Sunday, 22 February 2015

Stuff and Stuff

As some of you are aware, I broke my wrist, which has seriously hampered my output. That wasn't the only thing hampering my output; I haven't been firing on all cylinders for months before that. Things take their toll. I was just getting my mojo on when life stepped in....or, more accurately, when I slipped on the ice and fell.

On the Other Hand....

(....which would be my left....)

My mojo doesn't seem to have suffered from the break. Just my typing!

Goodman Games has a kickstarter for The Monster Alphabet by the Amazing Jobe Bitman (with Manly Michael Curtis). You will note the new printing of GM Gems as part of the kickstarter, with DCC rules conversion by Yours Truly.

Likewise, this Con season, if you happen to play in The Hypercube of Myt, I was given a chance to work on this super-funnel, and I hope you like it. The other creators are a whose-who of cool in the DCC world!

If you haven't picked up The Portsmouth Mermaid from Purple Duck Games yet, you should. I have a related creature submitted to Crawl #11, which I hope will make it into that issue. Also, I sent a critter to Crawling Under a Broken Moon which might find some use in your game. I devised it to help bridge The Mall Maul in CUaBM #3 with Anomalous Subsurface Environment.

Likewise, The Treasure Vaults of Zadabad is well worth the purchase. Wrath of the Frost Queen is a bit pricier as a pdf, but I enjoyed the adventure and had the opportunity to give the writer a small amount of input on presentation. Hopefully, at some point, Frost Queen will be available as a POD product, with a discount for those who already bought the pdf.

Oh, and for the sake of Mitra, pick up Mark Knights' free DCC adventure, The Serpent People of Skitterborne Swamp.

Now that my mojo is back, and I am typing slowly but steadily......

My goal is to make 2015 outperform 2013 for DCC content. Outperforming 2014 seems to easy a goal.

Your Reward for Reading Through This Maundering....

Unique Centaurs from the Aeliusian City-States:

Asbolus:  Init +3; Atk hooves +2 melee (1d4+1) and sword +4 melee (1d8+1) or bow +5 missile fire (1d6+1) or other weapon; AC 14; HD 4d8; hp 20; MV 50’; Act 2d20; SP poisonous blood, foresee future, curse, death throes; SV Fort +3, Ref +2, Will +5; AL N.

Asbolus is a centaur gifted with the powers of prophesy. Most often, he divines portents through the flight of birds, but he will also cast stones or use the entrails of animals. When consulted, he may demand the body of a specific animal to answer a specific question, or to read a difficult future. He does not otherwise demand payment, although he only grants interviews to those he deems worthy – those who have achieved something of note, or who are at least 3rd level.

Absolus’s blood is poisonous. He can dip his own arrows into his flesh (causing himself 1 point of damage per arrow) to create poisoned arrows (Fort DC 15, 1d5 Stamina damage, 1 point is permanent on a failed save). Contact with his blood is likewise hazardous, though the Fort save in this case is only DC 5 to avoid 1d3 Stamina damage. A Reflex save is needed to avoid splashed blood when making a successful melee attack (DC 10 + damage done). All in melee with Absolus must make this save, although anyone other than the attacker gains a +2 bonus on this save.

Asbolus can cast curse once per day, with a +6 spell check bonus.

If reduced to 0 hp, Asbolus does not immediately die, but can take any remaining actions in the current round, and then gains 1d5 d24 Action Dice on the next round, to use for attacks or to curse his slayer.

Aspect of Chiron:  Init +5; Atk hooves +4 melee (1d4+2) and sword +6 melee (1d8+2) or bow +7 missile fire (1d6+1) or other weapon; AC 16; HD 8d8; hp 40; MV 60’; Act 3d20; SP poisonous blood, spell use, curse, death throes, immortal; SV Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +8; AL L.

Known the oldest of the primordial centaurs, Chiron remembers many things from past ages of the Ancient Earth, but has little special knowledge of the current era. He is a clone-thing, grown in vats in the ruins of Daedalus, which somehow always comes to lair in the same spot. Each Aspect of Chiron only knows what he was born knowing, plus his own experiences, so that when one Aspect is slain, the next knows nothing of his predecessor’s life beyond the ruins or eventual death. Yet, if one Aspect is slain, another will arise in 1d5 months, making Chiron effectively immortal so long as the Vats of Daedalus endure.

