An Ode to Crappy Maps

When I was young, and first getting into this hobby, maps were printed inside modules using blue ink.  For the most part, at least.  The building interior maps in Keep on the Borderlands and Village of Hommlet were the sort of maps I could aspire to draw by hand, and even the main maps were ones that I could draw something along the lines of.  Well, except the Caves of Chaos, which I never was able to satisfactorily copy…er, emulate.

In some ways, the advent of rpg cartographic software has lifted us up from the mire of crappy maps,  but…was that really so much of a mire?

Take a look at the moathouse in Hommlet.  That was a map that inspired, and inspired many (myself included) to feel that even my junior efforts were not only good enough, but were worthy of presenting as a place that adventures might be had.  Even if all I had to create those maps was drugstore quality graph paper and a ballpoint pen.

The way in which rpgs stimulate us to create our own adventures, settings, gods, spells, classes, races, monsters, maps, etc. – the way rpgs empower their users – is fairly unique.  And computer games that have emulated that to some degree (for example, Spore) have been able to use that as a real selling point.

So, yes, I (like many) enjoy the beautiful map of Castle Ravenloft, and the amazing efforts shown in many a Paizo or Wizards of the Coast module (including those from Dungeon Magazine under the guidance of both companies) , but I strongly prefer game materials that make me think “I could do that!” over those that make me think “How the hell did they do that?!?”

So, here’s a couple of my maps.  You could do just as well.  Hell, you probably do better!  But I like to work this way, and I hope you will enjoy (and use!) what you see.

The Game of Theseus – The Quest for Control of Objective Identity

As strange as it may sound to some of you, I was recently on a forum arguing, yet again, that there is no such thing as objective identity.  That, essentially, identity is subjective, and that, in some cases (such as to make language work), we agree to standardize identity under special circumstances.  This standardization is agreed upon by a wide range of people, but certainly not by all (or the meanings of words in language would not drift over time).

How does this relate to gaming?

Well, the discussion was on Dragonsfoot, and it related to the question of whether or not some particular edition was “D&D”.  Mind you, no one was arguing that any particular edition was not sold under the trademark name of Dungeons & Dragons, but rather whether or not purchase and ownership of the trademark somehow changed the nature of identity from a subjective value into an objective one.


Now, I don't care what is, or is not, "D&D".  Is 4e D&D?  Sure.  Is 5e?  Why not.  Is Labyrinth Lord?  As far as I am concerned, it is.  My concern isn't what is, or is not, "D&D", but rather ensuring that it is individual human beings -- not corporate entities -- that get to decide.

I am not a lawyer, and the following should not be constituted as legal advice (and I despise the fact that we require such disclaimers to discuss far too many topics these days, lest the lawyers pounce).  Here is a link that might help:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark

It should be noted here that, while a trademark grants protection in some cases against identifying another product with that of the trademark holder, it grants no protection at all against others refusing to accept the trademark identifier.  I.e., if I purchase the rights to “D&D” and decide to sell a soft drink as “The D&D game” where the rules consist of “Drink as much of this stuff as you can”, my purchase and my actions in no way – legally or otherwise – force anyone to accept that as “D&D”.

Moreover, while my purchase would allow me to act against another company who put out a game and called it “D&D”, it would in no way give me power over the user base of the product calling it “D&D”.  Paizo doesn’t call Pathfinder “D&D” or encourage people to do so.  If the vase majority of gamers decided that Pathfinder was “D&D”, and WotC’s latest was not, trademark does not offer legal recourse.

Part of the problem is caused by conflation of definitions of the words “identity” and “identify”.   


Consider how the definitions here, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/identify, actually apply to trademark.  What trademark is intended to do is ensure that people looking for Product X are not confused by a similar Product Y.  Also (and related to this) to ensure that the money spend to advertise Product X is not effectively spent to sell Product Y.  It is notable that it is Product Y, its trade dress, its packaging, its advertising, etc., that must give rise to the confusion for a lawsuit to succeed.  If the public believes that Product Y (despite understanding that it is not Product X) is closer to what the trademark of Product X identifies itself as than Product X actually is, and the public uses the trademark term to identify Product Y rather than Product X, the end result is not that the public is wrong, but that the makers or Product X are likely to lose the trademark.

