Skip to content

Plans Announced for New Edition of D&D

Monday, January 9, 2012

Wizards of the Coast announced today that plans are underway to produce a new edition of Dungeons & Dragons. Addressing fans in “Charting the Course of D&D”, Mike Mearls stated:

The game is at its best when it is yours. For that reason, we want your participation. The goals we have set for ourselves are by no means trivial or easy. By involving you in this process, we can build a set of D&D rules that incorporate the wants and desires of D&D gamers around the world. We want to create a flexible game, rich with options for players and DMs to embrace or reject as they see fit, a game that brings D&D fans together rather than serves as one more category to splinter us apart.

The article above also includes an invitation to sign up “to be notified when the playtest is beginning and how you can participate.”

Filed in Gaming News, Role-Playing Games | Tagged | Comments Off

The Very Idea 2: More Variations of the Trait Ladder

Friday, December 30, 2011

What started as a joke continues as a joke, and I make no recommendations whatsoever to use any of these unconventional trait ladders in Fudge (except the first). In fact, I think it is counterproductive to introduce a multitude of different trait ladders as it does nothing but create confusion. Nonetheless, here are four more for your amusement.

The first is a slight modification of the Not-So-Very-Varied Trait Ladder. Some players don’t feel quite right about not having a Legendary trait level, so instead of adding Very to each additional level above Superb, Legendary is situated above Superb and each level above that adds another Very. The same is done with sub-Terrible trait levels and the substitution of Abysmal.

Fudge Traits # Epic Not-So-Very-Varied Traits
Superb +4 +7 Very Very Very Legendary
Superb +3 +6 Very Very Legendary
Superb +2 +5 Very Legendary
Superb +1 +4 Legendary
Superb +3 Superb
Great +2 Great
Good +1 Good
Fair 0 Fair
Mediocre -1 Mediocre
Poor -2 Poor
Terrible -3 Terrible
Terrible -1 -4 Abysmal
Terrible -2 -5 Very Abysmal
Terrible -3 -6 Very Very Abysmal
Terrible -4 -7 Very Very Very Abysmal

The All American Trait Ladder

Here is the trait ladder for Americans of the Great Depression and Second World War. This is the language of gangsters and coppers, flappers and mols, GIs and MPs, the Three Stooges and Our Gang. It’s the Common Man’s trait ladder, and it’s Swell, see? And don’t let any Lousy bum tell you differently. Besides, that palooka is only a So-So boxer and you’re, well, you’re O.K. with your mitts. Sure, you can take him. Oh, you mean the bruiser over there? He’s Pretty Good in a fight. Nice knowing ya, pal. Good luck. Gotta go. So long!

Fudge Traits # All American Traits
Superb +3 Terrific
Great +2 Swell
Good +1 Pretty Good
Fair 0 O.K.
Mediocre -1 So-So
Poor -2 Lousy
Terrible -3 Rotten

The Proper Lady’s Trait Ladder

To suggest that a proper lady is only able to distinguish between what is proper and improper would be far from correct. A proper lady has an extensive vocabulary with which to describe her trials and tribulations as well as her triumphs. It would be most vexing indeed if one were limited to a mere two words; two words would be less than advantageous if they were one’s sole means of supporting oneself in a cruel world. Turbulent is the life of a proper lady who is forced to contend with the daily indignities of dealing with Dreary household servants, common labourers with Ghastly manners, and nieces who are Atrociously difficult to match with gentleman callers. O, to be extricated from that undeserving fate and elevated to her proper place! — such is the conundrum uppermost in her thoughts. A proper lady, a lady of society, ought to be able to expect, quite reasonably, to concern herself exclusively with attending Lovely parties in the company of other personages of importance like herself.

Fudge Traits # Traits for Ladies
Superb +3 Divine
Great +2 Lovely
Good +1 Acceptable
Fair 0 Tolerable
Mediocre -1 Dreary
Poor -2 Ghastly
Terrible -3 Atrocious

The Cold and Analytical Trait Ladder
[To be recited in a monotone.]

This trait ladder is stripped of unnecessary sentimentality. Do not expect this trait ladder to generate an emotional response or any other human weakness. The function of this trait ladder is to achieve Maximum efficiency. Inefficiency must be eliminated. To operate at less than Standard Capacity is to be inefficient. Most human capabilities are Below Standard; many are Well Below Standard. Therefore, humans are inefficient. Inefficiency must be eliminated. Now processing data…

Fudge Traits # Cold & Analytical Traits
Superb +3 Maximum [Capacity]
Great +2 Well Above Standard [Capacity]
Good +1 Above Standard [Capacity]
Fair 0 Standard [Capacity]
Mediocre -1 Below Standard [Capacity]
Poor -2 Well Below Standard [Capacity]
Terrible -3 Minimum [Capacity]

[Originally posted here in the Omnium-Gatherum section of Fudgery.net.]

