Renpy: The Difference Between Jump and Call

I'm sure that there's a learning curve to any particular programming language. I wouldn't really know - I'm barely fluent in HTML, and I have a very loose grasp on Python as it is.

That said, I've started to get pretty good with using Ren'Py, and recently came across this little tidbit that makes my life so much easier now that I understand it correctly.

Today, I'm talking about the difference between a jump and a call.

When making any project in Ren'Py, you could theoretically place everything into a single file... but doing so is a nightmare in practice, especially when it comes to finding particular scenes. So you split the script up into different files. Not every Visual Novel (or game in general) needs to have a linear progression, but it's usually nice to allow some amount of player agency, or to offer branching paths. Even if it's just something as simple as letting the player choose which scene plays out next, you need to be able to make that happen in the code somehow.

So, you use the jump command to go over to a label. This is telling the code "look for this thing I defined and run it immediately". Most of the time, this works really well, but then sometimes, you need something just a little bit more complex.

Let's pretend that you're like me, and you want a game with some kind of a day planner. Or has a hub menu that you make choices from. You make selections and scenes play out. But how do you get to return to the hub? Well, you could jump to it, but that's not always the ideal way to go about matters - especially if you've got a previously-running script that needs to keep executing (like a day planner). You need some way to return to where you were when executing your code, and a jump command just won't do.

In these cases, you use the call command instead. One way to think of it is putting a bookmark where you just were, so that at the end of your scene you can use the return command to take you right back to where you came from. You could think of it as inserting a new block - whatever is inside runs, and then returns to the previous block (unless you make a new block inside of that one).

So, what happens if you use the jump command, and then end your scene with return? Well, if you do that, you go back to the main menu. This is not the ideal way of doing things, especially not if there's more game planned after that!

The reason is because, as I mentioned above, using the jump command treats everything as though it were running in the same block of code. If you're in the main block, then when you return, there's nothing left to go back to except the start of the game - meaning your main menu.

In a lot of simpler games, jump is more than enough to get you where you want to go. But if you need something a little more involved, call will become your best friend.

Hopefully this helps someone better understand these tools. It's taken me awhile to get this far, but I've got to say it's really rewarding to finally understand these things.

April 2017 Progress Report: Project Cranberry Jam

It has been several months since I last gave any indication as to where we stand for Project Cranberry Jam. This is unacceptable so here goes.

All of the character and background artwork has been completed, though not all of the assets have been converted just yet. Being a one man operation in a lot of respects slows some of that progress down. (Not to mention the attending hardware/OS failures that initially delayed progress, combined with a rather troublesome bug... ugh.)

In what time I've been able to find, work has been slowly progressing on getting the scenes into the engine so that work in other areas can finally begin. The scenes for the demo itself are about 60% completed at this point - the scenes required for Week 3 are about 30% finished by now. A number of them are fairly short, so that shouldn't be too difficult to deal with, provided I have the time.

UI design still hasn't been touched. Again, one man operation, UI work will come after I get the scenes taken care of. Also, no audio has been completed yet - though work has commenced on some of the music. If the stars align, this is something that can be taken care of within another month or so.

There's still a good amount of editing which needs to be done as well. For now, my focus is on getting the scripts into the engine, so that they can be more easily adjusted - I'll have to go through them all again anyways when it comes time to put in the audio.

So as it stands, we're at about 50% completion for the demo, I feel. Getting the scenes all put in is the biggest part of the game - it's the core of the experience, really. Once those are all finished, the demo can be considered about 75% complete - the rest is getting in the audio, fixing any other weird bugs that might pop up, and finishing the UI (and assembling some credits? That's probably important for a full release!).

All told, still a lot of work to be done, and while it's not where I hoped it would be by now, having all of the artwork finished is a huge step forward.

This has been your not-regularly-scheduled break in silence. Back to work.

Jan 8 2017 - Displaying images sanely

I think one of the most difficult challenges I face with not having a strong programming background is not knowing exactly how syntax is set up for different languages.

Case in point: Renpy. You would think flipping an image is a simple thing. Spoiler alert: It is. But figuring out how the heck the engine expects you to do it with the spaghetti documentation that exists is kind of a nightmare in my experience.

I have a picture, and I want to be able to display it facing left or right. This isn't a difficult thing to ask. But there are a lot of ways to do this, some of which are more trouble than others. It's possible to declare the image transforms upon initialization, but when you could potentially be flipping thousands of images, you need a much better solution. Same with exporting duplicates of every image that could be flipped and hoping you remember the naming conventions.

It's a nightmare, and while it might work for a one-off instance, it DOESN'T work for my project at all (or most projects, I'd wager).

Fortunately, there's a much easier solution, one that isn't covered in ANY of the documentation at all.

I present to you the xzoom command.

    scene black

    "This here is just a test scene meant to play around."

    "We're going to play around with some images right now."

    show tzania happy at right:

          xzoom -1.0

 The gist here is pretty simple: By declaring a show command with a colon, you can apply transformations such as scale, zoom, rotate, whatever. It does NOT work like the following:

                 show tzania happy at right with xflip

Despite the fact that the documentation seems to indicate this should work. (It doesn't because it has no idea what xflip is. Or xzoom. Or a lot of other things for that matter.)

So lessons learned once again, and if you ever need to flip an image in renpy quickly, this is how you do it. (You can also use yzoom -1.0, that works just as well but with the other axis.)

I'm sure I'll figure out other ways I can use this to my advantage in the future.

Dec 13 2016 Devlog: Cracking the code

Tonight I'm going back to the usual tone I've set lately, and delve into some of the programming issues I've been wrestling with. It comes with a surprising revelation: I'm actually sort of okay at this thing it seems.

I still feel like a hack when assembling things, but tonight was one of those nights where I made a plan, followed it through, then came up with a better way to do it immediately after. So I'm going to be talking about that.

How do you make a game?

Today I'm going to take a break from what I've been writing about lately to talk about new lessons I've learned as an indie game developer (and why it feels weird to call myself that). While I won't be talking about programming issues (at least not directly), I'm going to instead discuss some of the other lessons I've learned the last couple of months.

So hopefully someone out there finds this useful. I need a break from the usual thing anyways.

Ren'Py, the DSE, and How Events Work

So, I have mentioned in the past that programming is hard.

What a surprise, right?

Well, today's bit of weirdness comes from the way the DSE framework in Ren'Py handles events, the way it processes those events, and the way that it determines when to execute an event.

So here was my issue: When setting up the core events for my game, I came across a truly strange interaction where the game began to execute a specific event, despite the fact that it was in neither the correct location, nor the correct time, or even the correct day within the game.

My first instinct was that maybe it was a typo. I was visiting the laboratory, but for some reason one of the character's generic events was playing out that occurred in the library! So maybe I'd just made a spelling error in the event.

Turns out it wasn't so simple. Or rather, it was simple, but not in the way I had expected.

After turning it over and over, I finally managed to hammer down what was going on, and in the process learned something about how it processes variables.

See, here's what the event code looked like:  

$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library', tod == '3', dow == '3'", event.only(), priority=175)

$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library', tod == '1', dow == '1'", event.only(), priority=175)

$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library', tod == '1', dow == '7'", event.only(), priority=175)

$ event("cyn_base_garden", "act == 'garden', tod == '3', dow == '2', day >= '5', cyn_rel >= '1'", event.only(), priority=175)

$ event("cyn_base_garden", "act == 'garden', tod == '3', dow == '6', cyn_rel >= '1'", event.only(), priority=175)

$ event("cyn_base_lab", "act == 'laboratory', tod == '4', dow == '4', cyn_rel >= '1'", event.only(), priority=175)

Turns out, what I was doing was totally wrong, because none of those conditions was actually causing the event to play. What I should have typed was this:

$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library' and tod == '3' and dow == '3'", event.only(), priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library' and tod == '1' and dow == '1'", event.only(), priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library' and tod == '1' and dow == '7'", event.only(), priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_garden", "act == 'garden' and tod == '3' and dow == '2' and day >= '5' and cyn_rel >= '1'", event.only(), priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_garden", "act == 'garden' and tod == '3' and dow == '6' and cyn_rel >= '1'", event.only(), priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_lab", "act == 'laboratory' and tod == '4' and dow == '4' and cyn_rel >= '1'", event.only(), priority=175)

Instead of triggering the events when all of the conditions were met, it seemed more than happy to select the events based on their priority, totally ignoring the variable block.

