Repost from SEP

Although the release was done in the stealth model, Mundus Novit: the Changed World is available at RPG Now. This reminds me of Clerks: “I Assure You, We’re Open!”

The sourcebook is systemless, it provides the secret histories and information on organizations rather than rules for playing in Mundus Novit.

What smells like shoe polish?

I’ve been working on designing an RPG for sword noir. Right now, it’s running on a PDQ engine, but with each step, moves a little farther from that. I don’t know where it will end up. I know it will have some form of “qualities” or “aspects.”

In any case, the whole thing is based off the description of sword noir I’ve provided here previously. One of the biggest difficulties is getting something together that I would both love to play and hits all the beats. For example, I’m having real problems addressing this part of the description: “Trust is the most valued of commodities . . .” Then there is the part that states: “The characters are good at what they do, but they are specialists.”

For the trust thing, I’ve been working on a Reputation mechanic, but I find that while it might do what I want, it doesn’t seem to fit organically into the rest of the system. For the specialist part, using descriptive qualities doesn’t really enforce this, though if the character is built from a concept forward, it certainly could help to facilitate it.

In the end, I don’t know if the design I am working on now is the one that will meet my needs. I may need to try again. Here’s a question, though: do I need a new/specific system to address that description, or can I address it using flavour—like setting and narration—to create an atmosphere, expectations, and motivations?

Right now, because I am enjoying the design process, I’ll keep at it. It may prove, though, that story may trump system: that I can do what I need without re-inventing the wheel.

You can follow the design process here.

You can read my thoughts on the design process over at Sword’s Edge Publishing.

The sword noir description can be found in this article.

The sword noir system is inspired by Jaws of the Six Serpents, which you can learn about here.

Cross-posted at SEP

I can see the end of Dark Horizons on the—dare I say it/write it—horizon. So, what to do next? What to do with SEP? Most blogination happens here, with the occasional personal post over at my tumblr page, so whither SEP?

I’m wondering if serial fiction is the way to go. It keeps me writing. The problem is that it does take up so much of my writing time, I do little else. Also, it works best when there is a large (as in five or six) buffer of chapters/posts, which means I likely wouldn’t be prepared to transit immediately into a new story. Finally, I would have to decide what to write. I have so many ideas and inspirations, and they change so often, it’s a tough question to answer.

If I free up my writing time, maybe I can get some products out there. The Osiris Files have stalled, mostly based on the stalling of the release of Mundus Novit. It is the plan that should the Files go forward, they would no longer be linked to MN. While I remain enthusiastic about MN, the lack of certainty regarding its status—now and in the future—means I would prefer to focus my efforts elsewhere.

So, those of you still visiting, if you feel invested in SEP at all, what would like to see? More serial fiction? More product? Something else entirely? Or should this just become a legacy site and I should focus my efforts elsewhere?

I’d put up a poll or ask for comments, but I would likely be embarrassed by the response. Instead, just email me if you actually have an opinion.

I was lucky enough to get a review copy of Alephtar Games and Cubicle 7’s Rome: the Life and Death of the Republic. This supplement is a licenced product for Chaosium’s Basic Roleplaying, about which I know nothing. I warned Angus at Cubicle 7 that the best I could do would be a review of the flavour text. Since I got the review copy, it is apparent he agreed to that.

Thankfully he did so. I love this book.

Those of you who know me, or have followed the podcast—especially Collateral—know that I am a fan of Roman history. If you’re planning on doing a military campaign in ancient Rome, I’ve got you covered with episodes about the Republic and Carthage, the Civil Wars, and the Principate. Guess what? Rome: LDR covers two out of those three. Coincidence? You be the judge.

But now that I’m done pimping my own stuff, I’m going to pimp Rome:LDR.

Pros
There are a lot of these.

First is the very breadth of the book. It covers the Monarchy to the fall of the Republic. That’s a heck of a timeframe. It looks at Roman culture, society, religion, games and festivals, the military, and the city itself. It also looks at characters, and magic and superstition—using the Basic Roleplaying System. There is a lot of ground to cover, but this book has over 215 pages of content.

