichés in this respect. I urge you to get these all out of your system at once so that you can concentrate on more interesting and original approaches thereafter. By way of example, the first adventure that I ran utilizing the Parallel Plot structure was for the graduation exams in my trainee superhero campaign, where each player was presented with the same mystery in turn, and had to solve it. All but one of the five student PCs chose a different guilty party because the right answers kept changing to whatever was most interesting to play. The setting was a convention of butlers – one of whom was the killer and one the victim. I was even able to title the ‘adventure’, “The Butler Did It!” without giving anything away – this article has been titled in reminiscence of that adventure.

Technology & Magic

In the foreword to Asimov’s Mysteries, Isaac discusses the perceived difficulties of uniting the mystery genre with science fiction in his foreword. I’d like to start this section by quoting some selected passages from that essay:

…yet science fiction writers seemed to be inhibited in the face of the science fiction mystery.

Back in the late 1940s, this was finally explained to me. I was told that ‘by its very nature’ science fiction would not play fair with the reader. In a science fiction story, the detective could say, ‘But as you know, Watson, ever since 2175, when all Spaniards learned to speak French, Spanish has been a dead language. How came Juan Lopez, then, to speak those significant words in Spanish?

Or else, he could have his detective whip out an odd device and say, ‘As you know, Watson, my pocket-franistran is perfectly capable of detecting the hidden jewel in a trice.’

Such arguements did not impress me. It seemed to me that ordinary mystery writers (non-science-fiction variety) could be just as unfair to the readers. They could hide a necessary clue. They could introduce an additional character from nowhere. They could …

…The point was, though, that they didn’t do anything. They stuck to the rule of being fair to the reader. Clues might be obscured, but not omitted… …The reader was remorselessly misdirected, misled, and mystified, but he was not cheated.

It seemed, then, a matter to be taken obviously for granted that the same would apply to a science-fiction mystery. You don’t spring new devices on the reader and solve the mystery with them. You don’t take advantage of future history to introduce ad hoc phenomena. In fact, you carefully explain all facets of the future background well in advance…

Magic and the other trappings of Fantasy are just as problematic, because (by definition) they contravene what we know as physical laws. If they exist, they make possible the otherwise impossible. But the same solution holds – understand how it works, what its limitations are, and how it affects cause-and-effect, and make sure that any relevant information is provided to the PCs trying to solve your mystery.

It’s an additional complication, but one that yields great rewards in the long run.

Some final principles

When you are preparing a mystery – whether for a story or for an RPG adventure – there are some key steps and principles that you should keep in mind.

  1. Where might information be found?
  2. What do these sources know? What will they speculate? What will they get wrong, for reasons of prejudice or other failure?
  3. What do the investigators need to know in order to solve the mystery?
  4. Where can they get that information?
  5. Where Else can they get that information?
  6. What can your players do? What can their characters do? What are their respective strengths and weaknesses? How can you utilize the former to drive the plot forward, and how can you ensure that the latter don’t make it come unstuck?
  7. What will be tedious to play through, and how can it be made interesting?
  8. Mystery plots are inevitably frustrating at some point – how can you relieve that frustration? Will a little random action suffice?
  9. If the players get totally lost, how can you help nudge them forward?
  10. What DON’T you want the players to learn – and how can you avoid it, while still being fair?
  11. How can you make sure that everyone has fun while solving the mystery?

It is in failure to address the first two points that the designer of the module I was GMing, and which I referred to at the start of this article, failed to perform his due diligence. The first item should have turned up the potential for investigation of the Druids, and the second one should have provided the answers necessary to keep the plot rolling along.

One other tip: It helps a great deal with the last couple of items on the list if players can find things out for themselves with their characters, rather than being spoon-fed answers through dialogue!

One Final Technique – and its pitfalls

A technique that I have used occasionally is to create a puzzle without creating a solution. Let the PCs investigate and theorize about possible solutions until you hear one that you like – then expropriate it, give it a slight twist to make it your own, and run with it.

Sounds simple, right? There’s a sting in the tail. If you don’t know where the PCs are going, they can end up painted into a corner. You are not guaranteed that there will BE a solution, after all. You can accept a solution, only to realize, months later – or for a player to realize after such a time-span – that the solution contradicts one or more of the clues that you fed the players and which was overlooked when they came up with their solution.

It gets more complicated – what if, on being confronted, the accused had admitted his guilt – and months later, a line of thought proved that he wasn’t guilty? Why had he lied? Why go to prison, or get executed, or whatever, if he wasn’t guilty? Was he protecting someone or something sufficiently important to justify this sacrifice? Was he misled, or stupid, or forced to confess by back-room interrogation techniques?

What if you’ve lost all your notes in the meantime?
I strongly recommend that if you adopt this technique – which can be an invaluable one – you make DARNED sure that you begin making contingency plans immediately for the possibility that the train will go off the rails at some future point!

Of course, the same thing can happen with ANY mystery if the GM doesn’t get his logic right, so this is good general advice for ANY mystery!

Immersion

A good mystery can produce greater immersion in the campaign world than any other plotline, but you need to hook the players. It’s a great way to take the campaign background and setting and make it relevant to the PCs. A bad mystery can confuse, obfuscate, and – in general – have exactly the opposite effect. The advice above should help bring you more of the successes and make failures fewer. That’s a good thing, don’t you agree?

Update 25 May, 2021

There are now two sequels to this article:

Links open in new tabs.

Comments (18)

OMG, We’re Nominated! – 2012 ENnies (Updated)


Campaign Mastery is incredibly proud and humbled (and not a little excited-exuberant-exultant!) to learn that we are amongst the five Nominees for Best Blog at this year’s ENnies (Wikipedia Page) – (full list of nominees here).

The competition will be stiff, there are many other fine blogs nominated (and even more that didn’t make the five) – and that should be a source of pride for the entire gaming industry. I want to congratulate all our fellow-nominees.

With the judges choices made, it is now over to you, the public, to vote for your favorites in each category. Voting starts a week from now (on July 20th) and runs until July 29th. I’ll share a link when voting starts.

In the meantime, you – the public – can nominate your favorite publisher for a special fan-based award. Click here for details. Nominations are only open until July 17, so don’t be tardy!

Thank you to the judges for choosing Campaign Mastery as one of the five finalists, and a huge thank-you to our fans, followers, contributors, and – heck, to anyone who’s even thought about clicking a link to us! Without your support, this would never have happened!

Yaaa-hoo!

Comments (13)

Theologies at 30 paces: The Hell of Evil in D&D


Planet Hell by Zakeros – click the thumbnail to view the image full-sized (it’s worth it!)

One of the big questions that every GM should consider when creating their D&D campaign is how to resolve the anarchy of the theological implications of the cosmology.

It’s a simple question: In a world where miracles are readily apparent at the hands of every cleric, where Gods and Demons and Devils and Heaven and Hell are demonstrably real, why would anyone in their right minds choose to be evil?

A proven eternity of torment awaits anyone who transgresses, according to standard theology – and even if you found room for doubt based on a multiplicity of theologies, why would you take a chance?

In standard christian belief, Evil can succeed in tempting the weak because there is room for doubt and confusion. As soon as there is concrete evidence, never mind proof, resistance to temptation should rocket skywards.

D&D attempts to resolve this solution by utilizing multiple pantheons and different versions of Hell (in the form of the planes of the Abyss) but the solution is only half-hearted. Devils and Demons remain standard (if high-level) encounters, and much of the descriptions of the 9 Hells and other planes of the Abyss are relatively standard extracts from christian belief.

The Fumanor Solution

So concerned was I about this particular problem that I decided to do away with evil entirely within the theology of my Fumanor campaign, making it all about a Nihilistic Chaos and a Desperately Rigid Order.

Of course, the morality of the situation I devised is not that simple. The Chaos powers are too disorganized to plan, instead coming up with new stratagems on the spot and executing them immediately. That doesn’t make them dumb, by any means – in fact, they are frighteningly intelligent. It can be argued that it takes even more intellectual firepower to fight an organized planner to a standstill than it does to devise and prepare contingency plans in case your current scheme fails.

Because the landscape keeps shifting on them, the Gods are forced to continually reassess and revise their plans, being forced into progress despite themselves, when what they would prefer would be to act as a constant, consistent foundation for the mercurial changes of mortals to build apon.

The two sides really do need each other in order to be complete, but both consider any such proposal to be heresy of the worst kind.

There is also an interesting moral inversion at work in that the progressives are frequently painted as being the good guys and the conservatives the bad, out of touch with reality. The result is a very 1950s flavor to the campaign, which at the same time is also very modern.

Everything that connects with the problem described in my opening paragraphs is explained as the manifestation or creation of one side or another. The Chaos Powers created demons to do their bidding, so the Gods created devils to interfere and compete with the Demons while creating Celestials to oppose both and keep them in check. All the temptations of evil are actually manifestations of Chaos. What the PCs have yet to realize is that so are al changes for the better. :)

The Fumanor Solution was not intended to become the be-all and end-all answer to the problem; I fully expected to need to implement one of the two solutions given below. It just worked out that I could answer all my questions using the fundamental Law-vs-Chaos conflict that I had already made fundamental to that campaign – if not perfectly, then at least, well enough.

Do as I say, not as I do

The Fumanor solution is a half-measure, and I’m the first to admit it. That it works is immaterial to that assessment. There are better answers.

There are two real solutions to these quandaries that I have been able to come up with, and detailing them is the purpose of this article.

What Fools These Mortals Be

The first solution is to link alignment with intelligence, and decide that only the foolish will ignore these obvious moral warnings. The forces of true evil have always been described as infernally deceptive manipulators, after all, and it is not unreasonable that the less-intellectually profound could be misled into a fatal mistake.

This approach mandates a different, even biased, handling of alignment transgressions than that described in the rulebooks. There can be no forgiveness – any moral lapse must leave a permanent stain apon the character of the transgressor. Absolution is a myth under this paradigm, or almost so – perhaps it is simply two, three, four, or even five times as hard to regain lost moral ground.

Under these circumstances, using the planes of Evil for afterlives of torment and punishment works. Demons and Devils run around setting traps and moral quandaries for mortals, testing and tempting them, and with each success, they gain a greater grip over the mortals who have succumbed to temptation.

The Consequences

This is not a perfect solution. Intelligent enemies are often more interesting opponents than the dumb, and this solution takes that off the table – unless you further refine the concept to make Evil something akin to an addiction. If your smart bad guys are all fallen, corrupted, good guys – think Martel in David Edding’s Elenium trilogy – does it all make sense.

You can’t spring this concept on your players without warning, or after the campaign has begun. It has to influence and shape your encounter design and society and theology and mythology from day one. It needs to subtly reshape the rules of the game – aside from alignment and alignment transgressions; there are various spells that may need subtle adjustment. The definition and class description of various classes might need to be tweaked.

As a result, while this is a simpler solution than the alternative discussed below, it is like an iceberg – there will be a lot more work needed behind the scenes and below the surface.

Let Evil Be Evil

The alternative is to redefine the nature of Hell, as depicted and represented in D&D. If it is no longer a place of torment for all who come to reside there, if there is something about that afterlife that is appealing to certain personality types, suddenly the problems all go away.

In any afterlife where there is a judgment rendered, there are always three options. The first is bliss, for those who have led a life of spiritual purity – or who have at least been forgiven and absolved of their sins. The second is condemnation (and possible destruction) for those who have been willingly disobedient to the “pure” moral code. In between these two extremes lie a middle ground – one that holds all manner of promise in terms of game theology.

Why could it not be that both extremes have their needs met by the spirits of those in the middle – until whatever minor infractions that had led to this condition had been paid for?

Two standards of Evil

This defines two different degrees of being Evil – the aristocracy of evil and the peasantry of evil. The aristocrats may be those who are actively evil, or this rank may be reserved for those who enter into pacts with the forces of Darkness, or there may even be a hierarchy of rank between these two levels of commitment to the cause. The peasantry are those who merely succumb to temptation, who take the easy way out.

If the representatives of Evil can offer power not only in this world but in the next, it both increases the appeal of Evil as a way of life and a philosophy, but overcomes the stumbling block that makes choosing that path so nonsensical. If those who labor on Evil’s behalf have a realistic expectation of a life of comfort and ease, with servants and lesser beings to fulfill their every need (no matter how vile), a life of Evil becomes far more tempting – and the playing field for mortal hearts is restored to an even balance.

The Consequences

Unlike the first solution, this can be introduced retroactively. Even if the PCs have been to the planes of Hades and seen the tortured souls of those exiled their, this can be glossed over – if the victims they had seen were neutrals being tortured not for their misdeeds by to demonstrate the power of the true evil souls for whom this was their final reward.

But, if anything, it is more work than the first solution, though it might not seem so at first glance.

  • Entire planes of existence need to be redefined;
  • the cosmology in back of them needs to be reexamined;
  • a whole theology needs to be assembled complete with rituals and mythology;
  • the cleric class description needs to be adjusted slightly;
  • other classes with theological connections like Paladins, Monks, and Druids need tweaking;
  • each of the major races needs to be appraised to integrate the new world-view;
  • and finally, some of the standard monsters need to rewritten to fit the new paradigm.
Alignment, Schmalignment

It should be noticed that beyond the general principle of good vs evil, this has no more to do with the standard alignment definitions and treatments than does a duck or a sunset. The ethics and morality can be as complex as desired. Consult my five-part series on Alignment for more discussion in this respect. The link is to part 1, An Unnecessary Evil? which in turn links to the other 5 parts of the series.

The Reward

So, with all this work to do, why would you choose this solution over the other? Well, firstly, it puts the bad buys on an even playing field with the good guys – which automatically ramps up the challenge and drama of whatever the situation is in the game. Second, it feels far more integrated than the somewhat slapdash first solution. And thirdly, it gives more scope for independent creativity, for making this campaign different from that.

It makes your world more personal, more unique, more a reflection of you and your ideas. It makes your game better – provided you have the prep time to put all those pieces together.

That sounds like a pretty good reason, to me.

Comments (13)

300, 550, 37, 40, 3300, 387 – Thank You!


Milestones are special. Campaign Mastery has just had two – 300,000 visitors and 550,000 page views. We want to thank each and every one of you. But even more than that, we want to thank our many readers for their loyalty; more than 37% of those visits are from returning visitors. Ten percent is usually considered an excellent result for a website. 37% is extraordinary!

Another statistic that I am very proud of is our continued growth rate of 40% per year. Another incredible result! And then there are the comments – over 3300 of them, on our 386 posts so far. Enlightening, thoughtful, insightful, and encouraging, they have driven us to even greater efforts.

Sadly, Milestones also often mean change. For the last few months, Johnn has been slowly prioritising other endeavours, and working to fulfill other commitments. To make room for these efforts, he has now chosen to set aside his efforts at Campaign Mastery – at least for the foreseeable future. Which probably means he’ll be back in a month or two, since the best-layed plans have a penchant for cataclysmic disruption as soon as they are announced! I’ve greatly enjoyed working with Johnn, and I think we made a good team. I wish him well and hope to see him back in these pages on a future occasion.

