Review: The Nameless City

When I started posting reviews, I jumped on a soapbox  - I lamented that we needed more reviews out there.  I tend to get a lot of modules naturally (evidence:  GM day stuff) but there's not nearly enough reviews to help differentiate the good from the bad from the great.  I especially noted there didn't seem to be enough Swords & Wizardry reviews.  Be the change, Beedo!  So here's a review of The Nameless City.

The Nameless City is written by Alphonso Warden, published for S&W by Mythmere games.  You can grab the pdf over at RPGNow for the low price of $4.95.  I noticed the art is by the blogosphere's own Ostensible Cat, Jonathon Bingham; I loved the serpent man picture.  It weighs in at 43 pages, and is for levels 7-10.

The adventure site is an ancient city lost in the desert.  It's loosely based on the HP Lovecraft story of the same name, "The Nameless City".  In the Lovecraft story, the protagonist discovers a city built by a primordial race of crocodilian reptile men; the module replaces them with the more familiar serpent men (of Valusia).  The module describes about 15 encounter areas in a cavernous, underground ruined city, and then 3 small dungeons within the ruins.

What did I like about this product?  First off, the atmosphere and vibe does an excellent job of capturing the spirit of pulp adventure, starting with a weird purple smoke monster that can lure the unwary into the city (and to their doom).  If you like Lovecraft, Robert E Howard, or Clark Ashton Smith,  this adventure will be right in your wheelhouse.  Entering the city will be very memorable for the explorers in the group.

There is no overarching plot or story.  What we're presented with is an adventuring site, some history, game statistics, and wandering monsters; it's largely up to the DM to determine how the inhabitants of the city respond to attacks and bring it all to life.  There are plenty of dangerous battles with magically endowed serpent people - the serpent people of Valusia had sorcerors, after all - and the author provides example tactics that should help the DM run otherwise complicated high level battles with lots of abilities.  I thought the tactics were a really nice touch.

I should also point out, the full game statistics are placed after the room description and are set off from the room text.  I know it's a small thing, but I find it helps combats run better at the table when full stats are provided in this way.

As for issues:  the lack of a strong plot hook may turn off some DMs.  Since I try to run a free form / sandbox style game, I see that as a feature, one less thing to cut.  Someone else's opinion may be different.  As presented, the city is very dangerous, with a very high bar just for entry.  Without a compelling reason to go on, some groups may just turn around after their first bloody nose.  The individual DM will need to come up with an appropriate motivation if they want their players to actually see this through.  Perhaps an important love interest or NPC is lured off by the purple mist, or a lost MacGuffin can only be found in the depths of the place?

The adventure seemed light on monetary treasure for the level of characters that would be exploring it.  On the other hand, it's loaded with magical treasure (although pretty much all of the magical treasure is in the hands of the serpent people and will be used against the players!)  I actually went back and added up the monetary treasure to confirm my suspicions - it seemed to be about 80,000gp (a group of 7-10th level guys probably needs 300k-400k in loot to level up).  If you're not playing AD&D (with magic item XP) you might need to add gems and jewelry.

Normally I would take a moment and discuss how the enterprising DM can add some horror elements to the adventure and give it a horror twist.  Between the copious serpent people mummies, the massive god of the serpent folk slumbering beneath the city, the numerous death traps, and the atmosphere, achieving some horror won't be a problem.

I don't necessarily see myself running this in Gothic Greyhawk because of future plans (though you never know - this is worth trying to work in).  However, the players in the kid's game are already lost in the desert as we explore B4 The Lost City - if they survive long enough, this could be a good follow up to B4.  On the other hand, this might be a bit too intense for young folk!

I liked it a lot, and would give it 3.5 out of 5 stars on the Beedometer.  Despite some modest flaws, it has a really great atmosphere.

Illusionism and the Sandbox 3: Resolutions

Thanks for all the interesting replies to Part 1 and Part 2; I was out-of-pocket until late yesterday attending a work conference, so didn't get to reply.  Mulling over the comments helped me get my head around some of the nuances of the issues and come up with some guidelines I can use.

