Concerning Vecna: (spoiler) In my most recent session zero when asked what players wanted from the campaign or not, the most strongly voiced opinion (agreed on by multiple players) was: "We don't want a giant twist where we find out we worked for the bad guys all along. That would make us feel bad."
I'm surprised that you aren't interested in the history of DnD given how much you utilize one of the core aspects of the old game - random tables. There's so much that has been lost from the early days (both in the game and the history of the game), that especially in this 50th year, that is worth reexamining. For yet another perspective (or 50) check out 50 Years in the Dungeon where Stan! has been having creators from the early-to-modern age guesting and reminiscing as he illustrates homages to some of the classic art we all know.
On the Nimble section, I understand why people like the 3 actions. nothing sucks more than having only one action and missing, feels like you wasted it. thats why games with only one action often opt to just let you succeed your action without a roll.
25:50 I play at many tables where the dodge action is all my high level caster will do, just to save time for the table because i know the barb can solo the fight. The DM seeing this, has trouble balancing challenging combat to the point where instead of making more targets, interesting battlefields, lair actions, and unit compositions, they just beef up one token's stats. But when a token has AC23 and +13 to all saves, how does a caster DC14 save do anything effective on their turn? I've learned that it is easier to take dodge action and flee, saving the table a 5 minute turn of reading complicated spell cards only to lose the spell slot to a +13 save. By calling the bluff the DM has to Deus Ex Machina a solution or TPK . Combat that the barb can solo, or combat so impossible you should flee until the DM improvises a reason to survive. Neither situation is much fun.
Working with bad guys is definitely a cool story, The flip side of that is having to work AGAINST a good npc because their faction has goals that don't align with ours
I agree. The series is riveting and the production value is top-notch. If you like the podcast, I highly recommend the books 'Game Wizards,' 'Slaying the Dragon,' and the 'Designers and Dragons' series. They go into further detail about what happened during the TSR days. The audiobook versions are really good. The great, and unique, thing about 'We Were Wizards' is all the interviews with people who were there. Even if they are biased (how could they not be?), there's something special about hearing from the people who were actually there.
What you said is very true, people like Gary did not come out of this situation looking clean. I’d like to however make some additions and context: Mike Carr refused an offer for reduced royalties on B1, which is why Gary slapped B2 together in a couple of weeks, repurposing entire sections of Castle Greyhawk which then became the Caves of Chaos. AD&D seems to have been intended as an evolution of OD&D rather than solely existing for legal reasons and only later on did products make a point of philosophically differentiating AD&D from OD&D (after Arneson understandably sued in late 1978), so the changes still carried sincere design intent (that also went beyond just tournament play as is sometimes claimed). The account of Gary’s time in Hollywood can be one sided, Peterson (author of *The Game Wizards*, often used as a source for these things) dismissed Gary’s telling of it out of hand for being unreliable. Gary claims he was essentially put out to pasture by the Blumes due to disagreements over the direction of the company. Another thing to consider that a lot of the contemporary information used as sources for this stuff was indeed gossip, namely from columns of *Different Worlds* a magazine which was ran by Chaosium (which positioned itself as the anti-TSR), many salacious rumors spawned from it. Former employees embittered by Gary or TSR often contributed to it. The history of this period in the game’s history is unfortunately very messy, what I took away from it is that sometimes the enlightenment you seek by studying the past is not to be found there, especially when primary sources still living today have vested interests in not telling the truth, and all you learn is the reaffirmation that human beings are very complicated.
100% This. Attempting to piece together the history of TSR from the "When We Were Wizards" podcast is a lot like trying to learn Roman history from only reading Suetonius' "The Twelve Ceasars" - while what you learn may be correct, it's also fragmentary and sensationalized.
18:44 this is such an important realisation. I mean, we do not throw the baby along with the bathwater. Works and ideas outlive their douchebag creators, as they should.
I feel like Nimble 5e is another remix that is a good middle ground b/t DC20 and 5e. I backed DC20 and really like some of the ideas in it, but it is definitely crunchier than I need for my table. Nimble has some ideas that are easy to cherry pick even if you don't use the whole thing.