All because I didn't use the word 'and' to separate my variables.

Hopefully someone finds this useful someday. In the meantime, it's back to the grind with me. There's so much work left to do, but this seemed like one of those major things that was really just a minor thing. Really though, I felt proud when I figured it out on my own, and without needing to consult the Internet for help.

**EDIT**

I AM AN IDIOT AND YOU SHOULD IGNORE THAT STUFF ABOVE BECAUSE IT'S STILL WRONG.

So after spending almost literally my entire night, here's the way the code blocks should really look:

    

$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library'", event.only(), "tod == 3", "dow == 3", priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library'", event.only(), "tod == 1", "dow == 1", priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_library", "act == 'library'", event.only(), "tod == 1", "dow == 7", priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_garden", "act == 'garden'", event.only(), "tod == 3", "dow == 2", "day >= 5", "cyn_rel >= 1", priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_garden", "act == 'garden'", event.only(), "tod == 3", "dow == 6", "cyn_rel >= 1", priority=175)
$ event("cyn_base_lab", "act == 'laboratory'", event.only(), "tod == 4", "dow == 4", "cyn_rel >= 1", priority=175)

You will note that the variables have been moved outside of the second block. It's because the 'and' statement may or may not work. But it probably won't, so don't use it in that context.

LESSONS CONTINUE TO BE LEARNED!

Let's Make a VN!

It's been nearly four years since I last dusted this thing off. Well, this seems as good a place as any to talk about things, and I could definitely use an outlet to talk about my latest project. It may be interesting to keep a development blog for this, as I can remind myself of any lessons I might learn.

So, I'll just walk through my thought process. For so many years, it's been my desire to make a game. But I was always limited by something or other. I wanted to break into the video game industry somehow, but things always seemed to get in my way. It didn't help at all that the industry tanked, and I simply don't have the experience necessary.

The desire to create, however, has never really abated, and after a very long period of debate, I decided that there was only one way for me to get what I wanted. I would have to just take matters into my own hands. If I wanted to make a game, then by god, I was going to make a game.

Making games is hard though. I bounced between different engines and concepts, talked with some friends about one idea or another. Thanks to some collaborative projects I've done with one friend in particular, I settled on trying to deal with something that is well within my grasp.

I've come up with some pretty cool pitches before, all of which are rather difficult to implement the first time around. I may revisit those ideas at some point in the future. But the important thing, or so I have been told around the Internet, when getting started with game design is simply to make a game. It doesn't necessarily matter what kind of game it is, so long as it is a game. It probably won't even be very good. But if you can play to your strengths, and design around your weaknesses, you can create something that people enjoy.

Which brings me back to a thought I had nearly fifteen years ago: I should make a Visual Novel.

Over the years, I have continued running games, creating settings, and making characters. I like to think that in the last year or so, I've really been bringing my A-game. I've been thinking about how to make the most effective experience I can with the tools available to me. And I've also helped craft a few tabletop systems in the meantime too. So now, I think I have a fairly solid idea of what all goes into making a simple sort of game.

And let's just be honest with ourselves: If games like Go Go Nippon! can succeed, then by god I can do something at least marginally better.

I realized that a programmer wouldn't be very likely to fall into my lap, and my work schedule being what it is, I'd need a project I could work on in my spare time anyways. A VN seemed like the perfect fit. I have an art degree, I know animation and such, and there are plenty of tools available to me that I can use to craft the experience. Moreover, writing a VN should be a far simpler programming task to accomplish. But before anything can really be announced, I had to create the core game mechanics, and ensure that they worked.

This led me to Ren'Py - a game engine that was first conceived about fifteen years ago. I remember when it had just come out, and to my surprise it is still very much in development. So I began to poke around, and ask myself: How hard would it be to actually create a game in Ren'Py?

Not very, I soon learned. Thankfully my basic programming experience let me settle in pretty easily. I can read code to an extent, and while I'm no coding wizard, I can definitely read documentation and fumble around until I find the right answer, which is just my sort of pace. By proving that I could create even a very basic, linear experience within a couple of days of picking up the engine, it seemed much more likely that this could easily be done with a two-person team - with me assuming most of the workload, as it were.

I partnered with my friend, who had a pretty neat concept lying around, and helped her flesh it out. We created a basic world, and populated it with a variety of nations with which we could pull NPCs from. Within a week, we had a pretty decent background to set the game in, and I was beginning to consider how the game would actually function.

We had a setting, we had a game concept, and soon enough we had characters. But there was still one thing we didn't have: a working game engine. So with the background elements in place, I started working through figuring out how I could create something a little more complex than just a typical linear VN. I wanted to make something more like how I've set up some of my more recent tabletop games. I wanted a game that was a little more open-ended, that was more of an interactive story with multiple choices. A combination of the Mana Khemia series in terms of story - where things happen, and a plot progresses, but really the main fun is just hanging out with your friends for a year at school.

From there, the pieces just started to fall into place. I had a basic concept for how the game would progress, and as far as I'm aware, this isn't an approach many people take when trying to make a VN.

But of course, I know how I can be, and that I have a tendency to go a bit overboard sometimes. So I came up with some guidelines to follow, and once I've completed the playable demo, we'll see where things go from there.

The basic game itself (the demo, as it were) will only take place over a period of one month. 30-ish days, really. This cuts down on the work that needs to be done. But it's also very important to ensure that all of the game mechanics can be expanded to a full year if need be - since that is the original scope of the game. If this moves beyond the demo stage, I would like for players to be able to take their save data from the demo and pick up where they left off in the full game. It may be a small detail, but it's important to me, and it forces me to think further ahead as a result.

So I am left with the following problems to consider, as this is my first real attempt at making a video game:

- Creating core mechanics that are simple and engaging, which can easily be expanded if the game is ever moved beyond the prototypical demo stage.

- Keeping things simple enough so that my head doesn't explode from too many choices.

- Crafting an enjoyable experience where the choices the player makes actually influence the game, even if in subtle ways - I'm tired of skills being static things that don't really have an impact on how stories play out.

- Ensuring that no matter what a player does, the game is still somehow 'winnable' - whether they like the outcomes or not is besides the point. They aren't required to make friends with everyone, just to survive to the end one way or another.

- Letting the player's choices be dynamic and meaningful. The choice of what skills to progress during the course of the game should affect how the player progresses. Playing an angry warrior type should feel different than a laid-back artist, for example.

- Lastly, and perhaps most importantly: Make sure that all of these things remain simple enough for anyone to pick up and play.

They're fairly tall orders, but I think I can say with confidence that I can now achieve all of these goals. It will take a bit of time, but this is a labor of love, and if the demo is well received, that will let me know that I've done something right. In the event I've only managed to make a horrible trainwreck of  a game, well that's fine too - at least I'll have learned something along the way.

That having been said, here is what I have managed to accomplish in the day I've picked the project back up again:

- Implemented the skill system, imposed a class choice at the start (to determine your starting skills), and ensured that it functions as intended.

- Tested hiding certain choices if the player does not have the requisite skill - feature functions as intended.

- Tested conditional modifiers of choices - having skills at a certain level will cause the scene to play out differently. Feature appears to work as intended.

- Tested and confirmed working adding skill points as necessary.

All in all, I'd say this is a good start. Now while the core skill system is now in place, I need to consider the next major hurdle - implementing the class schedule, and ensuring that it plays out as intended.

