The Collapsing Column Conundrum

In this post I talked about a friend's game where we found ourselves in a room filled with granite columns falling all about us. I was contrasting one of the differences between D&D and Dungeon World. That difference being that in D&D getting "hit" by a column was a matter of losing hit points, while in the fiction-first world of DW, missing a roll to avoid a granite column would likely prove fatal.

I'm in a DW mood again and I found myself pondering this situation again. Even though I'm in a DW head, I think I've stumbled on a more satisfying way to handle this in D&D.

The real crux of problems like this in D&D is remembering that hit points are abstract constructs that represent many facets of a character's ultimate survivability (see this post). In this sense, hit point loss is a narrativist opportunity. Well, D&D isn't a narrativist game, so hmmm.

Here's my idea (finally): In the column room example my character was a fighter (natch, I usually play fighters), with somewhere around 70 hp. The room was quite large and filled with these falling columns. I think another way to handle this would be to say "In order to cross the room, you have to make 3 successful Dex checks (or saving throws, whatever). For every one you fail you take d10 damage."

I think that makes it more narrativist. It models an escalating situation, where every column that you don't "dodge" whittles away at your chances of getting to the other side of the room alive. You're getting more tired, more tensed up. Maybe you're dodging away from one, only to step in the way of another one. In any event, if you do make it to the other side alive, the damage from the failed checks represents the physical and emotional exhaustion of such a harrowing experience.

And if the DM wanted to be extra nasty, for each failed roll impose a -1 penalty to the next roll. That would really ramp up the tension.

I'm Lazy, I'm Not Dead

Just when you thought all was safe in the blogosphere . . .

I'm back.

So, 7ish months is quite a spell. Of course, there's been work. Lots and lots of work. But, once I fell out of the habit of sharing these scattered thoughts, I fell hard. I still have the random thoughts (12 hours a day driving leaves one with a lot of time to think), I just became lazy about posting them. Also, they have been wildly random, even for me. I'll hit upon what I think is a real gem of an idea for a post, then when the weekend gets here and I have time to knock it out, it's gone. Or the interest in it is gone. Or whatever.

Well, let's just dive right in from here, shall we?

I'm on a Dungeon World kick of late. Actually, I'm on a (Whatever) World kick. I bought the pdf for Uncharted Worlds and I'm printing that this weekend. I almost pulled the trigger on that when it was a kickstarter, but I didn't. I haven't backed a kickstarter yet, but I really want to be like the cool kids and do it. Unfortunately, I'm like that virgin that tries to feel better about being a virgin by reciting the mantra "I'm waiting for the right one".  I digress.


I also snagged the Bundle of Holding with all the Dungeon World goodness. I printed Perilous Wilds yesterday. It looks fully awesome on the flip-through. There were some other good looking pdfs in that bundle, too. Grim World looks quite promising, but it is a dual use book and includes the necessaries to use it for Fate. I don't piss ink, so things like that slow down my acquisition cycle.




Speaking of ink. I haven't read Uncharted Worlds yet, but I can make a comment about the physical product. It includes several versions of the pdf, one of which is "Low Impact". I assumed this meant low impact on ink. Maybe it does, but looking through the pdf, I don't see it. There are a lot of pieces of art (which I really like the art, by the way) that would consume enough ink to print at least 5 pages of rules, no exaggeration. I've opened both the "regular" file and the low impact side-by-side, and I can't see a difference that would result in ink savings. By the way, the interior is all black and white. The art has a real 1980's Star Frontiers or Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society vibe. In other words, it totally rocks. Also, and don't quote me on this, but I think UW is based off Apocalypse World, rather than Dungeon World, for what it's worth.

So, there you have it. I'm back. No promises on how regularly, but I'm back. I must say, I missed it. Odd, I know, but there it is.

Some (Very Early) Thoughts on Dungeon World

I've been reading my printed pdf a bit, and studying forums, reviews, and blog posts. One of the biggest problems I am having is that I didn't take the plunge with this game sooner.

I really dig the core mechanic, from concept through implementation. I'm a big fan of the bell curve, so naturally a 2d6 resolution mechanic is right in my wheelhouse. I also really like the graduated results. Just in case you didn't know, to resolve an action roll 2d6 + relevant stat bonus. If the roll is 10+ you succeed as desired. A 7-9 means you succeed, but with some sort of complication. On a 6 or less, it is the GM's call. Maybe you succeed but with a cost of some sort, or maybe you suffer humiliating defeat. (This may sound arbitrary, but the rules hammer the notion of "the fiction". So, the GM's response to a 6- roll should be logically consistent with the scene as it is being played out.)

