Skip to content

Arm Yourself Against Interstellar Villainy

You will be issued two (2) futuristic weapons upon reporting to The Random Science Fiction Arms Generator. If you require additional armament, proceed to The Random Weapons Locker Generator at once.

These random generators were created with information I compiled for the Odd Reference pages at the Cuparium.

One Robot…One Computer…One Spaceship will be (freely) available soon.

Recruit a Motley Crew One Crewman at a Time

You may have a robot, a computer, and a spaceship, but do you have a crewman? Simply use The Random Spaceship Crewman Generator to recruit (or press into service) a qualified crewman for your spaceship. Fill out a name, gender, age, nationality, species, and background story, and your crewman is ready to trek space.

So, what exactly does it generate if it leaves all those trivial details such as name and gender and species to you? Well, it generates a list of skills, interests, combat training, attributes, gifts, and faults along with corresponding trait levels where appropriate. If you like what you see, you can decide for yourself how he or she fits into your universe and consult other random generators as desired.

The inevitable direction of this random generator and its predecessor from the day before, is the birth of a new, free, instantly (or nearly instantly) playable role-playing game called (after the inspiration of the previous article), One Robot, One Computer, One Spaceship, or, as is the fashion today, 1R1C1S. I make absolutely no serious claims about it; it’s a silly endeavor, and that’s all there is to it.

Lest I forget, ’twill be a Fudge game, naturally.

Stay tuned…

One Robot, One Computer, One Spaceship, and You

In need of a faithful robot sidekick, a trusty computer, and a spaceship of your own? Then The Random Science Fiction Accoutrements Generator is your friend. Just click on the link and you will be well equipped for your next adventure with one of each.

This random generator was created with information I compiled for the Odd Reference pages at the Cuparium.

Why, you may not unreasonably ask, would anyone want to use this random generator other than for one’s personal amusement? Aside from the fact that there is no better reason than for amusing oneself, one could also use it for generating an instant (albeit farcical) campaign. You have a crew (i.e. a group of players) and nothing else? Give them one robot, one computer, and one spaceship and see if it doesn’t create a universe of possibilities.

Increasing Web Log Navigability

I added two new pages that duplicate information found in the sidebar of the front page, but which now makes them accessible from any page or article in Fudgerylog. The Archives page lists both Categories and Months and indicates the number of articles for each. The Links page lists the main Fudgery.net navigation links as well as a selection of external Web comics and Web logs.

Skills Page Improved

I have begun working on two pages at Fudgery.net again, namely Optimum Skills for Fudge and the corresponding Big Chart of the same. I added Cryptozoölogy, wrote a description for Brawling, and tweaked Cryptanalysis, Exobiology, Occultism, and Xenology. Next, I will be writing descriptions for all the martial arts I left blank.

Offensive Damage Factors Considered

One of the things I like about Fudge is the simplicity of determining how much damage a mêlée weapon causes. I’ve seen it boiled down to its bare essence in a variety of ways, but I think this version is the best:

-1 unarmed, no formal combat training
+0 unarmed, formal combat training
+0 small weapon
+1 medium weapon
+2 large weapon
+1 sharpness
+1 two-handed

So, if a character enters combat, you ask yourself these questions:

If the character is unarmed, is he formally or informally trained in unarmed combat? (Apply 0 if the former or -1 if the latter.)

If the character is armed, is the weapon small, medium, or large? (Apply 0, +1, or +2 respectively.) If it is sharp, add +1. If it is wielded with two hands, add +1.

Example: A rock is a small blunt weapon (ODF +0). A shillelagh is a medium blunt weapon (+1 medium = ODF +1). A knife is a small sharp weapon (+1 sharpness = ODF +1). A gladius is a medium sharp weapon (+1 medium +1 sharpness = ODF +2). A longsword is a large sharp weapon (+2 large +1 sharpness = ODF +3). A claymore is a large, sharp, two-handed weapon (+2 large +1 sharpness +1 two-handed = ODF +4).

This can easily be used to extrapolate the damage factors of everyday items such as a bowling ball (medium blunt object; ODF +1), a brick (small blunt object; ODF +0), a spade (large, blunt, two-handed tool; ODF +3), or a sickle (medium sharp tool; ODF +2).

This presents a quandary. Why would anyone choose to learn a specific weapon skill if Brawling can give one the ability to use just about anything as effectively? We know that household objects are not as effective as actual weapons, but how can this fact be reflected without complicating the simple formula of which we are so fond? Since the ordinary object is inferior to the weapon possessing similar qualities by virtue of its different design purposes, I think the best way to reflect this is to impose an initiative penalty to the wielder of the ordinary object whenever the two are matched. This would only work if alternating combat turns are being used. If simultaneous combat rounds are being used, one could rule that the wielder of the actual weapon gains a +1 mêlée modifier when engaged against a brawler attacking with a chair or a walking stick or any other object.

