This is the song from the end of last night's Walking Dead episode. This is a great gaming song to me. I can picture a group of inexperienced (1st level) people that have decided to band together and go face some menace to their peaceful village. I can picture them steeling their resolve, gripping weapons, and walking into a creepy, mist-shrouded forest, toward whatever destiny Fate has laid.

Anyway, give it a listen, I doubt you'll be disappointed.

Walking Dead

Who watched it tonight? Show of hands . . .

I really dig this show, so I hope you won't mind if I post about it from time to time. Tonight's was a good return from their extended holiday hiatus. I'm very curious with how all this farm business will shake out. The group can't stay this big. Sooner or later they'll have to bug out and when they do, who gets left? Or will there be a big killing? Tonight's episode set up a potentially rival group moving toward the farm. That could end badly.

Spoiler Alert!

Turn Back If You Haven't Seen Ep 208! Highlight below to read.




What about that ending? Damn. I love those moments when all of a sudden a guy shows unequivocally how big a bad ass he really is. Tonight was Rick's time to shine. Shane has run around like the only bad ass while Rick's been torn by guilt and the weight of leadership. Rick is the leader for a reason. Tonight he slipped into full cop-mode, read those two clowns, and when the time came did not hesitate to use deadly force.
They did cross a line, though. Only Rick, Glenn, and Herschel know it right now. They have crossed the line into having to kill other survivors. I saw it said somewhere that the zombies aren't the bad guys, they're just obstacles, like a blizzard or raging river. The real bad guys are other survivors with more questionable morals. Tonight we saw how true that will be.

Just When I wasn't Looking

Wow! I started this blog mostly for myself. I hoped I would find some "regulars" to talk gaming with, but if not, then ok. I just wanted to put my ideas, thoughts, and experiences into some form other than a "journal". It helps me to realize how stupid and narrow my thinking can be if I can expel it and come back for later review.

I don't think I checked the blog at all yesterday, then I get on tonight and look at my stats. Lo! and Behold! 132 page views yesterday! I can't believe it! And a bunch of new folks following the blog! Welcome to all of you, it is great to have you here.

I've been a little quiet this month because, frankly, my ADD got the better of me. I'm hoping that I am about to move into a more focused cycle, though. I'm currently fostering interest in Dark Dungeons and the Forgotten Realms Old Grey Box. If I can fan these into flames they'll keep me busy (and blogging) for a little while at least.

So, I just want to thank everyone that has taken an interest in my ramblings, especially Lee, who's commented regularly and given me someone to talk to and get feedback from.

It Doesn't Get Much More Old School

If ever there was a one-sentence phrase to sum up old school play, this is it:

"My very first D&D character was a fighter. He was paralysed by a ghoul. The party looted me while I was still alive and used my body to wedge the door while they ran away."

This is the sig of one Bochi over on Dragonsfoot. He may use it elsewhere, as well. I just wanted to share it because it cracks me up and it really does have that old school ambiance.

Critical Hits in D&D

This post over at Tenkar's Tavern (excellent and highly recommended, by the way) got me to thinking about critical hits in D&D, any flavor, including clones thereof. As a player, and as a DM who likes to see smiling player faces, I love critical hits. Nothing is quite so exciting as getting your ass handed to you and all of a sudden rolling that beautiful 20 (we always yelled "NATCH!"). You may still get your ass handed to you, but that crit insured that the other guy knew he had been in a fight.

Of course, we handled it differently over the years. There were hit location tables, confirming crits, secondary tables with more abstract things than direct hit locations (Bleeder!), and the ubiquitous double damage. It was the double damage we generally used most often. It was faster, less fiddly, and quite a visceral experience to slap some jackass with 28 points of damage.

The enemy could score crits on the players, too, and there was always the dreaded fumble. This usually was simply fall or drop your weapon. Either way, you basically missed your next turn.

I'm not such a fan of critical hits these days, and I'll tell you why.

