RSS
Ramble and Request
What week-long hiatus? What are you talking about?
Well, obviously I’ve been busy with school this past week, so I haven’t had the time to write anything here. That said, I have the next week off for Reading Week (Canada’s university spring break), so I’ll try to get some posts done/started. I’ll also try to get the “Aboot” page up. Maybe I’ll hack myself a new theme. I did pretty good with ChattyDM’s.
At the moment, however, I have a bit of insomnia, so I’m doing a bit of an update here.
On the only topic I seem to post with regularity, we didn’t have a game last weekend, due to a recent loss of two players and the car of another getting vandalized. We are gaming tomorrow/today, however, so expect a writeup this week.
On the Pathfinder adventure, I’m still being pleasantly surprised by how little I’ve had to change. With the exception of the Quasit battle last time, pretty much everything has been playable as-is.
More on that after the next session.
Now, as for the request in the title, I’d love to do more posts like I did at the beginning of this blog. Variant rules are one of my favourite topics. (Statting creatures is always fun too.) But I need your help on this.
See, as it stands, I’m pretty satisfied with the state of the 3.5e rules, but I still love making variants and fixes for things. I could just make up random things, but that’s hardly motivating or fun. But it doesn’t have to get used in my own game to get me thinking about it.
So I want to hear from you. What do you want out of a game, that you need a house rule for? Have you tried a rule, and it didn’t quite work out, and you don’t know how to fix it? Have you been considering trying someone else’s house rule, but there’s something grating in the back of your mind about it?
Send these things to me, via email. (You can get the email on the right side of the page, just under Ralph.) I’ll post them here, and develop a fix for you. Think of me as Miss Lonelyhearts! Except for RPGs. And male.
Mr. Lonelydice?
Whatever.
This could also work with creature creation. Perhaps you’re not good at statting up the creatures your incredible fluff creates. Well, I’m a crunch-side DM, so if you have monster fluff that needs to be realised, I’d be happy to give it a shot.
And if anyone wants to buy me a beer for doing so, be my guest.
As long as that beer is whiskey. 😉
On a different note, it has come to my attention that I have a large reader to post ratio, especially considering post frequency. 15 people subscribed to my RSS feed (plus more who don’t use RSS). An average of 8 visits per day (and generally at least 6), even when there’s nothing new, which is often. Somewhere around 121 visitors who have seen the site at least twice (which is good enough by me). All with 14 posts (including this one) over three months.
For someone who merely intends to use this blog for a creative/crunch outlet and a log for our group’s games, that’s not too shabby.
So anyways, this week you can expect a few things. First, a DM log, of course. Next, we might be seeing player logs (though I don’t know if that should be plural) start up soon. You will definitely get a second post by myself this week. A book review, in fact.
Beyond that, it depends on what kind of response I get to this Lonelydice thing. If it’s sufficient, I can hopefully make this a regular feature.
Mr. Lonelydice… Yeah, I think I’ll go with that name. It’s weird. I like it.
6 Comments
Graham on February 17th, 2008
Alright, Tommi. Nice and vague. 😛
Is there something in particular that you would want to get out of such a system?
Tommi on February 17th, 2008
My personal priorities are: 1. Player can make difference; that is, choose to succeed when it is important.
2. Negotiation, not mind control.
3. Binding results. This is not contradictory with 2.
4. The players always get to roll dice, but can still be affected.
5. The character’s style matters: Intimidation and seduction, even if used to achieve the same goal, have different consequences.
6. The rules can be ignored when they are not needed, yet are robust enough to handle minor disagreements between players that are also disagreements between characters.
Is that too hard, not hard enough, or something between?
Graham on February 17th, 2008
Hmm…
This one is a complex issue.
I’d probably start off with a variation of Ruch Burlew’s Diplomacy rules. I will definitely put this in the think tank, though it may take me a little bit to get at the core of it all.
Expect me to write this this week, and get back to it asap.
Noumenon on April 10th, 2008
You are going to have a heck of a lot more readers than that if you do more posts like your one on the Rule of Cool. Loving the campaign log posts too.
I would like a better way to handle “Charm Person” type spells. I can never start spellcasting in a conversation without making the person so suspicious my DM wants to roll initiative. I don’t want to be reduced to casting a flavorful spell like Hypnotism from around the corner, and I don’t want to waste my feats on silent spells.
Graham on April 10th, 2008
Thank you, Noumenon!
I have a couple ideas for the Charm Person issue. I’ll put them up as soon as I can.
Tommi on February 17th, 2008
The way social stuff, especially lying, is handled is always interesting. So, if you have a shortage of ideas, write a bit something about them.