What does that mean for Campaign Mastery? Not much will change. We’ll still post tips and content twice a week – most weeks, at least. There may be the occasional gap when Johnn would previously have provided a stopgap article, and – on average – Monday blog posts will tend to be smaller (at least in theory). I’m still hoping to open the blog up to more guest posts (including, perhaps, the occasional one by Johnn), and I’m still working on the sequel to Assassin’s Amulet.

Some priorities may shift a little, but the overall goal remains to arm and equip our readers with the tools to improve their campaigns, either by example, or by lessons learned through experience, or by offering insights and ideas and fresh perspectives.

And, of course, we’re not far away from our 400th post (this is number 387) – I’m trying hard to think of something special for THAT one! Any suggestions?

So here’s to the 300K. I hope you’ll all be back with us when we reach 400,000!

Comments (10)

Selected Ticks Of The Clock – Session Scheduling for RPGs



My history with RPGs encompasses an unusual variety of settings in which to play. Each different circumstance involved different session lengths and conditions, and so I feel that I am uniquely qualified to discuss the subject of session scheduling.

NB: The following is necessarily edited and omits a huge amount in favor of the relevant.

The Early Days

When I first got involved with RPGs, we played at a student facility within the University of New South Wales here in Sydney, on Saturdays. The facility, known as The Blue Room for reasons I never really understood, was used by students post-lessons which meant that we didn’t actually take possession of the premises until Noon, and even then had to share the facilities with non-gamers until 1-2 PM. Most had lunch while we waited for the students to go home.

We had use of the facilities until 6AM, in theory, though numbers started falling off at about midnight. That’s 10-16 hours of play each week.

Around 6 or 7 PM – after 5-6 hours play – we would break for dinner – usually about an hour. Between midnight and 1 AM, we would break again for a late-night snack and then play through until one of us announced reaching the limits of his endurance.

The whole atmosphere was very casual, and ten minutes lost here and there was never a problem – I can even remember one occasion when all the games came to a halt because a player was approaching the high score in Defender!

Variations

Campus Security were the only people not happy with this arrangement, and after lodging a number of grumbles with university management, a couple of students not actually part of our group had too much to drink and made a mess on university grounds, providing them with what they claimed to be a Causus Belli. Claiming that they were too busy monitoring our group to keep full control of the rest of the campus grounds, they succeeded in restricting us first to a 1AM finish, then Midnight, and then in getting us banned altogether.

Until the last of these restrictions, all this really did was to cut out the late-late-session, though the fact that we had no opportunity to continue for an extra hour or two if necessary to finish the current stage of an adventure had a profound psychological impact on everyone.

As the final hour or so approached, first the GM would begin rushing, almost forcing the pace, and then the players would begin feeling and reacting in the same manner. Roleplaying elements became submerged in favor of cursory descriptions of action; all the characters everyone began to resemble a Sly Stallone knockoff. The haste made for some incredibly thick-headed decision-making by both parties.

The Long-Weekend Social AD&D Game

In the course of the Queen’s Birthday long weekend (early June in our state calendar), I participated in a standalone social game held at a suburban home from Friday night until Sunday afternoon. This was the first (and last) time I’ve roleplayed in any game where the players were free to consume alcohol (and some did, to excess).

The whole event was incredibly casual. Half the group spent the evening gathered around the bonfire in the back yard, players were continually scattered all over the quarter-acre block, there was a continuous stream of barbequed steak and sausages for whoever wanted them, and gameplay was incredibly calm and slow – until about noon on Sunday, when the GM suddenly seemed to realise that there were only three hours or so left in the game session. That was when the panic set in; having spent 36 hours getting about 6 hours of play done, the GM then attempted to get another 6 hours worth into the final three hours. Nor was he completely sober at the time.

Predictably, the results were something of a mess. My character didn’t even enter play until mid-afternoon on Saturday, and some players never got their characters into play. There was no organization in the campaign, either; players were told what level of character to bring, but beyond that it was open slather. Character backgrounds were virtually non-existent, some were overpowered with magical goodies while others were underpowered, concepts were contradictory (three players decided that their characters were brothers without noticing that one worshipped Aphrodite (Greek Mythos), one worshipped Odin (Norse Mythos), and the third worshipped Set(Egyptian Mythos))!

The First Principle

These experiences gave me my first principle of session length: The psychological effects of available time are more important than the physical or social effects.

If you have too much time and not enough game, the focus of the game and the urgency of events will dissipate. The longer the session, the harder it is to get the pacing right. And, unless you get the pacing exactly right, at some point you will discover that there isn’t enough time left, and a state of slight panic will set in.

The MLC & Institute Of Technology Eras

Around October of 1981, it became clear that we were no longer welcome at the University Campus, and we started looking around for somewhere else to play. We ended up hiring some meeting rooms on the first floor of the MLC Centre building in North Sydney, rooms which were completely unused over the weekend. This was about two or three miles away from where I was living at the time so I was able to walk home over the iconic Sydney Harbour Bridge. This was also when I first started to GM.

We gained access to the facilities when the security guard day shift arrived at 9 AM, and were required to vacate the premises at Midnight, when the evening shift finished. Because there was no competing demand for the facilities, they cost very little to hire, and there were quite a lot of people gaming at the time – sixty to seventy-five – so the price per head was even lower.

The day obviously broke naturally into three sessions – morning, afternoon, and evening – but a funny thing happened: no game started in the morning session went anywhere. They had trouble holding onto players or getting regular attendance and those players they did get seemed to have trouble maintaining concentration.

The Second Principle

It didn’t take very long for this to establish the second principle of game scheduling: Habits are powerful and persistent, no matter how inconvenient they may be.

Because we were all used to starting play after lunch, and spending time gossiping and chattering about geekish things prior, what happened was that the ‘general chatter’ period became extended through the morning. It became a time for board games and card games and character generation and even some game prep – anything and everything except actual play.

Variations

As a result, when the opening times varied over time (in the direction of starting later and ending earlier), not much changed. It was, in general, only a matter of cutting short the “gossip period”. Over time, we became well known to the security guards, and when eventually the building stopped using human security and relied on electronic alarm systems, we were entrusted with arrangements for keys.

During this period, state laws were enacted which required us (and other organizations, clubs, playgrounds, and the like) to have insurance, which in turn required us to organize into a formal club – “The New South Wales Historical Gaming Society”. It wasn’t so much a requirement targeting accidents and injuries to members as it was targeting accidents to incidental members of the public.

Because the biggest risk we faced was of somebody tripping over a bag full of books, and our core activities involved nothing more strenuous or risky than sitting down at a table, the premiums started off very low – from memory, our weekly fees rose from $1 to $2.

The problem was that each time we got a new risk assessor, they kept confusing us with historical reenactment societies, and especially The Society For Creative Anachronism (SCA) which carried out activities like mock combats. As a result, the premiums kept going up, and then being negotiated down – but never down quite as far as it had been the year before.

As a result, from the outside, it appeared to management of the MLC building that we were engaged in continual disputes with the various insurers (we used to chop and change regularly, always seeking the lowest premium).

The Institute Of Technology

Eventually, the MLC building was sold, and (in part) because of this dispute history – which looked worse on paper than it actually was – the new owners informed us that we would have to move elsewhere. Since we had been using the MLC building for years at this point – it must have been 1985 or ’86 – we now had a long history of trustworthy behavior – we were able to find new premises on the 26th floor of the Institute Of Technology, a technical college in central Sydney (which later became the University Of Technology).

We had access to a student recreation/gathering area on the 26th floor, and to one of the classrooms. Also on this floor were the facilities of the Institute’s Radio station, something that would quickly become significant. But I’ll get to that in a few minutes.

We had access to the 26th floor from Noon to 10PM. That suggests breaking the day into two equal segments of five hours each, with each of them having a meal break at the start.

Didn’t Happen. The half-hour from Noon to 12:30 – or so – was lost to lunch and gossip, and the hour from 12:30 to 1:30 – or sometimes 2 PM. If the chatting went over-long, as it sometimes did, it could be as late as 2:30 before “serious” game play got underway.

5PM soon proved to be too early for the evening meal. 6PM was more typical, and 6:30 was not uncommon. So play session one ran from about 2 (by the time set-up was complete) to about 6 (a total of about 4 hours) and session 2 ran from about 7 to about 10 (about 3 hours).

But this brought about an interesting phenomenon: because people were used to playing until Eleven, that final hour of mad panic didn’t happen any more in the evening session (though it always felt like we were stopping early). Because the afternoon sessions were also down an hour on what people were used to, the same thing happened – and the same “finishing too early” feeling obtained.

In other words, the Second Principle was being (quite accidentally) used to the benefit of our games.

GM Politics

These session times were important because of the number of games being played. When we had first moved to the MLC Building, GMs ran the same campaign every week, all day. Occasionally, a game would finish early and a different game would then start on a given day, usually after a meal break.

While at the MLC, the number of GMs running campaigns increased, and some GMs (myself included) began running multiple campaigns concurrently. There were a number of arrangements tried to organize this; we tried splitting the games by the evening meal, we tried splitting them by days of the month, we tried combinations and we tried running them as “what do the majority feel like playing?”. There were a number of arguements between GMs over whether or not one was being greedy in tying up players in their campaigns.

Ultimately, we ended up sorting out some unofficial round rules and drawing up a timetable. The three most popular campaigns (by number of players) were permitted a full day each; other campaigns had a half-day each. They were all organized by availability of existing players. It turned out that mine were two of the most popular campaigns, and that they had no players in common with the next two most popular campaigns. So these formed the 1-2 punch at the start of the month, when tables were at a premium, and for the other weeks of the month, it was session-by-session. Anyone wishing to start a new campaign simply had to find players who were available – or who were more interested in the new campaign than in continuing within the game they were currently signed up for.

The notion of a timetable, so that players knew when the games they were committed to were going to be played, did not go over well with everyone, but it prevented so many arguements that most accepted it as a necessary evil.

You can see how the timetable evolved from one of my early articles at Campaign Mastery, Clash Of The Timetables.

The Third Principle

The timetabling adventures through the years establish the Third Principle of game scheduling: Predictable schedules can create patterns of behavior which strengthen games – if they do not conflict with the Second principle.

The Connection

Session lengths play a crucial role in timetable negotiations. They have different lengths – afternoon sessions tend to be longer than evening sessions. They have different attendance restrictions – afternoon sessions can be delayed by players who work Saturday mornings, evening sessions occasionally run afoul of other social functions. They have different psychologies – afternoon sessions have daylight and are better suited to heroic and friendly campaigns, while night-time campaigns are better suited to gothic, horror, and cinematic game styles, as well as anything sci-fi oriented, because the environment helps players buy into the game.

The Fourth Principle

This identifies the fourth principle of scheduling: the environment can reinforce or or undermine a game; schedule accordingly.

Radio Station Dramas

In winter, when they kept the doors closed to retain warmth, there was no problem, but in summer, when the staff of the radio station wanted to keep their doors open for additional ventilation, they found they couldn’t because of the noise from roleplaying in full heat.

After a couple of years, these complaints led to us being relegated to a couple of classrooms. The space available, which was already more confined than we had been used to, reduced even more dramatically. Then we got moved to even smaller classrooms on the 25th floor. The situation was becoming untenable, but having learned already how difficult it was to locate affordable venues located centrally, we made the best of it, expecting that once the weather cooled, we would be permitted to return to the 26th floor open area.

But then an incident occurred that brought an end to our time at the Institute. One occasional attendee who had been an irregular fixture since the Blue Room days took it apon himself to climb the fire stairs to the 26th floor and have a stickybeak inside the Radio Station facilities – and got caught. He subsequently became the first and only member to be expelled from the club; we all felt betrayed and let down by his behavior.

The Woodstock Era

Fortunately, we had always been wary of the possibility that we would have to move again, and had been constantly on the lookout for potential future venues. The facilities that we moved to were somewhat controversial at first, since they were many kilometers removed from the city centre, but we quickly became accustomed to them.

The hours of operation were very similar to those we had enjoyed at our previous venue, but the arrangement of rooms meant some changes to the established routines. The preliminary card and board games went away, replaced by the occasional game when a roleplaying session finished early.

This was a period of stability in game environment, which meant that the only changes were in the games that were being played and not when. We stayed at Woodstock for well over a decade, and it was only when the facility was slated for redevelopment by the city council (who owned it) that we reluctantly moved.

About the only change that took place was that the timing of the evening meal slowly crept a little later, finally stabilizing at around the 6:30-7:00 mark. In essence, this added an hour and a half to the morning sessions, at the expense of the evening sessions, and marked the end of those incidental side-games.

Attempting to even the balance

There were numerous attempts to even the balance in timing between the two sessions over the years, and none of them lasted very long – two weeks was a good run. This only reinforced the significance of second principle as a dominant factor. In fact, this point is sufficiently important to reinforce it as the Fifth Principle of scheduling – but I’ll get to that in a moment.

The Gamestore Era

And so we moved to where we gather to this day – most of the time – a first-story game store, where we have been based for about a decade. Since the store had its own insurance, we let our organization lapse into history. The store opens at 9 or 10 AM, and for the first few years, closed at 10PM. Did we start at that 9 or 10 time? Hear that hollow echo?

We started at the same time that we had been starting. People would show up between noon and one, eat lunch and chat until somewhere between 1 and 1:30, and start play between 1:30 and 2 PM.

After those initial years, the store was sold to new owners who were not themselves gamers, and hence the closing time was adjusted to between 6 PM and 6:30. Where previously, we had been running two games a day, suddenly there was only time for one – unless we started earlier and interrupted the first game with a meal break in the middle. Did we start earlier? Any guesses?

We started at exactly the same time that we had become used to starting. And people started adjusting their lives to take into account a departure from home timed to get them to the game within the Noon to 1:30 window. People started sleeping later, for example.

The Fifth Principle

And that brings me to that fifth and final Principle: Any ingrained habit will persist until people are forced to change it.

It didn’t matter that we had more time available in which to play – because it would have meant starting at a time earlier than that which had become convenient and routine, it simply didn’t happen. The best that could be done was ensuring that everyone got to the game as close to the regular starting time as possible rather than being a little more casual about it, and even that could not be done with any regularity.

The Final Principle

The final thing that I have noted over the years is that Regular Breaks break immersion – but strengthen it the rest of the time. While I haven’t exactly nailed down how often they should come and how long they should be, I do have some guidelines to offer.

