I'm a massive fan of Cthulhu Dark Ages. I love the system, the design, and the fact that I have a great roleplaying game using one of my favourite game engines and periods of history. The Cthulhu part of it is both a bonus cherry on top and an option, as I'm more than happy to drop the Mythos and concentrate on the period, maybe adding my own low-fantasy twist on things.
I came into posession of this wonderful map that I found on the website www.anglo-saxons.net - it's a great little resource for this kind of thing.
I think it's great - it's covering the general period that I want to game in (I'm looking more towards the late ten hundreds so that I can squeeze in some of the First Crusade) and has some very nice names. I'll be making up my own places, of course, but generally I'll set it around the Midlands, near where I live. There's the city of Lichfield marked on this map; that's where I live!
I could easily go beyond the 11th century as the game is so flexible, but this age is pretty good. I've been wondering about doing a Medieval period inspired game and, strangely, it's only kind of struck me recently as to why I don't just do a game set in the Medieval period. I mean, I've been playing in games that emulate the period in a fantasy setting, and recently I've been running a Dragon Warriors campaign that's perfect for that kind of era.
The things is, as much as I love running Dragon Warriors - and long may the game continue - I want to do something a bit deeper, with a bit more detail and system crunch. Dragon Warriors is perfect for the group I have now; 6 players and a very simple, fluid system makes for a fun game that doesn't get bogged down in detail and slow the progress down when you're trying to keep 6 people entertained. If I run a Cthulhu Dark Ages game I'll want 2 or 3 serious roleplayers who want to get into character and enjoy a slightly more complicated system. This way the characters can have a bit more detail and the game can be a lot more focused.
As I type this I'm listening to the 'Robin of Sherwood' soundtrack 'Legend'. As I hear the music I'm reminded why it is I love Dragon Warriors, for the fun stories and high adventure we're creating. If I run this Cthulhu Dark Ages campaign, I think I'll play the 'Game of Thrones' or 'The Pillars of the Earth' soundtracks, instead.
Tuesday, 31 January 2012
Monday, 30 January 2012
GAMMA CON pictures
Here's a few pictures from our successful GAMMA CON last Saturday. Go to the Gamma Con website to see more.
Sunday, 29 January 2012
My mission to make the internet explode
I've been perusing the amusing TV Tropes website and I came across this, a long list of the causes of Internet Backdraft for Tabletop Games. For those who don't know, Internet Backdraft is best explained by TV Tropes intro to the topic:
'Poor, innocent, hapless newbie wanders into a forum and wonders aloud if that guy in that show should be with that girl in that show. The forum erupts into flames, igniting all the boards that deal with the show, which ignites whole sections of the Internet into a blazing Inferno.'
So, with this in mind and an evil grin, I've read down the long list of the causes of Internet Backdraft in the tabletop gaming world and I've picked out some of my favourites:
- 'Whether or not Katanas Are Just Better, on the Wizards of the Coast Dungeons & Dragons forum. Even suggesting that a katana should have different D&D stats from a longsword or bastard sword will get you flamed. Katana threads were actually officially banned for a while.'
- 'Try this fun little experiment. Head over to Warhammer forum and start a discussion about which is Warhammer Fantasy Rules Set is better: 7th or 8th edition. Enjoy.'
- 'Try mentioning anything remotely positive about any White Wolf game on a Pen&Paper roleplaying board that favors WotC. If you REALLY want to get a bonfire started, use one or more of the following words: "Deep," "Conflicted," or "Morality System."'
- 'Go to rpg.net and mention ANY Palladium RPG, see how it works out for you.'
'Poor, innocent, hapless newbie wanders into a forum and wonders aloud if that guy in that show should be with that girl in that show. The forum erupts into flames, igniting all the boards that deal with the show, which ignites whole sections of the Internet into a blazing Inferno.'
So, with this in mind and an evil grin, I've read down the long list of the causes of Internet Backdraft in the tabletop gaming world and I've picked out some of my favourites:
- 'Whether or not Katanas Are Just Better, on the Wizards of the Coast Dungeons & Dragons forum. Even suggesting that a katana should have different D&D stats from a longsword or bastard sword will get you flamed. Katana threads were actually officially banned for a while.'
