Mystery Dice Goblin

Sometimes people ask me to review their products. Sometimes they send me their products. My time is limited and my bandwidth for a lot of these things is...even more limited.

Mystery Dice Goblin is a group that sells dice and dice accessories (bags, etc.). Like all gaming nerds, I've purchased plenty of such things over the years, to the point that I'm a bit jaded: if I'm going to buy a dice bag or box, it better be some sort of hand-crafted, artistic nonsense, and better be in a price point that doesn't make me feel like an idiot (or is just so cool that I can't live without it). Usually, I'm a "pass" on most such things.

And dice? I have enough dice. 

But they sent me some of their signature product: their "mystery dice" bag: a small, resealable bag with a full set of seven dice. They sent me three such bags, which my kids and I quickly divided up.

And what do you know...the gimmick works! It's kind of cool to rip open a mystery bag and 'oo' and 'ah' over the dice inside. All three of the sets were different, with gemlike finishes and inset, colored numbers. Of the three sets, two of them were nice enough that they might have been worth purchasing even had they been visible (sadly, my set was not to my taste...but two out of three ain't bad).

Pic is from their web site...

As a stocking stuffer, or birthday party gift bag or similar, these are great little packets for handing out to kids (or adults) who are into geeky dice games. And the price is good: a six pack of mystery bags is only $40, which is cheaper than a standard $8-10 box. And, as said, the gimmick's fun. Like ripping into a Cracker Jack box to get the prize. Dig it.

All right: Friday commercial done.

In other news: disappointing Seahawks game last night, but we've watched a lot of disappointing Seahawks-Niners match-ups the last couple years. Two dwarf teams in a row (Giants, too)...and dwarves are rough for orks. Especially when the dwarves are GOOD (which is the case with San Francisco, injuries or not). *sigh*

Watched The Spine of Night the other day. Not bad. But not great. The story felt very post-apocalyptic up until the end when it gets all mythical, fallen gods, and blah-blah-blah. Would have preferred fallen space men in a 50th century Earth, but oh well (AND, if one is looking for inspiration for a PA, warring city-state campaign world, the first hour or so is pretty groovy). Some of the (still) art was great. Some of the animation was pretty...mm..."pedestrian."  In other words, the movie was a mixed bag and uneven. However, for what is (basically) a 90 minute film that would have been par for Heavy Metal magazine, it wasn't terrible. 

And...this ain't the greatest blog post. But it's Friday and I'm busy. Later gators!

"F" Is For "Fudging"

This is going to be my last post on this stupid, stupid subject. I really have other things I'd rather work on.

[for my prior posts see this and this...you might also want to check the comments as they elaborate on some of my thoughts/points. I mean, if you care about the elaboration of these things...]

"Is that a note of frustration I detect in your blogging, JB?" Yes. Yes you do.

BA wrote his own blog post on fudging yesterday, in which he lists many examples of which NONE I find to be "fudging," not even the one he claims is...at least it is not "fudging" in the way the term is generally used (and the way in which the original blogger of this subject intended the use of this term). However, in the comments on BA's post WQRobb gives a perfect example of fudging:

In my last gaming session I fudged a couple of to-hit rolls by the monsters the PC's were fighting because everything was just going so freaking badly for players that session. In the end the players still had a rough time and barely came out on top, but showing a small bit of mercy in the name of fun and keeping a game going isn't that big a deal in my mind.

THIS is what is meant by fudging. The DM made a decision that things were going "freaking badly" for the players that session, and so "fudged a couple of to-hit rolls by the monsters" (presumably calling attacks misses when hits were rolled) in order to show "a small bit of mercy in the name of fun." As WQRobb explicitly writes, in his own mind this wasn't a big deal. And BA would seem to agree.

I agree with BA that fudging one (or more) dice roll will not result in "The End of Days" nor prevent a person from getting to their particular afterlife. But I absolutely disagree that it's not a deal...a big deal...when it comes to a game that uses a fortune mechanic (i.e. dice rolling) to determine objective outcomes of play. WQRobb's fudging on behalf of his players has several effects:

• It declares that the result of the dice don't really matter.
• It declares that the rules of the game don't really matter.
• It declares a lack of trust in the players to deal with game consequences.
• It prevents players from learning from the experience of game play (becoming better players).
• It denies players a potential victory on their own earned merits (i.e. a real victory).
• It can break players' trust in a DM to be fair and impartial (depending on how aware they were of the DM's fudging).
• It can generate false feelings of accomplishment leading to poor play in the future that will in turn require more fudging (reinforcing the above points).

And even if these things aren't said out loud at the table, the action of the fudging itself will certainly plant these concepts in the psyche of the participants (certainly that of the DM who knows the fudging has taken place). And for a DM who has declared the dice results and rules don't matter (because they can always be fudged as needed)...well, they're just more likely to fudge again and again in the future.