Concerning Nimble: I was on the lookout for a new system for my group(s). Watch out, very personal opinion. I felt 5e basically good, but some things just lacking. I felt Pathfinder 2 or going back to D&D 4e too crunchy. Daggerheart (currently dming a campaign) has some good ideas, but also bad ones. MCDM seemed too crunchy. A5E too crunchy, Tales of the Valiant too vanilla, Shadowdark too OSR-y. I was kinda eyeing DC20, but unsure about it and felt sad it wasn't 5e compatible. Along came Nimble. I've absorbed whatever I could find (previews, "reviews", Nimble v1 - which has great designer's notes about the reasoning/intent btw). The more I read, the more enamored I become with Nimble. I think this is *my* 5e.
Really looking forward to seeing the full rules of Nimble, I am no fan of Wotc after all the things they have done, and have looked towards third party to get my 5e fix. So far Level Up A5e has been the solution, but it also has things to it that aren't ideal. My 4 groups I currently run, one of them really enjoys A5e and has fully embraced it, two others find it ok, but they feel there is a bit much to remember compared to 5e, and the physical group just said, nah, this is not for us. And I get them, A5e is great, but it is also a lot more crunchier then 5e. Nimble seems to change things up quite a bit and also creates a combat system that actually seems to have a focus on tactical decisions and how to best use the 3 action points one has, I think that Nimble very well could replace A5e for three of my groups and become the go-to game system for future campaigns
NPC: The GM has to help be the player's eyes, including things the characters would notice or sense that the player can't. Betrayal is fine, but telegraph and give hints just like w traps.
I will be supporting your Kickstarter 210%, Mike. You’ve done so much for the hobby and the community. You are and lovely bride are wonderful and amazing people. ❤
After using Nimble v1, I can't support v2. I think there are some good ideas, but overall, it is a very messy presentation. My players and I have been very frustrated by the presentation. We just switched back to vanilla D&D 5e with some of my own homebrew ideas for combat that will be easier to implement. The combat system is neat but very frustrating.
"Three different empires... Corrupt British Empire, ... Corrupt French Empire...and the undead" Ohhh, you mean the Spanish? JK, but I am surprised that the Spanish were not represented, but that is a good argument for not putting it in our history.
Hi Mike, really interested what you thought about Dragonbane as a system, as I am eying it right now. How is it, especially compared to Shadowdark and D&D 5E? Do you think it would be easy to get people that are new to the hobby into TTRPGs?
I love the idea of the City of Arches--and I'd love to support you once again--but I have no taste for 5e anymore. Any chance you could publish a Shadowdark conversion?
On the topic of untrustworthy npcs: What about the opposite? What about at (to coin a phrase) "Snape character," who seems completely untrustworthy from the start, but turns out to be completely trustworthy? For example, I had an npc in one of my previous campaigns who had become the land owner of the main town through strange and mysterious circumstances. He was always grumpy, wore deep red robes and many expensive rings, and was always upset what the PCs were getting into. However, he was actually a really good person; he just inherited the title of land owner, but never wanted it because it took him away from his home, his friends, and (most importantly) his boyfriend. He was dour because he was taken from his old life to live in a podunk - and probably homophobic - town on the edge of civilization, all because the previous land owner, his niece, shirked her own duties to live the life of an adventurer and got herself killed.
I personally have run the legendary monster = one action in between each PC and its worked really really well to keep fights fast and interesting. The Dungeon Dudes made a video on it "Epic Monsters" and will be detailing how to build them in their upcoming Monsters of Drakkenheim book. Also thanks for the heads up on Nimble 5e, I am very curious as I search for the perfect system for my table which likes 5e but is super slow at it....
