Creating a Persona #2

Usually, I'd do a post on alignments, but I felt like continuing with character creation because that is what I've been doing.

One of my players is running a game in a few weeks and wanted us to send in characters early so he could start planning things. Normally making characters is a tedious, sporadic, and partially insane process for me. I tend to create the background and mechanics at the same time.

And I was thrown for a loop. We were all told to create a character with no background. Similar to Jason Bourne; we're bad-asses with no memory of our past selves. And the game is stealth based so we need to be able to infiltrate.

I didn't want to play a rogue, as the last character I had played was a rogue-esque character that could disappear at the drop of a hat; so I wanted something different. However, not being able to create a backstory threw me for a loop. I had to try and pick a mechanic character and hope the personality evolved out of that.

And it did; so this is also a valid way to create a character personality. Let the mechanic dictate behavior. As soon as the GM approves the build; I'll post it here.

Assuming a Persona

So you're on the other side of the DM screen. You are the Player. But before you sit down to the first session, you need to create a character. The mechanics of making a character will vary from system to system; but before pencil gets put to paper you need to know who you are making.

For D&D the personality is secondary to the mechanics of the game; but is no less important than rolling dice. What motivates your character? What do they dream of? What are their goals?

More importantly: where do you go for the answers to these questions. If you've roleplayed before, the answer is trivial, but a to a new player it can be mystifying. How are they supposed to come up with these answers?

You can look to many different places for inspirations on personalities. If you're just starting to play, perhaps playing someone whose beliefs match closely to yours will make the experience easier. You know what you will and will not do in most circumstances, so you can just be yourself.

If you want to go outside of who you are, you can look to literature, movies, and even psychology for ideas. Find a movie or a book that you like and base your character off of a character you are fond of. Using this manner, you know how the character has acted in situations presented in the book or movie and can extrapolate from that.

Or you can take a favorite character and change in ways you find interesting. What if Batman was willing to kill? Would he approach everything the same way. What if Superman was the poster boy for religion instead of patriotism? Not all changes need to be that dramatic, even subtle differences can result in unique characters.

You can even turn to Jungian psychology and look at archetypes in developing a character. Basing a character off of ideas such as the Wounded Healer or the Wise Old Man can lead to very rich characters.

Finally, you can show up with a blank slate of a character, relying on their alignment to provide the framework of who they are. From there, you develop their personalities as situations arise. Perhaps your characters first encounter with a dwarf is unpleasant and your character then becomes somewhat of a racist towards dwarves. The key here is to remain constant in how you act. Any changes to the way you behave need to be evolutions of what happens in game.

After you've done all that, or just decided to use "The Blank," you can begin the number crunching.

Things I Do

I mentioned before the spreadsheet I made to calculate hit percentages and the second page on it.

The second sheet is actually useful in a practical, non-theoretical way. It will calculate the BAB, Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saving throws as well as the die type for hit-points and the average hit-points for that die. In my gaming group, we roll against the DM for hit-points and take the higher of the two values. This will skew the average up a little bit, which is reflected in the final column.

All too often players will forget a step in the leveling up process and this sheet helps offset that just a little bit. You can also use it to check and see how well, or badly, off you are for hit points compared to the average baseline. Eventually I'll update it to include the Pathfinder update to the way that hit dice are determined.

The next sheet that will be added to the utilities is a sheet comparing average hit and Armor Class for each challenge rating. This sheet can help DMs create monsters, since it gives you a rough baseline for core stats or help players see what they need to be able to hit each level to remain useful in combat (in the most basic sense, spell casters and battlefield controllers don't necessarily need to be able to hit the monster in order to remain effective).

Dirty Words in Gaming - Overview

Not your normal dirty words, no. These are words that are spoken with vileness and disdain. Words that offend the people on the receiving end. Words like power-gamer, munchkin, twink, metagame, and min-max. These terms typically refer to things that go on around, about, or outside of the general game and therfore they all fall under the umbrella of metagame.

The strict definition for meta (from Wikipedia): ...the prefix meta is used to mean about (its own category). For example, metadata are data about data (who has produced them, when, what format the data are in and so on).