Again, identity is not determined by trademark.  Not even in a legal sense.  Use of trademark is determined by trademark, and if the public disagrees about identity, the trademark holder can lose that trademark.

If WotC took a deck of playing cards, painted a bunch of cartoon dragons on the backs, and said, "Okay, here's Dungeons and Dragons, 6th edition," then, technically and legally, that stupid deck of cards IS Dungeons and Dragons. It's not 1st edition D&D, it's not Gary Gygax's D&D, or TSR's D&D, but it would still be D&D (unfortunately). – Turko (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=55537&start=120)

One can see, then, why this sort of statement is just plain wrong.  Trademark doesn’t grant some form of objective identity, but rather the exclusive right to use a term, phrase, trade dress, etc., in order to differentiate a product on the market from its competitors.  This is a form of identity – self-identity – but it isn’t objective.

(To make this easier to understand, I could self-identify as “The Handsomest Bloke in Toronto”, and I could even conceivably trademark myself as such, but it wouldn’t make it true.)

Technically and legally, WotC’s hypothetical deck of playing cards would be a deck of cards sold under the Dungeons and Dragons trademark. Nothing less, but also nothing more. When you conflate the trademark identity (which the company owns, within certain legal limits) with the actual identity by which the public (or individual members thereof) views the product (which the company does not, and cannot, own), you make an error of reason.

Rogers Cable can buy the Skydome and rebrand it the Rogers Centre (in fact, that did occur), but they cannot make anyone else identify it as such. Nor is anyone who refers to the building as the Skydome dishonest or wrong.  Despite the religious fervour which some folks are displaying to the contrary.

I only wish I had written as well as jasonzavoda about halfway down the page (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=55537&start=120).

And in answer to Mock26, no number of people “approving” the rebranding makes it objective.   There is no “correct” version of D&D.  If you find yourself  needing to determine which version of D&D is the "correct" one, you need only decide which is correct for you.  Attempting to then claim that your decision is somehow objective, though, is an error of reason.

Writing D&D on a Candyland box does not make Candyland D&D, even if you own the trademark.  All it makes is a Candyland game that you are calling D&D, using the D&D trademark, and that you hope others will accept as D&D.

Just as some call Pathfinder “D&D”, and extend the D&D identity to games like Mutant Future, so too some will not agree that a new edition has the same identity as “D&D”.  Trademark law prevents Paizo from calling Pathfinder “D&D”; it doesn't prevent you or I, or the unwashed masses, from doing so.

Identity is not an objective property of an object. Identity is not a “fact”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_(philosophy)

In particular, two questions arise which are relevant to this discussion:

What does it mean for an object to be the same, if it changes over time? (Is apple_t the same as apple_t+1?)

If an object's parts are entirely replaced over time, as in the Ship of Theseus example, in what way is it the same?

The Ship of Theseus example is, actually, extremely relevant to this discussion, and a link to that can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus. 

Summary form, in the event that you don't feel like reading all of that: (1) There is no clear rational basis known upon which all of the questions of identity can be answered, especially as relates to things that change over time and/or have their parts replaced; (2) Identity occurs in the space between your ears, not in the objective universe, and ultimately (3) Identity is not real in the way that an object is real.

The 4e PHB is real.  That the 4e PHB is objectively identifiable as “D&D” is not real.  The same is true of the 1e PHB, and the little brown books.  No matter how you slice it, identity is subjective.  It comes up peanuts.

So there is no number of people who accept the rebranding that makes it objective.  However, there is a number of people who do not accept the rebranding, and instead apply the trademark to other products, which can cause the trademark holder to lose that trademark.  How many people?  The courts decide that.  And it should be noted that the courts are not deciding that X isn’t “D&D” if the trademark is lost, or that Y is “D&D” if it gets to use that trademark – all the courts are deciding is whether or not the trademark (which is different than identity) has been lost.

