ASC Review: Galactic Funtime

Galactic Funtime (Shawn Metcalf)

SWN for four to six players of 3rd-5th level

Ugh...I haven't been looking forward to this one. Stars Without Number isn't my cup-o-tea and it's been a loooong time since I even looked at the rules. My apologies to the author in advance.

For my review criteria, you may check out this post. All reviews will (probably) contain *SPOILERS*; you have been warned! Because these are short (three page) adventures, it is my intention to keep the reviews short.

My knowledge of SWN is pretty limited. I read it a while back, and thought it might make a good system for modeling the WH40K universe with a B/X chassis. But that ain't what this adventure is.

THIS adventure is Aliens (giant mutant spiders, actually) take over the local Chuck-E-Cheese. Players land their spaceship in the parking lot, decide to investigate, and hilarity ensues.

Um...

We have a map of the Galactic Funtime complex. Three types of spiders: "typical," "large," and the unique "Soapy the Spider," a huge, intelligent version...these are the only encounters you'll have. They're not poisonous or anything; they just do damage, sometimes attacking in swarms. 

Players that survive can carry off video game cabinets and sell them to collectors off-world for 1d4x1000 credits each. I have no idea if this is a lot of loot...my recollection of SWN was that x.p. was not awarded for loot, but rather for accomplishing "missions." So...what's the mission here? Getting loot? Killing spiders? No mission x.p. award is given in the adventure so, um...yeah.

I don't know why Gibson wanted SciFi submissions; they don't really grade out along the same scale as the D&D stuff. This thing seems...fine. But I don't know. It's outside of my wheelhouse and probably won't crack the top eight on my list.

Three stars (out of five) with a "-" because, while playable, it's boring, and I don't find myself as amused by the subject matter as some folks might be. 

***-

Dave Bezio's X-Plorers

 

A couple weeks back I managed to pick up a copy of Dave Bezio’s X-Plorers down at Gary’s Games in Greenwood. A lot of people over the last couple years have suggested I pick this one up due to my A) dissatisfaction with most space opera RPGs on the market and B) my love of things “old school” and somewhat “rules light.” However, until recently the thing wasn’t available in a print form that I could pick up and hold and flip-through and read…at least not that I’d seen down at my FLGS.

See, I’m a weird dude. I read email and comments (here and on certain forums) fairly regularly from folks complaining that I don’t offer my books in an electronic or PDF format (though, yes, I do offer my B/XCompanion in such a format these days)…but for me, it is extremely rare that I will EVER fork out hard-earned cash for anything less than a solid, tangible product. I can’t be sure, but I think the only time I’ve made such a purchase (at least in recent memory) was Raggi’s Death Frost Doom, and I was terribly disappointed (not because it was a bad adventure, but because I ended up blowing a bunch of ink and paper to print the damn thing…I just don’t like reading books off a screen!).

[oh, wait…I also purchased a copy of 3:16 in electronic format, too]

So anyhoo…I’m an anachronistic kind of guy and unless something is readily available for me to buy in a physical format I generally won’t…such was the case with X-Plorers. I had previously browsed the free version on-line, but truth-be-told I didn’t pay all that much attention to it, being put off by the large swatches of blank space (compared to, say, the downloadable Terminal Space)…it gave the whole text a feeling of…well, a fairly amateur effort I guess.

[to understand my bias, you have to grok that I’ll write up 30 pages of game rules and charts myself that, save for the nifty spaceship diagrams, look about as good and yet are nothing I’d consider publishing…]

So fast forward to me shelling out hard currency and holding the glossy soft-cover in my hands…Bezio’s book is great, and I was VERY impressed when I saw the printed book. Previously, I’ve written a brief piece on my thoughts of Terminal Space and a rather lengthy bit on my feelings for SWN but I’ve got to say that between these three Old School offerings of space opera fantasy, X-Plorers has got to be my favorite of the bunch…something I was not ready to say prior to holding the solid work in my grubby grasp. Here’s why:

X-Plorers isn’t “dungeon-delving in space.” It’s not “space opera on a B/X chassis.” Heck, I wouldn’t even call it a “what if RPG that examines an alternate reality where the designers of D&D instead chose to focus their efforts on pulp Sci-Fi” (which is, pretty much, the objective laid out by the author).

