A few years ago I read a book called "How to Draw Fantasy Art and RPG Maps", by Jared Blando. It was one of those "I didn't know I needed this until now" moments - a step-by-step guide to a subject that had long vexed me. While some of my older maps were okay, I had become rather dissatisfied with them, and especially given the availability of electronic tools that should have made the task much easier.
When I finished that book, the one other thing that struck me immediately was that it could do with a companion volume, dealing with how to draw fantasy cities and settlements. I guess Jared Blando realised the same, as he has now produced that book: "Fantasy Mapmaker". I finished reading this one over the weekend, and intend to try some of the techniques out over the winter break, time permitting.
My review of this book is slightly mixed. On the one hand, this one did not have the same transformative impression on me. How could it, given that the first volume already did that? On the other hand, it is probably the superior volume - perhaps Jared Blando has refined his techniques and/or style over the past few years, or perhaps he just has a greater passion for cities and settlements?
Either way, this is a great book, and highly recommended for any GM - it joins "The DC Guide to Writing Comics" and "How to Draw Fantasy Art and RPG Maps" on my list of unexpected resources.
Now, if he could only produce a third volume, dealing with dungeon maps...
Monday, 16 December 2019
Monday, 2 December 2019
The Prism Pentad
Aftre re-reading the Spelljammer novels last year, I decided this year to re-read the first series of Dark Sun novels, "The Prism Pentad". I first read these when they were published, so it had been about a quarter of a century, with my memory of them being that they were pretty good but pretty tough to get through. I had also of the opinion that publishing them was a big mistake, but I'll get to that...
I re-read the novels across the space of five months. My intention had, of course, to spend about a week reading each novel, allowing me to fit them easily in my "60 books" pattern. However, I found that this rate was over-ambitious. In general, the books took me about 10 days each to wade through. My assessment of them being a bit of a slog was basically spot-on. I also found that they haven't aged terribly well - it's fair to say that Troy Denning's writing has improved very significantly since then!
Unfortunately, I'm still of the opinion that these novels probably should not have been published.
The problem is this: TSR published their exciting new Dark Sun campaign setting - a new banner setting for the AD&D game. There was great fanfare surrounding the setting, and especially the (very good) boxed set that introduced the setting.
They then published the Prism Pentad that, in the very first novel, upends one of the key pillars of the game. Suddenly the core starting area was changed almost beyond recognition! Further novels in the series led to further massive changes, such that by the end pretty much everything that made up the setting was different. (Not necessarily worse, but different.)
TSR did eventually publish a revised version of the setting, but if really didn't get anything like the same push, or the same traction, and Dark Sun basically died a death until the 4e reboot. (There was a semi-reboot in 3e, in Dragon and Dungeon magazines, but given the scope of the setting this wasn't the support it really needed. And there was also a fan-led effect that did rather better, but again was limited to people who were already familiar with the setting.)
When WotC revived the setting for 4e, they did what I felt was the right thing - they reset the setting to what is probably the most interesting instant in it's history (that is, just after Tyr becomes the free city), and basically ignored everything that didn't fit their revised vision. I do feel they made another mistake by over-explaining everything. (They saidthat it was a setting where the Primordials won the great war at the dawn of time. That's absolutely fine, but we don't need to know that. And, actually it undercuts one of the major themes of the setting - that it has been ruined by uncontrolled abuse of magic.)
My overall opinion of "The Prism Pentad" is quite negative after the re-read - they're okay examples of "game fiction" (which is hardly a genre noted for excellence), but they're not great reads in their own right. And as tie-in fiction for the setting, I'm afraid they're mostly counter-productive. The very first novel is probably worthwhile as a lead-in to the 4e campaign setting (which IMO is probably be best version of that setting), but even that is not essential... and the DM may well prefer to come up with his own backstory anyway.
I re-read the novels across the space of five months. My intention had, of course, to spend about a week reading each novel, allowing me to fit them easily in my "60 books" pattern. However, I found that this rate was over-ambitious. In general, the books took me about 10 days each to wade through. My assessment of them being a bit of a slog was basically spot-on. I also found that they haven't aged terribly well - it's fair to say that Troy Denning's writing has improved very significantly since then!
