While it seems that there's a consensus for Gatavia revival, I thought I'd at least mention the third option. We could, of course, create a new setting from scratch. The downside would be the amount of work and the fact we'd be giving up the past history of 2 campaigns. However, the upsides are significant. First of all, a new setting would mesh more neatly into the scheme of ACKS, and all of the design features could be more clearly brought into play. We'd have the campaign start instructions to use and all of the mapping conventions etc., . Secondly, it would give everyone a chance at some new input as to campaign style, rather than be bound by the three or so years ago Dave outlook.
I must admit that coming up with another set of gods and religions seems a bit tiresome, even if the Gatavia ones are mostly just Earth ones anyway.
Although one track might be to start really tight and gradually build the world outward. Our previous multi-campaign world, Caedes, started as "Horny Bill's Trading Post" and the forest immediately around it, and gradually grew into a whole continent with a lot of development, used for 4 different campaigns (of various levels of success).
Monday, April 15, 2013
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Open a Can of Setting?
If we were not to use Gatavia/Badlands again, the second option would be to use a canned setting. I basically have three choices:
#1 World of Greyhawk: Upside: beautiful, huge poster-sized hex maps. My copies are a little fragile, being 30+ years old. Ample space for adventure, plenty of opportunity for staking a wilderness claim. I only have the most basic Gazetteer, so we could create all the gods etc., we wanted. Downside: as written the world is incredibly unpopulated. I mean, the density is just about zero, so it would take a major re-cajjering of the stats. Really, it boils down to a really, really awesome map and that's it.
#2 City State of the World Emperor/Invincible Overlord/Wilderlands: another ancient map set, only it comes crammed with wilderness maps and city maps with dungeons, strange lair encounters and tons of old Judges' Guild weirdness. It gets down to naming everyone who works in every shop, and they ALL have classes and levels. It could be an incredible experience. It could be an ocean of weirdness. It might take as much effort to understand as it would to create a new setting. Huge amount of detail, but much of it would have to be adapted.
#3 The Auran Empire: this is the implied setting of ACKS. All the flavor text in the books would of course be perfect for the setting. The full setting isn't published. There is a world map, but it is just a smallish JPEG and isn't that great. We'd have to tart up our own region from scratch.
I could just as easily imagine myself working up any of these three as the Gatavia campaign. And truthfully, the "Amount of Work" for any of these first four options isn't all that different. And, double-truthfully, from now through August, any option that is MORE WORK, is actually better for me, since this is my prime RPG-output months of the year and I love digging in to stuff round about now.
#1 World of Greyhawk: Upside: beautiful, huge poster-sized hex maps. My copies are a little fragile, being 30+ years old. Ample space for adventure, plenty of opportunity for staking a wilderness claim. I only have the most basic Gazetteer, so we could create all the gods etc., we wanted. Downside: as written the world is incredibly unpopulated. I mean, the density is just about zero, so it would take a major re-cajjering of the stats. Really, it boils down to a really, really awesome map and that's it.
#2 City State of the World Emperor/Invincible Overlord/Wilderlands: another ancient map set, only it comes crammed with wilderness maps and city maps with dungeons, strange lair encounters and tons of old Judges' Guild weirdness. It gets down to naming everyone who works in every shop, and they ALL have classes and levels. It could be an incredible experience. It could be an ocean of weirdness. It might take as much effort to understand as it would to create a new setting. Huge amount of detail, but much of it would have to be adapted.
#3 The Auran Empire: this is the implied setting of ACKS. All the flavor text in the books would of course be perfect for the setting. The full setting isn't published. There is a world map, but it is just a smallish JPEG and isn't that great. We'd have to tart up our own region from scratch.
I could just as easily imagine myself working up any of these three as the Gatavia campaign. And truthfully, the "Amount of Work" for any of these first four options isn't all that different. And, double-truthfully, from now through August, any option that is MORE WORK, is actually better for me, since this is my prime RPG-output months of the year and I love digging in to stuff round about now.
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Return to Boscovania?
Thinking about an Adventurer, Conquerer, King campaign, the first major question is which setting to use.
I have a certain inclination to use the Gatavia Region, we've used for "Return of the Trolls" and "AD&D Badlands" campaigns. Jason has expressed an interest in taking up the Badlands campaign where we left off, and that sounds somewhat tempting to me too.
A couple of obstacles:
#1 Hexes vs. Squares: all of the campaign material for ACKS is expressed in 6 mile hexes and 24 mile hexes. I have really soured on using hexes for mapping. I much prefer either a ruler with no grid, or a square grid. With a square grid the math is easier, and it is far easier to scale up and to scale down for larger or smaller maps. Of course, the Gatavia Map is square-gridded (10 mile small squares, 50 mile large squares).
Luckily, I've done a quick run through of the rules, and it turns out that they are all stated in square miles as well as hexes, and the hexes aren't key at all. So, the mapping conventions are not as important as I thought they would be.
