Jack of Spades: Indian Brave

Jack of Spades: Indian Brave

Back in action, here is the next playing card in the series, a native American Brave. You can  grab the fig here.

Once more into the Breach

Oh man, what a year. Needless to say, I've been neglecting the blog a bit, but today I’m shaking off the ol’ cobwebs and am getting back into the game. 

So, where were we? Oh yeah, gaming. Well, I am unhappy to say that I haven’t played an RPG in an embarrassingly long time, but I have been playing my fair share of board and card games. In fact, I've even been working on one of my own, and it is currently entering the second round of play-testing. As of yet, it is not quite ready for prime time, but once a few of the wrinkles are ironed out of it, I’ll release it into the wild and see if it can stand. For now, I will just mention it is a coopetition game exploring the world of courtship in Victorian England.  More on that to come as things progress.

As for the blog, the plan is to return to Miniature Mondays and continue with the random ramblings on gaming, story design, and what-have-you. In addition to this, I will be throwing in my two cents on some of the board and card games I've been playing, as well as giving updates on the play-testing. Should be fun.

Where the heck have you been?

Lost the stylus to my tablet, so haven't been doing any minis, and as always life....I'm coming back and soon.

Miniature Mondays: King of Clubs: Shaman

King of Clubs: Shaman

Chat it up with the spirits of your ancestors with this pipe smoking priest of the native people. You can grab the fig here.

Shadowrun Cheat Sheet

I've been planning on running a Shadowrun game for a bit now and I put together this helpful cheat sheet, and I figured I would share it with ya'll. Download it here!

(Note: It is formatted to be printed on legal size paper)

Morality

Anyone who has played RPGs for an extended period of time has run into the quagmire of morality. Let’s face it, 80% of most game books are rules on how to kill things. But does this make us all a bunch of amoral sociopaths with a death fixation? For the majority of gamers, I would say no, but the thought does creep in there as you revel in the slaughter of an entire village of goblins, or when you’re looking up the rules for interrogation to find out if the group gets a higher modifier for removing the NPCs teeth with pliers or a hammer. When, or should we explore morality in our gaming?

Characterization and Empathy

You never see news reports about chess leading to an increase in violence -- a game where the path to victory is devising the best way to kill as many of your opponent's men as possible in an attempt to trap his king, so he can be imprisoned and tortured until he surrenders all his lands and titles to the victor, at which point he is to be dragged through the streets of the capital and beheaded for the amusement of the townsfolk. Why is this? Well, because there is no characterization in chess, most people don’t name their pawns or devise elaborate backstories for their knights. In an RPG, this is what we are doing -- adding context to the fight, leading us down slippery slopes of morality. How can a character who routinely sticks a long sword through someone’s cranium be considered “good?”

Well, the answer is rather simple. While the real world may be filled with shades of gray, your game world doesn't have to be. For example, goblins are creatures of pure chaos and evil; they only exist to kill, maim, and destroy. They serve no function in the cycle of life. They don’t have a moral code they are attempting to uphold; they are not misunderstood, and they do evil things because they are evil. It isn't until we start applying all the high falutin’ subtext that goblins become tragic figures who are merely victims of their upbringing, more deserving of a warm blanket and mug of hot cocoa than an injection of cold steel through its vital vitals. 

Why do we do this? Why do we feel the need to humanize the inhuman? I blame television.

Well, a majority of our modern entertainment to be precise; the world has always been a place muddied with moral ambiguity, but there has definitely been a shift in our popular entertainment over the last couple of decades to get away from the ideal good/evil dichotomy. A nice example of this is 2004’s Battlestar Galactica, a re-imagining of the 1978 show of the same name. When you compare the original with the remake you notice a stark difference in the overall look and feel of the show that goes beyond special effects. 

In the ’78 series there is no question as to who are the villains, the justifications for their actions goes no deeper than the fact that they are the bad guys, and this is what bad guys do; but in the ’04 retelling we find much more ambiguity as to who is the true villain. We are asked to explore what it is to be Cylon, and whether they are morally justified in their mission to eradicate humanity. We are meant to weigh every action to determine if the ends justify the means, and who deserves to sit on the moral high ground, or if such a place even exists. We see this as mature storytelling, and I don’t deny the power of this style, but its vague conclusion, and bittersweet moralizing doesn't usually leave us fulfilled, or feeling very good in the end, and begs the question is this what we want out of our entertainment. 

Is maturity really what we are seeking when sit down to roll dice and save the princess? As with most things, “different strokes for different folks” and how much moral ambiguity should you build into your game is a question that you and your players should answer before the game begins.

Afterlife

What happens when you die has been a topic for debate for as long as people have been dying, and we are no closer to an answer than we were when we were poking mammoths with pointy sticks. 

This question has led us to others. What is the point of life? Do our actions have consequences for us post-death, and if so, what is the appropriate moral code to ensure a happy afterlife? 