Chiron is renowned as a healer, as a teacher of heroes, and as a magician. He can heal up to 3 HD each day, cure poison at will, allow any creature a Fort save to throw off a disease each day (DC 5 to 15, depending upon the disease), set bones so that the heal without ability score loss, and brew 1d7 potions of healing (1 HD) each month. A Lawful warrior or dwarf who studies with Chiron for three months can gain a one step increase in his Deed Die with a successful Luck check (one time only).

He can cast the following spells once per day, with no chance of disapproval, misfire, or corruption (+6 spell check):  animal summoning, comprehend languages, detect magic, read magic, locate object, consult spirit, blessing, second sight, banish, remove curse, and speak with the dead. in addition, Chiron can cast curse once per day, with a +10 bonus to the spell check.

Chiron’s blood is poisonous. He can dip his own arrows into his flesh (causing himself 1 point of damage per arrow) to create poisoned arrows (Fort DC 18, 1d7 Stamina damage, 1 point is permanent on a failed save). Contact with his blood is likewise hazardous, though the Fort save in this case is only DC 8 to avoid 1d5 Stamina damage. A Reflex save is needed to avoid splashed blood when making a successful melee attack (DC 10 + damage done). All in melee with Chiron must make this save, although anyone other than the attacker gains a +2 bonus on this save.


If reduced to 0 hp, Chiron does not immediately die, but can take any remaining actions in the current round, and then gains 1d5 d24 Action Dice on the next round, to use for attacks or to curse his slayer.

Friday, 23 January 2015

Greek to Me 3: Lamia for DCC

Lamia: Init +2; Atk tail grapple +4 melee (1d6+2); AC 14; HD 6d8; hp 30; MV 30’; Act 2d20; SP Charming gaze, constrict, kiss, death throes; SV Fort +4, Ref +6, Will +4; AL C.

A beautiful woman from the waist upwards, and an enormous serpent from the waist down, Lamia was transformed by the jealous goddess Thera to her present state after Lamia bore the hero Aclueus by the goddess’s husband, Xanxes. Lamia was forced to devour her mortal children, and cursed with a great craving for the lives of the young. It is also her desire to inflict revenge upon all men, and especially upon Xanxes and Thera, their priests, and their followers.

Lamia can charm another with her gaze, using an Action Die. Her victim must succeed in a Will save (DC 12) or do nothing on his next initiative except move in a straight line towards Lamia at his best speed. Lamia cannot charm adult women, although she can charm girls below the age of 10, and males of all ages.

When Lamia makes a successful grapple with her tail, she thereafter constricts for 1d6+2 damage each round thereafter until either she or her victim are dead, or her victim succeeds in a DC 15 Strength check. Lamia can kiss a willing victim automatically, or a grappled victim with a successful attack roll. Each kiss causes 1d3 points of Strength damage.

When Lamia is reduced to 0 hp, a swarm of venomous serpents issues forth from her wounds, and forms from her spilled blood. These serpents attack everyone in a 20’ radius for 1d3+1 rounds, and then the swarm disperses. Each remaining hit point the swarm possess when dispersed indicates a surviving serpent, and each of these serpents becomes a member of the Brood of Lamia.



Venomous serpent swarm: Init +4; Atk swarming bite +3 melee (1d3 plus poison); AC 12; HD 6d8; MV 30’; Act special; SP swarm traits, poison, transformation; SV Fort +3, Ref +5, Will +0; AL C.

The poison of these serpents does 1d3 damage, with a Fort save (DC 10) to avoid 1d3 Strength damage as well. Each of these serpents grows into a brood-born of Lamia over a period of 1d12 months.


Brood-born of Lamia: Init +2; Atk tail grapple +2 melee (1d4+2) or spit venom +3 ranged (poison); AC 12; HD 2d8; MV 30’; Act 1d20; SP Spit venom, constrict, kiss, death throes, transformation; SV Fort +2, Ref +3, Will +2; AL C.

