to hit armo(u)r class zero v.2

I wrote v.1 more than 9 months ago and it’s about time I continue with this topic. Here’s a brief summary of what was discussed:

• Combat in RPGs, which is supposed to be a time of high tension and excitment, can often be drawn out, boring and/or understimulating.
• Everybody has a different idea of fun. Therefore, in any RP group, it is quite improbable to maintain maximum fun levels for all participants for the entire session, let alone one combat encounter.
• Groups should then rather aim to maintain a satisfactory average level of fun for all participants. I argued that this level can be maintained by keeping everybody ‘in the game’, as it were.
• And, perhaps not made clear in the main post, but coming out in the comments: it’s up to both GMs and players to make the game fun.
• Also coming out in the comments: participants knowing the rules of the game and not cheating are somewhat integral to a group having fun.

This topic (making combat more fun and/or faster) is quite a popular one (especially after the PHB2 Game Day fallout). Hopefully, though, I can still add something new. I ended the last post by stating that aiming to keep your players actively involved in the game (especially during another player’s turn) may help maintain the fun. Well, how do we do this? Today, I’m going to discuss  and focus on one of the methods I’ve tried using.To be honest, I haven’t had much success yet (I think I’ve been too subtle in introducing my idea to my players), however, I think the idea still has merit and warrants further investigation. The basic premise revolves around rewarding and promoting combat actions that involves more than just one player character and the antagonists.

The simplest example involves the (underused) Dungeons and Dragons aid another action. When you use the aid another action to add +2 to an ally’s next attack roll, you have essentially made an investment in your ally’s roll and will thus naturally show more interest in your ally’s actions (as you are now using a different measure to gauge the worth of your own actions). There are, of coures, many different tactics your players (or NPC antagonists) may employ, including even this:

By introducing such a concept to your players, this should allow you to introduce more exotic combats while hopefully minimizing  risking complaints of nerfing certain characters (3.x rogues vs undead and constructs, for example).

In the near future:

• More ideas on keeping combat fun
• Teaching other players through play (as either GM or fellow player)

- jatori

The Case of the Bitch [Full Text]

The full text version of The Case of the Bitch: Gender and Identity Construction and Formation Within Role-Playing Narratives can be found here.

30 Seconds Software and Boardgame

30 Seconds is a board game that started in South Africa, and revolutionized the “knowledge” gaming scene that was dominated for years and years and years by Trivial Pursuit.  Other games like “Who wants to be a Millionaire” might have gained temporary favour, but was always defeated by the classic Trivial Pursuit.

30 Seconds really arrived on the scene when it was played by the house mates in Big Brother South Arica (first series).  The most important difference between Trivial Pursuit and 30 Seconds, is that in Trivial Pursuit a team’s collective knowledge was important.  Therefor having a diverse team is very important.  In 30 Seconds the team’s communal knowledge is more important, therefor having a team with similar strengths is good.  Like all good games (and good gamers) we always try to improve on the rules.  30 Seconds has one very, very stupid rule… the negative dice.  Random bonus is fine in a game, but a random penalty is demotivating.  Rather double the squares on the size of the board, and make the 0-2 a bonus.  It’s much better moving 5-7 when you get 5/5, than moving 3-5 when you get 5/5.  Or even worse, imagine struggling, getting only 2/5… and then having thrown a 2, you don’t get to move at all.  It’s the same thing, but it works very differently on the psyche of the players!

I recognized (in 2003 already) the educational use that 30 seconds could have.  Imagine for instance trying to teach the capitals, states and other important cities and monuments to a class of kids.  If you had a small database of 200 or 300 words, this could be a quick and fun way for the class to gain the knowledge quickly.

So I created an application back then, and now rereleased it, now that printing cards are somewhat easier via Excel.  If you’re interested you can download the application for free at the website. Also you can become a fan of the boardgame on Facebook or a fan of the software.

DnD 4th Ed Alignments

‘ve now played several different DnD editions, and the alignment system changed a couple of times…

Basic DnD had only three (Lawful,Neutral,Chaotic).  Then 2nd ed came, and they had 9 as seen below.

2^nd and 3^rd ed

	Law
Good	L/G	L/N	L/E	Evil
	N/G	Neutral	N/E
	C/G	C/N	C/E
	Chaos

But the “neutral” option tended to always have been “wishy-washy”… Neutral-Good… what is that?  I’m goody… but actually average Joe. Actually it’s “I just want to play this game ok… don’t give me this much options!”.

But in 4th they decided to chop it to 5…

	Law
Good	L/G	L/N	L/E	Evil
	N/G	Neutral	N/E
	C/G	C/N	C/E
	Chaos

It is decent enough options (definite improvement!)… but the “wishy-washy” types stayed (in Good and Evil) and you can just 1-up them.  Be “very-good” or “very-evil”.

