Update from the Lich Queen (7/31/17)

Well, I had to make characters for a huge party, of around 6 or 7 players, I really only expected 3 or 4. So, let's just say it was hectic, and pretty messy. But people had fun, even the newer players who weren't interested in the game too much, were starting to get into the character generation.

We have a crazy group of chaotic characters, ranging from good to evil, with a lot of guys sitting atop the fence. Some of them are a part of the band that is on their way to Almore to compete in a competition, and the others are just travelling with, likely as bodyguards, and some of them for their own reasons. Most of the characters, just want to party and have fun, so this will be interesting.

I'm actually really needing to redirect parts of my quest and will be having to rework content to accommodate more players, and if some aren't there, I can scale it down. I'm not entirely sure what the entire quest is going to entail, and the entire scenario may need a rework. I'm debating on that, a lot right now.

We have a:

• CN Halfling Rogue
• CN Halfling Bard (Yes, they're twins)
• CN Dwarf Barbarian
• CN Dwarf Fighter
• CG Dwarf Druid
• CG Half-Elf Warlock
• CE Elf Ranger

So yes, this party is going to cause some mayhem.

But basically, I've been busy with D&D, and am highly excited.

The Lich Queen's approach to Alignments

(Sorry this post was a day late, been a bit busy!)

I think of Alignments very differently than many people I think, and in a way it's based on a combination of viewpoints that I've heard over the years. To me, alignment is very important yet simultaneously useless. That's gonna sound weird, but it's how I feel. Alignment is useful as a mechanic and as a neat and quick run-down on the kind of character's personality, but it's way too vague to mean anything of substance from a storytelling perspective. If I say "The lawful good character wants to stop the chaotic neutral character because he was getting into trouble with the law," it doesn't really say much. It says about as much as if I said "the dwarven fighter" and "the halfling rogue" instead of calling them by their alignment. Your little imaginative brain can fill in the rest but it might not even be close to the actual story.

I look at alignments instead, as a necessary mechanical tag that is used for certain effects in a game. When I create a character I ask what their motivations are. Why are they in the game and what are they trying to do to get there? This doesn't get me to the alignment just yet but is the first step of my process, and to let you know, no I do not start with alignment on a character almost ever if I can help. However I do need it, so let's take a look at the steps I go through to produce alignments for characters, and then I'll give an example at the end. Let me give you a warning, alignments are highly subjective, but I use my system because I've spent way too much time debating the topic and finally found an approach to the topic that I feel is more useful.

The Process

Step 1: What is your character's goal?

You should not have any character in a story or game that does not have a goal. If you make a character in D&D, and he doesn't have a goal, you should make him one. Why? Because goals aren't hard. A farmer wants a bountiful yield this year so he can make a little extra cash. The dwarven fighter wants to come back home with a mountain of gold and an ever larger pile of stories to tell. It's easy. Feel free to let them get a little more complicated than that.

Step 2: Why do they want that?

This is somewhat optional but I'd recommend coming up with something. For example: The rogue wants that money badly, but why does he want it? Well, he has a daughter at home that will starve if he can't get it; which brings us to step #3.

Step 3: How far will they go to get what they want?

This determines the Good vs. Evil (GvE) axis, and is honestly not all that hard. I don't get why people try to get all philosophical about GvE in D&D, it's a tabletop game. The core of GvE is essentially about this concept of 'how far'. Good characters will try to achieve their goal without harming anyone, they will likely even try to spare bad guys (such as bandits) if they're given the choice. Evil characters will be willing to murder, lie and steal to get what they want; genocide is not even out of the question for some. Keep in mind, this step and the next step are on a 'scale' of sorts, so you can have a neutral leaning good character, but that's unnecessary in terms of alignment classifications.

On a scale of 1 to 9, how far will they go? 1 is as good as you get, 9 is as evil as you get.

Step 4: When they tackle their problem, how do they go about it?