• D&D combat models results. It's roots are in a wargame, and a wargame is concerned with who wins, not how. Any sort of critical hit system intrudes on the model.
• Combat is conducted with a d20. It is based on linear probability, which means the stable boy and the war hero will crit 5% of the time. Now, I know that confirming your crit mitigates this, but who wants to fiddle with another roll? And have you ever seen a player in a desperate situation that failed to confirm? It isn't pretty.
• The roll to-hit is simply that, a roll to-hit. The only possible rationale for basing a critical hit from that would be to assume that a high roll (a 20) could indicate a hit to a more vital spot.
• To me, it really should be the damage roll that indicates a crit. I have no system for this because I do not desire one. I am merely speaking hypothetically. Exploding damage dice or something. I just think that it is silly to roll a 20, double the damage, roll like a 2, and end up with a "critical hit" doing maybe 6 points. A damage roll that indicates max damage is more critical than that.

I am an old-schooler when it comes to weapon damage. I love the idea of all weapons doing d6. So, and this is completely off-the-cuff as I type this, I think if  was going to introduce crits, I would just allow an additional d6. Maybe. I don't know. I just know we are trying to model outcomes and introducing subsystems like critical hits into the model engine are doomed to either fail or disrupt the engine.

Alternity Artifacts

Having rekindled my old flame for Alternity, I have been scouring the net for talk of it over the last few days. There isn't very much current, but I have been perusing quite a few forum archives. There was a great deal of polarity over Alternity. People seem to have loved it or hated it. There was one thing that proved a polarizing point above all others, though: the die mechanic.

For those of you who don't know, it is a fairly straight-forward thing. The target number for any task is invariably the character's stat + skill (where applicable). The goal was to roll under this total on a d20. Circumstance modifiers were handled by adding or subtracting a modifier die. The particular die would be based on the degree of the bonus/penalty. Thus, for your character to negotiate a narrow plank crossing a deep chasm, add Dexterity and Acrobatics. Roll d20 under and you're good. But wait, it is quite windy and there is a driving rain. This results in a 3-step penalty, so you would roll a d8 with your d20 and add them together.

Pretty clear, I think. There are a lot of comments out there about how counter intuitive this is. The variable bonus/penalty isn't the main villain, though. It seems like it would be, since most of us are accustomed to fixed bonuses/penalties. But no, it is the roll under that causes the most wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth. Rolling under is counter-intuitive? Are you kidding me? These Alternity haters revile the roll-under like it sprang from the mind of La Vey.

Remember, I said that these forum archives are not new. In fact, a lot of them smack of edition wars, with d20 Modern/Future in one corner and Alternity in the other. D20M wasn't even that old when a lot of these shots were being fired. Why is this relevant? Glad you asked. Most of the people championing d20 and flaming Alternity for it's counter-intuitive roll under mechanic had been playing AD&D only a few short years prior. I love D&D, but let's be real. There are a number of totally unrelated die mechanics for different activities in D&D. Including roll unders, most notably Thief Skills and Non Weapon Proficiency checks.

So, I just don't understand how those haters could blast Alternity for being so counter-intuitive, baroque, and unfathomable, when just a few years prior they were up to the eyebrows in dueling die mechanics. Jim Morrison said it best:

"People are strange . . ."

A Look at Alternity

This is one of those games I adore, but have never been able to play. I'll buy just about any gaming book that interests me, money willing. I've always loved to read, so to me there's never been a difference between paying for a hardback of some novel or historical book, and paying for a gaming book. As long as I am entertained/educated/enlightened, I got my money's worth. As a result of that I've run into a lot of games over the years that I read but never played. Most of the time I could live with that. I knew going in that my group (when I had such a thing) wasn't going to be swayed from D&D. Still, every once in a while, I did read a game I tried to pitch to them, and when I failed to sway, became sad and a little bitter. This was such.

This is not intended as a review, an overview, or any other view. It is simply me lamenting missed opportunities with what I thought was a great game. In fact, it is the rediscovery of this line that has seen me so absent from the blog this week. Between getting reacquainted and wondering if I should even post something about this game (it is not "old school" except under the most esoteric definition), I discovered that there are quite a few diehards still feeling the Alternity love.

If you've never checked it out, you really should give it a look. There are quick starts and a metric ton of support and resources at alternity.net. Most of the line is available from Amazon. You can get used copies of the two core books, plus one of the campaign settings for less than what one of the books cost at release. If any of you do end up checking it out, I'd be interested in hearing your impressions.