The Vampire sandbox

I listened to a podcast that discussed the first scenario for Vampire, in the back of the 2nd ed rulebook. I remember when Vampire was the hottest thing, and how I bought that book and pored over it. I tried to figure out how to make a "personal horror" game out of it, and even though we played it a bit it never really fulfilled its potential. Looking at that example scenario do provide some fairly good hints on how the creator, Mark Rein Hagen, really envisioned his game.

The scenario is very limited in its geographical location. There are no extensive secondary world to explore, there are no obvious fights and no obvious treasure. But, there are a crowd of NPCs.

While I never really came to appreciate the "super heroes with fangs" aspects of Vampire, I did find the idea of a NPC based scenario to be intriguing. I've found that it is a challenge to make them flow well, though. If the NPCs one after one come up to the PCs and talk, then walk away to make way to the next in line, it will feel like the players really are standing there with a line of people. To make it still feel like a place, like something is happening, was always a challenge to me.

If we take a look at some scenarios that look like that, which I've had more success with, I at once think of Call of Cthulhu. Many CoC scenarios have many people to talk to, but they also almost always have a strong plot element. Sometimes even so strong it can be considered railroaded. But, I've found that is one of the best ways to make the "crowd of people" scenario work. If you have some plot going on, with things happening no matter what, all that talk doesn't feel as much like it's happening in a vacuum.

Now, you know what I first thought when I listened to how the podcasters (I wish I remembered which podcast it was, but my mp3 player have crashed and I have no copy of the file anywhere and no recollection of how I found it) described the scenario? I thought, "this sounds like a sandbox"! But, often sandboxes are described as a setting, a place, where the players are free to create their own plot and explore freely. This is another kind of sandbox, that is almost not a place and not about exploration. It's a sandbox of people.

I've never thought about that before, and naturally it makes me wonder if anyone have thought of doing a sandbox like that for their game, their old school game of D&D and similar games? Has it been done, or have we not yet left the dungeon?

Getting the full impact of the story of a game

I just finished reading Permanence, by Karl Schroeder, today. For those of you who don't know, it's a outer space science fiction story with some intriguing aliens and some cool plot twists and turns, and real sense of wonder.

More than once I've lamented the fact that never have science fiction games turned out like I'd want them. When I finished Permanence I once again got reminded of that, since some parts of that book would work just fine as scenes in a Transhuman Space game. But, the philosophical implications, the inner turmoil of the characters and the way the mysteries of the settings were shadowed in the actions of the protagonists of the novel, those would probably never crop up in a game. Maybe it's a problem for me that the kind of sf I like is hard to recreate in a game. Or is it something else?

A while back I watched the Western remake, True Grit. It was a fabulous movie, with great shots and excellent interplay between the characters as they discovered their own "true grit". They way it was shot, using the scenes and the camera to show distance and closeness was also excellent. Today I saw the original, the True Grit from 1969 with John Wayne. I'm quite fond of many of his western movies. The Searchers, High Noon and Stagecoach I consider some of my favourites of all time. So, here we had the same story told in two different ways, just like the same adventure could play out very differently at two different tables.

That movie was shot very differently. It was always very light, never dark even when it was clearly supposed to be night. The music was so light and merry I almost laughed. After hearing for so long that "this ain't an easy trip, sister", that music totally flipped that impression over into a jolly ride into the wilderness. Surprisingly many of the lines the actors had were identical in the two movies, but they felt quite different. They both basically said the same thing, but it came across in a new way.

So, what does that mean for my longing after the deep impact of Permanence in my science fiction games? Well. I know that I can decide not to play jolly music when it's supposed to be grim, and I can try to describe the inner conflicts in NPCs by their external actions. But, I'm still a far away from capturing that magic. Sometimes you say the same things, and it comes across in a totally different way.

I wonder if I'll solve that riddle.

But, damn do I want to play an Old West game now, or what!

Forgotten Realms Personalities - what levels are they again?

Everyone knows about Elminster, right? Lot of people have also heard of some dark skinned elf with some feline companion from some kind of novel or three, right? Mary Sue, anyone?

So everyone knows that there are multiple high level personalities in the Forgotten Realms. Many of us feel that those long lists of people in the setting books are slightly intimidating. Is there any space for the stories of my character?

I decided to sum the level of the named personalities in the grey box for Forgotten Realms, FR1 Waterdeep and FR5 The Savage Frontier (all for 1st ed. AD&D) and see what the average level is of them. It might give you a hint of what might be the best books to use, and if FR is a place for your heroes to make their mark. The results are interesting.

