Looping the Hen Games

Gary Gygax was probably the most important person in my life that I never actually met, and I find myself mourning him much as I would a friend or family member. He passed away yesterday, and I find myself remembering the joy his game has brought into my life, and the lives of millions of other geeks, dorks, and misfits.

I've never played D&D as often as I would like, though in my early days I imagine that left more time for dreaming. I remember putting myself through early modules (pre-made adventures) like Keep on the Borderlands and Castle D'Amberville because I didn't have a DM. It was probably not surprising that I always survived and walked out with heaping piles of treasure, even that which was hidden behind secret doors I never would have found playing correctly. I remember poring through the Monster Manual, Fiend Folio and Deities and Demigods (D&D rulebooks) almost obsessively, constantly checking the creatures Treasure Types to figure out what type of loot they would have. I remember hand-drawing hundreds of maps, most of which never saw a single adventure. I remember creating a thousand NPC's (Non-player Characters) that never lived anywhere other than in my head.

I remember our first tentative steps to 'real' D&D, playing with my friends and a couple of times with my brothers. The first times were pretty bad (I still have some of that, but hopefully less), with our share of Monty Haul and deity-challenging games. But we rolled dice, put on cool armor, cast amazing spells, and let our imaginations roam to lands no one else has ever visited. I remember playing once at the town library with Greg and Leila Godowski and her flaming red hair; Greg and I both died twice in the first two hours to a several-years older DM and figured out that was not our style of game. This was the era of Lord O' Leisure (Greg), the most memorable and enduring character I ever knew. I still regularly use his signature line in various circumstances, 'Hi there, I am the Lord O' Leisure, and you are pleased to meet me!'

In our twenties, we hit our stride. Greg, Tina, John and Kenny were the core group of the longest campaign I ever DM'ed, and some weeks we played 20 or 30 hours. I remember Greg's Na'ag, Necromancer extraordinaire and bane of the world, John's Heroic Baron and his island estate as the bastion against the will of evil, Tina and Fiver, her giant bunny familiar, and Kenny as the all-around sneak. We laughed and shared hundreds of good hours during that campaign. We had pun-fights where we all ended up black and blue (you got punished for punning by being punched). Life was good. However, as it always does, time eventually got to us and the game broke down, with Greg disappearing to Law School, the collapse of my long-term relationship with Tina, and John and Kenny moving to North Carolina.

Although we've had some good campaigns in my thirties, finding a large core set of players and working around scheduling conflicts has definitely been challenging. However, I am ever hopeful that we'll find a groove and 10 players that can meet 5 times a week!

More than just good times though, Dungeons and Dragons helped teach me to think, write, and appreciate numbers and statistics. It developed my imagination, confidence, public speaking and a myriad of other skills I never would have learned without the constant interaction of the game. It was something to turn my mind to in my darkest hours, and probably carried me through several times when I otherwise wouldn't have made it.

To Gary, I pray you are on high with full knowledge of the millions of people's lives you have improved. I honor and thank you for all you have given me, and my heartfelt condolences to your family and loved ones.

Though you never knew me, I will miss you.

Posted by at 11:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I never even got to mention winning the Unhallowed Prerelase last month! (The final was decided by a 3 out of 5 d20 playoff; I was behind 2-1 and came back for the win!) Photos here, two with yours truly.

My warband:

High Inquisitor - 49 (least active commander ever; the Dragon and Wolf and surprisingly the Canoloth carried the band)
Vampire Dire Wolf - 45
Large Black Dragon - 44
Canoloth - 24
Wild Elf Warsinger x 2- 18
Changeling Rogue - 6
Fire Mephit - 13

199 points - 8 activations

It was fun, though I drove a different way this time and almost missed the event, showing up after everyone else had built their bands. I lost one match, to the player who I ended up beating in the finals via the roll-off. Second turn decided that game, as his Beholder Lich rolled a Turn Undead 20 on my Vampire Dire Wolf and routed it off the board before it ever got close to the fight.

Posted by at 2:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I have been thinking about the new campaign a bit more. I've also been watching some of what Tammy and I have taken to calling 'Asian Bonnet Movies', such as Crouching Tiger, Hero, House of Flying Daggers and Curse of the Golden Flower. As I am going for some of the high action feel of those movies many places in the campaign, it got me to thinking what it was that I enjoy so much about the environs, people and settings of these movies.

One thing I noticed is you can go from a quiet scene around a dinner table when suddenly ninjas attack. There is a burst of action, and then the heroes finish their dinner, barely noticing the dead thugs around them.

I particularly dislike the D&D combat sequence; at early levels it is easy for someone to die. At high levels combats can last forever, taking near two hours for a decent-sized battle, and even then sometimes I don't feel like it is truly 'epic' combat. If I can manage, I'd love to come up with some easy rules to allow the insertion of some cool 'minor' battles, and save the full ruleset for the big guys.

For example, in Curse of the Yellow Flower, I watched last night, it is awesome when one hero cuts through a dozen bad guys like they were grass. At the same time, it is not because the bad guy is bad, because against any 'normal' person, they would be considered a deadly assassin. It is because the hero is truly heroic! Running the same battle in D&D as it stands would take an hour or two.

So I am just brainstorming here, anyone else with ideas please toss them out. Say one of the PC's is a Dragon Samurai, who while going to the stable to fetch something, is assaulted out of the shadows by a half-dozen low-power ninjas hired by the local magistrate in a fit of pique because he was offended by the PC's in some small way. Each round, the ninjas roll 6 dice as normal to see how many hit the PC. The Samurai, in return, tosses off 3 attacks. Instead of tracking hp, anything that hits a bad guy's AC is a wound, and 2 wounds auto-kills low-level dudes. Anything more than 6 over the bad guy's AC is an autokill (or disabling strike). If the player playing the Samurai gets detailed and comes up with a cool way to use the environment to defeat his opponents, he might even get an additional attack or two or a modifier of +2/+4 or +6 to all of his standard attacks for 'coolness'.

Thoughts anyone? I think something like this allows it to strike home how cool the PC's really are. There will still be risk to the PC's, but if they do die, it will be in a blaze of glory in the center of a pile of black-hearted ninjas!

Posted by at 1:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

No game again this weekend, sorry y'all. Mom is in town for Easter, and we're going to go do the Frist, Parthenon, Melting Pot, among others!

April 21 next scheduled game if everyone can make it!

Thanks!

Posted by at 9:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Okay, it seems we all need a little change. I'm not sure what it is, but I think we're all a little burnt out. I for one need to do something different or take a break to recharge. The lack of a consistent 4th is also hurting the game, as I think it limits the group dynamic. I've put up a request for players on a couple of sites, and I will probably go drop a note at Game Keep as well. When we get the new campaign going, I will probably try to start with 5 or 6 people; it's hectic, but we might be able to at least maintain a core of 4 people.

In the meantime, what does everyone want to do? Do we want to start the 5th level chars and see what happens? Do we just want to do some arena brawls? Do we want to do a trial run of Sphere? Do we want to play some sci-fi or cyberpunk or something completely different? Does someone else want to run a game? Do we want to find some good boardgames?

