Christian Johnson's page

First, let me state that I am a HUGE Hero Games fan, but I cannot tolerate the DC Heroes slighting that has gone on here.

The DC Heroes (2nd and 3rd editions only) system is extraordinarily robust. In fact, it is as flexible as Hero and it plays much quicker. It is more 'role' play than tactical, Hero is the king of tactical -- having Star Fleet Battles as one of its system influences.

I also noticed some slighting the FUZION engine version of Champions. While I too would not recommend it, it was an amazingly ambitious attempt to fuse Champions with R. Talsorian's Cyberpunk system. In that capacity, it succeeded greatly. The publishers merely underestimated the love their fans had for their house system. The reboot was likely published as 4e sales dropped as every 4e product was a Dark Champions product for a good sting.

All that said, Hero 5th is a great game with great support. The Galactic Champions sourcebook is a good place to look if you want to run a Legion game.

Christian

Sell it?! Are you crazy?!

Sure, I bought 4th edition. Sure, I'll mostly play 4th edition from now on. Mostly. I still play Chill, DC Heroes, Star Ace, Buck Rogers, and Star Frontiers (to mention a few) from time to time.

I have a gaming library and I don't imagine that will change soon.

I hate the old delve format, but the way they adapted it to 4e works great. No flipping back and forth, everything laid out easy to read.

Um...I'm pretty sure that Doom was kidding when he said "stop spreading your vile lies." I'm pretty sure he knows that 2nd edition had psionics and may even know that the 1st edition PHB had the world's most awesome psionics rules (as did Eldritch Wizardry) which were totally balanced.

No one has answered the trivia questions yet, but you can email the answer to geekeratiradio@gmail.com

Join us in a conversation with tonight's Geekerati Online Radio Show guest Erik Mona. Visit and discuss the exciting Planet Stories line of books and the new Pathfinder roleplaying game.

The Geekerati Radio Show focuses on "Geek Culture," everything from movies and comic books, video and roleplaying games, to Science Fiction, Fantasy, Pulp, and Mystery novels.

Geekerati is a featured show of the BlogTalkRadio network (and a part of the BlogCritics channel on BTR), a network that is revolutionizing the way podcasting is done on the internet. The shows initially air live and then are stored on iTunes as podcasts. You can listen to archived episodes at www.blogtalkradio.com/geekerati or look up Geekerati on iTunes.

The show airs live on Mondays at 7pm Pacific Time as an interactive broadcast. If you have questions for Erik, you can call in at (646) 478-5041 or you can join our chatroom as the show airs.

Past guests on the show have included:
* Open Game Design Founder Wolfgang Baur
* Film and Television writer John Rogers discussing the writer strike, LEVERAGE, and comic books.
* Television writer/producer Tim Minear (Angel/Firefly) discussing the writer strike.
* Television writer/producer Rob Long(Cheers) discussing the writer strike.
* Variety editors David S. Cohen and Peter Debruge discussing film animation and this year's crop of films, including the remarkable 3D animation on BEOWULF.
* Game Designer and Author Matt Forbeck.
* Science Fiction author Susan Palwick who discussed her excellent novel "Shelter"
* Comic Writer/Reporter Marc Bernardin discussing his Highwaymen comic book.
* Film Critics Luke Y. Thompson (The OC Weekly) and David Chute (The LA Weekly and Premiere.com)
* Wold Newton Historian Win Eckert discussing pulps and the Wold Newton Universe.
* Comic Book editor and author Jeff Mariotte
* Game and Publishing Industry Editor James Lowder.
* Many others.

ABOUT GEEKERATI RADIO – Geekerati Radio is an online radio show hosted by Christian Johnson, Shawna Benson, Bill Cunningham, and Eric Lytle which features discussion of popular culture by geeks for geeks and is a featured show in the BlogTalkRadio network. The Geekerati Radio show airs Monday nights at 7pm Pacific and the archives are available 24/7

I would love to see Action Points in the Pathfinder RPG. In my Eberron campaign, and in my Pathfinder campaign, we use APs as a standard part of the game. What might surprise most of you is how the players use the majority of their Action Points, it's not for rerolls. I let them use APs to:

1) Stabilize automatically, something desperately needed in the Pathfinder Adventure path.
2) Gain an additional use of a x times per day power. Low level Paladins won't hesitate to use an AP to smite again. The barbarian rages more. This was especially true in CARNIVAL of TEARS where resting at all means the death of the town.
3) The standard roll 1d6 "before you know whether you succeed or fail" and add it to a d20 roll. I can't tell you how many times I have stressed the players out and they have spent points when they didn't need to spend them.
4) Alter the environment in some useful way. Remember the DC Heroes RPG? Imagine your PCs sword is sundered and he needs a weapon. You're at Thistletop and there are certainly a lot of weapons in certain rooms, but is there another longsword. Instead of begging the DM and getting into a conversation, if you have it standard for APs to alter the environment with an AP cost associated with "severity" of alteration, you just ask "how many APs do I need to spend to 'find' a shortsword lying around in a convenient location?" It's very useful as a tool, particularly if you are not relying on battlemaps. You can use APs as a means for Rogues to ensure they are flanking, which is difficult to arbitrate without a tactical map. By difficult, I mean it is arbitrary without a map. But incorporate APs and it suddenly isn't.

Those are just some of the ways we use APs in my home game.

Did I mention that I own SenZar and The World of Synnibarr too? Not that I like those, just that my obsession with trying the new led me to purchase them.

Let me assure you that SenZar is the "In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale" of rpgs.

I have to say that I am surprised, and disappointed, to read that Amber Scott will not be writing products for 4th edition.