Second is the depth of the information. It just happens to be enough. There isn’t so much that it drowns you, but it isn’t too shallow that you can’t dive in. It gives the game master enough information to present these eras of Rome in a game environment. More likely won’t be necessary, but there’s a very nice bibliography in the back if you need a kick start researching any topic further.

Third is the writing itself. Pete Nash has done a great job. The prose is never heavy. It’s crisp and carries just enough weight. I don’t know whether Mr. Nash is just a very talented writer or if Lawrence Whitaker is an extremely aware editor. Perhaps both. The text is free of the glaring errors that have been so common recently in gaming texts, even from companies that should have the funds to pay for top-notch editing.

This does not read like a text book, even though it is giving us the kind of information one might usually find there. The text seems aware of its purpose, that this is a gaming supplement, that this is part of someone’s escape, someone’s entertainment. I actually think that the flavour portion of this supplement might  better serve kids in high school learning Roman history.

Even with the breadth and depth to which I’ve alluded, the book never loses its core, and that is the city of Rome. Much of this information could be applicable should one play a campaign in one of the provinces—if one is playing in an era with provinces, of course—but the book specifically and consciously aims to discuss the city of Rome (the expansive title aside). That central point provides a lens to help keep the topic focused.

I could continue to gush, and I do on Collateral 29, available from the Accidental Survivors. Leave me to say that this is a great text, one I enjoyed reading, and one that Pete Nash, Alephtar Games, and Cubicle 7 should be proud to have published.

However, nothing is perfect.

Cons
The only complaint I have is the plethora of quotes from primary sources. The vast majority of topics in the book includes quotes from contemporary writers such as Livy, Plutarch and Pliny. The book overflows with them. Now, being a student of history, I am as enamoured of primary sources as the next history grad, but I do think that like salt, they are useful for flavouring, but should not overwhelm the meal. I felt that here, we have a little too much of a good thing. I can understand a writer’s enthusiasm for sharing the words of the people who lived in Rome, but a few quotes on select topics could have done so. I just feel there was too much.

And that’s it. That’s the only con.

So, as you can imagine, I wholeheartedly endorse this product. However, because there is so much information in here, if the players are not as well informed as the GM, a game might come off too much like a lesson. There is nothing wrong with learning as long as it is secondary to the fun. One way of doing this that occurred to me is having the characters be outsiders—perhaps Gauls or Greeks, perhaps even Spaniards—so that as the players learn of the city, so do the characters.

In any case, if you wish to hear more, go listen to the aforementioned Collateral episode.

The cover price on this book is $34.99 USD. That isn’t particularly expensive for the page count, and this book is extremely high quality. Given that I am a cheap bastard, the price would likely make me flinch. I think, though, that if you regularly spend as much on gaming books, that this one certainly matches anything out there. You’re getting a lot of bang for the buck.

I give this one 4.75 gladii out of 5. Outstanding.

We attempted a pulp game last night. I say attempted because although everyone professed to have fun, I have to admit I did not.

We’re going through a published module that I’m going to review (you’ll see it here and hear it on the podcast). I’m not a huge fan of published adventures, but as my game design time dwindles (especially as I’m trying to devote what little free time I have to creative writing), published adventures might be a way out.

Or not.

There were three big problems that actually made me stop running the game and discuss the situation with the players. When I read this module (three times before trying to run it), the problems didn’t really jump out at me. They really hit me during the game.

First, there is the level of railroading that seems to be necessary for most published adventures. This module came right out and said (I paraphrase): “Yes, you will railroad your players. There’s just no way around it.” And I get why. The module is replicating a pulp adventure, and it wants to jam all the pulp tropes in there. The problem is that in insuring—for example—that the characters get captured by the villains so the villain can monologue, the characters are put in a situation in which they cannot win. No matter what their skills, abilities, or powers, nothing they do can avoid this trap.

And that really bothers me.