Filed in Fudge, Role-Playing Games | Tagged , | Comments Off

The Very Idea: Variations of the Trait Ladder

Friday, December 30, 2011

From time to time one hears complaints about the trait ladder of Fudge being “broken” because the adjectives do not extend above Superb or below Terrible, whereas results may occur beyond these ranges, especially when characters possess Great or Superb traits. I consider any result above Superb to be an extension of Superb, and it only matters how Superb if one is involved in an opposed action in which more than one character gets a Superb or higher result. If it is a matter of combat, then I generally just deal with the numbers in order to arrive at a relative degree. If the conflict is not combat-related, then I merely state results in terms of one being “more Superb” than the other. Some may balk at such vague descriptions, so for those who desire “hard and fast rules” preserving the adjectival integrity of the trait ladder, I offer the following simple remedy that will extend the ladder without relying on numerical modifiers or adding more words to memorize. All one has to do is add “Very” for each level above Superb or below Terrible. That’s all there is to it. If your Superb Swordsman rolls +3 in a fight against a Superb Axe-wielder who rolls +2, then you now know that your Very Very Very Superb result defeats his merely Very Very Superb result. And whatever you may say about a Terrible combatant who rolls -4, it’s a Very Very Very Very Terrible result.

Fudge Traits # Not-So-Very-Varied Traits
Superb +4 +7 Very Very Very Very Superb
Superb +3 +6 Very Very Very Superb
Superb +2 +5 Very Very Superb
Superb +1 +4 Very Superb
Superb +3 Superb
Great +2 Great
Good +1 Good
Fair 0 Fair
Mediocre -1 Mediocre
Poor -2 Poor
Terrible -3 Terrible
Terrible -1 -4 Very Terrible
Terrible -2 -5 Very Very Terrible
Terrible -3 -6 Very Very Very Terrible
Terrible -4 -7 Very Very Very Very Terrible

The Good, the Bad, and the Adequate

To be honest, all results really boil down to being either good, bad, or adequate, or degrees of the first two. To extend the idea presented above, one could center the trait ladder at Adequate, with Good at +1 and Bad at -1. For each level above Good or below Bad, one adds “Very.” A Great result is now Very Good, a Superb result is Very Very Good, and a Terrible -1 result is Very Very Very Bad.

Fudge Traits # Good to Bad Traits
Superb +4 +7 Very Very Very Very Very Very Good
Superb +3 +6 Very Very Very Very Very Good
Superb +2 +5 Very Very Very Very Good
Superb +1 +4 Very Very Very Good
Superb +3 Very Very Good
Great +2 Very Good
Good +1 Good
Fair 0 Adequate
Mediocre -1 Bad
Poor -2 Very Bad
Terrible -3 Very Very Bad
Terrible -1 -4 Very Very Very Bad
Terrible -2 -5 Very Very Very Very Bad
Terrible -3 -6 Very Very Very Very Very Bad
Terrible -4 -7 Very Very Very Very Very Very Bad

The English Gentleman’s Trait Ladder

To reflect a more civilized point of view, one may opt for the famous capacity for both understatement and overstatement that is characteristic of the archetypical English gentleman. Whilst one may admit that French cuisine is Quite Sufficient, one can state with satisfaction that English cooking is simply Smashing. Similarly, whereas the Bataan Death March was a Rather Bad situation, the service in this restaurant is Appalling!

Fudge Traits # Traits for Gentlemen
Superb +3 Quite Sufficient
Great +2 Jolly Good
Good +1 Splendid
Fair 0 Smashing
Mediocre -1 Appalling
Poor -2 Dreadful
Terrible -3 Rather Bad

Big Brother’s Newspeak Trait Ladder

George Orwell’s 1984, written as a warning of the dangers of totalitarianism, has a built-in trait ladder for those who wish (for whatever incomprehensible reason) to adventure in his nightmarish dystopia. Note that there is no equivalent trait for Fair in this trait ladder. The concept of “Fair” is a thoughtcrime. Report at once to the Ministry of Love.

Fudge Traits # Newspeak Traits
Superb +3 doubleplusgood
Great +2 plusgood
Good +1 good
Fair 0 [not applicable]
Mediocre -1 ungood
Poor -2 plusungood
Terrible -3 doubleplusungood

[Originally posted here in the Omnium-Gatherum section of Fudgery.net.]

Filed in Fudge, Role-Playing Games | Tagged , | Comments Off

More Useless Trait Ladder Variations for Fudge

Friday, December 30, 2011

In 2006, I posted The Very Idea: Variations of the Trait Ladder in the Omnium-Gatherum section of Fudgery.net. In 2007, I wrote a sequel to that article and didn’t bother to post it. I felt it was lacking something and eventually forgot about it. Now, at the end of 2011, I have dusted it off, polished it, and posted it in its rightful place in the Omnium-Gatherum. In response to no demand whatsoever, I present The Very Idea 2: More Variations of the Trait Ladder.