Most of my work before today was poking at menus, figuring out how to adjust them as necessary, and moving them around to better fit all of the information I required. That was fairly easy work, I'm finding, but now I know which bits to fiddle with, and that makes this far more attainable.

Now comes the difficult part: working on the class menu, and making sure the schedule plays out as intended.

For anyone that cares, I decided to use the DSE (Dating Sim Engine) Day Planner and Event Manager to make my life infinitely easier. It comes with most of what I needed already built-in - skills and values for them, and most important an event manager that automatically checks to ensure sequences play out as intended. If you decide to go to the library in the afternoon and the lake in the evening, you can choose that at the start of the day and, barring something catastrophic occurring that would interrupt the next event, it will play out. (If you wind up passing out from an assassin's dagger in the library, well, you're clearly not going to be visiting the lake that evening.)

I'll wrap up this big long spiel with one last take on what I plan to accomplish in the coming weeks. I intend to ensure the core class mechanics work. Once those work, I can begin working out how to set up a rotating schedule for the five interactive NPCs with story arcs - as well as testing for events to play out in specific locations on specific dates.

I foresee the classes thing being a huge headache, but not nearly as troublesome as choosing which location to visit in the scheduler. Ren'Py doesn't support drop-down menus for some reason, so I will need to find some kind of workaround for that. One thing at a time though - first we focus on the class schedule, then we work out the rest.

It's going to be a fun project, and I suspect the biggest hurdles are now in front of me.

Wildly Inadvisable: Being Inadvisably Wild

More on the skills tonight, I suppose, since I really want to write something tonight. Progress on separation of the skills went by rather swiftly, but imagining how it would all work together is taking a bit of work. But here's the basic concept.

For the most part, I'm keeping the "Perfect 10" idea I had for the General Skills. It lends itself well, and it makes me think that maybe I might have a good thing going. Now that I've looked at what I've done, there's been some reconsideration on the level cap thing for the general skills. If I put a cap on it, perhaps it will be 20, and there are a few reasons for this (assuming I want a cap at all).

Based on some NPC drawings I did up, a good "villain", or at least one for this particular game, has a fairly high base for magic-based skills. Using this as a litmus, I decided to ponder difficulties and the benefits for taking points and specializing in certain areas. For instance, Mind Control, a specialty of the Advanced Spell Control skill.

Basically, any spell that falls into usage by this are things that take either little effort, or take preparation. A few of them might be usable at will - for example, Mind Control. Of course this all will eventually tie into making Willpower rolls, which is good, but as a base, I wondered how many ranks it would take to destroy or create memories in a person's mind, based on previously-written DCs, under the new system. Using one of my villains is a great way to test this.

As written, and by preparing to use the rules I set forth, in order to perform such a feat, it could take approximately 6 character points to achieve this level of mastery - and in fact, this could even be enough to allow total domination of a strong-willed creature. Here's how this works out.

For every CP you spend, you gain two skill points. For every two skill points, you can spend one on a Specialty. Specialties grant you a +2 bonus to their respective field. For example, Mind Control grants you a double bonus for that particular use of the skill. So, with 6 points, that gives you a total of 12 skill points. That's 8 ranks, and four specialties, which when added up, gives you a +16 to Mind Control (if you decide to take it all four times, mind you). Depending on your ability, this could mean that you can either remove someone's memories, create new ones, or just dominate them outright (subject most likely to a Willpower roll, of course).

That seems rather excessive, however - a powerful ability for only 6 CP spent. Of course, all of that progression is difficult to swallow in a single gulp. So either something is very wrong with my DC tables, or I need to adjust how skills works. Perhaps the main issue is that the DCs appeared fine when I was only dealing with a die roll for these skills. But when you are guaranteed the maximum result, it makes things considerably more difficult.

On the other hand, however, if we make the Difficulty for resisting Mind Control equal to the caster's Advanced Spell Control skill (which in the above example is 16), most people should be able to resist that - even the average Joe ought to have a decent chance at resisting that, since the average Willpower for any given person should be 7-9. Now, this only gives the normal person (or even PC!) a 30% chance of resisting the effect of what could essentially be a total mindwipe. This is both good and bad, because it gives a player few options at resisting an extremely powerful effect, while at the same time not entirely trivializing an extreme amount of specialization.

Of course, it also means that for only 6 CP, you are pretty much given the license to go fuck around with people's minds free-range. With only a one in three chance of failing, odds are in your favor that you will win - even better since your Magic skill will inevitably increase the difficulty. If the average Magic score grants a +3, then there goes any chance you ever had of resisting an effect.

I think that some DCs need to be reconsidered in light of this. Most effects should have their ability shifted up by at least five points or more. This way abilities will require more progression (another three skill points, which translates to two more CP), and which promotes a more balanced approach to increasing the power in one's arsenal.

Now, the negatives: This means it can be pretty easy for an enemy to be able to dominate even the PCs, which is a very bad thing. Of course, since the only thing that really sets a PC above any normal person is their choice of skill arrangements and Advantages, it can be difficult to find a good balance to this. Willpower was originally meant to be one of the few stats that was extremely difficult to increase - particularly due to the influence of Corruption playing a major part in the system.

Perhaps certain effects should be shifted up even further, to make purchasing the ability to control another person even more demanding. More consideration will have to occur on this point, and I think I have gotten away from the main topic at hand, which was that skills have new specialties available to them.

Some skills will allow abilities that can be used by a character, both inside and outside of combat. Such abilities include being able to create computer viruses, cast special spell rituals (summon SUV anyone?), or even the creation of magical items. I'll get into that some other time, but magic items are rare and should remain so - after all, they are very powerful and time consuming to make. We're talking days for something simple, weeks or months for something most players would consider "useful". But again, that is a topic for another time, the important thing is how this impacts skill progression.

Some skills have many specialties, some of which now affect certain attributes that are otherwise difficult to increase. Athletics has specialties which allow you to increase Health, Fatigue, Speed, or even your Stamina. Feats of Strength can now be used as a good determination of what kinds of objects a character can lift - and if they deal any bonus damage when throwing them at someone (or something!). Similarly, some specialties may in fact have their own branches of even further specializing. In the case of enchanting magic items, perhaps you can spend a point to lessen the time it takes to create an item.

Perhaps another 'fix' to this is to have the initial 'rank' of certain Specialties do nothing more than grant access to an ability, instead of also granting a +2 bonus to it. That would require 3 additional Skill Points in order to attain the same amount of power, while at the same time not overpowering the initial rank of a specialty. You can be a Jack of All Trades, but you will suffer as a result. But likewise, a well-rounded character will be more versatile than a one-trick pony.

A lot of things to consider, and I've taken up enough time typing this. I'll sort through it later.

Wildly Inadvisable: The purpose of skills

Behind on blogging again, but life's twists and turns keep me on my toes lately. I've some extra time tonight, and in order to get to sleep, I think I will muse on Wildly Inadvisable, since I'm back to running it and the skills system has been bothering me quite a bit.

What's the point of a skills system? Well, that is a difficult thing to answer. In broad terms, it is a measure of things your character can do. This can include things such as creating objects, remembering a piece of information, climbing a wall, or casting a spell. In simple terms, this is a pretty easy thing. But taken into gaming terms, it can get pretty complicated, especially since there tend to be two types of skills: Combat skills, and non-combat skills.

In 2nd Edition AD&D, there was a pretty clear divide here. You had a list of Non-Combat abilities, such as Seamanship which got you a host of things like bonuses to swim, and the knowledge of how to work on a boat, but not necessarily run one. It was like how Professions became in d20 Modern - a measure of things your character has done in the past to give them an edge of sorts.

But many systems attempt to lump skills into the same category, and force them to play by the same rules, which can make things quite messy. Therefore, I have come to the realization that my previous dependency on d20-like mechanics is actually hurting the way I have conceived of the skill system for WI. Let's examine this.