Any serpent that survives from the venomous serpent swarm becomes a brood-born of Lamia. This creature resembles her progenitor, but is clearly reptilian even in her upper extremities. Her scaled head is crowned with a frilled crest rather than hair, and her unblinking eyes are incapable of charming anyone. Like Lamia, though, the brood-born can constrict with a successful attack, doing automatic damage each round (Strength DC 12 escapes grapple).

The brood-born can also spit a stream of venom in a line up to 10’ long. Those who come into contact with this venom must succeed in a DC 15 Fort save or take 1d5 points of Strength damage (1 point on a successful save).

When a brood-born is slain, it loses all of its human features, becoming nothing more than an enormous frilled serpent. When only one brood-born remains, it goes through a transformation lasting 1d24 hours, during which it sheds its skin to become the reborn Lamia. During the transformation, the brood-born has only a 1d16 Action Die. Afterwards, it has the full powers, as well as all of the memories, of the original Lamia.


The only ways to truly end the threat of Lamia are to destroy all of the venomous serpents before they can transform into brood-born, or to destroy the last brood-born before she can become the reborn Lamia.



Thursday, 15 January 2015

More Greek to Me: Euryale

Euryale: Init +2; Atk short sword +2 melee (1d6) or bite +1 melee (1 plus serpent bites) or serpent bites +0 melee (1d3 plus poison); AC 15; HD 5d8+5; hp 33; MV 30’; Act 2d20; SP infravision 60’, serpent bites, poison, scream, immortal; SV Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +3; AL C.

Euryale is one of the sisters of Medusa, a creature shaped like a woman with poisonous serpents for hair. She possesses fangs like a viper, and if she bites she gains an attack with her snake-hair serpents as a bonus attack. Although Euryale’s bite is not poisonous, those of her serpents are (1d6 damage; Fort DC 15 or also take 1d4 Strength and 1d3 Agility damage).

Three times a day, Euryale can scream with potentially lethal effect. All within 30’ take 3d8 damage (Fort DC 15 for half). All between 30’ and 60’ take 2d8 damage (Fort DC 10 half). All farther than 60’ away, but who hear the scream, take 1d8 damage (Fort DC 5 half). Euryale must wait 1d5 rounds between screams.

Euryale is immortal. When reduced to 0 hp, she does not die, but must withdraw, moving at half speed, until she can find a place to recover. She can be hindered. She can be hurt. But she cannot be damaged worse, apart from cosmetically. 2d3 weeks later, Euryale emerges at full strength, and probably eager for revenge. Even if her body is burned and the ashes scattered, Euryale is restored.


Sunday, 11 January 2015

All Greek to Me: Three Demons of the Aeliusian City-States

Charonite (Type I demon):  Init +1; Atk staff or claw +4 melee (1d4 plus soul rend); AC 13; HD 2d12; MV 30’; Act 1d20; SP infravision 60’, darkness (+4 check), half damage from non-magical weapons and fire, safe passage, soul rend; SV Fort +2, Ref +1, Will +4; AL C.

Charonites are Type I demons in the service of Charon, the infernal ferryman of the river Styx. They appear much as their master – tall skeletal figures wrapped in dark robes, possessing a simple pole, and always mounted upon a boat. A Charonite can be summoned with demon summoning, burning a soul in the censor of Charon, or by adding three drops of water from the River Styx to any mortal body of water, fresh or salt. A Charonite can only be summoned where there is a body of water in which its boat can appear. A mist arises, and from that mist the Charonite and its boat appear.

A Charonite can accommodate up to 16 passengers on its boat, and the boat is always sized to the expected number of passengers. Each passenger must pay 2 coins (of any denomination) for the trip, and the Charonite can take its passengers safely to any point where a body of water meets the land, in any plane of existence.

