Sam Seer's Blog

This is an OSR Pattern. If you haven't read one before, scroll to the bottom for some context! One, Two, or Three Exits A room with one exit is a dead-end; with two exits: a waypoint; with three exits: an interesting choice. Four or more exits is fatiguing, yet may have its place. Sometimes, you'll see a dungeon room that has way too many doors: The Temple of Elemental Evil (1985) This is uncomfortable for both the Referee and Players. The Referee has to communicate too much information at once. The Players have to comprehend too much information at once; they will ask for clarification now or later. People can hold 1-3 pieces of information in their mind at once. This is true for NPCs . It is true for quest hooks. And it is true for dungeon rooms. When placing exits, do so deliberately to manage cognitive load and pacing. A room with one exit is a dead-end . This is... A cognitive break, as the Players have reached a terminus. A tactical nightmare (no escape) or a fortifiable...

Running my first gold-for-XP game (well,  gold-or - XP  game) has me thinking about incentives. Specifically, what does gold-for-XP incentivize? Acquiring loot Doing jobs for pay Stealing Running a profitable business Avoiding things that don't pay Avoiding things that kill you Is this what I want my game to be about? No. I want my game to be about: Exploring the World ¹  Engaging with the World Following your interests By using XP, how might one incentivize this kind of game? Exploring: Give XP for locations visited and locations fully explored. Engaging: Give XP for completing quests, partnering with factions and NPCs, slaying beasts, developing your skills, doing daring and ambitious things. Following your interests: Give XP for completing personal quests. Do I  want  to  dictate  what my game is about? Of course. I don't want to play a game about running a business or managing a kingdom or waging war between armies. I don't mind if they're an el...

Rather than gold for XP, the Players choose: gold or XP.  That is, hauling the grave goods back to civilization and liquidating them is not enough to earn XP. You must then spend the funds. The only stipulation is that the way you spend the money cannot benefit you materially in anyway. You can't buy land, build a fort, or fund a powerful mercenary faction. You can do that, you just don't earn XP for it-- you earn those things. To squander the wealth and earn XP, you might: Carouse about town Give to a religious or educational institution Donate to museum Distribute it amongst the poor Bury the goods with a dead Player Character (Why is there so much loot in the earth? XP) Anything. You just can't benefit materially. The point is the Players must decide between advancing their Character (HP, stats, etc.) or advancing their assets (gear, reputation, relationships). Heroes of Might & Magic 3

I ran a one-shot of The Warren this weekend for my Dad and two of my sisters. It was my first time playing (or running the game) and, overall, it was a success. Here's the two big takeaways: The Worst Thing: Presenting the Mission These days, I think one-shots are best when there's a clear goal. So I presented a mission right away. Here's what I said:  Dusk is coming on when you hear a voice over the hill. 'Tu-lip! Ja-ack!' It's the Widow Opal, looking for her two lost rabbit kits. What do you do? Immediately, I felt the misstep. I presented it like a choice, but for the Players, it didn't feel like a choice. They felt they could either (A) accept the quest, or (B) derail the session I had planned. In an effort to course-correct, I told them it really was a choice and—because the map was robust and the Players were generous— they immediately chose a different action (steal cabbage from the garden). It turned out OK, but it was a valuable lesson. If I could ...

Next time you're running a combat encounter, try telling your Players this: A creative stunt will always do more damage than your weapon. A stunt is anything: cutting a chandelier, collapsing the roof, pushing off a ledge, choking with a grappling hook, etc. It just has to be creative. As for "more damage", it doesn't have to be game-breaking. Just increase their weapon die a step (d8 -> d10) or, if it's a wound-based system, increase damage by 1 wound. The important thing is that Players know they will be quantitatively rewarded for their creativity.  Are those doubts I hear? Now, I hear what you're saying: why would a chandelier do more damage than a tool literally made for bloodletting? Where's the goddamn verisimilitude ? And to that I say: I don't give a fuck! It's more fun this way! This is a way purer expression of the tabletop RPG medium because it capitalizes on tactical infinity. Plus, it reminds me of another unrealistic rule that...

As a design exercise, I've been messing around with a tabletop RPG of Skyrim. It's been really productive to get away from my preferences (d20, a few good rules, story-focused) into stranger design territory (d100, no attributes, many skills).  Along the way, I got thinking about a rule for Armor— Armor Pool You have a pool of HP and a pool of Armor. When you take damage, you lose Armor.  If your Armor is 0, you lose HP. Some damage— like critical hits, fire, and magic— bypass your Armor and you lose HP directly. During a rest, you can recover HP. But your Armor can only be repaired in a settlement. I like this because it's piecemeal, degrades, and dead simple to track. It also gives Players another reason to leave the dungeon (or wilderness) and visit town. That's it. It's a new idea to me, but I'm sure systems already use it. Let me know below.