When I was working for the Australian Bureau Of Statistics processing the Census in 1996-97 and in 2001-2, OH&S rules mandated a 5 minute break every 2 hours as the absolute minimum for workers using computer screens or performing tasks which required high levels of concentration. Having slightly more was found to actually increase productivity and attention to detail, especially on the part of decision-making. To ensure that the productivity targets were achieved within OH&S guidelines, the breaks were mandated as a scheduled 10 minutes, every hour. This meant that if necessary while working on an urgent task or to meet a deadline, staff could miss a break without violating the OH&S guidelines.

With the increased use of tablets and laptops even in tabletop gaming, those OH&S guidelines – and especially the serendipitous effects on concentration, decision-making, and attention to detail – seem to be entirely valid as guidelines for gaming.

Putting It All Together

Ultimately, session lengths are the result of a confluence of other factors – start time, finish time, and meal times. The latter form natural boundaries that should always be taken into account. The worst possible session length is two hours; the first hour, everyone is distracted with chatter and food and non-game social activities, and the last hour can produce time pressures that lead to poor decision-making. Every hour in between is at maximum efficiency and attentiveness provided that regular breaks of 5-10 minutes every hour are taken. Sessions longer than about 6 hours are unsustainable unless they are considerably longer (at least 2 more hours and preferably 3-5 more) and broken by a meal. The same sloppiness/distraction effects also affect the half-hour before and the half-hour after a meal break. Don’t bother trying to change when those meal breaks happen – it won’t work. Build your session times around those meal breaks and natural partitions and you’ll get more play squeezed into the hours available.

Gaming at other times

Having tried gaming on occasions other than Saturdays now and then, I have some additional advice about scheduling games at such times. I’m presenting these as something as a postscript for the sake of completeness, because they aren’t part of the main subject of the article. A recent survey that I saw showed that 90% of RPG gaming happens on a Saturday; the remainder of these comments are addressed at the other 10%.

Some weekday comments

Weekdays are problematic because there is always the consideration of work the next day to take into account. I’ve seen games break up as early as 9PM as a result – and when you started at about 6:30 or 7PM, that’s a problem. Beyond this additional complication, all the advice about Saturdays still applies.

Some Friday Night comments

The one exception to the preceding comments comes on Friday nights. For more than a year, I used to precede my Saturday games – first at the Blue Room and then at the MLC Building – with a Friday Night session. These have been supplemented with other occasions from time to time.

And what I’ve noticed is that there is little urgency and less focus. People want to unwind after the working week and don’t want to do anything that feels too much like more work.

I’ve seen some games that took advantage of this state of mind – Paranoia worked especially well – and some that tried to swim against the tide, and they failed spectacularly. Old-school mindless hack-and-slash also works quite well.

If your thoughtful, intelligent players turn into savage barbarians in every game sessions, and you’re playing on Friday Nights, a change of schedule might produce more roleplay and less mayhem.

Some Sunday comments

Sundays are just like Saturdays except that they also have the problems of a weeknight insofar as most people will have to go to work on Monday morning. The exception is a long weekend, when they really ARE just like a Saturday.

Nevertheless, there are a few differences, psychologically, between a Saturday and a Sunday. The latter is usually a little more relaxed, the calm-and-casual point of the week. Saturdays are a little more business-like. Again, this can be important to the style of game that you want to run. It’s not a major factor, but it is nevertheless a contributing factor.

A Caveat and a Conclusion

Of course, all of this relates to gaming in Sydney, Australia, in an organized group or the remnants of such a group. The majority of tabletop RPG gaming is conducted in people’s homes, and of course, most of it is outside Australia. So your experiences may be different to mine, and so far as the advice is concerned, YMMV.

When do you play – and how do the principles I have identified vary, based on your experience? Your comments might be invaluable advice to a novice gamer whose circumstances are more closely related to yours than to mine, so don’t hold back!

Comments (6)

May the camels of 1,000 fleas – wait, that’s not right: Improving Curses in 3.x


Based on an enhanced scanning electron image of a flea from the CDC's Public Health Image Library, Identification number #11436

One of the most under-developed game mechanics in D&D is the Curse. This has so many problems its hard to know where to begin, but I’ll give it a shot:

  • Only clerics can curse because its a clerical spell.
  • They hold no fear for anyone because they are so easily lifted.
  • The suggested effects don’t even come close to matching human inventiveness when it comes to curses.

Curses are an untapped source of creative and roleplaying potential.

The Shards Connection

Having realized the above some time ago, when the proper opportunity arose while preparing the house rules for my Shards Of Divinity campaign, I seized it. The Shards campaign was intended to be a marriage between Gothic elements and High Fantasy, and giving Curses a bit more bite was essential to capturing that genre meld.

My solution was based, in part, on Curses Large and Small by Lloyd Brown III, which appeared in Knights Of The Dinner Table Issue 115, published by KenzerCo in 2006. I modified the contents of that article to suit my campaign’s needs at the time, and have revised them somewhat in light of experience for the appearance of the House Rules here.

The Anatomy Of A Curse

A curse consists of three elements: the effect, the misdeed, and the deity inflicting the effect in response to the misdeed. A fourth necessary element is a DC for the breaking of the curse. In addition, there are a couple of optional elements that may be included – triggers and duration limits, for example. Each of these subjects is considered in detail below.

Anyone can cast a curse – sometimes – at a price

The first major change is this: Anyone can beseech one of the Gods to bestow a Curse apon their enemies.

If the Curse is being bestowed as a dying act, the decision as to whether or not the Curse will be inflicted depends on the relationship between the Deity, the person requesting the Curse, and the circumstances. If the petitioner has been a faithful follower of the Deity, or the request accords with the portfolio of the Deity, the Curse may be bestowed. In making the request, the petitioner pledges his spirit to the service of the Deity in the afterlife. The GM may also rule that a Curse can be bestowed under other circumstances, such as when the petitioner is the last survivor of a family or group. Such curses must target the non-divine non-demonic non-devilish being responsible for actually carrying out the act. In return, the petitioner pledges his life to the service of the Deity.

If the point of death has not been reached, the proclivities (alignment) of the Deity becomes a factor.

  • If the Deity is of Good alignment, a Curse will only be inflicted as punishment for an evil act.
  • If the Deity is Neutral, a Curse will only be inflicted as a measure of Balance or unnatural act. It is not sufficient for the Curse to be in retribution for an act of extreme alignment. Furthermore, the act being punished must be in direct opposition to the portfolio of the Deity in question. For example, polluting a waterway would justify a curse by a god of Nature.
  • If the Deity is Evil, a curse will only be inflicted if it will benefit the petitioner and be in retaliation for a specific act of a Good nature that directly impacts the petitioner.

When a Curse is petitioned, the Deity will announce a price in response. Depending on the personality of the Deity, they may or may not haggle, and may or may not demand payment in advance. This payment will usually be in the form of service, though that service may be indirect – the construction of a shrine or temple, the commission of a statue or artwork, the publication of a book of prayer or philosophy, the sponsoring of a charity or orphanage, the creation of a park, the sacrifice of the first-born or mate, the sabotage of a trade agreement.

It is usually easier to prepare a “price tag” in advance for deities when one of their followers is likely to be encountered.

Not all such requests will be granted, even as a dying act. People die, and get killed, all the time, and even the promise of service in the afterlife may not be sufficient to convince the deity to grant the request. Something about the circumstances needs to be exceptional, or the character making the bequest must be particularly valuable as a follower to the deity. Being a cleric or priest of the deity, and having been a faithful servant, is enough. Being the last of your kind is probably enough. But something exceptional needs to be involved – otherwise every sentient killed by a PC would inflict a curse!

The intent is not to make Curses as commonplace as the sunrise, but to make them more common, and more significant, than they currently are.

The role of Bestow Curse

Clerics (and other classes with access to clerical spells) can bestow Curses using the clerical spell without all this fuss, because they have been granted the authority by their Deities to act as their representative.

An additional requirement

A Curse cannot be successfully cast on a creature that could somehow benefit from it; if one is, the effects should be reinterpreted by the referee as much as necessary to inflict harm on the target. For example, a Curse which bestows a negative level, when cast on an undead, the referee should treat the ‘negative’ level as a positive one, reducing the number of HD of the target by 1 die, having the same effect that the Curse would have if it was cast on a non-undead creature.

The Nature Of A Curse

Curses come in two varieties: Temporary and Permanent (the latter including Curses of indefinite duration). In general, permanent Curses are less powerful than temporary ones because some of the energy of the Curse is diverted into making it last.

Curses as an Anti-Feat

This requires a standard to be set in terms of the effectiveness of Curses. Fortunately, such a standard already exists, codified to set a standard for the effectiveness of Feats. This standard is common to all my d20 campaigns, and I discussed it – amongst other things – in Exceeding The Extraordinary: The Meaning Of Feats. In a nutshell: A feat can confer +4 to a single specific check, +2 to two related specific checks or one type of saving throw, +1 to four related specific checks or to a single combat-related numeric value, an ability normally useful no more than once per round in combat or a more powerful combat ability that can only be used in specific circumstances or is otherwise constrained, or a non-combat class ability.

It seems entirely reasonable as a basic standard of effectiveness of a Curse to consider it to be an “Anti-feat”.

Relative Strength Of Curses

But there is a caveat: Because of the permanency of the effect, Bestow Curse must necessarily be weaker than other spells of equivalent level. This should be borne in mind by the GM when assessing proposed effects. Even minor curses can be life-threatening if the target never has the chance to remove it, and this should also be a consideration by the GM when adjudicating a Curse.

Permanent/Indefinite Curses

Most Curses are intended to last, until the subject of the curse has atoned for whatever misdeed prompted the curse. Such curses are the bedrock and standard apon which Curse mechanics are built.

Temporary Curses

A temporary Curse applies only until the target achieves some specific task, such as a pilgrimage to some specific shrine or temple, or fulfilling three tasks for the high priest of the city.
This alters the effectiveness of the curse by +25%, +0%, -25% or -50%, depending on the difficulty of the task to be achieved.

Until the task is achieved, a Remove Curse will only grant 24 hours relief. The basis of comparison should be the difficulty of completing the task.

  • If the difficulty of the task is easier, there should be a +25% increase in the severity of the Curse.
  • If about the same, there should be a 0% change.
  • If a little harder – the equivalent of obtaining a Remove Curse from a specific priest – then the effectiveness of the Curse should be -25%.
  • If a lot harder, then the effectiveness should be reduced 50%.

Sloppy wording of the condition eg “Until you atone for your transgressions” is considered to be equivalent to the default, as it is presumed that a priest will not Remove the Curse until he is satisfied that the character has done so. The final arbiter of any such judgments is the referee.

The subject of these curses can be absolved of the Curse as soon as the specified conditions are met.

Practicality and Idealism

Some Deities are realistic about the conditions to be fulfilled for absolution from a temporary curse, insisting that the condition be within the capabilities of the subject. Others are more idealistic and pay this no attention. The personality and attributes of the deity in question should be reflected in the specifications of the Curse. A curse establishes an extremely personal relationship between the caster, the subject, and the deity, which should be referenced every time the Curse’s effect has an impact on play. It may even be possible for the subject of the curse to pray for temporary relief if that would be in the best interests of the deity. A curse is an ongoing opportunity for roleplaying that should not be wasted.

Conditional Curses

A little additional ingenuity in the wording of a curse can greatly expand their functionality. “May [Curse] happen if you [do | do not do] X” is a perfectly acceptable syntax – “May your sword arm wither and rot if you betray your oath” for example. Where the “X” is an ongoing task, such as adhering to an oath, this is considered a permanent/indefinite curse which will last until the character is relieved of the obligation; where it is a task with a measurable conclusion, such as “erect the shrine within 30 days” or “place Baron Huschfeld on the throne”, it is a temporary curse.

Removing a Curse

One of the first questions a player will ask when his character is afflicted with a Curse should be “How do I get rid of it?”. Under the standard mechanics for Curses, the question is more likely to be “Where’s the closest cleric with Remove Curse” – assuming that another party member doesn’t have the spell, or even the character himself.

A key aspect of the changes to Curse mechanics is the alleviation of this condition. A Curse should be more significant and less of a passing inconvenience. It’s a third level spell in 3.x (and from memory used to be a 4th level spell in older editions of the game), after all.

There are two conditions under which a Curse can be removed without difficulty, so lets look at those first.

Lifting a Curse

The character who bestowed the Curse can lift it at any time – provided that it was not inflicted as a dying act, of course. Even then, it may be possible – but the difficulties are much greater; the subject can’t exactly intimidate the bestower, after all. However, the third party to the curse should also be involved; blackmailing or threatening the bestower of the Curse will not win any favors with the deity in question, and far from lifting the original curse, the subject may well find himself saddled with a second.

Absolution

Curses with built-in limited duration conditions are subject to Absolution as soon as the conditions are met. The effects of the curse are lifted immediately, though the curse may be re-imposed if the subject then acts on opposition to the condition. You can’t be cursed until a shrine is built, build the shrine, and then immediately destroy it. You can’t put someone on the throne and then immediately attempt to undermine, usurp, or make the new ruler a figurehead. In other words, the spirit of the curse is just as important as the letter.

To be released from the danger of Re-imposition, the subject requires a priest – any priest or cleric not opposed to the deity who empowered the original Curse – to Absolve the character, ie to acknowledge that he has completed his penance, learned from his mistake, and forgive the original offence. Once this is done, the character is free to act however he sees fit with no sword of Damocles hanging overhead.

This places a reasonable amount of responsibility on the shoulders of clerics and priests, and senility sometimes causes absolution to be granted when it should not be. Religious orders are usually fairly wary of failing faculties and will often retire a priest they suspect of becoming a little vague, because it is their reputation that is on the line.

Absolution can also be granted retrospectively if the subject dies in the attempt to redeem himself.

Absolution & The afterlife

Absolution has a second effect that can be quite significant – it means that the crime for which the curse was imposed can no longer be held against the subject when he enters the afterlife and faces judgment. This can be a significant spur to a character’s decisions. As a character gets older and more aware of their own mortality, some may choose to find a cleric and confess to the worst of their past misdeeds, requesting a curse that permits them to earn absolution before it is too late. Of course, the choice of which Deity from which the character chooses to make this request has a very big bearing on the outcome – and on what is considered a misdeed.

The net effect is that behavior tends becomes more extreme as characters get older. This is especially true of NPCs – PCs generally being less willing to bow to any restrictions on their behavior will tend to take their chances and worry about tomorrow on the day after.

Again, this is a source for a roleplaying encounter or two if the party includes a cleric. An NPC or two seeking absolution makes an excellent subplot and a nice seasoning as a cohort or other follower.

Breaking A Curse

The other way out of a Curse is to Break it. Once broken, a curse can be Removed. Curses can only be broken be a cleric, a deity, or another character type with access to clerical spells.

Breaking a curse is a violent act, as is implied by the name of the process. The act of casting Remove Curse triggers a metaphysical confrontation between the bestower of the curse and the cleric attempting to break it. The former is represented by the DC of the Curse, while the latter is on hand. It should also be obvious that unless the Deity who granted the curse is especially capricious in nature, the cleric must have a different patron to the original deity.

