16 February 2014

Tenebraeist Class


TENEBRAEIST
Prime Requisite: INT
Requirements: None
Hit Dice: 1d4
Maximum Level: 14
Saves, fights, and proficiencies: As Mage
A tenebraeist is human who has made a pact with dark and mysterious forces. Tenebraeists cannot be Cosmically aligned as the ultimate sources of their power is not from the gods of the lands, not even a god of shadow or darkness would grant these powers, and while they start may out as Weirdic, most are or will become Voidically aligned.
Despite in many ways being superficially similar to a mage or other spell-casters, the forces that they wield, called Occult Secrets, become less and less like spells as the Tenebraeist's link with their shadowy masters increases.
This is almost identical to the Shadowcaster from WotC's Tome of Magic. The only differences are the lowered level cap, and most of the other class abilities will become proficiencies: Sustaining Shadows will now be three proficiencies, Umbral Sight becomes three allowing 30', 60' and 90' infravision.
At 9th level a Tenebraiest that sets up sanctum will attract a number and kind of apprentices similar to a Mage.

14 February 2014

Weird Rant about ‘Story’ versus the stories you tell.

I realized this morning that as much as I rail against those that disdain combat in RPGs for somehow impeding “roleplaying”, and while my reasoning is valid for my disdain for their disdain. By that I mean just because you are using dice to determine the outcome the situation does not mean you aren’t “roleplaying”. I view the dichotomy of “roll” verus “role” as inherently false, especially as it applies to the more mechanistically focused games: anything that isn’t freeform or FATE/FUDGE.
I personally play melee combat oriented characters for a table top RPG. But yet I’ve noticed that a either I will be one of the first to stop a combat short of slaying the enemies to engage in parley, prevent a combat from starting as long as possible to engage in parley, or avoid combat period. This comes with characters that designed primarily to hard to hurt and to smack shit down HARD in games that focused around the idea of fighting through everything, pathfinder I’m looking at you. And most of the memorable situations that have arisen during a game have happened DURING or are the CAUSE of a combat.
I dislike the conceit that “story” should ever trump “rules” because without rules you might as well be making up shit around the camp fire. If you sat down at the table with some dice and there are rules to the game you claim to be playing, then it behooves you to follow through with that claim and follow the rules of the games you have laid down.
If you as the game master of a game of this type: DnD and it’s variations and derivatives, CoC/BRP, even KAP, but yet you feel that the rules are in the way of you telling some great story you need to stop. Game mastering is not the place for you let forth your pent up novelist frustration.
Of course if you are this kind of GM or play with one and have no problem with this, that is fine, I don’t care overly much. I do however have a problem when I find out that my GM is this kind of GM, and finds it in their story’s best interest to creatively and selectively misinterpret the rules to advance their plot to the detriment of my, or anyone’s, character’s continued existence or wishes.
This has turned into a weird rant about something only slightly related to my disdain for people who think that because there is combat there cannot be roleplaying, that having rules with random determination in it is a hinderance to roleplaying, and that by extension if you as a player, which the GM is as well, feel that having events in the game world be randomly determined is somehow invalidating your grand story.
This also fits in with those people that feel that their game world needs to make logical sense, or that you need to plot your games like a play or movie. The real world would not make sense as a game world setting, but yet does, but only from hindsight. It is only after events have happened that you can explain the circumstances leading up to it, and thus create a narrative that fits the evidence.
I sincerely believe that the kind of stories you should be striving to make are those that are worth telling. The kind of stories that everyone cares about. The “no shit there I was…” stories. Those are the things that people remember from their games. The tiny things that happened between your grand epic plot line. How many people actually mention their game’s metaplot after the fact except only to point out when the “story” had to override their fun?
I’m actually a dumb easy to hook player. I don’t need a fancy and elaborate reason to roll up a character and go explore shit and get fake wealth. And most of the people actually have gamed with are like that. My character by necessity will be motivated by what ever the GM throws at him otherwise there is no game and I just wasted MY time.
This parallels how I run my games. I let the people I want to run a game for know as much as I can explain about the game I want to run. I let new players know if their character might be a bad fit for the intended tenor of the game or the assumed genre, but even then I am generally going to say “fuck it, do what you want. these are the hooks I am providing. this is what the game is about. go do what ever. and here are the consequences.”

05 February 2014

On Ice-T reading some deep deep deep nerd level shit and white people getting upset.

 
 
Yo. He is reading a book.
He is NOT putting on a one man play.
He is NOT staring in a movie.
He is reading a book.
That is it.
A book.
Reading.
Aloud.
Like one would do for a child to put them to bed.

If you are getting axle-wrapped about him poking some fun at a nerd book written by nerds for nerds based on a game made by nerds for more nerds based on another game made by nerds for nerds inspired by some of the nerdiest books ever written is even more hilarious than Ice-T taking the piss over reading some deep deep deep nerd shit and having no fucking clue what is going on in this book, you might want to relax.

I would mock this attitude just as hard if people had a problem with him mangling Shakespeare or some deep ass work in the literary canon.

02 February 2014

Real World Weapons: Liechtenauer Edition: Intro

I am going to periodically posting a different take than Charles Taylor at Spells and Steel on real world weapons. There will be some differences, but also several similarities in our view points.

I won't be covering the exact same weapons he does, or in the same manner.

The first series will be primarily from a view point of the manuals in the Geselschaft Liechtenauers (Society of Liechtenaer) which is primarily concerned with two combatants on roughly equal terms as far as arms and armor with the intent of fighting to the death.
I will cover armored (Harnischfechten) and unarmored (Bloßfechten) broken down by weapons as follows:
  • Wrestling (Ringen und Kampfringen)
  • Longsword
  • Spear
  • Sword and Buckler
  • Pollaxe
Those are the weapon forms I have the best first hand practical knowledge in that style, so I won't be delving at this time in the crazy later period stuff like sickles and grain-flails.

The other series I plan on doing will be centered around George Silver, a man who wrote strongly against the Italian rapier being so popular in Elizabethan England.
In it I will cover:
  • Shortsword
  • Two-Handed Sword
  • Bill-hook
  • Long Staff
  •  Short Staff
  • Dagger
  • Grips


And here is my physical library. The works of fiction are to help place things in context, because RPGs are fiction.