When what should probably be happening is the DM should be learning their own lessons from the incident. Not a lesson of "crisis averted, fun had" but lessons of how to be a better DM:

• Maybe the players were having a hard time because monsters appearing were inappropriate (too tough) for their characters.
• Maybe the DM was failing to communicate the necessary information to the PCs that would allow them to escape death or determine a path to victory.
• Maybe the DM needs to develop a different mindset then "attack until all the players are DEAD." Maybe the monsters should have offered quarter, agreed to take a bribe, sought to have prisoner for ransom, or requested the PCs perform some task (like aiding the monsters against a different foe) in exchange for their lives.
• Maybe the DM needs to be a better teacher of the game to the players.

And it's certainly possible that after the session WQRobb took all those thoughts to heart and will adjust his methods of running games in the future to account for all these things. Possible...but probably not. After all:

"...showing a small bit of mercy in the name of fun and keeping a game going isn't that big a deal in my mind."

or so he wrote. Which to my mind sounds like a justification to just 'keep on keeping on.' Though I admit I'm making an assumption that the comment reflects his honest attitude and outlook.

I've gone back now and read Cavegirl's post multiple times, and the more I read it, the more asinine I find it. She has two main conclusions that are just...awful. I just want to address them one at a time:

#1 Fudging isn't inherently bad because it's a matter of individual taste whether or not one wants to fudge the dice.

Let me substitute something else for "fudging" and see if that logic makes sense:

Drinking and driving isn't inherently bad because it's a matter of individual taste whether or not one want to drink and drive.

Or how about:

Kicking your dog isn't inherently bad because it's a matter of individual taste whether or not one wants to kick their dog.

Or how about:

Posting hate-filled rhetoric on a personal website isn't inherently bad because it's a matter of individual taste whether or not one want to post hate-filled rhetoric.

But JB, you argue, that's different! You're hurting (or potentially hurting) people in all those examples! Am I?

• To my shame, I've driven many times when (probably) over the legal limit for alcohol consumption...never crashed, hurt myself (or anyone else), and never been pulled over. 
• A person's dog is their personal property, and I am legally allowed to euthanize the animal at any time. Would that be preferable?
• Hate-filled rhetoric? Don't read it if you don't like it. 

But okay...maybe all those examples are too despicable for the subject at hand. How about voting for a political candidate that's a climate science denier, anti-vax/-masker, who wants immigrant children jailed in caged isolation to teach their border-crossing parents a lesson? That's just a matter of personal opinion right? Nothing wrong with helping to get that guy elected...by whatever means necessary. Just exercising my right to vote. You can't tell me my choice is a poor one...it's just a matter of individual taste.

#2 Players should be allowed to fudge dice rolls because default assumptions of GM authority (i.e. traditional allocations of narrative responsibility) is kind of bullshit and anyway if the GM can fudge, why can't players? What's the big deal...it's not like they'll wreck the game or something.

Setting aside the underlying worthlessness of the premise (the given: "fudging is okay for GMs")...while I can see SOME logic in the conclusion ("why can't they fudge when I do?"), this is still a preposterous doubling-down on rule violation with regard to many RPGs, Dungeons & Dragons in particular. AD&D, at least, is explicit in that final control and authority lies in the hands of the DM. There are other RPGs where this is not the case (even games without a "GM" figure: see Fiasco, Polaris, Blood Red Sands, etc. for examples). In games where narrative authority is not firmly established in the instructions...sure, reasonable minds might agree to portion out some responsibilities to the players. But, again, it is the underlying premise ("fudging is okay!") that derails the whole of the discussion.

And that last bit gives me a chance to segue into the end of this post on a dumb subject (and to be clear, when I said it was stupid, I mean I'm being stupid for even writing about it...I sincerely doubt I'm going to change many minds here). There are many role-playing games other than D&D on the market...perhaps folks should be taking a closer look at what's out there.

Because a lot of this fudging subject seems to be a "D&D thing" or an issue for procedural RPGs of D&D's ilk. Does it not dawn on folks that D&D was designed a particular way to accomplish particular objectives? And that if you want it to play differently than the solution is to redesign the thing to meet your specific parameters? Why do folks continue to try pounding square pegs into round holes? 

All that means: change the rules, not the dice results.

Fudging is BAD. Fudging is WRONG. Fudging, by definition, is violating the rules of the game, which is the epitome of CHEATING. Regardless of whether or not fudging is okay with your "personal taste."

Have I fudged a die roll before? Yes, more than once. And on BOTH sides of the screen. And for all the usual stupid, wrong reasons. I've done LOTS of bad things in the past that I'm not proud of. As I get older and (somewhat) wiser, I'm trying to do better. To not do wrong. That's the best I can do. 

Not fudging dice rolls any more is one of the easier fixes.

Winning and Losing

The abuelos left town Monday night and as of yesterday are back, safe and sound (if a little sad) in Orizaba, my wife's hometown. We were able to "zoom" with them while watching the Sounders kick the heck out of Leon in in the inter-League cup quarterfinals. 