The cleric attempting to break the curse generates a Spellcraft total and compares it to the target DC while casting Remove Curse. If the result is equal to or greater than the DC, the Curse is broken.

Curse DCs

If the Curse was bestowed by a Cleric, that cleric should roll a Spellcraft check which becomes the DC for breaking the spell. If the curse was bestowed by someone other than a cleric, the DC is 15. These values may receive a +5 if the Deity bestowing the curse is strongly in favor of the act. Dying-act curses may also receive up to an additional +5. A Curse bestowed directly by a Deity automatically has a DC of 25, plus the +5 for being strongly in favor, for a total of 30. In practice, the average DC is going to be around 20-25.

If the cleric attempting to break the Curse is of the same alignment as the original bestower, he receives a -5 to his Spellcraft check to Break the curse. If he is of an opposed alignment, he receives a +5. This means that the best person to break a curse from an Evil deity is a cleric of Good, and vice-versa.

Despite antagonistic alignments, deities may refuse to break a Curse if there is presently no strife between them and the deity who empowered the original Curse. Breaking someone else’s curse is a hostile act, and earns the enmity of the deity who imposed it. Some people will attempt to boost their chances by stirring up rivalries and ill-will in advance – but this can in itself be a dangerous business; if the deity being beseeched was offended by the actions of the subject, they may add a curse of their own to the mix.

Failure is a definite set-back – each cleric gets only one shot at a Curse at the original DC. If they fail, they can’t try again until they have gained another level as a clerical spell user, and there is a -2 penalty to their Spellcraft check for each failure. It only takes a few failures for the DC to exceed the capabilities of the cleric, effectively permanently. This encourages those wishing to break a Curse to seek out the highest-ranking cleric they can find – and those fellows usually charge a lot of money for their time and effort.

Compound Curses

Being Cursed by two deities of antagonistic alignment at the same time is the worst of all possible outcomes, because clerics of either alignment will recognize the ‘taint’ of the Curse to which they are not antagonistic and refuse to aid the character. Characters who are subject to multiple Curses are in real trouble even if the cleric agrees to make the attempt, as the cleric’s target DC is the sum of the DCs of BOTH curses, which usually puts the target beyond the abilities of all but the most powerful.

Curses and Spell Focus

Spell Focus can be used to raise the spell’s save DC, unlike most Necromantic Spells. It follows that there are three groups whose Curses are especially potent, and hence exceptionally difficult to break: Deities, the High Priest or Archprelate of a particular faith, and clerics who specialize in bestowing Curses.

Spell Focus can also be employed to assist in Breaking a curse.

Inheriting A Curse

If a deity or the beseeching individual is especially put out, they may choose to make a Curse generational, affecting not only the subject but their entire family, or their first-born in each successive generation, or all their descendants of a particular gender, or all their descendants, or all their relatives. This sacrifices some of the DC for breaking the Curse in exchange for generalizing the target.

  • Entire Family (by blood): -2
  • First-born descendant each generation: -4
  • All descendants of a particular gender: -6
  • All descendants: -8
  • All relatives now living and their descendants: -10
  • Excluding the original target: +1 (offsets the above modifiers only)

Detecting A Curse

Detecting the presence of a Curse is easy – just cast the first level spell. Clerics can even make a WIS check while holding the hand or blessing a character to get a hint that the character has either been cursed themselves or that they have been associating with someone who has been, especially if the effects of a Curse have actually affected the person being examined. The DC of such a Wisdom check is 40 minus the DC for breaking the spell – so the hardest Curses to break are the most easily detected.

Identifying the specifics of a Curse is equally easy, once the presence of a Curse is proven (not merely suspected). It merely requires the cleric or religious figure – a Paladin can do it – to pray over the character for a while. The number of hours of prayer required is equal to the DC of detecting the Curse as specified in the previous paragraph.

While being examined, the subject of the investigation must not perform any activity that would require a skill check, and must not do anything relating to a deity other than the one being invoked during the investigation. Priests, Clerics, and Paladins will normally insist on Blessing the character before commencing, simply to remove any spiritual “aftertaste” of other deities that the subject might have with him. It is also normal for the subject to remove all magic items and clothing, wearing only a simple penitent’s robe – essentially, a smock of cotton, wool, or burlap – for the same reason. Individual faiths may have further requirements, but for most these are sufficient.

As the prayers continue, the Minister conducting the prayer service will begin to sense the intensity of the Curse (ie, how difficult it will be to break), the name of the Deity who granted the Curse, the nature of the curse’s effects, any conditions attached to the Curse, and finally the reason for the curse – the deed that caused the subject to be Cursed in the first place. Only when all of these are known and acknowledged by the subject can the process of Breaking the curse begin.

Cursed Items

“I curse this weapon. Any who claim it will be driven to avenge me.”

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using a desirable weapon with a curse attached as a plot device. It doesn’t even necessarily have to be a magic item. Once the Curse is complete, the character gets the weapon. If he should fall in the process, it will wait for the next person to come along and take his place – however long it takes.

Such curses are not part of the weapon, they merely use it as a conduit, but they will still be detected by a Detect Curse spell. However, even putting such a weapon into a backpack or other storage device with the intent to sell or analyze it later is enough to invoke the curse, and actually selling it does not relieve the curse, simply passes the potential to another like a time bomb with no visible timer. Only when the PC succeeds or dies will it go off.

Such curses have to be broken not once, but twice. The first time breaks the curse on the character, freeing him, but leaving the curse itself lurking intact within the item. The second Breaking must be directed at the weapon itself. This circumstance is the only exception to the rule about multiple attempts at breaking a curse, since the second Curse Breaking can only proceed after the success of the first. That still does not grant multiple attempts at breaking either curse, it only permits a single attempt at Un-cursing the item once a religious figure has successfully broken the hold of the curse on an individual.

Note, also, that the item must be present to be prayed over in order to break the curse within it.

Sneaky Moral Tricks

PCs will already be wary of treasures after players read the above section. At the same time, the potential for a desirable weapon with a built-in mini-quest would have to be tempting, if the item is attractive enough. The problem is that characters have to “buy” the item before they get to inspect the merchandise – or, in this case, accept the curse before knowing how useful the treasure will be. Alignment questions can also become entwined in the whole issue – a character can break the curse but still be compelled by his alignment to complete the task that would have nullified it.

More subtle variations

If the GM suspects that even this might not be tolerable by his players – contrary creatures at the best of times – he can place am item with a more subtle Curse, for example a temporary curse that only affects the character when he scores a critical hit – or when her is subjected to a critical hit – or when he uses a specific skill or ability. How tempting would a +4 or +5 weapon or suit of armor be, even with such a price-tag? And if the player is truly unhappy with the price tag, he can always expend money in attempts to break the curse; either way, the GM gets a plotline out of the deal.

A list of suggested Curses

I’m going to close this article with a long list of suggested curses. These should be just a starting point for your creativity… Have fun out there!

  1. -3 penalty to the three physical characteristics (STR, DEX, CON) or -3 penalty to the three mental/emotional abilities (INT, WIS, DEX).
  2. -1 penalty on all characteristics.
  3. -4 to one particular variety of Saving Throw (Fort, Reflex, or Will).
  4. -8 to saves against a particular magic descriptor.
  5. All spells cast by the target henceforth have an additional material component of 25xp per spell level.
  6. The Cursed creature cannot speak except to cast spells.
  7. -8 to all skill checks tied to a single specific ability.
  8. -4 penalty to all skill checks.
  9. -12 penalty to all skill checks against a single specific skill.
  10. -4 ‘clumsiness’ penalty to AC.
  11. -6 ‘clumsiness’ penalty to all attack rolls.
  12. Save DCs against the Cursed creature’s spells or innate abilities are reduced by 4.
  13. The creature cannot declare any creatures to be allies for the purposes of flanking, moving through squares, spell effects, etc.
  14. Every 2nd attack made by the subject creature must be against an ally. The subject will drop his weapon to change to a ranged weapon and/or move up to his maximum as necessary to achieve this.
  15. -3 penalty to all attack and damage rolls.
  16. The creatures damaging spells only inflict half damage.
  17. The creature cannot confirm critical hits.
  18. The cursed creature always receives the minimum healing from spells.
  19. The character loses all special sight (low-light vision, darkvision, etc) and is immune to any spells which bestow such abilities.
  20. The target cannot make attacks of opportunity.
  21. The target suffers 1hp of sonic damage every round that someone within 30′ speaks, per speaker.
  22. The target can no longer cast spells with an alignment descriptor (any alignment descriptor).
  23. Any time the creature rolls a 1 in melee combat, he must make a reflex save against DC 14 or drop any and all weapons used in the attack.
  24. The target cannot heal wounds except by magic.
  25. The target cannot eat or drink and therefore cannot benefit from magical potions or effects like Heroes Feast.
  26. The target loses the ability to read.
  27. The target cannot use any Metamagic Feats.
  28. The target is affected by a Nightmare spell (Caster Level 9) every night.
  29. The target loses all armor proficiencies.
  30. The target loses all weapon proficiencies.
  31. The target must make a Balance check at DC 15 to move more than half its speed in a round.
  32. Every time the target uses a charged item, he causes the item to expend an additional d6 charges to no effect.
  33. Every time the target uses a charged item, he causes the item to expend an additional charge which is inflicted apon himself.
  34. All possible critical hits against the target are automatically confirmed.
  35. Ability damage inflicted against the character is treated as ability drain.
  36. The target is denied its Dexterity bonus to armor class.
  37. The target is Slowed whenever it is within an enemy’s threatened squares.
  38. Allies must defeat SR 21 to target the Cursed Creature with spells.
  39. Making a single attack becomes a full-round action for the target. The target cannot make iterative attacks or attacks with two weapons.
  40. Any time takes damage (magical or otherwise) from flame or heat (including Fireballs, etc), the character catches on fire (refer DMG for consequences).
  41. The character suffers from a phobia or fear. Whenever the object of the phobia or fear is encountered or threatens the character, he must make a Will save against a DC of 15 or cower in fear. If the save succeeds, the character is Shaken. Phobias include darkness, open spaces, confined spaces, heights, depths, running water, open water, thunderstorms, spiders, undead, insects, birds, dragons, etc etc.
  42. In melee, the subject of the Curse cannot move to flee or threaten another creature (but can attack any enemies that move into its threat range).
  43. All allies of the target suffer a -2 on attack rolls and skill checks when within 60′ of the target.
  44. The character’s ranged attacks are limited to a single range band.
  45. The character suffers -4 caster levels (to a minimum of 1).
  46. The character must eat 4 times as much food as normal in order to survive (but gains weight as though they did not). If the character fails to eat sufficient food, he is considered to suffer from Starvation.
  47. The character must drink 8 times as much water as normal. If he does not, he is considered to be suffering from Dehydration.
  48. The character loses up to four magic item slots. Items in those slots have no effect. The caster of the Curse must specify the slots using a single word description.
  49. Whenever the target strikes an opponent in melee combat, he suffers 1d6 damage (doubled if the character achieves a critical hit).
  50. The target’s Spell Resistance (if any) is reduced by 4 points.
  51. The creature bleeds at the rate of 1hp per round per dice of damage inflicted in melee.
  52. The creature is required to provide an attack of opportunity each time he takes a 5′ step in melee.
  53. The creature earns only 75% of the experience they would normally receive.
  54. The target suffers 1d6 damage per round that they hold or touch a particular type of weapon or object.
  55. The target suffers 2d6 damage per round that they hold or touch a specific weapon or object.
  56. The target experiences the effects of a Polymorph spell for approximately half a day, every day. The caster of the Curse must specify either a daily trigger event (eg midnight, noon, dawn, sunset, moonrise, moonset) or specific time interval with a one-word description (eg daytime, nighttime) or other similar condition which activates the Curse. The character acts as a normal member of the population of his Polymorphed form would but remembers his actions in that form when he is restored to normal. The other form must be of a half-hit-dice creature or less.
  57. The target experiences the effects of a Polymorph spell for approximately 1/4 of the time, as specified by the caster of the Curse. These must be linked to a particular season, phase of the moon, or other such naturally-recurring phenomenon. While in his other form, the target acts as a hostile member of the population of that form. The other form must be of a 1-hit-dice creature or less.
  58. The target experiences the effects of a Polymorph spell for 1 hour after experiencing a specified common event of activity. The character acts as a rabid or extremely hostile member of the population of that form. The other form must be of a 2-hit-dice creature or less.
  59. The target spends any money that comes into his possession (above 25 GP per character level) as quickly as possible. He must make a will save against a DC of 20 to refuse any offered item. He cannot give this money away, or tithe it, or give it to someone else for safekeeping, or store it.
  60. The target spends any money that comes into his possession (above 100 GP per character level) as quickly as possible. He must make a will save against a DC of 20 to refuse any offered item. He cannot give this money away, or tithe it, or give it to someone else for safekeeping, or store it. He must immediately sell any magic items he possesses whose values exceed this limit.

One Final Mention

One final thought that’s worth mentioning, and which has also had its part to play in inspiring some of the content above: a slight reimagining of the Curse of Edaemus from The Shining Ones by David Eddings, (Book 2 of The Tamuli). Edaemus cursed the waters of the lake where his people lived, which already caused them to glow, so that their touch inflicted the rot of the grave in mere seconds AND gave them a telepathic link to those they could see. In time, they learned to control these ‘gifts’ – but consider the horror of the situation before they did. They not only caused sufficient fear in those who beheld them to provoke insanity and gibbering in terror, the telepathic link meant that they would have felt every moment of their victim’s pain and terror, and feel the rotting of tissues as the curse manifested.

Talk about your Gothic Fantasy! That’s the power of a well-constructed curse to add flavor…

Comments (8)

Go Hard Or Go Home: Graceful Character Aging



Some game systems have rules built in for character aging. Others don’t.

Some of those aging rules function gracefully. Others don’t, or are shockingly clumsy.

This post is all about how I handle character aging in my campaigns – gracefully and relatively painlessly.

The Harbinger Of Aging

Quite early on in my GMing career, I wrote up some sophisticated aging rules for AD&D, which took the rather loose guidelines provided in the PHB and DMG and turned them into a functional system. A couple of the key features of the system were:

My original system for aging

Aging checks

There were no automatic “X years older gives X points of stat loss”. Instead, characters made a CON-based saving roll against a target based on their age and history. If they failed, it indicated a characteristic loss or other ageing symptom. On a critical failure, this occurred immediately and permanently. If they succeeded, the size of the next potential characteristic loss increased, and the target for the next check became harder to achieve, but there was otherwise no effect. If they got a critical success, the target for the next check still became harder, but there was no other impact.

Shrinking intervals

These age checks took place at intervals across the entire average lifespan of the race in question that steadily declined in size. When characters first started adventuring, they could look forward to making their first check in about a decade, game time, for humans, about 50 years for Dwarves, etc. These intervals would gradually get shorter until they became once a year, at which point the rate of increase would slow eventually becoming twice a year, then three times, and so on.