I was thinking about this as I was adding the description to the Brawling skill in Optimum Skills for Fudge. The unarmed combat skills are the only skills for which I have not yet written descriptions, and Brawling, being the most basic of all fighting techniques, is the first I have undertaken. On the table above, Brawling qualifies as unarmed, no formal combat training, and thus provides a -1 offensive damage factor. Any other form of unarmed combat requires some amount of formal training (having a default level of Nonexistent) and provides a 0 offensive damage factor. Special attack techniques will bestow a +1 offensive damage factor. To keep things simple, I think the difference between most of the martial arts will be style rather than effect, leaving the description of specific techniques to players if they so desire (and providing some examples in the skill descriptions). Certain skills may have exceptions, such as Aikido, Judo, Jujutsu, and Wrestling, which are more focused on disabling opponents than injuring or killing them (depending on the style and the individual practitioner, of course).

Doctor Who Observations Part 3

[This article is in support of my project to design an unofficial (and free) Fudge role-playing game adaptation of Doctor Who (the original show).]

The strength and weakness of Doctor Who as a role-playing game is that it is best suited for small groups, preferably of one to four players plus the GM. If the Doctor ever had more than three Companions at once I would be surprised, and more often he had only one. This is not to say that more Companions would be impossible, but it would certainly be a challenge to maintain the atmosphere of the show with so many main characters (and it must be stated here, if it was not already obvious, that one of the major goals of this game is to convey the atmosphere of the original show, regardless of whether the players are portraying characters from the show or characters they have created).

For those who have difficulty finding or starting a gaming group (or coördinating the schedules of the members when a group is found or started), playing a game that offers the richest rewards for smaller groups is a blessing. Doctor Who thrives best when there are only a handful of characters. Violent solutions to problems should always be a last resort (except in the case of rare characters like Leela), and smaller groups will be less tempted to use force unless necessary. By the same token, if there are fewer player characters, each will have more opportunity to interact socially with the non-player characters. In general, the greater the number of Companions a Time Lord has, the more all of them will be overshadowed by the Time Lord. Fewer Companions will have more opportunities to participate, and each will be likelier to shine in a particular area of expertise or natural advantage, e.g. Zoë with her super high intelligence or Jamie with his bravery and decisiveness.

In my own experience running FASA’s Doctor Who, sessions with two players were ideal, but sessions with just a single player were quite playable and enjoyable. Entire stories (which in Doctor Who typically consisted of four episodes) could be run in a single session with no sense of being rushed. This would be perfect for convention events, were it not for the fact that convention organizers usually prefer role-playing events to accommodate at least six players. True, there are times when only one or two players will turn up at an event. The first time I ever ran an event at a convention (GenCon XVIII), two players showed up for the first time slot for my satirical take on the World of Greyhawk for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, 1st Edition. I could have cancelled it, but I decided to run it, and a fun time was had by all despite the fact that I had designed it for four to six players. For the second time slot, six players reported in, plus two more. Being too much of a softy, I allowed the two extra players in (I had had the foresight to bring additional pregenerated characters), but a combination of factors (including the length of the table, the loudness of the game room, and the unwieldy number of participants) made the experience less satisfying (especially for the unfortunates at the opposite end of the table at whom my descriptions often had to be yelled to be heard). As a result, the maximum number of players I will now accept at my events is six, and the number I prefer is four. With regard to this game, however, I think it might be best to run it as a free Fudge demo amongst one to four interested parties at a time. [Edit: To clarify, when I used the word "parties" I meant "individuals," not "parties of adventurers." That would be a challenge.] I’m not sure of any other way to run it effectively at a convention.

In summary, this game will be aimed at maintaining the dynamics of small groups consisting of at least one Time Lord and one to three Companions (one of whom may also be a Time Lord) to better promote playability and preserve the atmosphere of the original Doctor Who.

Trait Conversions Updated Again

The Ladder by Paul Elliott and Mazes & Minotaurs by Olivier Legrand have been added to Optimum Trait Conversions for Fudge.

Both have already been added to the Links page, but I’ll link them again here for good measure:

Role-Playing in Ray Harryhausen’s Mythical Greece

Legendary Games Studio has announced the return of the original fantasy role-playing game, the progenitor of the entire role-playing hobby, Mazes & Minotaurs. Published in 1972 and later released as a Revised edition in 1987, M&M defined fantasy adventure for millions of gamers worldwide. Now, Legendary Games Studio is making both the Original Rules and the Revised Rules available to all for free! To download the free PDFs, visit the Legendary Games Studio Official Mazes & Minotaurs Web site!
(Continued)

Page of Updates

I have added an Updates page here for frequently updated pages at Fudgery.net.