October 20, 2016

Happy Halloween - Here come the Undead

Happy Halloween!  Boo!  

You've played a ton of fantasy RPGs, and you've battled undead numerous times, but have you put much thought into the undead?  Are they just a spooky monster or is there a story there?

In my quest to inject as much story and plot into everything I do as a GM, today I'm going to talk about the stories behind the undead.  I'll take a list of the most well-known undead, break them down into five categories, and talk about the plot that's out there for each category and each variant.  The five categories are:

  • Incorporeal Ghosts
  • Corporeal Ghosts
  • Death Demons
  • Animated Corpses
  • The Infected

Art by Zeke Nelsons

Incorporeal Ghosts
In general, ghosts are awesome.  A single ghost or small group of ghosts makes for a unique story about an event in the past that has an echo in the present.  The connection between the past and present is great for A-plot/B-plot dungeon design, and can serve as either the A plot (the reason the PCs are here) or the B plot (something interesting that they can explore while they're here).

  • Allip:  The allip is the mad ghost of a person driven to suicide by madness.  This can be congenital mental illness, extreme traumatic stress, grief, or burning guilt and shame.  Mad ghosts are terrifying.
  • Banshee:  When an elf woman dies after being betrayed by or betraying those she loves, she becomes a wailing banshee.  The general idea of the "ghost of a traitor consumed by hatred" is a great story.
  • Ghost:  When someone dies with unresolved earthly business they just can't let go of, they linger on this plane as a ghost.  There are countless ghost stories out there.  Ghosts shouldn't always be evil, though the kind of obsession that keeps a person from passing on to the afterlife is indicative of a dangerous person regardless.
  • Specter:  These are the mad ghosts of people who died a sudden, violent death.  They're a reflection of the horror and violence of their death.  I like thinking of them as people who died in a horrible and sudden tragedy, like a shipwreck, mine collapse, terrible battle, or an orc slaughter.  Instead of reflecting the personality the deceased had in life, the spirit reflects the violence and horror they experienced at the moment of their death.  They're tragic, crazed, psychotic killers.  Specters have varied in difficulty over the years, and in 5e, they're pretty easy foes.  That's good, because unlike most ghosts, you'll probably want to use specters in groups to represent the haunt left over by mass tragedies.  Specters also make good poltergeists, as the 5th edition designers recognized.
Corporeal Ghosts
You don't have to be translucent and insubstantial to be a ghost.  D&D has a bunch of traditional flavors of corporeal ghosts - living humans who have passed on but not left this world.  Like other ghosts, each corporeal ghost is its own unique story.

  • Bodak:  This ghost is the remains of a humanoid destroyed by the touch of absolute evil.  This has cool implications.  See the "basically demons" undead below for examples of absolute evil (Nightshades!) that might be good Bodak-spawners.  Bodaks are people who aren't killed but instantly corrupted, so they're a sad, twisted, hate-filled version of their former self.  In 5e D&D, there are no stats for the Bodak yet.
  • Death Knight:  The Death Knight is an awesome image:  A powerful loyal warrior who served a dark god dies, and is preserved in death by the god's power.  It's the fighter's version of a Lich (see below).  Death knights are not really plots in and of themselves, like other ghosts (corporeal or not) are; instead, they're part of a greater plot about the servants of an evil god.
  • Lich:  Imagine if you were so afraid of death that you wouldn't leave your body even after it died.  A lich is a wizard who figured out how to do just that.  They're corporeal ghosts of wizards who used a profane ritual to bind their soul to this world forever, through a phylactery.  The phylactery is an excellent plot device, because a lich cannot be killed without also destroying its phylactery.
  • Mohrg:  The corpses of truly awful villains who died "without atonement" rise again as mohrgs.  It makes more sense to say they "died without justice" -- the villain slain by heroes to stop their evil scheme is not going to become a mohrg.  The villain who lives to a ripe old age and dies of a heart attack might be brought back as a mohrg, though.  A mass murder who dies in an accident might come back as a mohrg.  A villain killed by another villain could come back as a mohrg (but see also Revenant!).  There are no mohrgs in 5e yet, but you could re-skin the Revenant.
  • Revenant:  The body of a murder victim whose spirit won't leave the corpse until their murder is avenged is called a Revenant.  They're not out for justice for the sake of justice.  They're out for bloody revenge.  So they're pretty awful monsters.  They're full of hate and resentment and insane self loathing.