16:35 'we can like the work…without…removing the problems they had as human beings…' - totally agree. I love Caravaggio paintings, but the guy was a homicidal nutjob with a short fuse. Doesn't change (one way or the other) my enjoyment of his painting. Great point, Mike… …and thanks for a little coverage of Nimble 5e. I'd have probably backed it already if it wasn't for the terrible name (fickle much!), but I'm still interested enough to consider getting the PDF. Waiting for City of Arches to launch before I decide on any extra entertainment budget stuff for August! Also, although I'm always very likely to customise anything, I very much appreciate your hints, constant permission and encouragement to make adjustments. It's so healthy for the game to do this for GMs, especially those just starting out. Thanks so much for this week's programme. I've never felt the need for safety tools, but I play with people I know well. When I've not, I adjust to 'just met in the pub, but not drunk' level of conversation. If everyone there asks me to stop swearing, I'm probably best moving to a different group (or pub, if it's the landlord!). If things start to move in a direction that's morally or ethically dubious, I'd stop and have a brief conversation because we're all adults. Then there's when we get beyond dubious into the abhorrent, hateful and nauseating, which I don't mind one bit (because it's happening in our imaginations and my real world has had enough nasty that stories don't hold too many worries), but I'd have a natter anyway with my friends before I'd introduce the stuff in some of my favourite Kult adventures, or Delta Green: God's Teeth. People are allowed to change too and, even from day to day. Sometimes we all want something a bit lightweight and easygoing. The fascinating thing is where you talk about the dodgy moral decisions a party or group will make, because they're in the moment and haven't thought about it as though their PCs exist in a real world. Like a bunch of first-time camping kids that accidentally start a forest fire which burns down a town. Experienced adults would be more likely to properly manage and extinguish their campfire. For me, I think it's worth knowing what sort of people the players are thinking they want their individual characters to be (alignment used to help with this) so the GM can stop and ask, 'Are you sure your character(s) want to do this?' It's very similar to stopping a character from doing something that would lead to them running off the edge of an obvious (to the PC) cliff, or murder a stranger in a street next to a pair of city guards. Goal focussed players don't always have the same ordinary, daily awareness as their PC would, hence the amount of times we've all witnessed and indulged in game behaviour that's retrospectively unhinged. A little help to gain the perspective for verisimilitude is sensible, whether that's about noticing an (obvious to the PC) physical hazard or the (fairly clear) risk of committing a mass homicide.
I still have my original B1 from the Holmes box set. And now I'm picturing Stone Cold Steve Austin running around in D&D. (Check out his acting in Abraxas.)
Left most die is the primary die? Why not just use the closest die to the player? Lot less ambiguous really. Lots of fortune telling traditions use closest first.
Love Forge of Foes as a tool, both for tidying up and improving combatants. I didn't expect to use it much but it swiftly became a go to that I've used almost every session. But also really respect how the crowd funding campaign was run and delivered. There wasn't a bloat of up-sell tiers and add-ons. And the turn around from campaign to digital and physical was faster than any other RPG product I've backed.
Concerning NOC betrayal The first campaign I ran lasted for 20 levels (about 50 sessions). It was like a fantasy superhero/vigilante game, and they worked for something like the avengers. About 5 sessions before the end, it was revealed the director of the "avengers" was an evil shape shifting necromancer, who had concealed his identity for decades. I don't really remember much of his motivation or plan anymore Now... was this a good idea? No, probably not. Did my friends love it? Yes they did. Also, he went on to kill about half the NPC's. (They were all resurrected in the after credits) I do think I should mention, it was a very silly campaign (although I didn't realize it at the time). And I don't think they were all that attached to his character. I'm sure it wouldn't have gone over so well if it had been one of the other NPC's. And there were a few subtle hints. Most so subtle I doubt they noticed, especially in ttrpg format. The kind of foreshadowing you pick up on on the second viewing of a movie I think the genre matters too. It felt like the most obvious/common big twist I could do in that genre Did I break their trust? They let me run another campaign right after that, so I guess not. And we still play together. In fact, I think they were rather impressed I managed to keep the secret for about two years So, is there a morale to this story? No.
About Pirate Borg, the author in the rules book there are no native faction, no statblocks for natives, etc. So you have to purposely introduce conflict with natives to have those moral issues. In my head cannon about the Dark Caribbean settings, there was a war between the natives, the Old Ones and the Undeads, and the natives lost. And when you lose against the undead, there is no you anymore.
All monsters are scaled to the players, so I think the arguement that the monster would be weaker if I were not here is kind of a silly one. If you were dm'n 2 people the monster is not as strong as if you run for 7 people and you do not run into that ancient red dragon till you are a high enough level to deal with it. That is how balance in a level based game goes. Alternatively, you can play dragons bane, GURPS, or rune Quest that does not have levels. D&D at a base level works based on level and party sized balance.
I just finished binge listening to the podcast. Wow! I thought i knew all this history pretty well, but they go into such great detail. I am stunned how great the podcast is. Thank you for the recommendation.
Thanks for talking about Gygax and anderson. I can as a family business owner find people can be crazy but we can view the super position and know people are complicated
Our table has been doing monsters interspersed between player turns for more than a year now without issue and I’ve really been enjoying it - we go around the table as well And you hit the nail on the head with DC20: huge marketing budget
The discomfort of those moral situations is a feature, not a bug. Avoiding quandry robs opportunities for learning and growth and the possibility of epic 'doing the right thing" moments. And the surprise is a key part of the experience. Play what is fun for you of course... and, the safety folks are often kind of missing the point and using the exception to make a suboptimal rule. A world w/out risk and challenge is one w/out drama, resiliency and a sense of true accomplishment.