Nope, what we have here is a mash-up of Star Frontiers and Swords & Wizardry (the OD&D retroclone) with a tiny bit of D20 sensibility thrown in to boot. And Star Frontiers (which I’ve lambasted system-wise on more than one occasion) has never looked so good.

The fact it can do this in under 40 pages is truly remarkable.

Now my own “B/X space opera” game (on-hold lo these many moons as I’ve pursued the development of my DMI-based system) shares a number of similarities with X-Plorers, which probably goes a long way towards endearing it to me, especially as Bezio has managed to articulate some things better than I ever did. His spaceship combat system is very close to my own, but better done, and his classes and level structure…and especially his class-related skill checks…are very similar to my original ideas and I especially like the particular archetypes he’s chosen, and their corresponding overlap of skills. Interesting that I can see the integration of Star Frontiers skills into the classes in a very logical and intuitive way…as someone who played a lot of SF back-in-the-day I find this ingenious, even if it is a no-brainer in retrospect.

Allow me a moment to gush over some of the additional highlights (*ahem*):

-          Compacted Star Frontiers equipment list; keeping the flavor without going over-board (to we really need rules for a recoilless rifle? No…and Bezio leaves it out, while still including sonic swords and lasers and SEUs). Kudos especially to adequately adapting the system to its OD&D base.

-          Very workable starship combat.

-          Good rules for crafting alien monsters…better than Star Frontiers ever did, IMO.

-          Nice, workable psychic rules.

-          Good ability scores/modifiers (doesn’t overwhelm the game).

-          Good, adapted personal combat system (hard to tell without running a few rounds, but seems just fine).

-          Nice, tight, streamlined package allowing plenty of space for imagination and hours of adventure possibility with little extra effort.

Now it’s not a perfect game. Some of the “low lights” are pretty critical ones. Without getting TOO nitpicky I’ll say the multi-classing doesn’t work, or else doesn’t make much sense…I understand what his objective was, but it just doesn’t translate in execution (quick! Your character starts as a level one warrior and advances five levels in scientist…how many XPs does it take you to achieve 7^th level?). It’s just not quite as slick as it could have been…but I understand that it’s tough to make the “warrior-botanist,” etc. without it, since most specific procedures (i.e. “skills”) are tied directly to class.

The other main issue is the lack of guidance on how much XP to award for successful “missions.” Well, the guidelines for mission creation in general is pretty sparse, but especially with regard to reward/advancement there’s little guidance aside from “whatever feels right” (I guess). Which, to me, is a fairly big cop-out of game design, though I suppose it beats the alternative of trying to make sense of a nonsensical advancement system (which is something I’ve struggled with for years now in attempting to write an intelligent space opera game).

Those are the main gripes, though of course X-Plorers isn’t really built to do Star Wars (which is kind of the point…for me…of writing/playing a space opera game). If I wanted to do Star Frontiers with players working for the PGC against the evil Sathar and space pirates, etc. this would be the system to use…I don’t think it would be too hard to come up with rules for dralasites and vrusk and yazirians (either making them their own classes or else having an XP up-tick in exchange for a few species related bennies).

Actually, X-Plorers is slick enough (and sleek enough) that it should be a real piece o easy to adapt a LOT of classic space opera ideas to it…including Star Wars. Hell, like I said it’s already pretty similar to the B/X Star Wars I was working on prior to DMI. I am sorely tempted to create a compatible supplement using the terms of their X-Plorers Trademark License using the rules and notes I’ve already got archived on the old zip drive.

Sorely tempted.

; )

"Hard Mode"

AKA "Revisiting the Value of Character Death"

Just bear with me for a moment.

In writing a fantasy heartbreaker, or ANY old school style RPG for a combat heavy genre (Space Opera, Magic-Punk, Cyber-Western, etc.) I find myself approaching certain systems with design ideas based on my own experiences in gaming, and my exposure to other games and design theory.

One of the theory things I'm always trying to get at is "design the game so it does what you want it to do." God, that can be hard sometimes. You don't WANT the game to be tweaked or fudged in-play...for example, my Shadowrun-esque game fell down on its face for being TOO close to 1st edition SR, specifically with regard to the initiative/extra action rules, which allowed some cyber-roided (and physical adept characters) outshine all the non-wired kids in the party.

