The Politics of Boxing Up Games

Well, with our broken shelf, we are down to just three shelves to store gaming books instead of four. Instead of buying a new shelf, we took the easy route and got a set of cardboard 'bankers' boxes to store games we rarely use, and those are going into storage. We are cutting down on the number of gaming books we have out at one time and just sticking to what we like to play.

It is a strange exercise, because in gaming culture your 'display' feels like your 'street cred' - and who doesn't want a large collection on display at one time? Now, each book is being judged on it's 'fun value' and 'usefulness' and either staying out or going in the closet (or sold if it really is of no use).

You have a pile of books on the floor and you are asking yourself that question about each one of them. It really does get your gaming priorities straight, and I am finding it to be a refreshing exercise in dealing with my tendency to hoard and collect books.

D&D 4? We still use some of this material from time to time, but not all of it - so I will probably keep the basic three books plus some of the planar guides out just for reference. The rest of the pointless, already errata'ed and now useless power card collection books are going in the closet. It is funny, after the game's online systems and errata downloads go away someday, all we will be left with are the books, so what was printed will outlast the errata.

D&D 5? We sadly don't play it enough to justify keeping it out. There is nothing really different about for us, these are the same monsters and the same worlds we have in D&D 3.5 and other versions of the game, just MMO-ized (in my feeling with those infinite-use cantrips) and with the rules streamlined. Now note I said "for us" and this doesn't mean others are having a lot of fun with the game, and they should. We kind of missed the boat on this game, and we had long-standing campaigns based on the D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, and D&D 4 material still going strong, so there was no need to switch mid-stream (and it would have been disruptive, a lot of change just for the set of rules, and we went through that in the D&D 2 to D&D 3 shift).

Pathfinder? Here is where it gets interesting. Do I keep out just the basic three books? The world guide is staying out, just for reference. I am not seeing a great value to some of the class add-on books, and I have this sneaking suspicion we may have more fun with the game the less we have out for it. I can still pull an oddball book out if I need it, like a monster book, but if the world were just 'the basic three' would we play it more? There is an argument that the books past the first three are what makes the world unique and special, but it will be interesting to see if the first three books can sustain the game (for us) or will those just sit there like orphans wanting the rest of their shelf-mates.

This will be the test, I suppose, for Pathfinder for our group. If not, I am feeling the basic three books will go in the box and we will just keep the world guide out. At that point, we will be looking for a new set of rules to play in that world. There mechanically is some fun to the rules, the question is for us, are we that interested in all that fiddly mechanical character build stuff to sustain interest? With less books, there are less build and less reasons, so there may be a benefit to identifying the core supporting books and keeping those out. We shall see.

The retro-clones such as Labyrinth Lord and Basic Fantasy? Of course those are staying out, even if we don't use them all the time. There is very little cost to keeping a single 'all in one' book out on the shelf, and these books are actually inspiring and fun packages of gaming goodness. For us, 'big system games' are a tough sell, even if it is just the 'traditional three' books of the player's guide, monster book, and referee's guide. For us, something that is just a hundred or so pages and contains everything needed to play will beat out three-volume sets that clock in at around a thousand total pages.

There is a value with less is more, and would I play a D&D 5 type game that was more of a one-book solution of around 100-200 pages? Yes. I doubt they could do that since the game really feels like it evolved into a big box affair where more is more, more spells, more monsters, more magic items, and more of everything is more - even referee's advice and art. More is more is fun and gives value, but there is a point when my shelf collapses and the game becomes too big to play. Even at three books with near a thousand pages, I am feeling a smaller one-book game still has more play value.

But then again Labyrinth Lord and Basic Fantasy fill that niche of the single-book, compact and fun game - but I would like to see the big publishers try. They would probably have to fundamentally change the structure of the game and not do a 'cut down levels 1-5 only with 20% content' sort of thing, but make a complete game within that limitation. They tried with D&D 4's Essentials line, but I feel that fell short since those were not self-contained books - and you still needed the original books for a lot of stuff.

