Mike Mearls D&D fail - Lets get back to the game we know

If you know me you know my opinion of Mike Mearls and his butcher job of D&D 4th ed. 4th ed is in my opinion a good set of really detailed skirmish rules which are not as good as the much better Warhammer Quest and Descent Journeys in the Dark etc ad nauseum. Its Bloat-ware meets skirmish gaming.

How Mike Mearls got this job I don't know. How he has kept his job after Paizo Publishing and PATHFINDER gave his D&D Fail edition a spanking, I just don't know.

Thankfully Hasbro/Wizards got Monty Cook back who does have some real D&D cred and the Bruce Cordell who does great work on his books.

Just go and try find out what great outstanding rpg product Mike has made. His Gimmicks guide to Gadgets showed an appalling lack of Mutants and Masterminds system understanding and a lack of general comparability with the core Mutants and Masterminds rules. His other land mark products were the Alderac Entertainment Group D&D stuff which was really quite pedestrian/ordinary except for the d20 Toolbox which was really very good ...but which he did not work on. Just so you know the list of works the guy did before the landmark D&D Fail Edition go have a look. I'm really not sure how he got the big gig for Fail Edition.

So D&D Next - stupid uncool name by the way. I say build off of what is essentially Basic D&D, Labyrinth Lord and Swords and Wizardry, and some sprinkles of AD&D. Look at the proliferation of house rules people have compiled. It looks like people out in the OSR like things like
Fighter options - i.e Feats for fighters
Easy and few, skills  maybe even on a D6
Easy multiclassing
No demihuman level limits
Shields which shatter
Optional alternate spell system to Vancian
Just go google fu "House Rules" and you will get a great list with a large consensus of applications. If shields don't shatter in the new edition you will know they did not browse OSR blogs, as this one rule is nearly a ubiquitous house rule.      

If you want to see the sort of thing people want from a serviceable game outside of D&D go look at D&D 3.0, Savage Worlds and BRP. In the framework these games provide for their systems there is a lot to learn.

Bring back a focus on the story telling, the role playing and the emergent game actual play at the table over character optimization mini games .

And Hurry up Wizards !!! Your fast becoming irrelevant, with the OSR and Pathfinder I dont NEED a game with the D&D label on it - You need to show me that I do ... Or I'll go on playing stuff I call D&D but is not your product.

If OD&Ders and other folks can do this in a few months and get it right, why is it taking you so bloody long to get it right?
 

  

Adventure ideas for totems of the dead

A common question for Totems of the Dead is what do I do;

I think there is some source material that would make quite good inspiration or maybe even adaptable for a  Totems game.

I think it would be relatively easy to adapt the Griffon Island boxed set from Runequest. Sure you could equally use the original Griffin Mountain but you would require more normalization to get it striped and fitted to a Totems of the Dead game. The "map" coldnt really be reused but much of the content could be re-purposed and put to use to create a good sandbox for play. 

The other solid option in a similar vein would be to adapt the Mongoose publishing Slaine rpg adventures
that is

• The Invulnerable King
• Teeth of the Moon Sow
• The Ragnarok Book
• Way of the Horned God

I also remember there is a Conan d20 rpg adventure about Thunder River and settling lands out form a fort
I think its Across The Thunder River


But many of them could likely be adapted including

• Trial of Blood
• Ruins of Hyboria
• The Lurking Terror of Nahab - city based so this would have to be in one of the big hubs
• Reavers of the Vilayet

If you have some good suggestions please post them in the comments section so I can follow them up.    

I would not be surprised if there were some good and appropriate pathfinder modules that could be tweeked too....humm Kingmaker for a group of Sea Wolves setting out to expand the frontier?

A Savage Switch

Game night was last night. We switched from OD&D, to Savage Worlds to see how the game would run under those rules, more as an experiment, than a real plan. Actually it was quite good. It hit all the "F'"s. Fast, Furious and Fun. The players seemed to enjoy the switch and want to keep on "giving it a go".

The extra options supported by Savage Worlds; a skill list, edges, hindrances, beanies and the magic system, all seemed to suit them and what they wanted from a game (as Players). I have to say, the system is, very easy to prepare for as a GM. Management during the game is a breeze too. The hardest concept in Savage worlds is the "Shaken" condition and the players easily took it in their stride and gamed on. 

I have some small regrets leaving OD&D behind. OD&D is great from a GM's perspective, lots of support, great community, ease of preparation, all of that. House rules for OD&D is however getting quite frankly, ridiculous. While its fun to do this type of thing, its a bit of a joke keeping all the tiny tweaks for the game in line. I do share the perspective that JM shared; house rules should only be the rules used at the table. Unfortunately straight Labyrinth Lord, Original Edition D&D, Rules Cyclopaedia or OSRIC just doesn't quite get the players over the line - they want more from the character subsystems. The things above are good examples.   

To give you an idea of the breadth of our house rules, which have crept in over time,
Fighter options - sort of like "feats" see original edition delta for the same sort of concept
No Cleric class only a magic user class, a combined spell list with some spells culled
Thief skills on the Target 20 check type
Target 20 for combat
"Good At" skills based off appropriate stat bonus using Target 20

I think its happened as a result of liking many of the innovations in  3.0+ D&D. They are not a huge change to the dynamic of the game but significant enough. I wonder how D&D5 will manage these realities. Small changes to what was the 3.0 core would actually us back to the core game. Not in the direction of Pathfinder. Its to power game-ist, too ... I cant really find the words but its sort of a good example of the "wrong" direction to my way of thinking. I want a "Less is more" approach. David Bezio's X-Plorers being a great example of just how much you can do with a "just-enough" approach.  
After following a few online discussions and looking over Blogs like the The City of Iron [great blog] it seemed like savage worlds was a natural move.

I was already predisposed to Savage Worlds due to the wonderful World of Solomon Kane, Beasts & Barbarians and the splendiferous, Totems of the Dead.

My only concern now is to make Savage Worlds feel sufficiently gritty enough for a  sword and sorcery feel and I'm sure we can get that happening. To be totally honest I have some doubts about the game and its play style. For me I could try a new game every few weeks though so - mainly because I find role playing such a compelling hobby. 

I also feel Savage Worlds opens up a whole new realm of gaming for the group maybe giving them a desire to play the games listed above as well as games like Deadlands. 

So we go on with this until I get a Sci Fi game all planed out and ready to go. Who knows maybe I'll use Savage Worlds for it too.