Grey Box - 9
Waterdeep - 6.5
Savage Frontier - 13.333

What do you say about that? Considering the box is detailing a significant part of a whole continent, it's not surprising to have a few level 26 individuals in there. But, the average lands right in the sweet spot for "name level", which kind of makes sense if these are the people who are significant enough to stand out. They have begun to make their mark in the world, which with player characters happens at "name level". Maybe FR is not so filled with demigods after all?

Lets then look at the metropolis, Waterdeep. Considering this is the most densely populated place in the realms, you would imagine this is a place you are quite likely to find those big wigs.  Interestingly, there are some character in the upper teens, but not as many as I expected. The movers and shakers are described in vague terms, and the so called "Lords of Waterdeep" are actually secret, which makes it easy to slip in a player character or two in there.

Then, finally, we have Paul Jaquays. While I have a healthy amount of respect for the man as a dungeon designer, I think I know where I don't like his world building. In the Savage Frontier we have him fleshing out the wilds around Waterdeep and he adds a few high level personalities. By adding in his marvellous The Enchanted Wood adventure material for DragonQuest (which I happen to have an extra copy of, if anyone is interested), he manages to up the epic feel quite a bit. I remember someone posted that they felt FR5 was a bit much, when a section about random events mentioned two flying castles with dragons crawling over them passing overhead, locked in a wizardly duel. I think I agree. This book adds way to much. In my FR I think I will pass on it, however much I like Jaquays' dungeons.

I don't have many more of the earliest FR books for 1st ed. Since Ed Greenwood wrote the one on the Red Wizards, and they are all over the Grey Box as the big evil force, I feel tempted to to a similar analysis of that one. I have Moonshae, but it feels a bit separated from the rest of the world.

So, while it seems like the reputation FR has of a myriad of high powered NPCs is not totally unfounded, I think it is not found in all the sources. Personally I can't stand game novels, and I have stayed away from most of the 2nd ed. source books as well, since most of those are written after the novels started to flow out of TSR. If those are ignored, and some source books are screened, I think there are space left in the Forgotten Realms for your heroes.

A campaign which uses the Grey Box as a basis, adds Waterdeep and takes that Old West feel, might be a "Greenwood-ian" realms, and one wherein your adventures might not only fit, but also make an impact on the world. That's how I would run it.

Old School Forgotten Realms

I have been reading the grey box Forgotten Realms lately. Yesterday I also took out the first supplement, Waterdeep. Apart from some very interesting art in that book, I suddenly realized that these books differed to some extent from other old school gaming books.

In the FR cyclopedia of the realms, you get a sketchy view of many kingdoms and different landmarks like bridges and villages. There are many opportunities for adventure and I felt like I wanted to start a campaign there. But, there was that other chapter that felt different. There's in both the cyclopedia and the Waterdeep book a long, really long, list of personalities of realm.

In the cyclopedia, there are some personalities that are of a different class, namely the Powers. I think this is interesting, for Ed Greenwood does not call them gods, but Powers. That and the list of NPCs makes me thing that the powers are just heroes of old that have ascended. You get the distinct idea that adventuring in the realms you will interact with many of all these personalities mentioned, god or mortals. Is this a peculiarity of the Forgotten Realms?

Thinking back on other distinctly old school game books, I don't think there as are many NPCs listed there. I remember thinking a way back that a dungeon, whatever it was I was reading that day, felt kind of empty, since there was no named personalities in it.

I know some people dislike FR, and anything touched by Ed Greenwood. To many it makes them think of Elminster, the deus ex machina, or heavy handed "story" based game mastering. Even though Ed is not to blame for those practices, it feels like his FR is slightly more about people than monsters. Even though I love the explorative part of the game, and some good exhilarating fights with foul beasts, I can't but help feeling a lot of sympathy for a game where there are heroes and personalities around. It kind of makes the world feel like a real place. Someone lives there, and are doing heroic deeds.

Maybe this subtle flavour difference of the Forgotten Realms it just my imagination, but I'm wondering how important interaction with named personalities is to my and other peoples expectation of fun. Anyhow, if you are having fun, you are doing it right. Right?

Gamemastering Call of Cthullhu - pacing

Today I was once again behind the screen as Keeper of Arcane Lore. I'm collecting experience, and this was my sixth time as a Keeper! While running this session I experienced something I wanted to talk about.