One single big action really sucks when that one action misses or fails. Congrats, your turn was useless. Now wait 10min for everyone else to do something until you can miss again. Fun game.
Or play in a game/with people where you are engaged with what’s happening no matter whose turn it is because the play and outcome matters to you, so one miss is not a big deal (esp. it is totally possible to fail two or three actions on your turn as well). This kind of complaint strikes me as coming from people who think or act as if they are playing a solo video game.
i have always preferred OD&D and the Basic line to AD&D, not just for gygax's greed and ego, but also because AD&D was the first version with the infamous strength table that capped women's strength lower than men's, introducing structural sexism into the game
@@HereComeMrCee-Jay i agree, and i also don't think a fantasy game needs to be bound by real life, anyway. almost all my players face some form of structural oppression or prejudice in real life. i want my game to be a welcome reprieve from the constant strain of dealing with such things.
Re: Creators and their Creations I also struggle with this distinction. I think of JK Rowling. I love Harry Potter but I struggle with putting any money in her pocket. She actively attacks marginalized groups. So, I guess it come down to a case-by-case basis (what are their actions), and the level of support you want to give them (voting with your wallet)?
This is a bit tricky, but I also feel there is not really an issue with a dead creator unless you are looking at it for context of the work. It feels a bit icky to bad mouth the dead, for me. You do you, but I never got the urge to spit on a grave. There is also a bit of an issue with this pod cast specifically where it is populated by people who were upset at Gary Gigax (some rightfully so), so they are going to present everything they do in the worst context. If your worst enemy wrote your biography with the knowledge that your family did not have the money to sue for slander, how would you be presented? I take it with a grain of salt because he had friends and family that liked him who they didn't interview because it is not scandalous, eye catching, and might contradict the scandalous ones.
As if I couldn’t like Mike Shea more! 16:48 about being able to separate the creator from the work is perfection. It’s ok when our heroes mess up. They’re human and it WILL happen. What matters is that we dont take it personally when those heroes get called out.
@@NegatveSpace with JK Rowling I feel she was kind of put in a position where someone asked her about an opinion on something she had no investment into. It came off as a "purity test" question as she never publicly endorsed any kind of trans issues before. Ie, "should women be allowed to be drag queens?" is a question you probably never thought about unless you are in that sub culture, so an off the cuff response is probably the "wrong answer."
You did not understood what makes the Preface offensive. All the books published use the Preface to highlight the importance, the contribution, the place in the cultural landscape, what is original and special about the work. You can agree or disagree with WotC views but the place for that discussion was not in the Preface. Is like putting on a tombstone what you believe the dead had done wrong. That is not a tombstone, and it is offensive.
@paulbrandson6656 In an addendum, considerations from publisher at the end of the book. If it was my choice, I would trust the readers to have their own ethical conclusions.
@@magdalenavalentinastegaru8531 that makes sense. Content warnings and ratings always go at the end of movies, allowing viewers to reach their own conclusions about the material. I, like most GMs, I have a session 0 at the end of a campaign so players can discuss how they feel about the subject matter we played through.
@paulbrandson6656 That book is not a movie, the purpose is informative and not to have an emotional experience. More over, that book was published as an anniversary tribute to a work that has cultural impact, personal value and still puts food on the publisher table. .
Concerning Vecna: (spoiler)
In my most recent session zero when asked what players wanted from the campaign or not, the most strongly voiced opinion (agreed on by multiple players) was: "We don't want a giant twist where we find out we worked for the bad guys all along. That would make us feel bad."
I'm surprised that you aren't interested in the history of DnD given how much you utilize one of the core aspects of the old game - random tables. There's so much that has been lost from the early days (both in the game and the history of the game), that especially in this 50th year, that is worth reexamining. For yet another perspective (or 50) check out 50 Years in the Dungeon where Stan! has been having creators from the early-to-modern age guesting and reminiscing as he illustrates homages to some of the classic art we all know.
On the Nimble section, I understand why people like the 3 actions. nothing sucks more than having only one action and missing, feels like you wasted it. thats why games with only one action often opt to just let you succeed your action without a roll.