I think it should be

	Law
Good	L/G	L/N	L/E	Evil
	N/G	Neutral	N/E
	C/G	C/N	C/E
	Chaos

Balance,Chaotic,Lawful. Neutral, Good, Evil.

These are two different axis for a reason.  Being good has nothing to do with following the law.  Being chaotic is not at all an evil act.

In 4th Ed, alignment is not a gaming mechanic.  (Although I think Paladins still have to be Lawful-Good?) But it is, and always be, a role playing mechanic.  World of Darkness equivalent (vices and virtues), creates a character without too much restrictions, but it does help to aim your character into a roleplaying direction.

Choosing an option of the extreme on the axises gives you a lot more definition to your character, which will help make your roll playing (decisions) quicker and more predictable by the other players.  This means a quicker game for everybody, and that is by far the biggest critique of RPGs… the speed. (Why I am watching the d0 concept closely)

Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and cauldron bubble.

Homebrewing – that’s this month’s RPG Blog Carnival topic. For me, there are two sides to homebrewing: the flavour side and the mechanical side. I have been making up games and creating house rules for existing games from about the time I realised that Lego was not meant for swallowing. My interest in making fantasy worlds and characters developed at about the same time, because, for some reason or the other, I needed a plausible reason for the brave Lego knights to attack the GI Joe stronghold to save my sister’s stolen Barbie dolls. The knights needed names, motivation and background stories to take on Cobra Command. So to did the GI villains and Barbie victims need similar attributes.

As of yet, I haven’t decided which aspect of homebrewing I’d like to write about to contribute to September’s Carnival. In the meantime, however, I’ll leave you with some handy homebrew links:

Dawn of Worlds: A group game used to develop fantasy worlds.

Dire Press: Lots of random generators to get the imagination engines turning.

Fantasy Name Generator: Elves always need apostrophes in their names. This generator knows how to use apostrophes.

the case continues

Identity, a word that should be easy to define, yet it encompasses a variety of meanings and situations. According to Culler (1997), identity in the form of the I can be understood in “four basic manners”.

The first, opting for the given and the individual, treats the self, the ‘I’, as something inner and unique, something that is prior to the acts it performs, an inner core which is variously expressed [or not expressed] I word and deed. The second, combining the given and the social, emphasizes that the self is determined by its origins and social attributes: you are male or female…and these are primary facts, givens of the subject or the self. The third, combining the individual and the made emphasizes the changing nature of a self, which becomes what it is through its particular acts. Finally, the combination of the social and the made stresses that I become what I am through the various subject positions I occupy, as a boss rather than a worker, rich rather than poor (Culler: 1997; 110).

From this, one can deduce that identity is not only a means for a person to identify him or herself or to come to a sense of self through it, but something that is intrinsically gendered. As one learns from Althusser, one’s sense of self is created through the process of recognition; you are you only in terms of other people recognising this form as you. This occurs because part of who you are is created in terms of the way in which others see you. And unfortunately, as mentioned above one of the easiest ways to recognise a person as that particular person is in terms of their gender, thus highlighting the inescapable truth that gender and identity are tied to each other. What does this have to do with character creation for a game? This is important for character construction as the player constructs every aspect of the character they want to play.

When you are constructing a character that you want to play/perform everything is to be considered, which includes that character’s gender. Play and perform are terms used together because both of them demonstrate the various aspects that come to the fore in role-playing and identity construction. As the character’s gender could have an impact on the character concept, the first and possibly most crucial step in character creation.
The concept that describes the character is the bedrock upon which he is built. No matter how complex or confusing his choices become over his career, you the player always have a guiding concept to fall back upon. The concept is a general idea that tells everyone just what your character is about. A concept is generally an adjective and a noun — intrepid explorer, deviant librarian, callous detective, haunted survivor (Blackwilder et al: 2005; 64).

the case of the bitch: gender and identity construction and formation in role-playing narratives