Filed in Fudge, Role-Playing Games, Site News | Tagged , | Comments Off

Let the Dice Fall Where They May

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Dice in any game contribute suspense. Your strategy may appear flawless, but dice represent the fickle finger of Fate that tends to poke you in the eye just when victory is in sight. On the other hand, it can also point the way to safety just when you think all hope is lost. In a role-playing game, dice are the element of chance that is the great equalizer between the GM and the players. For the GM, dice are both a limitation and a liberation. The GM already bears the burden of describing a world and all the inhabitants the players encounter. When the dice are rolled, however, there is no such burden except to describe the results. Here is where the GM gets to participate like a player, where events in the world the GM created can be influenced by an external neutral force. For those GMs who rarely get the opportunity to be players, this is where they, too, can watch events unfold from a non-omniscient point of view.

In order for this dynamic to work, it is necessary for the dice to be rolled in the open. That is to say, the dice ought to be rolled in full view of the players and the GM. Certain kinds of rolls would still be made secretly by the GM, such as a percentage chance of a certain event or encounter happening or when a player character attempts a skill for which success is not readily discernible (e.g. searching for a secret door or detecting a trap), but rolls that represent a contest between characters or a character and the environment should be visible to all participants in the situation.

One problem this alleviates is distrust by the players. If a player can see the GM’s roll, he or she knows that the GM is not fudging rolls for the players’ benefit or detriment. Although some GMs are suspected of fudging rolls in favor of their NPCs or monsters, I suspect many more are actually guilty of fudging rolls in favor of the players because they do not wish to be too harsh. I suspect this because I was one of those GMs in my early days in the hobby. Mollycoddling players does them no good in the long run. You may think you are helping them, but in actuality you deprive them of the true taste of victory when they succeed if you withhold the bitterness of defeat when they fail. You are also obstructing their growth as gamers.

Any given dice-rolling tradition is probably as old as any other. Some GMs roll in the open; some roll in secret; some let the players roll, but never tell them the target number; some even roll for the players, too. Different groups have different needs. My needs, both as a GM and a player, require that I get to roll dice and let them fall where they may.

Filed in Editorials, Role-Playing Games | | Comments Off

Thousand Suns Now Available

Thursday, December 22, 2011

The Thousand Suns Rulebook by James Maliszewski, a complete role-playing game in the tradition of “imperial science fiction,” is now available for sale in PDF, softcover, and hardcover formats. Read about it in Grognardia, the author’s gaming Web log. Buy it at RPGNow.com.

Filed in Gaming News, Role-Playing Games | Tagged | Comments Off

The Better to Link You With, My Dear

Sunday, December 18, 2011

The Links page at Fudgery.net proper has been ever-so-slightly altered to improve readability. Honestly, I ought to have done it years ago.

Filed in Site News | | Comments Off

Character Death, Where Is Thy Sting?

Sunday, December 18, 2011

In most adventure role-playing games, it is important for players to understand that death is a real possibility for characters. If the GM is constantly snatching player characters from the jaws of defeat with fudged dice rolls, an important aspect of the game is being sacrificed. Essentially, it encourages less intelligent decision-making on the part of the players, which usually results in a degradation of verisimilitude at the same time that it diminishes role-playing. Actions that have cushioned consequences (or none at all) lead to irrational and unrealistic character behavior. When the possibility of character death is eliminated, another thing is eliminated, too: risk. Risk is the very heart of game-playing itself. It is also the heart of what constitutes an adventure. So, what happens when you eliminate the element of risk from an adventure game? It makes the activity rather pointless, doesn’t it?

Character death is not equal in all role-playing games, however. In some games a new character can be generated in five minutes. In others the process may take hours. In either case, if a player has been using a character for many months (or years), the sudden death of that character can carry quite a sting. Without detracting from the significance of a character’s demise, it is possible to make the experience less painful for the player and perhaps even make it enjoyable.

When a character expires, it should almost be as much an occasion for celebration as for mourning, like a traditional New Orleans funeral procession. The character’s journey has ended, but that doesn’t preclude the player from role-playing the death scene to the hilt. If the scene is role-played well enough, whether seriously or comically, the player ought to be rewarded in some manner when they generate the next character. Depending upon the game, the GM might award the new character bonus experience points, a reroll of one attribute, an extra skill, a special ability, an increased chance for psionics, or anything else that appropriately encourages good role-playing and rewards good sportsmanship. And if any particular behavior should be encouraged above all others, for the health of the hobby and the enjoyment of all, it’s good sportsmanship.