25:50
I play at many tables where the dodge action is all my high level caster will do, just to save time for the table because i know the barb can solo the fight.
The DM seeing this, has trouble balancing challenging combat to the point where instead of making more targets, interesting battlefields, lair actions, and unit compositions, they just beef up one token's stats. But when a token has AC23 and +13 to all saves, how does a caster DC14 save do anything effective on their turn? I've learned that it is easier to take dodge action and flee, saving the table a 5 minute turn of reading complicated spell cards only to lose the spell slot to a +13 save. By calling the bluff the DM has to Deus Ex Machina a solution or TPK .
Combat that the barb can solo, or combat so impossible you should flee until the DM improvises a reason to survive.
Neither situation is much fun.
One part of history of D&d that is interesting are the early magazines, with people bringing up the same questions people ask today
As usual there is a Jon Peterson book for this. "The Elusive Shift" covers contributions and feedback from early D&D adopters via fanzines.
Working with bad guys is definitely a cool story, The flip side of that is having to work AGAINST a good npc because their faction has goals that don't align with ours
I agree. The series is riveting and the production value is top-notch.
If you like the podcast, I highly recommend the books 'Game Wizards,' 'Slaying the Dragon,' and the 'Designers and Dragons' series. They go into further detail about what happened during the TSR days. The audiobook versions are really good.
The great, and unique, thing about 'We Were Wizards' is all the interviews with people who were there. Even if they are biased (how could they not be?), there's something special about hearing from the people who were actually there.
sordid*
What you said is very true, people like Gary did not come out of this situation looking clean. I’d like to however make some additions and context: Mike Carr refused an offer for reduced royalties on B1, which is why Gary slapped B2 together in a couple of weeks, repurposing entire sections of Castle Greyhawk which then became the Caves of Chaos. AD&D seems to have been intended as an evolution of OD&D rather than solely existing for legal reasons and only later on did products make a point of philosophically differentiating AD&D from OD&D (after Arneson understandably sued in late 1978), so the changes still carried sincere design intent (that also went beyond just tournament play as is sometimes claimed). The account of Gary’s time in Hollywood can be one sided, Peterson (author of *The Game Wizards*, often used as a source for these things) dismissed Gary’s telling of it out of hand for being unreliable. Gary claims he was essentially put out to pasture by the Blumes due to disagreements over the direction of the company.
Another thing to consider that a lot of the contemporary information used as sources for this stuff was indeed gossip, namely from columns of *Different Worlds* a magazine which was ran by Chaosium (which positioned itself as the anti-TSR), many salacious rumors spawned from it. Former employees embittered by Gary or TSR often contributed to it.
The history of this period in the game’s history is unfortunately very messy, what I took away from it is that sometimes the enlightenment you seek by studying the past is not to be found there, especially when primary sources still living today have vested interests in not telling the truth, and all you learn is the reaffirmation that human beings are very complicated.
100% This. Attempting to piece together the history of TSR from the "When We Were Wizards" podcast is a lot like trying to learn Roman history from only reading Suetonius' "The Twelve Ceasars" - while what you learn may be correct, it's also fragmentary and sensationalized.
18:44 this is such an important realisation. I mean, we do not throw the baby along with the bathwater. Works and ideas outlive their douchebag creators, as they should.
I feel like Nimble 5e is another remix that is a good middle ground b/t DC20 and 5e. I backed DC20 and really like some of the ideas in it, but it is definitely crunchier than I need for my table. Nimble has some ideas that are easy to cherry pick even if you don't use the whole thing.
Excellent talk about some rough issues
I think the best betrayals are the ones players see coming.
Great to see nimble 5e getting some love
Concerning Nimble:
I was on the lookout for a new system for my group(s). Watch out, very personal opinion. I felt 5e basically good, but some things just lacking. I felt Pathfinder 2 or going back to D&D 4e too crunchy. Daggerheart (currently dming a campaign) has some good ideas, but also bad ones. MCDM seemed too crunchy. A5E too crunchy, Tales of the Valiant too vanilla, Shadowdark too OSR-y. I was kinda eyeing DC20, but unsure about it and felt sad it wasn't 5e compatible. Along came Nimble. I've absorbed whatever I could find (previews, "reviews", Nimble v1 - which has great designer's notes about the reasoning/intent btw). The more I read, the more enamored I become with Nimble. I think this is *my* 5e.