In fact, it was tracked as the number of days until the next check.

Modifiers

There were all sorts of modifiers – to the number of days until the next check, to the number of days since the last check, to the target required for success, and to the size of the potential impact of a failure. Each night spent “roughing it” while adventuring counted as two days toward the next check, for example – hard living brought aging forward – but it also counted as a day of exercise, and every ten days spent exercising between intervals improved the chance of success by 1%. Each day spent in decadent luxury counted as three days towards the next check, but also counted as a day of rest. If you rested ten days in a row, you negated the extra days accrued by ten days hard adventuring.

In particular, each time that the character was reduced to 25% hit points was counted as an extra day; each time the character was reduced to 10% hit points or less counted as two extra days.

Warning Niggles

The system was set up to reward an appropriate “work-life balance” long before the term came into vogue. After each adventure, the characters needed to rest – how badly they needed to rest, and for how long, were dependant on the character’s constitution. If characters rested too long, they would get out of condition. Both of these would result in “warning niggles” – passing mention of an ingrown toenail, a stiff back in the mornings, and the like. As an aging check approached, this would also be signaled by a series of warning niggles.

Abandoning this subsystem

This particular aging subsystem didn’t last beyond my first couple of campaigns (I’m a little surprised that I remember it so clearly). But its legacy lives on in the approach that I use for aging in my current campaigns. (NB: this is the first time they’ve ever been codified in writing)…

Growing Old Gracefully

I always felt that growing older didn’t change the personality or expectations of a person. They still wanted to do the same things as they were doing twenty years earlier, but no matter how willing the spirit was, the flesh was weak; an accumulation of little niggles handicapped the ability. Having aged a few decades since first formulating the aging subsystem discussed above, I stand by that perception. I don’t feel 49 years old – I feel 25 with encumbrances that prevent me from acting like I was 25.

Another part of the aging process is learning to manage those encumbrances. Compromising how much I do, how hard I work, permits me to achieve more in the long run by not aggravating the various infirmities that have accumulated. Compromising how I do things slightly – relying less on my own memory, for example, and more on my ability to take reminder notes – is actually more efficient because I spend less time getting up to speed each time I resume a task. My particular case is compromised by a degenerative ailment, but the principles are the same – the tolerances are just tighter.

I don’t run any more, for example. My knees and back won’t permit it, save in cases of emergency. That doesn’t mean that I can’t do it – just that the price of that type and level of exertion would cost me more in lost capacity in the long run. I stop and rest after walking a few city blocks, if I can – not because I can’t walk any further, but because doing so will leave me bedridden the next day. At the same time, there are limits to how far I can walk comfortably, and exceeding them not only causes distress and reduced capacity for some months afterwards, part of that loss is permanent.

Aging, then, is an accumulation of niggles, and an increasing cost of performing activities, and a diminution of the ability to recover.

Life Increments

My whole approach to aging is somewhat different, these days. I no longer enforce stat loss on characters, instead suggesting that the players make appropriate adjustments. They key to determining how many such adjustments are needed is the concept of Life Increments:

Life Increment = (Average Lifespan – Age of maturity)/20,
+0.5 for each physical stat 16-20
+1 for each physical stat 21-25
+1.5 for each physical stat 26-30, and so on;
-0.25 for each physical stat 6-10,
-0.5 for each physical stat 4-5,
-0.75 for each physical stat 2-3,
-1 for each physical stat 0-1 (D&D scales, adjust as necessary for other game systems).

Physical stats in D&D are STR, DEX, CON, CHAR.

EG Generic D&D Human:
Life Increment = (65-25)/20 = 40/20 = 2 years. So every 2 years after they achieve maturity is an additional 5% of their allotted span.

EG2: D&D Human with STR 18, DEX 15, INT 22, WIS 14, CON 16, CHAR 16:
Life Increment = 2 +0.5 (STR) +0.5 (CON) +0.5 (CHAR) = 3.5. So every 3.5 years after they achieve maturity is an additional 5% of their allotted span, gone.

When the appropriate time comes, I simply inform the player, “Your character is another 5% older than he was” and ask how they think that will affect the character’s stats. As part of the process of justifying their decisions, I will also usually characterize what the character has been doing for that time – “Adventuring too hard too often”, “maintaining a reasonable balance between rest and adventuring”, “spending too much time sitting down and arguing politics with the king and not enough exercising”, and so on. In general, there will be minimal changes until the character is about 50% old. I keep track of the number of life increments consumed.

Why this is better: No rolls, easy to calculate, rarely consumes game or prep time, very fast.

Serious Injuries

Every time a character drops to 10% of their hit points or less, assuming they survive, their life increments drop by 10%, and I add another life increment to the “consumed” tally. So the character gets 5% older prematurely, and their overall lifespan reduces. This is regardless of any healing that may be done and represents accumulated wear and tear. However, a character gets a number of these as “freebies” equal to their CON bonus (D&D scale), minimum of zero. The serious injuries count resets at zero each time the total triggers an adjustment.

Why this is better: No rolls, easy to track, minimal time & effort required, but still very responsive to individual circumstances.

Going Hard

Another key component of my current approach is the need to rest after any period of prolonged exertion. Every 2 days of adventuring or rough living adds one day to the total rest required to get rid of the accumulated discomforts and niggles that have built up.

Every 2+CON BONUS (D&D scale) days that the character has spent adventuring counts as 1 day that they need to rest. Before they can start counting rest days toward this total, they first need to rest for 1 day for every life increment they have lived.

Hard living adds discomforts to daily life, which are expressed as Niggles. On the assumption that a character will be more attuned to changes in their highest stat(s) and more susceptible to changes in their weakest stat(s), I will choose a niggle appropriately.

These niggles arrive at Niggle Intervals.

Niggle Interval (D&D scale) = 4 + CON – Life Increments consumed, minimum 1.

Eg CON 12, Age in Life Increments 4 gives Niggle Interval = 12 days.
Eg CON 12, Age in Life Increments 12 gives Niggle Interval = 4+12-12 = 4 days.
Eg CON 17, Age in Life Increments 12 gives Niggle Interval = 4+17-12 = 9 days.

Each niggle received reduces the Niggle interval by 1. So the next niggle arrives a day sooner. When the interval gets to zero, the character needs to rest (if he hasn’t done so before then). When he rests for long enough, the Niggles go away and the Niggle Interval resets.

Combat Effects of Niggles

None, nada, zip. Niggles are strictly a roleplaying cue. But as a character gets older, they will arrive more quickly, and give the impression of an older character. See also “Long-term consdequences” below.

Resting

Resting means loafing around for a day. In the wilderness, even in an idyllic location, each day counts as only half a day for resting purposes. In a civilized environment (eg an Inn), Spartan accommodations also only count as half a day, while luxury counts as a-day-and-a-half. Luxury accommodations in an idyllic location might count as double. As GM, I tweak these values constantly to reflect the circumstances. Characters can read, relax, feast, drink, stroll the markets, buy goods, play games, gamble – in fact, do just about anything that might normally be done on a vacation or day off. But they can’t undertake any strenuous activities, engage in combat, conduct serious spell research, or anything of that sort – if they do, the day doesn’t count.

Again, what is acceptable activity and what is not is variable depending on the character and circumstances – spending a day in solitary contemplation might count for a Monk or a martial artist, but would not do much for mage fascinated by politics or a fighter with a low threshold of boredom. This is about roleplay, not system mechanics!

Going Home

Soft living relaxes one’s tolerance for discomfort. This is a progressive effect:

  • when characters are actively adventuring, a period of rest eases any accumulated discomforts, so when they first set out on a new adventure, I will make no mention of such.
  • If they stay inactive for a little longer – say twice as long – when they do finally get going again, the first day or two (perhaps as much as a week) will be a compound of niggles as they work the kinks out and get back into shape, annoying discomforts as they get used to roughing it again, and a slightly giddying elation at the sense of independence and liberation from tedium. It will be an adventure, and overall, it will feel good to get back in the saddle.
  • If they stay sedentary and inactive for longer again – say three times as long – any exertion will trigger niggles and discomforts, which I will work into the flavor text describing their day’s activities.
  • If they stay sedentary and inactive for a lot longer – say, ten times as long as it takes them to rest up – they will start to experience niggles even without a triggering exertion. This might include having trouble fitting into clothing as they gain a few pounds, a shortness of breath after climbing a long set of stairs, and so on.
Long-term consequences

If characters don’t rest, or adventure too long, what are the consequences? At the time, none whatsoever. These niggles are just a cue for roleplaying, and the players are perfectly at liberty to ignore the prompts.

In general, though, they won’t. Firstly, because they give them the opportunity to put a different aspect of the character on display for a while, and do something different, Secondly, because there are always useful things that can be done in down-time; and Thirdly, because they will always be concerned that I might impose a combat modifier due to their niggles if they grow too frequent or pronounced.

Misses, Failures, and Fumbles

I feed that fear by frequently describing the results of any sort of failed die roll in terms of niggles (if any). So when characters are freshly out of town, a miss might be due to a lucky dodge by the opponent, or a leathery hide, or a blow bouncing off armor – but when they’ve been on the road for a while, it might be a muscle twinge, or a sudden cramp, or a moment of reverie. When the rogue blows his stealth roll, he might stumble – or he might sneeze.

Why this is better: Minimal math, no die rolling. Easy to track. It adds to roleplay and verisimilitude without becoming burdensome, gives you a source of flavor text, but doesn’t straightjacket players with an arbitrary aging system that has to be slavishly followed.

It’s not a set of rules; it’s a set of guidelines – and inspiration. It’s a way of Simulating ageing without forcing anything down a player’s throat – or onto their character sheet.

Comments (8)

Look beyond the box: a looser concept for NPCs



Most game systems are great when it comes to a precise definition of what a character can or can’t do, but there are any number of occasions when the level of precision they impart and entail is overkill. The result is that character generation takes a lot longer than is really justified by the intended role of the NPC within the campaign.

While preparing an NPC for my shared pulp campaign, I had a moment of inspiration. A short-cut to NPC generation that I immediately put into practice and which immediately proved its value. Now, I’m going to share that moment of insight with GMs everywhere. I’ll start by looking at the specific case that led to this idea, and then move on to a more generalized description of the technique.

“Creepy” as a skill

The NPC that I was creating was a butler. While he was to be no particular threat, we wanted his personality, tone of voice, manner of expression, behavior, etc to be, well, “creepy”. Now I could have spent a lot of time specifying skills and abilities and disadvantages and so on in order to define exactly what “creepy” meant in terms of the system mechanics – but time was short and there were better things to expend it on.

The solution was to define “Creepy” as a skill like any other within the Hero System. Suddenly, there was a full set of game mechanics at our disposal – whenever he interacted with a PC, we could simply have him roll his “Creepiness” skill and – if successful – describe the reaction he had engendered in the listening PCs. If they wanted to resist the effect, we could have them oppose the roll.

In effect, we plugged an abstract quality directly from the character description into the game mechanics, hardwiring it to the rules system. It was that simple.

The Limits of the solution

The more involved with the PCs an NPC is going to be, the more closely that NPC should be built to PC standards. An NPC who adventures with the PCs should be as fully-detailed as they are.

A lesser standard is required for characters who are just there to be in a fight. There’s not a lot of need for background skills, but battle-related stats will need to be specified. In D&D terms, for example, the minimum would be Attack, Damage, AC, Initiative, HP, and Saves. In the hero games system, OCV, DCV, Damage, SPD, Body, Stun, and END would be the absolute minimum.

But when the NPC is just there to be a personality or an advisor, this approach offers a way to dramatically reduce the requirements, saving a lot of time and effort.

The General Technique

Using this technique is a two-step process.

Define an abstract quality

The abstract quality that the system is summing up should be defined as simply as possible, and should encompass as much of the uniqueness of the character as possible, preferably all with a single word.

Set the Associated Skill Level

You have two contrasting and possibly contradictory considerations in the second step. The first is deciding on the absolute frequency with which the abstract quality that you have described is going to come into effect; the second is the relative measure of how easily you want PCs to be able to overcome or resist the effect. If necessary, come up with two separate numbers and average them, but most of the time there will be a compromise available.

Results probabilities of 3d6

This requires that you really understand the system mechanics and their basis in probability. If you are talking about rolling 3d6 and aiming to get the target score or less, then you have to know how increasing the target by 1 affects the likelyhood of success.

Of course, this is really easy with a d20 system where each +1 growth in the target equates to a 5% increase in the likelyhood of success.

Assessing the relative level requires some understanding of the attribute scores that your PCs (or NPCs) can bring to bear in opposition or resistance to the desired effect. If the average resistance is d20+3, then d20+5 appears to give a 10% chance of success – but examining the statistics tells a different story. If the goal is to get the bigger total, as it usually is in these opposed rolls, then the actual number of cases out of 400 (20×20) that result in success for the d20+3 is 17+16+15+14+13+12+11+10+9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1 = 153 out of 400, or 38.25%.

How did I get that result? Well, the minimum result of d20+5 is 6, so the minimum result to beat that result on d20+3 is going to be 7. Seven minus 3 means that the lower score wins on a roll of 4 or better – which happens 17 times out of 20. With each +1 to the result on the d20+5 roll, the minimum result required for success goes up by 1 – so if the d20+5 roll is a 2, the target is 7, so an 8 is required, which requires a roll of 5, which happens 15 times in 20. The pattern obviously continues until you get to 0 times in 20.

That gives the string of numbers that I added together – the one that runs 17+16+15+… and so on. Multiplying the number of possible results on each die (20 x 20) gave me the 400.

I also cheated on the addition. If we set the “..+2+1” part at the end aside, and add the highest to the lowest, we get 17+3 + 16+4 + 15+5 + … and so on. It only takes some quick counting on fingers to find that the eight result is “10+10” – but there’s only one ten, so that also has to be set aside. So the total is 7×20 + 10 + 2 + 1 = 153. I only pulled the calculator out for the last part – converting 153/400 to a percentage.

Some more examples

There are all sorts of ways this technique can be applied. Here are just a few of them:

  • “Emotionless” – on a fail, the character exhibits an emotion.
  • “Rigid Self-control” – on a fail, the character exhibits a reaction when surprised, given bad news, given good news, etc.
  • “Foolish” – on a success, the character does something stupid or silly.
  • “Deceptive” – on a success, the character projects the reaction or impression that he desires to express and not his true feelings or intent.
  • “Politician” – on a success, the character says or does whatever he thinks is going to be the most popular/beneficial regardless of his true intent or belief.
  • “Charming” – on a success, the character makes the person he’s speaking to feel comfortable, safe, secure, at home.
  • “Wealthy” – on a success, the character attempts to use money to solve whatever problem he currently has.
  • “Pious” – on a success, the character exhibits his faith, resists doubt, disbelieves evidence to the contrary, etc.
  • “Redneck” – on a success, the character acts like a redneck. (duh!)
  • “Italian” – on a success, the character acts like a stereotypical Italian.