I also don't understand her reasoning that she doesn't want to learn another system, that she'll just stay with 3.5/GURPS.

I don't mean that insultingly btw, I'm just one of those weird guys who obsesses about learning new systems, 3.5 and GURPS are very good systems and Amber is right to enjoy them. But I also like Chill (both editions), Star Ace (okay same system), Burning Wheel, Call of Cthulhu, Esoterrorists, Feng Shui, James Bond 007, Top Secret, Top Secret SI, Champions, DC Heroes, Marvel Superheroes, Marvel SAGA, Star Wars d6, Savage Worlds, Villains and Vigilantes, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, Earthdawn, Shadowrun, the Storyteller system, and many more.

As a game player, I am excited to learn new systems -- even when I don't play them, and I find it disappointing that someone whose work I have enjoyed in the past (Secrets of Xendrik) won't be working on a new edition of a game that I am excited about.

To clarify, my disappointment is not with Amber, but with the fact that I won't be able to buy Amber 4th edition products. Speaking of Amber...I like that game too.

Earlier in the year, to the rejoice of Heroscape fans, the successful Heroscape line was put under the purview of the WotC division of Hasbro. Now it looks like the man who headed up the department that supported the creation of Heroscape is moving over to WotC. Doesn't sound like a bad fit to me.

The relationship the Heroscape community has with Hasbro, prior to the Wizards shift, was a positive and transparent relationship -- something we can all agree has been lacking at Wizards.

Loren's stepping down may well be GSL related, or it could be that Hasbro wants to bring someone who has been successful in increasing sales to "boys" over to a department that is treading water.

As for the history of companies run by gamers for gamers, it has been mixed. Palladium suffered from internal financial difficulties and almost went out of business, TSR had some internal strife due to some shenanigans back in the day, many gamer run companies have been victims of financial hinkydom. I don't mind having business people in charge of the money, so long as they leave the creative stuff to the creative people. It works for movies, books, and TV.

Ah. the joys of being a Superscriber and a PS Subscriber.

D&D has always been a cinematic system and not a gritty one. This is intentional, but I won't let my argument stand upon my own assertions alone. Let's see what good ol' Gary had to say back in Dragon #24 (ah, that CD rom collection is awesome):

This melee system also hinges on the number of hit points assigned to characters. As I have repeatedly pointed out, if a rhino can take a maximum amount of damage equal to eight of nine eight-sided dice, a maximum of 64 or 72 hit points of damage to kill, it is positively absurd to assume that an 8th level fighter with average scores on his or her hit dice and an 18 consititution, thus having 76 hit points, can physically withstand more punishment than a rhino before being killed. Hit points are a combination of actual physical consititution, skill at the avoidance of taking real physical damage, luck and/or magical or divine factors. Ten points of damage dealt to a rhino indicated a considerable wound, while the same damage sustained by the 8th level fighter indicates a near miss, a slight wound, and a bit of luck used up, a bit of fatigue piling up against his or her skill at avoiding the fatal cut or thrust. So even when a hit is scored in melee combat, it is more often than not a grazing blow, a scratch, a mere light wound which would have been fatal (or nearly so) to a lesser mortal. If sufficient numbers of such wounds accrue to the character, however, stamina, skill, and luck will eventually run out, and an attack will strike home . . .

I am firmly convinced that this system is superior to all others so far concieved and published. It reflects actual combat reasonably, for weaponry, armor (protection and speed and magical factors), skill level, and allows for a limited amount of choice as to attacking or defending. It does not require participants to keep track of more than a minimal amount of information, it is quite fast, and it does not place undue burden upon the Dungeon Master. It allows those involved in combat to opt to retire if they are taking too much damage � although this does not necessarily guarantee that they will succeed...

My favorite part is the assertion "even when a hit is scored in melee combat, it is more often than not a grazing blow, a scratch, a mere light wound which would have been fatal (or nearly so) to a lesser mortal."

That sentence by itself describes D&D HP as cinematic.

I know that this is redundant given my prior post, but it is pretty obvious by the comments made about the interface that no one (other than me that is) who has posted on this topic actually uses Wizards' DUNGEON TILES series of products.

That's what the Dungeon Tiles look like folks, with the exception of the cool 3D urns and 3D effects on the statue's base.

For those who think that D&D is "moving to video game status," this should eliminate those worries. Instead, the video screen simulates products that you can buy for your home table. That way, if you learned to play using DDI and can find a group who is close to you, you can buy the TILES and Minis and feel at home.

Then if you feel like it, you can abandon minis/tiles all together (if that's your style of play) or upgrade to FlipMats, Dundjinni, or World Works for your terrain.

I actually really like that the online tool looks like the Dungeon Tiles that I use in my weekly game. That way the online version simulates what we're doing at home pretty well.

Don't get me wrong, I primarily use Dundjinni. But I do own 20 sets, or more, of the various Dungeon Tiles and this program translates them almost perfectly.

You know what's funny. My wife and I are expecting twins, so I am clearing out my "gaming library" and converting it into a nursery. In the process, I have had to pack up a lot of rpg books. I haven't packed up any of my 3rd edition stuff yet, but likely will by the end of the year. But I did pack up my 2nd edition stuff.

WOW!

I had a lot of 2nd edition stuff, bookcases full. Complete Ninja's handbook? Really? All that Birthright stuff, FR stuff, and 1st print 2nd ed. and black cover 2nd ed books. I had like a whole book case. My "official" 3rd stuff is only like 21/2 bookshelves and I own it all.

I owned way more 2nd edition stuff, in volume and in inflation adjusted dollars, than I own 3rd/3.5.