If y'all do still like the current campaign, please let me know what direction y'all want to go, because I'm a little at a loss. If we want to table the game until some time later, I'm good with that too.

Anyhoo, everyone is free to comment; I'd like to hear what's on everyone's mind!

Thanks!

Posted by at 9:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)

The drums roll, the crowds scream...it's time for the ARENA!

Okay, here is my thought. Best 2 out of 3 matches (due to Magic-users starting at range having a pretty big advantage). One match starts with the combatants a full map away. One match starts at 50' away, and one match starts with the characters adjacent. After we do this a couple times, we can toss in things like corridor matches and the like. Also, standard races only the first time; later we can start tossing in Monster Manual or other level-adjusted critters.

Characters should be built with a standard 28-point buy (all stats start at 8; cost for attributes is 1 point up to 14, and 2 points after that. Use the 6 standard abilities only). Use recommended starting gold for PC's based on level, that chart is either in the PHB or DMG. I'll post the gold available when I put these up as well. You can use any current 3.0/3.5 edition sourcebook. Spells and spellcasters done by the book (no spellpoints).

I don't know what to do for prizes, but they always sweeten the pot. I'd be happy to give away a single +5 roll during the following gaming session or somesuch to whoever takes out my fighter, or something similar. Or everyone who wants to participate could all toss an uncommon mini into the pot, and the player who wins the most bouts gets them.

Anyway, this should produce some neat fights, as I don't have all of the books y'all have, but I think I may have one or two no one else (currently) does. Also, we need to decide whether we allow the leadership feat or not, and how it works (Cohort only or cohort and followers)

So, first bout:

9th level characters
36,000 gp (no more than half can be spent on a single item)

Work for everyone? Also, we should do this just prior to our gaming sessions, so everyone needs to start getting to my house earlier! (1:30-2:00pm)

Posted by at 8:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (11)

This is the new official stat block for WoTC, introduced in the DMG 2 I think. For anyone submitting NPC's, if you can do it in this format that would be super!

Thanks!

Posted by at 10:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Treasure Tables (you may have noticed a new link over on the right) is a DM-help Blog I've taken to reading regularly and find it on some occasions pretty informative. The post today is a question I've sometimes wanted to ask y'all.

I think y'all have figured out that I used to tweak encounters on the fly pretty often; some got a little more powerful, some a little less so, though less of either lately as I think I've gotten better at judging overall party capabilities. However, I wonder if y'all ever wondered about the other stuff like were there any secret doors, did we miss any major encounters, etc? It's no biggee to me either way, this is more a curiosity question than anything.

I for one, the few times I have played, was more of a 'I don't want to know,' type of guy. Any thoughts?

Posted by at 10:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Eric posted this comment under one of the other threads:

Just a thought here, but T-Bone and I were talking one day about how interesting it is to do battle with other humans or at least creatures that are very much like human. I think we should push for more people interaction. what if every player made 6 characters at various levels leaving there names blank but possibly supplying histories and backgrounds then submitting them to the DM for his modification (if he so desires) and the Dm can decide how to introduce these NPC's into the game and use them as either action scenario catalysts or as an opposing party that has its own goals and agendas. I think that alot of the fun in fighting humans is in the fact that you generally know what to expect from a human (Magic aside). Its like chess, throughout the entire game you know exactly how each peice can move, and yet the game is a ton of fun. Sometimes I think the unexpected can be overplayed.

Super idea, when can you start?! Making NPC's is a very timeconsuming process; making interesting ones is even harder! So any help I can get is gratefully appreciated!

In either campaign, y'all are welcome to submit NPC's with basic motivations, combat tactics, and histories and I will definitely fit them in when I can. Please use the DMG when deciding how much loot they have. I typically don't allow NPC's to spend more than 1/3 to 1/2 of their recommended gold on magic items. (Due to us running a low-magic campaign) Also, I prefer NPC's you may come into conflict with to have more one shot items like scrolls, trinkets, potions, magical bolts or arrows, over powerful weapons or armor.

FYI, there are a lot of humans and humanoids (of varying power levels) in the next adventure, from the extremely weak (per Tevis' suggestion about the party needing to be able to 'flex' a little sometime; I balked at the time but decided he was right about it as I was designing this. This does not mean you need to randomly kill people to 'flex' though;)) to the more powerful (no more pulling punches should y'all decide to just try to brawl through everything; you now truly risk capture or Total Party Kills).

This is the largest scenario I've ever created in terms of each NPC having their own agendas, plotlines, and alliances. There are also multiple distinct ways to work through it, plus whatever y'all can come up with. We'll see if it works!

I'll try to post a format I use for NPC's later, so everyone who decides to submit them will have a template to work from.

Great idea, Eric and T-Bone!

Posted by at 9:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I think Gribble is going to be in Gatlinburg this weekend, so looks like there will be no game. Next game looks like March 9 then.

Posted by at 11:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (20)

That this should show up on Wizard's site today. And to think, I never even noticed the Hold Person, auto-fear check or Scorching Ray (Heaven forbid he started grappling)! Who needs fireballs?

Posted by at 10:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (17)

I wanted to say thanks to everyone for a good, non-argumentative game! It actually piqued Tammy's interest that we played with such little fuss the last couple times that I think she will join our game after all.

So thanks!

Posted by at 10:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

It seems we need some explanation about the 'personal deity' thing, so I thought I would let you know how it all works in my worlds.

There are two types of deities. The first are deities created by prayer...such as 'in the beginning some folks started saying the Prayer of Morning Light.' Some time after they did it, their combined efforts caused a spark to appear, the beginning of the goddess. As more people began to worship this way, and created temples and started saying other prayers, the goddess took form and eventually gained sentience. But not one such as ours, one that is both more powerful but less human. Eventually the goddess can communicate with some of her followers, such as prophets, and begin to answer prayers. From there, she decides that those who protect her church and those who enlarge it should have spells to help them do those things. However, it all comes back to how many people are praying that determines how much power and how many spells (or other miracles) she has to give out.

The other type of deity is a demigod. These are humans/elves/dragons or other creatures that eventually became so powerful and attract followers because of that power. Alfamane, if he chose, could become a demigod. They have their own inherent power, plus they get some power from that of their worshippers, but not as much as a typical god. This is the type of god who on occasion finds entertaining the company of mortals, and will more readily communcate with their followers. Their existence is not centered around keeping their congregations growing, and thus their power is more certain, sometimes greater than gods with few worshippers, but rarely more powerful than gods with many worshippers.

So how does this relate to Gaea, Sanguine and the goddess of Light and their relationships to the characters? First and most importantly, those people who gain power for their deities get preferential treatment. No one in the party has regularly and actively recruited, built churches, or done anything to gain congregations for their deities in ages. (Now, sidenote, Kyrie is doing a much better job of this than anyone ever has, but as of recently, and also because it is a benefit to him, not just to her) So your respective deities have very little reason to expend lots of extra effort on your behalf. Now, I am not saying there is anything wrong with what you have done, I am just saying that it is not directly tied to the increase of power for your deities and thus most of their attention is focused elsewhere.