So metagame means the game about the game. This can cover areas like building characters and player vs character knowledge. People in general have a very disparaging view about metagaming.

I used to play both Magic: The Gathering and Legend of the Five Rings quasi-professionally. I did fairly well at tournaments and was very good at building decks. This involved the metagame. You had to be aware of what other people were playing, counters to their strategies, counters to their counters, and so on.

My involvement in that particular environment has shaped my views on metagame. Whether you consider metagaming good or bad, it is necessary. It can speed gameplay up through tedious times, it can save explanation, it can even help players build characters.

So philosophically, metagaming isn't bad; like everything else intent matters. When done to increase everyone's fun it's good. If you try to do it to "win" it's bad.

Series Information

I'm going to try and provide some structure for the blog.

Right now, I've got the series on Alignments (Aligning Misconceptions). Other series I'm currently brewing over will be about specific monsters, thoughts on metagame, and going over various means for building characters and specific builds I've seen or made. If anyone else has any ideas, I'd be more than happy to run with them.

If anyone has any suggestions on podcasts to listen to or blogs to read, let me know. I'm currently working through some podcasts and would like to get more.

Tonight is very content light, but tomorrow I'll start the series on Metagame thoughts.

Aligning Misconceptions #2 - Lawful Neutral

Typically Lawful Neutral is described as the judge. They have no regard to compassion or people's situations in matters of the law. The reason behind a crime means little; save a starving family or greed for jewels, a crime was committed.

This isn't to say that they are heartless or disinterested; they have faith in the system. If you've been accused of a crime, you must stand trial for it. They may present evidence for you or do what they can within the system to help your cause, but they will not act outside of it. However, Lawful need not only refer to laws of the state. Codes of ethics and discipline can be the focus of Lawful. The image of a monk comes to mind. Their discipline and ethics are what rule their lives.

The two can come into conflict. Should a pacifist monk be pressed into military service, what would they do? Do they compromise their ethics or the laws of their land? Would either action unlawful?

A Lawful Neutral character can even act in in selfish ways. They can exploit the system. Loopholes can be used to their advantage. Laws can be interpreted loosely (within limits, otherwise they veer into True Neutral). Laws can be overly enforced to selfish ends.

Lawful Neutral characters can also make amazing villains. The clerics from Equilibrium (which is amazing) are Lawful Neutral, yet they serve an oppressive, and arguably evil, government. They act without questions and they are entirely justified in what they do. Yet  because they are not evil themselves, they offer varying options for roleplay.

Perhaps they can be "turned." Exposed to the atrocities their government commits they can turn to the side of good. Or perhaps they embrace what they've done and turn to evil; abusing the system for personal gain. Or perhaps they turn away from the state laws and instead forge their own ethics.

Even boring old Lawful Neutral can be made interesting if you stop looking at alignments as absolute boundaries or black and white labels.

Keeping Encounters Fresh

Do you remember the first time you encountered a troll without knowing what it was? The horror at realizing that nothing you were doing to it was sticking? The mad scramble to find damage that would stick? Pleading the with the GM for a clue?

Fast forward a few campaigns and suddenly when the party encounters a troll, the appropriate gear comes out. Fire and acid become the words of the day and the party mage is lambasted if they don't have fire spells.

How can you keep the thrill of discovery and the tension of encounters alive after many campaigns? Whether players intend to or not, previous knowledge comes into play, and that excitement is lost. I feel that what the players feel translates to their characters and can enhance their experience. So no matter how well the players can roleplay they will not have the experience that they once did.

So how can the GM help the players?

By changing monsters. Trolls don't have to be green in your world. Hell, trolls can have two heads in your world and mechanically function exactly the same. As far as game mechanics are concerned the description is meaningless, so have it be what you want. Make your Hill Giants look like Clay Golems, keep your players on their toes.

Give monsters meaningless abilities, non mechanical ability. Have one or two orcs in a fight constantly smoldering. Have a skeleton show up oozing black ichor that smokes when it hits the ground. Let your players believe that they are more than what they are and the entire tenor of the fight will change.