For background, I want to shift mediums from gaming to improvisational theater.  My wife is an improv actor, and she roped me into doing 4-5 improv courses a bunch of years ago.  You'd be surprised how many parallels there are between game mastering and improv (folks like Robin Laws have built a cottage industry on game master advice that incorporates good improv techniques into running games).

The two techniques I'm thinking of are incorporation and denial.  If you haven't seen improv theater, the idea is that two actors get an audience suggestion, step out on stage, and build a scene on the fly.  Who they are, where they are, evolves on stage as they start creating a scene whole cloth out of the blue.

One of the core ideas is that things established in the scene are true.  If one actor greets the other actor as a family member at the start of the scene, then that's true; contradicting the other actor on stage is called denial, and it's a bit jarring to the audience (and can derail the scene, since the actors are building it on the fly).  Incorporation is the idea that previously established information in the scene is true, and the actors should continue to work it into the world they're creating by continuing to reference it.

These concepts help me establish some guidelines on when Illusionism is harmless or damaging.  For me, I'd like to say Illusionism is always bad - just as the DM shouldn't fudge dice - but since I recognize that pragmatism sometimes has to win out over idealism, some guidelines will be useful.

  

Let's revisit the bandit example from Monday.  Trey helped highlight the nuances of the situation in the comments.  Think of how the utility and merits of Illusionism changes as these facts change:

1. The party has 3 choices  of road to leave town, and there are no facts established previously that bandits live on one of the roads at the time the players make their decision.
2. In the second set of facts, let's say the DM has previously established (through role play) that bandits often attack travelers on the west road.
3. In the final set of facts, let's say the players previously said they wanted to take the west road to the mountains,  despite  knowledge of the bandits.  At the start of the next game, they make a spontaneous decision to go east to the big city instead.

In the first set of facts, the DM is free to plant the bandit encounter on any of the roads, because there are no expectations set.  I'll concede it's "no harm, no foul".

In the second example, if the DM moves the bandit encounter, it would seem to violate the established facts - in improv terms, it would be a denial.  Imagine the players rolling their eyes when they encounter bandits anyway, despite choosing a different course.  However, the DM can still 'save the day' by incorporating the established facts into the story; perhaps the players learn that the bandit leader himself was in town, creating the rumor of bandits on the west road, and the bandits have been on the east road all along.  As long as the players learn of these facts, the integrity of the situation is preserved.

In the last example, the players changing their minds, there's still a problem with Illusionism, but perhaps the DM can be excused because the players wasted his preparation time.  Regardless, to maintain the believability and credibility of the world, it would still be valuable to incorporate some mitigating facts - once again, the bandits are actually on the east road because a plant in the town gave the PC's misinformation.

In general, I wouldn't like the "solution" that there are two or three sets of bandits, one on each road; it's lazy, and doesn't incorporate the established facts.  It may be plausible, but the merits of presenting a world where the players can make meaningful decisions outweighs DM laziness.

Once I realized this approach, it solves the Strahd problem and the issue of crappy CRPG plot hooks, as well.  When a DM seeds a module plot hook into the sandbox, the amount of information provided will determine the current state of affairs at the adventure site.  If the players choose to ignore the plot hook, the DM is obligated to evolve the situation at the adventure site when time passes.

Going back to the Strahd example, here are two sets of facts:

1. The player's get a plot hook to return a magic sword to Barovia (for money).  No information about an ancient evil awakening is provided.  They show up in Barovia 6 months later.
2. The player's get a plot hook to return a magic sword to Barovia (for money), because an ancient evil is in the process of reawakening.  They show up in Barovia 6 months later.

In the first set of facts, the situation at the adventure site hasn't been established, and there isn't an Illusionism problem if the DM keeps the adventure site in the same state for 6 months.  It's like never telling the players which road has bandits.  In the second situation, the DM is obligated to incorporate the previous facts into the setting - the ancient evil is now wide awake, and waiting for them.

The words that come to mind to describe this approach to managing a game world are things like consistency, integrity, common sense.  Not helpful to phrase a guideline that says "Be consistent when running your game world."