#2: Conversion: much of the conversion might be a bit dicey. For one thing, the designer of the ACKS hates halflings, and there are no halfling character classes in either book. Also, there are no rules for illusionists. Therefore, Bosco Tripod and Nigel Mysterio are left flapping in the breeze. These two are really minor problems rather than major ones. In the Gatavia universe, halflings are biologically more or less completely human. We could easily just allow halflings to use a limited selection of human classes and go on from there. Worse comes to worse I would just play Nigel as a wizard.
More serious problems with conversion would have to do with various plans and spending history of the characters. They would have spent and invested based on the "old" economy and assumptions, and would find themselves in a new surrounding, having bought things or spent massively for reasons that no longer apply. Also, ability scores would have to be seriously modified, probably to the point of re-rolling ability scores to re-describe the characters in the new scale.
So the conversion project might be awkward and wonky, but if everyone were patient and cool, it would eventually work out.
What's the upside: When we play D&D in almost any form our campaigns tend to be significantly longer-running than with other games. Most campaigns we run are 10-15 sessions, while D&D based games are 20-30 sessions. When we started the Badlands, I wanted to start a really long term game. And when we broke for Kings of Orion, it was more because of Andrew's eagerness to GM it than because of any lack of momentum. It was my intention to pick up Badlands where we left off, but then I had an unfortunate case of severe Traveller fever (something I catch every five years or so, but which usually passes). When that passed, I sort of stumbled into Mutants and Muskets by accident. Now that ACKS has come into view, I see that it could be a vehicle to make Badlands into the super-long campaign I always had heard about but never had really seen, and which I always wanted to be involved in.
It would take very little setting conversion to get running. I used very similar population density assumptions as the ACKS crew, and our opinions on Alignment are in remarkably exact agreement. I'll have to do some work with the Old Ones to make them fit into the scheme (but they may be close enough to the decadent Zahar of ACKS to fit).
What do I think: I'm putting a peg in the idea of re-starting the Badlands where we left off, only converting to ACKS. It currently ranks as a "Very Good Idea". But, I want to think everything else out too. I think we would allow everyone to either convert their characters, henchmen and possessions over or, if they preferred, create some replacements. In any case, I don't think we need to play first level D&D guys, we've all done that enough times to know what it's like, and we don't need to suffer through it again.
I have a certain inclination to use the Gatavia Region, we've used for "Return of the Trolls" and "AD&D Badlands" campaigns. Jason has expressed an interest in taking up the Badlands campaign where we left off, and that sounds somewhat tempting to me too.
A couple of obstacles:
#1 Hexes vs. Squares: all of the campaign material for ACKS is expressed in 6 mile hexes and 24 mile hexes. I have really soured on using hexes for mapping. I much prefer either a ruler with no grid, or a square grid. With a square grid the math is easier, and it is far easier to scale up and to scale down for larger or smaller maps. Of course, the Gatavia Map is square-gridded (10 mile small squares, 50 mile large squares).
Luckily, I've done a quick run through of the rules, and it turns out that they are all stated in square miles as well as hexes, and the hexes aren't key at all. So, the mapping conventions are not as important as I thought they would be.
#2: Conversion: much of the conversion might be a bit dicey. For one thing, the designer of the ACKS hates halflings, and there are no halfling character classes in either book. Also, there are no rules for illusionists. Therefore, Bosco Tripod and Nigel Mysterio are left flapping in the breeze. These two are really minor problems rather than major ones. In the Gatavia universe, halflings are biologically more or less completely human. We could easily just allow halflings to use a limited selection of human classes and go on from there. Worse comes to worse I would just play Nigel as a wizard.
More serious problems with conversion would have to do with various plans and spending history of the characters. They would have spent and invested based on the "old" economy and assumptions, and would find themselves in a new surrounding, having bought things or spent massively for reasons that no longer apply. Also, ability scores would have to be seriously modified, probably to the point of re-rolling ability scores to re-describe the characters in the new scale.
So the conversion project might be awkward and wonky, but if everyone were patient and cool, it would eventually work out.
What's the upside: When we play D&D in almost any form our campaigns tend to be significantly longer-running than with other games. Most campaigns we run are 10-15 sessions, while D&D based games are 20-30 sessions. When we started the Badlands, I wanted to start a really long term game. And when we broke for Kings of Orion, it was more because of Andrew's eagerness to GM it than because of any lack of momentum. It was my intention to pick up Badlands where we left off, but then I had an unfortunate case of severe Traveller fever (something I catch every five years or so, but which usually passes). When that passed, I sort of stumbled into Mutants and Muskets by accident. Now that ACKS has come into view, I see that it could be a vehicle to make Badlands into the super-long campaign I always had heard about but never had really seen, and which I always wanted to be involved in.
It would take very little setting conversion to get running. I used very similar population density assumptions as the ACKS crew, and our opinions on Alignment are in remarkably exact agreement. I'll have to do some work with the Old Ones to make them fit into the scheme (but they may be close enough to the decadent Zahar of ACKS to fit).
What do I think: I'm putting a peg in the idea of re-starting the Badlands where we left off, only converting to ACKS. It currently ranks as a "Very Good Idea". But, I want to think everything else out too. I think we would allow everyone to either convert their characters, henchmen and possessions over or, if they preferred, create some replacements. In any case, I don't think we need to play first level D&D guys, we've all done that enough times to know what it's like, and we don't need to suffer through it again.