If you don't have the time, or aren't willing to invest the effort in redefining lots of monsters, there is another options. Look to expansion splat books or 3rd party supplements for additional monsters or templates.

My players have been playing for some time, the Monster Manual is fairly well known. This has also led me pull from Monster Manuals 2, 3, 4, and 5. My players are only familiar with what I've thrown at them so all of these books are valuable resources.

When Can You Cheat?

Cheating is a rather contentious subject in any game and cheating can take many forms in a variety of games. As far as roleplaying games go there are two sides to this coin: GM cheating and player cheating.

How does a GM cheat?

1. Fudging die rolls. GMs can alter the game through misleading die rolls. Are the party members in a desperate losing battle? The monsters may miss a few more attacks than previously. Do the players need to remain unnoticed in a stealth situation? Perhaps the guards don't hear as well as they should. 
2. Applying templates or rules in ways that aren't allowed. A very memorable encounter I recently had was with a Dryad whose tree had died, but she was cursed to live on. I applied a few undead templates to her (Fey can't be undead). The encounter was memorable for both myself and my players.
3. Fudging die rolls (the other way). If the players are waltzing through every encounter with barely any effort, perhaps the monsters hit much more than they should. Perhaps the guards are rangers instead of fighters so they're better equipped to hear sneaky people. 
4. Change stats and gears on the fly. Maybe the monster needs a few dozen more hit points; maybe he has a few dozen less. Maybe the NPC has a few extra spells or a really fancy sword.
5. Lie to the players. Perhaps the NPCs have told the players some piece of information. Then over the course of a few sessions, you forget what you told them initially, so you tell them something different. The players will probably remember both and have an outcry. Instead of owning up and saying you forget, evolve the story in your head, shrug, and say "That's what he (the NPC) tells you."

 When should a GM cheat?

GMs should never cheat "just because"; you should only cheat when making the game fun demands it. Having the PCs die to a string of bad or good rolls, is hardly fun for anyone. Conversely, combat being ridiculously easy is hardly fun for anyone. GMs should only cheat when it enhances everyone's fun or it builds the drama and story. Of course increasing the drama means you have to cheat the other way if things get out of hand.

If you're cheating to teach your players a lesson or out of spite, don't do it. They'll pick up on it and become resentful and then it rapidly turns into no fun.

How do Players Cheat?

Players can cheat s much as GMs do. They can fudge die rolls and stats. They can lie about what they have or where they were.

When should Players Cheat?

Never. GMs should cheat to make sure everyone has the most fun possible. When players cheat, it's so they can have the most fun. Players caught cheating should be harshly beaten and viciously derided.

At the very least, they need a stern talking to and possible expulsion.

Designing the Campaign

So how do you design a campaign?

I can't attest to how others do it; but I design things very loosely. Before I start a campaign I usually have a very clear picture of how the game starts and where I would like it to end. Everything else is up to the players.

I have key plot points and events in my mind. A simple analogy come from video games. I have the cut scenes in my head; but the game play in between is up to the players. This allows me a good amount of flexibility for my player's hijinx.

Many of the people I gamed with early on had a rather negative opinion of "railroading." When the GM has a story to tell and, come hell or high water, it is going to be told exactly as they plan. When free will is removed, player's become incredibly spiteful and will go out of their ways to derail the story. Building in flexibility helps avert this.

Be free and accommodating with your story. If you plan an event and the player's go in a different direction; just find a way to work it in where they are. Done well, it presents a seamless world for the players to explore. 

Pen and Paper RPG vs MMORPG

In case you didn't know; there is a new kid on the block: the MMORPG.

MMORPG are part of a very bizarre circle of life in the RPG world. Back in the beginning of gaming, there was war-gaming, usually re-enacting historic battles and it was good. Then someone someday wanted to re-enact a battle from a work of Tolkien(I assume. Sounds right to me anyway), and it was good. Then someone wanted to control a person, not a unit; much like a hero in Tolkien's works (I'll look for a citation later), and it was good. And thus was born RPGs.

