the-skeleton-lord

[the-skeleton-lord]

Possibly the greatest NPR exchange ever recorded

[the-skeleton-lord]

One of the things that appeals to me as both a player and a GM is the threat of failure. When playing through BG3 if I dont like the outcome of a choice or if I slip up I can always load a save and try again or if I am unsure about what the best option is I can just look up the answer. Even if I dont do that I still have the option to do so. Whereas with TTRPGs that isnt the case, its not uncommon to end up in unfavorable positions and having to work your way out as best you can or seeing players do so if you are the GM. Systems where success is assumed do not appeal to me for this reason. That being said mysteries do present a challenge as a GM in that you want your players to have a good time and a good time means success, but if you simply let the dice fall as they may there is a good chance the party will just get stuck and not know what to do (unlike in combat where they at least die swinging or have the option to run away).

The solution that I have found has two key components: 1. Let players fail, but give them the tools they need to succeed. Clues/information comes in two varieties "free" and "earned". "Free" clues are the starting point for further investigation. No check or test is needed to gain this knowledge and depending on how you view player agency you can even assume that the PCs take certain actions. For example the party notices that there is a security camera that monitors the area where the artifact was stolen, they check the footage but the artifact simply disappears from its case. This is a jumping off point for other "earned" clues. The party may have an idea as to how this happened (ie the camera was tampered with, the thief used magic/advanced technology, ect) but these leads require the player characters to use their skills available to them to determine. Success brings them closer to solving the mystery but failure might very well lead them to more "free" clues they can try to pursue instead (eg the party is unable to determine if the footage has been doctored but they do find out that the security guard responsible to watching the cameras wasnt present during the theft, maybe he had something to do with it, was paid not to be there, or lured away). They should eventually make progress somewhere and even if they fail at absolutely everything they should at least have enough information to answer part of the mystery, which leads the the next component

2. Add layers to the mystery that can be peeled back (and not necessarily all at once - its free real-estate plot hooks) As the players continue their investigation you should keep seeding more questions that need to be answered. In (most) games when you hit 0 hit points you dont die instantly and your only goal isnt always just to kill all the enemies. Likewise in a mystery just because you fail one test shouldnt mean that you cant figure something out nor should there only be one question to answer. By adding layers to the mystery the players are able to both succeed and fail on their own merits without being handed the solution or being stuck going in circles. Heres an example, the party finds out that the artifact has been controversial for some time and that several factions have been demanding it be handed over to them for various reasons. They also know that the culprit must have been a former security guard as she would have known the inner security workings, had the skills to steal the artifact, and has been missing since the theft. But the party is left in the dark on if she is working with a faction and who that faction might be and where she escaped too. This may be enough to call it a day, get rewarded and move on (the party did their best but came up a bit short) or it could be the seed for the next adventure. Because the party was left unsatisfied they may want to try to track down this former security guard and figure out where she went, who she is working with, and why.

I dont think that failure or chance are the enemies of a mystery but they can lead to an unpleasant play experience if used incorrectly. A mystery in a TTRPG should not be like an old point and click adventure where the party must find an exact item and use it in an exact location to solve the problem. As a GM you should present some information to the party and allow them to be creative in what they want to do with it. There are wrong answers but not necessarily wrong approaches, and where one path dead ends they should be able to divert to a new one. Then at the end of the day they will have at least a partial picture of what happened and if they want to delve deeper this is just another opportunity for more mysteries to solve at another time and place.

Saw mystery talk on the dash last night - Specifically about how most mysteries do give you enough space to solve it yourself, by the end - and of course my brain went to ttrpgs so i'm going to talk about that!

Because see, how to actually run a mystery in a tabletop game - usually d&d but honestly a lot of them have the same problems - has been a persistent bugbear in the medium, to the point where i've seen more than one person say "you can't run good mysteries in ttrpgs"

And like, i kinda get it? Imagine trying to do a typical gathering evidence scene, right? The GM prepares all this evidence and has the players roll to find it! Cool!

..Oops. They all rolled low. Now what? Do you have them roll again? give it to them anyway? Give up?

And like, the obvious solution is "don't have them roll for that, have them roll for other things" but sometimes you DO want to engage with the mechanics for the main premise of your game, so that doesn't really work either...

Enter: The system made for investigation. The biggest example of this is probably Gumshoe, which does operate on the logic of "yeah just give them the important clues", but still allows player input. Namely, the player has certain topics they're knowledgeable in, and if they go "I have Architecture as a skill and want to use it on this locked room" they always succeed, and you can tell them "yeah, you can see that this door is newer than the others in the building - it was replaced recently" with no chance for failure.

Which you know, i've never played and i've heard good and bad things about, but it does solve the issue!