It is the "tablet versus PC" thing I feel, and the big-box games (at least for us) feel bloated and heavy - especially when you start adding books. Something small, single-book, less than 200 pages, and all-in-one feels more playable than a three volume collection of 800-1000 pages where everything is handled and everything is given in maximum detail. At least for us - and for some groups that love the complexity do better with the big-box games (since there is more to enjoy). Again "tablet versus PC" comes up, for hardcore gamers - PC all the way with upgrades and swappable parts. For casual users, less is more, and a tablet will do the job for most computing tasks. Right now I am feeling less is more for our group, and we would actually play more if we focused on lighter-weight games.

Retro Clones: They Keep Coming Back (For Me)

Something keeps me coming back to the simple retro-clones like Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy. They have an incredibly low barrier to entry, cover what you need for old-school, and have that Monopoly-like appeal of being a gamer's game rather than a large computer operating system-like set of rules with rules and options for everything. I can get a group started with them for free or little cost.

What kills me about Pathfinder is I have this feeling I bought the system into un-playability. Too many books. My gaming bookcase just collapsed, literally, under the weight of the system. One night we were playing a game of 7 Days to Die and we heard in the other room, bang, bang, bang.

The shelf holding Pathfinder had collapsed. The books are completely fine and no one got hurt, but now my books are on the floor and I am sitting here wondering why I need so many rules and books to have fun. I wonder if I haven't falling into the trap of hoarding and collecting books, and buying something because more is better. Then I end up loving it to death and smothering the system with so many options and books it becomes un-fun.

I am seriously considering boxing up everything I have except for the base gazetteer for Golarion, just for reading and inspiration, and calling my open shelf in my gaming room for the game done. I don't have the play time for something this complex, and the books just sit there on the shelf like some sort of gamer-cred display case. I end up looking at them and feeling bad I don't have the time, so why have them out?

Kudos to the D&D 5 people for keeping their system to the base three books, but I don't play enough D&D 5 to warrant buying the add-on modules for that either, and I fear the end result would be the same if I were into the game as much as I would have liked.

But again, the simple calls to me. The retro-clones feel like what I started with so long ago. They don't require learning curves or hundreds of pages of spells or character options. You are not chasing the next book or rules addition. I know I love the art and direction of both Paizo and Wizards, and yes I know sales of new stuff keep great and creative people employed at both companies, but I feel a system can only get so big before, well, my shelf collapses.

I know this sounds like, "Well, not everybody's shelves are so cheap, dude. Buy a better shelf." I would agree with that if it were someone else saying this and I loved the game and played it all the time. This is not a system wars thing, just a reflection that I have a shelf full of books for a game I infrequently play.

The bigger question is, what do I need? You know, it is like going out and buying a pickup truck and all you use a car for is going to the store and work and back. You literally never put anything in the back bed of the truck, and it just collects dust and leaves. And now that you have a truck, the payments and upkeep cost prevents you from having the car that you may want and need. You may be a hybrid person in a city and find one of those fits your life perfectly. You may love the thrill of a sportscar. You may be better suited with an off-road 4x4.

I have this suspicion owning two or three dozen Pathfinder hardcovers is actually keeping me from playing the game. You know the feeling? And I also get the feeling this mass of books is keeping me from playing fantasy medieval RPGs at all because using all that material seems intimidating. What is your hang up, right? Dive in and play! Well, maybe I am not a fan of all those options and what I want is something simple. And having a shelf full of books out means it is better than a single-book game, right?

So the retro-clones get ignored. You have Pathfinder and D&D 5, play those. Yes, I can drive the pickup and it takes me where I need to go. But there is that always hard to express question, "Is this what I want?" You have a massive 17" gaming laptop, what use would you have with a ultra-thin 13" lightweight notebook? The gaming laptop can do it all! But I can't take it anywhere. I need a backpack to take it out. It doesn't go to the coffee shop or library, and I feel tied to the behemoth. That sort of feeling.

You can love a game for what it is not, and because it fits into your gaming lifestyle better. There is something to be said for games that do a lot with a little.

