Interesting Discussion

There's a very interesting discussion going on over at enworld regarding the differences in combat styles between 1E and 4E.

None of the information is effectively new. However, the author of the original post does an outstanding job of explicating the situation.

Basically he breaks combat into two forms: combat-as-war (1E) and combat-as-sport (4E). The former requires the PCs to do everything in their favour to ensure an unfair fight (right on!), whereas the later emphasizes balance and teamwork (I'm paraphrazing on both counts).

Anyway, be sure to give it a good read.

Happy Super Sunday!

Critical Hits

I'm curious how you or your DM runs critical hits in your game?

In my BX/LL game, a roll of 20 indicates a critical hit and the PCs can double their rolled damage. We also play with critical fumbles. If PCs roll a 1 they then roll on a d8 sub-table for mishaps.

There seems to be more consternation about critical hits in more recent editions. This is just another example of rules bloat to me.

Barrowmaze Cover Art Revealed!

Here's the cover art for Barrowmaze.

I think Stefan Poag has really captured the essence of the dungeon.

The flagstone dungeon, mold, and the burial alcoves set the tone.

The scene depicts a zombie battle that apparently isn't going to well for the adventurers/tomb-robbers. I specifically asked for the shield homage :)

Amid the chaos, the halfling seems to have noticed that they have a new problem...

Please let me know what you think.

Barrowmaze: Interior Art VI

The mongrelmen are another faction trying to survive in the Barrowmaze.

This fellow, an interesting NPC, was illustrated by John Larrey and Jason Sholtis.

Update: I just received the colour cover from Stefan Poag last night! I'll be sure to post a preview in a couple days.

WotC: New for 2012 with Translations!

I've enjoyed reading the updates from DDXP recently.

Normally I wouldn't give a rat's arse, but 1) I'm interested in the old edition reprints, 2) WotC is always good for entertainment value.

Some of their new crap from 2012 warrants comment:

If these are indeed the new covers for the AD&D reprints, then I'm just so-so on them. They could be a lot better, they could have been a lot worse.

The other information I've run through the WotC-5000 translation device:

Q: Is Ed's Forgotten Realms edition neutral?
A: It focuses on his specific campaign, so his individual stories might mention mechanics from different editions, the stories and lore should apply to all editions.

Translation: Ed wasn't raised on the new crap, but we'll continue to shoe-horn it the best we can.

Q: Any plans to rerelease the other products for 1E and 2E and other editions, either in print or electronically?
A: We are looking at making a lot of that older material available to you, but we want to make sure we do it right for you guys and for Wizards. We'll have more news on that.

Translation: We might do it if the AD&D reprints sell well.

Q: Resetting of timelines for the Realms?
A: I can't give a specific answer to that. We know there are things that people like and dislike about different timelines in the various settings. If there's information that's part of the canon, it still happened. We won't tell people in what time period to play in.

Translation: We know we really, really, dropped the ball and F-ed the Realms. So, we'll avoid the question by talking about timelines instead.

Q: Lots of errata has happened, making old books "worthless." Will it be better for D&D Next?
A: We're working on a better process for errata, and we hope very much to not have as much errata in D&D Next.

Translation: We know a lot of our 4th edition stuff wasn't publication ready, but we published it anyway.

Q: What did WotC learn from Essentials?
A: Do the ground-floor, entry-level stuff first. Start with the starter set, then add complexity. If we'd released Essentials first then PBH 1 as an Advanced PHB, we wouldn't have had the same problems.

Translation: We thought not having a beginner set (to begin with) was a great idea. Now we realize that we're the only people that thought that way. Oops.

Q: What's the goal for the art in D&D Next?
A: Art should tell the story of D&D. Show you a scene that looks like it's an adventure.

Translation: We finally realize that our constant representation of heroes in GQ model poses really sucked-ass. We decided that we needed to do what we should have been doing all along, rather than doing our own thing. *shakes fist*

Barrowmaze: Interior Art V

Here's a look at a key faction operating in the Barrowmaze - The Acolytes of Orcus, illustrated by Stefan Poag.