Again, I understand the why of it—the need to hit that trope—but in my mind the removal of character autonomy, the removal of player power from the equation, is a very serious action while the payoff—the villain monologue—is not reward enough for it. I can think of a few ways to get through the villain monologue without pulling the “rock falls, no save.” It just goes against everything I believe makes a fun game.

Second, there are points in the story—early in the story—where the continuation of the plot demands success at a specific action. In this case, the bad guys get beaten, and a successful search reveals clues that lead to the next step in the adventure. What if the characters don’t search the bad guys? What if they do, but the search attempt (a skill check or trait test or whatever) fails? There’s no next step.

The particular example is not egregious because I believe I could have GMed my way out of it. Still, the continuation of the plot should never be a situation that might not happen as written. If the clue is important, why make it a trait test? Why not just say “You find X when you search the guys.” In my case I did “As the police haul away the bad guys, X and Y fall out of one of their pockets.” Sure, problem easily solved, but why did the problem exist in the first place.

Finally, assumptions are made that are, frankly, poor assumptions. The module intro basically lays down the law about pulp adventures, and in pulp adventures, the characters are good. There are mechanical penalties for acting morally ambiguous or evil. However, in the fight with the bad guys referenced above, the only two outcomes posited in the module are escape and death. It just so happened, two of the players took the good guy law to heart and knocked out two of the opposition.

So now what? Again, as a good GM I can pull this fat out of the fire, but why is it in the fire in the first place? Why was the assumption that the good guys would kill opponents out of hand? Especially after reminding everyone to play nice.

It seems to me that this adventure compilation will be getting a pretty poor mark. A good GM, armed in advance against these defects, could keep the game going strong, but given that I can pretty much run a 4 to 6 hour session of RPGing with a page or two of hand-written notes, if you want my money for a published adventure, I want it to save me time and I want to enjoy the process. Not so much last night.

And here’s the hook for your next modern action adventure.

This has got it all: an exotic locale (unless you live in South Korea, though I did for 3 ½ years, and I still find it exotic), government assassins, and a high level defector. There’s not much more you need to add to create a great action adventure.

But maybe there is more to this than meets the eye. I mean, when do reporters ever get it right? Could this be a case of being reported what one is told and not digging deeper? Of course it could.

Who is Hwang? What from his past might give us a hook, some departure from the norm?

He studied in Russia from 1949 to 1953. Stalin time! He returned to North Korea the year of Stalin’s death! Hmmmm.

The Soviet Union was a big believed in parapsychology—what I call parapsych in Mundus Novit. It is possible that Hwang was either brainwashed OR was a subject in one of the “beyond the limit” experiments of the time. Did he become a puppet for Stalin? Does he host an imprint of Stalin’s brain? Had he been gaining control of North Korea’s political players since his return in 1953, cast adrift after Stalin died? And if so, why is Kim Jong-Il impervious to his mental controls?

Possibly because he so crazy, but I digress.

What if, on the other hand, Hwang was sent to the Soviet Union to control it, to use his vast mental (or perhaps magical) powers to insure that Stalin never turned his back on North Korea. Hwang might have been a tool crafted specifically to control Stalin, and it has taken him decades to properly harness his power, re-direct it, gain full control of it. When he did, Kim Jong-Il set out to remove him. He was, you see, far too great a threat.

But Hwang escaped. He left behind his family because he really didn’t care about them. He has been focused on recapturing the thrill of control he had exercised over Stalin. An exercise noted by Beria and the Troika, which was why they assassinated Stalin—they did not know Stalin was, in fact, being controlled, they only recognized the results of that control.

Hwang is now in full control of his powers, and he wants revenge. Once he accomplishes his revenge on Kim Jong-Il, he will take control of South Korea—a rich and powerful prize, even better than Stalin’s Soviet Union. The assassins are from a special force specifically chosen and trained after Hwang’s escape, knowing that a confrontation will occur.