- 'Try this fun little experiment. Head over to Warhammer forum and start a discussion about which is Warhammer Fantasy Rules Set is better: 7th or 8th edition. Enjoy.'
- 'Try mentioning anything remotely positive about any White Wolf game on a Pen&Paper roleplaying board that favors WotC. If you REALLY want to get a bonfire started, use one or more of the following words: "Deep," "Conflicted," or "Morality System."'
- 'Go to rpg.net and mention ANY Palladium RPG, see how it works out for you.'
GAMMA CON - I'm happy to report...
...that GAMMA CON was a great success!
A very, very successful day with a great turnout and some great gaming. The hall was packed and there was a great atmosphere. I'd like to thank everyone who attended, everyone who helped and, most of all, I'd like to thank my wife Lisa for carrying me through all this. More details and plenty of pictures to come, but right now bed is calling for an after-event coma. Thanks again, everyone, for a brilliant day.
A very, very successful day with a great turnout and some great gaming. The hall was packed and there was a great atmosphere. I'd like to thank everyone who attended, everyone who helped and, most of all, I'd like to thank my wife Lisa for carrying me through all this. More details and plenty of pictures to come, but right now bed is calling for an after-event coma. Thanks again, everyone, for a brilliant day.
Friday, 27 January 2012
GAMMA CON
Well, tomorrow is the big day. I've got traders, demos, games and interested parties. Paper, pencils, stuff to sell, lots of dice. All I need now is plenty of gamers to come along and just hang out and have some fun. Game or no game, it's all about meeting fellow gamers and expanding the community. Creating friendships, giving the hobby a boost.
It's these little get-togethers that keep the gaming community going, keep the hobby alive. I hope to see plenty of people, veterans and newbies alike.
It's these little get-togethers that keep the gaming community going, keep the hobby alive. I hope to see plenty of people, veterans and newbies alike.
Sunday, 22 January 2012
The best contender for a Dragon Warriors movie yet
Forget the crappy rock music used in the trailer, and ignore the woefully terrible 'Heavy Metal Goes Medieval' tagline that I've seen on some promotion stuff. This is a historically inaccurate but incredibly high-octane flick that ticks all the 'I want to see a movie where dudes beat the shit out of each other with big swords' boxes. Behold IRONCLAD!
It's proper gory and very violent, and it has an air of darkness and brutality about it that really sets a grim tone. Stick some bearded guys throwing spells about in there and you've got a Dragon Warriors movie.
It's very wrong about the seige of Rochester and, if done properly, a movie about that important moment in English history would be all kinds of dramatic. But, in true boy's adventure fashion, the film makers decided to drop all that and go for 'this is what a greatsword can do!' and 'double-headed greataxes are awesome!!!' instead. It's got some great performances and it's worth watching for an amazing speech by King John (played to the hilt by Paul Giamatti). This is a great film and pleases me on so many levels.
Currently, as far as TV shows and movies to inspire a Dragon Warriors game goes, I'm listing the following in order of suitability:
1 - Robin of Sherwood
2 - Ironclad
3 - Black Death
4 - Cadfael
5 - The Name Of The Rose
6 - Arn: The Knight Templar
I'll add to the list as time goes on.
It's proper gory and very violent, and it has an air of darkness and brutality about it that really sets a grim tone. Stick some bearded guys throwing spells about in there and you've got a Dragon Warriors movie.
It's very wrong about the seige of Rochester and, if done properly, a movie about that important moment in English history would be all kinds of dramatic. But, in true boy's adventure fashion, the film makers decided to drop all that and go for 'this is what a greatsword can do!' and 'double-headed greataxes are awesome!!!' instead. It's got some great performances and it's worth watching for an amazing speech by King John (played to the hilt by Paul Giamatti). This is a great film and pleases me on so many levels.
Currently, as far as TV shows and movies to inspire a Dragon Warriors game goes, I'm listing the following in order of suitability:
1 - Robin of Sherwood
2 - Ironclad
3 - Black Death
4 - Cadfael
5 - The Name Of The Rose
6 - Arn: The Knight Templar
I'll add to the list as time goes on.