I have been running games now for almost 25 years, and I think I have a pretty good grasp on how to behave in many different situations. Are the players looking excited? Are they laughing? Do that guy over there look like he is getting bored? I think I have those things nailed down when I stomp around in my familiar fantasy grounds. Especially the problem of pacing is something I usually know how to handle.

Today they players sat down trying to continue from having explored a warehouse of a suspected cult and having had to retreat with one member of the party K.O.'d. What now? From my point of view it was pretty obvious what to do in a Call of Cthulhu game. You visit every named NPC and talk to them to track down ever scrap of knowledge, since knowledge is the most important thing in this game. Right?

Naturally, my players did not do that.

After some very intelligent and smart use of backstory, connections and leveraging Credit Rating, one of my players found a masonic brother and started to talk. Since he was the D.A. I thought that this was a guy who knew stuff, and had resources. I had him mention a few things and be friendly. That and some interest from the players in one of the named NPC and they had finally gotten the idea that talking to people was good, and digging around for people in the know was fruitful. Finally.

Now the P.I. in the party decided to go sneak into the posh mansion of one of the key NPCS. In broad daylight. In an area where I specifically mentioned police patrols being regular and observant. Guess who got to spend a night in jail?

So. What would I have done? Well. I don't understand why they didn't start to talk to all the people on the list they had gotten from their main contact? I would have visited each and every NPC, in alphabetical order! After the session some of the players even voiced the opinion that it felt like it was a bit hard to find the clues. I even play with GUMSHOE inspired rules, so they will find core clues, and they know it. At least I have mentioned it. Interesting.

You do know about the three clue rule, right? Go read that essay if you haven't.

Now, if this had been a fantasy game I would have rolled for a random encounter. I love the idea of a random encounter. The random encounter could provide a conveniently dropped clue, to make it an even three, or just something to do so that after the encounter someone had a new idea.

What do you do when there's a lull in the action in an investigative game? You can't really push the players toward the next clue. It would be bad form, and boring. Also, in order to entertain them while waiting for the penny to drop, do you let wandering kobolds show up and pick a fight? I guess not. I think there are, after more than 20 years, still some things this old dog has to learn.

Old Traveller adventures - the emptiness of space

I recently bought the Mongoose edition of Traveller, as you might remember me mentioning before. It is a good game, and a fun read. Now I have brought som eof my other Traveller stuff out of storage as well, browsing it since the mind is full of Traveller anyway. You know what? I think I'm seeing a trend in these adventures.

A classic Traveller adventure is describing a locale, either a space ship or a planet. There is usually a task to be done, and some hindrances in the way.

Does that sound familiar? I noted another thing. Quite often the party is stuck in this research outpost, APC, starship, desert, jungle, whatever and need to use their tools to get out alive. More often than not there are rules for how to handle the environment and/or the technology at hand.

I'm missing something.

This setup there's the party, and this locale. That's it. Who the hell are you supposed to interact with?

If you look at classic D&D adventures, there are always NPCs. Remember Lareth? Remember the nutty lich in D2? Remember the zoo of factions in the Caves of Chaos? Space is empty in comparison.

I think I've found out why I so often fail at making science fiction games fun. Space just is too big, cold and empty.

Now, what do they want?

I have been thinking more about different kinds of adventures. I realized that I have played quite a few games, for example Beyond the Mountains of Madness, where there's obviously a plot. Those kinds of game can be horrible, in a bad way, if all you get to do is to look at the NPCs doing stuff.

But, thinking about what makes Dogs in the Vineyard work, I realize it is not only the fact that the PCs are clearly in charge, and have something to do (even though it helps) but one thing that makes a difference is that the NPCs all want something. Maybe even a monster in a dungeon wants something, even if it's just a slice of that pie? BtMoM was about wants.

Not exactly revelations of deep design insights, I know. But, I somehow feel maybe it should be more up front. The first thing you get to know when you see them is what they want, not that they guard that door or treasure over yonder.

Maybe it's just be that suck at NPCs that have finally caught up with the rest of you...

Styles of adventures - weird fantasy style, and others

There lot of different kinds of adventures you can design, and play. I think not all of them have been analyzed or talked about as much as they deserve. Last night I played in an online game with Jim Raggi, and the kind of adventure we played just one of those.

The kind of adventure that most people think about when they hear "old school" is probably the location, or site based, adventure. It sits there, and you can come and go as you like while exploring it. Another adventure is the one where you have a string of occurrences, a time line, and you can interfere with it as you like. Naturally there are more than those two. I think it would be interesting to have a conversation about styles of adventures. Their strengths and oddities, and pitfalls to look out for both when designing and running them.