I was excited about 3rd edition then, and I'm excited about 4th edition now.

1) Do you plan to convert to the new edition of D&D? My group will be converting day one, but will continue our current campaign through its narrative resolution as a side game.

2) If Paizo converts its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products? No, because I will already be buying your products.

3) If Paizo does not convert its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products? I will purchase Planet Stories regardless, but I will have more than sufficient 3.0/.5 materials and do not look forward to converting anything...so I won't buy any 3.5 specific material for long.

I find it funny how much people keep stating that "this is D&D for 10 year olds" or "if I was 10 I'd like this version."

Well...guess what? I started playing D&D when I was 10 thanks to the first Red Box Basic set (the red box with Erol Otis art) and haven't turned back from playing the game in each subsequent edition for 25 years.

Has anyone really gone back and read 1st edition or, worse yet, the white box of three booklets? Those are almost unplayable. Actually without either ignoring a lot of rules, or making up your own stuff, they are unplayable. Back in the day people learned to play D&D from people who already knew how to play.

To quote John Eric Holmes in Dragon 52 (you know the guy who wrote the very first blue box Basic set):

When Tactical Studies Rules published the first DUNGEONS & DRAGONS rule sets, the three little books in brown covers, they were intended to guide people who were already playing the game. As a guide to learning the game, they were incomprehensible. There was no description of the use of the combat table. Magic spells were listed, but there was no mention of what we all now know is a vital aspect of the rules: that as the magic user says his spell, the words and gestures for it fade from his memory and he cannot say it again.

When I edited the rules prior to the first edition of the D&D Basic Set, it was to help the thousands (now millions) of people who wanted to play the game and didn’t know how to get started. Gary Gygax acknowledged that some sort of beginner’s book was badly needed, and he encouraged me to go ahead with it.

The fact is that Hasbro, and WotC (as well as TSR back in the day), want new players to play the game. They don't want you to have to "learn" from people who are already playing. They also want to increase the amount of mechanical balance (for us old timers who like games like Hero that are internally consistent).

There are changes, to be sure, and the game is being aimed at being more accessible, to be sure, but don't you all remember what it was like when you first played the game?

I was wide eyed with my first level Magic-User, named uncreatively enough Gandalf, ready for adventure and action and all the stuff I'd read and seen. Instead, I was turned into an Axebeak when I tried to read a scroll to see if it was magical and missed my saving throw on a save or get hosed roll.

That's my first memory as a player and since that day, I have hated save or die effects. I like cinematic action and D&D has always advertised, but rarely delivered (at low levels especially), cinematic action.

If the last 10 percent or so of your hit points are real damage, and the rest a combination of these other factors, that's something I can live with.

See...this is where you and I disagree, and I'm not talking about in just 4th edition. When you make damage "abstract" the way that D&D does, the rules aren't accounting for 10% -- or any other percentage for that matter -- to be "real damage." They are abstract and only when you reach 0 or lower are you suffering any real damage.

Even given that, let's take what we know (which is almost nothing) about the Marshal. It is likely that his ability allows people to use their own in class healing abilities more often (like Star Wars' second wind) and thus won't come into play at negative HP. Even if it does, then it is like the hero who has taken a massive wound who gets back up to fight because the world needs him/her. It isn't narratively implausible in a fantasy setting. It is highly implausible in reality, but these games aren't a representation of reality. They are representations of heroic fiction.

I actually find your need for a specific quantified amount of "real damage" in D&D irritating. I don't find you irritating -- I actually find you to be very polite -- just the need for specific quantified amount of real damage in D&D, which you aren't alone in desiring. It isn't how the system was designed. There are games, Hero System, that do that. D&D isn't, and never has been, one of them.

Poul Anderson -- The Broken Sword
Poul Anderson -- Three Hearts and Three Lions
Manly Wade Wellman -- John Thunstone Stories and John the Balladeer Stories

One of the most common recurring themes in D&D HP damage discussions is whether HPs represent physical damage, luck, skill, endurance, etc. or some combination. This has been true in every edition of D&D, with many people unsatisfied by the fact that a character with 110 HP (a lot in 1st edition where a Huge Ancient Red Dragon had 88 HP) is just as ready for combat as a fighter with 1 HP. With regard to the rules, there is no difference save for the distance to 0 and below.

D&D has always been a cinematic system and not a gritty one. This is intentional, but I won't let my argument stand upon my own assertions alone. Let's see what good ol' Gary had to say back in Dragon #24 (ah, that CD rom collection is awesome):

This melee system also hinges on the number of hit points assigned to characters. As I have repeatedly pointed out, if a rhino can take a maximum amount of damage equal to eight of nine eight-sided dice, a maximum of 64 or 72 hit points of damage to kill, it is positively absurd to assume that an 8th level fighter with average scores on his or her hit dice and an 18 consititution, thus having 76 hit points, can physically withstand more punishment than a rhino before being killed. Hit points are a combination of actual physical consititution, skill at the avoidance of taking real physical damage, luck and/or magical or divine factors. Ten points of damage dealt to a rhino indicated a considerable wound, while the same damage sustained by the 8th level fighter indicates a near miss, a slight wound, and a bit of luck used up, a bit of fatigue piling up against his or her skill at avoiding the fatal cut or thrust. So even when a hit is scored in melee combat, it is more often than not a grazing blow, a scratch, a mere light wound which would have been fatal (or nearly so) to a lesser mortal. If sufficient numbers of such wounds accrue to the character, however, stamina, skill, and luck will eventually run out, and an attack will strike home . . .