End result? A lot of disgruntlement and comments like, "my next character is going to make sure to have X, Y, and Z implants"...regardless of the player's character concept.

See, that's MY failing as a designer. If you build the game in a certain way, that confers certain advantages, then make those advantages necessary as par survival (due to a heavy combat style to the game)...well, of course, your game is going to devolve into a min-max twink-fest. Which is NOT what I was aiming for, by the way.

[and which is why that particular game needs a lot of work before being publishable]

Now I look at a game like Stars Without Number, which is a fine and dandy piece of work. For me, I can see it being used to play a particular style of space opera...something akin to B/X Warhammer 40,000. Why? Because the way the game is written player mortality is going to be exceptionally high. Character starting out with single digit hit points are going to get splattered by the weapons involved in the game. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is A thing...a thing that should be noted.

And yet, folks (including the designer) feel that with the right "massaging" the game can be used for most genres of space opera. I disagree...but then I prefer to play with rules as written, without tweaking or fudging or "drifting" to get the desired effect.

That's why I try to be ultra-specific in my game design.

SO...back to the original reason for my post: revisiting character death in RPGs. I find myself lately adding all sorts of "take backs" and metagame mechanics into my designs which will increase PC survivability. Something that irritates me to no end about myself. For a guy that totes "character death" as a FEATURE of the B/X game system, why would I get all wishy-washy with my own fantasy heartbreaker, adding things like "luck points" to the game.

*sigh*

Because not everyone wants to die.

I enjoy the challenge of a game where my PC might die...it's like playing imaginary Russian Roulette (at least I get to walk away from the table, even if my character doesn't). But the truth of the matter is, I spend much more time running games than playing 'em, and not everyone shares my weirdness.

In fact (news flash!) some people like to play fantasy adventure games because they like to imagine themselves as some sort of heroic fantasy character! Wow, you never would have guessed that, right? These people want to play a fantasy RPG, AND they want a simple fantasy RPG (like B/X or similar) AND they would prefer NOT to die.

Really. Really, really, really.

[I am repeating this for myself, folks, so I can wrap my head around it]

Role-playing is a type of entertainment, it's a method of social interaction, it's a form of escapism that allows us to shrug off the shackles of our mundane life for a few hours and pretend we're someone doing amazing things in incredible environments. And, no, the threat of death does NOT have to be present for players to get a charge out of it.

[...really, really, really...]

Now having acknowledged that, and acknowledged that some people might enjoy playing this game for nickels instead of going all-in with the family mortgage payment, shouldn't the ones willing to risk more get something greater in return?

Shouldn't we reward the folks with the balls to step into the death match?

In video games (a comparison to RPGs I hate to make but oh, well, there it is) you often see different game settings, like Easy, Medium, Hard, Suicidal, etc. Kind of like different degrees of spiciness at a Thai restaurant. How much heat can you take?

What about including a "Hard Mode" in role-playing games?

In my current fantasy heartbreaker project (up to page 8...I'll try to keep it under 64 pages), there are classes and levels (max 5, right?) and experience points awarded to track those levels. What if the XP awarded was determined by whether or not players were playing on Easy or Hard mode? What if level maximums were capped based on a player's chosen style of play?

I'm just throwing the idea out there...I haven't included anything in the book, yet (hell, I can always delete the wimpy "save your bacon" points if I decide to go "all hard"). But this is me tossing a bone to people who want to play fantasy characters in a fantasy world without getting bitten in half by a purple worm when they least expect (or want!) it to happen.

Here's what I'm considering:

• Default Easy: Players who choose to play on Hard Mode (no luck points, critical damage tables, instant death on failed saves, no re-rolls) earn DOUBLE the normal XP.
• Default Hard: Players who choose to play on Easy Mode (taking all the bennies listed above) earn only ONE-HALF the normal XP.
• Max Level: Players who choose to play on Easy Mode have their max level capped...possibly as low as 2nd or 3rd level. Without real risk, why do they need increased effectiveness?

What do y'all think? Am I talking crazy (again)?