This determines the Law vs. Chaos (LvC) axis. I could get into a whole spiel about why I think LvC is a terrible concept and how it should be Order vs. Chaos, but I won't as it's sorta pointless; and it's hard to frame this step without a description. The examples below might shed a little more light but here's my explanation. Lawful characters appreciate authority, obedience and order, they are organized and generally methodical. Chaotic characters are about impulse and freedom, they do not care much for authority and would prefer that authority stays out of their way. If we take the rogue from step 2 and clone him, then make him chaotic good, and his clone becomes lawful good you'll see the difference. The lawful good rogue will likely try to pick up some jobs from a bounty board, legal or not, he's going to go look for an opportunity to make money in an organized, controllable way. The chaotic good rogue is probably going to just break into a house on the fly and try to hawk it to a nearby merchant.

On a scale of 1 to 9, how organized are there methods? 9 is on the fly and completely chaotic, 1 is structured and cautious.

The Example

We're going to use an NPC from a game that I ran about a year ago. Albert Stark, the primary antagonist of our game, and an evil NPC in an evil campaign. You might be thinking "Wait ... the players are playing evil characters why are they fighting an evil character?" that's a good question! One that I do not have anymore space on this page for, but here's my two cents on the idea. Evil characters, don't think what they are doing is evil. For all intensive purposes, Albert Stark thought he was a good guy.

Step 1: What is your character's goal?

Albert Stark wishes to reclaim the imperial throne for his family.

Step 2: Why does he want that?

He wishes to gain power, and feels that his family was cheated of their rightful place.

Step 3: How far will he go to get what he wants?

Stark was never willing to commit genocide, but he wasn't afraid of murdering anyone who stood in his way. I'm gonna put him up at an 8.

Step 4: When they tackle their problem, how do they go about it?

He is incredibly organized, a methodical thinker with a propensity for manipulation. Stark was a fantastic schemer in a world of politics, created on a foundation of scheming. I'm going to put him all the way down at a 1 for this.

Which according to my scale puts him in the lawful evil quadrant. I have no qualms with this, it's a great description for him.

And here's a little table for you, with a somewhat transparent grid on top for you to use. I find that a more detailed grid helps a bit more to define just how far your character is on these alignments. You can be a chaotic evil character and be leaning more towards true neutral, but not actually true neutral. You'd be in the top left corner of chaotic evil and that can help you make decisions about "what would this character do?". He's not a psychopath, he's not even an 'agent of chaos'; he's an unorganized dude who's probably a bit of a dickbag. Yes, I said dickbag.

Update from the Lich Queen (7/24/17)

Hey! It's lich queen Naomi again. The last two weeks have essentially been non stop work. Writing, map designing, digging through the monster manual, etc. I've had to learn 5E's rules, look through it's changes, talk to the players, introduce some people to the game, etc, etc. It's been a bit tiring actually, but it's had some excitement. First off there is the one-shot I ran.

One-Shot

I ran a one-shot with only two of my players (they were the most readily available) to try and get the gist of 5Es rules. I personally have an easier time learning when I'm just doing what it is I'm trying to learn. My players seem the same. I also wanted to get those two up to speed, so I could focus on teaching the new players separately once we are running the main campaign. On top of that, we were all kind of itching to play, so it wasn't exactly a bad idea to me.

The setup was actually kind of simple, it was a 3 person game, just Maggot, Dunmur, and myself as GM. We generated characters real fast (Fun fact: I generated Maggot's character and had Maggot generate Dunmur's character) and I threw them into a game they had NO CLUE what has going on, and this is intentional. It's intentional because I have a more long-term purpose for this game, and I don't want the player's influencing it too much. That's not to say I'm railroading any aspect of this, but instead I had a simple concept that has one or two important aspects, and I need them there to get this idea to work without a hitch.

Side note: We're playing online using Roll20, the name's I'm using are their online aliases, I know their real names but I don't feel like using them.

Things didn't go entirely as planned but it did work out ... sort of. See I kinda misunderstood the CR guidelines (and forgot that 5E's CRs suck ass), and almost killed both players. The players were on a boat before it got attacked by this giant tentacley kraken like beast, the boat was destroyed and they were knocked out unconscious. Their bodies slipped into the water and as their vision faded to black, something happened. They were taken down into an underwater prison, where they finally awoke inside a damp cell. I was pretty lenient on what they had, most of what was taken from their person was simply weapons or things that could open the cells, I of course made an exception for the rogue's Thieve's Tools.

