The newest episode of the podcast went live, and I can now embed it into the blog. So if you want to list, just click this button:
In this episode, we discuss character backgrounds. I like them short and emergent, while James is in favor of slightly longer and more defined ones.
Apparently James likes longer episodes, too, because this one is 21 minutes long.
I published the first episode of the Dekahedron RPG podcast this week.
If you use a “real” podcatcher (I use AntennaPod but there are many others), you should be able to find it in the search results. If you can’t find it, the direct RSS feed is https://anchor.fm/s/94739d0/podcast/rss.
If you listen to your podcasts another way–like through the web or something, the following links will work:
James and I are recording a new episode tomorrow. The topic is “obnoxnious character behavior.” That’s different from “obnoxious player behavior.” That will be a future episode.
This week’s gaming activity has been focused on the podcast:
I hope to get the real first episode out this week.
Unrelated to the podcast, I’ve had a couple thoughts for the Moana campaign:
My Hawaiian vacation ended with 27 hours of travelling, then straight back to an 11-day workweek with 6-hours of jet-lag. All that is to say that this week’s post will be super short.
I grew up on the coast of New England. One of the big differences between the north Atlantic and the tropical Pacific is the clarity of the water. Whenever I go on whale watching trips, they tell me that the cloudy darkness of the cold Atlantic waters are like that because they’re teaming with life. The whales travel there in the summer to feed, and return to the crystal clear but nearly lifeless waters of the tropics in the winter to give birth.
While I knew all this intellectually, it wasn’t until I was in Hawai'i that I really understood how clear the waters were. That gave me an idea. For navigating, instead of using stars and a compass, what if sailors in my Moana campaign just looks down at the see floor from their boats? They navigate at sea like we naviagte on land–by using landmarks. But instead of mountains and trees their landmarks are coral reefs, kelp forests, sunken ships, and undersea cities that sank eons ago.
I told this idea to James. He said “Would that work in real life?”
My answer was simple: “Who cares? Casting fireball doesn’t work in real life, but it’s fun.”
What do you think? Do you like it? What other things can be underwater for them to use as landmarks? If landmarks are under water would that make them "watermarks?"
I got some feedback from last week's idea. To save you from clicking the link, the idea was for a campaign set in a fantasized version of stone-age Hawai'i. Let's address it!
I immediately assumed it was based on the Moana Disney movie, and the description didn't change my mind. That said, I'd play that.
Well, I'm glad he liked the idea!
I had completely forgotten about Disney's Moana. Well, not completely, I guess. When I typed the name last week, I thought "Wait--isn't there a Disney thing about moana?" So I tought about it it for a second and decided "No--Disney's Hawaiian movie is Lilo & Stitch. I must be thinking about how the say 'ohana' all the time" Oops.
So I need a new name. Kai is the Hawaiian word for "sea." Maybe that will work, but I'm thinking about stripping away all the Hawaiian in order to not be culturally offensive.
Can you take on another world? LOL
This is a good point. But I'm not going to go full bore. Basically this is just a modification of my Okeanos setting. And this might actually make a great setting for my U.S.S. Crowfield idea.
But the idea doesn't have to be fully fleshed out. I just need to get enough "flesh on the bones" so that when I'm ready to run it I can dig up my notes and work on it more.
Doesn't this sound a lot like Earthsea?
Yes, I'm answering my own thought. But this is a good point. I think Earthsea was the first non-Tolkien fantasy series that I read. The author, Ursula K. Le Guin, purposely created a non-medieval non-European fantasy world. Wikipedia describes it this way:
The world of Earthsea is one of sea and islands: a vast archipelago of hundreds of islands surrounded by mostly uncharted ocean. Earthsea contains no large continents, with the archipelago resembling Indonesia or the Philippines ... The cultures of Earthsea are literate non-industrial civilizations and not direct analogues of the real world.
So yes, there are definite similarities. It's not a direct copy, though, and there will be very distinct differences, so I think I'm safe.
Do you have to do this? Has someone else already done the work for you?
I didn't se any GURPS worldbooks, so that makes me think no one else has. But I did come across a free RPG called Mythos of the Maori. I haven't read it in depth, but it seems like good work. Except this is exactly what I'm trying to avoid: a direct reproduction of actual Polynesian culture. I fear that is too likely to be offensive to modern sensibilities.