Imagine this.

You have an interesting location, and some people there. Something then happens that upset the status quo, and everyone of those people there have an interest in using the change to their own advantage. Let's say the player characters wont be happy with most of those developments, but find themselves in a position to have to be the arbitrators between all the different wills pushing and shoving.

Is that old school? When is it not? How do you create such a game if you suck at developing NPCs (Like I do)? How would an expert game master handle a situation like that, to make it smooth to run and enjoyable to play?

I'd love to see more talk like that in the blogosphere.

The point of NPCs, and styles of play

This morning I met an old friend whom I used to game with. We chatted a bit about life, work and family before delving deep into our gaming experiences since last time. Since I split from a game after inheriting this friend's character I talked a bit about why that game didn't appeal to me. This made me verbalize a few things which I've been thinking but never before put into words. I'll try to share some of that insight here.

I was playing in this game where we were young adults in a weird kind of post-apocalyptic fantasy world with religious overtones. It kind of made me think of the Alvin Maker series by Orson Scott Card. We all had some Gift, and our village felt like some kind of religious commune. Since everything around the village, out in the woods, is dangerous and strange we all had the roles of rangers in training. After having encountered some soldiers and had a big fight there erupted a thunderstorm and when our village elder visited the druids in the wood afterwards we learned that he had made a deal for us to stay for one year in the village, not trespassing into their realm.

So, here we were, sitting for a year in the village with a bunch of refugees from another village which had been invaded by the soldiers we'd fought. Note that this year was not to be glossed over. We were expected to play it out, in a fairly low pace. That is, we would spend the game chatting with ourselves and "getting involved" in the refugees and other NPCs in the village. Character based soap opera, in other words. I quit the game.

I realize I'm already a bit long winded, but will now get to the point.

What are the point of NPCs in your game? Sources of information? For you and the players (I'm writing this from the point of a referee here) to interact to find out more about that NPC's inner life or maybe develop the character you're playing?

Now when thinking of why a soap opera game was to contrary to all my wishes, I managed to narrow down what I like with roleplaying as the possibility to explore a secondary world. Using NPCs you can showcase how someone who knows this world acts and thinks. Basically, they are they way the secondary world shows itself to the players. The NPCs are a way to make that world look like it breathes and moves while your players are not looking.

Contrast that with NPCs who are there in order for your players to get to express their longings from drama class. In that case you are interested in the NPCs for their own sake, and in the player characters for their own sake. Not for their actions, which is very different.

I've come to the insight that the latter way, especially combined with ideas like "freeform" or "jeepform" bores me to death. I want to play a roleplaying game not act in an amateur theatre group. If I wanted that I would be better served by finding an amateur theatre group, I think. Add to that the pretentiousness of some of the people involved in that kind of "gaming" and I feel like throwing up.

How do you feel about styles of play, and the roles of NPCs? It might be different, and it's totally ok. But, if you differ very much from how I feel, I doubt we will enjoy the same game for long. Now I at least have something to show people when they want to know what kind of game I like.

Dungeons in new games

Zak wrote something interesting about dungeons the other day. He notes that newer RPG are often a bit more cinematic and also they usually don't feature dungeons. This made me think.

I have a few friends who have been playing role playing games since way back. They also have one thing in common in that they look and sound a lot less enthusiastic when you mention the word "dungeon".

For some people the fun part, and even the whole point of, playing a RPG is to interact with NPCs - to roleplay. What is interesting with dungeons though, is that like Zak writes anything, however mundane, is potentially interesting. Exploring the environment is what the game is about. Your role is not method acting, it's interacting with the other party members and acting out your role in the party. This doesn't necessarily mean you don't do roleplaying!

I still wonder how to make my friends more enthusiastic about this kind of roleplaying. We might like slightly different kinds of gaming, but you play with the gamers you've got and like to hang out with. Also, I like to think roleplaying can be a lot of different things, maybe even at the same time, for different people.

Maybe there is a way to make NPC interactions more common in a dungeon environment? Maybe there is a way to make the virtues of explorative play more common in the NPC crowded city based game? I'm not sure how, but I like to think it can be done.

If James Joyce does that in his exploration of Dublin, maybe I need to read it? I think that sometimes cityscapes have been less used as a canvas of the fantastic than they deserve. While going down a hole in the ground to dig out treasure have a certain resonance of the Hero's Journey, I guess the urban jungle can be just as wild and feel just as much like a game of exploration. How would it be to do a hexcrawl of a fantasy city?