How Things Turned Out

The concept behind skills seemed pretty straightforward. You had your attributes, which each had key skills tied to them. From there, these skills had specialties, ranging from resisting a specific type of damage to being able to create a computer virus. In theory, it works great. In practice, it's pretty messy overall, and it is hard to actually find anything in there.

Not to mention the messy amounts of math involved. For every two ranks you place into the basic skill, you can apply a single point to a "specialty", which basically means you gain a higher benefit to a specific instance. For damage resistances or elemental affinities, this is kind of cool. But it makes for a very messy skill sheet, particularly for a game that is supposed to be simplistic.

Fixing The Problem

In order to address this, a few ideas have occurred to me. Instead of an overly-complex system like I have already had set up, one can easily just separate things into combat and non-combat skills. Combat skills are those which do not have a hard 'cap' on them, and are intended to be scaled up as high as possible. Non-combat skills, on the other hand, should have a 'soft cap'. Is it really necessary to have to roll over a 30 to hack a computer database for information that is likely vital to the plot? Not really. So instead, let's have the two follow very different rules, instead of attempting to shoehorn everything into a single category where all the skills play by the same rules.

For lack of a better term, the Non-Combat skills should follow a "pip" system. Let's just say that each of these skills has ten "pips", or ranks that you can put in. Spend a point, get a "pip", similar to how it runs now. However, for every "pip", or maybe every two "pips", you gain an ability tied to that skill. For example, leveling Athletics could grant you a bonus to climbing, or maybe even let you avoid most climbing-based rolls. Or, it could grant you a higher base speed, to reflect your training. Likewise, the computer-based skill can be overhauled as well, so instead of having to roll for the skill, you instead can either perform the requested action if it is well within your ability to do so. Alternatively, treat all non-combat skills as if they had a result of 10. This is important for a second reason, and that is clearing up the combat system, while laying the foundation for the next major thing: Status Effects.

One main issue I have with the system as it is now would be that attempting to add in status effects threatens to slow down game play immensely. Roll Spell Control. Roll Status Defense. Determine whether it beats the target's Defense. Apply Damage and resolve Status Effects. On start of target's turn, roll Status Defense to see if still affected.

This really puts a strain on the combat system, and reminds me of the clunkiness that plagued the d20 system. Instead, I want to apply the above-mentioned "perfect 10" defense, with a bonus caveat: You can have benefits to your status defenses. You can have increased resistances to certain types of Statuses, lessened Status duration, or maybe even mitigate the drawback a Status has on you - perhaps even to the point of an immunity to that particular status. This is a great boon for making good 'villain' or 'monster' templates, which will be very important if the game system is to actually go anywhere. Players will likely not wish to pursue these options, but a monster with nothing to lose might enjoy an immunity to being blinded, poisoned, or even set on fire!

So what determines a "Combat" skill and a "Non-Combat" skill? A "Combat" skill is one that is important in combat, and has no real cap to it. This includes skills such as Resist Status, Dodge, so on and so forth, and may require rolls for it. Non-Combat skills, on the other hand, never have to be rolled, and have a soft-cap, after which point putting more ranks into the skill are pretty much pointless.

I suppose that's enough musing for now, and I covered all the important points I wanted to remind myself of, so that's good for now.

As for modeling stuff: Not sure how much time will be available for this in the near future, but we will see. I may have a contracting job coming available, so time will tell how this works out and whether a change in career is just a pipe dream or a distinct possibility.

Tonight's progress cut short

No images, sadly, and very little time allotted to actually updating due to house findings and potential job offerings. All in all, important stuff. Here's what I did manage to touch on though:

- Attached ear to side of the head
- Attached hand to the body
- Mirrored and attached geometry
- Minor tweaks to base mesh


Unfortunately, it seems mirroring the geometry only worked to identify several key problem areas that will need to be addressed. Lots of strange geometry down the center of the model, and there are a lot more points with lots of vertexes meeting, and several Ngons that are aggravating me. Sadly though, I must be up early tomorrow in order to go to work, so that's about as much as I'm getting done tonight.

Also, odds are low of a game occurring this weekend it would seem: Friend Zeth is unfortunately back on the road again, due to Home Stuffs which I gather are greatly important, and sadly one of the group's other mainstays now has a night-time job, which will likely preclude him from any games. In addition, with the loss of Eyolo due to babies, things do not look very good this weekend.

From what I'm seeing, probably the best game prospect at the moment is Wildly Inadvisable, which I suppose isn't a bad thing. It's about time I got back into the swing of things with that anyways, and it will give me a chance to really sit down and take a second look at how status effects and the skills system works.

Anyhow, that's all for tonight. Perhaps tomorrow will see another update, but with the weekend looking to be a bit hectic, I may not manage another entry until late sunday. We'll see.

A note on updatage

An actual update will occur tomorrow. Was planning to do some work once I'd gotten home, but then that got torpedoed by stuff, which is not something I'm liable to go over here.

Mostly because it is boring.

Also, upcoming gaming weekend, hoping to finally get back into the swing of things. Currently on my docket of scheduled games are Roguelife and Wildly Inadvisable. I've been pondering system stuff for the latter, and am considering taking another long look at the core mechanics of spells - namely status effects and such, and really asking myself how one can make interesting spells while at the same time not making something be completely broken beyond belief.

I may also be considering dealing with how skills are laid out, and how one improves upon them. The idea of using the skill system to enhance the defensive characteristics (such as status effects) is interesting, but far too cumbersome. After looking at a few other systems (notably Legend), I may be considering changing the whole thing. The point of the game was to make something lightweight and easy to use, not something that requires advanced algebra every time you want to do something! That is not very fun. Well, okay, maybe it is, but it is just time consuming, which detracts from the real fun!

I may roll some advantages into that instead, and remove the previous 'cap'. For example, perhaps one can take advantages that grant defensive benefits, such as increasing your overall status defense by one, or granting you a +2 defense against a specific type of effect (see how I re-used an idea there?).

On the docket to be played this weekend... unknown, but there could perhaps be some Guildion. For as far as I know, Flotilla is currently on hiatus, due to the GM having a terminal case of the babies, who takes up much of his free time to do much of anything. Like concentrate on a computer screen for more than half an hour. So until that is resolved, odds are pretty good that game will be on indefinite hold until further notice.

Anyhow, real stuff tomorrow - this has already gone on far too long as it is.

Getting on Track

Because I seem to have done too many titles beginning with the word "Let's" lately, I suppose I ought to change up things a bit.

On occasion, my curiosity gets the better part of me, and I look at things, like if places like Bethesda are hiring. Also on occasion, I find out "oh wow, looks like they do have some positions open."

Even better are when they seem to have posted things that I actually mostly qualify for.

How awesome would it be if they hired me? BRB, moving to Maryland would probably be the first words out of my mouth. But it really makes me think about what I am capable of doing, if I apply myself hard enough.

I really want to break into the games industry. Not because I want the money - if I was in Animation for the money, I'd be focusing elsewhere. Games provide an immense challenge, with tremendous personal reward, I think. Yeah, so you can spend days or weeks rendering your beautiful images. So what? I want them rendered in stunning detail sixty times per second. That's a true challenge, in my book, and it is one I know others like myself share.

I want to do this because it is something I love, and something I believe holds great value. I want to be a part of making some of the greatest entertainment on the face of the planet. To be a member of a group whose creation makes it to millions of people, that makes them smile, laugh, cry, or maybe even frustrated in a good way. But this is nothing new.

So a realization dawns on me as I look at the job posting. I could actually *do* this. I am fully capable of doing something relatively amazing. I just need to brush up on skills.

First things first, I need to finish the human model I've been poking at. I've lost a lot of steam on it, but I think I have what it takes to finish her. Will she look good? Probably not. Will she look passable? Most definitely. It will look like a human woman. Probably not attractive, but then again the model itself isn't very attractive. The original goal was to throw her into zBrush and have fun from there, but I think I'm also going to rig and animate her, for shits and giggles.