Trademark dilution protection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_dilution) in fact exists to protect trademark holders from this to some extent…it is certainly arguable that “D&D” is in danger of becoming, a genericized trademark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark), and, like aspirin, may lose substantial protection in the decades to come.

I am ready and willing to argue that a corporation cannot change cultural identities merely because it has the cash to purchase trademarks related to them.  Indeed, I am ready and willing to argue that allowing a corporation to do so is inimical to the health of any culture so affected.

And I am ready and willing to argue that an individual has a right to not give way to corporate rebranding as actually changing the identity of a product. Indeed, I am willing to argue that this is a fundamental right.  A corporation may attempt to expand the meaning of “The Beatles” to include music by Rush, but I have a fundamental right to say that Rush is not the Beatles, even if Rush is rebranded as such by a trademark owner of both bands.

Corporate “citizens” have power enough in this world without also granting them that level of power over language and identity, which, pushed far enough, is ultimately power over how we think.

No.

When the question arises whether Kleenex is also kleenex, Foster Grants can mean any sunglasses, it is the public that has the power.  The courts follow common usage, not what the trademark holder prefers.  The trademark holder is required to defend against changes in public usage, but (in North America at least), fundamental principles of law allow you to refer to coke instead of Coke. 

Pretending otherwise is either intellectual dishonesty or ignorance.  Or both.

The Quattro Dungeon

There is something about stationary and art supply stores that I just love.  I mean, really.  I’m happier in a Staples Business Depot than I am at Future Shop.  Something to do with all of the untapped potential lying in wait in all that paper, I suppose.  Also, I really like a good pen, with a nice flow and even lines that don’t smudge.

Anyway, yesterday I picked up a Quattro 8 x 8 grid notebook, pictured below.

This notebook has a 2 x 3 inch grid, 1/8 divided, with 80 acid-free sheets.  I’ve included a scan of the interior, with a pencil beside it for size comparison.  The overall book is 3.4 inches x 5.5 inches.  The grid is 32 squares by 24 squares.  Assuming a scale of 1 square = 10 feet, that allows each page to hold an area no more than 320 feet by 240 feet.

My plan for the Quattro dungeon is this – each page holds a separate area, which links to at least one other page in the notebook (and probably 2-4; sometimes more).  The entire dungeon uses all 80 pages, and no area is larger than can be fit on a single page.  Connections might be long halls, stairs, chutes, chimneys, etc., but the areas must be clearly divided.  What I am imagining here is a hive of relatively small interconnected spaces to explore, extending outward and downward.

I might decide that some area needs a larger scale map, and that some pages will break this down to smaller scale.  Conveniently, the Quattro notebook breaks down 4 squares x 4 squares, and 8 squares x 8 squares, allowing one to create 40-foot or 80-foot scale maps and then break them down with ease (assuming no area uses more than 4 x 3 80-foot squares or 8 x 6 40-foot squares).  I have, in the past, found this sort of scheme useful for creating cavern complexes connected by long passages.

The result will be a potential 491,520,000 square feet of area to be mapped, and while each map will undoubtedly use less than its full potential, this should allow for an area large enough to be considered a megadungeon, mapped on a notepad small enough to conveniently fit into a jacket pocket.

And the notebook cost me about $2.50 Canadian at the Curry’s Art Store near Yonge & College (north, on the west side, across from Wendys).  Nice pen and coloured pencils are extra, of course!

Now, I’ll grant a priori that this may make me an über-nerd, but I find the very idea inspiring.  Simple to carry maps, large area mapped, and a cool format as well.

What’s not to like?

Thoughts?  Opinions?  Want to see some finished images when I map them?