Friday, April 12, 2013
Adventurer Conquerer King Characters
I'm poking around the Adventurer, Conquerer, King System (ACKS) and am definitely finding it to my liking. It's bones are the Basic/Expert D&D system, but it has some interesting modifications which are minor in verbiage, but possibly very interesting in practice.
The character generation plan is a good one: everyone rolls 5 characters, using 3d6 in order. Each player picks 1 of his rolled characters as his PC, and then 2 as back-ups, and then gives the remaining 2 to the Judge as NPC's or Henchmen.
One other interesting feature is the "Experience Reserve", you can spend money on totally non-useful things (Much like we did in the Badlands Campaign) but that spent money doesn't go toward your experience, but rather into a "Reserve". If your PC dies, then the reserve is given to the PC's heir so he doesn't begin at 0 experience.
The character generation plan is a good one: everyone rolls 5 characters, using 3d6 in order. Each player picks 1 of his rolled characters as his PC, and then 2 as back-ups, and then gives the remaining 2 to the Judge as NPC's or Henchmen.
One other interesting feature is the "Experience Reserve", you can spend money on totally non-useful things (Much like we did in the Badlands Campaign) but that spent money doesn't go toward your experience, but rather into a "Reserve". If your PC dies, then the reserve is given to the PC's heir so he doesn't begin at 0 experience.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
End Embarassing Gap... Now
As I've explained over at Lords of Hack Blog, my half year aversion to doing game "homework" in all forms is finally over. I've been going back to reading games, going to message boards, thinking about future plans etc.
First Thought: I will never, ever, ever, ever allow players to run totally simultaneous multiple PC's again. The practice is an absolute role-playing killer. Awesome as the role-playing was in our first Traveller game on Skull was with 1 PC each, the minute we had 3 at once the next game, there was a noticeable and precipitous drop. While everyone did a good job bringing 1-2 of their characters into sharp focus, nobody brought all 3 to full PC vividness. Having multiple PC's also just ended up with shuffling around characters to find the one with the easy solution, rather than making the PC's come up with a solution with the tools at hand.
Henchmen are always the better solution in so many ways. They're disposable, they're subordinate, they're limited in power, and they're not all meant to be vivid.
I don't mind multiple PC's, but they have to be separate and segregated. So, a player could run Malsquando the Mage one week, and if he is detained on magical research, Larry the thief the next. That's good, that's cool, that's even to be desired. But, never 3 guys at once, at the same place, doing the same thing, every session. Never again.
First Thought: I will never, ever, ever, ever allow players to run totally simultaneous multiple PC's again. The practice is an absolute role-playing killer. Awesome as the role-playing was in our first Traveller game on Skull was with 1 PC each, the minute we had 3 at once the next game, there was a noticeable and precipitous drop. While everyone did a good job bringing 1-2 of their characters into sharp focus, nobody brought all 3 to full PC vividness. Having multiple PC's also just ended up with shuffling around characters to find the one with the easy solution, rather than making the PC's come up with a solution with the tools at hand.
Henchmen are always the better solution in so many ways. They're disposable, they're subordinate, they're limited in power, and they're not all meant to be vivid.
I don't mind multiple PC's, but they have to be separate and segregated. So, a player could run Malsquando the Mage one week, and if he is detained on magical research, Larry the thief the next. That's good, that's cool, that's even to be desired. But, never 3 guys at once, at the same place, doing the same thing, every session. Never again.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Foiled Again
I was planning to do a solo scenario wherein Tim's Tornados did an assault on the house formerly owned by Ace Nubunto, for which I had an awesome map. However, my cat puked all over the map. O, well.
Successful Computer Necromancy
I did manage to replace my dead hard disk on my old laptop. And then installed the Ubuntu operating system on it. The whole process turned out to be one of the simplest error-free computer processes I've ever had to do. I was sure I'd "roll a fumble" somewhere along the line.
It's kind of amazing that Ubuntu will run the computer just fine for free, comes with a free set of office software that approxmates Microsoft Office, and with an internet browser. It seems to take a fraction of the space that windows does too. I kind of feel like a goofus spending money on Microsoft products now. I suppose you're paying for compatability with everyone else. I also suppose you should begrudge another fellow his racket.
Anyway, now I have a functioning spare computer that might be awesome for use at the table. I know I'd like to reduce the amount of paper piles sitting around me. I've got all the Traveller books on CD, so maybe I should install them on the thing.
What other sorts of things might we use it for at the table?
It's kind of amazing that Ubuntu will run the computer just fine for free, comes with a free set of office software that approxmates Microsoft Office, and with an internet browser. It seems to take a fraction of the space that windows does too. I kind of feel like a goofus spending money on Microsoft products now. I suppose you're paying for compatability with everyone else. I also suppose you should begrudge another fellow his racket.
Anyway, now I have a functioning spare computer that might be awesome for use at the table. I know I'd like to reduce the amount of paper piles sitting around me. I've got all the Traveller books on CD, so maybe I should install them on the thing.
What other sorts of things might we use it for at the table?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)