Death Demons
Some creatures in D&D are traditionally (or currently) associated with the undead, but are more demons associated with death and the dead than the risen bodies or souls of dead people.  Death demons should be connected to stories about thinning boundaries between life and death, foolish necromancers talking to demigods in the shadow world of the dead, or ancient death deities awoken from slumber to consume the souls of the living.
  • Devourer:  A devourer was never a human to begin with.  It's an undead extraplanar demigod who eats souls.  Because it's associated with death and the land of the dead, and it's powered by human souls, it's often categorized as undead in D&D.  Devourers are spooky mid to high level villains.  There isn't a devourer in 5th edition D&D yet, so consider using the stats for a Vampire, but re-skinning it as a soul devourer and removing the folklore references.
  • Nightshade:  Half darkness, half absolute evil made manifest, a nightshade is a curse-demon that comes from Shadow.  D&D created a meta-mythology of "shadow" as the energy of entropy, death, decay, and darkness, and it began infesting every setting from Dark Sun to Dragonlance.  The Nightshade is one of the creatures made of pure shadow.  There's no Nightshade in 5e yet.  The Shadow Demon is similar to the Nightshade in theme, but not in power.  You can use a Shadow Demon's stats for a Nightshade -- just amp up its power level with more HP, higher Proficiency bonus, more attacks, and some magic resistance to make it scarier.
  • Will o' Wisp: In folklore, the will o'wisp is a bad faerie.  In other editions of D&D, it's an extraplanar spirit.  In 5e D&D, it's undead.  It's not the soul of a dead person, but instead a faerie (or demon) that lures people into the swamp to kill them.  
Animated Corpses
There are a few ways corpses get animated in the D&D mythology.  First, necromancers can animate the dead to serve them.  These monsters are basically constructs, but with a corpse theme.  A necromancer plot is a story of a magical mad scientist, basically.  The undead aren't the story - they're just minor antagonists in a story about a human villain.  Second, when tombs or graveyards are violated (by tomb raiding adventurers, villagers who don't know they're there, evil cults, bandits on the run from the law, etc.), the gods of good or death will animate the dead to protect the sanctity of the tomb, get revenge on the violators, and prevent further violations.  The undead could be the villains, but the source of the problem is human intrusion into the domain of the dead.  Third, a powerful curse or celestial event could animate the dead.  The story here would be similar to the profaned tomb, but isn't necessarily linked to a graveyard.  The bloody murder of a village priest by the town's alderman could cause the dead whose funerals the priest presided over to rise every night until the priest's body is found and their murderer is punished.   The horror novel Pet Sematary is an "animated corpses" myth.
  • Flameskull:  This is an animated burning skull with animal intelligence, and it's almost always the creation of a necromancer.  The gods don't like to break corpses up to make them into fire-weapons.
  • Flesh Golem:  Technically a flesh golem is not an undead monster in D&D, but it is a corpse re-animated by a magic-user to serve them, so it's not really too different from a zombie.  There's a "Frankenstein's Monster" aspect to the flesh golem, though.  It's created with alchemy and naturalism gone awry, while the zombie is created by channeling necromantic energy with arcane spells.
  • Mummy:  This is a catchall category of tomb guardians that protect the resting places of the dead.  Mummies are returned to unlife for this purpose by mysterious "desert gods" in D&D folklore.  But there are mummy myths in other Earth cultures.  The draugr is a norse mummy protecting a tomb, returned to unlife for this purpose by norse gods, for instance. A mummy doesn't have to be a bandage-wrapped corpse.  It can be a dried out husk of a corpse or a skeleton draped in its funerary shroud
  • Skeleton:  The D&D skeleton is a set of walking bones held together by magic.  A skeleton is basically a medieval robot.  In a departure from previous editions, in 5th edition D&D, they're semi-intelligent and not mindless.  A distinction between skeletons and zombies is that skeletons are often the corpses of people who died many years ago, while zombies are the corpses of the fairly recently dead.
  • Zombie:  We all know about zombies.  The D&D zombie is a shambling corpse.  It's not infectious, so it's a lot more like a voodoo zombie than a 28 Days Later zombie.  It's also like a medieval robot, but a lot stinkier than a skeleton, you'd imagine.