The first fight was pretty fun, Maggot (our Rogue), gets clever and starts throwing objects at the naga guard he runs into. The two of them gang up on it, take his weapon, and finish it off. In a way, they got a bit lucky since everything went off without a hitch. They round the corner, find their stuff, and turn around to notice that two naga have started coming that way to investigate what's going on. Dunmur (our Bard) is just like "Nah, fuck it, 2v1 I can take both of you!", and actually rolls intimidation to get both of them to come fight him. While Maggot is trying to hide around the corner and slip away, however he doesn't want to abandon the bard, so he stays kinda close. The naga charges up annnnd the next thing I know both of them are at 0 hp. "Uh oh ... I think these guys are a bit much." I took a pause for a second and took a thought. The naga knocks out the bard using non-lethal damage, he's dragged off and hastily thrown into a cell, they don't even strip his gear. The other was dragged off by a civilian that they freed, who knew a thing or two about medicine. He heals him up, takes the healing potion from Maggot's body and administers it.

Skip forward a bit, the bard escapes his cell, and the rogue has been unlocking all the cells while the naga were distracted. They gather all of the men and go for the front door, which is magically sealed. Maggot realizes this and is a bit perplexed, and looks over to Dunmur for assistance, he has knock, right? Nope. He used both level 2 slots in the first fight because, reasons. I make up some bullshit about one of the NPCs knowing how to undo the lock but he needs a few minutes, in which they need to guard him, but Maggot isn't going to sit for 5+ minutes. He wanders off to the side and checks one of the store rooms where there is another equipment chest. I look down at my notes and see that I had an item pile that was meant for the research lab, and realizing that the fight in there will be way too tough for them right now, I just move the item pile to that chest. It has a little circlet, a potion, and some explosives, of course that's the hint for the players to just blow the fucking door up, and they do. They're essentially in the clear all the way to the exit now, so I make things a little more tense by throwing two giant naga at them (for reference I was using a Yuan-ti Abomination, CR 7), and they simply slither towards the party, trying to cut their way through the other prisoners. They scramble around, find the potions of water breathing I left around, and make their escape with some of the NPCs who helped out.

I didn't get to show everything, but Dunmur did clearly ask "wait ... were they turning the humans into those lizard things?", I thought ... should I let him know? Fuck it, why not. I say "yes, absolutely, you guys didn't get to see the rest of the hints but that was the idea". They talk about it for a bit, and Maggot even asked "can you keep that character sheet? I'd actually like to play this character later."

Postmortem

I think the important thing was that the tension was high enough and my GM skills aren't that rusty as I was able to improvise, make things a bit fun, and really make the situation seem doable. They got out alive, had to make sacrifices (they couldn't take all of the prisoners), but in the end, they were free.

I'm actually some what excited to potentially play a game with Dograx, the rogue, as he was kind of a neat character. While we randomly rolled most of the characters, Dograx was a dragonborn, rogue who was raised by wolves. Maggot took that as a sign that while Dograx knew some common, he communicated mostly in growls and signals, and did not like speaking if he could help it. I may run a solo game with him provided there is time, and additionally, I have another campaign idea stored away for later that he could be apart, especially since the players were not informed which world this took place in.

I think I learned a lot about CR from this game, and I also tried an important little technique I learned from the well-known Matt Colville. Don't go easy on the players. It's not to say that you can't change things slightly or alter a tiny part of the dungeon, but instead to try and avoid the downward spiral of nerfing everything in your dungeon until it's no longer challenging. I kept a lot of it the same, but changed just a few things and then said to myself: "Nothing changes from here, let them figure out what needs to be done."

In the end? They got inventive, they weren't just doing the "I attack the naga ... again" routine, which I find happens in some of my games as players are trying way too much to play it like a video game where the only thing you can do is try harder until you die... If this weren't a one-shot where the players were stuck in a prison, I probably wouldn't have even let them get away given the fact that it probably would've been their fault.

City Campaign

I have something in the works, a West Marches inspired campaign setting where players are trapped in a large city as part of a resistance force against a massive army. The details are being worked on, but sooner or later I'll do a post about it's success or failure.

Alignment Chart

So, after my alignment article I thought it'd be wise to try and make a chart or 'calculator' type of thing that just gives you an idea of how I rate my NPCs on the alignment scale.

Choosing your game, and why it matters.