Another Dragon Warriors Movie
I like to find movies that give me inspiration for my games, visually and possibly thematically. This is another movie that sets the tone for me - Arn: The Knight Templar. It's a very good movie, although not as action-packed as the trailer suggests, and has some great characters in it I could use as Dragon Warriors NPCs.
It does drag a little in some places but overall it was an excellent film and I was really impressed with the main character Arn and think he'd make a great NPC.
Check it out. It's a good film. Next on my list is 'Ironclad'. That's in my DVD player right now and is ready to go.
Saturday, 21 January 2012
'Story trumps rules'
I was watching my DVD of 'The Gamers: Dorkness Rising' (top movie, if you've not seen it) this week and this line sticks in my head - 'Story trumps rules'.
I agree with this to a certain extent, as in allowing the rules to get in the way of fun or immersion can yank a person out of the emotional involvement a game, but to ignore the rules too much takes away any sense of achievement and can make some people feel that they're just wandering through someone else's story. I thought about it more as I read some D&D forums as they talked about 5th edition, and a lot of the posters are very focused on how the rules work and how they interact with each other. In some cases I get the impression that the rules are considered as not just guidelines but strict, definitive instructions on what the players (and GM) can and can't do.
As a GM I've fudged a few rolls here and there for dramatic licence but I do try and at least stick to the rules in as much as the players don't feel like they're being led around by the nose, or that they feel that their rolls don't mean much in the grand scheme of things. If a GM has a definite idea if where he wants a story to go then the rules can get in the way so no doubt will be more inclined to fudge or ignore. I guess it depends on the kind of game that's being played, or the rules system being used.
Does story trump rules, or is it the other way around? Is there happy balance?
I agree with this to a certain extent, as in allowing the rules to get in the way of fun or immersion can yank a person out of the emotional involvement a game, but to ignore the rules too much takes away any sense of achievement and can make some people feel that they're just wandering through someone else's story. I thought about it more as I read some D&D forums as they talked about 5th edition, and a lot of the posters are very focused on how the rules work and how they interact with each other. In some cases I get the impression that the rules are considered as not just guidelines but strict, definitive instructions on what the players (and GM) can and can't do.
As a GM I've fudged a few rolls here and there for dramatic licence but I do try and at least stick to the rules in as much as the players don't feel like they're being led around by the nose, or that they feel that their rolls don't mean much in the grand scheme of things. If a GM has a definite idea if where he wants a story to go then the rules can get in the way so no doubt will be more inclined to fudge or ignore. I guess it depends on the kind of game that's being played, or the rules system being used.
Does story trump rules, or is it the other way around? Is there happy balance?
Check this baby out
Spirit Games in Burton is top notch - the sheer amount of games new, old and obscure keeps me browsing for ages. In the middle of a whole load of AD&D and D&D 3.x stuff I found this tucked away:

It's the rules book from the boxed D&D game that TSR released in 1991. Just the rulebook, mind you, not the entire box. Which is a shame, because that would have been amazing. It's basically the rules from the Basic set all in one book so I now have a copy of the original rules that I miss so dearly, all for the bargain price of two English pounds. All that remains now is for me to win the Ebay auction for an original and complete redbox Basic D&D set and I'll be in hog heaven. That is, if hogs liked old roleplaying games.
Wednesday, 18 January 2012
So why did I fall out of love with old D&D?
It’s a good question. I picked up the AD&D 2nd Edition rulebooks this week and I’ve spent the last couple of nights reading through them, trying to remember why it was I turned my back on the system way back in 1989/1990. After reading the Player’s Handbook and the Dungeon Master’s Guide I kind of remember.
First of all I loved looking at the books again. It’s been a hell of a long time and it was nice to go through the musty old pages. I know it was a long time ago but some of the art hasn’t aged well. I was screwing up my face a lot and thinking ‘why did they use that image?’, but then I got to the obvious image of the priestess from Red Sonja on page 80 of the PHB and figured, ‘well, they obviously didn’t give a toss.’ Some of the images are positively atrocious, but some of it was good. A lot of it was trying to do something sadly lacking from much of the art used these days – they were trying to impart a sense of reality.