So how about this for guidelines?  If someone can phrase them better, would love to hear it.

Player choices should be meaningful and have consequences.

Player choices are based on partial information.

The DM is obligated to administer the setting in a way that ensures player choice is meaningful, and in accordance with previously established facts.

Thanks for the good discussion fellas!
 

Illusionism and the Sandbox - Part 2

Schrodinger's Module

Yesterday I spent some time broaching the subject of Illusionism and the sandbox game.  It comes down to the consequence of choice.  Do player choices matter?  The issue I have with the bandit example from yesterday is that regardless of which road the players choose, the same consequence happens - they DM just picks up the bandits and places them somewhere else.  Illusionism implies,  "Player choices don't always matter, but as long as the players think their choices matter, they'll keep playing."  In other words, a game where the DM applies Illusionism can still be fun.

That being said, I wanted to bring up a different wrinkle regarding Illusionism and the Sandbox. The temporal nature of plot hooks in the sandbox creates an Illusionism problem.  A sandbox plot hook is a moment in time and windows of opportunity need to open and close for choices to have meaning.

Okay, that's a mouthful - here's another example to illustrate.

The players are in the tavern and hear about two adventuring opportunities.  The miners just outside of town are being attacked by an ogre clan, and are willing to pay well for mercenaries to hunt down the ogres before they return next month to overrun the mine.  The other opportunity has to do with the local Baron; a patrol of soldiers just captured a humanoid scout in the north woods, and the Baron is looking for adventurers to go north into the wilds and track the new tribe back to its lair and assess the tribe's strength.

Regardless of which plot hook the player's take, isn't it common sense that the other opportunity will be gone?  If the players don't hunt down the ogres,  the miners will be eaten, or other adventurers take the job in their place.  The ogres don't go into stasis waiting for the party to circle back months later when it's convenient.  There's an opportunity cost implicit with decision making.

I find this idea interesting because many of the situations presented in modules represent a snapshot in time.  G1 of Against the Giants presents the circumstances in the Steading of the Hill Giant Chief's lair at the time the giants are raiding the nearby kingdoms.  If the party stumbles upon the Steading in the sandbox months before the raids have started, the inhabitants will be in a different state.  If the party ignores the raids and the pleas from the neighboring kingdoms, and decides to investigate the Steading months after the plot hook is introduced, won't the hill giants be in quite a different state?  Perhaps months of successful raids, uninterrupted by the players, have swelled the ranks of the hill giants due to acclaim and renown.

I introduced a plot hook for the characters in my campaign to go to the misty valley of Barovia, and return a magical sword to the mayor of the village.  The idea behind this plot hook was to give the group a reason to visit the area where the AD&D 1E module I6, Ravenloft, takes place.  They learned that an ancient evil was stirring in the castle overlooking this distant valley.  The players took on the mission to find a powerful magical sword that would help the mayor protect the people of the valley.

This was months ago in game time, and the players are taking their time making their way to the valley to fork over the magic sword.  They're still planning on doing it - I think - they'll just be six months late.  So I have a perfect test case to decide whether the state of the valley at the beginning of the module represents the snapshot of time when the players actually arrive on site, or whether the situation has continued to develop in the months since the plot hook was introduced .  It raises a question about the "beginning state" of a module when you place it in the sandbox.  It's a bit like Schrödinger's Cat - we don't know the current state of the module until someone actually opens the box - the results are unquantified when the lid is completely shut; teasing the module opens the lid of the box and starts the clock.

Here's another way of looking at it - assume there are 3 states for Castle Ravenloft:

State A is when Strahd has been sleeping for centuries.  Bad omens convince the folk of Barovia he is reawakening.  A messenger is sent out of the valley to find a lost magic sword.

State B is the time at the start of I6 Ravenloft - Strahd is awake, and ready to kill some PCs!

State C is the disposition of the castle if Strahd is left unmolested too long… he accomplishes some of his goals, rises in power, and builds an army of Strahd zombies (to kill PCs!)