Tabletop gaming isn't exactly serious business, it's about having fun. However that doesn't mean we can't try to squeeze out as much entertainment out of the precious time you spending playing these games. Obviously, having an incredible and fulfilling game in a system that is perfect for your players is much more rewarding than having a pretty good game with something that didn't quite fit. So how do you go about doing that? Let's start with what aspects we should be looking at.

What to ask yourself

What are your 'player types'? I find that one of the best places to start is with is the players at the table. You might not really know much about them, but it's not a bad idea to ask. If they aren't familiar with tabletop games, don't sweat it! Find out what their favorite genres are in any medium. Video games, film, TV shows, books, music; anything. Do they like movies with complex narratives, or are they more the type to binge watch cheesy action films? Do they enjoy the adventurous style of The Hobbit or prefer the grand, larger than life scenes from Lord of the Rings? These sorts of answers can help inform you about what kind of player types each one falls into. I won't go into detail here about what each player type is, but they really boil down to what the person wants or likes. The 'optimizer' is generally going to gravitate towards games that give them the ability to customize and fine-tune their characters, while the 'actor' wants to play out a character in a story.

Tabletop Experience. This one is essentially just asking yourself, and everyone at the table if they've played tabletop games before and what have they played. This can help you a lot, as if you have a whole table full of people who are all familiar with D&D, then it can be a huge relief. If you fall back on playing D&D again, they're familiar with it and will likely have an easier time focusing on enjoying the game. If you switch to another system they will probably have no problem learning some new rules. It also matters for the GM, as lack of tabletop experience can make things difficult. It's hard learning a whole new game while you're still learning the basic concepts of being a game master.

What level of complexity are you looking for? There isn't really a handy chart for this, so it's going to be a generalized 'level' of complexity. This comes down to:

• How many factors will be influencing the average die roll?
• Per action, how many rolls have to be made to determine the outcome?
• How extensive is the list of actions and skills that I have to keep track of?
• How many mini-games inside of my tabletop game are present? (I'm looking at you, Shadowrun)

The lower each of those are, the lower the complexity; the higher they are, the higher the complexity. It's pretty simple and for newer tabletop players I often will recommend going with something that is low to medium. It's one of the reasons I frequently recommend D&D 5E, Pathfinder, Exalted or even older editions of D&D to start out with. Once players are more familiar with these kinds of games (or if they ever want to move beyond them), I fully encourage people to check out other systems such as Vampire: The Masquerade, Shadowrun, Cyberpunk 2020, GURPs, Burning Wheel, etc. They may be harder to run, but once you get the hang of it they can be incredibly rewarding.

What are YOUR skills? As a game master, it's important to know what you're good at. Tackling a complex political game with a heavy emphasis on writing and roleplaying isn't exactly a great idea if you think politics and story are your worst areas. It's good to improve those by practicing but it's not exactly fun for the players if they're expecting one type of game and get a half-baked version of it instead. In my humble opinion, it's better to slowly introduce those elements until you feel comfortable diving head first into it. However let's get away from what you're bad at and focus what you're good at. Are you good at number-crunching and encounter designs? Pathfinder will likely be able to let you take advantage of those skills. Are you more the type to write intricate plot lines with a dark and gritty atmosphere? Well I think you'll like Cyberpunk ... You see what I'm getting at? Additionally, you may want to take your non-gaming skills such as art, coding, architecture, game design, etc, into consideration; these may be able to influence your decision as well. I really like creating old-looking fantasy maps, and so D&D is a natural go to for me; not only am I interested in it, I'm good at it. The players definitely notice and appreciate when the GM goes just that extra little mile with the map.

Setting. This one kind of goes without saying, and is sort of in the 'player types' paragraph, however this is more about taste and set pieces. If your players are absolutely in love with Star Wars, it wouldn't be a bad idea to look into the Star Wars RPG. However this also extends to things not directly linked to an intellectual property. Seriously, if all your players talk about is Ghost in the Shell, Akira, Fifth Element, Deus Ex, and the future of humanity with the oncoming of rapidly advancing human augmentations ... then you might want to ask if they're interested in Cyberpunk 2020 or Shadowrun. Or tell them to shut up and stop worrying about the coming dystopian future.

Not sure how to find a new game to run?

Don't worry the internet has got you covered ...