In answering these questions we craft our sense of good and evil, which is why we can’t quite nail down a universal definition for these terms. This is not the case in the game world, however.

Most systems have a very well-defined afterlife, usually filled with a pantheon of gods each with their own agendas and guidelines on what will win you a deluxe apartment in the sky. Combine this with the existence of resurrection spells, and death is merely a tick on your personal timeline, and is as substantial as your first haircut. Sure, your character may not have all of this information laid out in front of him, but you, as a player do, which means that you can weigh your decisions in the moral context of the game world, instead of that of the real world.

The major take away here should be that there is a huge difference how one acts in the real world versus the game world, and that you shouldn't feel guilty about slaughtering goblins because they’re going to a better place, and you know that for sure.

Good Gamin’

Victory Conditions: How to Win an RPG.

"How do I win?" The first question most people ask when they sit down to a board game for the first time, and a very appropriate one. Now, ask this question at an RPG and you’ll have bags of flaming dung hurled at you while an army of liberal fascists melt your face with caustic hate speech that would make a clansman blush. Okay, maybe not all that bad, but the idea of winning has gotten a bad rap when it comes to RPGs, and this stems from a misunderstanding of the victory conditions of an RPG.

There are several "#1 rule(s) of gaming," but the one I prefer is “Have fun.” Vague and enigmatic, and much like any good religious text, it is open to vast amounts of interpretation; one man’s fun is another’s torture after all. So, what are we to do?

Well, the first thing you need to do is figure out, "What is fun?" Do you enjoy rules-light systems with a focus on character interactions? Do you like busting out the minis so you can duel the GM in a chess-like battle of wits? Do you enjoy sitting around a table with friends rolling dice and eating Cheetos? Or is it a little from column A and a little from B? Look over your previous gaming career and think about what in the past has tickled your fancy in that special way that makes you keep coming back to chase the dragon. You may even notice that what you find enjoyable may vary from system to system.

I know if I sit down to a Pathfinder game, I enjoy a bit more strategic combat than when I play World of Darkness, and I know that stems primarily from the game mechanics at work and the design of the system. Once you've discovered what it is you are looking for, you can inform your GM or players to what it is you are looking for in your gaming, so your fun will be represented.

Now, as anyone who has ever ordered a pizza can attest, pleasing everyone is not easy, and to believe that everyone in a group will have the same idea of fun is folly; so, this is where you have to put your big boy pants on and understand that compromise is the name of the game. Yes, you may have to endure a few rounds of combat before you get back to the courtly romance, or suffer through an intense negotiation over the party’s fee in lieu of rolling a dice and moving on, but that is life, and if you want your fun, you’re going to have to let others have theirs.

TPKs and Derailing

Now, there are two forms of fun that are universally loathed: the TPK (Total Party Kill) and Game Derailing. If you disagree with this statement, congratulations, your friends probably hate gaming with you. Both of these things can happen unintentionally, and it sucks, but what sucks far more is when a GM or player sets out with this as his goal.

For those of you who may not know what I’m talking about: a TPK (Total Party Kill) is when the GM kills everyone in the party, usually though an unbalanced encounter. I’m amazed at the number of GMs who brag about doing this, as there is no skill involved in it. As the storyteller you have access to an infinite amount of in-game power, while the player’s power is restricted by the rules of the game and what the GM supplies them with. Bragging about a TPK is like being proud of sucking, and unless you’re the reigning BJ Queen of Tijuana, you shouldn't feel this is an accomplishment.

Now, on the other side of the coin is derailing a game. This is the player equivalent of a TPK, but instead of killing the party, you kill the story. This is as easily accomplished as a TPK; just refuse every hook, or take actions to illustrate the restrictions of the story (i.e. attack the king as he’s giving you a quest, heading to town C when the quest is obviously in town A, etc.). Do these things and you will be assured to have a place in the halls of Dickdom, where your obvious disrespect for the time and effort the GM has put into the game will be acknowledged for all time. As anyone who has GMed knows a story is a fragile thing, requiring a lot of maneuvering and quick thinking to keep it on course; it also requires the players to work with you at a certain level to get the ball rolling. If a player thinks he is clever for out-smarting your story's obvious hooks, or feels you've cheated him because, as the GM, you haven’t whisked him away to a land of enchantment and mystery in the first 5 minutes of a new campaign, so now it must die, then he has some entitlement issues, and needs to talk to his parents about how he was raised.

The common thread that both of these victory conditions share is that they target your fellow players and not anything in the game. You are actively being mean to your friends and wasting their time, so unless you enjoy having your time wasted and being cock blocked at every turn, this may be one type of fun that you don’t allow in your gaming group.

Gaming is about fun, it’s a hobby, not a job; if you aren't enjoying it, you are doing it wrong. So quit being a loser, and find the fun.

Good Gamin’.