Filed in Bag of Tricks, Role-Playing Games | Tagged | Comments Off

Always End with a Cliffhanger 2

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Previously, I stated that any role-playing session based on movie serials or pulp fiction ought to conclude with a cliffhanger. After all, a cliffhanger adventure requires cliffhangers by definition. In addition to accurately capturing the style of the source material, the classic cliffhanger ending has the benefit of sharing the writer’s advantage with the players.

Anyone who has ever watched an adventure movie serial knows that whatever happened at the end of the last episode or chapter, there is more to it than meets the eye. The hero may appear to have plummeted off the cliff in his automobile, but next week we discover that he threw himself clear and rolled into the underbrush. The hero’s pal may appear to have been blown to bits in that shed where all the dynamite was stored, but next week we learn that he noticed the fire in the nick of time and leapt through the open window to safety. Writers, of course, have the luxury of writing the story, but player characters live it. In most cases, they must react to situations instantly or face dire consequences.* In a cliffhanger, however, situations that may seem hopeless become more manageable when players can weigh their options and fine-tune their strategies between sessions. Although player discussions may be limited to what is possible for their characters during the session (e.g. they must be within earshot of one another; they must be able to converse without being overheard by the enemy; they are limited to what their characters know), no such limitations exist between sessions. In fact, the crazier the scheme that results from such freedom the better! One could even argue that this is one instance where giving the player limited “narrative control” is acceptable even in an otherwise straightforward role-playing game. If the player offers a sufficiently entertaining and plausible resolution to the cliffhanging situation, the GM may rule in favor of it even if the player introduced certain elements that were not previously described by the GM. The GM may require the expenditure of Fudge points or Fortune points or Karma (or whatever the game provides for), or the player’s proposal may be granted for free. Skill rolls or attribute rolls, if they pertain, may be resolved normally or adjudicated by the GM.

In any event, the cliffhanger ending is one of the aspects of the genre that makes it special, so it deserves special attention in any role-playing game that attempts to emulate it.

* Some groups are more casual about in-character and out-of-character statements than others, just as some groups are less focused on in-game events than on socializing. If your group has no boundaries between player knowledge and character knowledge, no restrictions on discussion, or no time limits to player character reactions, then the benefits of the cliffhanger ending will be significantly lessened.

Filed in Role-Playing Games | Tagged | Comments Off

Thy Inheritance and Thy Duty

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Families and Heirlooms, written by 1d30, solves the problem of how to pass on the possessions of a deceased character to his or her successor in a way that enriches the setting, invests new characters with a sense of continuity, and takes a bit of the sting out of character death. I particularly like how a character’s actions affect his or her family’s reputation, which in turn may affect the fortunes of any family member starting out as a new character. These rules are probably more suitable for some settings and cultures than others, just as they are more relevant to some role-playing games than others. The next time I start up a Dungeons & Dragons, Labyrinth Lord, or Tunnels & Trolls campaign, I will give them a try.

Filed in Elsewhere, Role-Playing Games | | Comments (1)

Simple Critical Miss Table for Rubber Band Guns

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Mishaps with rubber band guns are not uncommon, and the frequent result is the inadvertent shooting of oneself, which rarely results in anything more serious than a brief stinging sensation. Our tenth table of tribulation is for use with rubber band guns:

Critical Miss Table for Rubber Band Guns
1d6 Result
1 Drop weapon.
2 Weapon misfires.
3 Drop weapon; discharges in random direction.
4 Shoot self.
5 Shoot self.
6 Shoot self in eye.

Random directions for rubber band projectile weapons, whether caused by accidental discharge or ricochet, may be determined by the usual means (1d6 for hexes, 1d8 for squares, or a compass die) modified by a roll on the following table:

1dF Result
+ Upward vertical
0 Horizontal
- Downward vertical

A d6 may be substituted if your Fudge dice have mysteriously (or not-so-mysteriously) disappeared.

Filed in Role-Playing Games, Rules | Tagged , , , | Comments Off

Simple Critical Miss Table for Machine Guns

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Even the most fearsome weapons have disadvantages. Our ninth table of frustration is for use with machine guns (mounted or otherwise):

Critical Miss Table for Machine Guns
1d6 Result
1 Weapon jams.
2 Weapon jams.
3 Ricochet in random direction.
4 Ricochet in random direction.
5 Trigger stuck.
6 Mechanism breaks.

Random directions for firearms, whether caused by accidental discharge or ricochet, may be determined by the usual means (1d6 for hexes, 1d8 for squares, or a compass die) modified by a roll on the following table:

1dF Result
+ Upward vertical
0 Horizontal
- Downward vertical

A d6 may be substituted if your Fudge dice are missing in action.

Filed in Role-Playing Games, Rules | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off