[no, we didn't end up watching game shows last night...nor did I grill. Cooked up a big old slab of corned beef brisket with garlic roasted red potatoes and asparagus on the side and a heaping helping of steamed green beans. Good stuff]

Sad as it is to see them gone, it means that a lot of our lives are back to normal (well, the "new normal"): less road trips, more cooking in, less visits to local breweries, more gaming. Blood Bowl is back on the table.

Literally. It's exploded all over my dining room table.

Last night featured the wood elves (Diego) versus the orks (me) in the first game of our "mini-BB World Cup." It was pretty tight and hard fought...my wife at one point called from the other room, "Take it easy on him!" My son and I just looked at each other and guffawed. 

"Mom, he can't take it easy on me...I'm winning!" However, the laughter was at even the suggestion that anyone would be 'going easy.'

Another dead elf is a
poor substitute for a TD.

Well, he did end up winning in the end...the wood elves' "prayers to their barky god" seemed to have been answered. But I gave it a good go. I got the tying touchdown in the last minutes of regulation to make the score 2-to-2. We decided to play overtime, and by the end of the match there were only three wood elves left on the pitch (two K.O.'d and seven outright casualties). Against the full might of my squad, he just managed to dislodge the ball from my ork blitzer just four squares from the end line, and in his last turn of the match, pulled off a desperate maneuver that would allow him to win the game on a Long Bomb throw to a standing wardancer in the opposite endzone. This required multiple dodges, multiple "go for it rolls," and an incredible pass-n-catch...all without re-rolls...with one turn left to succeed. Amazingly, the elves managed to get just about everything right.

Then they fumbled the pass.

So, overtime ended and the game was decided on "penalty kicks" (I'm not sure GW really understands how Gridiron football works), which in BB means both players roll a D6 and whoever scores higher gets the win. I rolled a 1; Diego rolled a 2. Absolute joyful pandemonium (on the part of my child) ensues.

I bring this up in light of yesterday's post on fudging dice rolls. Noisms had a good take on the subject today with regard to the difficulty people have being objective when it comes to things they care about: it's damn tough. I love my children: it gives me no joy to see them crestfallen and unhappy when results aren't as expected, not even if I'm winning (at their expense). And my son, especially, who becomes VERY emotionally invested and is generally hyper-competitive...well, he really wanted to "fudge" that last die roll to complete the pass. "Wait - I didn't roll right! Wait - the die hit the box at the wrong angle! Wait...!"

As such, we have pretty strict house rules regarding dice rolls in my home. All dice are rolled inside an empty box top; once they're rolled, it's done. Dice that bounce OUT of the box requires the whole result to be rerolled (even if one die lands IN the box). Once the dice come to a rest it's done. And only one set of dice are rolled at a time (with no other person's dice being allowed in the box during the roll). These firm strictures (which we use for ALL our games: D&D, Monopoly, Blood Bowl, etc.) are well understood and prevent any disagreements over dice results.

And it prevents me from fudging dice rolls in my kids' favor. Because I want them to win...I like watching them win. But you can't win all the time and losing, while hard, can be good for you. Not only can it help you learn and grow from your mistakes, but it is humbling, and most of us could use a bit more humility in our lives. It's also good preparation for future losses; we watched a LOT of Little League baseball the last couple months, and while the Spring season saw a lot of wins, the Summer ball had nothing BUT losses (the latter team was, frankly, terrible). And the All-Star tournament in-between? Ooo...that was a rough one.

Losing, of course, also helps one appreciate the wins more...hell, it even helps appreciate the ties more. D's summer ball team was so bad they didn't even get a tie till the final game (the game had to end because of the time), and man were those kids ecstatic!

I was reflecting on this a bit (duh), and I came to the idea that perhaps one key component that's missing for some folks (who might be proponents of "fudging") is quantity of play. After all, if you play a LOT of a particular game (any game) you'll see lots of wins and losses. If you roll lots of dice, you'll see plenty of "hot streaks" and "cold streaks." Last night I saw plenty of both in our game...my stupid-stupid troll continuously rolled "1s" for his stupid roll and did almost nothing the entire game...meanwhile, every time I landed a block with one of my blitzers, a wood elf would end up folding like a paper hat (landing that block was tough, though). 

[for the most part, though, my dice were pretty icy, and it was mainly elven attrition that kept me in the game]

When you're a Seattle baseball fan and you're used to the futility, it's far less aggravating (though still frustrating) to see the Mariners combust and burn out round about the end of the summer...you've seen it so many times, you're used to it. If you play B/X D&D regularly and you're inured to a random arrow wiping out your 1st level character, the sting just isn't there, and the rolling up of the new PC registers about the same as ordering a beer from the bar or opening another bag of potato chips. We can become accustomed to the whims of fate, the wins and the losses, if we Just Play More...and then the outcome of die results, the successes and failures, can be far less important than the play of the game itself.