Great Article: A new recipe for the roleplaying game formula

Check this out:

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/GuidoHenkel/20170207/290402/A_new_recipe_for_the_roleplaying_game_formula.php

...wow, this is literally worth days of thought and discussion around here. Some great points about CRPG design that also apply to pen-and-paper games, check out his thoughts on skill trees.

I love it when the old-school designers, either computer or pen-and-paper, pop up and share science with us.

Good stuff.

Dice Review: Ultra Pro D6 White Dice (Black Large Numbering)

Here is an interesting dice set, the Ultra Pro D6 set. I ordered these looking for a standard-sized numeric set of dice and by the look of them I was expecting a set with some heft and weight. What I got was different, but still an interesting and somewhat humorous set of dice.

They are slightly smaller than your normal 'board game' d6 dice, and they are also considerably lighter. They are also very, very rounded and combined with their light weight, they roll all over the place, spin on a corner, bounce off decks of cards, roll in large circles across the board, and generally never stop rolling around during a throw. If I ever wanted to annoy a gaming group with dice that just do not stop puttering around and taking forever to settle down, I would use these dice.

One took a near-perfect two-foot diameter circle path around our Eldritch Horror game board before bouncing off a deck of cards before stopping. Another spun on its corner for a whole second before flopping around to come to a rest. One had to be caught before it rolled off the table - after it bounced off a deck of stacked cards and rolled right back at me in the opposite direction in which I threw it.

Their light weight means they are less likely to knock over game pieces and push things around, but their silly antics in a way endears me to these dice. Rolling them and seeing how they can annoy or entertain you on the next throw makes them worth the price of admission. They are my my go-to "crazy dice" set.

I wished they were a bit heavier and a bit less rounded, I was looking for a larger, heftier set of non-pipped dice. I wanted a set with some mass and gravitas for a tabletop game we are working on, almost like a numeric version of the standard board-game dice.

Am I happy with the set? Well, that depends. As serious dice I would stake my character's fate on? Probably not, because I don't want a set of dice causing a distraction for me or other players at the table. As an entertaining diversion for a lighter-hearted game, or to use as a set of replacement dice for a traditional game, such as Monopoly? Then yes, because these dice and their antics would definitely add to the fun of the game.

If I am in a situation where the 'party atmosphere' is more important than the rules and a set of dice could enliven an already dry game, then yes, I would say go for it and use these. Seeing what the 'crazy dice' will do would become a part of the fun and add an element of unpredictable chaos to the next roll, and make the drama of both good and bad rolls more entertaining.

If you absolutely do not want to roll a seven and one die comes up a six and the other one sits there spinning like a top for two seconds before falling on a one, I would say that would be a pretty entertaining failure and one the group is going to remember. Normal dice just do not do that often enough, but these...at times...can.

Mail Room: Blue Rose PDF

The Kickstarter books have finally started shipping for the Blue Rose (AGE System) RPG and I just got my PDF copy - and the book is on the way. Needless to say, I am impressed by the PDF, and it meets and exceeds the art direction and quality for many modern releases - Pathfinder and D&D 5 included. More on this soon as I flip through the PDF and wait for my copy in the mail.

Would I play this over Pathfinder or D&D 5, especially for dramatic adventures? That is a good question, and from what I have seen this does a good job at being different. I get this feeling in both Pathfinder and D&D 5 of playing those games to "be in a D&D type world" and I feel at times that familiarity can become a burden at times - what is known is known. You got the drow, the mind flayers, the beholders, Golarion's goblins, the planes, demons, dragons, and so on - what has came before is new again in a JJ Abrams style of reboot and going over the same old for nostalgia reasons and good feelings.

I don't mind nostalgia, but there are times when I want to be thrown out of that box and dive into something new. Something where I have no clue on who is who and what is what, and have a completely unknown and new world to explore.

Blue Rose does a good job at presenting a dramatic-experience themed game. But from what I have seen, the world is vastly more interesting and compelling with all sorts of social relations and interactions, great evils, and dark forces at work looking to destroy the world. This is not just "romance fantasy gaming" per-se, but a real Game of Thrones style fantasy world worthy of consideration and exploration by serious fans of fantasy.