Barrowmaze with DCC RPG rules

http://www.unseenservant.us/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=523

I am looking to start a pbp game, exploring the Barrowmaze using the Dungeon Crawl Classics rules by Goodman Games.  I have the full rules release pdf, but all players need to get going are the Beta Quickstart rules, located here:  http://www.goodman-games.com/downloads/DCCRPGQuickStartGuide060811.pdf

Full Beta rules can be found here:  http://www.goodman-games.com/DCCRPGbeta.html

Each player begins play with 4 0-level PCs.  A random party of four can be generated here:  http://jmarrdesign.com/dcc/

You can email me the resultant pdf at dbishop at danieljbishop dot ca, and be entered into the PC Roster, or you can use the Unseen Servant die roller to post your results here.

Each character must be made using the random process as listed, including 3d6 in order and random hit points.  Dead characters are replaced at 1 level below the lowest other surviving character, to a minimum of 0.  If you are required to make 0-lvl characters as a result, you make 4.  Hopefully one will survive to 1st level.  This is a potentially brutal game!

Between forays, new players may join.  They start with 4 0-lvl characters, just as the original players did.

Best of luck, and look forward to the mayhem!


RC

Dungeon Crawl Classics - I Have It, and I'm Impressed

So, last Friday morning, I was able to acquire my pdf of the Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG by Goodman Games, courtesy of pre-ordering.  Then I immediately drove away for the greater part of the weekend, leaving the pdf at home on my laptop so as not to upset family by spending Easter with my nose therein.  Afterwards, while I have perused, and read, and read other passages, and re-read some interesting bits, I have yet to sit down and do a cover-to-cover reading, so be warned that my current perspective is not grounded in having all the facts. 

First impressions? 

This is easily the most beautiful RPG book that I have ever had the good luck to peruse.  This is so obviously a labour of love that it is impossible to “flip” through the electronic pages and not imaging Joseph Goodman is by your side, nudging you with his elbow, and saying, “See that?  Like that illustration?  How about that rule?  Huh?”

And I mean that in the best possible way.  The love and enthusiasm with which this product has been produced is prodigious (say that three times fast).

This book is really a lot of fun to browse through.  The artwork is not all perfect, but it is all evocative of the mood being set by the game.  I don’t believe that it is possible to browse through this book without being inspired; in this way it will deserve a spot on my gaming shelf right next to Gary Gygax’s DMG and Goodman Games’ The Dungeon Alphabet.  Can I give higher praise?  I think not.

Second impressions? 

A lot of randomness, which I had expected from the Beta Playtest, but a lot of randomness that is probably very fun to experience at the table.  I had considered the difficulty in creating NPCs, especially spellslingers, in this system because of the level of randomness, but neither NPCs nor monsters need to follow the rules explicitly, which is a major plus.  Otherwise, the “homework factor” of the game would be like that of 3.5, which is not (IMHO) remotely desirable.

I note with great satisfaction that DCC RPG is truly behind its 3pp supporters, advertising not only the Goodman Games forthcoming material, but also material from Brave Halfling Publishing, Purple Sorcerer Games, Chapter 13 Press, Thick Skull Adventures, Lands of Legend Adventure Modules, Land of Phantoms, Crawl! Fanzine, and Fight On!  There are pointers to OSR blogs and forums, as well as other resources.  This is classy as hell, and points out the amount of support that the DCC RPG is already receiving.

And you will need that support, I am thinking, because the rules concerning spells, patrons, and gods all require that, sooner or later, you will want to create new ones.  It seems unlikely that there will be many generic campaigns using this system – the system demands a certain level of unique creativity on the part of the Game Master.

The section on Judge’s Rules could, quite honestly, be longer.  I wouldn’t mind more insight into Goodman’s thinking on how DCC RPG adventures should be structured.  The two adventures from last year’s Free RPG Day module are included, but it would have been nice to have included something new.