This is what I've been trying to instill in my son this summer. I keep telling him how fortunate he is to even play baseball at all. Not only because of last year's pandemic wiping out the entire Little League season...no, I've been trying to instill in him the understanding that one day he won't even be able to play Little League at all. At some point he'll be too old. And even if he goes on to play in high school or college or professionally or whatever, there will come a day when even that will end. So enjoy it now. Enjoy every minute of it. Every chance to swing a bat or catch a pop fly or hang out in the dugout chewing gum and spitting and snarking with other ten year old kids. 

Yesterday, Diego's eyes got so lit up when we opened the Blood Bowl stuff. "Man I LOVE Blood Bowl!" he exclaimed...multiple times. And he does. Even when I was pounding his team into the dirt and prompting exclamations of "you suck" and "I hate this team" and whatever (in the moment) he still kept coming back to "I love this game." And he loved having the chance to play it again. Winning was just the cherry on top. 

And I know he feels much of the same about D&D and (other) role-playing games. 

I realize that much internet ink has been spilled over the debate of whether or not D&D (specifically) is "about telling stories." I know which side of that debate I'm on, and I also know that folks on the other side probably ain't going to be swayed much from their stance. So be it, yada-yada. For people on MY side, there should probably be no question as to the awfulness of fudging dice rolls ("cheating"), but I have to say that I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND the urge to do just that...to cheat the system, to get a result other than what is revealed through our oracular polyhedrons. Because we don't play enough. We don't get 162 games a year like a pro-baseball team does (I certainly don't!). We don't have so many swings of the bat that the sting of striking out has faded to a dull pain, easily brushed off with the hopeful "I'll get 'em next time...at least I get to play this sport!"

Maybe we just need to play more. With our family, with our friends, with our "community of gamers." Maybe we need to play enough and often enough that we (and those we play with) don't get hung up on the result of a particular roll of the dice. Because there will be more dice to roll...always...so long as we keep playing. And there's always the hopeful thought: I'll get 'em next time.

Okay. Time to go buy some coffee.

Disagreement On Every Level

Recently, it feels like every time I comment on someone else's blog, it's almost always some super-negative, ranty bit of spite and bile. Which (and I'm sure I've written THIS before in multiple blog posts) isn't all that helpful/constructive: telling someone "you suck" is a good way to get them to ignore you and continue on their merry way, wrong-headed or not.

Also...ugh...I don't need to swim in the negativity. I already spend too much time swimming in that particular sea on a mostly daily basis. And my life is awesome! Jesus H, I have nothing to complain/worry about...why I bother getting worked up about shit like climate change or racist politics or folks dying of some disease that I'm vaccinated against. Shit...why should I care? I bought a share of Moderna stock back in February when it was around $150...that bitch just hit $492 yesterday! Life is good, the weather's sunny (again...been a lot of that this summer). Probably grill up some steaks for dinner tonight while the family reclines in front of our flatscreen, checking out some mindless show like Holey Moley or Family Game Fight.

*sigh*

This morning I read this post from Cavegirl on fudging dice that...well, I just found her conclusions to be stunningly bad. Which is to say, I disagree with most about every sentiment expressed in the post. Which is...um, fine? Everyone's entitled to an opinion? Something-something-or-other?

But me being me, there's some stuff I can't just let "sail by" unchallenged. And rather than post some sort of ranty, batshit comment on her blog, I'll scribble it up here:

What the F?! What are we doing here? I mean, what exactly is the point of playing these games? What is the reason for designing them and writing them down and selling them and buying them and running them? What is the point of including randomizers and fortune mechanics like dice and card draws and coin clips? What is the reason for establishing rules and boundaries and limitations?

Why don't we just hang out with our buddies, sipping tea (or beer or vodka or whatever) kabitzing about interesting shit and having a grand old time? Why don't we just watch a movie? Or read a book?

Are we out of money? Are we out of ideas? Are we out of options? Or are we just some sort of delusional idiots going through monkey-see motions, an ancient ritual of play long-ago established in our formative years and repeated now like a superstitious canticle to ward off the specter of boredom or the miseries inherent in daily life? What the actual hell?

Let's think about this for a moment...I mean really think about this. About what the point of it all is. If it's pointless, well, okay then, Do As Thou Wilt shall be the whole of the law. But then...why are you bothering to play such-and-such game? Why are you wasting your time with this? You may be dying of cancer and not even know it...isn't there some other way to enrich your life?!

But if we want to play a game...any game! Pick your poison!...I assume it's because this particular game (any game!) is one that we want to play. And the game has rules. And the rules are part of the game. And we like the game (that's why we want to play) and we like the parts that make up that game (including the rules). 

Ugh. Words are failing me at the moment. It's like trying to explain elementary principles like, I don't know, how to breathe or something. "You suck air down your throat, and then you blow it out again." Something. My brain is melting here. Maybe I'm the one that needs a deep breath.

[*inhale*]

I'll try this a different way: in a role-playing game that uses a fortune mechanic (like a die roll), the mechanic is presented for a particular reason and that reason isn't simply to give the participants a physical action to perform while sitting around the table. 