But recently there's been another wave of mystery games, that take a very different approach. You see-

Hm. Actually. Let me start with this.

So in Blades in the Dark a core conceit is that the player characters are good at this in a way the players never will be. You don't plan, you just assume your character planned ahead - because they know what they're doing! - and do flashbacks if necessary. You don't even decide ahead of time what items you bring, you just (if you haven't hit your item limit) decide "Ah ha! I had the perfect tool for just this moment!" when needed.

And like, that does recreate the experience of watching a heist movie! Seeing these cool super badasses be hyper competent and come out just ahead against impossible odds, pulling out a surprise tool right when they seem backed into the corner!

...But a lot of people don't like that. They want to plan. They want to choose the right tools. They don't want the character to feel competent, they want to feel like they were competent. And hey, that's fair. I love Blades, but I get that.

Anyway, as I was saying before: in 2022 a game called Brindlewood Bay - about elderly women solving small town mysteries with some eldritch shit going on under the surface (seriously. and i love that concept dearly) - was released with some very... Interesting mechanics.

Because Brindlewood Bay - and the games inspired by it, usually called Carved from Brindlewood, although some games are more standard PbtA using the mystery mechanics like Apocalypse Keys - is not a game about solving mysteries, as a player.

It's a game about the characters solving mysteries, sure, but the players don't solve them because there is no solution.

The core mechanic of the game is that the players have a mystery to solve, investigate to find clues over the course of a session or two, then together the group formulates a theory and rolls to see if it's correct. Up until that point, it could've been anyone. It's only when the players succeed at the roll that it becomes true that yes, X person did it.

Which is... interesting! I mean it does fit the PbtA "play to find out what happens" ethos, that's for sure. And for non-mystery games that's not even unusual - you set up a situation and only decide what's really going on behind the scenes as it becomes relevant to the story. And it's not like the players have free reign - more clues make it more likely to succeed, it has to make sense with what's happened to far, etc.

But it's... I mean it's the same problem as Blades, but worse. Because for the kind of person who loves heist movies, "My character is cool and flashes back to their prep" and "We plan ahead and think of something cool even if it goes wrong" are both ways of engaging with the same fantasy, yeah?

But with mysteries... I mean, sure a lot of people just love to see the detective figure out something that feels impossible, but for a lot of people being able to figure it on for themself is core to a good mystery. Even if they don't actually do it, know that they COULD have is important.

Which to be clear: I don't think is actually a flaw with the game. I'm certain the creators understood that and and made a conscious decision to make this kind of game - one where the question is never "do they solve the mystery" because you know the answer will be "yes", so the fun is more "how do they get there and what conclusion do they reach" - with that in mind...

But it's still interesting, you know? I'm not surprised these kinds of games are controversial among a lot of people, since PbtA can be controversial in general among some, and stepping so far outside the core appeal of the genre for many will make it worse, but I do find them fascinating.

...Need to actually play one one day though, lmao.

[the-skeleton-lord]

184. Various Authors - Dragon #69 (January 1983)

Welcome to 1983! A big year for AD&D which will see among other things the debut of the animated TV series and the Ravenloft module, we have some 72 entries on my list to get through this year of D&D products, so let's get to it! 

We start off with issue 69 (nice!) of Dragon magazine, with a great Clyde Caldwell cover and a bunch of really good articles inside, it's a great way to start the year. The magazine opens with a double article on Runestones, first with an historical overview and then with Ed Greenwood chiming in with a fantastical take on the runes, which if you are a Forgotten Realms fan you will know as Dethek, the Dwarvish script, a great article for FR fans. 

Gygax then introduced the concept of the Thief-Acrobat, which seems to be the first time that there is a development of a character subclass, something which is now very much an integral part of D&D. Gygax also brings us a further instalment in the Gods of Greyhawk series, and more fungoid monsters. Other articles are Lakofka's exploration of the NPC class Entertainer, and Moore's comparison of the various classes in AD&D. Last but definitely not least is Greenwood's article bringing us 4 more magical tomes from the Realms as related by Elminster to the author, in a long article full of lore and information about the FR. 

[the-skeleton-lord]

overly specific dnd meme that could also be about godhood if you think about it

[the-skeleton-lord]

Gelatinous Cubes and a Young Dragon

For the last year or so I have been running a consistent campaign of Dark Heresy, taking a break in the summer while people were out of the city for vacation. However, this week two of my five players told me they would be absent right as they are about to start a new mission. Normally I would just play through them not being there but it seemed like a bad idea to set up the whole scenario, not get much done, then have to re-explain everything again but worse since it would just be an info dump. Luckily the night before I had a gut feeling something like this might happen so I quickly prepped something different.

