4e and Life Expectancy

Candace was casually thumbing through the Fourth Edition Players Handbook the other day at my request when she spotted something a little odd.

I needed her to give the book a glance because she's a set of relatively fresh eyes as far as Role Playing and Dungeons & Dragons are concerned. My reading of Fourth Edition materials tend to leave me either crumpled in a corner whimpering or foaming at the mouth and gnashing my teeth. Her perspective would have to be closest I could get to an unbiased view until I actually have a chance to play/run it.

She noticed that oddly, the life expectancies for virtually all of the pre-existing races had been reduced rather drastically. This wasn't too unusual really, as Fourth Edition seems to be more geared for "Heroic" play that centers on characters retiring at 30th level as challenging encounters dry up (granted, this could be rectified with future Paragon/Epic Tier Splats), so living to a ripe-old age is pretty out of the question.

However she did notice that Tieflings did not have a life-expectancy listed. This will probably be clarified and Errata'd into oblivion but it did get my gears turning after a fashion. Is it being tacitly implied that Tieflings are immortal barring hazard?

Odd.

Back and Fourth

I wonder if anyone is contemplating an OD&D conversion of H1: Keep on the Shadowfell.

On the various blogs and boards that I frequent, there seems to be a remarkable lack of understanding between the grognards (self-styled or otherwise) and the unaffectionately dubbed 4ons (before this, it was 3etards, which also got a giggle from me). I think some of this friction could be due to the lack of a shared vernacular when it comes down to what each edition contributed to the style of play.

Ask a grognard about "shifting" or "feats" and the best you'll get is a blank stare.

Ask a fan of fourth edition about re-rolling hit points at every level, or the concept of "Race as Class" and you'll be met with the same reaction.

Many of the conversations are one-sided, with the OD&D gamers sounding suitably venerable and crotchety (with frenetic exclamations that often begin with "back in my day") while the newer 4th Edition gamers who have migrated from a crunchier 3.5 are busy drooling over potential synergistic exploits and cool factor.

For instance, after the "shift" to Third Edition, character optimization became character concept. I fail to see anything really wrong with that. My OD&D players optimized the heck out of their characters whenever they were given the chance, and as a DM (a mantle that when worn, does not give you the game-given right to be an ass) I encouraged this. The magical sword found in the crypt in Chandlerwood, the musty tome of forgotten fire magics found in an abandoned monastery near the Lavafalls, a set of Gnomish Thieves Tools that when commanded would be wielded by small spectral gnomes who actually climbed into the lock to pick it, the players loved these things because they made the characters more awesome. I know, "These goodies were handed out based on DM fiat" you protest! "Players had no where near the control that they have now!" Wrong. The only thing limiting player control is the DM, and as "bringer of fun" it's your job to insure this happens, not to tell your story. Seriously, your story is only mildly interesting at best.

But back to our sheep, what would be nice, however daunting, would be some transcripts of Actual Play for each of the editions, for the same adventure. This would do wonders to eliminate some of the fluffiness that causes the veterans to weep and the greenhorns to cheer. The crunch is what could serve as a universal language, the much-maligned "Common Tongue." Even though OD&D didn't have rules for governing some of the things that the newer editions do, gamers and game masters everywhere still have the same baseline of creativity. All D&D games edition-neutered can be just as fun and memorable as each other, but very few have attempted to accept the challenge of dissecting why. Less rules in OD&D served as a springboard for creativity and house rules, but people are house-ruling things in 4e right out of the box. Why is this? The reasons seem to revolve around either More Balance or More Fun. The problem is Balance can be an enchantment applied to a FunBane sword. Just as Fun spells counter Balance.

A first level Mentzer Dwarf could Cleave as a critical hit house-rule (on a natural 20 naturally) with the approval of a non-adversarial referee. Is this balance, or is this fun? It is highly likely that 4th Edition is no more fun or balanced.

I think we all forget that there is no wrong way to have fun, and that D&D has been about fun since its conception. It is not now, nor will it ever be, "more fun." Rules and mechanics simply don't do that. Instead, rules and mechanics are there to tell you "how" and "when" and "where" a predetermined amount of fun can take place. While certain groups and play-styles may lend themselves to certain editions, they do not limit.

My initial reactionary thoughts on my WoAdWriMo contribution for this month were as follows:

A Chaotic Evil Dragonman Wizard and his Neutral Evil half-devil henchmen are disenchanting magical items across the land and systematically destroying the economy, it is up to our intrepid band of Neutral Good gnomish PCs to stop him.

Instead, I might try to eviscerate as much fluff and IP from H1 (a dangerous task, all things considered, as the last thing I want is to cleave through a swarm of legal minions). As purely a thought exercise, I believe that that Fellshadow Fortress is just begging to be a rollicking OD&D romp.

Or better yet, design an adventure that can be run in any version of D&D, so that my dreams of uniting players from all editions under a common banner may someday be realized, or at the very least, help to bridge the chasm of incredulity that players on both sides of Edition Canyon seem to be camped on.

Perhaps even better, an OD&D adventure with 4e feel and vice versa. Hmm.

Taking the Initiative

Some notes on Initiative:

Index Cards have been wonderful for tracking initiative.

As a self-admitted Index Card junkie, I have literally thousands of them lying around at any given time. When I discovered that my venerable printer could print on them, I began to print cards with enemy statistics for ease of reference. Once initiative has been determined I can scrawl this on a card and stack them in order to keep track of the order.

Possible ways to improve:

Currently, I only ask for the player’s Armor Class and Initiative score to place them in the pile. Noting Hit Points on the card seems like it would result in too much redundant bookkeeping. Perceptions skills, ranges, and other tactical tidbits could be useful though.