[at least not in an RPG that's had some thoughtful design go into it]

Instead, the fortune mechanic is provided to give a random chance of some particular in-game event occurring: success or failure, a spread of potentialities, a degree of achievement, whatever. In my experience, thoughtfully designed games generally have sensible reasons for calling for a particular die roll (i.e. for the use of a fortune mechanic). If the system/setting/design would deem use of the fortune mechanic to be inappropriate or nonsensical, then no such use of the mechanic is preformed.

In other words: don't roll dice if there's no question about what's supposed to happen in a given instance.

As an example: these days I've been playing AD&D. Many of the die-rolling mechanics found in AD&D pertain to combat. That's because the game models battle to be an iffy, chaotic affair that could result in death or defeat for either side depending on tactics, abilities of the combatants involved, and the whims of fate. The "abilities of the combatants" provide the probabilities (a high level fighter is more likely to hit and damage an opponent) while the dice account for the "whims of fate." Tactics, however, can influence both of these things: striking from ambush increase the probability of success (a bonus to attack rolls) as does use of weapon (more or less damage) and may even negate the whims of fate altogether (cutting the throat of a bound prisoner or sleeping opponent results in an auto-kill without dice rolling). 

I can totally understand that some people may not enjoy the "iffy-ness" of AD&D combat. They are certainly welcome to play other games that are more to their liking. They are certainly welcome to modify the AD&D system to their liking, creating their own game...perhaps one where PCs automatically hit or where damage from monsters can never "kill" a player character, only knock them out or something. That is fine and dandy, so long as everyone at the table can come to an agreement that THAT is the game they all want to play.

Because games have rules. When we sit down to the table, we are agreeing to play by the rules of the game being played.

There is never a reason to "fudge" the result of a die roll. There are times when dice are rolled by mistake ("oh, wait, I didn't need to make you roll for that...that's automatic") and a DM who has made a mistake in calling for a die roll at an inappropriate or nonsensical time has two options: 

1. fess up to the error and reverse ("retcon") the events that occurred due to the die roll, or 
2. plow ahead with the results. 

Generally, option #1 is recommended unless the result of the die error was either A) trivial in nature, and/or B) provided a favorable result for the players at the table.  But if the die roll was made appropriately (i.e. not a mistake) then there is no reason to not stand by the result of a die roll.

A die roll expresses a number of possibilities: it should be used only when a range of different possibilities are needed.  If my dungeon has a balrog wandering the halls of the 6th level and I want there to be a chance of a dithering bunch of adventurers encountering said balrog while they debate the best choice of a particular crossroads to take, I may roll a die to see if such an encounter occurs...given that there is also a possibility that such an encounter does not (because the balrog is in a different wing of the level, perhaps dining on some corpse the party left in their wake). On the other hand, I may know with absolute certainty that no balrog will be encountered at all (because it was called away on a mission for Sauron or something) OR that it will be 100% encountered (because it has no interest in eating corpses but incredible interest in slaying interlopers and its keen sense of smell allows it to track the bloody bandages of wounded party members), and in such cases no die roll is needed at all. In these latter cases, even rolling a die would be a mistake on my (the DM's) part.

Rules are present in a game for a reason. Secret doors make some things difficult to find (unexplored sections of a map, special monsters, super-cool treasure, etc.). If a DM wants something to be absolutely definitely found by the players, then it shouldn't be located behind a secret door. If there is a clue that the DM absolutely must have the PCs discover, then don't hide it, and don't assign a "random chance" of discovery. Just have them find it. It's not really a "clue" at that point, but a piece of exposition ("the bandits will be meeting at the old church at midnight!") which the players can then choose to ignore or not. 

Don't complain about die results: design and run your adventures better. 

"Playing by the rules" is not something "subjective" or "a matter of taste." If I'm running out of money in a game of Monopoly and I fudge my die roll to not land on my opponent's hotel (or if I slyly gift myself with a no interest "loan" from the bank funds) I am failing to play by the game rules, clear and simple. Yes, it IS cheating...literally, "violating the rules" is a definition of "cheating." Choosing to ignore the result of a die roll is just that. 

Now, rather infamously (since I mentioned AD&D) Gary Gygax wrote in his DMG (with regard to rolling dice) on page 110:

Now and then a player will die through no fault of his own. He or she will have done everything correctly, taken every reasonable precaution, but still the freakish roll of the dice will kill the character. In the long run you should let such things pass as the players will kill more than one opponent with their own freakish rolls at some later time. Yet you do have the right to arbitrate the situation. You can rule that the player, instead of dying, is knocked unconscious, loses a limb, is blinded in one eye or invoke any reasonably severe penalty that still takes into account what the monster has done. 

The emphasis is added by me. Note that Gygax is not advocating for the result a die roll to be fudged; he is instead arbitrating a penalty more-or-less equivalent to death (remember characters can be returned to life in D&D), in order to allow a PC to survive...albeit maimed, blinded, captured, etc. 