The Acolytes are looking for something hidden in the Barrowmaze and won't let anyone, or anything, stand in their way.

Update: I'm just waiting for Stefan to finish the color cover and then it's off to RPGnow. We're getting really close and I'm getting pretty excited to let it loose across the interwebs!

Eternal Keep?

So am I correct that blogger has managed to derail the Eternal Keep?

I use that site and Old School RPG Planet, to catch up on stuff I've missed.

Blogger keeps messing me over too, I can only see comments if I view through safari.

Help with maps

I need some help with a map but my graphics-fu is not strong.

I want to take the map, cut it into three equal sections, and paste those into my word document.

It needs to be such that all the squares line up exactly, so folks can have the option of putting them all together in one glorious map (if they wish).

5E and Monsters

Two things about the new edition that I don't understand:

1.If they aren't keen on Fifth Edition or 5E, and lets face it nobody will call it D&D Next for any length of time, why didn't they label the edition their preferred name when they made the announcement? You won't be able to fight down 5E two years after the fact.

2. What are they going to do with monsters? I mean to say, how many OD&D/Basic/1E players are going to want to play with Hellspawn Goblins and Teeth-Nashing Zombies (or whatever stupid IP name they come up with)? Hopefully they will leave all that shite for later monster books.

Thoughts?

Mummified Cats

Somewhere, either on the interwebs or in a fanzine, I recall seeing a monster entry for mummified cats but with a more exotic name. Can anybody throw me a bone?

Mearls Interview

I have to admit, I do get a kick out of some of the stuff that comes out of WotC - if only for entertainment value.

Mearls is quoted here in a 5E interview as saying the following:

The D&D Fantasy Roleplaying Game Starter Set in the red box has also been a real success for us. It highlights the importance of having a good intro product—something that is definitely on our radar as we plan for the future.

This was always the strangest part of 4E to me. Why did they wait 3/4 of the way through the edition to create a starter set? Seems to me, if I were to design an RPG, the starter set would be the first thing I'd do - as that set would be the gateway drug for future gamers and would drive sales throughout the length of the new edition. Was this WotC just doing everything ass backwards or was there a specific reason for that? Does anyone know? I'm curious why it happened that way. Seems like they learned from the (major) oversight.

Google+

I know, I know, I'm late in the game but I just added myself to Google+

Feel free to add me there.

Munchkin and Dungeon!

Red Box Niagara met last night. We were going to continue with the Barrowmaze sessions but, because we didn't play in December, we thought we would have a shoot-the-shit session and play some different games.

I'm a pretty hardcore D&D guy, mostly because one gets so few opportunities to play, but wanted to try out the Munchkin card game. I wasn't sure what to make of it at first, but it was pretty fun and I'd play it again. Alex won to which he exclaimed "I won Dungeons and Dragons...and it was Advanced!" :)

The other guys had never played Dungeon! before so we had a rousing game in which I lost by 1 square. Figures lol

Anyway, it was good fun and I also got a chance to try out the new camera. We plan on playing our next Barrowmaze session next week.

Finally, I have my editors working hard to find typos etc in the Barrowmaze document. Will have those addressed next week. I should also have the cover art in the next wee while. After that I'll upload it to RPGnow, order a print copy, and if it's all good I'll open it for sale.

AD&D Hardbacks Reprinted

Looks like WotC will reprint the AD&D core books for release on April 17th in North America. This will help support the Gygax Memorial.

Interesting the timing of it - right after the death knell of 4E :)

I wonder if they will come in the sleeves like the 3.5 and 4E books did? Just wondering aloud.

Count me in for a set, maybe two.

Very interesting times for D&D right now.

Link

Barrowmaze: Interior Art IV

Just received this illustration for the Barrowmaze from Toren Atkinson, who did a great job on Meatshields! and is a fellow Red Boxer.

This is a Blood Thirsty Spider - I'll say no more. I don't want to spoil all the surprises.

BTW Barrowmaze will be compatible with Labyrinth Lord and the Advanced Edition Companion. Although if you don't use AEC that won't pose a problem.