Really looking forward to seeing the full rules of Nimble, I am no fan of Wotc after all the things they have done, and have looked towards third party to get my 5e fix. So far Level Up A5e has been the solution, but it also has things to it that aren't ideal. My 4 groups I currently run, one of them really enjoys A5e and has fully embraced it, two others find it ok, but they feel there is a bit much to remember compared to 5e, and the physical group just said, nah, this is not for us. And I get them, A5e is great, but it is also a lot more crunchier then 5e.
Nimble seems to change things up quite a bit and also creates a combat system that actually seems to have a focus on tactical decisions and how to best use the 3 action points one has, I think that Nimble very well could replace A5e for three of my groups and become the go-to game system for future campaigns
I binged the We Were Wizards podcast over the last few days from your recommendation. An enthralling listen.
NPC: The GM has to help be the player's eyes, including things the characters would notice or sense that the player can't. Betrayal is fine, but telegraph and give hints just like w traps.
In Search of the Unknown was great. As a new dungeon master back in the day, it was so helpful in forming my design efforts.
I use Forge of Foes almost every week!
I will be supporting your Kickstarter 210%, Mike. You’ve done so much for the hobby and the community. You are and lovely bride are wonderful and amazing people. ❤
After using Nimble v1, I can't support v2. I think there are some good ideas, but overall, it is a very messy presentation. My players and I have been very frustrated by the presentation. We just switched back to vanilla D&D 5e with some of my own homebrew ideas for combat that will be easier to implement. The combat system is neat but very frustrating.
25:50 the saving trow in this system uses only 1AP. Also because every attack hits any character WILL contribute to the fight
"Three different empires... Corrupt British Empire, ... Corrupt French Empire...and the undead"
Ohhh, you mean the Spanish?
JK, but I am surprised that the Spanish were not represented, but that is a good argument for not putting it in our history.
I wonder if Mike will look over Draw Steel! by MDCM.
Has anyone used an oracle roll/dice or solo mechanics in their group game? Or are you basically just playing PbtA at that point?
Hi Mike, really interested what you thought about Dragonbane as a system, as I am eying it right now. How is it, especially compared to Shadowdark and D&D 5E? Do you think it would be easy to get people that are new to the hobby into TTRPGs?
The starter box is excellent. I think it can be a fine way to bring new players into the hobby. It’s really strong.
I love the idea of the City of Arches--and I'd love to support you once again--but I have no taste for 5e anymore. Any chance you could publish a Shadowdark conversion?
It can be easily used with any fantasy rpg including Shadowdark.
On the topic of untrustworthy npcs: What about the opposite? What about at (to coin a phrase) "Snape character," who seems completely untrustworthy from the start, but turns out to be completely trustworthy?
For example, I had an npc in one of my previous campaigns who had become the land owner of the main town through strange and mysterious circumstances. He was always grumpy, wore deep red robes and many expensive rings, and was always upset what the PCs were getting into. However, he was actually a really good person; he just inherited the title of land owner, but never wanted it because it took him away from his home, his friends, and (most importantly) his boyfriend. He was dour because he was taken from his old life to live in a podunk - and probably homophobic - town on the edge of civilization, all because the previous land owner, his niece, shirked her own duties to live the life of an adventurer and got herself killed.
I personally have run the legendary monster = one action in between each PC and its worked really really well to keep fights fast and interesting. The Dungeon Dudes made a video on it "Epic Monsters" and will be detailing how to build them in their upcoming Monsters of Drakkenheim book.
Also thanks for the heads up on Nimble 5e, I am very curious as I search for the perfect system for my table which likes 5e but is super slow at it....
16:35 'we can like the work…without…removing the problems they had as human beings…' - totally agree. I love Caravaggio paintings, but the guy was a homicidal nutjob with a short fuse. Doesn't change (one way or the other) my enjoyment of his painting.
Great point, Mike…
…and thanks for a little coverage of Nimble 5e. I'd have probably backed it already if it wasn't for the terrible name (fickle much!), but I'm still interested enough to consider getting the PDF.
Waiting for City of Arches to launch before I decide on any extra entertainment budget stuff for August!
Also, although I'm always very likely to customise anything, I very much appreciate your hints, constant permission and encouragement to make adjustments. It's so healthy for the game to do this for GMs, especially those just starting out.
Thanks so much for this week's programme.