But what happens when you can't get people around to game? You're jonesin' to roll some dice, murder orcs, and woo damsels, but no one around to help. Enter the BBS RPGs, the precursor to Everquest (which was the precursor to WoW). You could hunt monsters, interact with people (in a very limited fashion), and gather loot  all through a primitive text interface.

Time advances, as it does. The BBSes gave way to MOO, MUSHes, and MUDS. Then Final Fantasy 7 happened, and RPGs became mainstream enough to be profitable. Out of this came MMOs. (I don't need a citation. You know it to be true).

So what are the differences between the typical Pen and Paper RPG and an MMO? (Be it Champions, Everquest, WoW)

MMOs are great for a variety of reasons.

• There is always someone online to play. With tens of millions of users across all the games, across the world; you will always find someone online to play with.
• The rules and system are nicely encased within the product. Anything you can do is available right out of the box. You don't need to buy "splat books" to make things interesting.
• The complicated math and rolls are transparent to the user. You press a button and it happens. Either you miss or you hit. You heal X amount every time. Your damage is a tidy range from Y to Z, with no calculations on your part.
• They're cheap to play. While the monthly fee is a deterrent to many, one hardcover gaming book can range anywhere from 2 to 3 months of an average game. Nevermind if you buy minis, in singles or boosters, or if you try different systems.

So how do Pen and Paper games stack up? They take more effort to get everyone together. As adulthood encroaches, time becomes more and more precious. The books and accessories are expensive. When an edition changes you are either left behind or your books are obsoleted and you have to start over again.

I think the experience of Pen and Paper roleplaying is much deeper than can be found in an MMO. In an MMO, the quests are repetitive. Why does this one jack-ass need 5 million wolf pelts? And how can he pay so well for each one? As a singular individual, he will devastate the economy. In a Pen and Paper game, the story continues and will not be as repetitive (ideally each campaign is unique unto itself, but originality can be hard to come by).You have more freedom in Pen and Paper games. What if you want to steal from Wolf-Pelt-Man? Can't do that in an MMO, but you sure can shiv him in a Pen and Paper game.

Also, I think the interaction is more enjoyable. Face to face time with friends you know or have known for many years. There is something to be said for sitting with your friends around the table, drinking soda or beer (age depending) and having fun. I know that team speak servers can alleviate some of that; but having an excuse to sit around with my closest friends on Saturday is one of the biggest draws for me.

Aligning Misconceptions #1 - True Neutral

I figure the best place to start off the discussion about alignments is in the middle.

True Neutral.

No strong feelings towards ethics and no strong feelings towards morality. This alignment is the gray area. Rather selfish as a whole; this alignment can be given to altruism.

In my mind; this is the commoner alignment. The stereotypical view of peasants for this time period is a hard life; one too difficult to be blatantly good or evil. Working within the law, but out for their own benefit if possible. The PHB describes this alignment as undecided in part.

This is a good alignment for people who have never gamed to start out as. This can allow them the freedom to define the character as they are comfortable instead of trying to play to an ideal they may not understand. An old GM that I knew would refer to this as the cop-out alignment; because there is no definition for people play to. They can work with the GM to discuss what alignment they are playing after the game and that opens up discussions for a better understanding of alignments to see what they want to try in the future.


The most relevant example from Wikipedia of a True Neutral character is Han Solo, at least at the beginning. Self-interested, no strong convictions beyond himself. Later in the series, his alignment changes to reflect his changing attitudes.

Pro-tip: True Neutral ignores all of the protection spells. So there's that.

Aligning Misconceptions - Overview

Alignment has caused many arguments and debates. The rules state them in what appears to be a clear and concise fashion. So why all the debate? Why all the heated arguments?

What the rules don't state or cover clearly is the subjective nature of morality. What is the difference between angels waging war on devils and vice-versa? Paladins commit genocidal acts rather frequently, against both humanoids and monsters; yet their alignment is rarely in question.

What separates genocide from rightful crusade? What separates justice from vengeance?

Intent.

Not to veer too far into moral relativism, but many acts committed by PCs can be done either for good or for evil, for chaos or for law. A death can throw an area into chaos or restore order. Can serve the greater good, the self, or the worst evil.