Second, most of the adventures you have been on have only very rarely helped your deities directly, the Temple of Light being one, and Jerel and the cleansing of the land being another. Gaea gets some of her power from the earth and living things, and so cleansing it helped her in that way. The Temple of Light was a temple where the worship there wasn't getting to the goddess because of the evil there; when that was fixed, the goddess was very thankful. One of the two main events of Sanguine on the island was the destruction of her clerics and the desecration of her temple. The 2nd was the building of a temple, gathering of worshippers, and then the destruction of that congregation as well.

Now, it is true the party has these allegiences to their respective deities, but only rarely do they result in a direct benefit to the deity. Now, if a deity has a choice of helping a cleric at the Temple of Light recruit more followers and expand her temple or help Mikaela raid a tomb or plunder a caravan, she is going to help the Temple first and Mikaela 2nd. Now, Mikaela still receives help from his goddess in the form of spells and spell points, while the Temple received the 'personal attention', because Mikaela was only expending her power while the Temple was accruing it. Now, there is nothing wrong with what Mikaela was doing. However, providing personal contact when on a quest that has nothing directly to do with the deities interest is going to be less appealing to her than helping her directly increase her influence and power and help many of her people, instead of one.

Yes, there are some 'down-the-road' benefits to helping Mikaela, because he is a good role model and indirectly recruits the occasional follower. However, instead of working on a temple and a congregation, he worked on teaching people to fight. Again, there is nothing wrong with this and he still got his spells every day, a very potent blessing from the goddess, but again, her direct interaction here costs her more than she gains.

All this to say, for the first type of deities, to get them to interact with you, you really need to be in a position of providing them more power than you drain every day. As an example, assume 100 followers saying the Prayer of Morning's Light generates 1 divine point. And say one divine point generates enough energy to power 5 spell points. That means it takes 900 followers just to power one 9th level cleric for one day. Now, assume that 9th level cleric is out adventuring and doing little to directly recoup that cost, except when directly called by the goddess. Now assume there is another 9th level cleric, and he spends all day, every day, recruiting people, building shrines and otherwise doing what he can to increase the number of followers the goddess has. He only spends 45 spell points per day, but through his work he has recruited 500 spell points per day of divine energy.

Who do you think the goddess is most likely to answer direct requests from? Now, I know y'all, and some might say, 'well if she contacted me more, I'd help more.' However, it doesn't work that way. Those that go out of their way to increase their deities power, without expecting anything in return, are the ones more likely to have personal interaction with their deity. Those who only ask for things when they are about to die, or want resurrections or otherwise use their deities power up without providing a lot in return are the ones most likely to have less personal interaction with their deity.

Now, there is another route. Those clerics who directly safeguard the body of worshippers and the places of worship (such as the Temple mission), also have a better chance of personal interaction. Thus, if one of y'all would like to be a crusader for a deity, where one regularly goes on missions to protect the power of their deity, there is more of a chance for personal interaction. For example, this is what Brook and the druid coven basically does, and y'all are more than welcome to help them at any point.

So, back to Sanguine. If one wants Sanguine to provide one with powerful items or abilities,or personal interaction, one must provide her with more power than you drain. Being 9th level is not nearly enough and really has nothing to do with it. Sacrificing things is the source of her power, so if you don't do it, or recruit people who do, and often, you are not providing her with squat, and she has no reason to interact with you.

Anyhow, I hope that explanation helps everyone understand how the diety system works.

Posted by at 6:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (16)

FYI - Tammy and I won't be going to Connecticut for Christmas, and I have all of Christmas week off (and the Friday before), so if we want to schedule a game as normal for the 30th or any other day that week I am up for it.

Also, if anyone is really bored and if we can get 4 or more people for a sealed minis tourney, I have a case of Blood Wars boosters we could use. (Also, Rodney, do you know if the person who wanted the other case still wants it?) Either that or maybe we can fit in a game of Risk or Talisman. Anybody else have Civ 4 for the PC?

Anyhoo, I'm pretty much up for anything.

Posted by at 3:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

Good game Saturday! Definitely not something to do every session, but a huge battle every once in a while is guten! I will look at getting Heroes of Battle, WOTC's product that is supposed to help run large-scale battles, because as y'all go up and your little country survives, it will most likely be whacked at again.

I am glad Jerel is branching out with the cool spells, Stoneskin being one of the best Druid spells available. Just FYI, it is also one of the few Druid spells with a material component (Granite and 250gp worth of Diamond dust). So before we start seeing this cast 3 times per session, let's clarify component rules.

We've not used material components in general up until now for any class, though I have always intended to, at least with spells where there is a high GP value component (as some spells specify expensive gems, materials, etc). A simple way to handle I thought would be to assign a casting penalty of 5% per level for a spell where one does not have the material components, similar to the penalty a mage gets when trying to cast in armor. So for Stoneskin, a 5th level spell, there would be a 25% penalty when trying to cast it if one does not have the appropriate components.

Yes, I can hear the nerf cries already, but dealing with material components has been on my list of things to do for a long time, and for particularly powerful spells such as y'all will be casting now and in the future it becomes an important part of balancing the caster classes.

Posted by at 1:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

In addition to the two games I am running, I am starting two new long-term projects, with target completion some time in mid-2007. The first is to create the 'point-based' character creation I mentioned a few posts back. The second is the design of a new campaign. Both of these items I am very interested in working with the players to make the most balanced, interesting systems I can. For the point-based system, it would be strictly optional, as new players most likely would find it confusing and wouldn't necessarily know how to assign points to make a character they like.

For the campaign, I am very serious about the level of interactive involvement I would like on the design level. We have all learned a lot about the rules, what is fun and what isn't, and I would like to carry over those experiences into a new campaign.

My current thinking about the new campaign is to create more of a high-fantasy theme with more non-basic character classes, prestige classes, creature templates and races. I would completely revamp the races away from fantasy standards (such as dwarves and elves), and redo the deity and planar system, as the more I think about them, the more random they seem to be, and ineffective in terms of what I want in a campaign. For folks who would like to help, I would love to implement player-made classes, races, and even countries/npc's, assuming everything fits into the new milieu in a way that seems consistent and interesting. If it's a powerful race or class, it would still be a playable option, just with an ECL modifier like I am using now for the elves and frost dwarf. (So yes, the new campaign would allow ogre half-dragon, half-celestial spirit shaman's, assuming one doesn't mind a +7 ECL or so).

My next post is going to be an initial foray into the point-buy character system and some interesting first results I had trying to break down 2 classes into their base components.

Posted by at 2:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Barring special circumstances, non-standard rezzes will be limited to 2 per player. If you can find and pay a high-level Cleric, that will be done on a case-by-case basis. Just as I don't have typical 'magic shops' in-game, I have a hard time believing a 15th level Cleric will just take gold for spells, and will most likely look for a combination of gold, time, exp, and deeds, as well as assuming the alignment of the dead player is not too far off from the Cleric in question.