Of course, if I want the zBrush mesh to work well, then I'm going to have to export the zBrush model back into Maya before I make my changes - that way all I have to do are fix the textures.

But then, that might also mean I will have to have completed the zBrush model of the character *before* I decide to do any mucking about. But that is part of what experiments are for, I suppose.

So, I want to try to set a goal for myself this week, with perhaps a bonus objective. I have thought about perhaps attempting to reward myself for good behavior, as a way to incentivize my actions. Also, I don't care if that's not a word, because it is now.

- Complete basic Andrea model by the end of the week; This includes basic eye and mouth parts
--*Bonus*-- Skin model for texturing
- *Bonus* - Import into zBrush and begin sculpting process to create a new base mesh, to be taken back into Maya
- *Bonus* - Begin work on rigging character by adding a basic skeletal structure and re-learning the process of rigging.

It's work, but then again, that's work for you. These things take forever, but if I don't start working on them bit by bit, then I'll never get anywhere, will I? As of right now, the Andrea model I have still needs to have a foot created and attached, the hand completed and attached, and a breast region defined to look breast-like. In addition, I still need to complete the head by creating and attaching an ear, and also creating an actual mouth plus eyes.

I've also been thinking a lot about how Bethesda approaches their model designs, and I really wish there were better ways. I like how efficient some things are - such as not completely attaching hands to the rest of the body, neck/head regions not attached to the rest of the body... that kind of thing. It is something I think I would like to find a way to do. Perhaps create my own "base mesh" sort of thing that I can then tweak, like a character creation engine - throw in some sliders, that sort of thing. It's a highly-advanced character rig, but I think it would make for an interesting project at some point, personally.

But for right now, I should just stick to basics. Another thing I would like to do would be to use this model to create a high-poly bust model in zBrush. Those seem to be rather popular, and are a decent way to show one's skill with modeling and sculpting.

I'm not even going to worry about texturing, because that's a whole other beast entirely. Although, I suppose that I *do* need to make sure I skin the model before I can animate it. So I'll add that to the list up top. It should be a higher priority than other things, I think. Or I can just let zBrush deal with it. We'll see.

Splitting the model into different sections is another reason I think that it would be more "efficient", at least from a texturing perspective. That way one can focus on having a few high-resolution textures (or even medium-resolution) to comprise a complete model. Of course, a single texture is the most efficient, but one must also balance making something look good as well as making it workable. So if every character model utilizes four or five different texture regions, that would be highly inefficient. Most likely the same thing for complex items as well.

I keep trying to see if I can find a way to import the model information in Skyrim to work in Maya, and I keep finding issues with it. I'd really love to see how everything fits together, and take a peek at how they do their texture maps... but I guess that will just have to wait until I can actually figure out how that is supposed to work.

By this point, I believe I have written more than enough, so with that, I bid you adieu, and with any luck I'll have another post perhaps by the end of the day with any progress I've made. Additionally, I will make efforts to attempt another post by wednesday, in attempting to keep with my 'normal' schedule.

We'll see if we can get this thing off again properly again, and with any luck I may be able to get some games running off the ground as well once more.

Sometimes, I really hate blogger

So I am reading this article (which is a blog I love dearly, mind you), and decide I want to reply to it. But sadly, it doesn't want me to post, as it seems to have a character limit on replies. Which saddens me, because as I look at it, I seem to have written a lot. Seems I was, oh, a few paragraphs over the limit.

Instead, I'm going to put my analysis of our group here. I guess this will count as my blog update for today? (Yesterday, technically, behind a day again!) I'm fairly sure you should know which category you fit into, if you're in my group.



Geez, how to describe my group. We have had an interesting lot over the years, but I think I'll just stick with the ones who play most often.

First of all is the person I would call the Fluff. I call her this because she is not very into the rules of any given system, despite having had the longest track record of playing with me. Her thing is that she tends to play rather reserved characters who are kinda-average dudes that don't really make a lot of hard decisions, and are by and large good at heart. She, like most of us, craves the experience of just *being* that character and interacting with the world, be it shooting something in the face, or just casually chatting it up with the other characters in the group. Her backstories are usually fairly lightweight and easy to deal with, often times to the point of frustration because she will give so few details that it can be difficult to tell what will engage her as a player.

Next is the Main Character. I call him this because in any given situation, that is how he will act. He sees the game as one would see a typical RPG game, with a singular main character who helps to drive the plot. This is a blessing and a curse, because if you drop a plot line in front of him, he'll snap it up like a fish eating a worm. However, this very same enthusiasm often causes friction with the rest of the group, because he will be trying to force the plot forward while the rest of us are still not ready to move onto the next "plot point", or while we are preparing to do something else. On occasion as a GM, I've been able to harness his impatience and made it work in the narrative - charging ahead in his giant warmachine inside a cave system, he sets off a trap that causes the tunnel to collapse, which actually causes more damage to the cave system overall, because his machine is so large and heavy. But sometimes, this very same impatience has ruined a many good scene, particularly when the 'spotlight' shines on other players, and his role is to not say anything and let the 'leader' do the talking, instead of actively antagonize the people we are dealing with. Success with this character are almost guaranteed - even with dice rollers, his luck is off the charts, and 95% of the time, if he makes a roll, he will succeed it with almost the best results possible. Great for moving the plot forward, but occasionally does not mesh well with the others.

Then there's the Comedian. Another guy I've known for awhile, he hasn't played for as long as some of us, but most of the time his characters are downright hilarious. I consider him to be invaluable to the games, because in a lot of our serious-business plots, he adds that touch of lightheartedness that is needed to help balance things out. I dislike playing games without him, because his sheer comedy value during the game is so necessary a lot of times to keep us engaged.

Then there is someone similar to the Comedian, who I guess I'll call the Teacher. That is kind of his role in life now, but in the games he often plays a similar amusing role as the Comedian, but spends more of his time looking for ways around a given situation that doesn't involve just shooting at its weak spot until it dies. As a GM, he has surprised me several times by looking at things he has created or acquired in the game, and applied them in ways I had not anticipated - but interestingly enough, by applying them in a way that correctly solves a given problem, and also helps to make the narrative that much more interesting.

Next, we have the Drifter. He's a great GM, if you can tie him down long enough to do something. He has a tendency to create something, then grow tired of it in short order as it is not quite what he originally envisioned, or it does not live up to his incredibly high expectations. An intelligent player, a great character creator, and an incredible penchant for backstories make for a guy I'd love to have in every game. But unfortunately, if a game (or his own character!) don't fit his vision perfectly, he is more likely to just give up and want to forget about the whole thing entirely, which is a real shame.

Lastly, there's the Storyteller. This guy is nothing short of amazing, because of the things his characters will tell you. This man is a social interaction king, and he is quick to pick up rules as well. But interaction is his real game, and the best part about any character he creates. Every character he makes has an immensely interesting backstory that works with the game world, and even better are the stories that his character comes up with, often on the fly, that both entertain and help to expand upon the gameworld itself. A regular fountain of knowledge, he can play dumb, he can play smart, and he can play a dumb smart kind of guy. Having him in the group usually means that when he's around, there will be someone who can engage with the other people in the world, and who will say things nobody would ever expect, and who will do things that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

That's my group in a nutshell. The Drifter is hard to nail down, but I've found the Comedian and the Fluff manage to make a great combination together, and with the Teacher as well, we have a fairly stable group. Throw in the Storyteller, and you have a group of fellas that will entertain you from here and back - even if you never actually manage to leave the tavern floor.

A new year, with a few new things

I had told myself that I wanted to get back into the habit of doing this thing again. As the holiday season has come to a close, I already missed the first monday update of the year - a sad thing, to be certain, but I believe it to be forgivable, given my life's recent upturn, and the surprising developments that have been taking place this year.