So those were my thoughts and the thoughts inspired by those that send me comments. If you have any more thoughts, please let me know.
I'll leave you with is picture I took a couple of nights ago as I was standing on the rim of Kīlauea. The glowing stuff is lava!
I talked before about my desire for game world settlements to be few and far between in order to force the player characters to travel through "untamed wilderness" between towns. In that same post I talked about a part of my game world called "Okeanos."
Okeanos is an archipelago. Players would travel from island to island in ships. The idea is based on Homer's Odyssey. As such the ships, weapon, armor, and cultures are all based on bronze age Greek mythology.
I also talked before about my desire to run a campaign set in the Stone Age.
Today I'm in Hawai'i, and the though occurred to me to marry those two desires. My working title is Moana (Moe-AH-nah), the Hawaiian word for "Ocean."
The technology, ships, and cultural lifestyle would be a very fictionalized and fantastic version of what we know of pre-European contact Polynesia, just like most RPGs are very fictionalized and fantastic versions of medieval Europe. I would develop a new theology from scratch to avoid trivializing anyone's real life beliefs.
A quick search has already shown me a good article that talks about the weapons of Ancient Hawai'i.
What do you think of the idea?
Every time you roll the dice in an RPG, you are determining the answer to a question:
Other than the last one, notice how all of these are “yes/no” type questions.
It wasn’t long after the hobby started that people started expanding the rules. Even though it was never an official rule, a common house rule was that rolling a natural 20 indicated a “super success.” In combat, not only did you hit the opponent, but you hit this in a critical organ for bonus damage. From this the term “critical hit” (or “crit”) was born. A crit is kind of like answering the question with “Yes, and more!”
Of course, that was followed almost instantly with the thought that if a natural 20 was a critical success, then a natural 1 must be a “critical failure” or a “fumble.” A fumble is the yes/no equivalent of “Not only no, but…”
(On a side note.. the “6” roll in Lucky 7 is the “Yes, but…” answer.)
Lucky 7 will not have fumbles.
The main reason for that is because it would be very unfair to the players. Because L7 is a “only the players roll” game, there’s no change that a monster or NPC would ever fumble. Giving the players a one-sided risk seems unfair.
Lucky 7 will have crits.
This is still one sided, but it’s one sided in favor of the players. When the rest of the world is out to get them, giving them this advantage is the least we can do.
There are people that think a 1:20 chance is too high for a crit, and I agree with them. It’s even worse for L7, because we use a d12. So (sadly) crits in L7 will (possibly) require a second roll.
If you’re rolling one die, and you roll a 12 you may roll a second die. We’ll call this the “crit die.” If the crit die is also a 12, then your result is a critical success. That’s a 1:144 (or 0.7%) chance. If you (as a GM) think that’s too rare, feel free to change the what is needed on the second die. This chart is provided for your benefit:
| Crit range | Odds | % Chance | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 1:144 | 0.7% | |
| 11 & 12 | 1:72 | 1.4 % | Probably what I will use at my table. |
| 10 — 12 | 1:48 | 2.1% | |
| 9 — 12 | 1:36 | 2.8% | |
| 8 — 12 | 5:144 | 3.5% | |
| 7 — 12 | 1:24 | 4.2% | |
| 6 — 12 | 7:144 | 4.9% | About the same as a simple crit d20. |
If you’re making a bonus roll, you’re already rolling two dice. In that case, if both dice are “12” (or, if using a different crit range, if the high die is a “12” and the second die in in the crit range)), then you got a crit.
If you’re making a penalty roll, then both dice have to be a 12—there’s no way around it. This is because in a penalty roll, the lower die is the one that counts. So in order for the roll to be a “Natural 12,” the lower die has to be a 12 and that can only happen if both dice are 12’s.
If you’re using a different crit range, this means that crits will be more common if you’re rolling with bonus, and less common if rolling with penalty. This seems fair to me.
Posts might be scarce for the next month or so. I usually write my posts during the weekend, and I’ll be away on vacation for the next two weekends, and working my second job the weekend after that. I will try to post something but no promises.