Any adjective can be treated in this fashion. Just choose your description and let it be your character!

Going Even Further

It doesn’t have to be just NPCs, either. This approach also works – perhaps better than anything else I’ve ever seen – from defining organizations…
 

  • Formal
  • Casual
  • Greedy
  • Public-spirited
  • Arrogant
  • Militaristic
  • Progressive
  • Conservative
  • Radical
  • Violent
  • Pro-Farmer
  • Bookish

 
…to governments…
 

  • Stuffy
  • Sanctimonious
  • Defensive
  • Paranoid
  • Martial
  • Subversive

 
…to laws…
 

  • Protective
  • Permissive
  • Conspiratorial
  • Vengeful
  • Fiery
  • Myopic
  • Effervescent

 
…to anything else that can be described with an adjective! Weapons, animals, cars, wagons, pets, spices, novels, music, poetry, clothing, artwork, recipes… these can all exhibit a personality, as I discussed in With An Evil Gleam.

An organization example: “Florid 14/-“

“Florid” means ornate, flowery, showy, ruddy, or high-colored. So, an organization that is “florid” has:

  • A lot of bureaucracy, especially detailed forms that need to be filled out and about which they are very fussy;
  • A very strong and showy public relations department;
  • A penchant for dramatic gestures and big, showy projects;
  • A tendency to make big, even boastful claims;
  • A liking for making speeches;
  • The habit of using flowery and long-winded statements, filled with grandiosities and showy excess, and probably short of a lot of practical detail.

So whenever a PC interacts with this organization, or reads about them in the paper, or whatever, you simply have to roll the die and interpret the results.

A government example: “Repressive 5/- Paranoid 5/- Blunt 5/- Militant 10/-“

There are 25 combinations when you have 4 attributes. Any given action by the government can be:

  • Repressive but not Paranoid, Blunt, or Militant
  • Paranoid but not Repressive, Blunt, or Militant

  • Repressive and Paranoid but not Blunt or Militant

…and so on, through combinations of three at a time, culminating in a final:

  • Repressive, Paranoid, Blunt, and Militant

There are so many combinations that it is really quite inconvenient thinking about them, even counter-productive. Instead, think about each attribute, and it’s opposite.

  • Actions can be Repressive, ie designed to pick on one particular sub-population or practice that would normally be tolerated or even accepted – or encouraging, designed to make a particular practice or policy more attractive to the general population.
  • Decisions can be Paranoid, targeting enemies real, theoretical, or imagined, or they can be optimistic, assuming that people will support the government.
  • Phrasing and applicability can be blunt, or they can be subtle and discrete.
  • Decisions can be militant, emphasizing enforcement, or passive, expecting cooperation.

For example, consider a change in tax policy. A repressive policy might be to triple the number of annual audits while targeting one particular group for no specific reason. An encouraging one might be a tax rebate equal to half the additional tax recovered to anyone who (in confidence) informs on a tax cheat. A Paranoid policy might add imprisonment and/or steep fines or even seizure of property to be paid on suspicion of tax evasion and pending the investigation, while an optimistic one would assume that everyone is trying to do the right thing to the best of their understanding and hence levy no punishments whatsoever short of a bill for the additional tax owed. Blunt tax laws might start by describing tax evasion as a crime and then referring to people throughout the tax code as “suspected criminals” or “criminal tax evaders”. A subtle and discrete tax law would use four paragraphs of dense legalese to define the word “tax” – “a debt incurred through the accumulation of profits and revenues consequent to employment, labor, ownership of business or property (whether encumbered or otherwise) and on and on and on… . Finally, we have militant (automatic mandatory audits and if you don’t lodge a return, nosy people come around asking “why not?”) or passive, which assume that people who don’t lodge a return don’t have to pay taxes at all.

In practice, I think that four such traits are too many. Pick one that’s overwhelming and one secondary choice at most. “Militant 10/- and Paranoid 5/-” is enough to characterize a government.

I could continue with more examples, but I think the point has been made…

Skill Applications

One final note, added at the very last minute: you can use the same technique to synopsise tricky skill sets. “Lensman 15/-” works perfectly well. So does “Green Lantern 10/-“. Or “Mad scientist 16/-“…

Comments (14)

On The Edge: Implications of the D&DNext Advantage mechanic


Only a short article this week (at least in terms of word count) because there is easily five times as much work beneath the surface!

A few weeks ago, I read a really interesting analysis of the mathematics of the D&DNext advantage mechanic by the Online DM. And yet, there was a disconnect between that analysis and the actual situation in which that mechanic would be employed that meant that I still didn’t have a feel for the impact and implications that the new system would actually have in play.

So this week I wanted to go beyond the maths provided by the Online DM (and others) and think about the consequences.

Recapping The Results

The Online GM reduced his results to a single table, showing the % chance of success based on what you needed to roll in order to succeed, under three different conditions: a straight d20 roll, when you had Advantage, and when you were Disadvantaged.

The Mechanic

When you are adjudged to have the advantage, you roll two d20s instead of one and keep the best result. When you are adjudged to be at a disadvantage, you roll two d20s instead of one and keep the worst result. When neither side has the advantage, you roll a single d20.

The Table Of Results

The results from the Online GM were:

 Target   d20   With Advantage   With Disadvantage 
1 100% 100% 100%
2 95% 99.75% 90.25%
3 90% 99.00% 81.00%
4 85% 97.75% 72.25%
5 80% 96.00% 64.00%
6 75% 93.75% 56.25%
7 70% 91.00% 49.00%
8 65% 87.75% 42.25%
9 60% 84.00% 36.00%
10 55% 79.75% 30.25%
11 50% 75.00% 25.00%
12 45% 69.75% 20.25%
13 40% 64.00% 16.00%
14 35% 57.75% 12.25%
15 30% 51.00% 9.00%
16 25% 43.75% 6.25%
17 20% 36.00% 4.00%
18 15% 27.75% 2.25%
19 10% 19.00% 1.00%
20 5% 9.75% 0.25%
21 0% 0% 0%

The shortcomings of this result

This table of results is not as useful as it could have been, for the simple reason that the key variable by which they are indexed is not one that is immediately at-hand, but is the result of an earlier calculation – one that the system doesn’t actually require determining. The actual mechanic is to roll dice, add bonuses or penalties, and compare the result to the target number set by the DM.

Rather than the results of the analysis being instinctively understood and directly applicable by the GM to assess the impact, he has to interpret a theoretical situation, translate the result into the appropriate entry on the table, and then interpret the results. It’s no surprise that the significance of the mechanism is not readily accessible for most GMs.

Well, if that’s the problem, let’s fix it.

Relative Impact

As a first step, let’s rewrite that table of results so that instead of giving an absolute percentage of success, it displays the impact of the advantage/disadvantage mechanism relative to the base value of a straight d20 roll. For future reference, I’ll call this Table 2:

 Target   d20   With Advantage   With Disadvantage 
1 100% +0% -0%
2 95% +4.75% -4.75%
3 90% +9% -9%
4 85% +12.75% -12.75%
5 80% +16% -16%
6 75% +18.75% -18.75%
7 70% +21% -21%
8 65% +22.75% -22.75%
9 60% +24% -24%
10 55% +24.75% -24.75%
11 50% +25% -25%
12 45% +24.75% -24.75%
13 40% +24% -24%
14 35% +22.75% -22.75%
15 30% +21% -21%
16 25% +18.75% -18.75%
17 20% +16% -16%
18 15% +12.75% -12.75%
19 10% +9% -9%
20 5% +4.75% -4.75%
21 0% +0% -0%


Now, that’s a very interesting pattern. For targets of 9-13 there is very little difference – if you were to plot these on a graph, that range would be almost flat. 7 & 8 are also almost identical, as are 14 & 15, and the same can be said for 5 & 6 and 16 & 17. But we’re still not quite in a position to really look at what these results mean.

Bonuses & Targets

When you’re talking Advantage and Disadvantage, you’re generally talking about attack rolls. The target value – which is indexed to the results shown above – is the difference between the AC of the target and the combat bonuses or penalties of the attacker.

The example that the online GM mentions by way of proving that those bonuses are still around and part of the game system is prone, but really there are few other mechanisms for the implementation of magic weapons and the like. What’s more, an appropriate stat still contributes a bonus as well.

Most ACs in the game will fall in a range between 1 and 25. Let’s carry the results up to 30 to be on the safe side. Most often, bonuses will be zero-plus-stat bonus – when you’re talking PCs that’s anywhere from +1 to +5. Throw in the potential for a -2 (prone) and up to a +5 (magic) and possible bonuses totals run from -2 to +10. When you put all of these into a table of target numbers, we get:

Table 3:
Target
Numbers
Bonus
AC  -2   -1   +0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5   +6   +7   +8   +9   +10
1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
7 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1
8 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1
9 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1
10 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1
11 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
12 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
13 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3
14 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4
15 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5
16 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6
17 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7
18 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8
19 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
20 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11
22 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12
23 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13
24 20 19 18 17 16 15 14
25 20 19 18 17 16 15
26 20 19 18 17 16
27 20 19 18 17
28 20 19 18
29 20 19
30 20

Once again, a very interesting – if fairly familiar – pattern. This sort of table should be fairly well-known and obvious to every GM who’s been around for a while.

It’s only when you make the mental connection between the two tables that the real significance of the fairly obvious pattern makes itself clear. An increasing bonus creates an upward trend in benefits (as shown in table 2) from a combat advantage AND a similar trend in penalties from a combat disadvantage.

This all becomes clearer when the appropriate values are transplanted from table 2 into table 3 to give tables 4 and 5:

Table 4:
With
Advantage
Bonus
AC -2 -1 +0 +1 +2 +3
1 +9%  +4.75%  +0 +0 +0 +0
2  +12.75%  +9% +4.75% +0 +0 +0
3 +16%  +12.75%  +9% +4.75% +0 +0
4 +18.75% +16%  +12.75%  +9% +4.75% +0
5 +21% +18.75% +16%  +12.75%  +9% +4.75%
6 +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%  +12.75%  +9%
7 +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%  +12.75% 
8 +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%
9 +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75%
10 +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21%
11 +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75%
12 +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24%
13 +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75%
14 +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25%
15 +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75%
16 +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24%
17 +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75%
18 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21%
19 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75%
20 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16%
21 +4.75% +9% +12.75%
22 +4.75% +9%
23 +4.75%
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

 

Table 4:
With
Advantage
(cont)
Bonus
AC +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10
1 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
2 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
3 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
4 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
5 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
6 +4.75% +0 +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
7 +9% +4.75% +0 +0 +0 +0 +0
8 +12.75% +9% +4.75% +0 +0 +0 +0
9 +16% +12.75% +9% +4.75% +0 +0 +0
10  +18.75%  +16%  +12.75%  +9% +4.75% +0 +0
11 +21%  +18.75%  +16%  +12.75%  +9% +4.75% +0
12 +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%  +12.75%  +9% +4.75%
13 +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%  +12.75%  +9%
14 +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%  +12.75% 
15 +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75% +16%
16 +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21% +18.75%
17 +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75% +21%
18 +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24% +22.75%
19 +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75% +24%
20 +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25% +24.75%
21 +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75% +25%
22 +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24% +24.75%
23 +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75% +24%
24 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21% +22.75%
25 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75% +21%
26 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16% +18.75%
27 +4.75% +9% +12.75% +16%
28 +4.75% +9% +12.75%
29 +4.75% +9%
30 +4.75%

 

Table 5:
With
Disadvantage
Bonus
AC -2 -1 +0 +1 +2 +3
1 -9% -4.75% -0 -0 -0 -0
2  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0 -0 -0
3 -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0 -0
4 -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0
5 -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75%
6 -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9%
7 -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75% 
8 -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%
9 -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75%
10 -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21%
11 -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75%
12 -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24%
13 -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75%
14 -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25%
15 -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75%
16 -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24%
17 -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75%
18 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21%
19 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75%
20 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16%
21 -4.75% -9% -12.75%
22 -4.75% -9%
23 -4.75%
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

 

Table 5:
With
Disadvantage
(cont)
Bonus
AC +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10
1 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
2 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
3 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
4 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
5 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
6 -4.75% -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
7 -9% -4.75% -0 -0 -0 -0 -0
8  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0 -0 -0 -0
9 -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0 -0 -0
10 -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0 -0
11 -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75% -0
12 -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9% -4.75%
13 -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75%  -9%
14 -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%  -12.75% 
15 -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75% -16%
16 -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21% -18.75%
17 -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75% -21%
18 -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24% -22.75%
19 -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75% -24%
20 -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25% -24.75%
21 -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75% -25%
22 -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24% -24.75%
23 -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75% -24%
24 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21% -22.75%
25 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75% -21%
26 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16% -18.75%
27 -4.75% -9% -12.75% -16%
28 -4.75% -9% -12.75%
29 -4.75% -9%
30 -4.75%

 

Some interpretation

Viewing the results in this way makes a number of implications clear.

  • For any given combat bonus, there is an optimum AC which maximizes the benefits of Combat Advantage which is equal to 11 plus the bonus.
  • That same optimum AC also maximizes the penalties that result from Combat Disadvantage.
  • At ACs lower than the optimum, Combat Advantage makes a likely outcome (a success) even more likely.
  • ACs lower than the optimum are divided into two bands: those that are 6 or more less than the optimum, where combat disadvantage has a relatively small effect, and those that are between that value and the optimum, where combat disadvantage is significant.
  • At an AC greater than about 16 more than the total combat bonus, chances of success begin to decline rapidly despite combat advantage.
  • At an AC greater than about 7 more than the total combat bonus, chances of success decline rapidly with combat disadvantage.
  • The greater the combat bonuses, the less significant (in general) combat advantage is except for a small band of low ACs.
  • The 50% success mark is at (approximately) target=11 (straight d20), target=15 (with advantage), and target=7 (with disadvantage).
  • The 25% success mark is at (approximately) target=16 (straight d20), target=18 (with advantage), and target=11 (with disadvantage).
  • These can be used by the GM to select opponents posing different standards of tactical challenge.
  • The relative tactical importance of achieving advantage over your opponents is variable depending on your combat bonuses and the AC of the opponent.
  • The relative tactical importance of denying an opponent advantage over you is variable depending on your AC and your opponent’s combat bonuses.
  • The two will rarely be the same. The optimum tactics to employ in any given situation are hence highly variable.
  • The higher your combat bonuses, the less important tactical advantage and disadvantage are. It follows that min-maxing a character construction will often be less effective than being average and using smart tactics.
  • It also follows that the optimum target value for min-maxing is different in every encounter. Past a certain point, the player is expending a great deal of effort to replace part of one benefit with an increase in another. As a result, it is both more difficult and less rewarding to min-max a character.