I think the alignments are an internal structure for the characters. Someone who is lawful aligns his ethics with the laws, yet can lead rebellion against unjust laws (good) or enact or uphold laws that oppress others for personal gain. Someone who is "free-spirited" (chaotic) can steal to help those in need (good) or for personal gain (evil).

Alignments aren't boundaries that cannot be crossed. Once crossed, they can be crossed again. Or the character may discover that they enjoy the new found freedom or structure of their new alignment.

Aligning Misconceptions

I'm going to briefly dip my toe into talking about alignments. Eventually there will be a longer discourse on each individual alignment with ideas on how each of them can play.

This is more about how people, in my view, misconstrue alignments. Specifically, people look at alignments as absolute boundaries. Once you've picked your alignment; that is all you can ever be. If you act out of it; then you've changed alignments.

In reality, everyone (except Paladins and Blackguards) have flexibility. You can stray from your alignment, you can be morally challenged, you can grow and change. You can make a decision in the moment and your character can experience remorse, regret, or joy at the consequences.

A character that is against torture can find themselves in a position where they have to torture or allow torture to take place to further their righteous and vital mission. This provides a tremendous situation for roleplaying (in a Hack and Slash System? How dare I.)

Do they fail in their mission? Can they face their comrades, their superiors, the people they were protecting? Do they compromise their beliefs? If they do, do they secretly love it? Do they start down a darker path? Do they hate themselves and find ways to make amends? (Atonement and Gaeas Spells exist for a reason)

Don't let alignment be the entire character. If you deviate from your alignment, figure out if it was a one time thing or if it is the beginning of an alignment switch. Letting your alignment determine everything, with no consideration to the greater good or personal gain, leads to very flat, stereotypical characters.

Why DM?

Let's be honest: being a DM or a GM is a huge pain in the ass. It takes a surprising amount of work to prep before each game: designing combat encounters, designing social encounters, building cities, creating memorable monsters and NPCs; usually all for naught because the players will deviate from the story in your mind at the drop of a hat.

They'll suss out your villain within 5 minutes, they will bend probability and crit your "boss encounter" out of existence in 2 rounds, they'd rather cause a bar fight than talk to magnificently, hand crafted NPC.

Then there is the hours you have to invest initially to know the rules. A lot of reading, both online and off; a lot of hands on experience in past games; constant gathering of information just to be able to use the system to progress the story you want to progress.

And then the story. Waiting, watching for the moment of inspiration that catapults your mind down the adventure track; sometimes even actively seeking the the inspiration: through novels, music, movies, day to day conversations. Fleshing out the details, the characters, the politics, the events. Crafting a living, breathing world for your players to explore and help you define as they explore. And more likely than not, the players will want dungeon crawl after dungeon crawl.

Why do all that? It sound like a ton of work (It is). I do it because I enjoy gaming. The more time goes by as a DM, the more I enjoy it. I enjoy creating the framework of a world and having my players explore and discover the details. I enjoy the cheers after a difficult combat and the scowls at a despicable NPC. My running a game provides an excuse for my friends to get together on a nearly weekly basis. I enjoy the plot twists and the surprises, the reveal of the plan, the demise of said plan after the PCs are done dungeon crawling. I do it so that my players can game. I do it so I can game.

Perhaps I do it for the game?

Although, having my players stick to my plan every now and then would be nice. I've put a lot of work into it.

Hack and Slash?

People rag on D&D because the rules are all combat based; leading to the assumption that it is really only good for hack and slash. I am not certain where this idea comes from.

Yes, very few rules in D&D are concerned with social interaction. However, that doesn't mean that the system is devoid of social interactions. They are just treated as such: social interactions. If you want to talk to an NPC; then you talk to them. Arguments can be presented. Lies can be told. Diplomats can be diplomatic. Let what is said determine a bonus or if the PCs are particularly persuasive have them automatically succeed.

The rules for D&D focus precisely on what they need to: situations that cannot be acted out. Players can't swing a sword about, let alone one that is on fire, to determine how much damage they do. They can't cast any spells (Jack Chick's beliefs aside), let alone maximize the damage or speed up the casting. They focus on making all the cool movies we watch and books we read possible.