I am firmly convinced that this system is superior to all others so far concieved and published. It reflects actual combat reasonably, for weaponry, armor (protection and speed and magical factors), skill level, and allows for a limited amount of choice as to attacking or defending. It does not require participants to keep track of more than a minimal amount of information, it is quite fast, and it does not place undue burden upon the Dungeon Master. It allows those involved in combat to opt to retire if they are taking too much damage — although this does not necessarily guarantee that they will succeed...

My favorite part is the assertion "even when a hit is scored in melee combat, it is more often than not a grazing blow, a scratch, a mere light wound which would have been fatal (or nearly so) to a lesser mortal."

That sentence by itself describes D&D HP as cinematic.

BTW, a lot of this discussion is the same as what happened when 3rd edition decided that characters would roll HD for every level.

Nothing new under the sun, not even in what perturbs players.

I have yet to receive mine, in California.

sta·bi·lize /ˈsteɪbəˌlaɪz/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[stey-buh-lahyz] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -lized, -liz·ing.

–verb (used with object) 1. to make or hold stable, firm, or steadfast.
2. to maintain at a given or unfluctuating level or quantity: The government will try to stabilize the cost of living.

So does that mean that the roll of 11-19 "No change" means stabilized? This is actually what I thought when I first read it, but that is ... too dumb even for Andy Collins.

It would only be "stabilized" if there was no need for another roll, which there is. You keep rolling until you magically jump up with 1/4 hp, or you die.

"He's really worried about the future of the Realms"

Hmm...that's not the impression I got from the interview he had with Wolfgang Baur in Kobold Quarterly #3, which is a great place to look for what Ed Greenwood actually has to say.

This isn't to say that I thought he was tremendously excited about the changes, but he didn't seem worried either.

"The danger of a mutable system is that you or your players will go too far in some undesirable direction and end up with a short lived campaign...you must avoid the tendency to drift into areas foreign to the game as a whole. Such campaigns become so strange as to be no longer "AD&D". They are isolated and will usually wither. Variation and difference are desirable, but both should be kept within the boundaries of the overall system." -- Gary Gygax AD&D DMG Preface.

Yeah, D&D was never about "forcing you too conform." That whole "so strange as to be no longer AD&D thing...totally non-judgmental.

I think the success BL has had with their Solaris books imprint might be a part of the reason for this move. Add to that the fact that they have published "enough" WFRP stuff for a very long campaign and that by September there will be a "decent" amount of 40k rpg stuff on the market, they were probably seeing diminishing returns on the expensive to produce, with narrow profit margin, rpg books vs. the more profitable paperback industry.

Once again, I would like to emphasize that BL isn't just the media tie in stuff. They have the Solaris imprint which has been doing quite well, and has some pretty good books available.

Tobus,

If you watched the previous ridiculous videos, you would have noticed that Scott Rouse mentions the "yet to be released" 4th Edition Preview books. It is pretty obvious that these teaser videos were filmed some time ago. So they aren't still playtesting, rather they are marketing poorly.

What lies beneath the Kobold King's domain?

What awaits my heroes after the Carnival of Tears?

I need more Darkmoon Vale stuff...and NOW!!!

I really like the location, and I have some extensions for it already planned.

But I want more "official" stuff.

Please...pretty please.

Matt Morris's group used a similar tactic to mine.

Glitterdust

Grapple

Drown

No DR vs. Drowning

Before the new policy making the True 20 license free, the license used to cost $100 per year for e-publishing only and $1000 per year for print publishers.

According to http://true20.com/licensing/:

Licensing True20

Since the release of True20 Adventure Roleplaying, we've received many queries from publishers that want to publish compatible material and take advantage of the True20 logo. This is indeed possible and the terms are straight forward. We offer two levels of licensing for True20:

1) E-Publisher: You can license the system and logo for $100 a year if you are a PDF publisher. This includes the right to sell up to 100 Print on Demand copies of each title. Any more than that and you need to step up to...

2) Print Publisher: You can license the system and logo for $1,000 a year if you are a print publisher.

In neither case can you do a stand-alone product. Every product must say that it requires the True20 rules for use. You must also use the Open Game License and adhere to its strictures as well, since True20 is an OGL product.

This license limits you to 6 products a year or less. This is to keep the amount of time Green Ronin staff spends on approvals down to a reasonable level and to prevent a flood of cheapo PDFs.

PDFs of all finished products must be submitted to Green Ronin for approval before they go on sale or go to print.

As you can see, they limited publishing to 6 items or less a year and required pre-screening before an item could be sold. It was a fairly restrictive, but accessible, license. WotC's license is a pretty fair deal, depending on what the details of the OGL are given the comparative benefit to having a WotC license vs. a GR license.

GR is a great company, and True20 is a great system, but they aren't WotC as far as public demand/notoriety.

A good question is whether the $5,000 needed to take part in the "early opt in," which gives about 4-6 months of "exclusivity" to license holders is the equivalent financial benefit to a company as $1000 was for 6 True20 items prior to the GR change in policy.

Christian Johnson

Yeah, that Chris Thomasson guy. I don't know how anyone ever let him edit anything...he's the worst editor ever...oh wait...he was a Paizo editor.

I agree that the Delve format leaves nothing to be desired in many ways, but Side Treks have been a staple of Dungeon for some time.

Personally, I wish they would abandon the Delve format and provide "Battlemap" sized maps for print out. They are digital now, after all.

Of course, I also wish Paizo would do the same.

Okay...this part of the Q&A was disheartening, though the existing OGL would still allow for these products:

"The new version of the OGL isn’t as open-ended as the current version. Any 4e OGL product must use the 4e PHB as the basis of their game. If they can’t use the core rule books, it won’t be possible to create the game under this particular version of the OGL."