The game notes that the characters have no access to the Internet, and that information is rare and untrustworthy.  That is very good – in fact, it recalls something I wrote in my own system:

It should be recalled that knowledge in pre-modern societies (as occur in most RCFG game milieus) is not an exact thing. Although devotees of some branch of knowledge may refer to their branch as a “science”, this does not mean the same thing in most RCFG milieus that it does in our world. In most milieus, the scientific method has not been invented, and there are no true sciences. An RCFG character with Knowledge (Chemistry) should not be considered equivalent to a modern chemist!

On top of this, there is no equivalent to the Internet or the Encyclopaedia Britannica in most RCFG game milieus.   Knowledge is always uncertain, and there are many things that no one knows — unless someone is daring enough to find out, either through exploration or magic.

The Game Master may decide that any Knowledge check is impossible, if she believes that there is no route for the knowledge to get to the character making the check. For example, no Knowledge check can grant a character foreknowledge of an unexplored continent, or of the contents of a particular person’s pockets.

The idea of braving the unknown, of exploring the unexplored, requires as a prerequisite that things can be unknown and unexplored in the first place.  One of the major problems with certain modern systems is the inherent concept that the players should be able to discover just about anything, just by rolling the dice.

(And I am very glad that I linked to this document in a previous blog, because otherwise it would seem very much like I was simply parroting Joe’s wise words herein!)

But there are areas where I find myself at odds with the philosophy of Mr. Goodman.  One of these is the range of area over which a typical campaign should occur.  Making your world “very small” (original emphasis) may be well and good for starting play, but it doesn’t reflect the adventures of Appendix N characters like Conan or Elric.

This leads directly to another question:  Would the “campaign dungeon” model work well with these rules?  The campaign dungeon is a device that allows a campaign world to effectively stay small; there is always more within that area to explore.  But the DCC RPG reads as though it would be best run as a series of quests – and not all of those quests (even those quests described in the rules) seem to fit well within a “very small world” or campaign dungeon model.

Also, some of the quests described in the rules are going to require the GM to do a bit of homework.  When the PCs start looking for the Eldest Sphinx, you can bet that he doesn’t exist within the 100-square mile campaign area suggested!  One of my sandboxing rules, if you will recall, is that you should get at least 2 hours play out of every hour’s prep, and that means that sites should be reusable.  I am not at all sure how many reusable sites the DCC RPG model would have, if taken at face value.

As an aside to this, if you find yourself directed to seek a dryad in the forest to the east, after having been directed to the Portal Under the Stars, and are then perhaps directed to somewhere else by your cleric’s god, after which your wizard’s patron directs you to another place….that seems an awful lot of directions.  I find myself somewhat concerned that the magic system in this game will result in the player characters dancing like puppets on strings.

(Those calling on higher powers should find themselves in uncomfortable positions, IMHO, but they should not always find themselves so.  I prefer that, given options, the players are largely self-directed.  I am wondering what a DCC RPG sandbox would look like, and how it would play, with the materials in the book taken at face value.)

I also find myself ambivalent about the “No more orcs” mantra.  Yes, it is very good to have new and unknown monsters.  But those monsters are new and unknown within the context of a world where there are things that can be known.  In my own game system, I find myself straddling a line where there are common forms of monsters, and monsters can be easily modified, so that it is never certain that Orc A is like Orc B, but most orcs are just orcs.

Joseph Goodman also seems to accept the 3e-era mantra that the encounter is the metric of play, as the XP system is based on the GM gauging how difficult each encounter was for the players.  I don’t subscribe to this idea; IMHO the encounter area is the metric of play, and encounters are not necessarily discrete.  If the orcs from Room 2 hear fighting in Room 1, and come to help their brethren, is that one encounter or two?  If they flee into a third encounter area, and run into the denizens thereof, is that one, two, or three encounters? 

Design is done encounter area by encounter area, but play may not occur according to that design.  And I despise design created to force play to occur in discrete encounter areas.

Likewise, as in my own design, I think that there is a place for PC-controlled magic with predictable results (ala the SRD-based spell systems whose progenitors arise from Gary, Dave, and Jack Vance) and less predictable systems where PCs can gamble for greater effects and greater costs.