: )

Stars Without Number (No…Really!)

Last weekend I was down at Gary’s, browsing the used game section (as I am wont to do) where I found not one, not two, but THREE copies of Dark Heresy in the bin. What the heck?

I went and asked Tim about this: Is there a 2nd edition coming out or something? No. Is the game going out of print? No…in fact there was a new published adventure for Dark Heresy on the display shelf. Did the people that sold the game SAY anything about why they were returning it? No…in fact there were several postings on the bulletin board looking for Dark Heresy games. Why the sudden exodus from the hot, young system then? A mystery, certainly.

Maybe those people have recently discovered Stars Without Number.

Even though it takes place in the year 3200, the game feels more like the Warhammer 40K RPG than any game I’ve yet seen…and that includes the Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, and Death Watch books. Beautifully produced as those GW volumes are, if *I* were going to run a space opera game set in the 40K universe, Stars Without Number (SWN) would be the way to go. It just needs rules for titans and possession by warp entities.

SO…that’s a good thing. But for me, it’s about ten to 15 years too late…or more. Back when I first discovered 40K (in the late 80s) or when I RE-discovered it (in the late 90s) I would have leaped through hoops of fire to get an RPG like SWN. These days? Not so much. My tastes in RPGs and gaming have changed somewhat over the last decade, especially with regard to game design, and there are more than a couple red flags for me here.

Not that the game isn’t an amazing piece of work. Kevin Crawford has put together something every bit as good as Proctor’s Labyrinth Lord and offered it for free on the internet. Scratch that…what Crawford has done is even more astounding, as Labyrinth Lord is really just a rehashing of B/X D&D (and an adaptation of AD&D to B/X with the Advanced Edition Companion). Crawford isn’t “retro-cloning” anything at all. He’s created a SciFi themed RPG using the rudiments of the D&D system.

And I mean REAL rudimental. You’ll find the following familiar terms: class, level, XP, the Big Six ability scores, hit points, saving throws, initiative (using a D8 dice)…aaaand that’s about it. Most everything else is pretty darn new. Especially, SWN’s approach to adventure design and the designer’s objectives in the matter (more on this in a moment).

So back to my “red flags” (since I’m sure I piqued some folks curiosity). Let me first start by admitting up front: I am not a science fiction fan. Not really, no. I enjoy the hell out of “space fantasy” like Star Wars. I enjoyed Asimov’s Foundation because it’s a good yarn, NOT because I enjoy Asimov’s real physics approach to SciFi (for the most part, I’ve dislike Asimov’s writing for many, many years). Planetary romances like Stirling’s recent books? Good. Military SciFi with emphasis on the non-SciFi aspects (Starship Troopers, Armor)? Great. Visual storytelling (i.e. movies and TV)? My usual cup o’ tea.

But I am NOT into cool technology or “technobabble,” or even pseudo-technobabble. My buddy Steve-O is a reader of SciFi literature and combs the internet for the latest breakthroughs in computers and alternate fuels and space travel. When I started writing my space opera game he wanted me to include all these actual and theoretical technologies like plasma rockets and solar sails and a bunch of other stuff that I really didn’t bother to retain in my memory. I’m more of the “Lucas School” of SciFi terminology: blasters (they blast things), transports (they transport things), speeders (they speed around). I don’t need no dilithium crystals to power MY spaceship (I don’t even care how it’s powered…so long as it gets around!).

Crawford appears to be more like Steve-O.

The book is stuffed with cool technology, pseudo-scientific terms, and hard SciFi jargon. Me? I have a hard enough time saying “Griffon’s Crag Keep” in my weekly D&D game…I am just too lazy (or too unconcerned with specifics) these days to worry about the difference between mag pistols and rail guns and spike throwers. Now if YOU are like my buddy Steve in your love of nano-tech and whatnot, SWN does a pretty bang up job…I definitely give it a thumbs up over A LOT of SciFi games with extensive gear lists (better than or on par with ShadowRun, CyberPunk, Blue Planet, and Mongoose Traveller). For me, I find it incredibly tedious to the point of stupefaction.