The Infected
Another common undead story is the idea of undeath as a contagion.  Because of the threat to D&D player characters, the game features several versions of infectious undead.  In addition to classic story hooks, infected undead are defined by their epidemiology.

Note that 5th edition seriously modified the traditional D&D epidemiology of infectious undead!  So the descriptions below are a bit longer, but they discuss those changes and give advice for DMs on how to make infected undead contagious once again.  Mwa-ha-ha!
  • Ghouls:  Like the typical zombie apocalypse, Ghouls can spread fast.  They're hungry, so they're motivated to go eat.  These are your "fast, infectious zombies."  Traditionally, in D&D, when they touch you, you can be paralyzed (like people in horror movies who become paralyzed in fear).  In 5th edition D&D, ghouls aren't specifically infectious.  So where do they come from?  Well you can use the ghoul as a death demon, based on the arabic myth they originate from:  The ghul is a spirit that lives in graveyards and eats the corpses of the dead.  You could also use them as curse-spawned or god-spawned animated corpse undead (see above).  But I think it was a mistake to remove their infectious property.  Their bite should transmit Ghoul Fever.
    • Ghoul Fever (house rule):  A character who dies with Ghoul Fever rises again as a ghoul.  At the end of each short or long rest, a character with Ghoul Fever must make a Death Save (regardless of their current hit point total).  On a success, the character fights off Ghoul Fever.  A failed Death Save works like normal:  The character marks off one Death Save.  After three failed Death Saves, the character dies and becomes a ghoul, even if their hit point total is positive.  
  • Wraiths:  Wraiths spread incredibly fast, basically turning a village into a literal ghost town overnight, but unlike ghouls, they can't travel far because they cook in even a little sunlight.  They can't just sleep in a ditch during the day like a ghoul.  Probably a lot of wraiths created in this manner get destroyed by sunlight because the area gets a little overpopulated, and I bet they squabble with each other over daytime resting places.  So ultimately there would be a small number of wraiths haunting a vast, deserted dead area with absolutely no life:  No animals.  Maybe not even plants and insects.  In 5e, a wraith creates specters instead of other wraiths, which fits with a specter's origin story (see above) but doesn't have the infectious quality wraiths had in past editions.  Feel free to change it back to wraiths begetting other wraiths.
  • Vampires:  These leeches need blood, have some serious Achilles heels, and look totally normal.  So they spread slowly and keep a lot of living humans around to feed on.  Once they become powerful enough to openly dominate a whole region, like Count Strahd von Zarovich, they stop caring as much about secrecy.  Vampires are conspiracies (dare I say... camaraillas?) hidden within human society like parasites infesting a host.  Vampires are also a darkly romantic image, with the sexual metaphor of blood drinking and relationship violence metaphor of mental enslavement.  Note that the 5th edition designers made vampires create vampire spawn, not other vampires.  You can change this:  Vampires can make other vampires, but it's a conscious decision.
  • Wights:  Wights are super ghouls.  Traditionally in D&D, when they kill someone, they come back as a Wight under the killer's control.  In 5e D&D, the victim comes back as a zombie under the Wight's control.  Basically they're the zombie plague if it was smart.  And they're smart.  So they keep their spread secret, maybe form into armies or other spooky Deadite / Army of Darkness scenarios.  Maybe they rule a valley as god-kings and keep a tribe of humans as their cattle.  If you want to keep the 5e Wight epidemiology, that's fine - one Wight forms the villain at the head of a deadite army!  But you could go back to previous editions and have a feudalism of Wights, with a "patient zero" Wight controlling a second tier, some of whom have their own sub-Wights.