I wrote a paper, so entilted, in the honours year of my English degree. The paper shall be posted in its entirety over the next coming weeks. Hopefully, it will inspire discussion.

~~~

A role-playing game [RPG] is a sophisticated form of make believe in which each player creates a game persona, and verbally acts out this persona in a game world interacting with other players (Livingstone: 1982; 5). Role-playing games can thus be viewed as communal narratives as their form is reliant on the interaction that occurs between the players. Communal narrative is that of combined storytelling one can clearly see that in a game where the emphasis is placed on the interaction that occurs between those taking part, that role-playing is in itself combined storytelling. As role-playing is a communal narrative it is easy to see that gender and identity construction occur not only on the creating player’s part, but also on the part of those the player is playing with. As one’s gender and identity are both concepts understood in terms of your position within a group, it is clear that role-playing games provide an interesting position from which to understand these concepts and their place within role-playing games. Role-playing games are clearly narratives if one takes the definition of a narrative as being “a story; an interpretation of some aspect of the world that is historically and culturally grounded and shaped by human personality” (Fisher: 1984).

Fisher argues that all forms of human communication are storytelling; in the case of Dungeon and Dragons© [DnD] and World of Darkness© [WoD] this is obviously true in game but Fisher’s argument is that this is also true outside of the game. This is because all events and interpretations of the events are understood in a manner that fits within the person’s narration or story. Thus, the player has his own narration separate to that of those he plays with and that of his character. These interpretations and the manner in which they are understood also to a certain extent rely on the person’s gender and identity and all the aspects, which come with that particular gender and identity. The collaborative story telling begins with the Dungeon Master (DM) [for DnD or Story Teller (ST) for WoD]; he is the instigator. The DM/ST is the central figure in the process as he is the person that has the idea for a story or even a new world. He is also the person who keeps it all together, as well as the one that gets the players [4 minimum 6 maximum] together. It is this structure and the process that form part of it that create the scope from which I will examine the process of gender and identity construction and formation within role-playing.

Within role-playing the player creates a character, a person they will play/perform. This creation takes into account the mundane aspects such as the character’s looks, mental and social attributes, as well as the character’s more specialized abilities such as skills and other abilities that differ from person to person. Creation includes the development of the core personality of that character and all the idiosyncrasies that each person has. This essentially means that a new identity and personality is being created and performed. The process of character creation begs the question: is identity something that can be created and performed? In terms of role-playing games identity can be created and it is clearly being performed. But, what happens when the person constructing a new identity is constructing that of a different gender to that which he is? I use he because role-players are predominantly male; comprising between 81 and 91 percent of gamers, as indicated in John Kim’s 2004 survey of data. Does any flexibility exist within this sphere of creation and performance? What is identity and how can one create it or perform it? Are players really creating new identities and personalities or are they just experimenting with other aspects of their own identities and personalities? Are they perhaps pandering to the gender and other stereotypes that exist? Do their own gendered identities impact on the new gendered identities they are creating?

to hit armo(u)r class zero

Combat is an integral part of any role playing game. Sooner or later, your character will get into a fight. Combat in a pen and paper RPG is exciting, exhilarating, fun… well, at least it’s supposed to be. Sometimes a combat encounter turns into a monotonous and boring obstacle to gaming fun and enjoyment. As both a player and game master, I’ve played in and run some very tragically boring combat scenarios.

So, how can we avoid turning the most (arguably) exciting part of the game into a tedious uphill slog through the snow – barefoot. Perhaps a review of what I expect from a combat encounter will help us come up with some useful ideas. Today I shall look at what I expect as a GM.

Number 1: I want my players to have fun.

This is a tricky one, as everybody has a different definition of what’s fun for them. Different players just prefer different elements of RP. There are those that prefer combat to demonstrate their rules mastery or test their tactical decision-making. Then there are those that prefer to really get into the role of their character, emphasizing non-mechanical character growth and development. And then there are those that enjoy the overarching communal narrative more than anything else.

So, how do we make sure that all player tastes (there are far more than those I listed above) are catered for in combat? Well, you can’t – at least not all of the time. Remember, though, combat is only a part of the game and a good RP session should involve a good mix of different types of encounters (for lack of a better word) to cater for all the different fun tastes. However, just because a player prefers one type of encounter to another, does not mean that the player should be allowed to get bored or frustrated in any one of the encounters.

Since it’s impossible to maintain maximum fun levels for all of your players in every combat, I try instead to aim for goal number 2. If you can achieve number 2 on a regular basis, then you are probably nearing maintaining an average of high-ish level of fun for your players. And that should be good enough for most GMs and players.

Number 2: I want my players to stay in the game.

I’ll be discussing this topic next time, with references to a ‘kill the rats in my tavern’s basement’ encounter I plan to run for an upcoming 4e game.

Challenge Rating

Recently, my job has me attending some training courses on self-empowerment. At the course, the following question was asked: “What really motivates you?”

And my answer: “A challenge.”

I suffer a bit from apathetic geniusness (and narcissism, obviously). I discovered at an early age that I was able to input minimal effort and get an above average result. School didn’t challenge me. If I don’t need to try hard, why try hard? What’s there to prove? Is getting an A over a B worth all the stress and effort? Is even a B over a C worth it? I still, to this day, follow the Pareto principle in many facets of my life. That’s just a fancy way of saying I’m lazy.

So what does this have to do with gaming? Well, for me, everything. Gaming challenges me. It engages me. It makes me try harder. Why?

Well, over the next few weeks, I’m going to investigate this by throwing my thoughts out onto the interweb and see what the tubes throw back.

My first thoughts on the matter will deal with the portrayal of combat in role playing games.

Thanks to the blunderbuss for inspiring the first topic.

Stay tuned.

-j