Although by no means unique to Appendix N sources, it is nonetheless true that Appendix N contains many “modern man thrust into unusual circumstances” stories within it.   This includes, but is certainly not limited to, Edgar Rice Burroughs’ “Pellucidar”, “Mars”, and “Venus” series; de Camp & Pratt’s “Harold Shea” series; much of August Derleth and H.P. Lovecraft, and books such as A. Merritt’s Dwellers in the Mirage.  It is a missed opportunity not to provide direct support for these sorts of tales, but with the amount of third party support, I will be surprised if this hole remains unplugged for long.

Conclusions

If you can read this book, or even leaf through it, and not want to be a player in a DCC RPG game, then you are no scion of Appendix N fantasy!  This is also a game that begs to be run, although I don’t imagine that it will replace RCFG as my go-to game.  As I said earlier, as an inspirational game I will be reading, and re-reading, this game for years to come. 

I will also say this:  RCFG is designed to meet my own personal needs/desires as a gamer.  DCC RPG comes the closest to making me forego the effort.  As I have the chance to examine more support materials, either I will be using this game to support my own design, or my designs to support it.  Right now, I lean to the former.  That may change.

I am very happy with this product.  I am very glad that I preordered it.  It is not my go-to game now, but it has the potential to grow into my go-to game in the future.  At the very least, it certainly is something that I will be using to support and inspire my gaming.

I now need to organize a DCC RPG Barrowmaze game (details will be posted here), and see if the system allows me to run said campaign dungeon in a satisfying way….links and details to be posted here.

Psychic Powers in Doctor Who

In Doctor Who, psionics is the study of psychic powers.  Psychic powers themselves come about through an innate ability to manipulate three special forces which have not been tapped (and, indeed, are largely unknown) to Tech Level 5 science:  artron energy, the lifeforce and fictional energy. 

Artron energy is generated within (or by) the space-time vortex, and is difficult to fully understand even for  a Tech Level 9 civilization.  Creatures that pass through the vortex gather artron energy around them, and artron energy can escape through thin points in space-time where the vortex is closer, as well as actual rifts in the fabric of the universe.  The rift in Cardiff, and the Untempered Schism on Gallifrey, leak artron energy.  Individuals who grow up close to those rifts — or who are strongly exposed to them as children — sometimes develop psychic powers.

The lifeforce is energy generated by all living things, infused with the living down to the molecular level.  The degree to which the lifeforce interacts with a potentially living thing is the difference between being alive or being dead.  Yet, even dead creatures that were once alive maintain reserves of this energy for a long time, or their bodies would collapse into a fine powder.

Fictional energy is a 6th dimensional energy source, which is directly related to probability and creativity.  Fictional energy is not fully understood even at Tech Level 10, except perhaps by creatures such as the Guardians of Time and the Trickster.  All storytelling and imagination utilize fictional energy, but massive uses of fictional energy to create psychic effects usually require very powerful psychics (and can create ionic discharges).

These energy types interact with each other.

The lifeforce and artron energy are entangled (similarly to the way in which quantum particles can be entangled, but with a more widespread and far-reaching implications) but, unlike quantum particles, have properties that can be decoded or programmed by their connections to fictional energy. 

In some cases, primitive creatures devise rituals in order to harness fictional energy to encode, decode, and manipulate these energies.  The science of psionics seeks not only to interpret the purposes of these rituals, but also to understand, harness, and manipulate these energies without the constraints or uneven results of ritual.

As with every type of energy, creatures have evolved to consume artron energy, fictional energy, and even to consume the lifeforce directly, although these creatures are thankfully rare, and usually come from (or have access to) other dimensions or universes.

True artificial intelligence requires a connection to the lifeforce, and allows the intelligence to potentially access psychic powers (as with BOSS and WOTAN). 