Conclusions

For my money, that last point is the greatest possible justification for this mechanic. All the other benefits – a more complex set of tactical considerations, the ability of a smart GM to work the system to provide a greater challenge to the players, and so on – are simply icing on the cake. In fact, there will be circumstances in which it is better overall for a min-maxed character to make themselves secondary to the battle and permit a character with good but not perfectly-tweaked ability totals to assume a better tactical position.

This will be especially true if the DM makes the precision of his adjudications with respect to combat advantage and disadvantage proportionate to the attack bonus of the min-maxed PC while being a little more generous (either way) on the part of non-min-maxed characters.

Will this end min-maxing and an elitist approach to character construction? I doubt it. Will it make these things less of a concern to DMs? Quite probably.

And that’s a very good thing.

P.S.

Anyone interested in the subject might also like to read Advantage vs Flat Bonuses at Critical Hits.

Comments (10)

Living in an RPG: The Accumulation Of Mundane Events


For obvious reasons, I’ve been in a very introspective frame of mind in recent weeks. It occurred to me today that my life has now changed almost comp-letely from where I was ten years ago.

Ten years ago, my primary occupation was as a bookkeeper. I hadn’t worked for a few years, but was still searching hard for employment and writing the occasional DVD review. These days, I write for Campaign Mastery twice a week and work on my own gaming publications the rest of the time. I’m now considered disabled because of a degenerative back problem that limits how much I can work; ten years ago this problem was a recurring but undiagnosed problem growing progressively worse. It had not yet reached the point of being semi-crippling.

I was living in a unit in a different suburb. I walked to the shops every day or two to shop, and made relatively little use of my refrigerator. Having lived in that location for more than ten years, I knew the shopkeepers and had set routines in terms of shopping and consumption. My diet was relatively consistent, week-to-week.

I now live too far from the shops to casually walk to them – actually, it’s not much farther than I used to live, but my health is not as good as it was. I travel to the supermarket every six to eight weeks and spend up big, then get it home delivered – using the refrigerator and freezer extensively. I’m only now getting recognized by a few of the local shopkeepers, and I can’t say I know any of them by name yet. I eat very few of the same foods that I did back then – having grown tired of some, having others become unavailable or too expensive, and simply having different shops available to me. (I still go back to the old stores occasionally and am still remembered there).

The programmes that I watched on TV, the websites that I visited, even the computer games that I played, were all matters of habit. I don’t remember the Tv shows that dominated my viewing landscape, but at the time there were only six channels available. These days, there are 16 (not counting redundant duplicates and home-shopping-only infomercial channels). While a couple of the shows that I watch regularly are repeats of classic TV, most of the programmes I watch regularly at the moment had not yet premiered. One of the few things to remain consistent to both periods is that I watch every Formula 1 Grand Prix. The websites that I visit regularly now are very different – for one thing, Twitter didn’t even exist ten years ago! I now get my TV guide and weather reports over the internet. Because of changes to computer technology – ten years ago I used Win98, and now I don’t – many of the games I used to play no longer function, sadly. Not that I have as much time in 2012 to spend on them.

My weekend activities also followed a fixed pattern. I played RPGs at a fixed time and place – a game store in a reasonably nearby suburb. I travelled to games according to a set routine – with Ian Mackinder once a month and with Stephen every other time. The games being played were fixed to a timetable – I played 7th Sea on the first Saturday of the month, GM’d my original Fumanor on the second Saturday, GM’d Warcry on the third Saturday, and GM’d the original Zenith-3 campaign on the fourth. On the fifth Saturday, on those months that had one, I would board game. About once a month, I would also run a campaign, “The Rings Of Time”, on a Sunday.

In modern times, about half of my gaming happens away from the suburban game store for various reasons. These were mostly held at Stephen’s place until his passing, and I expect that they will now take place at my home, simply because it is the most convenient location. I will usually be using public transport to get to gaming when it IS at Burwood, but will be able to get a lift home most weeks with Ian. While a fixed timetable is no longer essential, I still produce one every year. 7th Sea has moved to the second Saturday, and I am no longer in that campaign; the first Saturday of the month is now devoted to The Adventurer’s Club, the pulp campaign that I co-referee. At the same time as Seventh Sea, I usually run Fumanor, splitting the year between the two campaigns. Over the last few years, there have also been periodic Sunday sessions split between the Fumanor: One Faith and Warcry campaigns. The latter is necessary because the third Saturday has been given over to a new campaign, Shards Of Divinity. I still run the Zenith-3 campaign on the fourth Saturday of the month, and on any fifth Saturdays as well.

My reading matter has changed to some extent as well – I used to buy two formula-1 related magazines, one or two computer magazines, and a general motorsport magazine. These days, I only get one monthly F1 magazine. I still have all the books that I had back then, and still re-read them regularly; while I have added some additional ones to the list in the meantime, most of them are classics. Heck, half of the books in question were added to my collection back about 30 years ago. So that’s one area that hasn’t changed much.

The Character Analogue

These changes have occurred one piece at a time. Some of them have been gradual; others have been the result of monumental disruptions. This is normal, the product of simply being alive. Life is inherently a dynamic process.

Compare that with the state of existence of most characters in a roleplaying game. The default status of these characters is static and unchanging. This is something that I have talked about previously, in Time Happens in the background, part of my Lessons From The West Wing series.

In that article, I suggested tracking encounters with NPCs by campaign day number, and ensuring that the NPCs circumstances have changed by an appropriate amount according to the interval since the NPC had last been encountered. I also suggested using a building that is commonly seen as a visual calendar to reinforce the impression of the passage of time.

What I have realized in the last week is that this is not enough. No PC in ten years, game time, would be as unchanged by circumstances as we are in real life.

Muddying the confusion: Static Societies

When it comes to societies in RPGs, they are also quite frequently static except as the direct result of events in which the PCs are involved. To some extent, this is due to fidelity to genre; to some extent, it is due to preservation of game setting; to some extent, it is because our impression of feudal society is that it didn’t change all that much for long periods of time; and to some extent it’s because its a lot of work and GMs have better things to do with their prep time. These reasons all have a certain level of validity, but they aren’t enough to justify the lack of personal change in the life of a PC.

A more serious consideration is the fact that a PC belongs to a player, not to the GM, and therefore it should not be subjected to arbitrary change without that player’s consent.

Rather than simply throwing up our hands in defeat at this point, though, let’s simply take these two requirements – minimal GM prep time and player involvement – as parameters that my eventual solution will have to satisfy, and move on.

Muddying the confusion some more: The shortness of existence

What is the average life expectancy in a game? Not of PCs, but of the general population?

This is obviously something that is going to be extremely variable, dependant on lifestyle, diet, economic status, and a whole host of other factors. But most fantasy games are based on the feudal era of human history – so, to restate the question, what was the average life expectancy in that era? I’ve heard all sorts of numbers used in different games, and had a lot of trouble tracking down any historical statistics to use (mostly because the notion of compiling such was unheard-of until the Domesday Book of 1086. But, finally, I came across this Wikipedia page on the subject. And very interesting reading it makes, too, especially the numbers for Medieval Britain – 30 years, but if the individual survived to the age of 21, the forecast could be extended to 64 years of age. Since some people would obviously die at the age of 21, that essentially means that as many people died above the age of 64 as died below it, though we can’t say exactly what the distribution of numbers was – it is statistically just as likely from the information presented for them all to drop at 65 as it is for some to survive to the age of 80, or 90, or 100 – or 1000, for that matter.

What can be deduced from these numbers is an absolutely appalling child mortality rate – enough people under the age of 21 died to drop the overall average from 64 to 30. In fact, more than half of all children could not have survived to reach the age of 21. (In fact, I think it would work out to be 64/94ths of the population, or about 68%, but don’t hold me to that).

These numbers suggest that in any group of 100 people, roughly 3 would die in any given 2-year period. (100/64=1.5625). And two of those would be children.

Sure, the fantasy world has access to healing that this population didn’t have, but at the same time, there are many more ways to get killed in a fantasy world – so we can rather arbitrarily assume that these factors roughly balance out. Though there’s lots of room for a GM to weight the balance one way or the other, if he so desires.

Compare that to the modern age, with an average lifespan of 67.2 – and that’s including those areas of the world which have still not received the full benefits of modern medicine, nutrition, and so on. In the western world, the life expectancy average would be higher again. Assuming an even distribution of deaths at each age below this point, and using the results to exclude those who die at 21 or less, gives me a rough average of 97.7 years.

Both numbers suggest that we’ve added something like 32 years to the average lifespan.

Here’s the significance: in a world where people die younger, they will try to pack more into the time they’ve got. They can only go so far in that respect, of course, and that also brings in the question of opportunities for advancement socially and professionally. But it would not surprise me to find that the average age of marriage was reduced proportionately – by a ratio of 67.2/97.7, or about 69% of what we’re used to.

What’s the point?

The whole preceding question is about how quickly things will change. The conclusion is that any given change will take place after only about 70% of the time we’re used to. Middle age, and the respectability that comes with it, wouldn’t be age 30 – it would be age 21. Marriages wouldn’t take place at an average of 25 years of age, they would happen at about 17.5 (on average). A couple’s first child would arrive within a couple of years – say, around 19-20 years of age. Their second and third children would follow at intervals of about 18-24 months – by the time the couple were 25, four children would be typical – but there would be around a 10% chance that one of them would have died already (2 in 3 will die under 21, and the eldest is now around 6 years old; 100 x 2/3 x (6+4+2+0)/21 / 4 = 200 x 12 / 3 / 4 / 21 = 200/21 = 9.5%. By the time the couple is 30, their eldest would be around 11 (assuming he was still alive) and the father would be looking for a trade into which a boy could be apprenticed – even if it was simply “farm boy”. Certainly, the child would be expected to earn his keep soon, if not already. If a daughter, it would be time to start seriously thinking about accumulating a dowry.

Multiply this accelerated pace of life by the number of people a character knows, and there should be something happening every week. That something might be minor, or it might be major. And that’s without taking into account dramatic circumstances like Wars and Orcish invasions and the like.

Ending The Confusion

While society overall might not change very much, the individuals within it would be changing almost perpetually. Similarly, a PC’s family and neighbors would be in a constant state of flux.

What we need is a system for simulating that flux, one that also meets the other criteria that I’ve outlined.

That calls for a reasonably complex system that is nevertheless easy to use. My favorite tool for such systems: a deck of ordinary playing cards.

The List Of Events

During character generation, or when first implementing this system, the GM simply shuffles a deck of cards and hands them to a player. He then explains the rules: Red cards represent a positive event – a birth, a marriage, whatever. Black cards represent a negative event – an illness, robbery, imprisonment, death, and so on. The face value of the cards gives a rough guide to the severity. After every 2nd picture card, the deck must be reshuffled.

Then he simply tells the player to invent a list of events to match the cards he turns over. These should be described as succinctly as possible – who (generally) experiences the event, and what happens to them. “Brother falls ill.” “Father breaks leg”. “Friend imprisoned”. “Sister born”. “Father remarries.” “Honored by the Duke”.

These events should be listed on a sheet of A4 or foolscap paper with the PCs name at the top, and the name of the player.

The players should be encouraged to be as creative and soap-opera as possible in making out these lists, and not to fear repetition if they run out of ideas.

In The Meantime

While the players are working on their lists, the GM can create one for the neighbors and shopkeepers that the PCs encounter. This should be twice as long as those of any given player, because the GM will get more use out of it. Since this list will address multiple people, there is no need to be consistent – it’s quite possible for there to be multiple “father remarries” entries, for example. Otherwise, the same rules apply.

Sequencing events

Once everyone’s finished their events, the next step is to shuffle them in order so that the players don’t know exactly what is going to happen next, and can’t take advantage of it. The easiest way is to take the picture cards out (except for the aces) and shuffle the remaining cards.

  • Spades = 1-10
  • Clubs = 11-20
  • Hearts = 21-30
  • Diamonds = 31-40

With this chart, or some equally-simple list of suits, the GM should be able to write a number next to each background event almost as quickly as he can turn cards over. Once he has each list in sequence, the tables are ready for use – the GM should file them away until he needs them. Of course, if necessary, after dealing with the first 40 events, he can start again if necessary.

Employing the Domestic Events list

So, here’s how it works: Each time the PCs are in a position to interact or hear from a family member, the GM takes the next item in numeric sequence off the list for that PC. Using recent game world events as a guide, he puts it into a context, and simply describes a single paragraph of “news from home”. If a week passes without the PC being in position to receive such news, the GM jots his paragraph down on a sheet of paper, adding events each week (in order) until the PC is in a position to hear from home.

With each event, the GM has a three-fold choice:

  1. he can interject an event of his own creation, leaving the next item on the list for a later time;
  2. he can replace the subject of the event with the name of the PC, or the PCs spouse (if there is one), or append “-in-law” to the subject, as he sees fit;
  3. or he can use it as it stands.

Each time he exercises options 2 or 3, he crosses the number off the list. So the event that the GM has numbered (randomly) #1 happens first, then #2, and so on.

Similarly, every time the PCs interact with a neighbor or a shopkeeper, the GM can select the most recent event that has affected them off the list that he has created.

When a list runs out, the player or GM simply generates a new list and files it away.

The goal is that in 10 years – about 520 events – the mundane life of the PC should have changed completely.

Just as it would have done in real life.

Non-fantasy gaming

A similar approach should work in every game. Some of the events might be different – there would be less emphasis on death and injury and more on career milestones and changes in a modern game – but the general principles will still hold.

Give it a try and see how much your PCs lives come to life!

Comments (3)

11 Table Rules For Speed


Faster Combats make games better

Faster Combats make games better

Slow combats kill games. This hard truth frustrates you and I because, as GMs, we feel it’s our responsibility to facilitate fast, sleek and exciting sessions.

When combat grinds, you end up with fewer encounters in a session. Fewer encounters means less story told, less adventure and less fun.

Combat grind also saps your players’ energy. You put effort into bringing enthusiasm and excitement to the table. You employ techniques with pacing and encounter design to create even more focus and drama.

But then combat grind comes along and deflates the table like a farting balloon.

Slow combats kill games.

So what is a game master to do?

Table Rules To The Rescue

One of the biggest reasons your combats are slow is players. They dawdle. They’re indecisive. They don’t know the rules and need the same rule explained to them every time. They chatter and don’t pay attention. Some even pay more attention to their phones than the GM!

With Tony Medeiros of LeonineRoar.com, I have published the world’s first online course for game masters. It’s called Faster Combat and in 52 info-packed lessons we teach you step-by-step exactly how to cut your combat time in half.

And believe it or not, we show you how to also increase drama and roleplaying at the same time!

One of the lessons covers the 17 Table Rules for Speed, and that’s what I want to show you today. This post contains info directly from the course, with some additional commentary from me just for Campaign Mastery.