September 7, 2016

How to Write a Character Personality

Your character is more than a collection of stats and plot hooks.  Unless you're comfortable with a lot of bleed-in (and some people are), you probably want your character's personality to be distinct from your own.  You want to pretend to be someone else -- not just yourself with magic and armor.

In the past, I've talked about how to write a character background.  That's a great way to build a rich character with goals and enemies and connections.  But it doesn't finish the job:  You still need a personality.

There are a lot of ways to generate a character personality.  D&D has the famous alignment system, which I've written about in the past.  The World of Darkness has Virtues and Vices (and previously, Nature and Demeanor).  Other RPGs have had all kinds of other systems for helping you build your character's personality.  Some give you a mechanical incentive to act a certain way.  Others are a list of behaviors you're supposed to avoid or always do.

Regardless of the system the RPG you're playing uses, the best way to build a quick and memorable character personality that's easy to play and hard to forget is to use a list of absolutes.

Absolutes are behaviors your character always or never does, even when it would be pretty stupid to stick to them.  And absolutes are not just for "lawful stupid" paladins (priests, detectives, officers, etc.) and stick-up-the-butt elves (ventrue, wizards, high society types etc.).  Easy-going slackers and anti-authoritarian rakes have absolutes, too.

Consider the holy roller paladin who never murders sentient creatures.  When the party plans to ambush some bandits, the paladin refuses to join in.  "They're not hurting anyone, just walking through the forest.  It's not self defense.  I won't just kill them."

But also consider the foul-mouthed fighter who always mouths off to authority.  "Hey your high muckety muck-ness, you got your forest cleared of bandits.  Now what do I get for sticking my neck out, huh?"

How To
Pick at least two and at most five absolutes for your character and write them down somewhere you'll always see them, such as the top of your character sheet.

Revise them to make them as short and sweet as possible.  You can always explain to others that "Never Murder" means never kill a sentient living being without first giving it a chance to surrender or flee (as appropriate). But it's easier for you to write "Never Murder" on top of your character sheet, so you never forget it's there.  You just need the constant reminder.

Absolutes relate to specific topics.  Those topics are social norms - norms of respect, harm, autonomy, responsibility, purity, chastity, honor, honesty, politesse, etc.  Your character probably doesn't have an extreme position on every cultural norm, but here's a list of common cultural norms you might have an absolute position on:

  • Dignity/Vanity:  ALWAYS respond to an insult.  NEVER expect to be treated with respect.  ALWAYS downplay my achievements and value.  NEVER let someone call me anything but Sir or Sir Henry.  NEVER go out in public in shabby clothing.  ALWAYS exaggerate my accomplishments.
  • Respect:  ALWAYS call people sir or m'am.  NEVER use a noble's title.  ALWAYS push people's buttons and provoke them to anger.  NEVER show disrespect to my elders.
  • Piety:  ALWAYS show respect to the gods, even the dark ones.  NEVER trust a priest.  ALWAYS make sacrilegious jokes.  NEVER leave the dead unburied.
  • Self-Control/Gravitas/Temperance:  NEVER show emotion.  ALWAYS try to get people to laugh and cheer.  NEVER talk about my family because it hurts too much.  ALWAYS cry when someone I know dies.  NEVER repeat myself unless asked to.  ALWAYS go straight to death threats when things don't go my way.
  • Forgiveness:  NEVER forgive a wrong.  ALWAYS forgive and forget wrongs against myself (never against innocents).
  • Chastity/Purity:  NEVER drink alcohol or take drugs.  ALWAYS get blitzed between adventures.  NEVER turn down seductions.  ALWAYS flirt with attractive NPCs.
  • Prudence/Recklessness:  ALWAYS touch the shiny.  NEVER walk into a situation without an exit plan.  ALWAYS get it in writing.  NEVER trust an elf.  ALWAYS trust women.  NEVER compromise (my way or the highway).  NEVER make a threat I'm not willing to carry out.  
  • Exchange:  ALWAYS return a favor immediately (NEVER let someone have a debt over me).  NEVER do something for nothing.  ALWAYS give generously, tip generously, and share my wealth generously.
  • Courage:  NEVER stick my neck out for a stranger.  ALWAYS protect those weaker than myself, even unto death.  NEVER kill a fleeing foe.  ALWAYS be the first through the door.  NEVER ask someone to do something I wouldn't.  ALWAYS avoid scandal and shame.
  • Loyalty:  NEVER let a friend down.  NEVER make promises.  ALWAYS look out for number one - everyone else can go to hell.  ALWAYS repent for a mistake.
  • Honesty:  NEVER tell a lie.  ALWAYS try to convince people I'm on their side.  NEVER pretend to be who I'm not.  ALWAYS seal a bargain with a drink.  ALWAYS punish people who break their promises to me.