Earlier in the same section, Gygax writes it is the DM's "right" to "control the dice at any time," a phrase some might interpret as authorizing the fudging of dice results. I disagree. For me, "controlling" the dice simply means the DM is the one who says when and how (and by whom) the dice will be rolled. Gygax also writes that the DM "has every right to overrule the dice at any time if there is a particular course of events that you would like to have occur." Again, I see this as a mandate to call for there to NOT be a dice roll (when a desirable result is a certainty) rather than a call for the DM to fudge actual dice results.

*sigh* (again)

There are so many problems in the world, and here I sit, complaining over the way someone wants to play their particular game. Stupid of me. Oh so stupid. And writing all this up (or any of it) won't make a whit of difference as to how people play their games...I'm just, once again, pissing all over their "fun" and telling them their way of doing things is bad/wrong. They will cite references found in all manner of RPGs saying things like "never let a bad die roll get in the way of telling a good story." And they shall remain unmoved by one old man's ranting on the internet.

You know what else you shouldn't let get in the way of telling a good story? Wasting time with a game. Just go tell your story! You don't need a game to do that! Find a damn writing group. Get your friends to collaborate with you. Start a community theater thing, or some shared oral storytelling tradition or something. Theme it with tropes from your favorite RPG setting if that's what floats your boat. But why waste time with dice and instructions ("rules")?

Anyway. 

This is a stupid thing to rail against...I admit that. It's stupid to get worked up about...and I am worked up about it. And, no, it has nothing to do with challenging "assumptions about GM authority." The GM shouldn't be "fudging" (i.e. cheating) to get a more desirable result any more than a player. And (sorry Cavegirl) I really, REALLY disagree that the subject is "subjective" or a matter of "individual taste." 

There's playing a game by rules. And there's cheating.

OR (I suppose) everyone can agree that the rule of the game is "there aren't any rules, at least not when they inconvenience one or more participants at the table." In which case, you're not really playing a game; you're simply playing. Which is fine, by the way...but you don't need dice for that.

Okay. Spleen vented. Sorry about all that.

Rule Zero

I've had more than a couple questions pop up in the comments section of the blog regarding the "custom dice" that will be included with the print version of 5AK. I probably should have been more explicit about this earlier, so as not to get things "too hyped up." These aren't anything super-fancy with dragons or swords or skulls...just simple six-sided dice with the "1" pip replaced with a single word:

ZERO

Snake-Eyes in 5AK

This is the initial mock-up image from Chessex. The actual dice have the word written horizontally, not diagonally.

See? Nothing all that gaga, but still pretty cool. The game doesn't need custom dice...and until Thursday never used them during the play-tests...but they're nice to have as it's easy to otherwise forget Rule Zero and count the ones, especially for us long-time gamers.

Oh, wait...I haven't explained Rule Zero? Hmm, yeah, about that...here's the game text on the subject (from Volume 1, copyright 2013):

No matter the number of dice rolled, ANY ROLL OF “1” ON A DIE IS COUNTED AS ZERO. This is a very important difference from other games you may have played. Any D6 that comes up as a “1” should simply be removed from the roll, as if the player had rolled 1 less die. In other words, the result of a D6 roll will always be a 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6. When rolling a D3 the result will always be a 0, 1, 2, 2, 3, or 3. 

If all dice rolled come out as 1s (i.e. “zeroes”) then the entire roll is considered a ZERO regardless of any bonuses or adjustments that might have been made to the roll. This is called “zeroing out.” For example, when making an attack roll, a player adds her attack adjustment to her attack roll of 2D6. If the player rolls two 1s, the roll is considered a 0; the player is not allowed to add her attack adjustment because she has “zeroed out” and thus failed in her attack. 

Sometimes the rules will call for a player to roll a “D66.” In this case, the player rolls two D6 dice to generate a two-digit number, with the first die counting as the 10s and the second die counting as the 1s. For example, a roll of 3 and a roll of 5 would be counted as a roll of “35.” When rolling D66, die rolls of 1 are still counted as 0, so the number generated will be from 00 to 66.

Rule Zero is ALWAYS in effect. A roll of 1, never counts as “1.” If you’ve purchased a print version of this game, it should include dice with a “zero” side where the 1 would normally be found; this is to remind you of Rule Zero.

[that last sentence was only added after I had actually placed the order with Chessex]

The Rule Zero mechanic allows a lot of interesting system effects from a design point of view, not the least of which is giving me some extra numbers to play with (for example, on a normal 2D6 roll you have an eleven number range...2 through 12... but with Rule Zero you have a twelve number spread, including zero). It emphasizes the built-in consistency (in my rules) of high rolls = good and low rolls = bad. It doesn't skew probabilities downward when it comes to "high" dice rolls (for example, adding Rule Zero does not diminish the chance of rolling an 8+ on 2D6, not the chance of rolling a 14+ on 3D6), and it provides a means of automatic failure (like D20's "natural 1") that is self-evident..."Oh, yeah...I rolled a zero." 

Also, since the main roll in 5AK is the 2D6, the chance of that auto-fail is generally LESS than that of D20 (1 in 36 as opposed to 1 in 20...2.7% compared to 5%). A little less random clownishness, in other words. 