As players and DMs we determine how the social interactions take place. I don't believe there need to be pages upon pages of rules for governing social interactions. (I'm looking at you White Wolf). The rules should allow us to do all the things we want to but can't.

Cinematics

The curse and blessing of playing RPGs is getting to watch action movies and shows and picture how awesome it would be if combat was like that in games.

It is amazing watching those things and picturing your current character doing them. Called shots, one hit kills, amazing feats of strength and acrobatics; all these things heroes can do in movies but recreating them in games is incredibly difficult.

If a player wants to do something epic (which is usually not covered in the rules), what can a DM do? Saying no is a terrible idea. Players become very discouraged when they can't at least make an attempt to do something and may rapidly lose interest the game. However, awesome is rarely in the rule book.

In a recent came one of my players was in the jaws of a T-Rex, about to be swallowed and another player was in the branches of a nearby tree. Tree-Dweller wanted to leap from the tree onto the T-Rex and run along it's back and attempt to hit it hard enough to dislodge the Snack.

The jump, climb, and balance checks are in the rules and "easy" enough to adjudicate. The smacking of a dinosaur hard enough to make it drop its food is not so easy. However, DMs are not supposed to stand in the way of awesome from the players. Setting a damage threshold seemed the way to go. While he failed to do the required damage; everyone was on the edge of their seats for the outcome.

Unfortunately, this type of awesome requires a few things.

1. You need to be familiar with the rules. Enough to think on the fly and be able to extrapolate from very specific rules to almost completely, unrelated situations. 
2. You need to be open to suggestions from your players. Many minds are better than one. However, don't let suggestions take too long or the tension of the moment will be lost. 
3. If consensus can't be reached, make a ruling. Too often games drag because of rules disputes. You're venturing into territory that will never be explicitly covered by the rules. When the final ruling is made, players can either agree or disagree. If they disagree, continue the debate after the game. 

The most important thing is to try and work with your players on this. There will come points where you may disagree, but efforts need to be made to meet them at least halfway. Part of the fun is being able to tell stories about how awesome encounters were. And sadly, awesome is never in the rulebook.

Player's Creed

This is culled strictly from my group's experience; however, I believe most people will be able to find great similarities in their groups.

The following is a list of inherent promises players make to their DMs, by mere virtue of rolling a character.

1. We will hunt down any NPCs or monsters that are encountered in combat will be chased down and killed. Any and all resources will be used in killing that last goblin. No one gets away.
2. We promise to take actions you could not have possible planned for. You give us options A, B, or C. We will take option 3-Q-Alpha.
3. We will end epic encounters within 2 rounds by landing excessive critical hits. 
4. We will fail to land a single hit in a run-of-the-mill random encounter.
5. We will find uses for resources in ways you never thought possible. Lock us in a room and we'll find a way out using rats and rope.
6. We will suspect any NPC of betrayal. 
7. We will make running a game one of the most challenging, difficult and fun experiences for the DM.
8. Occasionally, we'll buy pizza.

Gaming in Miniature

As mentioned earlier, we play using battle-mats and miniatures.

I've read in passing on a number of blogs about some kind of debate that goes on in the use of miniatures in gaming. I'm not 100% why such a debate exists, as the miniatures add a great deal of accuracy in combat. We do play D&D 3.5, so this may no have much to do with other systems.

I've read that the minis detract from the game by too clearly representing things. Player's no longer need to use their imaginations in combat or gaming in general. Monsters are made tangible and there are no gaps left for people to fill in. If I describe a minotaur as a bull-headed giant, frothing at the mouth, wielding a great-axe, and snorting loudly the players can fill in details: notches in the great-axe, a broken horn, scars over the torso.

The presence of the mini somehow, suddenly renders both players and DMs unable to picture things in their mind.

I've played in games where minis weren't used and now I play exclusively with them. The games without were haphazard during combat. Area effect spells were almost completely in the DM's hands for adjudication. Feats involving range and speed were almost useless, since you were never 100% if it applied or not.