How Absolute is Absolute?
The mood of the game you're playing in will set how absolute your rules should be.

Superheros get to have absolute ethical boundaries that always seem to work out in the end.  No matter how dumb it seems that Batman doesn't just kill the Joker, it still works out OK because even if the Joker escapes Arkham, Batman always catches him again before he pulls off some horrible scheme.

But in a horror game, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't:  If you act against your instincts under pressure, you'll suffer for it.  If you stubbornly stick to your bad habits or morals, you might become a martyr to them.

Gritty mood games tend to push your boundaries, offering you chances to break from your absolutes and have your character evolve, or else suffer for their decisions (both of which are interesting developments).  The ethical paladin becomes more of a cold-blooded pragmatist and is judged for it.  The mouthy rake learns when to hold their tongue and grows as a person.

Character Growth
Your character might grow and change.  Absolutes give you a great opportunity to do so!  When you encounter a situation where your absolutes are tested, you can choose to act according to your absolutes and suffer the consequences or act against them and grow as a character.

If you stubbornly martyr yourself to your absolutes, you can choose to see the effect it had and regret it or defend your principles to the last.  If you stray from your absolutes, you can regret it and see it as a one time mistake, or you can realize you've been wrong all along and evolve as a person.

September 1, 2016

Smarter Theater of the Mind Mechanics

5th Edition D&D claims to be based around Theater of the Mind action.  The Starter Set doesn't come with any printed maps or miniatures, and the default mode of play is pure imagination.  The problem is that the designers describe everything you can do in terms of feet of distance.  They made no effort to overhaul the classic D&D "20' sphere" and "30' movement rate" to use actual Theater of the Mind range, movement, and positioning mechanics.

So I wanted to share with you a few ways a competing fantasy RPG - 13th Age - handles "theater of the mind" that you could house-rule into your 5e games.  13th Age is not some fan created hack (no offense to all the awesome fan hacks out there).  It was written by Rob Heinsoo and Jonathan Tweet, lead designers of 4th and 3rd edition D&D, and published by Pelgrane Press, an experienced, thriving game company with a vast library of ENnie award-winning titles, including 13th Age (which took silver for Best Rules in 2014).

Before we start, you should be aware that 13th Age has an SRD, so everything I'm talking about is publicly available at www.13thagesrd.com.  I recommend if you like what you read, that you go buy the 13th Age core book, because the art is phenomenal (you don't get that from the SRD!) and the game is great.  I like Pelgrane so much I just linked their page directly instead of using my amazon affiliate link (not that those ever generate any income, but it's the principle of the thing.)  Also, the Theater of the Mind combat rules are only one of 13th Age's interesting and innovative mechanics.  Go check it out!

On to the meat of the article.  The four things you need to consider with theater of the mind tactical combat are...

  1. Range and Movement
  2. Positioning, Tanking, and Intercepting
  3. Area of Effect Magic
  4. Retreat
This is an article for 5th Edition D&D DMs struggling with Theater of the Mind action.  So I'm going to cover how 13th Age handles these four things, and give you a tip after each that will help you improve your 5th Edition D&D game by importing some wisdom from 13th Age.    