But it was immediately followed by this:

"Future versions of the OGL, including a 4e d20 Modern version, may make certain games possible where they weren’t before."

So I think even Hasbro might be a little confused as to what they are actually saying in their new OGL.

I think my position is strengthened by this quote:

"The 4th edition SRD will be much more of a reference document than the 3e SRD. The current edition contains almost all of the rules and allows “copy and paste” publishing. WotC would prefer to see 3rd party publishers to use their creativity and talent instead of reformatting or slightly changing pre-existing rules. As such, the 4e SRD will contain more guidelines and pointers, and less straightforward rules repetition."

I know a lot of people think that the more restrictive 4th edition OGL is intended to prevent products like M&M and Spycraft. This may or may not be the case, I actually believe it isn't. What I do believe is the case is that Hasbro wants to stop products like the "Pocket Player's Guide" from being published. The PPG, by Mongoose, was essentially a pocket sized version of the PHB by an alternate publisher. It was essentially a cut and paste product. Spycraft, M&M, and True20 weren't and they will still be legal products as the current OGL never expires.

First, the best way for low level characters to defeat a quasit is for them to drown it. They even provide you a convenient pool for drowning in the first AP adventure.

Second, assuming the arrow "sticking" is a possible logical flaw given what HP represent. They represent both the ability to take damage and the ABILITY TO AVOID taking damage. Prior to a hit that takes a creature/character to 0 hp, all you have really done is reduced the creatures ability to avoid taking damage. The PHB is pretty clear that no real damage happens until 0hp.

Third, invisibility (and the DR/Fast Heal) are really the only advantages a quasit has. Do you really want to nerf them so badly?

The answer to that question should be...

DM: Of course not, you are perfectly right.

Players: Hells yeah, I want all encounters to be as easy as possible.

Christian

The question is...

Do you want traps to work like they do in the Indiana Jones movies, interactive and exciting, or do you want them to be "roll a saving throw/take x damage?"

I really like the encounter traps system. Thief characters, in the games I have run, have usually wanted to "role play" their encounters with traps. Prior editions, 1st being the ultimate example, weren't conducive to this kind of behavior. You could do it, but you had to wing it. I like having materials which provide DMs with tools to make traps fun.

As for "Save or Die," I outgrew needing to out-smart and punish my players a long time ago.

Heck even, Grimtooths Traps (which was fun to read) is better represented --IMHO-- by an encounter trap system.

Christian

It's like saying, "Man...that sucked. I want my FREE back."

Since Eando Klein's name is a combination of Eando Binder (Captain Marvel and the original "pre-asimov" I, Robot) and Otis Adelbert Klein (Robert E. Howard's agent and Burrough's pastiche master), I am going to have to say that Klein is a very talented Bard.

Sturm und Drang

I actually find it much easier to believe that a person who lived for centuries would spend 60-80 years being idle, as in the Corum novels by Michael Moorcock or Tolkien's elves, much more satisfying than it taking someone 80 years to become knowledgeable enough to become a mage. 80 years? No wonder humans are the dominant race. Elves are vulnerable and intellectually stunted for 60 years.

That doesn't make any narrative sense to me at all. So I have always played it that the 0-20 age rate is the same as humans, then they slow down.

It was those 20 years of primary education that really bothered my friend Aletenarian.

You do realize that if elves "mature" slower than humans, it also means that it takes longer for neural pathways to develop? So...elves, and all the other longer living races, appear to be mentally handicapped.

How old was your elf when he learned to read?

Ride a horse?

Talk?

Walk?

Battle maps, minis, and counters...oh my.

I tell you, this is one of the most challenging and exciting parts of being a DM. Storytelling and interaction is the most exciting, but creating a dynamic visual gaming environment is a fun (but slightly distant) second.

First, I use the D&D minis. I own a crateload.

Second, I own all of the "battlemap" suppliments -- like City of Peril -- that Hasbro released. These are great for generic sites.

Third, I use the Paizo GameMastery tile sets. Like the Hasbro/Wotc stuff, they are great for homebrewed and generic sites.

Fourth, I use the dungeon tiles from Skeleton Key games. They are vibrant and, since they are pdfs and I have a color printer at work, they are very customizable to the "weird" rooms that Paizo adventures often contain. Their Ptolus stuff is excellent for a city based game.

Fifth, I extensively use the Wotc Dungeon Tiles. These are a very good product, but the excellent Paizo rooms often don't match.

Sixth, I use the Bendy Walls from Z-Man Games. These are amazingly useful, and help with those weird Paizo room.

Seventh, I use terrain from Heroscape (the trees are awesome as is the fortress), Heroquest, and various pdf providers.

Eighth, [url="http://www.worldworksgames.com/store/"World Works[/url] has some amazing stuff. Time consuming, but amazing.

Ninth, I use a lot of the prepainted terrain from Pegasus Games. The crates, barrels, fountains, etc. are awesome and fairly inexpensive.

Did I mention I have a game room?

On a side note, I have never understood why Paizo couldn't create files with scaled versions of their maps for use as dungeon tiles. They have the cartography, they have the pdf distribution capability, I have the desire for the product, and their own tiles (which sadly have no relation to their adventures) look great.

Christian

3e and 4e are the products of two completely different companies, and two almost completely different groups of designers.

I agree. 3e was the creation of Wizards of the Coast as run by Peter Adkinson and headed by Monte Cook, Johnathan Tweet, and Sean K Reynolds. 4e will be Hasbro's first "real" venture into the field.

3e originated around the gaming table, whereas 4e originated around the boardroom table. 3e was designed by gamers to please gamers, whereas 4e was designed to please old men in grey suits who think "gaming" means the blackjack table at Mohegan Sun.