With minis, combat is very tactical. The DM doesn't have to hold the entire battlefield in his head; it's on the board. Player's don't have to wonder if they're one or two range increments away; they can count the squares (or hexes if you swing that way). Combat flows better since player's can plan their next move while someone else is resolving their turn.

If the thought of using actual minis frightens you for some reason: use dice, coins, bottlecaps, anything to represent the people in battle. While not my personal taste (I prefer painting and assembling minis), you'll still be able to "better" imagine the scene while giving you and your players the joy of tactical combat.

The Things I Do

I have discussions almost daily with one of my good friends about gaming. Perhaps not all the conversations start out that way, but that is usually where they end up at least temporarily.

Today's discussion was about current characters and combat tactics. His current character is very defense oriented. At level 5 he can get his AC into the high 20's, low 30's, at the trade off of his attack bonus. This prompted a discussion about average damage output since he was trading offense for defense. We went back and forth for a bit and eventually I decided to see if there was a point where the average damage output per round increased more from a boost to damage or to your hit rate.

This is the result.

You'll need to download the file to use it, but if you fill in the blue squares with the information required information it will generate a range of comparisons based on the To Hit and AC. This lets you compare your average damage output across a range of bonuses that may help you decide when to fight defensively or when to power attack for how much.

As a DM's tool this lets you enter your creature's effective AC and your PC's stats and you can get a rough idea of how long the fight will go on for if the melee classes do average damage.

I'll go into what the second sheet is on another post.

I plan on adding more sheets as more ideas arise. (Feel free to suggest them)

How We Game

As I mentioned before, I've been gaming almost solid for 10 years. Over the years, I've run and played in many different kinds of games, and in a various set-ups. During college it was in massive 10-12 person games around conference tables, then normal sized gaming groups.

Nowadays, we're in an interesting situation. We had a group of 5 people that we gamed with weekly. (We're some of the lucky few that still game on a weekly basis). Then various factors forced our wedded gamers to move into a different state. Thus began the innovations.

Initially we set up a webcam and computer and used either Yahoo Messenger, GTalk, MSN Messenger (whichever was feeling most cooperative that day) to videoconference them in. We would move the camera around to switch between the DM and the battlemat for combat. These chat clients were barely passable. Audio and picture quality were fairly low, but we troopered. on.

Then we discovered Oovoo and life became drastically better. Oovoo is a chat client similar to the above mentioned, but it also allows voice calls and video calls. The quality of both the voice and video was incredible and I cannot recommend this tool enough.

This helped alleviate some of the difficulties we had with battle maps not showing up clearly, but it still was lacking. Our next advance was in using Google Docs to create a spreadsheet that everyone can view and change. Our players in Colorado can view the map as we updated it and move themselves around; one of the players locally (in Texas) makes the appropriate changes on our battlemat.

This way everyone has a clear view of the board and can strategize much more easily than trying to do so based on a birds eye view of the battle mat.

How about you? Has anyone had any interesting challenges in their gaming that has been overcome by the use of technology or creativity?

Campaign Start

My name is Karl and I'm a gamer.

As time has gone by, I've gotten progressively more into gaming. First it was just RPGs on consoles. Then it was D&D 2nd edition. Brief hiatus until I got into college and then my hobby exploded. I started playing Palladium Boooks' Rifts, Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu, I got very much into Magic the Gathering and later Legend of the Five Rings, and the then new D&D 3.0 (I've continued console gaming as well).

Since I've gotten out of college I've manged to pare it down to just D&D 3.5 and will be incorporating Pathfinder into my games. I've become an avid mini painter, so much so that they were the decoration on my groom's cake when I got married. I've begun reading many blogs and and listening to podcasts about gaming.

Which leads us here, to this blog; the latest step in my gaming career. I plan to write my thoughts and philosophies on gaming, DMing, character and world building, as well as tweaks to systems and evalutations of products. I plan on asking members of my gaming group to contribute to this as well; as I've had many a lengthy discussion with them that I think are informative.

I'm not sure what the posting schedule will be like, as I've never attempted a project of this nature before.

Until the next post, happy gaming.