Range and Movement

There are three ranges in 13th Age:  Engaged (you're right next to them), Nearby (you can get to them in one move), and Far Away (two moves away from enemies, possibly more).  Ranged weapons fall into three categories.  Some can only hit Nearby enemies (thrown dagger), some can hit Nearby enemies and also Far Away enemies at -2 (javelin), and some can hit Nearby and Far Away enemies equally well (bows and crossbows).

13th age doesn't measure movement down to increments of five feet.  It's designed explicitly for Theater of the Mind action (though many 13th Age groups still use minis and maps), so it cares about where people are relative to each other instead of exact distances.  They make a few sacrifices for this:  Halflings and Dwarves can move around in combat as quickly as Elves and Humans.  But on the other hand, there's no need to get into arguments about distance, track who's within 30' for your javelin, and quarrel about whether your cleric can move to the fallen ranger to heal them.  The distance between things is measured in moves, not feet.

In 13th Age, a character can move to anything that's Nearby with their move.  A character can close distance from Far Away from something to Nearby with their move.  A character can Disengage with a move.  Disengaging is different from 5e D&D.  In 5e D&D, Disengage is an action.  In 13th Age, it's a move.  You either move away and take an opportunity attack or make a roll to Disengage (like the old 3rd edition Tumble check).  If you fail, you lose your move.  Some classes get abilities that interact with the Disengage roll to make them good at hit-and-run tactics.  I actually like the 5th edition D&D Disengage rule better than the 13th Age rule (5e also gives classes Disengage mechanics - see the Rogue's Cunning Action).

5e DM Tip!  If you're using theater of the mind action, it's already impossible to tell whether a Dwarf is too slow to get to a nearby enemy, unless you constantly track relative distances between each and every character in the scene.  Nobody does that.  So start describing distance in terms of "moves" instead of feet, with the understanding that one "move" is about 25 or 30 feet, if it matters.

Positioning, Tanking, and Intercepting

When you're using minis and a battlemap, the tactical movement options in 5e are wide open, but when you're using Theater of the Mind, it's impossible to keep track of the exact distance, in feet, between your character and every other relevant character and object in the encounter.  So your options for tactical positioning in 13th Age are not limited just because there's no grid.  They added a positioning system that doesn't use feet, but allows you to make declarations about where you are relative to other combatants.  That means you can keep track of a lot more information about relative positions since it's not all in exact numbers of feet.  There's no trigonometry involved.  Here are some of your positioning options in 13th Age:

You can move Far Away to avoid being attacked.  Since that takes two moves, nothing can both move to you and attack, and some ranged weapons can't hit you.

You can move Behind an ally, forcing enemies to go around the ally to get to you.  Any time an enemy tries to go around you, you can Intercept them, which lets you become Engaged with them and end their movement.

When you're Engaged with an enemy, it's hard for them to get away.  So you can "tank" by engaging with enemies.  They have to make a check to move away from you without taking an opportunity attack, and if they fail, they lose their move; or they can decide to just move away and take the attack without trying to disengage.  Protector type classes (and monsters!) have abilities that interact with the intercept, disengage, and opportunity attack mechanics to make them more "sticky."  Skirmisher type classes (and monsters!) have abilities that interact with these mechanics to make them more "slippery."

Other situations that are less clear are resolved with a GM call or an ability check if there's disagreement.  So if you rush the necromancer, and the GM says you have to go around his zombies to do it, the GM might refer to when they described the scene "I said the zombies filled the hallway shoulder to shoulder, with the necromancer behind them."  You can counter by saying "Yeah, but I can try leaping off the altar and swinging from the hanging tapestry, up out of their reach," and the GM will call for a Dex check.

5e DM Tip!  You can't copy 13th Age positioning into D&D without a lot of house rules, but you can take its advice about "Dicey Moves" -- any time a player argues that they can make a move in theater of the mind action, and you disagree, instead settle the disagreement with a die roll.  This is part of the larger "say yes or roll the dice" principle.  Any time a player wants to do something, and you think the opposition is too great, it's a disagreement over whether their character is good enough to overcome it.  That's literally what the system is for:  Let the dice decide whether their character is good enough.