I’ve addressed this in a previous blog entry, but the art used in modern D&D is far too stylised and cartoonish for me to take it seriously, and that kind of yanks me out of the reality of the game. The art may not be great in these original books but it tried to create atmosphere and didn’t try to impress with razzle-dazzle insanely impossible armour and weapons.
The way it’s written is quite cool, as well. It explains the rules clearly and is well presented, and it gives all kinds of flavour on how to run the game. It includes a lot of rules that are optional, depending on how detailed you want your game to be. You could run it as complicated as you wanted, or as basic as… well… Basic D&D. That’s a nice touch. It’s really well written and at times I could see myself playing it. I certainly remember sitting at a dining table back in 1989 and poring over the book, trying to decide what I wanted to play and how I wanted to play it. Those memories remind me of the music of Van Halen, for some reason, and Wagner’s Ring Cycle. Weird.
So why did I fall out of love with it? Well, looking at the books I’m sure it was a combination of things but the two main ones are:
1. Weighed down by rules. Yeah, a lot of them were optional but as you go through the book I just felt that I needed all these little extras to make the character better and fell into the trap of using them all. Basic D&D was nice and simple. It just seemed that they had the chance to really smooth out AD&D with the second edition but fell back on the old concepts, relying on those dodgy saving throws and pointless ability-based rules and adjustments – same basic system, just explained better. Not a bad system, by any means, and the fact it lasted so long speaks volumes.
2. The game I was in. I’m not going to name any names, but I was in a couple of different groups and I played semi-regularly so I was gaming with many different people. Anyway, one of the campaign worlds I was in wasn’t great. Ravenloft crossed with Dragonlance. It was a rules-twisting nightmare of a game with powerplayers, system abusers and egoists all vying for domination, and a DM who thought he was the dog’s danglies. I learned a lot from him, like, how not to do it. That didn’t help.
So, is that it? Could I have been turned off from D&D by the rules and the dodgy game I was playing in? Most likely, but I’m sure it must have been something else.
And it was.
AD&D wasn’t giving me what I needed anymore. I was turning to games that were a bit more skill-orientated with characters a little more defined by their capabilities. I started to play Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and the Middle-Earth Roleplaying game where I could see on the sheet how good someone was with a sword or a bow and not wonder how good someone was based on that awful THAC0. AD&D just felt like it was lacking something and was starting to feel somewhat bloated with all the campaign settings, additions and the constant extra bits supplied by Dragon magazine (which, to be fair, I still bought long after I stopped playing the game). I felt like I was constantly playing catch up with it. And that constantly expanding Monster Manual Compendium thingy. Sheesh. I did love the Forgotten Realms setting and would have enjoyed getting into Birthright, mind you.
I don’t think I truly fell out of love with AD&D or D&D in general. I think we grew apart, that there were other, shinier games that attracted my attention, games I was much more compatible with and treated me well. As much fun as I had with D&D I had my best games and most memorable games with WFRP and MERP, powerful dramatic sessions with huge story arcs and detailed characters. Things I never got from D&D.
I had fun with D&D, I know that – after all, I played it for five years – but it never gave me the options I really wanted. It felt like they were bolting on rules and extras to a system that desperately needed a makeover, a makeover it didn’t see until 3rd Edition. That was a game a bit more up my street, and I didn’t even get hold of that until a year ago.
I do miss the game, but I think I miss it in a nostalgic way. As much as I’ve enjoyed reading these AD&D 2nd Edition books and seen areas where I might have enjoyed running it, I don’t think I ever can. It’s a first love kind of thing, an affair that I remember with fondness but can’t go back to. There are rules systems now that I can get much more enjoyment from.
I’m glad I bought them.
I'm not sure this blog post made much sense, to be honest. I blame the vodka.