This is not just a narrative game. There is plenty of room in here to go gamist, simulationist, and go dark in story and content, and as someone looking for that dramatic "something more than dungeons" in my shared storytelling experiences I am very interested.

More soon, and this looks to be an underappreciated, but compelling and wonderfully readable and approachable classic.

Great Article: Starfinder

Check this out:

http://www.polygon.com/features/2016/11/17/13625140/starfinder-rpg-pathfinder

Wow, this article makes me generally excited for Starfinder. Magic plus sci-fi sort of is a tricky thing to do, since you get too much mojo going on at one time and people can't make sense of things - but this article generally hits the right notes for me and piques my interest in the setting.

A big plus is eliminating the original Golarion world entirely and forcing the setting to deal with "the everything else" out there. The original setting is so large and so well-established in the minds of players it would be easy to see how the game would bog down into "...with lasers" versions of everything on the original world, such as, "It is Cheliax...with lasers!" That? I'm not interested in that.

Forcing everyone to get out there in the stars and explore a post-Golarion universe? That sounds fun. It is like those anime stories where "original kingdom" is destroyed, and the plucky band of heroes needs to find a way to survive outside of the established safety net of "what came before." I swear my home campaigns are suffering from this and it is time to clean house, and it would be an exciting thing to shove the whole lot of "safe spaces" in my campaign to the back burner (or destroy them) and put players out on the hunt for fame, power, and a new sort-of-safe place in the universe.

Once campaigns go stale it becomes this messy political infighting that just feels stagnant to me. You know the moment happens when a player character goes into a government job. I like universes and settings in flux, where nothing is really, really safe, and players need to be heroes in order to make the world a better place. There needs to be cultures and races that demand to be dealt with, negotiated with, and got along with even though everything isn't super perfect and tensions exist.

Players hustle and fight the best when they are standing on thin ice. They are threatened. Choices matter. They can choose to be a hero...or not. Gaining power means a slightly larger margin of safety, but nothing is guaranteed. Safe spaces suck.

Starfinder doesn't sound so safe and settled, and that intrigues me. Even compared to the original Golarion world, which feels like a theme park full of separate and unconnected rides, this feels like a melting pot and universe in a constant state of change. Once can imagine different factions and groups fighting for control of resources and far-flung populations, with different factions splintered across a universe trying to find solid ground.

That sounds very intriguing to me. Especially compared with a bipolar Star Wars (that I still love) concerned with an us-against-them war, this feels more chaotic and in flux, with hundreds of factions in hundreds of conflicts for hundreds of reasons all seeking to grab a little more power for themselves and not get stabbed in the back by the next guy.

It that type of a universe, where empires are built on sand and crumble every day, the small guy matters. The hero matters. Choices matter.

And you can't make an assumption without digging into who this next group of people are, and what type of planet this is. You need to do your legwork and get invovled to know who is who and what is what.

Player engagement? Avoiding source-books that bog down the campaign into "kingdom X is this way and that's it?" That sounds interesting to me.

Great Article: Pathfinder Adventure Card Game Strategy #3

Check this out:

http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lja4?Pathfinder-Adventure-Card-Game-Strategy

This is a part three of a strategy guide for the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, and it has some interesting discussion of card game mechanics. Part of me sees this and wonders if this isn't a better way of implementing D&D 4's "card based" powers with a deck, hand, and draws for powers during an adventure - mixed in with d20 rolls and other bonuses that change and flow through the game.

With D&D 4, you build your character with a collection of 'card like' powers and those either can be used from turn-to-turn, once per encounter, or once per adventure. With Paizo's game, you build a deck with all sorts of allies, equipment, powers, and other cards that can be used in the situations that come up in the adventure. With D&D 4, your hand is your character, and you have no draws or shuffle mechanic. Paizo's manages to create a deck and shuffle mechanic, with your character's power being the cards they have in their hand.

I will have to admit there is a fun and interesting element of hand strategy and chance with Paizo's handling of card-based powers over the D&D 4 model, and this looks like a next generation of the 'cards as character' mechanic introduced in D&D 4, and advances the idea of 'deck building as character' that I feel D&D 4 never quite achieved.