I've never felt the need for safety tools, but I play with people I know well. When I've not, I adjust to 'just met in the pub, but not drunk' level of conversation. If everyone there asks me to stop swearing, I'm probably best moving to a different group (or pub, if it's the landlord!). If things start to move in a direction that's morally or ethically dubious, I'd stop and have a brief conversation because we're all adults.
Then there's when we get beyond dubious into the abhorrent, hateful and nauseating, which I don't mind one bit (because it's happening in our imaginations and my real world has had enough nasty that stories don't hold too many worries), but I'd have a natter anyway with my friends before I'd introduce the stuff in some of my favourite Kult adventures, or Delta Green: God's Teeth. People are allowed to change too and, even from day to day. Sometimes we all want something a bit lightweight and easygoing.
The fascinating thing is where you talk about the dodgy moral decisions a party or group will make, because they're in the moment and haven't thought about it as though their PCs exist in a real world. Like a bunch of first-time camping kids that accidentally start a forest fire which burns down a town. Experienced adults would be more likely to properly manage and extinguish their campfire.
For me, I think it's worth knowing what sort of people the players are thinking they want their individual characters to be (alignment used to help with this) so the GM can stop and ask, 'Are you sure your character(s) want to do this?' It's very similar to stopping a character from doing something that would lead to them running off the edge of an obvious (to the PC) cliff, or murder a stranger in a street next to a pair of city guards. Goal focussed players don't always have the same ordinary, daily awareness as their PC would, hence the amount of times we've all witnessed and indulged in game behaviour that's retrospectively unhinged. A little help to gain the perspective for verisimilitude is sensible, whether that's about noticing an (obvious to the PC) physical hazard or the (fairly clear) risk of committing a mass homicide.
I still have my original B1 from the Holmes box set.
And now I'm picturing Stone Cold Steve Austin running around in D&D. (Check out his acting in Abraxas.)
Just what is a HARD COVER PDF?
a pdf read on a phone with an Otterbox case.
Left most die is the primary die? Why not just use the closest die to the player? Lot less ambiguous really. Lots of fortune telling traditions use closest first.
Love Forge of Foes as a tool, both for tidying up and improving combatants. I didn't expect to use it much but it swiftly became a go to that I've used almost every session. But also really respect how the crowd funding campaign was run and delivered. There wasn't a bloat of up-sell tiers and add-ons. And the turn around from campaign to digital and physical was faster than any other RPG product I've backed.
Concerning NOC betrayal
The first campaign I ran lasted for 20 levels (about 50 sessions). It was like a fantasy superhero/vigilante game, and they worked for something like the avengers. About 5 sessions before the end, it was revealed the director of the "avengers" was an evil shape shifting necromancer, who had concealed his identity for decades. I don't really remember much of his motivation or plan anymore
Now... was this a good idea? No, probably not. Did my friends love it? Yes they did.
Also, he went on to kill about half the NPC's. (They were all resurrected in the after credits)
I do think I should mention, it was a very silly campaign (although I didn't realize it at the time). And I don't think they were all that attached to his character. I'm sure it wouldn't have gone over so well if it had been one of the other NPC's.
And there were a few subtle hints. Most so subtle I doubt they noticed, especially in ttrpg format. The kind of foreshadowing you pick up on on the second viewing of a movie
I think the genre matters too. It felt like the most obvious/common big twist I could do in that genre
Did I break their trust? They let me run another campaign right after that, so I guess not. And we still play together. In fact, I think they were rather impressed I managed to keep the secret for about two years
So, is there a morale to this story? No.
About Pirate Borg, the author in the rules book there are no native faction, no statblocks for natives, etc. So you have to purposely introduce conflict with natives to have those moral issues.
In my head cannon about the Dark Caribbean settings, there was a war between the natives, the Old Ones and the Undeads, and the natives lost. And when you lose against the undead, there is no you anymore.
It’s “sordid”, not “sorted”.
All monsters are scaled to the players, so I think the arguement that the monster would be weaker if I were not here is kind of a silly one. If you were dm'n 2 people the monster is not as strong as if you run for 7 people and you do not run into that ancient red dragon till you are a high enough level to deal with it. That is how balance in a level based game goes.
Alternatively, you can play dragons bane, GURPS, or rune Quest that does not have levels. D&D at a base level works based on level and party sized balance.
I just finished binge listening to the podcast. Wow! I thought i knew all this history pretty well, but they go into such great detail. I am stunned how great the podcast is. Thank you for the recommendation.