Here is where I disagree with you. Have you actually looked at the list of creators?

Rob Heinsoo -- Who is, in my opinion, most responsible for the changes I don't like, worked on Feng Shui for Atlas Games, copyread the 3rd edition of Masks of Nyarlethotep, and worked on Nexus. Feng Shui and Nexus share design elements with 4e, and d20 modern for that matter, some of which I think are not the best choices. But I am willing to give Rob a chance.

Chris Perkins -- In addition to a crapload of 3.x stuff, he worked on the design of the Shackled City and all the d20 Modern stuff.

Richard Baker -- Combat Options (2nd edition), Birthright, Gamma World 4th edition, Alternity. All of which seem to inform his design choices.

Mike Mearls -- Unknown Armies, Hunter, Godlike, AEG stuff, and Iron Heroes which might be why he was hired.

Jonathan Tweet -- Hmm...3rd edition, Ars Magica (the creator), Over the Edge. He's another of the guys who brought "new techniques" to 3rd edition that I thought were bad choices, but he's a talented and creative game designer.

The list goes on, but the fact remains that these designers have brought their own biases to the creation process. No suit told them to favor "cinematic action" and "anti-vancian" magic systems. These guys already had those biases. They have written articles critical of alignment, of Paladins as LG only, of class based systems.

What they haven't done, at least to my experience, is show the disdain for playtester preferences that Sean K. Reynolds and Monte Cook readily blogged/commented on after the initial release of 3rd edition. Monte and Sean's mantra seemed to be, 3rd would have been better if we didn't have to listen to those pesky playtesters.

Christian Johnson

I know the files are available as jpegs, but if I could get Dundjinni files that would be great.

christian.johnson at gmail.com

Boggle,

The use of a mere mechanic to decide the results of "diplomacy" and "bluff" checks is an interesting dilemma, one where your choice of what to do has serious ramifications for game balance (at least potentially).

As a DM, I like to encourage "role-playing" vs. "roll-playing." This bias was most reinforced in me as I played Superhero RPGs with abstract mechanics (DC Heroes and Marvel) where the story elements and the action elements were pretty well divided. But it was also DC Heroes that got me thinking about how to use social skills, as a mechanic, in the games I ran.

Earlier, I wrote that the use of Skill rolls is a balance issue, and it really is. Those characters that are good at these skills should be good at them regardless of the ability of the player to roleplay effectively. Those that are poor at these skills should perform poorly regardless of the player's ability to roleplay. This is because those classes who excel in these skills naturally often lack certain other abilities, Bards for example, and it becomes necessary for their effectiveness in the social areas to be important for the players of these characters to feel a proper amount of achievement contribution. Just trust me on this. A good example might be a much needed piece of information that the Gather Information skill should reveal, if they ask the right questions. These balance considerations become vitally important in city based mystery campaigns like my own CSI: Sharn game.

So how to you DM "Skill Roles" and not "Skill Rolls?" Which is what I recommend. There are essentially three ways that I see as viable.

First, you can have the players roleplay out the the Diplomacy or Gather Information encounter and give a +2 or -2 to any checks based on the questions asked or the quality of roleplay. This makes the proper roleplaying of a scene important, but it also encourages players who have low Charisma character (but who have forceful personalities in real life) to attempt to question the informant as emphatically as the skilled individual.

Second, and I really like this one and use it in my game, have the players roll their checks before the encounter begins. Have them use the results of their roll affect the way they roleplay the scene. If they rolled low, but have a high Cha, maybe they are moderately forgetful or say something that is taken the wrong way. This can be fun.

Third, and I also use this in addition to #2, is to remind players to roleplay as if they had "taken 10" on any check. You can always take 10, unless in a high stress situation, and it makes for a good default. Make sure to set the difficulties of things you want to be challenging based upon this assumption when you use this method as a person with an 18 Charisma and 4 ranks in a skill will have a base 15, but if you also assume that the listener to a bluff is taking 10 on Sense Motive you don't have much to worry about. You can also modify any "take 10" with the +2/-2 based on performance that I mentioned before.

Just remember that all players want their characters to matter in an adventure. They want to be important in the resolution. Sometimes players who aren't very social want to play very social players, don't punish them for not being their character any more than you would punish your average gamer for not having a +15 Base attack bonus.

One of my most agonizing experiences with Diplomacy etc. was a player who played a rude, angry, threatening, Cleric who would insult/threaten/ berate people and then use his +16 in Diplomacy to try to find out information. I kept having to tell the player that a +16 in Diplomacy probably meant that the character didn't say but two words of what the character was roleplaying. Remind the characters to roleplay, as much as they can, the skills they have chosen.

Christian Johnson

Here's my quick list of superhero RPG recommendations.

1) For a quick pickup game where you don't want to spend a lot of time learning the rules and want a great game experience, you cannot do better than Marvel Super Heroes (the original version). From a learning curve to gaming experience, this may actually be the best game ever. It's quick, easy, and adaptable. My group of D&D players, who hadn't even looked in the book, were playing within minutes.

2) A close second to the original MSH by TSR is the Marvel Superheroes Adventure Game, also by TSR. The rules are quick, easy, and the players decide how "important" each action is by determining which card value they want to use on an action. The "trump" feature can lead to some wild battles. This rules set was the basis for the second best, and second longest, superhero campaign I have ever run. It's based on the SAGA rules for Dragonlance, with the exception that it works. How do you defeat a Dragonlance dragon in HtH in SAGA? You don't. You use arrows.