If attacked, a Charonite’s attacks can rend the soul from its victim. Each successful attack requires a DC 10 Will save or the character takes 1d3 Personality damage. If Personality drops below 3, the victim collapses, and takes 1 point of permanent Personality damage each round until the Charonite is either defeated or driven away (spells like holy sanctuary, protection from evil, and restore vitality can interrupt this process). If the victim’s Personality reached 0, the Charonite rends the soul from the victim’s body, and immediately withdraws from this plane, delivering the soul to Charon himself on the River Styx. If the victim is to be restored, the demonic ferryman himself must be bargained with, and Charon does not give up the dead easily.


Empousa (Type I demon): Init +3; Atk bite +1 melee (1d4) or claw +2 melee (1d3); AC 12; HD 1d12; MV 40’; Act 1d20; SP darkness (+4 to check), charm, half damage from non-magical weapons or fire; SV Fort +2, Ref +4, Will +4; AL C.

Empousai are demonic female vampires, whose fiery-haired seductive beauty is marred with a bronze leg and a donkey’s foot. They are able to charm men, who must make a Will save (DC 12) or be entranced, allowing the empousai to approach and attack unopposed (no Agility or shield modifier to AC). Each round where an empousa successfully attacks, or each round where a companion attempts to bring the victim to his senses, grants a new save; if successful, the character can act beginning the next round with a -1d penalty on the dice chain to all rolls for the remainder of the encounter.

These demons of Hecate exist to devour men. They do not attack women.


Erinyes (Type III demon): Init +4; Atk fiery whip +12 melee (1d6+4) or claws +8 melee (1d5+4); AC 16; HD 9d12; MV 30’ or fly 50’; Act 2d20; SP infravision 60’, darkness (+12 check), immune to weapons of less than +2 enchantment or creatures of 5 HD or less, half damage from fire/acid/cold/electricity, teleport at will to Hades or any point on the material plane, crit range 18-20, constriction, fire, powers against oath-breakers; SV Fort +8, Ref +8, Will +10; AL C.

Also known as Furies, the Erinyes are demons of Hecate which serve to bring vengeance against those who break their word, especially vows made with the gods as witness. They appear as vulture-winged women of hideous aspect, armed with iron talons and fiery whips. A victim struck by a whip attack must make a DC 20 Reflex save or be entwined. Such a victim takes damage automatically each round from constriction and flames, and anything flammable on the victim bursts into fire. An Agility or Strength check (DC 18) can be made each round to get free, but the flames continue to do 1d6 damage each round until extinguished with a DC 10 Reflex save. A constricted victim has a 50% chance of being unable to use each arm; both must be checked separately.


Oath-breakers are the Erinyes’ lawful prey. An Erinyes attacking anyone who has broken an oath taken in the name of one or more gods gains a +2 on all saves.

Monday, 24 November 2014

Meaningless Encounters

Imagine, if you would, an encounter occurring which has no relevance to the scenario in which it occurs. It adds no verisimilitude, adds no flavour to the game milieu, and has no impact or potential for impact on future events. Moreover, the encounter is neither fun nor challenging in and of itself. It is a complete waste of time.

Game systems can encourage elements of this kind of encounter. For instance, in games where resources are intended to “reset” after each encounter, it is easy enough to remove the potential for impact on future events. 

A hypothetical game system that takes two hours to resolve a chance glimpse of a deer in the woods would make what is otherwise five seconds of description a chore that removes all fun. If a system “balanced” encounters so that the PCs were expected to win, and turned encounters into formula combats that took hours to resolve, a chance encounter with an ogre (for example) could easily be removed of its potential fun and challenge.

An adventure writer can also encourage elements of this type of encounter. “No matter what the PCs do, X will occur….” and “If the PCs kill X, assume that an identical X takes its place….” certainly reduce the potential for impact, if the GM actually follows those suggestions.

Yet, few and far between are those encounters which are completely meaningless, unless the system or the GM makes a clear distinction between “relevant” and “irrelevant” encounters. If this is the case, yes, you can make any encounter irrelevant. Doing so does not improve game play IMHO and IME. Forcing the players to determine the relevance of encounters to their own goals – or allowing them to create that relevance themselves! – is, to me, an important aspect of game play.