At Tech Level 7, it is possible to create materials that can hold or react to the lifeforce and artron energy (even if artron energy is not fully understood), thus enabling the creation of products such as psychic paper and the telepathic pendants of the Arcateen.

Fantasy Heartbreakers & What I'm Working On

Dausuul's Fantasy Game (aptly entitled "Heartbreaker") was announced, and is available for free download here:  http://www.mediafire.com/?2cm04w2ehh9m6ie

If you are interested in Raven Crowking's Fantasy Game, the compiled system-as-it-stands can be downloaded here:  http://www.mediafire.com/?om36l1vc23p7f6d – be aware that the OGL may need to be updated, as there is material that I have added since work on that section.

I have been working on RCFG for what seems like a very long time now, as some of you may be aware.  I have also recently been working on the first persistent campaign setting for RCFG, working on the megadungeon known as the Dungeon of Thule.  I am going to post two encounter areas below, but if you have any intention of playing in this game (online or offline), I would advise you to skip the following.

I am also still eagerly awaiting Goodman Games’ Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG, which, if all goes well, I should have the pre-release pdf of this week or next.  No word on the exact date is yet forthcoming…..I’ll be reviewing the game here.

2.  Hall of the Skull Cairn:  The passage leads into a room, some 30 feet north-to-south and perhaps 50 feet east-to-west, with an archway indicating a passage in the centre of each wall.  The room is dusty, with scraps of bone, rags, and similar debris scattered along the walls and corners.  About 10 feet in front of the western archway is a cairn of heaped skulls – humanoid and animal – that reaches to a height of about 3 feet.  The room is barrel-vaulted to a height of about 15 feet.

The cairn was a territorial marker for the Skull Heap goblins, which inhabited this section of the dungeon long ago.  The skulls are mostly those of goblins, dire rats, and the like, although a few are very small humanoid skulls (from mites), and there are one or two human skulls as well.  The skulls are ancient – most have been here for decades or centuries.  If the cairn is disturbed in any way, it will be reformed 1d6 days later, when no one is about, by the goblin spirits who still inhabit this area. 

If, however, the skulls are destroyed or taken away, the goblin spirits become angry, and 1d6 days later creatures passing anywhere in Areas 2 to 40 will begin to hear the almost inaudible muttering of goblin voices, which will grow louder over the next 1d6 weeks.  Eventually, the first goblin spirit incorporates and places the first fresh skull (a fully intact head, use the Wandering Monster chart to see what type) to build a new cairn.  Thereafter, groups of 2d6 goblin spirits will be encountered as Wandering Monsters (1 in 6 chance; if not, use the normal chart), working at severing heads until the cairn is rebuilt.  This will continue until all cairns (Areas 2, 41, and 85) are restored, the undead goblin witch doctor in Area 29 is destroyed, or the goblin spirits are exorcised or slain.  There is a potential pool of 123 goblin spirits.

During this period, the whole area becomes attuned to the Necromantic spell source, at first faintly, and then strongly.  When the muttering is heard, spells cast from the Necromantic spell source are cast at +1 Caster Level.  When the goblin spirits are able to manifest, these spells are cast at +2 Caster Levels, and can be cast using the ambient necromantic energy (not using the sorcerer’s spell slots).  These effects end when the cairns are rebuilt, or when the undead are otherwise removed.

Goblin Spirit (Small Undead):  Mv 20 ft.; AC 14; Init +2; HD 1d6; Att 1 short sword (1d6); SA None; SD Semi-corporeal (can turn incorporeal to flee or manifest to start encounter), silver or magic weapons to hit; SQ darkvision 60 ft., powerless in daylight; SV (Fort –2, Perc +0, Prow –2, Reas –1, Refl +2, Will +0); ML 10; XP 18 + 1/hp.  Skills:  Intimidate +4, Stealth +10, Theft +4.