For Monster cards, the borders or backs of the cards could be used to store random numbers. d20 along the top and bottom, maybe damage dice along the sides. If these factored in bonuses as well, that would be snazzy. Even just damage would eliminate some of the rolls and quick math, shaving seconds off of resolution.

Pre-rolling Initiative for enemies has also been great.

I must remember to group enemies together though. This heightens the pace and can be really evocative for conveying the “horde” or “swarm” mentality of minor opponents.

Rolling Initiative at the beginning of the Session works wonders for communicating a sense of anticipation for combat or a tactical encounter during the session, and also makes adjudicating Surprise that much more Surprising. Rolling Initiative for the next encounter at the end of an encounter is also handy.

An idea: with any type of sequential combat tracking system, instead of turning to the player on their turn and asking for an action, solicit this action by narrating a shift in focus. Describe the perceptions or actions directed against the player whose turn it is to indicate their turn.

Example: Krycon Narssisimar and a Lutzel the Low are toe-to-toe at the beginning of Krycon’s turn. Instead of asking Krycon what he wants to do, get in the habit of describing what Lutzel is trying to do to him, turning Krycon’s action into a reaction to the narrative.

MKhexgrid

Just a quick note about some lovely software I stumbled across while trawling the internet for Numbered Hex Maps:

MKhexgrid - a hex grid generator

The following spec.txt file seems to be working really well to generate a full page of decently sized, numbered hexes:


columns = 30
rows = 20
hex-side = 30
grid-grain = v
output = png
outfile = tut3.png
antialias = true
coord-bearing = 90
coord-distance = 18


Numbered hexes are the only way to map, and stocking all the hexes on Index Cards means that adventurers are never wont for adventures.

Rolling Dice (cont.)

In my previous post, I expounded upon the difficulties of dice. Seeking a solution, I acquired a variety of plastic containers to test the hack.

The cases that seemed to suit my needs best were made by a company called Craft Mates. They were less opaque than others, and the added benefit of a locking mechanism for the compartments means that I can shake the entire container vigorously without letting loose a hail of dice.

Interestingly, my favorite flavor of the Craft Mates I purchased contains 7 separate alcoves, each large enough for 3d6. Can you say "Instant NPC?" Using a standard Attribute Order (STR, DEX, INT, WIS, CON, CHR), I can generate the crucial stats for a generic NPC with a quickness hereto only rivaled by the tiny BASIC program I wrote in Middle School.

For most utilities though, the seven compartment can be filled as follows: d100, d20, d12, d10, d8, d6, d4. Even the unrully rolliness of the standard pyramidal d4 seems to be somewhat better when the dice are provided with a limited range of motion. I'm sure there have been studies to determine the amount of "shakes" required in order to maximize randomness (just as I recall reading somewhere that shuffling the standard deck of cards seven times seems optimal), but three quick (and thunderous!) shakes seem to produce a pretty broad spectrum.

Naturally, the players have yet to adopt this practice. There's a fair degree of superstition that goes into most of their die rolls and it seems that convenience can't overcome their predilection for the skin-to-skin contact of rolling dice the old-fashioned way.

On a Roll..

We’ve all experienced it. Either as players, or much more often, as DMs: Dice, and the rolling of said dice can take up a lot of valuable tabletop space. Numerous house rules have been developed concerning dice landing on the floor, askew and partially atop rulebooks, in drinks, ad infinitum.

I had a moderate epiphany today that could very well address these issues.

It started this morning as I was blearily leaving for work; Candace recently purchased a pill case that finally met her grueling standards. It’s quite large, and her reasoning behind putting off the purchase for so long was that a lot of her vitamins and supplements are much larger than the standard pill. As I was standing and staring at the box, I absentmindedly wondered how many dice could fit in a case like that.

Flash forward to a smoke break later in the day, that’s when the thought hit me: If a clear plastic container can contain the dice for storage and portability purposes, then why not utilize it for rolling purposes as well?

As I sit behind my homemade screen, I have rulebooks, stat sheets, index cards, and sundry other gaming supplies competing for space on my small side of the table. Rolling dice becomes such a hassle, that I have often just considered generating sheet after sheet of random numbers and marking them down successively. But if my dice we’re all stored within self-contained clear containers, rolling them would only involve shaking the container a few times and setting it down to read the pip. This could be particularly handy for percentile dice.

I believe there was an old board game that echoes this idea (Sorry? Boggle?), only 2d6 was stored within a clear plastic dome, and rolling was accomplished by depressing the dome. Now some of those would be pretty handy. Good bye dice clutter! Hello new self-contained rolls!

Container Store, here I come.

Note: If this idea has already been done, then I’m unaware of its application. If you utilize this idea to make RPG millions, I would appreciate a free set and some credit.

What kind of D&D character would you be?

I Am A: Neutral Good Human Bard (4th Level)


Ability Scores:

Strength-9

Dexterity-14

Constitution-13

Intelligence-17

Wisdom-12

Charisma-14


Alignment:
Neutral Good A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order. However, neutral good can be a dangerous alignment because because it advances mediocrity by limiting the actions of the truly capable.


Race:
Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.


Class:
Bards often serve as negotiators, messengers, scouts, and spies. They love to accompany heroes (and villains) to witness heroic (or villainous) deeds firsthand, since a bard who can tell a story from personal experience earns renown among his fellows. A bard casts arcane spells without any advance preparation, much like a sorcerer. Bards also share some specialized skills with rogues, and their knowledge of item lore is nearly unmatched. A high Charisma score allows a bard to cast high-level spells.


Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus (e-mail)