Crappy encounters do exist. If we take the elements of verisimilitude, flavour, potential for impact, challenge, and intrinsic fun, we can see that the more of these elements an encounter has, the better an encounter it will be. Consequently, the fewer it has, the crappier it will be.

IMHO and IME, adhering to an encounter template or a “plot” to which all encounters must conform is the most common way to create crappy encounters. YMMY, and if it does, party on! Never throw away something that works for you because some jackhole on the internet has a different idea, or different experiences. “Even if that jackhole is you?” Friend, especially if that jackhole is me. What works for me might not work for you. And vice versa.

Here’s the second biggest source of crappy encounters (IMHO & IME): Lack of planning. In order to have meaning, an encounter must both have impact on the setting and be able to allow the players to have impact. That means that there has to be some structure to hang the encounter on, and that there has to be enough leeway in that structure that the PCs can change it through their actions.

So long as those conditions exist, no encounter is truly meaningless. And your chance of having a crappy encounter go down considerably.


IMHO. IME. YMMV.

Sunday, 23 November 2014

The Tao of Failing My Will Save

How odd that there are people still who seem to believe that I am preaching the 'one true way.'  Feel free to agree with me and expand on what I've written. Most every comment like this highlights the best parts of my post, adds things I never thought of, deliberates over the nuance of a particular ideal and straightens out my thinking.

Perhaps it is the title of the blog - the apparent insistence that I know the path the reader must tread, that I am demanding that the reader tread it and that if the reader refuses, the reader is an idiot or a fool.

Rumson, however, does not confirm the thesis.  He proposes an alternative thesis ... but he doesn't ask if Holbrook agrees.  He makes it clear: "This is so.  There is no room for argument."  That's because Rumson isn't proposing a thesis ... which is, after all, the entire point of Logan's play.  Rumson knows.  That's why, when Holbrook answers that he doesn't agree, Rumson doesn't care.  He gets to the root of it.  Holbrook doesn't agree because Holbrook doesn't understand.

[T]here IS a path. One that we are walking upon together, arguing, challenging one another, pointing out details along the route. 

Don't piggy-back on my blog and offer an alternative method for 'how you do it.' I am writing here about how I do it. Either address my method, or go write your idea on your blog.

I don't care that the reader agrees.  The response, "I agree with some of what Alexis writes, but not all of it," is pure Holbrook.  I am not Holbrook.  I am Rumson.  Rumson knows.

I don't care that the reader agrees. Feel free to agree with me and expand on what I've written. 

If you want to disagree with me, fine. Do so. I better see a source or a credibly prescient example from your personal experience, and that example better be specific, detailed and ungeneralized. It better be in the first three sentences, too.

[T]here IS a path. One that we are walking upon together, arguing, challenging one another, pointing out details along the route. It better be in the first three sentences.

I am Rumson.  Rumson knows.

How odd that there are people still who seem to believe that I am preaching the 'one true way.'  

Sources: http://tao-dnd.blogspot.ca/2014/03/rumson.html; http://tao-dnd.blogspot.ca/2014/11/the-one-true-tao.html; https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3871409676946408069&postID=7569953836317449934&isPopup=true - this last is the comments form for Alexis' [Rumson's] blog, which demands that you feel free to agree with him, or, if not, present a cogent, detailed, and well-referenced argument in three sentences. 

Rumson is right in Logan's play because the author deems that this is the case, and unless you assume that you have a special relationship with the "author" of reality, one should not assume that they are right simply on the basis of their pronouncements. Para 3, above, is almost the definition of "one true way", and the insistence of Alexis that he is Rumson (Rumson knows) should make things clear. There is a reason people believe Alexis is preaching "one true way". But it is not clear to Alexis.

Friday, 14 November 2014

Revisiting Old Predictions

We often make predictions, but how often do we go back to see how accurate they were? Alexis did me a solid this morning by reminding me of this blog post that I responded to way back in 2012. I am pretty sure that wasn’t Alexis’ intention, but let’s treat it as if it were.