When the party first hears about a plot hook to go to Barovia, it is state A.  If the party moved right to Barovia, it would be state B by the time they got there - Strahd has woken up and is ready to rumble.  If the PCs take a really long time to get to Barovia, the DM must decide if their choice has consequences versus the other possible choices they could have made.  He could advance Barovia to state C - the group took too long, the villagers are all dead, and Strahd's zombie army is larger.  Or the DM can keep Strahd asleep… note quite awake yet… okay, one eye is opening… okay, now he yawned… oh, I think he's starting to wake up a little more… The DM can keep stretching out the awakening of the vampire to fill however much time it takes the PC's to get to Barovia.  Barovia will have just flipped to state B whenever they arrive - even if it's years later!

So how does this tie back to Illusionism?  In the previous post, I identified Illusionism as a situation where the players make a choice, and regardless of the choice, the DM ensures the result is the same outcome (usually for the convenience of the DM).  The player choice is essentially meaningless; they just don't realize it.

I would propose there is a corollary issue with Illusionism - when the players make a choice, there should be consequences regarding the choices not made.  In other words, when the group hears that a vampire is reawakening in the mountains, and they choose to take the scenic route to get there, should the end result be different than if they dropped everything and went right away into the mountains?

The interesting issue it raises for me has to do with seeding adventure locations in the sandbox and determining the state of affairs in the module at the time the plot hook is revealed.  Does the clock start then, or when the players show up at the location?  What happens to the situation presented in the module when the plot hook is ignored?  Like many things in gaming, I think the answer is, "it depends"; however, it's added a new dimension to the sand box.

Illusionism and the Sandbox - Part 1

Readers know that my current campaign style uses something I call "the sandbox of modules" - or modular sandbox.  I've populated my world with various campaign hooks and module site locations, and through a combination of home brew adventures, random encounters, and fully developed module sites, the campaign comes to life.

One interesting issue I have to grapple with is the concept of "Illusionism".  Here's a definition from the RPG theorists that's as good as any:

Illusionism:  A term for styles where the GM has tight control over the storyline, by a variety of means, and the players do not recognize this control.

An example is worth a thousand words.  Let's say you've prepared an adventure that kicks off after the players get ambushed by some bandits.  You expect the party to follow the bandits back to their camp and find the entrance to the dungeon in the bandit cave.  You place the bandit ambush on the west road out of town, where everyone knows some bandits lurk.

Here's the problem - there are three roads out of town, and although the party indicated last week they were probably heading west, this week, they decide to head towards the big city.  They take the east road instead.  Dingle!

That's where the Illusionist DM only gives the party the illusion of free will.  By golly, he built a bandit ambush to spring on the party, and one way or another, it's going to happen regardless of what they actually *wanted* to do.  He just moves the bandit ambush and cave lair to the east road, attacks the party as planned, and goes on with his story.

This is railroading.  The free agency of the players has been circumvented so the GM can drive the action to a foregone conclusion.  One can argue this is "socially acceptable" railroading if the players don't realize they're actually being manipulated by the DM; I disagree.

I strive, as much as reasonable, to give the players access to enough information to make an informed decision, and then abide by their plan without the Illusionism.  What's the point of running a sandbox if the DM is going to be a sneaky railroading puppet master?  It's an aspiration goal, because there is a finite amount of prep time.  Others will argue that Illusionism is practical, and certainly the lesser evil when compared to explicit or overt railroading.

Okay - all this background on Illusionism lays the framework for tomorrow's post; this introduction to Illusionism is probably old ground for most of you.  There's actually a related issue I'm most interested in discussing.  I'm calling it "Schrödinger's Adventure Module".   See you tomorrow.

Mythic Monday: The Priest Fight!

Mythic Monday - using elements of folklore, myth and legendry in your game

I always loved this cover of the old Deities and Demigods book, with the two clerics battling it out.  As the priests fire off magic from the rods they hold aloft, they fight as proxies for the divine struggle going on in the heavens above them.