Let’s see, other Red Flags for me personally…I didn’t bother reading the psychic section extensively, but it appears to be done well enough (Crawford takes a similar approach to my own game, though his categories are more classic SciFi: see WH40K or Mongoose Traveller for examples powers. Of course he uses Big Words for powers (even if the titles aren’t very intuitive, this is fine as there are a lot fewer psychic powers than types of tech). However, he uses a point (resource pool) system for psychics which is just one more record-keeping exercise I don’t find terribly interesting.

[oh, yeah…there’s also a lot of other tracking in the tech section regarding cost, availability, ammo, power clips, etc…ugh! I am too old and lazy for this kind of book work!]

Another red flag is the inherent skill system, though (and I found this to be very cool) Crawford provides optional rules for junking it! Neat…but with skill packages such a major part of character distinction, I’m not sure what chargen looks like without it.

Ah, chargen…you could sneeze a hole through a 1st level character in this game. From where I’m reading, the game combines some of the worst pieces of Old School and New School. Character creation is pretty long/cumbersome (New School) and character mortality is pretty near the surface (Old School)…the worst of both worlds! To make up for characters fragility you’ll find some metagame mechanics (combat re-rolls for warriors), high (i.e. good) armor classes, “Lazarus patches” (resurrection tech) and psychic healing, plus an admonishment to GMs to encourage playing smart, setting ambushes, and hiring meat shields.

Now this isn’t totally bad…again, I think the rules as written would be of great use in modeling Warhammer 40K (where life is cheap, and space marines are the most likely to make it through with their power armor, psykers, and apothecaries… though they still get wasted, too). But not everyone wants to play 40K…and I’m not sure the game works as well for, say, Star Wars or Firefly or Star Trek or Battlestar Galactica.

And advancement is its own weirdness.

But rather than talk about THAT, I want to talk about the new and innovative part of the game…at least new and innovative from a design perspective. That is, new to ME. Crawford’s main objective (other than writing a cool SciFi RPG that uses D&D as a base)…his MAIN objective appears to enable real and useful “sandbox” play. Several chapters of the game (including the GM Section, Factions, Adventure Creation, World Creation, and Aliens) are all written in aid of enabling the GM to run an organized sandbox campaign right out of the box.

I won’t beat around the bush…it’s a lot of work. But if you don’t mind the work AND you aren’t really feeling especially creative yourself AND you want to run a sandbox saga, then this is the game for you.

Sector creation, world creation, alien creation…all these feel very similar to Traveller (for me anyway), save that there are key words and phrases associated with various choices designed to act as indicators and hooks. “Factions” are a bit different, being a way for the GM to create influential power organizations (from pirates and cultists to Imperial hegemonies and rebel alliances), all of which are tracked in their own mini-game (complete with phases and turns) so as to keep third party action occurring on the sidelines, even when the players’ actions/attention divert them elsewhere.

It’s all very interesting. While Crawford acknowledges different ways to play SWN, I infer from his writing that he prefers (or at least idealizes) the old school “let the chips fall where they may” sensibilities. His text cautions GMs not get attached to favorite NPCs who might get dropped at any time, and players are cautioned the same about their own characters. It would appear that the faction system is a way to bring the neutrality and impartiality of The Rules to the GM’s management of the game universe. Factions have X number of resources and Y number of “hit points;” player actions deplete these resources, possibly disrupting or demolishing the faction…all as governed by the rules. It IS interesting and I’m curious to know how it plays in practice.

Not that I have an interest in practicing it. Running a game is as much an art as a science, and GMs of SWN are still expected to artistically integrate all the faction, planets, and alien hooks/key words along with player motivation.

And that last bit is where the whole house o cards starts collapsing for me. Players are supposed to give their characters motivations, something that drives them forward into adventure…but no hard and fast rules are given for this. Nor is there any game mechanic that manages it. Nor is it tied in any way, shape, or form to a reward mechanic (the main motivating factor for long-term play of an RPG). GMs have this huge swath of tools that allow them to craft and manage the sandbox universe (with a lot of work), all so the characters can putz around, maybe get the gumption to go do something, or maybe sit around doing nothing and saying, “huh what do we do now?”