My base prediction was:

It wasn’t the fault of fans that a toxic atmosphere was created, nor is it the fault of fans that 4e wasn’t well-received. Nor will the success or failure of D&D Next be due to anything other than the success or failure of WotC to put out a good product, market that product well, and undo to whatever extent they are able the ill-will their handling of the 4e release created.

And they have definitely taken some steps in the right direction, although I think that the NDAs for the beta playtest are a really bad idea (not required by most recent rpgs, including Pathfinder and Dungeon Crawl Classics, despite Mike Mearls’ claim to the contrary), and I don’t think 5e will fly without the OGL.

The systems that are doing well right now have the right combination of “good system + goodwill”, and I don’t think Hasbro is going to allow WotC the leeway needed to recreate the goodwill that was seen with the advent of 3e.

The rest of the discussion is actually, I think, worth reading. You will notice quite a bit of “IMHO” and “I think”, and this is largely because, as is obvious, no one can really be so sure what the future holds!

(1) The success or failure of D&D Next (now 5e) is the result of a combination of the product and of the goodwill WotC can generate.

If comments from Mike Mearls are anything to go by, 5e is a real success, and Hasbro is happy that target numbers have been reached. I doubt that anyone is going to claim that this is the result of “toxic fans” or a lack of good will towards WotC. In fact, between the time that I wrote my responses in the blog post and the release of 5e, WotC went out of its way to address the ill will generated with the 4e release strategy.

It is of interest to me that Mike Mearls continues to hedge in relation to the OGL, or what licensing 5e will eventually have. This suggests rather strongly that, despite 5e materials being created right now under the OGL, the system will have a different licensing arrangement. A return to the OGL would have been announced early, because it would generate interest and goodwill.  On the other hand, by deferring the question, WotC can hope to build up enough interest and goodwill related to the system itself that, whatever the eventual licensing, people will be too invested to quit.

And that was, AFAICT, the initial scheme:  Play it for a year, and then we’ll tell you the details about the licensing. Maybe.

(2) The NDA was a bone-headed move.

The NDA did was prevent prolific and prominent bloggers from discussing D&D Next explicitly. It was violated almost immediately, and anyone who wanted them could easily obtain the playtest materials.

But, in this case, perhaps that was the point. By making these materials appear hard to obtain (and that clandestinely), WotC may well have raised the interest in 5e in a way that an open playtest would not have.

(3) Hasbro will not allow the leeway needed to give 5e the goodwill seen with 3e’s release.

The jury’s still out on this. Certainly, that 5e is a better system than 3e or 4e has been touted regularly on various blogs and forums. Equally certainly, renewing access to early editions in PDF (and sometimes print) formats has generated a lot of goodwill. There is certainly a sense that WotC is listening.

As an obvious corollary, if 5e is wildly successful, that will be because of Wizards, not because of the fans. They will have produced and marketed a good product, and overcome the ill-will generated around the release of 4e. It will be an achievement.

Yes, I said that. So far, WotC does seem to have managed that achievement. In part, I suspect, by postponing the licensing announcements until player investment is heavy.

For 5e to be “D&D Next” it needs to feel like coming home…like a game that DM’s can take ownership of. It needs to not feel like a game you play only at the whims of WotC’s legal department.

I still hold this to be true. Whether or not DMs will feel that ownership once they discover the licensing terms is a whole ‘nother matter.


Well, I already know my opinions. Please “hijack” this blog by telling me what you think. I promise not to perma-ban anyone for not simply regurgitating my own thoughts!*










*And, yes, Alexis, that is me tweaking your nose. And no, I did not discover your blog post by searching from "searching for a name" on Google to stir up some controversy in order to maintain readership. Your blog is still on my reading list because, despite the many posts about how everyone else sucks, you do occasionally have very interesting things to say.

Monday, 10 November 2014

The Creator and Final Arbiter

"It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain that the game is mastered by you and not by your players...you are the creator and final arbiter." 

- Gary Gygax, Afterword from the 1st edition DMG

These words hold true for (nearly?) all role-playing games, not just Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. Rest well, Gary. You are missed.