Anyway...more on 5AK and design stuff later. Hopefully, I've satisfied the curiosity of folks that were wondering. 

: )

[oh, BTW, I am well aware of the whole "Rule Zero" definition generally used in RPG design circles and MY rule was indeed conceived as a deliberate stab in the face of that particular monstrosity. But I'll have to explain my opinion on that at a later date...right now, I've got a bunch of stuff to do and not much time to do it in!]

Right On, Chessex

Sorry...it's been feeling a lot like summer around these parts, even though it's only now (as of about an hour ago) June 1st. I've been watching a lot of baseball lately. And drinking a lot of beer...often together. My toddler (he's two) is also into baseball and we've been playing a lot outside. The kid is a surprisingly decent athlete. His throws nearly as far as me (I don't throw very well), if not quite as accurately, and he has demonstrated an ability to hit an underhand pitch from about ten feet. And he switch hits. He kept trying to bat left (and missing) but he'd hit 60-75% of the time (or better) when I'd ask him to switch to the other side. Then today he was batting left again, but managing to hit two out of every three or four.

I really don't know where he gets his genetics from. Right now, his favorite thing in the world appears to be lawn mowers, and I know that's not from me.

Last weekend (Memorial Day) I had four days off (through Tuesday). We spent about half that time down at the Seattle Center at the 42nd annual Folklife Festival (forty-something anyway). It was a blast but I got a damn parking ticket because...well, no one cares about that sob story, but it was damn irritating (only the second such ticket I've gotten in my life...I hate throwing money away like that). But otherwise, the weekend was a blast. My wife got back in town Sunday morning, and even though it poured rain all Monday, we spent the whole day lazy and having family fun and Tuesday was also great, 'cause my wife took the day off, too, and we went out and saw Iron Man 3 while D. was with the nanny. And to cap it off, when we got home my CUSTOM DICE had finally arrived from Chessex...the dice I'd ordered three weeks prior and which I intend to package with 5AK when it is finally released (hopefully) in the next couple weeks. I was so excited to open the box that I was willing to put off opening the box till after we'd gone out to dinner.

[you have to understand that I am a person who absolutely HATES "delayed gratification;" I don't like to wait for anything, and being forced to wait or being hamstrung in my freedom of impulse is the quickest thing to make me grumpy. It's a character flaw with which I constantly struggle, often losing because I'm not paying close enough attention. So for me to NOT rip the top off a box that I'd been waiting three weeks to arrive via mail order should tell you how excited I was...just KNOWING that the box had arrived...finally!...and that it was waiting patiently for me was enough to "carry me through" without needing to immediately satisfy my impulse. I was in a minor state of bliss]

So then when we got home and I DID cut open the box, you might be able to glean a little bit of my consternation when I found the contents of the box did not match my order.

Specifically, I got the wrong color. There will be two pair of dice enclosed with each copy of 5AK (at least, that's my intention at this point) and each pair will be a different color. Chessex sent me two bags full of dice, with the correct engravings and, presumably, quantities (I haven't bothered to count 'em yet), but the color of one set was wrong. Not only that, but it was a little too "matchy-matchy" with the color of the other set, which makes it really tough to distinguish between them (one of the reasons for doing two different colors in the first place). ARGH!!!

Not the right color, dude.

Welp, I called Chessex the next morning (EST) and they were very apologetic and professional and agreed to manufacture and mail me the correct order immediately, and I am extremely pleased to report that as of today, they've made good on my order: a box arrived in the mail with the correct dice in the correct color with (presumably) the correct quantity. And they did it with no extra charge, nor did they require me to ship the defective set back.

I am extremely pleased.

In fact, the whole mistake turns out to have been fortuitous. First off, it gave me a chance to see how Chessex operates when it comes to this type of order snafu (extremely customer friendly, as it turns out), which definitely gives me peace of mind for further dealings with their company. I know now I can trust them to fill future orders and not to screw me (accidents do happen after all, but how one deals with that accident shows character)...I hope I'm as responsive to my customers.

[if I haven't been, I apologize and will strive to do better in the future]

Secondly, I now have a large set of custom dice on hand that I can give out as freebies to my play-testers since I don't plan on packaging them with the final printed book(s). We used them Thursday night (Greg, Will, Kayce, and Zach showed up and each got a full set) and they really were fantastic...I'm really glad I decided to include them with the game (even though normal D6s work, there's a lot less confusion with these). So that's cool.

Okay, that's enough blathering for the moment. The wife's leaving town again tomorrow for a few days which means that I'll have a little more free time for writing (even though I'll have less energy for doing the same)...I've got some more stuff to post (including the download for my custom Dungeon! cards) but I'll get to that tomorrow.

Ciao for now!
: )

One More Beer

That is to say, one more beer for the night...not forever, jeez!