On the Barbed Devil and wandering monsters in general. First, on his power level. Just as your party is very powerful and wanders from place to place, often killing things, other powerful creatures including dragons, war parties, spellcasters, slayers and others are just as likely to have to go from point A to point B as well, and you have a chance of running into them. Your last 6 random encounters were 3 ruins, a defunct clay golem, a cowardly goblin war party and the Barbed Devil, so it is not like you are awash in overpowered encounters. There have been other encounters with creatures just as powerful (and more powerful, such as the Gith, the Dragon and the Advanced Displacer Beasts), but not so belligerent. You are in a hostile world full of hostile creatures, many of them more powerful than you, so I have no plans to change the way I generate random encounters or their challenge level. Additionally, this particular bad guy has been hunting for y'all for over a month, so it was about time for him to show up.

As for the 'he has no weakness' argument, I was a little surprised by this one, and it is not the first time it has been mentioned. Powerful creatures have few, if any, weaknesses, and a well-made character is no exception. The Barbed Devil had a limited number of spell points with which to cast fireball, that the party could have easily weathered, so his goal was to make people close with him (which y'all did) where he is much stronger. Powerful creatures that do have weaknesses tend to make one of their main goals dealing with them.

For example, Orsen knows he has a fire weakness, so he went had a magic item made to help deal with it, as well as choosing abilities that help compensate for them. Just the same, monsters with glaring weaknesses will attempt to mitigate them with allies, spell buffs, or magic items. If your party has weaknesses, it might be time to try to fix them, because you don't have any control over what powers monsters may or may not have.

Other than that, it wasn't too bad a couple hours with only 2 players.

Oh, on the unpublished comments thing, I am being hit with huge amounts of spam comments, and I didn't mean to block anyone. I still see all the posts and will publish them ASAP. I am not 100% sure of the website, but I think if you go to www.typekey.com and register I can mark y'all as 'trusted commenters' so your comments will show up automatically.

Posted by at 9:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (13)

In general, I try to have mixed-magic campaigns. Fewer magic items overall, but more interesting ones. More one-use type items and the like. I try to avoid the 'he has a +3 sword, +2 ring, +2 armor, +1 shield' thing that happens in a lot of the pre-made modules and campaigns, because those types of items don't seem very 'magical' to me. (I even plan on changing the WLD items on occasion to have a more interesting set of items).

As part of that, I have always intended resurrection to be a rare and wondrous thing. It's absolutely my fault, but it's gotten way outside that realm, and I'd like to hear from everyone what they think about resurrection and its effect on the game.

My main thought has always been, one 'second chance' is a good thing, but more than that and the challenge and sense of accompishment can easily seep out of a game. When a party stands at 20th level (if that ever happens) I want them to be able to look back and say, 'holy moly that's an accomplishment'. Allowing readily accessible resurrection I feel is detracting from that, as several of the party members have had multiple rezzes.

I know people get attached to their characters; heck, I get attached to your characters. However, even harkening back to the huge discussion we had regarding changing character classes, easy resurrection is one of the things that has prevented people from exploring new class opportunities that might be better suited for them or might be more enjoyable.

Part of my intent of the last rebirth of Kyrie is to say 'this is the end of the line,' but also do it in a way that is unique and fun. If you die again as a celestial, you are already close to your deity, and she will most likely call you home. If Jerel or Orsen die again, they might get a similar 'buffed' option particular to their class and race, but again, after that all bets are off.

I think level loss, exp loss and the like work well once, but they don't reflect well on the gravity of the situation. Heck, people are at the point where they readily sacrifice 1500 exp to save a magic item (or create one). Luck points were never really intended for that purpose, as they were more meant to land the heroic blow or prevent the odd critical hit Total Party Kill kind of thing, and as of now, the sacrificing experience points option is off the table. Also, luck points are also off the table for anything other than saving one's life or killing a bad guy.

I don't want to overly complicate things, but I think there are a couple of reasons we are having these challenges. First, we don't have a regular 4th party member yet, and it's making what should be average challenges into very hard challenges. (Although I didn't expect the charge straight into the multiple +18 attacks of the barbed devil either!) Second, and one that is presenting more than just logistical challenges, is the fact that we are mixing characters of different levels. Orsen is adjusting easier due to his being pretty hardy for a low-level char, but I have a feeling it would be very difficult to truly bring in the hexblade or the rogue.

Again, I am asking for opinions on how to rectify this? Do we run a 2nd game every 3rd session or so where everyone starts a fresh character? That way, if someone dies (or everyone for that matter), they have another character 'in the oven' so to speak? I'm not set on this idea, but the new player thing is not working like I want it to. Jerel and Kyrie and even Furea still have more backstory than Orsen, because he is going the 'rushed route'. He never got the chance to do quests and things to better his clan because he was immediately dragged into the realm of the other party members. Not that it hasn't worked, because he has adjusted pretty well, but it hasn't given him the same level of development as I feel every char should have.

I hope everyone will jump in and comment on this thread, as it will have impact on this game, and probably most future ones. As I said, I don't know what all the fixes are, but I do know that the impact of luck has to be decreased, and the rarity of resurrection increased. How we do that, I am open to talking about.

Thanks!

Posted by at 9:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

Good game last night. Definitely a little harder without the Sorcerer, though it looks like the Druid can blast with the best of them. Although I looked in the Player's Handbook today and couldn't find a druid spell that did 5d10 with a 40ft radius. Flame Strike would have done 9d6, very close to the same damage, but in a 10ft radius. So I'll need to check the spell description if it is in another book.

Also, my fault and I need to remember is that its dark; pitch dark, and I am not sure how y'all are targeting spells with no light.

Other than that I thought the tactics of the party were very good; hit and run working well. The hobgoblins' equipment and tactics are set up more toward pitched battles. I need to remember night is the Dark Dwarves favorite time and use more appropriately. Move silent checks and hide checks will come into play more next time on this type of mission, as well as search checks to continue to locate the enemy.

Overall I had fun, though need to do less Amberbock; 4am is a pretty late night!

I'll put up a new schedule based on Eric's time; Rodney, let me know if we can switch things around yet one more time! Tammy was happy starting later and she didn't feel so rushed all day, so we'll continue the 6:30pm start time.

I'll be working this week on finishing up the town and then doing the RIversang area, as that is where a lot of the action is generated from.

Thanks everyone!

Posted by at 1:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (17)

This is an interesting book I've come across reading through various RPG sites. It peaked my interest reading the reviews on Amazon, because some of the classes sound similar to what I have attempted to create with the Jin and the Pyromancer.

Instead of having a class like a fighter, which has x, y, and z abilities at 1st, 5th, and 10th, each level is more like laying a foundation and building a house.

For example, the Pyromancer has only 3 basic abilities: Fire Bolt, Fire Shield and Fire Craft. Fire Bolt is their standard attack, Fire Shield is their standard defense, and Fire Craft is an elemental they can manifest as a fighter/protector. Instead of increasing their powers with more spells or abilities, when they level they gain options about how to use their power. At 2nd level for example, they can pick improvements for 2 of their 3 abilities, such as 'Twin-Targeting' for their Fire Bolt power and 'Damage Wood' for their Fire Shield.