Google. Yep, I said it. I know you probably hate me now, but I had to add this one. There are plenty of websites out there with lists such as Top 100 Tabletop Roleplaying Games, and honestly, the lists usually aren't all that bad of resources. It's not going to tell you what you should play, but it may give you some leads to follow up on.

Reddit. If you hang around the tabletop subreddits enough you'll hear people mentioning all kinds of games, hell I learned that Eclipse Phase was a thing through seeing it in comments. Additionally, you can just ask, most of the subreddits are nice enough as long as you follow their rules.

Ask your players. They actually might have a suggestion, or they might even know exactly what game they want to play. If you have a more experienced player at the table, they might even be able to give you a list of recommendations so you don't have to do the digging yourself.

Just wing it! Don't be afraid to try a game. Dip your toes in a bit, try a ready-to-play module, skim through some rules online. You may find that simply reading the rules will get you interested, I know that happens to me way too often.

Altering your game ...

When all else fails and you're not quite sure, sometimes it's a safe bet to go back to what you know, and alter it a little bit to fit your needs. Here are some suggestions as to how you could go about doing that.

Thematic Changes. You're philosophically obsessed players are ready to go, you dropped the mention of cyberpunk and they're already calling you up to find out when they can start rolling up character sheets; but there's one problem, Cyberpunk 2020's rules are just too clunky. Someone is going to disagree with me on that I'm sure, but honestly, the mechanics might not sink in with everyone. My approach here would be to find another game with decent mechanics, D20 Modern, Shadowrun, Eclipse Phase, and strip out what you don't like. Strip out SR's magic rules, put Eclipse Phase on pre-fall earth, try to make D20 Modern not a god-awful mess ... Okay that last one I really can't recommend, it's gonna be a pain to do.

If you want something that's not sci-fi as an example, you could turn D&D into a low-fantasy game by simply disallowing any magic items and all the caster classes.

Change Rules. You might want to only change a rule or two, maybe you're altering the armor system in D&D to make characters more fragile, or your simply house ruling a few changes to make it more enjoyable for yourselves.

New Content. This doesn't necessarily mean to make new content, but to add new content. Add firearms to D&D, add extra classes to fit the campaign setting you're in, throw in some different races to spice up the mix. You can do a lot with almost any game by adding new content, and it can really change the tone of your game as well. For some systems you will likely be on your own, but for popular ones such as D&D and Pathfinder, you can find TONS of content online for use, and it's all user made. I can't guarantee that they will be quality posts either, so you'll have to at least skim through stuff before you add it, and I'd really recommend doing more than 'skimming' through class additions. If you do end up making your own content, I wish you luck, and hopefully I'll be making that into it's own post as well (or series of posts, it's a huge topic).

Well with that, I'd love to hear from you about any game systems you'd recommend. Preferably something you took a dive on and ended up loving.

Bonus Post: Why I've chosen 5E

Recently, an older group of mine came to and asked to play some Dungeons & Dragons, and having recently been watching some WebDM (Shout-out to these guys, they're awesome!), I was really in the mood to try out 5E. My background is mostly in 3/3.5/Pathfinder, so I'm mostly familiar with the basic concepts of a d20 based system. However I've always had a few complaints about Pathfinder and it's previous versions (3.0/3.5), I'll be lumping them together since they're so similar.

1. There's too many pitfalls. Players can find it very easy to play the 'nerfed' class, or dip into another class and horribly regret it. Now I get that, we're playing a Roleplaying Game, it naturally has some holes to fall into in regards to character builds and statistics. However depending on what version we're talking here (3.0, 3.5, PF), there are a lot of these. For the most part this is fine but for some groups or players this is a problem.
2. There's too many options. This kind of goes hand-in-hand with the pitfalls problem, often there are too many feats, spells, or classes, and it's hard to sift through all of them. Newer or player's such as myself that aren't 100% dedicated to memorization of the rulebook, have a harder time remembering what to pick. This can be remedied if, as a GM, you just say NO to the expanded books, but you wind up sacrificing extra content that players will likely want in their game.
3. There's WAY too many numbers to keep track of. I know, it's math, I should learn to deal with it, but honestly it gets to a point where your character has too many god damn numbers on the sheet and it just drives you bonkers. Optimizing characters requires you to consider every little detail, including what's the minimum you should ever put into a stat as to not gimp your character's saving throws.
4. It's slow. Pathfinder, is slow, and over time I've developed ways to speed this up, but it's still slow.