Now the player characters are caught in the middle. Hwang is definitely a huge threat, but right now he is focused on another huge threat. Do the PCs act now, perhaps in concert with the North Korean ESPer-hunters, or do they aid Hwang in destroying Kim Jong-Il, planning to then turn on Hwang?

Hwang, though, may be a far more dangerous opponent than they at first imagine.

And he’s not alone.

Duh-duh-duhhhhh.

But that’s the next adventure in the campaign.

I’m not going to comment on the article (though this is an interesting post for those following the election in Sudan), what I want to point out is the author’s name: Ophera McDoom.

Totally ripping that off for my next game.

Update: now, with an actual link to the article.

I’ve been listening to some lectures about the history of warfare, and—more particularly—the effect of warfare on history, or the lack there of. What is fascinating is that in the first urbanizations in the Old World (Uruk) and the new (Tenochtitlán), it seems that warfare, as such, was absent. There were no walls, no evidence of organizations of warriors, nothing that would indicate military activity. There was organized violence in the form of raiding, but not large-scale political violence. The theory is that originally, culture was transferred through trade.

What a great concept, eh? War is no longer endemic to humanity, though it might be at a certain part of civilization. Maybe we’ll outgrow it? Unlikely, but there is hope.

Along with that interesting information/theory and the attendant thin ray of hope, the discussion of culture and trade at the time of Uruk made me wonder about gaming in a Mesopotamian (or Meso-American) milieu. Technology and accepted society would be very different. I mean, gaming in a Classical Greek (or even Mycenean) campaign is different, but a lot of the assumptions on which we base our characters and settings remain. Taking inspiration from Uruk, or even its successors—in which warfare was absolutely a part—would be very, very different. From Priest-Kings to the lack of iron, to the hierarchy of society, a Sumerian campaign would be pretty alien.

Over at Sword’s Edge Publishing, I’ve revealed the huge gaping hole in my definition of sword noir—that being the lack of the femme fatale.

I’m not going to re-write everything I wrote over there, but considering that women are often the motivators of action in sword & sorcery, and that the femme fatale can certainly be readily found in S&S, how often does one find it in role-playing games?

I can’t say that I’ve ever created a femme fatale (or, simply fatale, if we want to go gender neutral/inclusive) for a game. I also can’t remember a time when I encountered a fatale as a player. So why is this archetype missing? Or is it?

It is quite possible that those of you out there reading have encountered or included a fatale in one of your games. For me, as I mentioned in the other article, the fatale is just another kind of macguffin. The fatale motivates the plot. It just happens to be a macguffin that can just as easily be a scapegoat. The fatale ensnares the character, leading the character into jeopardy. It allows the character to claim innocence and victimization.

Player characters should never be able to claim victimization. When a PC is a bad spot, it’s because the PC or that PC’s group has made conscious decisions that have led the PC into the bad spot. The bad spot should have been expected. Even when the PCs are caught in the middle of something, they should still be in control. When the PCs don’t have control, they might think they are playing Thomas the Tank Engine, the RPG.

Railroading.

The fatale might work if the fatale is leading the characters treacherously into danger. But then, there are so many other ways to do it other than through seduction. Greed rather than lust seems to be the vice of choice when herding PCs.

Seduction is also tough to RP, unless the players are blessed with extensive willing suspension of disbelief.

So, for me, the fatale is not something I would use as a motivator in a game. I can think of better macguffins and better RP experiences for my players.

Though I’m sure there are mileages out there that are varying.

There was a very loose collection of RPG rules I had worked on back in the day as kind of a mental exercise. I just ran across it again today. Back then I called it Blazing Sonata, as the rules mutated out of an exercise in RPG system design I had done basing a rules light game on film noir and music. That linkage is gone, so the title Blazing Sonata didn’t quite fit. I’m calling it Edge of the Story as kind of a riff on Sword’s Edge.

The rules are here.

Feel free to check them out and comment on them. I’ve never play tested these rules, though I would love to try. I believe it would need a group of players very comfortable with some level of narrative control, and with a willingness to further the story rather than just win.