Area of Effect Magic

5th edition D&D handles area of effect magic all wrong for theater of the mind.  It tells you that your character can send a streak of flame from your character's fingertip to a point you choose within 150' assuming your character has uninterrupted line of effect to that spot, at which point it explodes into a 20' radius sphere centered on that point, spreading around corners.  To know if you can hit multiple creatures, you need to know how far they are from you, how far they are from each other, how far they are from your allies, and then compute some trigonometry to figure out if you can choose a point to target that will hit as many enemies as possible without hitting your allies.  That's totally inappropriate for theater of the mind, and it results in a lot of "Haha sucker!  You also hit the fighter!  Ragnar has to make a Dex save!"

Take a look!

3rd-level evocation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 150 feet
Components: V, S, M (a tiny ball of bat guano and sulfur)
Duration: Instantaneous
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the damage increases by 1d6 for each slot level above 3rd.

13th Age is better for theater of the mind play.  It says that at any given time there are 1, 2, or 3 enemies close enough together that you can hit them, and if you're willing to cast it recklessly (which is a no brainer if your allies are not currently engaged with the enemy), you can actually get 2-6 enemies inside its explosive radius.  Instead of the GM deciding if you can hit 1 or 3 enemies, you roll a die.

Ranged spell; Daily
Special: When you cast this spell, you can choose to cast it recklessly.
Target: 1d3 nearby enemies in a group. If you cast recklessly, you can target 1d3 additional enemies, but then your allies engaged with the target may also take damage (see below).
Attack: Intelligence + Level vs. PD
Hit: 10d10 fire damage.
Miss: Half damage.
Reckless miss: Your allies engaged with the target take one-fourth damage.
7th level spell 12d10 damage.
9th level spell 20d10 damage.
Champion Feat Casting the spell recklessly increases the number of additional targets to 1d4 instead of 1d3.
Epic Feat Increase the number of targets to 1d3 + 1 instead of 1d3.

DM Tip!  5th edition D&D doesn't have such elegant theater of the mind AOE rules.  So you have to accept player assertions, like "I can get the three skeletons fighting Ragnar without hitting him."  If you start quibbling these things, you're wasting time and setting up an adversarial relationship with the players.  


It doesn't get more high stakes than a battle you're about to lose.  And when the stakes are high, whether or not you can successfully retreat and save your hide is a big deal.  In a game where distances and movement and relative positioning are measured in feet, it's a mess.

If you're routed in 5th edition D&D and decide to retreat, the combat system is not your friend.  Movement speeds in feet, initiative rounds, etc. all stack up against you, even if you're using a grid and miniatures.  Running away from a fight should not be that hard.

In 13th Age, it's much easier:  "Fleeing is a party action. On any PC's turn, any player can propose that all the characters flee the fight. If all players agree, they successfully retreat, carrying any fallen heroes away with them. The party suffers a campaign loss. The point of this rule is to encourage daring attacks and to make retreating interesting on the level of story rather than tactics."  (http://www.13thagesrd.com/combat-rules)

A "campaign loss" means "something bad happens in the story because you were defeated."  It doesn't mean you "lose the game."  Obviously, that's better than a TPK.  Because retreating is easy to understand and easy to do, players in 13th Age are braver and GMs can create more deadly situations without worrying about causing a TPK -- and as a result, the PCs lose more fights, but the campaign doesn't grind to a halt.

5e DM tip!  Import the 13th Age "Flee" rule wholecloth.  It'll make your PCs take bigger risks, and they'll lose more fights without ending the campaign.  It's a win-win!

August 23, 2016

Mood Infographic

Today's post is an infographic on mood in tabletop RPGs!

If you want a more detailed dive into mood in tabletop RPGs than this infographic, click on over to this old article here.  But I'll warn you -- the graphics are ugly.

Here's a much better looking infographic.