Simple-yet-Wahoo? Seriously?

Based on everyone else's post I read the Full Monte post and have two questions:

1. Why the hell would I want to play a character that didn't match what the DM wanted to do with their game/campaign? That doesn't seem like very good gamesmanship.

2. Say for example you have a group playing largely new school characters and an old school character. What the hell are you going to do when the group decides they want to search something? Do you have one player role-play while everybody else asks what the difficulty check is and wants to roll dice?

While I'm at it, here's a quote from The Full Monte in the Ivory Tower:

As D&D players, we shouldn't allow rule preferences to separate us. In the end, we have a lot more in common than we have differences, even if some of us prefer the simple-yet-wahoo style of old school Basic D&D and others the carefully balanced elegance of 4th Edition—or anything in between.

Seriously? Why the need for off-hand comments? "Simple-yet-wahoo" games must be played by "simple-yet-wahoo" players. Yeah. Thanks for that.

"Simple-yet-wahoo" - is that how WotC wins hearts and minds? Is this the great goodwill campaign at work? It amazes me how they just cant help themselves. This just confirms suspicions. Was that comment really, really necessary? What a jerk.

I (Really) Hate Character Builds

I was reading an interesting post on Mythmere's blog about some of the differences between OE through 2E and the follow-up comments.

One of the comments (by Brendan) struck a note with me, part of which I cite here:

"The more I have been reading old modules, the more I think this is one of the key differences between old school design and new school design. Old school challenges will often be totally unaffected by PC "build" choices (example: 1 in 6 chance of falling off a slippery beam), whereas new school design keys almost everything against something on the PC character sheet (athletics check, dexterity check)."

What struck me is that I really hate the notion of character builds. I mean I really fucking hate character builds and the god-damn min-maxing that goes along with it. Builds are a reflection of an exception based system and I fucking hate that too. Why? I don't have the time to read all the crap. Moreover, when I'm DMing I know exactly what the character classes do and can't do and can better judge accordingly.

This is actually something (now that I think about it) that I really had to explain to my new old school players. The notion that the ability scores don't really matter that much, it is the player skill that matters most - not which build you have or feats, or whatever.

The flip side of the discussion is that classes can't be too narrow either. I really hated weapon proficiencies back in the day. They were way too limiting. I suppose this is one of the reasons why I like B/X-LL D&D so much. I just don't have to worry about any of that crap.

5E and the FR

From the EnWorld 5E thread:

"The Forgotten Realms will be supported from the start, and a video game art studio from China has been hired to fully detail the Realms. We asked if going forward support would be continued for the current time after the Spellplague and the Neverwinter Campaign. A WotC spokesperson answered, "The Forgotten Realms has a rich history and we will support all of it. It is for the gamers to decide which time they would enjoy playing in." That would allow Wizards to take advantage of a massive back catalog of products."

I have mixed feelings about this. I remember buying the original Forgotten Realms Boxed Set (pictured above) - and found it really inspiring. Particularly because there was so much room for exploration and adventure. It was full of little hooks.

The problem, it seems to me, is that between modules, novels, and splats, 1) the Forgotten Realms have been done to death. Is there any place left to go exploring? 2) 4E really buggered the entire setting.

There needs to be a new campaign setting similar to early Greyhawk and the early Realms that inspires folks to game and to create.

I know it works contrary to the splatbook model, but the more space that's left blank (or briefly outlined) the more interesting I find it - and that brings me back to the original FR Boxed Set.

Thoughts on 5E FR or campaign settings in general?

Lulu and/or RPGnow?

Does anyone have any insight or experience with either lulu or RPGnow? Experiences? Preferences? I know the Canadian shipping blows really hard via lulu. I'm unsure where to go with the Barrowmaze project...

Barrowmaze: Internal Art III

The Barrowmaze has sections for new spells, magic items, and monsters.

Speaking of monsters, here's a fun one.

These are Sapphire Skeletons, illustrated by Stefan Poag. Enjoy.