Evil clerics are common antagonists and villains in the D&D universe - TSR's catalog of modules featured evil priests in Hommlet, The Temple of Elemental Evil, the drow priestesses in Against the Giants, the evil cleric in Keep on the Borderlands, and so on.  Here's the thing though - as I searched thought and memory for great moments in the mythic sources for similar fights, there's really only one place where we see priests of opposing gods squaring off and battling it out as proxies.  The Bible.  The Old Testament, specifically, is full of priestly throw-downs.

The Bible is a holy book for like 2 billion people, a third of the planet.  But it's also a foundational literary source for western culture, and certainly part of America's cultural DNA… and it's clear EGG used it heavily for inspiration when creating many of the spells for the cleric class.  It's not my intent to be disrespectful by discussing ancient Bible stories as mythology.

Getting back to the priest fighting - one of the most vivid priest battles is Elijah versus the priests of Baal  - 1 Kings 18.  Elijah shows up and challenges 400+ priests of Baal to a mystic throw down.  The two sides build huge wooden pyres with sacrifices on them, and the test is to see who'll be able to call down the power of their god and light up the sacrifice, a slaughtered bull.

The Baal guys spend all morning dancing around, shouting, performing some ritual blood letting, all to no avail.  Then Elijah starts in on the trash talking… “Shout louder!” he says. “Surely Baal is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened.” (1 Kings 18:27)

I'm finding the idea of biblical smack talk really funny.  "Helloooo!  Baal?  Anybody home?  Knock knock."

Well, you know how the story goes - the priests of Baal can't do anything, Elijah's god creates a huge flame from the sky that fires up his woodpile, even after it had been drenched with water.  Amazed by the display of power, everyone present switches sides back to Yahweh, and they march the Baal priests down to the river and, you know, kill them.

There are some other priestly confrontations in the OT as well; more throw downs with the Baal priests, throw downs with Dagon.  Who can forget the old "Charlton Heston as Moses" movie, where Moses gets into that spell slinging battle with the magicians of Pharoah, casting their staves into snakes and then having the snakes eat each other?  The whole 10 plagues sequence in Exodus is full of priest vs magician one-upsmanship.

As monotheism took hold of the Mediterranean world (and Europe), the idea of the militant priest that converts people through a divine show of force recurs again and again in story and legend.

I'm reminded of the story of St Boniface, the 8th century missionary to the Saxons who felled the mighty oak tree of Thor (the Donar Oak) with a huge gust of wind.  (He might have swung an axe, too).   I ran a dark ages Europe campaign a few years back, and spent a lot of time familiarizing myself with Carolingian lore.  When Boniface felled the oak, and wasn't struck dead by Donner's lightning, the locals decided to flip sides and become Christians.

Dueling Clerics in D&D
It got me thinking how to inject some conflict into the life of your campaign's clerics and use them as divine ambassadors and champions.  Start with the premise that the gods in your world actually want to be worshiped; they're jealous of their follower's devotion, and they want to increase their reach.  The clergy should be actively promoting the god's interests and challenging the capabilities of the opposing gods.  Enter, the priestly duel.

This town ain't big enough for two gods.

Put an element of the Wild West into your game - but instead of a couple of gunslingers out in the dusty street, you have a pair of clerics entering into the Thunderdome… two clerics enter, one walks out.  "This town ain't big enough for two gods, partner.  Now draw!"

Hold Person is a staple spell for low level clerics; Rings of Free Action would be premium items for dueling clerics.  Light, Command, Silence 15'; there are plenty of low level spells to support the dueling cleric.

Adventuring clerics in your game are probably the most well traveled ambassadors and champions for their temple and religion and could act as these wandering spell slingers for the faith.  Their very presence should be creating conflict as they travel into lands dedicated to foreign gods.  Either the incumbent priests want them out, or the god of the adventuring cleric wants to expand his or her reach.  So throw some complications your cleric's way and get them involved in some good old fashioned priest fights!

The interesting thing about dueling clerics, is that experience points matter.  The more experienced priest will be able to cast more powerful spells in the duel; most temples would want their champions to travel around and accumulate enough experience and magic items to defend the faith.