As a Pyromancer levels, they can determine whether they will be heavy on defense, offense, or a combination, and will have radically different abilities depending on how they choose their skills. I'm sure it doesn't match for the complexity and balance of the ones in that book, but I do think it's interesting that I've become focused on 'natural progression' type NPC's as opposed to buckshot characters. I think that is even part of the reason for the huge discussions we've had with players wanting to rework their characters. I do believe the #1 reason for those requests was to increase relative power levels, but I think an additional reason was that people felt their characters didn't meld well.

Although feats allow a lot of flexibility for the classes in D&D, I've never thought they were a very elegant solution as to how to incrementally power up a character. Most provide a moderate benefit, but often they don't seem to 'click' with a character, and half the time when I make NPC's now, they are left off because they don't seem to have a heavy impact. In fact, maxing concentration on a spellcaster seems more important than picking a meta-magic feat. (although I do think the metamagic and spell focusing feats are more interesting and in-tune with their class than the fighter feats)

It might be a huge undertaking, but I may try to finally reach for my Holy Grail of character creation: completely customizable characters, probably point-based, with every ability thrown into a giant pile. For example, say every character starts with 100 points. If I want the character to be a brawler, and ultra-survivable, I might choose something like this as my 1st level character:

I start him with +1 BAB that is worth 10 points, a d12 HD worth 20 more, and good saving throws (+2) across the board for 10 more points each. With my 35 remaining points I take a +1 natural AC, a +2 constitution bonus, 2 Spell Points and the Mage Armor Spell.

At each level there would be a natural cost for something, and then a cost to choose something higher than a player's natural level. For example, Base Attack Bonuses natural level is +1 (currently what a fighter gets each level according to the PHB). However, if I really wanted to be vicious, I could take a +2 bonus at first level at a cost of 30 points, where if I waited until 2nd level to take the 2nd +1, it would only cost me 20 total points.

The hard part of creating this system is simply determing how many 'points' everything is worth. For example, I would estimate an Arcane spellcasting level as probably the highest-point item a player can take, with a Divine spellcasting level as #2. (A rough guess would be 40-50% of a mage's or cleric's power.) A feat may be worth 10 points, or 1/4 a spellcasting level; each skill point is probably worth 1/25th of a spellcasting level, or 1/5th of feat.

One interesting variable is ability scores. For example, a Wizard currently gets more benefit out of an 18 intelligence than a Fighter does. They get not only the +4 skill points a Fighter gets, but at 7th level they will have 10 additional spell points (one bonus spell of each level 1-4) as well as a +4 spell DC. It might even be that each benefit of a high ability score is broken down into components. For example, I would have to say a +1 to hit and damage from a 12 strength is much more valuable than +1 skill points is at 12 intelligence. Maybe a +1 to hit and damage is worth 10 points, while a +1 dodge AC is worth 7 and a +1 skill point is worth 1.

Anyhoo, maybe everyone sees where I am going with this. Crazy? Not crazy? There are obviously a lot of interactions that may 'break' the concept, but I figure if everything is costed right, it should work. Going up levels might need to provide more skill points the higher level one is. (For example, going from 1st to 2nd level arcane spells is not as powerful as going from 2nd to 3rd, where the staple combat spells of the game reside). In this way, we could totally do away with class completely, as every character is truly a unique creation. Specific races could be chosen at 1st level for a certain portion (or even all) of a player's character creation points.

Okay, rambling now, I'm going!

Posted by at 2:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

This is the area the player's currently live in.

My scale was a little off as we've played in the past; this is the correct map regardless. The Ogres and Witches are really only a day or three away.

Map here!

And this is the entire island.

Posted by at 8:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Ok, I appreciate your comments on the NPC post Mikaela, however I will have to submit that again, I think you are again striving to limit the DM's creative options, for what reason I am not sure.

The comment in question:

I didn't read all of these comments but regarding the first two, I think it is in violation of the spirit of D&D to say that this is a class but you can't choose it. If its a class I can choose it and if its not then neither can they. You are as much as admitting that you min maxed these classes if your npc's can be them, but they are to broken for us to take levels in right?

I thought I would add a comment in regard to Eric's, however again it suggests another huge breakdown between our points of view and one we need to come to an agreement on.

If as a DM I want to create a Fire Giant Mage, that in no way means a PC needs to be allowed to be a Fire Giant Mage. If I want to create a Devilmancer, why do PC's need to be allowed to be the same? They are an evil class, and thus the rules of my game preclude creating one, because they disallow evil characters.

Jin don't like to adventure and don't work too well in groups; those are also both traits not allowed of PC's per a previous post. Certainly ingame you may ask them to teach you their secrets, but there is no particular reason you should be able to make a PC Jin.

This is really something we need to get to the bottom of, as one of my main points during the huge discussion is that the DM has (and needs) absolute control when it comes to creation and population of the universe.

If the Githyanki have a different class available only to Githyanki, there is no reason I need to provide the same option to a PC. The mechanics allow DM's to create NPC's, templates, and classes that have a 'level adjustment' to determine how tough they are.

For example, an Ogre Mage Sorcerer can have a half-demon template and go from a CR of 6 to a CR of 14. Putting an Ogre Mage Sorcerer in the world with more powers than a standard Ogre Mage is not min/maxing. If I add 3 points of strength to a kobold because he is strong, that is not min-maxing. If I give a hill giant a +3 club, that is not min-maxing. All of that is called being a DM, and its my job. When I have Darwin make someone a magic weapon, is that min-maxing? Why not? Making a monster that is more powerful than the PCs, no matter how I do it, with spells, better ac, more HD, additional classes, templates or magic items, is not min-maxing. If it was, the world would be populated by kobolds and commoners and there would be no reason to play.

Classes are just another tool in a DM's kit. A class that is more powerful than a standard class simply adds to a creature's CR and ECL. Thus, even if a PC could take it, they would start at 1st level, but not be able to level to 2nd until they hit 10,000 (or 15,000, or 21,000) exp, or 4th level for any standard character.

Just like adding the inherent ability to cast a lighting bolt to a particular goblin if I feel the world needs it, I have every right to add classes as well, and it is not min-maxing.

As for 'violating the spirit of D&D', I have to completely disagree, and would say the designer's of the current system would also. Players have a Player's Handbook (and many other books) from which to pick their class, race, and spells. As a DM I have modified those options, with Frost Dwarves, Elemental Elves, etc. However, having someone be a Half-Ogre Mage/Half Alfheim like Alfamane is not in the spirit of the game (for PC's), thus not allowed. This is not min-maxing. First, the race is not balanced and would have an level modifier of something on the order of +8 (so a player wouldn't go up to 2nd level until they have 28,000 or so exp.) 2nd, they are beings with a backstory that precludes me from wanting to introduce them at will into the campaign.

I guess I just don't understand your point of view of the game. The game is not about everyone being equal, and its not supposed to be. You have more freedom than you would in most standard D&D games. I would submit 'the spirit of D&D' as it is in a straight-by-the-book game is MUCH more limiting than mine is. If someone is going to argue that they should be able to be any race or any class, then the 'freedom' thing has really gone too far, because it takes away from the DM's ability to run a world with mysteries and secrets beyond the PC. Again, without that ability, there is no game.