My players were surprised when I told them that we are playing d&d 5e today instead and they had 45 minutes to each build a level 5 character. They threw together a human wizard, a half-elf barbarian, and an elf rogue. The adventure was a simple conversion of Ruins of Castle Korvald from 4e, a quick trek through a ruined fort where a young white dragon has moved in and has a few constructs to guard the place.

The first challenge the players faced was getting into the castle. Normally this should be a simple choice between either walking in the front gate (and getting ambushed by constructs) or making a relatively easy athletics check to climb the hill the fort is on and go in through one of the ruined walls. The players were still in acolyte mode and decided to conduct a thorough sweep of the area before making a decision. They were given a description of the castle, the surrounding cliffs, and they discovered a single set of humanoid tracks along the road leading to the castle (que discussion about if the dragon is powerful enough to shape shift). Ultimately the party decides that the side entrance is too obvious and must be a trap so they go in the front... and get ambushed despite their efforts to scout the area using the rogue and the wizard’s weasel familiar.

Two animated armors, two iron defenders, and two walking crossbow turrets attack the party while they are standing on a bridge between two towers. Thinking quickly the party jumps off the bridge and hides underneath to avoid the crossbow fire and fight the four constructs as they follow. Barb holds them back but gets his but kicked while the wizard casts shocking grasp and the rogue keeps failing to hit anything. Once the party deals with the melee enemies the barb runs out from cover, avoiding arrows and gets to a point where he can climb up the crumbling wall in safety. He clambers up the wall and gets into melee with the turrets while the wizard shoots magic missiles through the arrow slits.

The barbarian climbs back down the wall and raises the portcullis to let the other two into the castle proper. The rogue notices a secret door on the floor and the party climbs down into the hole to see where it goes (they assume its safer than walking around out in the open). The rogue scouts forward a short distance and doesn't see or hear anything, but he does feel that it is much colder in this tunnel than it is outside. The party decides that its probably safe to take a short rest here despite figuring out the dragon's nest must be connected to the tunnels in some way. What the rogue did not realize is that he just barely avoided the detection radius of a pair of gelatinous cubes in the tunnel. During the rest the weasel familiar was set deeper into the tunnels and (lacking any dark vision) was easy prey for the cubes. The wizard was informed the weasel was suddenly killed but there was no indication as to how.

Undaunted, the party continues forward through the darkness. They party reaches an intersection where they can go right or straight. To the left they can see the glow of winter sunlight coming through a hole in the roof but decide to go straight instead. The cube that killed the weasel silently follows. They realize that the tunnel they are following must go underneath the wall of the castle as they reach a corner with another secret trap door entering an empty tower. They stay in the tunnel and discuss what to do next while the cube slowly catches up to them. Lucky for the party the rogue notices the cube approaching and they shoot at it with ranged weapons and spells. It becomes very clear that my players have never dealt with a gelatinous cube in a confined space and dont realize how much danger they are in as they keep delaying climbing out of the trap door until the last second. Its an easy DC 10 athletics check to climb out of the hole under pressure; the wizard goes first and fails his check as he struggles to lift himself up, the barbarian easily passes and I let him use his action to pull the wizard up DC 10 again but he fails, the rogue goes last and also fails the check asks to use his cunning action dash to try again and fails the roll anyway.

The wizard and the rogue decide to run away down the tunnel while the barbarian watches the cube pass below. The stranded pair make a run for it through the dark and realize there is another path to the center of the caster where they can see the light. They take that path looking for another way out when they spot the second cube that has also spotted them. Realizing they are about to get pincered between the two cubes they make a break for it and try to get through the hole in the roof before the cube blocks them in. Its a very easy DC 5 athletics check to climb up the pile of rubble which the wizard makes but the rogue again gets his foot stuck or something. He asks to use his dash to try again again but this time dislodges himself and makes it above ground as right as the cubes catch up and then give up the chase and retreat back into the tunnels to look for prey.

We take an IRL break for a few minutes and I ask the players if they know what gelatinous cubes are/do and they all say no before looking it up and realize how much danger they were in.

Moving forward the players poke around the castle grounds and deduce where the dragon is hiding. Nothing of note happens other than they miss or ignore every piece of loot they could have found. Next step is the tower with the dragon in it. The rogue sneaks up and passes his perception check which tells him there is a campfire lit inside the tower, the sound of metal on stone (iron defender), and a single humanoid inside (an orc emissary from the nearby clan here to try to ally with the dragon). The party kicks in the door, gets a surprise round and kills the iron defender and orc thanks to the rogue's assassin ability. Then they realize the dragon isnt here... and then they hear it start moving below them.