Unfortunately, I'm still of the opinion that these novels probably should not have been published.
The problem is this: TSR published their exciting new Dark Sun campaign setting - a new banner setting for the AD&D game. There was great fanfare surrounding the setting, and especially the (very good) boxed set that introduced the setting.
They then published the Prism Pentad that, in the very first novel, upends one of the key pillars of the game. Suddenly the core starting area was changed almost beyond recognition! Further novels in the series led to further massive changes, such that by the end pretty much everything that made up the setting was different. (Not necessarily worse, but different.)
TSR did eventually publish a revised version of the setting, but if really didn't get anything like the same push, or the same traction, and Dark Sun basically died a death until the 4e reboot. (There was a semi-reboot in 3e, in Dragon and Dungeon magazines, but given the scope of the setting this wasn't the support it really needed. And there was also a fan-led effect that did rather better, but again was limited to people who were already familiar with the setting.)
When WotC revived the setting for 4e, they did what I felt was the right thing - they reset the setting to what is probably the most interesting instant in it's history (that is, just after Tyr becomes the free city), and basically ignored everything that didn't fit their revised vision. I do feel they made another mistake by over-explaining everything. (They saidthat it was a setting where the Primordials won the great war at the dawn of time. That's absolutely fine, but we don't need to know that. And, actually it undercuts one of the major themes of the setting - that it has been ruined by uncontrolled abuse of magic.)
My overall opinion of "The Prism Pentad" is quite negative after the re-read - they're okay examples of "game fiction" (which is hardly a genre noted for excellence), but they're not great reads in their own right. And as tie-in fiction for the setting, I'm afraid they're mostly counter-productive. The very first novel is probably worthwhile as a lead-in to the 4e campaign setting (which IMO is probably be best version of that setting), but even that is not essential... and the DM may well prefer to come up with his own backstory anyway.
Friday, 29 November 2019
The Beginning of the End?
It looks like my work game may be coming to an enforced end. Nothing to do with the campaign itself, and indeed it's not certain yet. But there was a conversation yesterday that decidedly felt like the beginning of the end.
I'll keep you updated. I do hope I'm wrong though, given that this game is now effectively my only connection to the hobby, and I see little chance of that changing.
I'll keep you updated. I do hope I'm wrong though, given that this game is now effectively my only connection to the hobby, and I see little chance of that changing.
Tuesday, 26 November 2019
How to Mess With Players' Heads
One of the features of the domain of Lamordia is the presence of "weird science" - the influences are very much Frankenstein and Doctor Moreau. As a consequence of that, I've inserted various weird science elements into the setting - the university has a Tower of Astrology (rather than astronomy), there's a Guide of Ressurrectionists, one of my villains will be a rogue phrenologist, and so on and so forth.
Of course, as far as the inhabitants of the setting are concerned, all of this is just 'science'. Especially since, in the context of a fantasy realm, it all works (at least sort of).
Unfortunately, one of my players suffered some fairly serious congnitive dissonance at all of that - I think he wants his magic labelled as such, and therefore had some real difficulties with my description. I suspect invoking Arthur C. Clarke's third law (about "sufficiently advanced technology") is unlikely to actually help.
All of which is rather unfortunate. I don't think I have any solution to that - I'll just need to try to work around it as best I can.
Of course, as far as the inhabitants of the setting are concerned, all of this is just 'science'. Especially since, in the context of a fantasy realm, it all works (at least sort of).
Unfortunately, one of my players suffered some fairly serious congnitive dissonance at all of that - I think he wants his magic labelled as such, and therefore had some real difficulties with my description. I suspect invoking Arthur C. Clarke's third law (about "sufficiently advanced technology") is unlikely to actually help.
All of which is rather unfortunate. I don't think I have any solution to that - I'll just need to try to work around it as best I can.
Friday, 15 November 2019
Designing a Mystery - one thought, and one mistake
My first adventure for the new campaign is a mystery - a young woman has been attacked and maimed, and people want revenge. So far, so obvious.
My approach for designing a mystery is basically to draw up a bunch of nodes and lines - the nodes show all the likely vectors for investigation and the lines show where they point. I try to make sure that there are at least three lines pointing to any node I want the PCs to reach, in keeping with the "Three Clue Rule".
