Ganz prinzipiell: warum sollte mensch ein System aus diesem Jahrtausend spielen, welches das Spielgefühl der 1970er Jahre vermittelt, anstatt ein System aus den 1970er Jahren?
Ich mag bspw. #DCC und #Shadowdark sehr gerne, aber das ist eine der Fragen die ich mir durch meine Beschäftigung mit #ODnD aka #0e und #SwordsAndWizardry schon stelle.
Issue 3 of Wanderer Bill’shttps://lkh.sdf-eu.org/wandererbill/grenzland/ just landed in my mailbox yesterday, with, among other things, an NPC class written by me (“The Anointed of Abyssal Slaughter”). It mostly was me combining the given topic of the issue with an interest in NPC classes a while ago.
The ‘zine also contains a one-page dungeon by Alex Schroeder (“The Crown of Neptune”), a game report (“Schiffbruch”), rules for sailing ships (“Salt’n’Tar”), and another scenario (“Eingekerkert”), the latter three all by Wanderer Bill. The ‘zine is a mix of German and English, and you can get it for the phenomenal price of free at the website.
(he does have a few more physical copies for 7 Euros left over though)
First and most obviously, #folklore enthusiasts, as well as those who are interested in German history and culture.
I also hope that #ttrpg players find these of interest - I am one of these myself, and the old German folk tales I am translating often have the same chaotic energy that the best role-playing game sessions have.
And finally, those with an interest in #storytelling in general. We should all try to find inspiration in those who came before us, and these stories break a lot of modern storytelling conventions which we take for granted.
(Note: Yes, I know I am a day late with this, but I still wanted to get my two cents in.)
The original game Fantasy Wargaming: The Highest Level of All (or just Fantasy Wargaming in some editions) was a 1981 book by Bruce Galloway, a clear variation on Dungeons and Dragons, based on Galloway’s home rules. Unlike it’s competition it was not afraid of using actual historical concepts like astrology and occultism in it’s descriptions, although it also was written so densely it was hard to make sense of it in any shape or form by someone not already familiar with roleplaying games. And, well, it was called Fantasy Wargaming.
Which made this a problem, as the game was published both in the UK and the US by mainstream publishers obviously trying to break into the nascent TTRPG market. The most available version was most likely the one published by the Doubleday Science Fiction Book Club, which made the game available to many people who did not have any experience with roleplaying games before.
Unfortunately one has to say, as the game’s size (300pgs) and conceptual denseness made parsing the book quite a feat, meaning if people used this as an introduction to roleplaying, it might not have been very successful.
The Story of Fantasy Wargaming goes into this, and into the development of the game. It could have been a bit more thorough and a bit more critical, but for what it is it’s a nice look into the environment that created it. And well, it’s free.
(I learned about this book from an episode of the Vintage RPG Podcast which had the author on and talked about this project. Well worth a listen)
I think the one thing we have all learned from #WotC this years is that corporate controlled creativity, even when done by good people, isn't nearly as good as what people come up without that company overlord telling them what to do.
Let's continue to support the smaller folks of the #ttrpg industry. Those are the ones who still care about the hobby beyond just dollars.
RPG tip from the archive: Watch the movies that fit the theme of the adventure you're running to fill your head with ideas you can improvise as you run the game.
https://gmkeros.files.wordpress.com/2024/05/warlocks_and_witches_in_a_dance5238827366399506857.jpg?w=1024John Faed, Warlocks and Witches in a dance (1855)I am not a fan of Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition. In fact I am not a fan of the 4th edition either, or the 3.5th edition, or Pathfinder (the 3.75th edition) for that matter. Actually I burned out running 3e and that was the impetus to go back to older edition, retroclones, and the OSR.
Which means I only really was touched by the introduction of warlock peripherally.
It didn’t help that I first saw them done in 3.5 and was not impressed. I still am not. It took them a while to get them into a state where players might intuitively grasp what the class is about. The 5th edition one seems to have managed that though, and I think I get why: warlocks are fun.
They are the kind of power fantasy that has all the hallmarks of a chugging half a quart of vodka with Red Bull and stealing a car. Maybe in the back of your mind you know that this is a bad idea, but right now you are intoxicated and it’s fun and who knows if morning will ever come and who cares about those flashing blue lights behind you?
Warlocks are the bad example your parents warned you about. It’s what lazy kids become when they grow up. But why, do the fighter and the magic user say, do they have so much fun being lazy? What about training? What about studying?
To which the Warlocks answer: “Eldritch Blast!”
But no, I think Warlocks as a character concept are really wonderfully OSR: you sell your soul to… not necessarily the devil, but SOMETHING, and then you can do all kinds of stuff you never learned. That sounds overpowered, and it is. But there is the implicit end of the warlock, which most people seem to forget because they treat it as just another class: this is a class that is completely dependent on some other unknownable being and their whims. There is not really a good ending for the warlock. Whatever actually happens with them when they die, in most cases it shouldn’t be pretty. If you have pledged your soul to the devil you won’t end slurping ice cold drinks at the shore of some scenic lake of fire. If you pledged it to an archfey you might end up as furniture.
I think what is missing from the class as written a bit is that there should be marks of what you are doing on you as well. You don’t become level 5 with no outside mark. I would say that every level there should be a possibility of a new pact marker. Cloven feet? Horns growing? Ears start looking like leafs? Something like that.
Reaction rolls should be affected. People might fear you, but they won’t respect you. You took the easy way and when people know they KNOW. Animals will look at you funny. You might not be able to pass under a horseshoe anymore. Mirrors shatter. That stuff.
Also ages ago I wrote about how to do multiclassing in my opinion. Every level, even the first, should cost as much as the next highest level of your other classes. That still holds up, but I think Warlocks… don’t follow that rule. Because learning another class when you spent your life doing something else shouldn’t be easy. Unless, well, you sell your soul or something. New warlocks just become warlocks.
RPG tip: Challenge high level characters by attacking several points — AC, saves, death saves, exhaustion, hit points, cumulative -1 penalties, and so on.
@FredKiesche Within the tiny world of RPGs ... I never got along very well with Gene Seabolt, but the one issue we agreed on was that we intended making books to endure, be explored and re-explored, to be experienced over years or decades.
Basically everyone else I've worked with in RPGs disagrees, feeling that we should consciously design for rapid churn, treat them as disposable.
I just started work on a #Hammondal design document with the title "Town of Copaganda," which is both "not as bad as it sounds" and "every bit as bad as it sounds." 😅
Finding interesting people on Mastodon has been my biggest challenge 😅, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it. If you're an author, aspiring writer, book lover, fantasy reader, tech lover, roleplayer, tabletop gamer, or anything in between, feel free to follow me! I'd love to connect and follow you back 😄📚🎲 #Mastodon#fantasy#rpg#ttrpg#gaming#tech