In the last campaign I played in we had a situation wherein this type of mechanic would have been useful. We were playing my friend's heavily houseruled AD&D 1e/2e mash-up. I consider my friend a completely awesome DM. He knows his world inside and out, being immediately ready with details like the best vintages from particular wine regions, through giving little clues buried in ancient dialects in lost writings. One of is "soft spots" his in strict interpretation of the dice. In this campaign, our first "encounter" was . . . frustrating.

There was a room which was obviously trapped. He didn't allow a detect trap type roll unless and until we described exactly what we were doing. Now, as a principle that is keeping with the finest old school tradition. But, there was a very specific method to this trap. We spent over an hour of that session mucking about with that trap.

I'm not busting on my friend. I would leap at the chance to play in one of his campaigns, any place, any time. I also know that his way is not the only way to DM situations like that. My only point is that a graduated mechanic, like that in DW, would have mitigated that situation and kept the game moving. When this type of mechanic is hard-wired into the rules, and everyone at the table knows it, the expectations change. When the expectations change, the dynamic changes, and thus the game itself changes.

I can see the other side of this argument. If we, as a group, had approached that room/trap with the expectation that we would get past it in one turn, even if it meant "something bad" happened, it would change how we approached it. However, it doesn't work that way. If you roll a 6-, as GM it is my option for how things progress. It is incumbent on me to exercise that option in keeping with the established fiction, though.

To return to the room for a moment: the room was large and filled with stone columns. The trap was that the columns would start falling before we could cross the room. My character (an 8th level fighter) had a column fall on him. He took quite a bit of damage, but, being a fighter, had the HP to cover it. So, he was described as being pinned, and had to be pulled out.

If this would have been DW, and we had rolled a 6- to defy the dangers of the trap, I would have been rolling up a new character. The fiction would demand it. A 2-ton granite column falls on you and it is time for your companions to salvage any of your gear that isn't flattened.

Of course, my friend could have narrated it that way. That's not the D&D way, though. That's not a criticism of D&D, just a contrast of two different games. D&D is about shaping the narration to fit the numbers, while DW is about using the fiction to inform the numbers. So, in the campaign, my guy took about 60% of his HP, obviously he was still alive since he still had HP. So, my friend had to narrate it that he was pinned under a chunk of granite. In DW the fiction states that 2 tons of granite falls on you and you're screwed. Period.

That may not sit well with some of you. Hell, when my ADD swings again, it may not sit well with me. However, on this rainy Sunday morning, it sits very well with me.

And Now for Something Completely Different

I'm a fighter guy. Nothing different there. One of the things I always hated about my old group was the wild disrespect they had for niche protection. Especially where combat rules were concerned. There was zero effort expended to make sure my fighters were consistently better at fighting. I can dig the thief backstabbing or a magic user with a Staff of Striking. Sure, my fighter won't mete out more damage than everyone else, every single round. But when it comes to laying down the hurt reliably, there should be no substitute for the fighter. I mean, it's right there in his name.

Now, for the "completely different" part . . .

I have noticed this game from afar for quite some time. It seemed far too narrativist for me, though. Even though I was seeing a lot, and I mean lot, of mad love for it, I couldn't get past the product description. There was a part of the blurb that said something to the effect that the players and GM collaborate on the world/setting when the campaign kicks off. Whoa! That kind of talk is like the Black Knight solemnly intoning "None shall pass".

That kind of talk rankles my referee nerves. One thing I despise about the narrativist movement is when it goes overboard with player agency. Said agency is a good thing, in moderation. In many cases, though, it goes too far, to the point that the referee is present to manage the players' entertainment. We're all there to have fun, and that includes the referee. I get it if the players don't want to play in a post-apoc dystopia, and the referee shouldn't be a dick about trying to force it. By the same token, maybe the referee doesn't want to run a game set in Candyland. Obviously, there is plenty of middle ground in which to meet, it's just that I've seen too many systems that think player agency should be Almighty.

Well, something happened (I can't say what happened because I don't know) that prompted me to give Dungeon World another look. I took up arms and approached the Black Knight, intent on passing and learning the secrets he was guarding.