First of all I loved looking at the books again. It’s been a hell of a long time and it was nice to go through the musty old pages. I know it was a long time ago but some of the art hasn’t aged well. I was screwing up my face a lot and thinking ‘why did they use that image?’, but then I got to the obvious image of the priestess from Red Sonja on page 80 of the PHB and figured, ‘well, they obviously didn’t give a toss.’ Some of the images are positively atrocious, but some of it was good. A lot of it was trying to do something sadly lacking from much of the art used these days – they were trying to impart a sense of reality.
I’ve addressed this in a previous blog entry, but the art used in modern D&D is far too stylised and cartoonish for me to take it seriously, and that kind of yanks me out of the reality of the game. The art may not be great in these original books but it tried to create atmosphere and didn’t try to impress with razzle-dazzle insanely impossible armour and weapons.
The way it’s written is quite cool, as well. It explains the rules clearly and is well presented, and it gives all kinds of flavour on how to run the game. It includes a lot of rules that are optional, depending on how detailed you want your game to be. You could run it as complicated as you wanted, or as basic as… well… Basic D&D. That’s a nice touch. It’s really well written and at times I could see myself playing it. I certainly remember sitting at a dining table back in 1989 and poring over the book, trying to decide what I wanted to play and how I wanted to play it. Those memories remind me of the music of Van Halen, for some reason, and Wagner’s Ring Cycle. Weird.
So why did I fall out of love with it? Well, looking at the books I’m sure it was a combination of things but the two main ones are:
1. Weighed down by rules. Yeah, a lot of them were optional but as you go through the book I just felt that I needed all these little extras to make the character better and fell into the trap of using them all. Basic D&D was nice and simple. It just seemed that they had the chance to really smooth out AD&D with the second edition but fell back on the old concepts, relying on those dodgy saving throws and pointless ability-based rules and adjustments – same basic system, just explained better. Not a bad system, by any means, and the fact it lasted so long speaks volumes.
2. The game I was in. I’m not going to name any names, but I was in a couple of different groups and I played semi-regularly so I was gaming with many different people. Anyway, one of the campaign worlds I was in wasn’t great. Ravenloft crossed with Dragonlance. It was a rules-twisting nightmare of a game with powerplayers, system abusers and egoists all vying for domination, and a DM who thought he was the dog’s danglies. I learned a lot from him, like, how not to do it. That didn’t help.
So, is that it? Could I have been turned off from D&D by the rules and the dodgy game I was playing in? Most likely, but I’m sure it must have been something else.
And it was.
AD&D wasn’t giving me what I needed anymore. I was turning to games that were a bit more skill-orientated with characters a little more defined by their capabilities. I started to play Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and the Middle-Earth Roleplaying game where I could see on the sheet how good someone was with a sword or a bow and not wonder how good someone was based on that awful THAC0. AD&D just felt like it was lacking something and was starting to feel somewhat bloated with all the campaign settings, additions and the constant extra bits supplied by Dragon magazine (which, to be fair, I still bought long after I stopped playing the game). I felt like I was constantly playing catch up with it. And that constantly expanding Monster Manual Compendium thingy. Sheesh. I did love the Forgotten Realms setting and would have enjoyed getting into Birthright, mind you.
I don’t think I truly fell out of love with AD&D or D&D in general. I think we grew apart, that there were other, shinier games that attracted my attention, games I was much more compatible with and treated me well. As much fun as I had with D&D I had my best games and most memorable games with WFRP and MERP, powerful dramatic sessions with huge story arcs and detailed characters. Things I never got from D&D.
I had fun with D&D, I know that – after all, I played it for five years – but it never gave me the options I really wanted. It felt like they were bolting on rules and extras to a system that desperately needed a makeover, a makeover it didn’t see until 3rd Edition. That was a game a bit more up my street, and I didn’t even get hold of that until a year ago.
I do miss the game, but I think I miss it in a nostalgic way. As much as I’ve enjoyed reading these AD&D 2nd Edition books and seen areas where I might have enjoyed running it, I don’t think I ever can. It’s a first love kind of thing, an affair that I remember with fondness but can’t go back to. There are rules systems now that I can get much more enjoyment from.
I’m glad I bought them.
I'm not sure this blog post made much sense, to be honest. I blame the vodka.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