Still, if three seems a bit unusual for a Tuesday night, well, yeah, it is...though three bottles over the course of an evening isn't nearly the same as a couple pints with a dinner out (which was last night). *Ahem* It IS unusual that I'll down half a six-pack, but it's been a loooong last couple-few days. No, I still have to go to work tomorrow. No, this isn't about the Mariners (hey, we're not last in our division this year...or even second to last!). No, it isn't about the damn David Stern-Sacramento Kings-NBA-thing, either (yes, I'd like to take my boy to a Sonics game some day; no, I'm not a basketball fan by any stretch of the imagination).

No, it's not even about rough times on the homestead...the wife's been back in town for nearly a week, and she's not heading to South America anytime soon, her last project having (mercifully) ended. Ha! I'll bet you folks thought the reason my blogging had fallen off the face of the earth the last ten days had to do with the fam or something. Nope, not at all.

The reason I haven't posted anything to the blog the last ten days is that I've been focusing all my creative energies on finishing one single project...D&D Mine, aka 5AK, aka "my little D&D/Chainmail retread project."

Yep. It's finished.

And I mean, finished. Completed. With artwork and formatting and page numbers and tables of contents and all that jazz. Finished it today. You'll forgive me if I feel a touch entitled to an extra beer.

I even (God help me), drew an actual map...you know, like a sample dungeon level?...and scanned it and stuck it in the book. After wrestling with my own blankety-blank scanner for hours last night (using both a PC and a Mac to no avail) I found one that would do the job at the library this afternoon and just cut the damn thing. And I don't care if it looks like crap compared to some of the brilliant artists posting their fine-tuned pieces of craftsmanship on their blogs. It's good enough. And the fact of the matter is, the game looks better than the original.

It does...it really does. Not that that's a huge stretch or anything...the thing's one can do with a little MS Word and a few jpgs would make those poor bastards doing layout in the 1970s absolutely crap themselves. I am a hack...I have absolutely ZERO background in layout or composition or...well, in anything really useful to putting these books together. I didn't work on a school newspaper or yearbook or anything. But I can fiddle around with these little programs and voila! I look like an f'ing genius. Or at least a competent semi-professional.

Crazy world.

So here's the next couple steps I've got to go through before I unveil the thing (yes, I know people want to see it...I'm hoping some folks might even want to buy it). First, I need to have a couple trusted sets of eyes read it...we'll see how that goes. Then I need to get some price-points from the printer and see about getting a few mock-up/proofs. I might need to get better scans of the artwork (it's excellent stuff, but still public domain and the resolution leaves a little something to be desired)...but like I said, it already looks nicer than the original books, so I might leave it as is.

After that, it's all about packaging. For those who haven't been following all that closely, I've written my own "Little Brown Books:"three slim volumes that still pack a lot of info (in a legible font, yes). They are much more setting specific and much less potpourri than the original LBBs but that's by design and for my own amusement (you can still adapt it to play a "generic fantasy RPG" but why would you want to?). I have about 99% decided to distribute them in two different formats:

1. A printed version with all three-volumes shrink-wrapped together along with a set of custom dice that I intend to order from Chessex or someone. Ideally, they'd be wrapped with one of those adhesive paper bands like you find around notebooks at B&N or dress socks, but I don't even know where to purchase such a thing. This may be a "limited edition" type sale depending on price to produce and demand...however, I'm still going to keep it simple (no box, dammit).

2. Electronic PDFs that can be purchased individually from RPGNow or some such. You'll have to pay for and download each book separately, and you will receive the "special dice," but some people may prefer that anyway. I mean, we all have dice, right?

All right, that's enough of an update for the moment...my beer's almost finished, the Mariners have tanked for the evening, and tomorrow's "garbage day" so it's time to clean out the fridge. I'll provide more information (or at least will probably be blogging more) over the next couple weeks, and I'm sure there may yet be some (minor) tinkering as monkey wrenches arise in play-testing. But for now, I'm quite satisfied. It really does seem to be the type of fantasy role-playing game I can live with...for a good, long while.

NOW, having said all that, I will say there's still a part of me that likes the idea of something a little more gonzo and gung-ho. White Plume Mountain-ish, if you'll allow me the conceit. Something a little bit more like B/X...except with druids.

Really, just the B, not the X...a lighter game, capable of introducing younger players to the fun of role-playing with a lot smaller scale and a lot more focused objectives of play...maybe even something that uses "funny shaped dice," like everyone expects. My recent posts on "subclasses" is what got my brain percolating on this idea...which is why I decided I really needed to buckle down and get 5AK finished. Bad enough I'm trying to get Cry Dark Future out, too (I've got five artists on board so far, which is great!)...I didn't want to let my "gamer ADD" sidetrack me when I was so close to the end. But now I am at the end (except for the mechanics of getting the thing printed, etc.), so maybe there's room on my plate for another project: has anyone done a retroclone of Holmes Basic yet?

Oh, yeah...and a completely random note, I have some scribbled ideas for rewriting Vampire the Masquerade. That might actually end up being a one-page micro-game.
; )

Later, gators...cheers!