I've seen games run where there is so little magic that spellcaster classes are disallowed. I've seen high-magic campaigns where a player can be any race in the book, including dragons, demons or beholders. I've seen realistic-type campaigns where there are no heal spells and players can only be human. Mine is a gritty, dark campaign where the PC's are at a disadvantage from the day they roll their character. Even though each of these is different, all of these campaigns are being run 'in the spirit of D&D'. Establishing a universe, including the boundaries of the PC's is an integral part of a DM's responsibility.

Posted by at 10:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Maybe this will help, how does this schedule work for everyone?

Oct 28 - 6:30pm Nihilat (This is the name of the evil world; it's never really come up!)
Nov 4 - 7:00pm WLD
Nov 11 - 6:30pm Nihilat
Nov 25 - 6:30pm Nihilat (If anyone wants to play Friday instead and if Rodney has off we could start as early as anyone likes)
Dec 2 - 7:00pm WLD
Dec 9 - 6:30pm Nihilat
Dec 16 - I'm open for anything here, as I will be in Connecticut for Dec. 22-New Years. Next game after this would be Jan 6 WLD and Jan 13 for Nihilat.

Posted by at 9:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I've been debating whether to post some of my NPC character classes. For example, the Jin Necromancer's class or Merilee's Pyromancer class.

On occasion I'll decide I want a particular character in the game, but none of the classes really enable what I want. For example, the Jin focus on creating skeletal undead, and while a wizard and cleric can certainly do it, they don't have the correct 'flavor' for the class. A Jin is a craftsman, desiging and creating each skeleton more like a golem than just raising them from the dead. Additionally, I picture the Jin casting very few spells in comparison to the standard arcane and divine classes. They have more in common with Darwin's Arcane Blacksmith class (as yet uncreated) than they do with most other class types.

The same with Merilee. She is a Pyromancer (that I picture in my head), and while there are some rules for elemental type classes in some of the expanded magic books, they don't do a good job of allowing her the level of control over her creations as I envision her having.

So in those two cases, I created NPC classes all the way to level 20. Are they balanced? Maybe, maybe not, depending on the circumstance. Certainly Merilee will soon be able to blast with the best Sorcerer and create elementals as well as any conjurer, but I am thinking that as some of the NPC classes in the DMG are meant to be weaker than PC's, some could very well be stronger. (For example, in all the campaigns I have used Ashuan-Eri, they are definitely more powerful level over level than a standard Psion).

In any case, one of the reasons I've done this is to do my best to continue my 'consistent npc' policy. A 12th level Jin may be the equal to a 14th level Necromancer PC or a 10th level Wizard PC, but a 12th level Jin will always have that same (or approximately the same) power level, so there shouldn't be radically differing abilities.

Anyhow, I'm interested in people's opinions on whether posting the class descriptions would spoil the mystery of encountering these types of NPC's. Especially as the characters themselves have very little knowledge of both these classes and will be strictly controlled on the amount of min/maxing they do when encountering them.

Posted by at 1:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (547)

One thing I never want to do is bog the game down with unneccesary details. However, I do want to make it so the world is breathing, moving, and important places like cities and strongholds act importantly. If you all decide this information does nobody any good, I will do away with the system; if you decide you like it, all of the places you are likely to venture will have this type of information associated with it.

I am working on assigning every major stronghold and city on the island a resource value. Basically, I am using a modified version of Civilization IV's city system, where each city and its surrounding area generates one or more resources. Some are necessary to survive, such as food and water, while others allow you to produce certain goods, such as iron and copper. Some even provide morale (happiness in Civ IV) in the city, such as luxury goods like silk and spices. Morale is important when it comes time to recruit militia or expand the city.

I am not going to a huge level of detail, but here is Freedom City's current resource chart:

Population: 2500
Morale: 3 (poor) (+1 freedom, +1 spirits, +1 herbs)
+5 food (capable of supporting 5000 people): +3 from environs (the area around the city), +1 from trade with Riversang, and +1 from Goblin Tribute.
+1 iron from Riversang
+1 spirits from Ogres (+1 happiness)
+1 leather from environs
+1 meat from environs
+1 wood from environs
+1 rock from Goblins
+1 herbs from Druids (+1 happiness)

Now, taking a look at this, one notices you have food for 5000 people, but only 2500 living in the city. This means you could potentially negotiate with another city or stronghold a point or two of food for something else. The +1 Iron, Leather, Wood and Rock means you really only have enough materials to support basic infrastructure improvements and repair what equipment you have for your troops and militia. If you had a +2 iron, for example, you would be able to create stocks of armor or weapons to trade, potentially at a higher value than trading food. If you had +2 copper or wood you be able to create some trade goods. If you had more stone you could add to the city faster. Etc.

Everyone please give their opinion whether any of this matters or you would rather just be concerned with role-playing and adventuring. Either way is fine with me, and the whole chart for the area didn't take much time, so it's something I can easily work in if it is useful.

Also starting this week, I've come up with random events for Freedom Province City that will occur once every session. They can be good or bad, effect the players, the populace, the main NPC's or the city. It can effect the trade levels, goods available, and happiness. I think it could be good fun, and some will generate combat to defend the city and its environs, some will generate possible quests, some will provide the PC's or NPC's with additional resources. Anyhow, we'll see!

Posted by at 12:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

One of the reasons I adopted a strictly extemporaneous DM'ing style is twofold. First, if I had pre-planned adventures and scenarios created, I feared I would push players toward them and that would curtail some of their freedom. Additionally, I worried that even if I didn't force them into a particular direction, I would feel some resentment if I did a huge amount of work and none of it ever mattered because players always ended up doing something else. Secondly, a good campaign world can require huge investments of time and effort for potentially very little use if there is a waning of interest, lack of players, or other vagaries associated with trying to run a regular D&D game. My steadfast refusal (until I started DM'ing the World's Largest Dungeon) to use 3rd party settings or modules also hasn't helped things.

As I have gotten older and decided I needed to to branch out and balance multiple hobbies requiring time commitments (running, business ventures, blogging, poker, ebay) as well as relationships with family and friends (and girlfriend!), I can no longer spend 6 hours a day working on a D&D campaign like I did in some earlier years. The problem has always been that some amount of planning is necessary to develop a cohesive storyline, timeline, and other thematic elements.

I've found that the mixture of only light planning and off-the-cuff dm'ing really starts to show around character level 10. Some monster and NPC faction leaders are often near this level. Even if they are of higher levels, they need to start taking notice of adventuring parties near this level as possible threats or allies. Many powerful creatures that would prefer to be out seeking powerful magic items, unique spell or alchemical components, or great wealth are instead stuck in their strongholds dealing with minions, overseeing estates, and keeping up politically with the joneses. Thus, some may like to enlist the characters as 'Tomb Raiders' while others would like them killed to prevent possible interference against their own adventuring parties.