The consequence of this is that the web that describes the mystery looks awfully like the web of room connections I would make prior to drawing a proper map for a dungeon.
Which is the observation I would like to share: designing a mystery is basically the same as designing a dungeon. It's just that instead of exploring the rooms of a dungeon, the party are exploring the web of interactions between NPCs.
(I don't hold with the notion that the DM should only design half the mystery, on the grounds that the players will come up with a more compelling resolution anyway. Because they might well not do that, and end up meandering aimlessly through the setting instead. It's much easier to provide them with an enjoyable journey if you know the landmarks along the way.)
Anyway, that brings me to the flip side of this observation, and the mistake I've made in my first session. In a dungeon, you have a bunch of rooms, and in most (though not all) of those rooms you want something to happen - some sort of an encounter, a trap, and what-have-you. And perhaps some wandering encounters in the corridors between rooms, or something like that, but I digress.
What I'm saying is that in dungeon design it's a mistake to have too many empty rooms - rooms where the PCs search and just move on. When designing a mystery then, and more importantly when designing a mystery adventure it's a mistake to have too many nodes where nothing happens. If the PCs go back to the scene of the crime to see what they can find, it's probably a good idea for them to meet some resistance at that point - maybe a glimpse of the killer (and an exciting chase), maybe some hired thugs sent to dissuade them from their investigations... something.
And so, the first "real" session of the new campaign got off to an okay start, but not a great one. It was just filled with too many 'empty' nodes, and therefore not enough action. Fortunately, that's easy to remedy for next time.
I hope.
My approach for designing a mystery is basically to draw up a bunch of nodes and lines - the nodes show all the likely vectors for investigation and the lines show where they point. I try to make sure that there are at least three lines pointing to any node I want the PCs to reach, in keeping with the "Three Clue Rule".
The consequence of this is that the web that describes the mystery looks awfully like the web of room connections I would make prior to drawing a proper map for a dungeon.
Which is the observation I would like to share: designing a mystery is basically the same as designing a dungeon. It's just that instead of exploring the rooms of a dungeon, the party are exploring the web of interactions between NPCs.
(I don't hold with the notion that the DM should only design half the mystery, on the grounds that the players will come up with a more compelling resolution anyway. Because they might well not do that, and end up meandering aimlessly through the setting instead. It's much easier to provide them with an enjoyable journey if you know the landmarks along the way.)
Anyway, that brings me to the flip side of this observation, and the mistake I've made in my first session. In a dungeon, you have a bunch of rooms, and in most (though not all) of those rooms you want something to happen - some sort of an encounter, a trap, and what-have-you. And perhaps some wandering encounters in the corridors between rooms, or something like that, but I digress.
What I'm saying is that in dungeon design it's a mistake to have too many empty rooms - rooms where the PCs search and just move on. When designing a mystery then, and more importantly when designing a mystery adventure it's a mistake to have too many nodes where nothing happens. If the PCs go back to the scene of the crime to see what they can find, it's probably a good idea for them to meet some resistance at that point - maybe a glimpse of the killer (and an exciting chase), maybe some hired thugs sent to dissuade them from their investigations... something.
And so, the first "real" session of the new campaign got off to an okay start, but not a great one. It was just filled with too many 'empty' nodes, and therefore not enough action. Fortunately, that's easy to remedy for next time.
I hope.
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
Racism in Ravenloft
Note: this post isn't about real-world racism at all, be it the hadling of different ethnicities, elements of the setting design that could be considered racist, or what-have-you.
Most of the best D&D published campaign settings originated in 2nd Edition days, and suffer from a weird disconnect - the settings tend to be written under the assumption that the vast majority of the PCs will be human, while the 2nd Edition rules made humans the least appealing character option. (The only advantage to a human PC was that you didn't suffer level limits - but level limits were very rarely reached and even more rarely enforced.)
From 3e onwards, the game has done a much better job of balancing the PC races, to the point where humans are a perfectly respectable choice. However, my experience has been that players will tend to go for something different for their PC - very often the more outlandish the better.