I’m going to cover 11 of the rules today. I’m hoping if you like this advice and use it to increase your combat speed, you’ll consider enrolling in the Faster Combat course for GMs.

What Are Table Rules?

Your game books cover the rules of play. They tell you how to resolve different actions. Even if you use a rules light system, your rules still provide a framework for figuring out who shot whom and whether hiding in a fridge during a nuclear blast was a success.

However, game systems rarely help you with the social aspects of play. Things like slow players or disrespectful players.

Social etiquette, respect and procedure greases the wheels of smooth GMing and great game sessions.

A table rule is a simple group agreement about how to handle problem situations that often arise during games.

There are no villains here – you all play to have fun. But the problem comes when people with different backgrounds, experiences and expectations impose their style onto others without checking first.

If I told you your dice was cocked and your natural 20 was disallowed, you’d be very mad at me, especially if the issue of cocked dice had never been discussed before.

Johnn: I’ve always GM’d that cocked dice don’t count.

Bob: Well, in my previous group we allowed them!

Sarah: WE always used to re-roll cocked dice, but only if it was really cocked.

Johnn: What do you mean by really cocked? Like, 15 degrees or more?

Sarah: Yeah, like that.

Johnn: Ok, let me get my protractor and get a measurement.

Bob: Screw this, my roll counts!!! @#@$#!

You can avoid these nasty situations and speed your combats up a lot with some simple table rules.

Below, I offer several examples of great table rules for speeding up your battles.

How Do You Create A Table Rule?

But first, let’s quickly discuss how you create and handle table rules.

Again, your game books probably say either the GM has final say, or that the rules are suggestions only and your group should change them as they see fit.

In neither case do you get any help on what to actually do about keeping everybody in the loop and happy with rule changes and additions.

So here is what you do.

Step 1: Make a list of table rules you want to implement that’ll speed up combat.

Step 2: Take 15 minutes at the start of next game session to talk over each rule.

Step 3: Go through each rule one by one and explain WHY you want this rule. The why is critical for player acceptance. If they understand the purpose of the rule and its benefits, they will comply much better during sessions.

The best way to explain why is to state the proposed rule and then add “because”. The word because is a clear and clean segue for you to explain your reasoning.

“Dice rolled on the floor do not count…because nobody can see what you rolled and it’s not fair to introduce that ambiguity. Plus, I want you to immediately roll a new dice and look for the dropped dice after your turn…because that will speed up the game, especially for those hard-to-find dice.”

Step 4: Have a brief discussion, consider amendments and change any rules accordingly.

Step 5: Next session, give all players a copy of the group’s new Table Rules For Speed. Be consistent and fair in their application.

Step 6: At the start of each session for the next few sessions, ask if there is any feedback on the table rules. Have a discussion, make amendments, distribute revised rules accordingly.

Step 6 should only be for two, three or four sessions until each rule has been tested, contested and rested. From then on, it will be smooth sailing.

Occasional hiccups will happen. In these cases, go back to the steps above, which are all about clear communication, group collaboration and fairness.

Ok, let’s dive into my suggestions for some Table Rules For Speed!

Top 17 Table Rules For Speed (Expanded)

Here are the very best table rules to help manage your game table and increase turn speed.

These table rules are designed for fairness and to help you run faster combats so you can chew through more exciting encounters every session.

Table Rule 1. Speak Up: Ask

Simply ask your players to take their turns faster.

Tell them things appear to be grinding to a crawl and the pace of combat needs to increase so there’s less waiting around the game table.

Tell your playgroup you’ll regularly ask players to pick up the pace throughout a given session or campaign.

This is the most important part of the table rule. You are getting player permission to call them out periodically when they drag the pace down. Without this table rule and their permission, you come off looking like a jerk.

But because this issue has been discussed, when you do ask a player to hurry up, the groundwork has already been laid that this type of GM callout is acceptable and is for the good of the whole group.

This table rule also communicates it’s not personal. All players will be subject to this callout, which makes any potential sting painless when it happens.

If you can, try a friendly approach. “Bob, I’m invoking Table Rule #1. Please finish up your turn quick here so I can move on to Frank.”

If you do this, soon you’ll be able to snap out, “Table Rule #1” and get a smile – and a faster player – instead of a stressed or hurt player.

It just becomes part of your group’s social standards, no harm or foul.

Table Rule 2. No Take Backs

Use the classic chess or board game piece rule: once you’ve declared an action or moved your miniature, there’s no taking it back.

Use this if your group has indecisive or highly tactical players.

Some players are tricky. They’ll announce an action and wait to see your reaction. If they think you’re about to lay down some smack, they’ll quickly recant and think some more.

You give away the consequences with your energy, facial expression and body language. You might even give yourself up with how you speak: “Awesome, well then, your foe….” Speak like that and a player realizes they’ve made a mistake and will do a take-back.

This table rule should include a GM protocol to help it along. You don’t need to discuss this, it’s just something you do. When a player declares their action, you confirm, then declare it final, then react.

How you word this is up to you, but one suggestion is:

Sarah: I charge forward, sword swinging above my head, giving my fierce battle cry!

Johnn: Haha, that’s a great description. So you charge forward? (? Your smooth confirmation, before reacting)

Sarah: Yes.

Johnn: (now you react ?) Great! To your horror, the floor drops beneath your feet. As you attempt to avoid the trap, you catch the glint of massive spiked cylinders churning below in a pool of vile blood and gore. [Make a Reflex save.]

Table Rule 3. Reroll Dice That Fall Off The Table

Flying dice cost time. And the odd thing is, good rolls on the floor tend to count, but bad rolls must be re-rolled because “my dice rolled off the table.”

Establish a clear rule on what to do when this happens and apply this table rule every time, regardless of what the dropped dice rolled.

One option is the player (or GM) must re-roll a new dice immediately. This saves the quest-for-dice delay, and it removes any temptation to ask for an appeal when the dropped dice result is spotted.

Another option is to not allow re-rolls for players with bad aim. Have those rolls count as a 1. That’ll quickly make everyone a lot more careful with their dice. This is especially good for players who are a little careless or who aren’t paying enough attention to the game.

You might also consider using a communal dice tray. A game box lid does just fine. All player dice must be rolled into the tray. Put the tray where you can easily see it.

Players should remove their dice from the tray once finished their turn so other player’s rolls do not accidentally touch another player’s dice and get “contaminated.” (You would not believe the dice arguments I’ve had with players, but as with any form of luck, superstition and habit sets in.)

A nice benefit of a tray is minimal cocked dice. No lie: a former group ruled a 15 degree angle or gap or more constituted a cocked dice. I brought a protractor to sessions. This only lasted a couple of sessions though, because it was so silly, but the protractor became a symbol.

Table Rule 4. No Cross Talk or Interruptions

Ask players to not interrupt or disrupt other players during their turns. It’s just the player and GM, focused on each other, working out that player’s turn.

I recommend you do not allow in-character talk with the active player, either.

Instead, for maximum turn efficiency, allow players to roleplay with each other when inactive as much as they like as long as they do not get too loud. This lets players plan and chat and entertain with each other without costing game time.

I know this breaks your game’s round length – how could so much conversation happen in those 6 or 10 or 30 seconds? – but it’s a nice compromise.

If you don’t like this, then consider allowing only in-character talk (no meta-gaming, please) with the active player. And just allow brief phrases, replies or an exchange of one sentence during the short period a combat turn represents.

The biggest time drag comes from indecisiveness. Some people cannot make snappy decisions. And if you allow other players to talk with the active player and introduce new ideas and choices, you just make indecisive players take even longer on their turns (which is stressful for the player too).

Not allowing cross-talk also prevents meta-gaming. Players cannot share info the active character would not know during his player’s turn. (It will happen out of turn anyway, but things always get “real” when the spotlight is on you, and minimizing meta-gaming this way helps roleplay and drama.)

The opposite of indecision is over-analysis. Does your group discuss and analyze every option on each character’s move? Holy cow, that’s a big peeve of mine and it takes up a lot of game time.

Finally, interruptions break concentration and steals the spotlight away from the active player. Not only does this slow combat down, but you rob characters of their shining moments.

You also rob roleplaying, because if you honour spotlight time and make it safe, players will roleplay PC actions and abilities more often.

Table Rule 5. Use Clear Language

Require that everyone declares targets, distances, hit rolls and damage totals clearly.

Make sure players point to miniatures or make sure every miniature is labeled so players and GMs can easily call them out throughout a combat.

Add up damage done to a target and say a single number out loud whenever possible.

The spirit of this rule is to avoid ambiguity. The time it takes to go back and forth cause combat turns to slog down.

Bob: I hit the lizardman for 10.

Johnn: Great, the lizardman….

Bob: No, wait! I do 8 with the sword, 2 for strength, 1 for the bless and 1 more for power attack. Ok, I do 12.

Johnn: You sure?

Bob: Yup.

Johnn: Great, the lizardman reels back but takes the damage like a true warrior. He hisses and you think he’s actually laughing at you!

Bob: Wait, what? No. I hit the already-wounded guy. Does he die?

Johnn: Oh, sorry, I thought you were attacking the guy in front of you.

And on and on it can go. Plus, in the example above it blew my great combat description and my little GMing moment of flavour. Boo.

One solution is to confirm everything. But that’s tedious too.

Instead, if players can help you by being crystal clear on all the facts involved in their action, you don’t need to confirm, you avoid the lengthy back and forth and demoralizing errors, and combats go by much faster.

Note: you can help players help you by giving them your full attention. Do not reward players honoring Table Rule #5 with a request for them to repeat themselves because you were only half listening.

Table Rule 6. Snack After Combat

No snacking during turns.

Encourage everyone to eat meals before the session so players have their full attention on the session and combats, rather than their food.

Members of my group take turns supplying dinner at the start of sessions. That way we eat together and the meal is taken care of, plus we fit in some great social time and session readiness time.

If you allow snacks at the table (which most of us do) then ask players not to eat on their turn. This makes turns go a little faster, and it keeps the game area cleaner. It’s also easier to not talk with your mouth full. :)

Table Rule 7. Make Passive Checks

Don’t slow down combat with yet more rolls.

Use passive checks or just assume success for certain situations, especially at higher levels of play.

Many games already include automatic checks like this (i.e., “Take 10”).

Ask yourself whether chance of failure adds any value to a particular situation. Does it add drama, chance of a great story result or twist, or fun because of chance of failure.

If the roll would add little to gameplay, hand wave it instead for the sake of brevity.

Doing this actually enhances story and roleplaying because you can dive seamlessly into great narrative or description, adding flavor, without the stilted effect of dice rolls and result calculations.

You can also ask players to provide great descriptions for automatic checks.

Johnn: Frank, no need to roll your climb because it’s just a 3 foot leap. You succeed. Instead, describe what happens.

Frank: With clanking armor and jingling weapons, Krog gingerly steps over the lava stream. He grunts from the heat and almost trips as his visor accidently closes, but he makes it across and keeps running towards his foe!

Table Rule 8. Seating = Init

Once initiative is set, have everyone sit in initiative order as a visual aid to track initiative.

Then play proceeds clockwise around the table with less time wondering whose turn it is.

This works when initiative is fairly static. If you play a game where init changes each round, I could make a case for switching to average init, and not just to speed up combat, but to make combat more strategic as well.

For example, as mentioned in Module 3 of Faster Combat, “an average initiative result approach yields a consistency of more realistic and immersive role-based quickness through an entire campaign’s worth of combats. Monstrous insects tend to always act faster than slow-moving giants, for example.”

However, I know init is very much a GM and group style choice, so there is no one perfect solution. My Pathfinder group rolls once at the beginning of combat, and we use a lot of readied and delayed actions, so seating in init order would end up being musical chairs.

But think how easy initiative management would become if each player knew it was his turn once the guy on his right is done, or that his turn is coming up soon because Bob seated over there is taking his turn now.

Visual, intuitive and fast.

Table Rule 9. Stand Up

Ask everyone to stand during combat.

Standing increases energy and attention levels. And in the case of combat, it increases focus.

Another perk: it makes players a little uncomfortable and motivates them to finish combat faster.

Sitting for too long – especially without good breathing practices – makes you tired. Standing up gets the blood flowing again.

Standing for combat also subtly implies action.

Table Rule 10. No Dice Massaging

Ban dice massaging from your game table.

A second or two is okay, but approaching five+ seconds every time someone rolls dice is an annoying time waster.

Do you have a player who must fondle his dice before every roll? I had one. We got into arguments over it. The superstitious ritual just kept getting longer and more involved.

It got even worse when the player ran into a bad luck streak. Suddenly the massages turned into performance art. Great for festivals, bad for fast combats.

Here’s where you can help me. Dice massaging is creepy, but fancy dice rolling moves are cool! Do you know of any sites or videos that show you cool ways to roll dice (fast). I thought magic trick sites might have some interesting flourishes, but um, no dice. So the quest continues.

Table Rule 11. Announce End Of Turn

When your turn ends, announce it clearly and audibly.

A simple “Done,” works. A “Done, Dave is next,” is even better.

And the platinum version? “Done, Dave’s next and Andrea – you’re on deck.”

This table rule speeds up combat in two great ways.

First, it makes it crystal clear when the next player’s turn activates.

Ever had those moments where nobody knows whose turn it is and the game simmers for awhile? You are busy checking up something behind the screen, so you don’t catch that the next player is oblivious it’s their turn.

Crisp hand-offs improve round speed and leave no guesswork about who should be declaring their action right this moment. It also prevents players from spacing out.

Think of it like a baton race. The fastest team depends on excellent hand-offs.

The second reason this table rule is so effective? When a player announces his turn is done, that’s it.

Similar to no take-backs, if something was forgotten that was potentially beneficial, it’s lost: do it on your next turn.

You stave off arguments, time-consuming retcons and re-calculations.

You also prevent the next player’s turn getting interrupted halfway through, which is a bit rude and flusters some players. Plus, sometimes the interruption forces a player to rethink their turn and start all over again. Killer.

This table rule encourages everyone to pay attention on their turn and make good decisions fast.

Bonus Tip

Print out your Table Rules For Speed and put them on the back of your GM screen. Just like B.A.’s screen in Knights of the Dinner Table, the table rules are public and there for all to reference all the time.

If you do not use a screen, post your table rules up on the wall, or get them laminated and put them on the table each session.

Summary

Done right, the Table Rules For Speed you assemble become part of your group’s culture. The silent message they deliver each session includes respect for each other, and to speed gameplay up so everyone can enjoy more encounters and story every game night.

You all have more fun because the group’s table rules grease wheels that might otherwise get jammed up from bad practices, poor communication and a weak gaming spirit.

Go through the list of table rules above. Select the ones you think would benefit your group best.

Add new ones as you sit fit (and please share them with us – I’d like to hear what yours are).

Have a group discussion. And then begin your faster combats. Roll initiative!

Comments (6)