I hope I have finally found a solution to many of my design and planning issues. I bet many DM's have done something similar for many years, and I just missed it. Similar to many MMOG's, I am starting to design modular faction templates. For example, say my current campaign needs a warlord to rule a campaign area. First, I create the warlord, say a 13th level fighter. I assign him a stronghold (with floorplan if possible; more on maps in a later post) with one or more economic activities associated with it (vineyard, mine, crafthall, armory, plantation). Doing so, I can reasonably assume it is self-sufficient (unless game conditions indicate otherwise). It also allows a way for the PC party to disrupt, enchance or protect a region's economic activity through missions.

Next, I give him some followers. If the followers have character levels (a 9th level fighter (Colonel), a 6th level Ranger (Scout), a 7th level Paladin (Knight), for example) but aren't storyline-level entities, I have found some great random NPC generators that create workable characters. Another random generator allows for some decent equipment options based on level and class. After I have a main npc's important followers, I can assign troops and other associated critters 'by-the-book'. For example, I might give a baron 250 0-level militia, 150 1st-level line troops, 15 3rd level sergeants, and 5 5th level lieutenants. As war in a magical world entails some specific challenges, I usually assume a major NPC has access to a few combat spellcasters (e.g. 5 7th-level Sorcerers) and air support (a half-dozen hippogriffs or some long range ballista), and maybe a few special combatants (a dozen owlbear hunters or a lizard-riding pixie knight).

At this point I have a basically complete 'faction', ready to drop into any campaign world I may have running. End-to-end, it takes about 3-4 hours (most of that is designing the faction head), but gives me a fully-fleshed NPC, his lair, followers he can send on missions, multiple adventure hooks, and most importantly, an inifinitely reusable generic warlord. This way I know that even if one group of players never interacts with him, another might.

To give a particular 'faction' a place in any current world, I plug him into one or more levels of the 'Faction Template' I have designed. For the current campaign I have running, there are two levels of factions: Minor and Major. Minor factions are those which the PC's have interacted with, but are not really significant in terms of the direction of the campaign. For example, the Stark Knob Witch, the Ogrish Whiskeymakers, the Light Temple and the Goblin Village are all minor factions. The major factions are those which rule large portions of the campaign area and include the Riversang Lich and his vassals, a Hobgoblin Warlord and Greater Barghest, as well as other major players, including Freedom Province and the Jin.

I have created a grid containing all of the major and minor factions and how they interact with each other. For example, even though the Lich is in charge, there are other factions which undermine him if possible or quarrel with his vassals. Currently, all of the major factions relate to Freedom Province (the PCs' home) with Tension, Hatred, or Neutrality. A few of the minor ones are counted on as Allies (Druid Coven, Temple of Light) or Friendly (Goblin Village and Ogrish Whiskeymakers).

All this to say that when I have a good cadre of NPC's and their factions created, when designing a new world I won't have to worry so much about 'starting from scratch' as I would have many of the bases covered. Certainly, each world has its unique characters (The Riversang Lich, for example) or characteristics (a low-magic world might have NPC's with fewer magic items or a high-magic world would have more), but most worlds I can imagine would need one or more human warlords, hobgoblin generals, or wizards guilds, and I will have an electronic file folder containing exactly that..

Anyhoo, that is what I have been working on for the past several weeks. I have around 5 complete factions so far, as well as a complete faction grid for Riversang Island. This should allow the players to consistently interact with most of the major groups within 100 miles of their home. We'll certainly see how it goes and whether this ends up in the 'good idea' or 'bad idea' category!

Posted by at 11:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (457)

I don't remember the last time I DM'd for 7 people; its not something I like to do all the time (err, ever!). It is hard to personally interact with that number of people. It is especially hard as two of them were brand new players, and they tend to be ultra-withdrawn to start. I always end up feeling guilty for not finding a better way to pull them into the adventure right off the bat. One of them also ended up dying at the first trap (rare in my games; this was part of the experiment), which is never fun, though I let her know in private that was likely to happen. (1st level char starting; average char level is 7)

Still, overall I think the session went well. It was an experiment of sorts, as well as a farewell to Raistca, who is moving to Seattle.

I am interested in anyones impressions!

And more later!

Posted by at 6:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

From the SRD (best website ever and is helping me greatly on my new NPC's and things)

Oops. I guess its not as bad as I thought. When I played Temple of Elemental Evil, entangled meant immobile.

Entangled: The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a -2 penalty on all attack rolls and a -4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a Concentration check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) or lose the spell.

Posted by at 11:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (12)

Well, now I've ranted and gotten it all out in the open. If you all still want to play with the rules that are now on the table, then let's do as Eric suggests and try it and see what happens. If I've offended anyone too thoroughly, my apologies.

Let me know!

Posted by at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I think it's time I went back to beginning; this may be a long post, so beware. It will, however, explain why I have decided it is time to redraw the lines my games are built on, and why it doesn’t work when they are crossed too often.

I think I was nine when I got the D&D Basic Set. It had a reddish box and came with Keep on the Borderlands, what I thought was the coolest module ever at the time. I don't know if I played right away, but I read all the stuff over and over. I ran as a player under my brother Todd for a few sessions. I ran a game for G and another friend or two, badly.

Eventually G and I started looking for games in town, as we knew we weren’t doing too well figuring it out on our own. We found one at the public library. We heard it had 'the best DM ever' and looked forward to playing. I made a character. In the 2nd room, I died. I rolled up a new character. In the third room, I died again. For some reason or another, I wasn't having a lot of fun. The DM kept telling me what my character was doing, and even still, my character kept dying. That was the last time I played that game.

I found another game not long after, and it was the opposite experience. I got magic items and loot by the truckload. I was fighting demigods after around 4 weeks of playing. I'm surprised I didn't give up D&D completely after this game, because there was something just as wrong with this game, even if I couldn't name the problem at the time (Monty Haul).

Still, I loved D&D and was desperate to play. I ended up rolling up a character and putting myself through Keep on the Borderlands and some of the Expert Modules I had acquired by this time. Funny, it was more satisfying to do that than it was to play in the 2 real games I had. I bought a ton of 'choose your own adventure books', including the advanced kind where you actually had to have dice to go through the books. I still have those books on my bookshelf (-1 that is lost). I kept thinking D&D should be a place to do anything I could think of; however, for some reason, every game I got into pushed my character into directions I didn't want to go and that didn't feel right to me.

I think I gave up for a couple of years, frustrated by my inability to find a good group. Around 7th grade, I decided to try DMing again. G played, and our friend Ralph, and Andrew (G's brother), and maybe Sean. It was the first game, at least for me, that clicked. We still fumbled through the rules, still made our characters a little wrong, but for the first time, we 'played' D&D. I made the world and the players made the story.

Based on my early frustrating games, one of the first things I decided was that players had to be allowed to do what they want. The thought was not as codified then as it was years later, or today, but I knew instinctually the players needed freedom if it was to thrive. I think it was around 15 when we had our first 'memorable' games. G created Lord O' Leisure and Banzai; we had started playing 2nd Edition at this point, and were exploring the original Unearthed Arcana book that had the cavalier and barbarian in it. I was making my own maps, npc's and monsters. Some good, some not, but they were all my own.