Thanks for talking about Gygax and anderson. I can as a family business owner find people can be crazy but we can view the super position and know people are complicated
Our table has been doing monsters interspersed between player turns for more than a year now without issue and I’ve really been enjoying it - we go around the table as well
And you hit the nail on the head with DC20: huge marketing budget
The discomfort of those moral situations is a feature, not a bug. Avoiding quandry robs opportunities for learning and growth and the possibility of epic 'doing the right thing" moments. And the surprise is a key part of the experience. Play what is fun for you of course... and, the safety folks are often kind of missing the point and using the exception to make a suboptimal rule. A world w/out risk and challenge is one w/out drama, resiliency and a sense of true accomplishment.
One single big action really sucks when that one action misses or fails. Congrats, your turn was useless. Now wait 10min for everyone else to do something until you can miss again. Fun game.
Or play in a game/with people where you are engaged with what’s happening no matter whose turn it is because the play and outcome matters to you, so one miss is not a big deal (esp. it is totally possible to fail two or three actions on your turn as well).
This kind of complaint strikes me as coming from people who think or act as if they are playing a solo video game.
Keep up the great work, Mike! I can't wait for the City of Arches Kickstarter.
Nimble 5e makes me think of Microlite20 or Microlite2020.
i have always preferred OD&D and the Basic line to AD&D, not just for gygax's greed and ego, but also because AD&D was the first version with the infamous strength table that capped women's strength lower than men's, introducing structural sexism into the game
In real life, there is no difference in strength between men and women.
@@HereComeMrCee-Jay i agree, and i also don't think a fantasy game needs to be bound by real life, anyway. almost all my players face some form of structural oppression or prejudice in real life. i want my game to be a welcome reprieve from the constant strain of dealing with such things.
I dont get the chapters ?
Thanks
Nimble is basically DnD without the crunch but still tactical and interesting
*Sordid
Re: Creators and their Creations
I also struggle with this distinction. I think of JK Rowling. I love Harry Potter but I struggle with putting any money in her pocket. She actively attacks marginalized groups. So, I guess it come down to a case-by-case basis (what are their actions), and the level of support you want to give them (voting with your wallet)?
I agree.
This is a bit tricky, but I also feel there is not really an issue with a dead creator unless you are looking at it for context of the work. It feels a bit icky to bad mouth the dead, for me. You do you, but I never got the urge to spit on a grave.
There is also a bit of an issue with this pod cast specifically where it is populated by people who were upset at Gary Gigax (some rightfully so), so they are going to present everything they do in the worst context. If your worst enemy wrote your biography with the knowledge that your family did not have the money to sue for slander, how would you be presented? I take it with a grain of salt because he had friends and family that liked him who they didn't interview because it is not scandalous, eye catching, and might contradict the scandalous ones.
As if I couldn’t like Mike Shea more! 16:48 about being able to separate the creator from the work is perfection. It’s ok when our heroes mess up. They’re human and it WILL happen. What matters is that we dont take it personally when those heroes get called out.
How has she attacked anyone? To my memory all she has ever said is women are women.
@@NegatveSpace with JK Rowling I feel she was kind of put in a position where someone asked her about an opinion on something she had no investment into. It came off as a "purity test" question as she never publicly endorsed any kind of trans issues before. Ie, "should women be allowed to be drag queens?" is a question you probably never thought about unless you are in that sub culture, so an off the cuff response is probably the "wrong answer."
You did not understood what makes the Preface offensive. All the books published use the Preface to highlight the importance, the contribution, the place in the cultural landscape, what is original and special about the work. You can agree or disagree with WotC views but the place for that discussion was not in the Preface. Is like putting on a tombstone what you believe the dead had done wrong. That is not a tombstone, and it is offensive.
Where should it go then?
@paulbrandson6656 In an addendum, considerations from publisher at the end of the book. If it was my choice, I would trust the readers to have their own ethical conclusions.
@@magdalenavalentinastegaru8531 that makes sense. Content warnings and ratings always go at the end of movies, allowing viewers to reach their own conclusions about the material. I, like most GMs, I have a session 0 at the end of a campaign so players can discuss how they feel about the subject matter we played through.
@paulbrandson6656 That book is not a movie, the purpose is informative and not to have an emotional experience. More over, that book was published as an anniversary tribute to a work that has cultural impact, personal value and still puts food on the publisher table.
.
😂 😆 😂 @@paulbrandson6656