I look at this game, the way it’s written (and it’s written well by the way; you definitely won’t find typos the way you would in the first printing of my book!)…I look at this game and I get this image in my head of the author. I see him as a highly creative individual, a person with a deep passion for his subject matter and his ability to create worlds, who has decided to codify his normal GM actions/prep-work, designing a game that will make his life easier in the future. He has put together a system that will allow him to manage (and micro-manage) vast galaxies of stars without number, so that no matter what the players in his game do, his created universe can continue on and on...sometimes behind the scenes, sometimes out in the open.

Man, I hope he has players that appreciate it. I sure hope they are down with his type of game and don’t whine “Ugh! You can sneeze a hole through my first level character!” My players bitch when I don’t let clerics have a spell at 1st level.

I hope they appreciate it because that is a CRAZY level of work to run a giant, galaxy-spanning sandbox that operates in such semi-independent faction. It’s like wanting to create (not play, but design and program) an MMORPG for the table-top…a living one with constant updates based on the actions of the NPC characters/groups. It’s like playing “Sim-Civilization” on a galactic scale.

Crazy. But GMs and game designers have been known to have a certain level of “crazy” in ‘em (look at that Tekumel guy).

Okay, the last thing I want to write about is the advancement system. Character behavior is often shaped and almost always influenced by reward mechanics present in a game…I don’t care if it is a game designed to facilitate a simulationist creative agenda. If anything clued me in on this being a sim-style game it was the scant attention paid to rewards (at least compared to other sections of the game).

Characters gain levels through experience points (XP). XP awarded are determined on a “per mission” basis, based on the highest level party member and the total number of player characters. Per the XP guidelines, at least half of the XP that would be awarded should be “hidden,” contingent on the performance of the player characters. From the writing, it would appear the XP reward = treasure found/awarded though this isn’t explicit in the text…it simply says here’s the reward (number) and that only profit from this (number) awards XP to characters.

Whatever…it appears that there are various ways to profit in SWN, but only a set number of points per mission will provide XP…and that number can be adjusted arbitrarily by the GM depending on the GM’s whim/preference per the text.

What is the net effect of this? Um…that PCs don’t know how or when or what they’ll do to advance. Level is tied to both effectiveness (in combat and skill use) and survivability (hit points and saves), but characters impetus to adventure is supposed to be some chosen “drive” that is unenforceable and unmanageable by the rules as written. And the reward mechanic doesn’t promote a particular in-game behavior because PCs are simply being rewarded for showing up at the table…if then (depending on the whim and designs of the GM).

This IS sim gaming, but it is pretty weak. That is to say, the drives of the characters are only going to be as strong as what the players bring to the table based on their own investment in the game. The detailed chargen system will help provide some initial investment (assuming players have at least some character concept to begin), but since a 1st level character has a maximum 10 hit points (warrior with max hit points and an 18 Constitution) and even a greatsword does 2D6 damage (not to mention a non-energy rifle which does D10+2), it’s hard to believe players are going to want to invest TOO much in their characters.

Now this post is not really a review of the game: I don’t really do reviews. I just talk about my personal likes and dislikes and thoughts and feelings. If a lot of this sounds negative, it’s because I’m explaining why the game doesn’t work for ME. A lot of these things…skills, technobabble, 220 page books with pretty pictures…are going to appeal to people besides me. Do I think the game is any worse than other SciFi RPGs that have been published? Not really…and it’s quite a bit better than some.

But it certainly wouldn’t work for ALL types of space opera and SciFi fantasy. I would certainly use SWN for any game modeled on the Warhammer 40,000 universe (the included setting knocks off more than a bit of the 2nd edition fluff). I found myself drooling a LOT at the thought of using it for a series that modeled Marion Zimmer Bradley’s Darkover series (at least the later books with the interaction between the Terrans and Darkoverans).

I would NOT use it for Firefly or Star Wars or a Heavy Metal-inspired mutant mash-up, nor for planetary romances like S.M. Stirling’s recent Venus and Mars books, and it’s a little limited for trying most military SciFi (like Starship Troopers and Nu-BSG). I mean, you could use it…but I would think it needs some hardcore tweaking to model certain serials effectively.

As for whether or not it can model hard core SciFi literature, I really couldn’t say. I don’t read that much, probably because I’m not a big SciFi fan.
; )