The dragon climbs up from a hole in the floor and immediately breath attacks the barbarian who fails his save. He's still standing but hit hard. The wizard casts haste on the barbarian, the rogue shoots an arrow, and the barbarian slips and falls on the icy floor caused by the breath attack. The dragon rolls a six to recharge his breath attack and fires it again at the barbarian who passes his save (thanks to haste) is knocked unconscious anyway. It then takes to the air and moves over to the rogue, it uses its reach to keep the rogue in threatened space while also being out of reach.

The wizard runs over to the barbarian and uses his potion of greater healing on him, risking slipping but passes the check. The barbarian gets up, rages, and (still hasted) unleashes a furry of attacks on the dragon with his glaive. The rogue uses his cunning action to disengage and shoot with an arrow. For a second time in a row the dragon recharges his breath attack and sprays the barbarian. He makes his save and the damage roll is low enough that he stays up.

Next the wizard casts web on the dragon and on the dragon's turn it fails its save and falls to the ground restrained. The barbarian and rogue get in a big chunk of damage while they have the opportunity but then the wizard's true plan is revealed. He casts fireball at the group and, because he is an evocation wizard, nominated his two allies as being excluded. The rogue easily makes his check and the barbarian passes due to haste, the damage isnt quite enough to kill the dragon but the wizard then points out that the webs igniting cause extra damage which was exactly enough to slay the dragon.

[the-skeleton-lord]

The Big Fucking D&D 4E Rant

Or, ‘That Time Wizards of the Coast Fucked Up D&D’s Lore’ 

At the risk of raising the spectre of edition war again, I feel like it’s worth going back and exploring that time that Wizards of the Coast fucked over basically all of their lore to chase a trend that wasn’t there. Admittedly this comes with the (begrudged) acknowledgement that quite a bit of of this is likely to be out of date now that fifth edition has been out for a good several years now, but that edition has its own problems and while I’m not really going to touch upon it now, my problems with it are many and numerous.

It should be noted from the outset that this is going to talk about fourth edition in a negative and critical context, but I’m not going to be talking about the rules of the actual game as a game. This is entirely centred on story, worldbuilding and lore, and how those were handled in fourth edition as compared to what came before. That being said, if you like fourth edition, and especially if you like its lore, I would not suggest reading further.

I’m going to go far beyond being critical in this; I’m going to get outright mean.

A shout out must go to Susanna McKenzie (@cydonian-mystery) for input and feedback on this.

I suppose the most important place to start is, in many ways, the beginning, by which I mean my own introduction to Dungeons & Dragons. Mostly because it’s directly linked to the main reasons why I consider the lore to have been ruined, but before I even start off with that, I’m going to have to tell you where the lore was before I can really adequately explain its downfall.

Keep reading

[the-skeleton-lord]

Grognard

I keep finding myself alienated from things I once loved. Perhaps I have just hit a point in my life where what I like as solidified while the world keeps changing around me. Each new edition or set to a game seems to drift further and further away from what I want. Ultimately this isnt the end of the world, I always have the old material to play with and the internet gives me access to a community of people larger than I could ever feasibly meet in real life. Instead there are other things that bother me. The first is that so often being a grognard is synonymous with conservative. The other day I was looking at material about the D&D setting Grayhawk, the one I was first introduced to as a kid and the only setting I have any real attachment to, and so much of it was full of spite for young people. Begin to scratch the surface and the real vitriol and hate for minorities and the LGBTQ becomes immediately apparent. Obviously an appreciation for older things doesnt make you into a bigot but the assosiation is still there. Its been well documented that the OSR community (something I am not a member of) has struggle with since inception. The second thing is a feeling of being popular. I was always a weird kid and it wasnt until highschool that I ever began to fit in at all and even then it was only in my weird niche. The music I liked was never liked by most people, I watched weird anime, and played weird games, for this I was always made fun of or looked down on. But then in college and as a young adult something weird happened, the things I liked became popular and in turn so did I. People came to me to ask for recommendations and I found myself towards the center of a large community. Yet as my 20s near their end I feel like that ease of connection is fading. Someone wants to talk to me about magic the gathering and I have to force myself to not sound bitter and alienated. Someone new and excited about D&D or 40k wants to talk to me about the hobby and I just cant drum up much enthusiasm for the current or new editions. I dont want to be a downer, act like everything used to be perfect, or especially get roped in with a much of conservatives but I definitely feel like my moment in the spotlight has passed. When I post ads for a game Im going to run I no longer have a flood of people looking to play, I still get by on word of mouth and reputation but I have to actively look for players. No longer can I just show up to university or a game store and find games that I will enjoy, instead I have to schedule and look for specific games. Its sad to see things change for the worse, but perhaps thats just part of getting older.