That being said I have to make it clear that I do NOT hate Pathfinder or 3.5, infact quite the contrary. I would praise Pathfinder as one of the best tabletop RPGs out there, however I don't not think it is for everyone. Which is exactly why I'm trying it with this group. The group is comprised of two players I'm very familiar with, and one player is 100% new to the game. One of these players will in the end, probably enjoy PF more than 5E as he's essentially our party optimizer. The other player reminds me of an OSR player, he's all about hiring henchmen, building up a hoard of items and gold, establishing a base of operations for the adventuring party, and murder, lots of murder. But he fucking hates math, he hates having too much to customization or optimize, and would in the end just google a PF build when he wanted something done effectively. The last guy, is new; he doesn't know if he likes heavy emphasis on mechanical gameplay, social gameplay, or even storytelling. But he already told me right off the bat, that he would prefer an easy system to get into. 5E solves a lot of these problems for me.

• Power-curve. In previous encounters with our optimizer, he usually outshines the rest of the players in terms of combat and social interactions through pure rolls. Granted this wasn't a problem when he played a low charisma fighter, the combat aspect was becoming an awkward tug of war with the rest of the party wanting to be useful, but he didn't want to be bored. Classes in 5E appear to be much more reigned in when it comes to over-all strength, and while yes, I understand the wizard is still gonna be at the top, I think the gap won't be quite as severe.
• Ease of Use. 5E is simple, damn simple. It's one of the simplest systems I've seen that still has meat on it's bones. It's a nice balance of simplicity and complexity, in my humble opinion. This is incredibly useful for the other two players. The OSR guy is going to enjoy the boiled down easy to follow class setups, and will be able to do his rolls and calculations much quicker and more effectively. The new guy will have less to worry about in terms of stats, and can focus on the role-playing, which brings me to the last reason this was the perfect party to test 5E's waters with.
• Roleplaying. It's baked right the fuck into the game. The new guy is new and has no clue what the hell roleplaying is. Our experienced players have ... a lot to learn. The optimizer is an alright roleplayer but has a hard time making interesting characters, the OSR guy is pretty good but sometimes has a hard time 'staying' in character, he will often take extra leaps in other directions which makes me question who is delivering the line; the character or the player. 5E's background, personality traits, ideals, and bonds, will hopefully help make it easier for all of them to get into character and stay in character, with a constant reminder on the character sheet itself.
• Rerolling. I don't kill characters often but I wish I did more. The reason for this is that I think death can be an incredibly meaningful and impactful moment in the campaign course. A noble sacrifice, the fighter that won't stop drawing blood until he's all out of his own, etc. With how easy it is to make a character, I hope that some of that hesitation on the player's part dissipates a bit. I hope to encourage dashing and daring maneuvers, action packed fights, and moments of heroism in their upcoming adventures. And of course, I'm not going to kill off characters left and right, but I would love to see that be an option on the table from time to time.

All of these factors make me think that 5E is guaranteed to be the perfect system for this group, but you can bet I'm going to be playing Pathfinder for years to come. I'd actually like to expand this topic in another post, and it will likely be my topic for Friday.

Update from the Lich Queen (7/17/17)

The blog is up and running! I'm going to hopefully rebuild the website's appearance and fine tune it to my liking, but in the meantime I'll be focusing on writing some content. I'm going to be busy for the next few days, but I hopefully will have something written up for Friday, I've been reviewing the 5th Edition Dungeons & Dragons material, and skimming over the rules to prepare for an upcoming game which brings me to my next talking point.

I've been building a map for an upcoming 5E game with some older players of mine who have always been somewhat fun to play with.

Welcome to the world of Aldoras!

http://hunter-64.deviantart.com/art/Aldoras-Regional-Map-692820288

I spent sometime practicing mountains and this was sort of a test to see if I could get an alternate style, and I think it worked. They'll be starting in the region of Oldorf, as a party of travelling dwarven musicians. Additionally, I'm toying with an idea which I'll probably write a follow-up later; fog-of-war. Roll20 comes with a built in fog-of-war system, and with a little patience I think it can be a fun tool for the overworld map, letting the players explore on their own and discover things slowly. It looks barren right now, but imagine what it will look like when the players finally uncover the whole thing?