Today, I'll be just talking about a game system I have just recently discovered - so recent, I've just started skimming through it in the last hour. It is a game called Legend, and it can be found on Rule Of Cool, as if that didn't sound awesome enough already. It can basically be summed up as D&D 3.5, but with many of the design philosophies of 4E. A different approach from Pathfinder, which is D&D 3.5 improved and spiffified (yes, I just made that a word), Legend does something new and unique that I see as a bit of a game-changer in the game design philosophy.

As I may have mentioned, I've designed some game systems myself, and often I have found myself struggling with issues of balance. Legend approaches this with a fresh perspective: Every class has these things called "tracks". Tracks basically detail when you are granted abilities. This is similar to how Pathfinder and D&D 3.5 did things: Classes gained abilities at X level, some gained multiple at the same level. Later 3.5 and also Pathfinder introduced "class options", which let you trade some abilities for other abilities instead, as a way of mixing up the classes.

Legend, on the other hand, has decided that, by granting you three 'tracks', you can substitute one track for one in another class, in order to multiclass. I have yet to finish reading through this, but already this seems exciting to me. Additionally, because of this methodology, it also manages to solve 'power balance' between different races, or monster classes. Vampires, Lycanthropes, those sorts of things are resolved by utilizing one's 4th, "free track" that every character gets. You get a choice between a few different types of "normal variants", such as True Mage, Necromancer, or my personal favorite, Vigilante. Or, you can swap that to be something like a Vampire, or a Demon. Like traditional races, you get racial feats and ability modifiers. Unlike them, however, you also gain additional powers based on your level, or your 'advancement' along that track.

This makes for a very intriguing system, and at the same time, it also makes for a system that is fairly lightweight and easy to understand. If you are X level, and have these chosen tracks, then these are the abilities you have. Skills, HP, all of that are based on your "base" class. You can be a Barbarian with some Paladin tendencies, but your core abilities are all based off your Barbarian class, which is pretty nice. No more trying to remember how many skill points you got off what level, it's all standardized and easy for you to calculate, which is a boon.

But thanks to the whole Track system, you can now do things that were previously not acceptable. Now you can create your own "track" templates for players to choose to gain additional power from for specialized games. For example, if everyone is in a Space Marine game, everyone has to take the "Space Marine" free track, where they gain additional benefits and powers. Or maybe even allow them to choose from a few different ones. Doing this doesn't break the game whatsoever, which makes having to balance encounters not very difficult at all, since it is already built into the game itself.

Overall, this looks like a very awesome system, and I am rather excited to look it over. I know one of the first things I want to try to do with this system.

I want to play some fucking Kamen Rider. =D

*edit*

Oops, I forgot to mention quite possibly the coolest thing about this system: It is free. Yes, completely free for download. Of course, you can go ahead and donate (please do, if you can!). Proceeds go towards making more stuff, but mostly to Child's Play. In short, the money goes to a good place, but you don't have to donate if you don't want to. Or you can donate later if you like. Whatever you feel like.

So check this out if you can. It is very awesome, and deserving of at least some of your time.

Why do the gods play games with mortals?

An odd thought occurs to me, and I should put it into writing, as it may be of use to myself later. Or to someone else, even.

Why do gods play games with men (or other mortals, I suppose)? There are many answers, perhaps as many as there are ways to interpret the question. In this case, I am referring to a pantheon, fictional or otherwise - a group of deities who seem to be important to the world at large, but yet appear to simply lounge around all day doing what? Playing complex chess games with mortal lives? Here's a stab at it.

Some people say they do it because they are bored. And while this may be a contributory factor in the equation, it is not necessarily the only reason. Often times, it is as a 'contest', where one god may bet against another. But what is the primary reason for these games? The answer is surprisingly simple, really. It is because, with all of their omnipotence and infinite wisdom, there is one thing that the gods cannot do: Agree on anything.

The basis of any good pantheon of gods is that you have a myriad of deities, often on two or more distinctly different sides. In D&D terms, this would be the difference between your good and evil gods, your lawful and chaotic ones, and your neutral guys who just want to chill out. But what is the purpose of a god? Everything must have a purpose, and I am wondering if perhaps we've been giving gods the wrong sort of shine. Yes, they are all-powerful. They do what they want, when they feel like doing it, and to hell with anyone that might disagree. Sorry, did you just say something to me? Bam, you're a cockroach, enjoy the rest of your life, simp.

What's that lady? You don't want to have hot wild sex with me? Screw you, I'm going to turn into a swan and screw your brains out anyways. Oh Zeus, you always were a bit of a cad. But in fiction, a lot of gods tend to follow this pattern - just really big, powerful jerks who do what they do, and whose pantheons physically interact with the mortal realm, often with disastrous consequences.

There are many different takes on pantheons, and why the mortal world exists. Often times, it is the gods that created the mortal realm. Other times, someone before the gods, who then later came and took things over. Or sometimes the gods consist of mortal beings who ascended to a higher plane of existence. In this particular case, let's just assume that a group of individuals have been together for most of existence. A lot of times, pantheons are depicted as being something similar to a big dysfunctional family. I like that, so let's roll with that.

For argument's sake, let's just say there are 26 people all living under the same roof. And of course, not everyone is going to get along. Almost never works out quite that way. Arguments ensue, but there has to be some way to get some answers laid down. Well, you're a god, you can do anything you want. Add fifteen rooms to the house, destroy them, whatever it's all good.

Except that, well, how can you decide anything when everyone can do the exact same things everyone else can? How do you decide if the walls should be pink or beige or aqua? What are you going to do, fight over it? You're both invincible. It would be an exercise in futility to try to duke it out - you'll be sitting there for thousands of years until someone finally decides the argument isn't worth it anymore, and then the victory is bittersweet, because everyone else is getting agitated because you're just stinking up the rest of the household all the time. You need a way for everyone to kind of get along. Some sort of common ground that everyone can relate to.

Enter the mortal realm. Okay, so you've got 26 different people, all in the same home, all with the exact same powers. But you need to try to make things livable, because quite frankly, it is really pretty annoying when people are sitting around bickering for thousands of years over how they failed to properly utilize the color scheme in the foyer. So, the heck with it, it's obvious you will never decide things on your own, without some form of outside assistance. So you decide to set up a game of sorts, one where you can't use your powers, because that would make the game pointless.

In short, it is a game where you choose a champion, and let *them* decide for you. That way, no one can really be angry, because it's sort of like the lottery - you either pick the winning number, or you don't. You'll win some, you'll lose some.

So everyone pitches in, and helps creating this thing - obviously, they have to make it so that the game is advantageous to them, while at the same time disadvantageous towards the others. So everyone plays a part in the creation process: some races are really super tough, but also super short, but really smart, but also have to make themselves dumb all the time with something they drink. Oh hey, let's make all of these things super frail, and require them to eat and drink and even sleep! That'll give everyone an advantage. Oh but my guy doesn't need to sleep, he's immune to that. But of course, now he has no such thing as free will, and as a result is dumber than a box of rocks.

Over time, you wind up with a world of mortal beings, going about their daily lives, thanks to the parts that the gods played. Over time, the 'game' grows more complex. Stakes may grow higher, politics may jump into things, and tempers may flare. But the one rule is pretty unshakable: The gods cannot directly intervene. Because to do so would ruin the fragile balance that they all have struck with one another. Everyone is invested in this thing, some maybe more than others. But despite being all-powerful, despite being capable of doing anything in the world, they still will require mortals to make their decisions for them - because otherwise, there would be no way they could all agree with one another.

It's just a fact of life. Even the jerk who would want to knock down his sister's sandcastle realizes that there is no winning or losing outside of the game - only endless bickering and arguing. Yes, you may not like them, but the fact is, you're stuck with them for all of eternity. All of it. You can't just run away, because there is nowhere to run to! So, the best you can do is try to get your hits where you can get them, and play the game, and see how much influence you can wield by the mortals that you choose to focus your attentions on.