3) The single best and longest superhero campaign I have ever run was a DC Heroes (2nd/3rd edition) game. The 2nd edition cleaned up the bizarre gadget system from the 1st edition and created a rules set that could handle everything from street level to cosmic without batting an eye and without ever feeling like it had "lost" something. The Hero Point system, and the subsequent ability to spend hero points to affect the environment, is one of the most ingenious systems ever created. So ingenious that it has been often imitated. The section on how to run an RPG is one of the single best GM advice columns ever, between it and Aaron Allston's comments in Strike Force (for Champions) you have an amazing combination of campaign design/running tools. If you also own Amber, more of a GM advice book than a game, and Robin's Rules, you have a complete "how to DM" library. The DC system can do anything that the Hero system can do, but still remain "glossy" and smooth. If you don't believe me, you didn't spend any time on the old DCH boards where we deconstructed the rules set much in the same way that Champs fans who realize that Armor was just resistant PD/ED (under the original system) at 0 end.

4) From a prepackaged campaign perspective, you can do a lot worse than Necessary Evil for the Savage Worlds game. The campaign, and adventure generator, are invaluable tools. The system itself is, intentionally, limited, but the adventure is a wonderful combination of V and superheroes.

5) Champions is the big boy on the block and I played it for 15 years. Coming from the Bay Area, I had too. But it has its origins as an adaptation of The Fantasy Trip and Starfleet Battles, and you can tell. What is the difference between segments and impulses? Game play is very much a practice of balancing an array of stun, body, and end during combat. Don't get me wrong, it is a fun game but I always felt like I was worrying about whether my REC would be sufficient to compensate for my "reactor core output." This isn't actually true, you can alter the end cost of powers, but when you really look at the system you can see what I'm talking about. Additionally, a tendency among the players of the most recent 5th edition revised (a kind of 3.5 for the 5th edition) is to make sure that you "itemize" each individual skill/power that your character has. "Only have MOLECULAR BIOLOGY and not CELLULAR BIOLOGY? Sorry, but you can't make a roll to find out that information." From my perspective, stick with the old 4th edition with the George Perez cover and the supplements. Dark Champions, which was brilliant, and Steven Long have been a blessing and a curse for Hero. Dark Champions essentially killed the game for me. Not that Dark Champions wasn't good, as I said it was brilliant, it's just that after that book came out all supplements were Dark Champions. It, and some of the mechanics deconstruction recommendations that Steven Long made, have forever altered the system. Still, the 15 years I spent as an active Hero gamer were a lot of fun, I just like my games a little more casual.

6) Villains and Vigilantes can be fun, and has some great adventures, but be wary of the character generation system. Living Legends improves the character gen system, but loses some of the fun of play.

7) Aberrant is overly friendly to a well designed Brick, but is a great setting. But as a GM expect to have to design the majority of your villains. Yes, this is a part of the fun of a Supers game, but if you're a GM on a time crunch avoid this game.

8) Mutants and Masterminds started as a great Champions alternative. It was sleek and rules lite with only one core book. Newer books have made the game "crunchier," but not any better. Not any worse for that matter. Good game which is easily learned by anyone with a d20 background. The second edition masterfully solves some of the problems with the first edition.

9) Superhero 2044 -- avoid this like the plague, except for an interesting patrol system the game is non-existant.

10)Superworld was the inspiration for the Wildcards series of books and is based on the Basic Roleplaying System that is the basis for Cthulhu and Runequest. Good game and has some adventures.

There are more, and I will likely talk more about some of them later, but work calls. Besides, I think I have loaded this with enough controversy and have to put on my flame retardant suit. BTW, there are some great "Superhero" games that were never intended to be Superhero games.

Christian Johnson

I would be very interested to see what kind of SciFi adventure digs its way out of your brain and attacks unsuspecting GMs.

One of the things that my regular, Eberron, game group does is to run secondary games during the second half of our Saturday Game Days. Right now they are crawling through the 1st edition Tomb of Horrors, with 1st edition characters. Two of the players are first time 1st-ers, and it's been fun so far. Though, I have to admit that I've made a couple of mistakes so far -- like using d10s for initiative instead of d6s.

Damn that decade of 2nd edition!

And reading through the rules about weapon speed factors has left more questions than answers.

The best Dungeons and Dragons movie is <em>Scourge of Worlds</em> (http://www.highprogrammer.com/alan/gaming/dnd/greyhawk/sow/index.html). That said, the second film is much better than the first, but that really isn't saying much. The second is also good for a SciFi television movie, once again not saying much.

What matters to me, in this case, is whether the film is fun or not. The first film tried to be fun --and largely failed, even with Tom Baker as an elf and Jeremy Irons. Though the DVD includes a "fast play" adventure on DVD rom. The second one pretty much succeeded as funfare.

Back to <em>Scourge of Worlds</em>, the Greyhawk movie. That was repeatable fun. Try to find the special edition.

I have alluded to this on another board, where the subject was a little more "touchy," but your Viktor trilogy has been the keystone of my Eberron CSI:Sharn campaign. Between this, now, trilogy of adventures and the material in the Sharn book regarding House Deneith, my players have been sprinting to stop/solve one crime after another.

Best of all was that in Hell's Heart you included a "quori possessed" prisoner. Ah, sweet serendipity. One of the PCs in my group lost his favorite cohort to quori possession and she will make a perfect substitute for the prisoner. Can they save her? And what information does she have about House Deneith?

Good Times.

BTW, I was serious on the other board when I said I would support a Patron project, like the one's that Baur does, if you ever have the time/energy to try. There's a c-note burning a hole in my pocket.

Christian Johnson

I thought I would respond to two of my favorite Paizo, and Open Design, adventure writers.