It would be interesting if Zak Sabbath was the one who finally made me read James Joyce, because I wanted to read the dungeon crawl novel, Ulysses.

Rough and Ready - an angry young man

I heard a song by what used to be my first metal favourites, Saxon, and this prompted me to invent this NPC. Stats for Tunnels & Trolls.

Peter
When taking a ride on one of the pick up rides from Korbo's Transport, you might ride with a young man called Peter. The story is that Korbo found him on the street, took him in and gave him a job. Now he is growing into a man, but is still just a kid. Peter is a dashingly handsome young man, with dark hair combed back. Should you find him out on his own after work, you'll probably recognize his swaggering gait and him constantly whistling some tune. Many have taunted him and called him "rubber legs", only to quickly regret it when they found out that young Peter is a pugilist of rank. He is also a womanizer with a nearly magical ability to charm. Many young girl have also found out another trait of his. He never beds the same woman twice.

Peter is not only a driver, he knows a thing or two. If something happened in Town, he knows it. If you want forbidden alchemical goods or a knife fight, he can take you there.

Name: Peter  
Kindred: Human   Type: Warrior Lvl: 2
STR: 17    IQ: 12       LK: 27
DEX: 24   CON: 10   CHR: 32
[SPD:  17   WIZ: 8]
Combat/Missile Adds: +30[+35]/+42
Weight Possible/Carried: 1700/-

Height: 5'11"
Weight: 170 lbs
Talents: The Voice +3/CHA, Puglism +3/DEX

Ideas
1 - Peter is actually the heir to a big fortune, but doesn't know it since he ran away from home when very young. The player characters get the jobs to try to find him.
2-3 - In one of the gambling joints there's one man who have lost one game to many. He couldn't pay when the crime boss asked him to, and came up with the lie that Peter had beaten him and taken the money. One other person who is owned money is a party member.
4 - Korbo allows Peter to sleep on the premises, but when the place get burglarized at night when Peter was out drinking all night he decide to kick him out. The next night the player characters are the ones burglarized.
5-6 - After a night out the player characters are jumped in an alley by some thugs. In the middle of the ruckus they hear a whistled tune familiar drawl.

Now listen to the soundtrack:



Tunnels & Trolls is a trademark of Flying Buffalo Inc. and used with kind permission

Sherlock Holmes, dungeon delver III

imagine standard spoiler disclaimer here

My last impressions of the Sherlock Holmes movie are concerning the main antagonists. If you have a recurring vilain in your campaign, you have probably been thinking about how to make that villain cool and worthy of the attentions of your players. I have some hint for you.

Imagine Lord Blackwood. He has short, backward combed hair. He has deep set eyes. He enters a stage to speak to his followers in a black leather coat which makes you think of Gestapo. He talks about his thousand year reign. He is tacky.

Imagine Professor Moriarty. He drives around in style. He has normal clothing. He let's others do his dirty work and when he is walking about he does it without being noticed. He don't want to kill everyone who disagrees. He keeps in the shadows. He offers threats which are subtle and thus believable. He is a good villain.

Keep it classy folks.

I have no idea if the book Villain Design Handbook by Kenzer & Co is any good, but I think it could have been useful for Guy Ritchie. Do tell if you know anything about the book.

Gaming family

Tonight we manged to play a session in a campaign started by a friend of mine when I was still living in Canada. He had told me I was welcome to join when I moved here, and now I did. Gaming is my hobby, and even though this campaign seemed to be quite different from what I like most, it is still gaming.

There were six of us, and each of us had some kind of family among the NPCs. Many of the other players had been developing relations with the villagers and I think that some are even engaged to be married. I guess you can tell that this is not a game about exploring the world, but playing a social game.

While it's kind of a waste not to go out and explore the world (our game master is a very good world builder, and I'd like to go out and see what he has invented!), it do work as a backdrop and fuels some of the intrigue and social interplay. But, what really struck me as interesting was the logistics of having a shipload of NPCs.

Imagine a village with 5 or so main families, and 5 or so members of each. Now imagine that those are the people you grew up with and have strong feelings about. It's quite a feat to just keep them all in the head, and even more to remember whom you should play a dislike for. Add to that the craftsmen, leaders and factions of leadership. How on earth do you run such a game! I wonder if I could. Frankly, I wonder if I really like people enough to care about them all. Quite different for me, this game.