Ironic, in a way, that the ones who created this world, and to whom are often asked for guidance from, are in fact the very same ones looking for that exact thing from the mortals they preside over.

Free will is a very real thing in this world. In fact, it may even be the most important thing! Because without that allowance of 'free will', the gods would just be playing themselves, and that would hardly be sporting. It would be cheating, and would go against the atmosphere of the thing. Not to say someone won't try to cheat at some point, and some gods will. But those who are caught (and often are) wind up having their next game penalized, either by virtue of losing 'votes', or by not being allowed to participate in the next vote.

Small games often decide very simple things, and are often equated to a bet of sorts. This is along the lines of, "I want to sit in that chair today." "Okay, I'll let you if that little guy manages to beat the living crap out of that tall dude." "Cool, you're on." And suddenly, the gods are taking an interest in a seemingly-normal bar brawl. Other times, some of the gods may team up, asking to make a change to the world itself - or to their home, even. Those may be games whose decisions are solved by entire wars between kingdoms, who may have bits of guidance from those on above, hoping to manage to eke their way to a victory below, so that their team wins the vote they are looking for.

I like to think this is a very fascinating concept. It makes the gods all-powerful and important, but yet it answers the very simple question as to their motivations. It isn't that they care - in fact, they care a great deal. But at the same time, because they care so much, they cannot act, because to do so would to be going against the very reason that they created the mortal world in the first place.

It's like making a rule, and then saying you can never break this rule. And then having someone ask you to break that very simple rule. It is just something that can't be done, because to break the rule that one time, it would invalidate everything.

Unless, of course, everyone else agrees to let the rule be broken. Just this once. Which may, in turn, spawn other contests if there is a stark division between the teams, who cannot come to a conclusion if the rule should be broken. Or if someone should challenge it.

And now, you know why the golds play games with mortals. It is because that is the mortals reason for existence. But fret not, because you shouldn't worry too much about it all. Your life is your own. The only thing that you need to know is that your life is quite meaningful in some way or another. Don't worry about the gods, and how you fit into their 'plans'. Because really, whether you were going to 'fit in' or not really doesn't matter.

What matters most is, you have a life, and you should live it out as best you can. And if, by some miracle, you can help the gods arrive at a decision somehow, then that is something praiseworthy.

GM Style: Add More Characters

So I was reading a blog post over at my favorite gaming blog, Gnome Stew, that was talking about how long people should wait to introduce new characters. Reading through some of the comments, as I occasionally do, I started seeing some very intriguing possibilities for the major game I run, Roguelife. The idea is that they have a ship full of characters, but I've been saying for some time now that the ship itself is understaffed - it's a pretty large ship, but the group doesn't really have the cash to allow a large number of crew on-board (though with some recent windfalls, I'm sure that could change). But the problem still remains: they're still running on a skeleton crew, and that is going to start biting them pretty soon, once they start to realize *spoilers*.

Anyhow, this got me thinking about how we could add more named NPCs to the roster while maintaining a good connection for the party. I've discussed with my players several times that it doesn't make sense for them to have certain PCs going on the 'away missions' - the talker is not a very good shooter, for one thing, and the mechanic is very good at very nearly getting herself killed at every turn. So I asked a couple of my players a question to get the ball rolling: How would they feel if I randomly handed them character sheets with a paragraph of description at the bottom and said "here, play this character"?

To my surprise, the two I was talking with openly embraced the idea, which gives me hope that the others will see it this way as well - and if they aren't, nothing is stopping their characters from participating. But this method will help to enforce the harsh idea that yes, they *could* die at any given time, and at least this way, if they do bite the big one, it will make it a lot easier for them to pick up another character, since they'll probably have a favorite secondary they could use instead, should, god forbid, their main character die.

This makes things very interesting in another way, though: it also makes it possible for us to start using other scenarios, such as "Dave got critically injured during the last mission, and can no longer participate... you're going to need to take someone else with you this time to fill his place." I think this makes for a very interesting scenario, and gives the players some breathing room - especially in a game where healing is something that only occurs naturally.

So, if you are thinking about trying to shake up your game a little bit, tend to use a mission-based structure for your game, and are in an environment where you are utilizing a large group mechanic (such as on a spaceship of sorts or military organization, etc), or are playing in a high-stakes game, maybe you can consider this approach.

I think I'll refer to this method as the 108 Stars approach, of Suikoden fame. Because really, that was one of the ideas I had in my head when I initially gave my players access to a functional spaceship all those sessions back. Allowing the players to control multiple PCs just makes that 108 stars dream that much easier.

As a tangent, I could force the players to create additional PCs - albeit at a much lower level - and force them to 'level' these side characters. Everyone should still gain some amount of inherent XP gain over time - but participating in the missions grants them a much larger amount of XP.

The other great thing about this method is that I can finally do away with the whole individual rewards system - and instead the entire ship as a whole gains the rewards, to be split not fairly, but to be used purely for the ship itself, and any equipment the group may wish to maintain. This has many benefits associated with it, I believe, such as being able to reward themselves with special equipment upgrades on occasion. After all, right now most of the PCs money tends to just get funneled back into the ship anyways (where it should be, really). It just seems like the next logical step to me.

I like to imagine that, much like some NPCs I had planned, that these additional characters would have price tags associated with them as well, allowing for some great amount of variability. PCs pay themselves a certain amount for participating in the missions - everything else goes towards the ship fund (which is kind of how it works right now already). For lower-risk missions, they could go send out some lower-level NPCs instead of their mains, who are probably busy with doing administrative bullshit, or working on far more important things.

It also makes it very easy to segue into a separate side-game temporarily in case the main group is on a mission that requires a specific player who is currently not present.

Lots of great ideas from this, and hopefully someone else manages to think of some others. Personally, I am excited by this prospect, and I hope that it will spread to my players as well. I have a lot of awesome things I'd like to do in the next act, so this will just make it even easier for me to make the stakes that much higher while not worrying too much if someone might die.

Of course, I'll also need to make some NPCs of my own, but I'm looking forward to that a little bit. There's something nice to be said about giving yourself strict limitations you cannot work around, or being able to craft character sheets that have a little something unique about them for the players to enjoy as well, on occasion.

Like allowing one of the players to control the military-grade assassination droid that they re-purposed.

It's the little things in life which give me the most joy, I think.

Things you can do with d20 Modification

The d20 Modification project, which was originally designed as making the d20 Modern system compatible with Pathfinder, can be used for a lot of interesting things. Like the old Modern system, it still tends to favor the high-intensity action hero sort of game. Unlike the previous system, low-level combat is even more deadly, thanks to firearm overhauls - all guns have a minimum damage modifier, meaning instead of a handgun dealing 2-12 damage, it deals more like 4-14. At low level, that makes a huge difference.

Part of it is because, especially with massive guns like the Barret Light Fifty, the reality is anyone even in the vincinity of one of those rounds tends to turn into a fine mist. But according to the book, those guns 'only' deal 2d12 damage. That means one of the most powerful firearms in existence *only* deals 2-24 damage. At least this way the minimum is brought up some, and it gives more power to people using them. On the other hand, they also tend to come with accuracy modifiers, balancing that out.

With the introduction of the updated magic system, things are slowly falling into place allowing for a variety of interesting genre mixes. One of those mixes I've always had in mind was a Star Ocean-esque setting, where futuristic characters are learning to use magic - something that always fascinated me. But it occurs to me that there are other genre-types one can emulate with a system this versatile. For one thing, it is one step closer to being able to emulate something you can see in the Marvel Universe, where science and magic tend to exist side by side (but don't seem to play well together, usually, and occasionally blurs the line between the two). Or you could even attempt something in the vein of Disgaea - all kinds of craziness can occur there.