In the Ravenloft setting in particular, this is something of an issue, as the setting assumes that 99% of all NPCs are human and they have an almost xenophobic hatred of the different. Combine that with a largely non-human PC group, and you have issues. (In fact, my party in "The Mists of Lamordia" is entirely non-human.) And given that I really can't be bothered dealing with racism in my fantasy any more, that's just not something I want.
Fortunately, the solution to this one is pretty easy, especially in the domain of Lamordia - change it. Where it comes to Lamordia, the people are noted as being rational to a fault, so it's a simple matter to have them simply accept the different as it is, and move on.
That's not to say that the matter will be entirely absent. I have a story point related to the absence of elves, in particular, in the setting, which means that the presence of the elven PC will lead at least to some comment. Additionally, part of the tiefling's shtick is about them being outsiders and shunned by society. Since the player in question chose that race knowing that, I'm assuming that that's something that will want at least some mention (and, again, it's easy enough to incorporate into the story). But for the half-elves and the dragonborn (and, later, if we have any gnomes, dwarves, or halflings), it will simply be a non-issue.
All that said, I do kinda wish we had an all-human party for this one. But it wasn't to be - and I'd much rather my players choose characters that they'd like to play, rather than ending up with something they're unhappy with just to fit "my precious campaign".
Most of the best D&D published campaign settings originated in 2nd Edition days, and suffer from a weird disconnect - the settings tend to be written under the assumption that the vast majority of the PCs will be human, while the 2nd Edition rules made humans the least appealing character option. (The only advantage to a human PC was that you didn't suffer level limits - but level limits were very rarely reached and even more rarely enforced.)
From 3e onwards, the game has done a much better job of balancing the PC races, to the point where humans are a perfectly respectable choice. However, my experience has been that players will tend to go for something different for their PC - very often the more outlandish the better.
In the Ravenloft setting in particular, this is something of an issue, as the setting assumes that 99% of all NPCs are human and they have an almost xenophobic hatred of the different. Combine that with a largely non-human PC group, and you have issues. (In fact, my party in "The Mists of Lamordia" is entirely non-human.) And given that I really can't be bothered dealing with racism in my fantasy any more, that's just not something I want.
Fortunately, the solution to this one is pretty easy, especially in the domain of Lamordia - change it. Where it comes to Lamordia, the people are noted as being rational to a fault, so it's a simple matter to have them simply accept the different as it is, and move on.
That's not to say that the matter will be entirely absent. I have a story point related to the absence of elves, in particular, in the setting, which means that the presence of the elven PC will lead at least to some comment. Additionally, part of the tiefling's shtick is about them being outsiders and shunned by society. Since the player in question chose that race knowing that, I'm assuming that that's something that will want at least some mention (and, again, it's easy enough to incorporate into the story). But for the half-elves and the dragonborn (and, later, if we have any gnomes, dwarves, or halflings), it will simply be a non-issue.
All that said, I do kinda wish we had an all-human party for this one. But it wasn't to be - and I'd much rather my players choose characters that they'd like to play, rather than ending up with something they're unhappy with just to fit "my precious campaign".
Tuesday, 12 November 2019
The Second Map
After I finished my map of Lamordia, my attention immediately switched to the capital of that realm - the town of Ludendorf. That one took a bit less time, largely because I got halfway through and then decided I had to up the pace very significantly. But the most important consideration is: it will do.
Having completed those two maps to my liking, I'm now starting work in earnest on the campaign notes, which is much more familiar ground for me - I'm pretty good with simple writing tasks. It's just a shame that there's so much work and not enough time!
Looking forward, I'm now feeling much happier about my ability to produce good quality campaign maps for the future - they're a lot of work, and eat up a lot of time, and the results are obviously far from professional quality, but they'll do the job I'm looking for. Which is a nice place to be.
Having completed those two maps to my liking, I'm now starting work in earnest on the campaign notes, which is much more familiar ground for me - I'm pretty good with simple writing tasks. It's just a shame that there's so much work and not enough time!
Looking forward, I'm now feeling much happier about my ability to produce good quality campaign maps for the future - they're a lot of work, and eat up a lot of time, and the results are obviously far from professional quality, but they'll do the job I'm looking for. Which is a nice place to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)