GMs, you need to be clear about the mood of your game before the players even make characters.  It determines who the protagonists are, what their ethical considerations will focus on, and how conflicts will resolve.  Superheros just beat up the obvious bad guy.  But in a gothic horror scenario, it may turn out that there's no good guy, and that the PCs were the real bad guy all along.  It determines conflict resolution - in a dark mood game, defeat is common and fun.  In a monster hunter game, defeat is rare and disappointing.

August 16, 2016

Weekly Wrap Up - Critical Hits, Infographics, and More

First big news:  I have another guest post up on Critical Hits today.  This one is on skill challenges in 5th edition D&D.  I crunched a lot of numbers to make sure the probabilities worked out for you, then I had to temper those numbers with the details of D&D - class abilities and spells that can give PCs huge advantages in exploration and interaction scenes.  Take a look at the earlier 5e skill work I did here.

Second, I've been making a lot of infographics based around concepts on the blog.  I'm enjoying it, and they get more shares and clicks than detailed blog posts.  Obviously we need a mix of quick and easy graphics and deep dives in blog articles, so I'm going to keep doing both!  Here's another infographic for today!  I plan to do one based around the 5e skill challenges piece, too, if I can figure out how.

This one is on the three act structure - a sort of "reminder" or cheat sheet.  If you recall, I did a big piece on the three act structure and the hero's journey a few years ago.  I'm not loving the bullet points, but it looked better with them than without.  Any real designers have tips on how to incorporate lists into graphics?

Last of all, I read a neat piece over on Sly Flourish quoting Mike Mearls' "we designed for the table, then we designed for theory, now we're designing for the table again" commentary and discussing the actual play podcasts and video series' and their potential impact on the hobby.  I had two thoughts on that.

First, RPG actual play isn't always how people actually play.  I think the videos and podcasts of "actual play" RPG sessions out there are a varying mix of reality and kayfabe.  Some, like the One Shots podcast, aim to show off how the system actually runs.  They're like a cooking show or a product demo. It's like if Rachel Ray GMed an Edge of the Empire game to show you how it's done.  Others, like the Force Grey series are closer to pro wrestling than the Food Network - they're set up for awesome improv between professional (or at least part-time) comedians -- not to actually portray how your Friday night D&D session actually works.  Force Grey is even edited.  Sure, they use the system, but they could be using any RPG system to the same ends, riffing off good and bad die roll results.  You can see a continuum in Chris Perkins alone:  The PAX live Acquisitions Incorporated shows are more theater than D&D (more Ray Mysterio than Rachel Ray); but the AI series is more D&D than theater.  They do away with the elaborate sets and models, and Chris Perkis is running a game a lot closer to how most GMs actually run D&D than his PAX Live performance.  There's definitely a place for each.  In my limited time, I appreciate the edited, entertainment-dense Force Grey shows, even though I'm aware that this is not how my D&D sessions will ever work, and in many ways I don't want them to work that way.  (Example: If you've been reading Run a Game for a while, you probably know why I don't like the trap scene in Episode 5 of Force Grey!) 

Second, designing for the table is a laudable aim.  But moving away from theory is not.  It's one thing to say "we neglected the table, so we're bringing that aspect back into the design" and another entirely to say "we neglected the table with our focus on theory, so we stopped designing from a strong theoretical base."  That's a common complaint about 5e - a lot of it feels thrown together and then playtested to shave the rough edges off.  Not that it's a bad edition of D&D, mind you!  I love it, but its "table first" design shows.  Table First makes fun (though poorly balanced) PC classes but terrible Monster Manuals.  A better philosophy would be to say "In the 80s and 90s we were great at designing for actual play, but we didn't have a strong theoretical base.  With 3e and 4e we developed a strong theoretical base, but we neglected to design for actual play.  Now we're aiming to build a strong theoretical base, and then shape it for actual play."  Doesn't that make more sense?

August 10, 2016

Magic Circle infographic

Relevant articles on Run a Game:

  • http://www.runagame.net/2015/05/the-magic-circle.html
  • http://www.runagame.net/2016/04/stance-and-magic-circle.html
  • http://www.runagame.net/2015/07/immersion.html