During the next 5 or 6 years I learned a lot about how I wanted to run a game, and how not to run one. I had my first rules-lawyer play, and it ruined a lot of sessions. The immortal words 'I don't think my horse reacts that way,' were first uttered. A player was trying to charge down a hill into the middle of a throng of bad guys; he wanted to hook his horse up to the drawbridge in the middle of this fight and pull it down or something. Anyhoo, something very complex. I told him to roll a reaction for his horse due to the smell of blood and the sight of monsters. The horse became skittish and wouldn't charge down the hill. My player didn't think this was the right reaction, and we spent the next 2 hours arguing about it.

I added 'no rules lawyers', to my list of gaming requirements.

When I left college and moved in with my first fiance, G, Tina, Jon, Kenny and I started our first 'hardcore' campaign. I introduced a brand new world and invented the 4 races of elves. G created Na'ag, perhaps the most memorable character I have ever played with. The players interacted on a level I had only hoped for. They became part of the landscape, part of the storyline. They interacted with psionic town sheriffs and queens. They lit 25% of a continent on fire, and it burns to this day. They averted a war, and started one. One became a loyal baron to the rodent-queen, and the others turned evil. They had lands, and vineyards, and men-at-arms. The baron bartered for an Iron Golem to protect his lands. The necromancer flew on a not-so-well-crafted undead manticore that could only stay 5 feet above the ground. The female cleric had a giant bunny named Fiver.

And it all worked, because we spent all our time playing, and none of it arguing. More than once, rulings made up on the spot were accepted, and in some cases became house rules.

Eventually that game ended and I started my period of moving around. I didn't play for 4 years until I moved to Bowling Green, KY. I found a group, but they already had a DM, so I tried to play once more. This time, the story was much better and the DM knew what he was doing, but it was still not 'my' story or the way I liked to play. The DM had the storyline all planned out, and it was simply up to the players to implement that storyline. I rolled up a pacifistic psionic monk, and the DM couldn't adapt to my playstyle.

Eventually I stopped playing and let everyone know why. They asked me to DM another game with them, and I did. It was fun, except for the other player that was the DM in the first game was a rules lawyer, and wanted to argue everything I did. Again, we wasted a lot of hours we could have been playing. Eventually that game came to an end also, due to personal reasons.

2 years later I was playing Magic the Gathering in a local store and some people started asking about D&D. I said I would DM and teach them to play on a few very simple conditions. The main condition? No rules lawyering. I explained that I did things different from many DM's and asked if that was ok with them. They all agreed and we started to play. We had a good run and the players got to about 8th level in their first campaign. Interest died down and we quit playing.

A year later we started a new campaign, my current one. My new world was a radical idea, and one I didn't know if it would work. I explained again that the world had what it had in it, and that the players would be outgunned almost all the time and that sometimes the party might have to run instead of fight.

We hadn’t played for 2 hours before we had our first argument. A player didn’t like the way Alfamane reacted to him. Time wasted: 3 hours. A player didn’t like it that his temple was taken over by a demon: 5 hours. Argument over the nature of magic and the planes: 4 hours. Polymorph and hp’s: 2 hours.

This last session I made the decision darkness imposed a –4 attack: 30 minutes (that was 2nd edition rule; new rules say you get concealment 5...guess what that equates to? -4 attack). Centaur not having enough hp (refer back to Polymorph discussion): 20 minutes. And these were just the memorable arguments. There have been plenty more about spells, magic item creation, and just recently, whether or not players should be able to alter their characters mid-campaign from 9th level fighter/clerics to 9th level monks and psions.

And then a complaint after I spend 2 hours of my personal time working up a major npc that my lich shouldn’t have a +5 ring because ‘Tobias the person’ gave it to him because I have a psychological need to win. Dude, wtf? Please tell me what you would find acceptable for a 140 year old 16th level lich to have, because I’m curious now? +3 gauze armor? A wand of butterflies? Do you know what an average 16th level fighter would need to hit the lich’s huge 27 armor class? BAB +16, +5 strength, +2 bulls strength, +2 sword. Hmm, sounds like a 3 or better. Add in weapon specialization and greater weapon specialization and the fighter only misses on a 1. And that is somehow broken and the only reason I gave it to him is because I have psychological issues? You need to step off, because you’re talking about things you have no idea about. You even suggested I need to roll randomly my creatures' stats and items. Do you have any idea what you’re suggesting? If you want a random world go get some graph paper and start rolling; I can point you to some great monster and treasure generators. I don’t remember anyone complaining about the powerful staff of thunder and lighting Gribble has. Is that too powerful for a 9th level character? How about Tina’s sword? Never heard an argument about that. A bauble that holds a pixie and resurrected someone? Not a peep.

You can’t have it both ways. Either a DM has the power to create a world, the creatures, and the items in it, or you go play Baldur’s Gate. Did you write emails to the designers complaining that the dragons were too tough in the game? Did you complain that your character couldn’t open every lock? Heck maybe you did. I just did what everyone else did if something was too powerful. Go get a few levels elsewhere and then come back and fight the harder monster.

I have never once said it was unacceptable to argue a point, and I appreciate that at least all this came about out of session. What I have said is that it is unacceptable to rules lawyer, and that’s what y’all do, every time we play. You say you are ‘beyond 1st level play’, whatever that means. What that really sounds like to me is that you have stopped playing D&D for the characters and the story, and started to play it for the little +4’s and +5’s on your character sheet. You’ve played how many 1st level characters in your life? Two, three? Maybe four? That hardly qualifies anyone as an ‘expert’, because all it shows is you’ve missed the point of the game.

Every game is different, as is every character. You want a 9th level monk? Then earn it through playing a monk for a year and learning what it means to be a powerful monk. Being a 9th level fighter/cleric in no way earns you the right to a 9th level monk, or mage, or anything else. It doesn’t earn you the right to skip playing lower level characters ever again. What it earns you is a 9th level fighter/cleric who is adored by kobolds, respected by goblins, hated by trolls, befriended by ogres and is a hero to his town. No more, no less. Those relationships don’t form if you don’t play levels 1-8. And if you don’t have those pivotal relationships, you don’t have a character, whether he is 5th or 15th level. Because a character is not about the numbers, it is about the time you have spent playing it.

Heck, you should go read Rodney’s blog, as he is starting a campaign where the characters don’t even get to start as 1st level anything. They start as commoners and have to work up from there. That is brilliant, and that is D&D at its finest. Starting a 9th level character from scratch is not D&D, at least not the way I will play it. A 9th level character is a hero. If you didn't play to get him there and he shows up fully formed, he is a hero without a story.

I failed, somehow, to instill the viewpoint that the game is more than the numbers on the page, because all everyone thinks about now is ‘my character isn’t powerful enough.’

It hit me on my way to work this morning the main crux of this. This party is having the same issues I had when I started playing all those years ago. You feel constrained, for whatever reason. So what did I do when I felt constrained? I stopped playing, and started DM’ing. If you really feel that so much is wrong with my game that you all feel the need to argue about it all the time, then you need to be a DM. Make your own rules. Give the lich his Gauze Armor and a 16 AC and 14 hp. Have Papa Smurf come out and hand everyone 25,000 exp for defeating Gargamel the 2nd level cosmetician. Whatever you want.

And it will be right, because it will be your world, that you can run as you choose.