Post Script:
I am keenly interested if readers are familiar with other mystic showdowns between priests or clerics in myth, legend, fiction, or pulp fantasy - just because I like to track this kind of stuff down.  The examples I listed come primarily from the Judeo-Christian tradition.  The Homeric epics feature martial champions of the gods fighting as proxies, but not priests of the gods fighting on the god's behalf; for instance, the priest Laocoon in the Iliad is struck down by Athena directly, and not an opposing priest.

I've mentioned before, my Appendix N reading so far has put me in touch with plenty of clerics vs elves and faeries; beyond that, the cleric seems under represented in pulp fantasy.  Let me know what's out there!

GM Day Plunder

Busy week for me taking advantage of GM day sales!

These are adventures in the group's current level range that might make an upcoming appearance in the sandbox:

Stonesky Delve
Barrow Mound of Gravemoor
The People of the Pit

Here are some higher level adventures that had been on the wish list for a nice sale (the epic quality of higher level adventures means you should start foreshadowing them earlier in the campaign).

Red Mausoleum
Forgotten Temple of Baalzebul
Iron Crypt of the Heretics

These next adventures, I just wanted for inspiration / reading:

Lesserton & Mor
Pod Caverns of the Sinister Shroom
Tower of Iron and Crystal
Knowledge Illuminates

Expect some reviews (and / or some playtests) in the next few months.

The Lords of Fairy

Next week I'd like to post the Realm of Fairy as part of the framework for my Greyhawk cosmology.  Recent posts have discussed Chaos and Law, and earlier this week I posted game stats for the Sidhe.

I have some ideas on the rulers of Fairy, but I see this as a good way to hear ideas from readers and see how others have used Fairy in their game.  Check out some of the approaches laid out below, then feel free to sound off in the comments or vote on the new poll.

Celtic
Unfortunately, I don't have any primary sources for Celtic fairies in my library.  I'm familiar with the idea of the Seelie and Unseelie courts, and the idea of sharing ruler ship of half the year; this seems to align with summer and winter.  Seelie fairies tend to be merry pranksters, and would include leprechauns, pookah, brownies, pixies, and Sidhe nobles.  Unseelie faeries are the malicious ones; they'd have their own lords, and would be joined by red caps, quicklings, boggarts, and goblins.

Shakespeare
A Midsummer Night's Dream gives us that merry wanderer of the night, Puck, along with his King and Queen (Oberon and Titania).  Who can forget Mercutio's Queen Mab speech from Romeo and Juliet?  Note that the Shakespearian approach isn't incompatible with the Seelie and Unseelie courts.

Dresden Files
When I read The Dresden Files a few years ago, I noted how fairies played a large role in the series.  Dresden divides the fairies between Summer and Winter courts (loosely mapping the Seelie and Unseelie) ruled by women.  There is a matron, maiden, crone thing going on - the wise ex-ruler, the ruler with all the power, and the lady who is queen to-be.  In addition, the two houses each have a Knight - a supernatural agent that advances their cause in the mortal realm.

Jim Butcher just builds on the source literature, naming his Winter Queen, Mab, for instance, and using Titania in the summer role.

Alien and Bizarre
Another approach is to go alien and bizarre - use the standard fairies and Sidhe as the rank and file, but the rulers of Fairy are straight out of Pan's Labyrinth - give them whimsical names like the Prince of Shattered Dreams, the Lady of Mordant Wishes, or Queen of the Thousand Screaming Eyes.   (Reinforces the fairies = pagan demons trope).

Medieval France and Law vs Chaos
The romances of Medieval France depict a realm of Fairy ruled by enchantresses, luring knights astray.  Morgan le Fay is a principle character.  This is very much in line with the approach in Three Hearts and Three Lions, one of my main inspirations for the Sidhe.  The lords and ladies of this Fairy have titles similar to their mortal medieval rivals - Dukes, Kings, Queens, etc.

Drop me a comment if there's an approach you like for Gothic Greyhawk - should it take a classical, whimsical approach, really emphasis a cosmic war between Law and Chaos, or dip into madness and horror?  A new poll has been placed as well.

I'd love to hear if some other DM's have built their own approaches to the realm of Fairy.

Edit:  Maybe I should have a David Bowie as the Goblin King option, too?