123 goblin spirits:  Hp:  2, 6, 1, 5, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2; 3, 6, 3, 2, 1, 2, 6, 4, 5, 4; 5, 6, 1, 2, 4, 1, 6, 6, 4, 4; 6, 5, 3, 2, 5, 4, 3, 4, 4, 1; 4, 5, 2, 6, 6, 6, 3, 6, 4, 5; 6, 5, 3, 2, 5, 4, 3, 4, 4, 1; 5, 2, 5, 1, 3, 2, 5, 4, 5, 2; 2, 5, 2, 6, 6, 3, 3, 1, 3, 5; 3, 2, 3, 1, 6, 1, 6, 5, 1, 5; 5, 4, 1, 1, 6, 6, 2, 6, 2, 4;  5, 1, 5, 3, 3, 6, 1, 1, 4, 3; 2, 1, 1, 5, 6, 1, 2, 5, 6, 3; 6, 4, 5.

51.  Temple of Osiris:  Inner Fane:  Mildly attuned to Celestial (+1 CL) and Eldritch Horror (+2 CL) Spell Sources.

This area is 15 feet high, the ceiling upheld by thick pillars that march in three rows, along the walls and along the centre of the area.  These pillars were carved as though they were living trees, but they seem twisted and fungal somehow.  Thick webs are strewn between the pillars, along the walls, in the corners, and along the ceiling.  The walls appear to be tiled with green, blue, and yellow tiles, but some sheen of iridescent colours seems to be growing across it, like a thin layer of slime.

The walls are cool and slimy to the touch.  Any creature touching the slime begins to glow softly at night with a strange, iridescent hue, after 1d6 days.  At this time, the character must attempt a Fort or Will save (DC 20).  If the save succeeds, the glow fades over the course of another 1d6 days.  Otherwise, the glow is permanent, and the character suffers a random mutation that manifests during the next 2d12 days, with a +20 on the roll.  Repeated exposure causes repeated effects, and each repeat causes the roll to be made at an additional +5.  If the slime is actually tasted, the roll has an additional +10, and there is no save.  If taken from here, the slime dwindles and disappears over the course of 1d8 hours.

Because of the webs (which do not burn), movement here is at half speed, and creatures cannot run or charge.

Within this area lurk eight spiders of Leng, man-sized spiders that can pretend to be human by wearing yellow robes that conceal their features, with four legs acting like “legs” and four acting as “arms”, each “arm” or “leg” being in fact two legs.  They can speak with thin reedy voices, and know all languages.  Indeed, these spiders are fed information from the Akashic record, and have Knowledge +20 in all things.  They also, therefore, know specific things about characters, their families, their fears, their hopes, and their weaknesses.  They claim to be temple priests of Yog Sutehkis, and will answer many questions and promise many things to avoid allow characters near Area 52.  When not pretending to be human, they can climb in this area at full speed.

Spider of Leng (Medium Aberration [Eldritch Horror]):  Mv 30 ft, Climb 20 ft; AC 15; Init +4; HD 4d8+4; hp 20, 18, 20, 12, 29, 20, 15, 24; Att 1 bite (1d6); SA poison (Fort DC 20, 2d6 damage for 2d6 rounds), webs (entangle DC 25); SQ darkvision 60 ft.; SV (Fort +4, Perc +12, Prow +4, Reas +12, Refl +8, Will +12); ML 9; XP 235 +1/hp (255, 253, 255, 247, 264, 255, 250, 259).  Skills:  Climb +10, Knowledge (All) +20, Stealth +10.

Dragonsfoot Down?

The forums at Dragonsfoot seems to have gone down overnight, so I am obviously extending a grace period for my Barrowmaze play-by-post.

Speedy recovery, gents!

Barrowmaze PbP

http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=55308

Having just picked up Barrowmaze and read it in a cursory fashion, I thought it would be fun to run as a rather leisurely pbp.  If you are interested, the link is above.  No number of players is too many, I should think, but if there are fewer than four people interested, I'll probably give it a pass.

When my advanced pdf of Goodman Games DCC RPG arrives in my email, I'll be happy to set up another Barrowmaze group under that ruleset.

RC