Urban Arcana could be re-envisioned - or even Urban Arcana Evolved (which is sort of like the future version of that). Sliders is another possibility, where characters may not always be existing in the same world from one game to another - which could make character choices even more interesting.

All of these things would require little-to-no modification of the system, really, and that was my main goal from the very start. When I was running a future campaign of mine many years ago, I thought it would be fun to pit the group up against some wizards, just to see how they would fare. Needless to say, the results were rather interesting, and the group perservered - of course, they also had far greater weapons than most fantasy characters often wind up with. But on the other hand, fantasy characters tend to get more awesome class abilities, so there is a balance there as well.

Overall, I'm rather pleased with the possibilities this system can offer, and hopefully I'll be able to get the rest of the magic system laid into stone. I don't think I'll be touching on the psionics or other FX abilities... but then again, maybe I might just at some point.

I wouldn't really bet on it though.

Special Edition: This Post

I'm a huge fan of Gnome Stew. I can't remember how I managed to find it, really, but while many of their articles have been kind of bleh lately, this one grabs me pretty good.

I have a huge problem with this myself, being unable to schedule regular times to run, and even worse, it's pretty hard for us all to come together without any in-home distractions (as there are many). But for an internet-centric group, it should be easier to find ways around this, I'd think.

Maybe this could give rise to a new sort of hybrid game - where players can edit wiki pages or post on a message board roleplaying stuff in between gaming sessions - helps keep players engaged, and lets us focus on the important things when it comes time for another session - and sessions can just pick up where conversations left off.

It's an idea.

Role Playing Games: Or RPGS?

There is a difference between RPGs and Role Playing Games. RPGs are more computer/console-based, and tend to waffle between one of two different tropes: you wander around randomly fighting things to gain experience to unlock greater powers, or you go from one battle in a 'chain' to the next until you reach the next portion, gaining amounts of XP along the way that you can then use to purchase whichever skills you like.

Sounds kind of familiar, right? But these games can be very different from Role Playing Games. Or, maybe even better, Tabletop Games.

Tabletop games evolved from old wargamers wanting to add a little extra something to their weekly war sessions - stories of how their figurines had gotten where they were, eventually evolved into something different from the norm - the Role Playing Games we know and love today.

It has since inspired entire generations of games made in similar veins, but there is still a distinct divide between what we experience on computers than what we experience at a table (or even virtual tables, if you will). Much of it is often attributed to not having an active gamemaster who can make up rules on the spot, or being able to change the game or even completely reinvent it as needed. But that's not the only place this divide comes into play: the design philosophies can often be different as well.

Now, many times people will argue that they are 'just the same'. But let's not lie to ourselves. There's a tremendous difference in the design philosophies between Final Fantasy X and our tabletop experiences. Take any random-encounter RPG - yes, old-school D&D has random encounter charts, just like most other RPGs. But those RPGs, you expect them, because they go by so quickly. Tabletop, however, is far more immersive - yes, you can have those random encounter charts, but you are in that area for a reason, and then suddenly TIGERS EVERYWHERE. What do you do?

There's a good point to understanding where this divide comes in, because as a GM, it's not just your job to set up a random encounter chart and go wild with it. It has to have a purpose and a reason. Let me share with you one of my experiments from my post-apoc future game, Roguelife.

The group was going to explore an abandoned city, looking for Quest Item X. Of course, X was something they had no idea where to find! It being a big city, I wanted it to be somewhat more old-school adventure - a bit of a departure from the traditional 'hallway segments', where the group goes from one battle to the next until they finally reach the end.

I set up a very large spreadsheet, which worked extremely well. It listed different building types, different creatures that could appear in those types, and depending on the sort of building it was (and it's size), you could expect to find a predetermined amount of loot within those buildings (if you were clever enough). This was awesome because it could generate some truly interesting things - in one building, they stumbled across a group of mutants who were being 'purified' by extremists - realizing they couldn't fight such a large battle, the group wisely opted to try looking elsewhere. In another building, they went all the way down to the ground floor, only to find an entire *herd* of Dire Caribou defending themselves from zombies. Successfully, I might add (they were, after all, DIRE Caribou).

Things like that can make for amazing gameplay sessions, but half of it is being able to know how to read those charts and react to them on the fly - how can you pull these elements together to create a similar scenario that the group may have already encountered, but adding some kind of twist to it? Another one had them trying to get into a gas station that was surrounded by zombies and... a DIRE BEAR. Oh man that bear almost tore them up, but they managed to bring it down and save the man inside.

Of course, since I made the chart, I already had an idea how these things could fit together. All in all, it was an attempt to make a tabletop version of a Roguelike - one that worked amazingly well.

So consider the type of game you are running, and the feel you want to give it. Is it a high-stakes game, where there is a clearly-defined goal and maybe even a clearly-defined path to achieve it? Or are your players looking for something more adventurey, where the destination is not as important as the journey to reach it?

Think it over. Talk it over with your group even. You might be surprised at what you can learn.

When GMs get it right

Bit early today, but found I have a little more time on my hands than expected, and since I'm still positively buzzing from our Flotilla game this weekend, I thought I would share some things about when GMs get things perfectly right.

Flotilla is a game based in a waterworld where almost everyone lives on ships or floating cities. There are, on occasion, islands, but they are very few and far between - most people never even get to see real land.

Our characters live on one of the largest fleets out there, known as the Marblehead Flotilla. It's a pretty cool place with a number of captains from each ship who are part of a council that votes on the future of the fleet. Our characters were mostly just regular joes who happened to live there (or were there for some reason, in the case of one of us).

There was recently an article on good game design over on Gnome Stew, which can be read here. The important part is further down, where it says "Build the Backstory, But Build The Characters Into It". That is one of the hardest things to do as a GM, without it somehow becoming a huge mess, or not what the players wanted/expected.

Well, I can safely say that after what Eyolo pulled last night, he did a damned good job.

Here's how this works: Everyone that lives on the Flotilla has a patron, which is one of the captains. The captains vouch for people - if you don't have the blessing of a patron, you're not going to be allowed to live in the fleet. One of the PCs is a fish-man whose mother is a powerful (and devout) follower of the Path of Light, the semi-religious order in the world, which is run by a guy named Caesar. Without spoilering for other people, there's some sort of connection between the main characters - in the mechanic's case, he is related to fishman's girlfriend (a girl who is always stuck in a rubber suit due to weak immune system), and has helped her out in the past in making her life a lot more comfortable over the years. My character was just a brute, who spends most of her time throwing people out of bars or brothels who act up, and generally being a Mean Bitch. But even she had a connection in her past to everything as well, it seemed, based on the backstory I provided.

Since it was mentioned in the last session, my character's father had something to do with Caesar's seal. There's a lot more I wish I could say, but out of fear of spoilering, I'll just say that there's a lot more to this than one might think. Knowing the story (because I wrote it), I can safely say that she is well-connected to the other PCs, because it seems as though she is also the granddaughter of one of the most infamous captains in the fleet - an ex-pirate.

Because of this development, I think we can finally rope in our other character, and start tying her into things - because from the looks of how the plot is developing, my character might just be inheriting a ship. We will, of course, need someone who can fix things (mechanic), someone who can sail things (the other character mentioned, not fish-guy). We'll also need someone who can heal things (new character introduced last night, amazing doctor based off of Ema from the Ace Attourney series). We'll probably also need fish-boy.

I think that, with all of us combined, we can pretty much pull people we all know and create a small gang who can sail off into the open seas, looking for answers. And maybe vengeance. I love vengeance. It means more chances to punch things in the face.

My character's world is about to come crashing down - and I appreciate this, because at the same time, it will liberate her and force her to rise to the top, and become something more than just a mere brute who beats people.

Maybe someday, we'll be able to get our ex-pirate captain a new ship, and maybe over time, we can make our *OWN* Flotilla.

Things like this is why I can safely say, our GM got it absolutely right this time.

I'm looking forward to next session. Shit is going to go down, all melodramatic-like.