Nicholas Logue, whose adventures have helped form the core of my CSI: Sharn campaign (with the addition of material regarding the Quori takeover of Deneith in City of Towers), wrote:

Sometimes I just feel WotC doesn't care if it poops all over a large fraction of its older audience if it means they can push boxes and boxes of plastic nonsense on rich young kids whose parents will shell out 20 gp everytime the child needs a fix.

If this sounds personal, it isn't, so please don't take it that way. BUT...I think that this is filled with a lot of assumptions, and a certain amount of potentially pride based "preciousness," regarding the underlying intentions of WotC. Namely that WotC is intentionally pooping on fans for some bizarre reason. As if they want to lose an existing fan base, which makes zero business sense.

I believe, and I can't know, that the reason they are making the changes they are making is to bring new players into the mix. That, by necessity, means that they are going to tweak some traditional tropes. After all, the existing ones aren't continuing to bring new gamers into the hobby. The complaints I hear by 3rd edition fans today are the same ones, only slightly modified, that I heard back in 1988 and in 2000. Hasbro is looking for new players, they need a new "branding" for the same reasons Pepsi and Coke keep changing their advertising and recipes. And those of you who think that New Coke was the only time Coke changed their recipe, I've got some real estate I'd like to sell you. They need to make it fresh. In doing so, they have to carefully balance the need to satisfy existing gamers with making the game "sexy" enough for new players. We're just lucky that they aren't making D&D into the Avatar: The Last Airbender rpg.

As for the "pushing boxes and boxes" assertion you made, I almost took that personally. I am not a "rich young kid" and my parents stopped buying my rpg stuff in 1985. I shell out no less than $350.00 a quarter to purchase complete sets of whatever new D&D minis set is heading my way. Why? Because my players, most of them anyway, like having minis in their game and like that I use them. Some will not play without minis and "wonder where their character is" when we have tried to play more abstract games. Heck, Erik Mona wrote about how much he loved Monte Cook games because of the massive use of Dwarven Forge and painted minis. Those were words I took to heart, and thanks to D&D minis and World Works I can have some pretty graphically interesting adventures. The D&D minis are one of the best things to happen in gaming, in my opinion, in quite some time. They are cheaper than lead, especially Games Workshop, and they are already painted. I most certainly don't think they are nonsense.

As I wrote before, I don't think you meant it that way, but your statement was highly dismissive and loaded with assumptions. I agree that Hasbro not sharing the new OGL is wrong. I agree that it puts Paizo in a position of having to make a very tough business choice, or at least know that they have the support of fans, but please don't assume nefarious motives.

Wolfgang Baur, of whose Open Design adventures I have been a patron of every one -- at the $100.00 level for the past 3 (which includes the upcoming Arabian themed adventures) -- and am a print and pdf subscriber to his Kobold Quarterly wrote:

I didn't really hear any bad feelings here, just a legitimate business concern. The time for WotC to start sharing SRD and 4E data to bring partners into the 4E community is now, not 3 months from now.

I agree whole heartedly.

Finally, just a neutral inquiry, what makes you sure that 4E has such great potential? I've heard snippets that seem promising, and others that seem, um, less promising.

Hopefully this won't torpedo my hopes of an accepted submission to Kobold Quarterly in the future, but...I have no certainty that 4th edition will be good. I know it has potential because it has very good designers, who have worked on excellent products in the past, working on it. I have as many concerns as the next guy. None moreso than after reading the post on design influences over at the Wizards site.

Rob Heinsoo's disdain for previous editions was concerning to me. He "didn't see 2nd Edition AD&D as an improvement over Runequest or Champions, so I gave it a miss." Say what? Runequest is one of my least favorite systems, and I own enough Basic Roleplaying Stuff to know (Stormbringer, Hawkmoon, Cthulhu, Superworld) that I prefer to use the very rich product they create as source material. And I, for one, am sick of the "choices not limits" philosophy of design. Some of my most individual character concepts were created during the "limiting" and "restrictive" character class eras. Want to know how "inviting" Champions is? Ask the noobish members of my group. They are so intimidated by 5th edition revised, they won't even consider a Champions campaign. Thank heavens for Savage Worlds and Necessary Evil. Don't even get me started on the crap that is Arduin.

But then I read James Wyatt and Andy Collins and my blood pressure lowered.

I am also hopeful because they are finishing Nicholas Logue's wonderful Eberron trilogy in the online Dungeon and I have hopes that they will continue to use the talented free lancers, like Nicholas, Wolfgang, and Matt Forbeck, who have a lot of great ideas behind them -- and hopefully many in front of them. I have such faith in Wolfgang that I have already gambled another $100 on him before I received his third Open Design adventure.

I am frustrated that the Monk might be made purely Asian in flavor, the original was based on Remo Williams (read Gygax's intro to Oriental Adventures if you don't believe me). I am frustrated that WotC will be ignoring Mythic archetypes and allowing multiple alignment Paladins. I am frustrated that they are merging the Succubus and the Erinyes because they "play the same game design role." Huh? Christianity based temptress devils vs. Greek demons of vengeance. Things like this demonstrate a distinct ignorance of mythology. Now if they had said Erinyes and Harpies shared the same place, I might have gone along for the ride.

I am sure 4th won't be perfect. 3rd certainly wasn't, and it got rid of some things I really liked and added more complexity than I'd have liked, but I still like 3rd and the new gamers it brought to my group. I hope 4th brings even more gamers to my group.

Oh and since I spent all that time harping on Mr. Logue. I should note that if he did an Open Design adventure, I'd totally sign on.

Christian Johnson
Host -- Geekerati: A featured show on the BlogTalkRadio network.
"If you can geek out about it, we will."