Cyberpunk 2077

Anyone who's read this blog for a while probably knows that I am a so called patient gamer. It's rare that I jump on a game on release day, though it happens. Instead I prefer to wait, and that usually pays off.

Today I want to talk about:

Cyberpunk 2077.

Created by CD Project Red, or CDPR, the makers of the Witcher games as well as the good folks who operate GOG, the best place to get older video games that actually work.

Cyberpunk 2077 (CP2077) is based on the old tabletop RPG Cyberpunk 2020, both written by Mike Pondsmith. This ensures that the story and lore are accurate, which is awesome.

CP2077 is a first person action RPG, where you play as V. You can't change the name, but you can change most other aspects of the character. Included in character generation is your life path; Nomad, Streetkid or Corpo. This life path explains your background and gives some insights and speech alternatives in the game, but don't have too much overall impact.

The game is basically split between two parts; the main story and everything else. You can run countless smaller gigs, race cars, fight in arenas etc. These smaller gigs pay well and can even unlock iconic weapons and grant you vehicles. Merely exploring Night City is extremely rewarding. CP2077 is ridiculously immersive and detailed, there is always something going on, and on this level alone, CP2077 blows every other game in this vein out of the water.

But lets look at the main story. As usual, I'm not spoiling anything, so bear with me. In V's quest for fame and riches, you go on a mission that turns everything on its head and sends V on a spectacular journey. The main story is emotional, epic, and awesome. It can be heartrending, it is sometimes really funny, but always pulse pounding. It is up there in the top five best stories I have played. But sure, it has a few flaws.

First off, I do think the game throws the Main Story at you too quickly. I would have liked to learn a bit about how the games plays, and figure out what kind of build I want before being thrown in to the deep end. I'd like to say so much more, but alas, spoilers.

Mechanically, CP2077 is great. It had a very rocky launch back in 2020, but since then CDPR has done a ton of work and taken a shaky game and turned it into a masterpiece. Again, there are some things I wish were different, but they are small stuff. My biggest pet peeve is the Journal, or quest log. Every time you exit a gig, it automatically activates whichever mission is next in the main quest, complete with waypoints on the minimap. If you want to do another gig, you have to go and manually change that every time and it is annoying. I also dislike how loud V's footsteps are. But hey if those are my biggest complaints, it's pretty damn good!

One thing that threw me off at first is the fact that CP2077 throws a lot at you in the beginning and it can be hard to try to remember it all. Hacking, fighting, blocking, stealth etc can set your head spinning, but the good news is that you don't actually need to use it all at once. In time you'll start using more and more elements, but until you do, you can get far by just shooting enemies in the face.

Building your character is a bit of a headache at first, but if you read the tooltips, it becomes easier in time. The game even has a free one time use re-spec, if you want to redo your talents. I will say that trying to be a jack-of-all-trades really makes you a master of none, and that is not a good idea.

What else can I say? The games is gorgeous, the voice acting is brilliant, and even the smallest side jobs are incredibly well written. The game can be quite raunchy, but there is a so called streamer mode, which if switched on, eliminates most of the sex, but not all!

I know I'm rambling a bit, but I'm trying to go though this enormous game in my head and remember everything I wanted to talk about. I guess I'll just wrap up and say that if you like well written stories, and cool action RPG's you owe it to yourself to play Cyberpunk 2077. There is a DLC, Phantom Liberty, but I haven't played it yet so I know nothing about it. Of all the games that I have played, Cyberpunk 2077 is one of the few that have left a real mark on me.

Oh, and the soundtrack is spectacular!

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great week!

 

The Laundry Files rpg part 2

Continuing on last weeks theme of the Laundry Files RPG, I have now read GOD GAME BLACK and I'm in the process of reading the Agent's Handbook.

I love GOD GAME BLACK . It's insanely well written and oh so informative.

Although it seems to bill itself as ”just” the follow up book to the original core book, documenting the events in Stross's Apocalypse Codex, its' actually so much more.

I'm of course not going to go through the whole book bit by bit, but the best, most valuable part in my opinion is the section concerning the Black Chamber.

The Black Chamber, or Nazgul as they're also called (but not to their faces), is the American equivalent to the Capitol Laundry Services. But they are a really terrifying lot. If you thought the Laundry could play rough, the Nazgul take it to another league altogether.

Being the biggest and most proactive of the occult agencies, the write up they got in the core book was in no way enough. Here you get all you could ever wish for. And then some more.

All in all a very useful book for running the games in the Laundry-Verse, but not perhaps for other CoC games.

The Agent's Handbook is luckily more than just the gear book. It is that, but it also goes through what's needed to succeed as a spy as well as expanding a great deal on life and death (and after life) in the Laundry. After all, you can't always go out cult-hunting. You also have to file the appropriate paper work. Otherwise something much scarier than the odd soul eating beast will come after you. Namely Human Resources and Financial Control.

I haven't gotten far enough in the Agent's Handbook than this, so it'll have to suffice for now.

Have a great week!

The Laundry Files rpg part 1

A couple of weeks ago I went past my friendly local game shop, or FLGS for you who are familiar with RPG abbreviations.

There I ran across the Laundry RPG, based upon the laundry files novels that I reviewed at the start of this blog. I was immediately tempted, particularly since it struck me that my idea to use side campaigns to illustrate historical happenings fits perfectly into the world of the Laundry.

I took some time to think it over, and two days later I plonked down some cash and picked up The Laundry Files together with some source books. I laid my filthy paws on the Core Book, the Investigators Handbook, License to Summon, The Mythos Dossiers and GOD GAME BLACK. Unfortunately Cultists Under the Bed hasn't been released yet. There is an adventure book – Black Bag Jobs as well as a GM screen, but I decided against them. It got expensive enough as it was.

I thought it'd be in order to share my impressions of these books. I say impressions and not experience since I haven't yet had time to play.

Let's look at the core book first.

It's really well written, first of all, and the art is solid. Not perhaps the best I've seen in an rpg book, but very cool none the less.

The rules are the familiar BRP rules used in Call of Cthulhu since it first crawled out of the squamous ooze of pre-history, also known as 1981. But they've been updated and expanded since those days.

New to these rules are things like Computational Demonology and the whole package is really well adjusted for what you need to “get” the Laundry-verse.

Naturally, you get a lot of info on the Laundry itself, it's international colleagues, and lots of other interesting stuff.

It's a hefty read though, hard covered and packing 288 pages. That said, it's easier to get through than I had expected, and a really good read besides.

Like all good core books, it contains all you need to play, if not all you want. This leads us to;

License to Summon.

This is the magic book of the series (if you want to be crass about it) but it is also more. Rather than just list a bunch of spells, it takes you through computational demonology as well as traditional sorcery, psychic power, dreaming, alchemy and more. Speaking of more, you get a really nifty section of gear that would make Batman jealous. He never had an anti zombie aerosol...

I get an almost Mage the Ascension feel from it, though of course not as free form. But the lads at Cubicle 7 have really thought about this stuff when they penned this book.

Finally for today, I want to talk about The Mythos Dossiers.

This book is a bit hard to pin down. It contains detailed write-ups and files on the major minor mythos races, but it's not a monster manual. Since the Laundry is a part of the British Secret Service, everything is officially re-designated, so the Deep Ones are called BLUE HADES, and the Elder Things are known as ANNING BLUE SKULL, with the shoggoths ANNING BLACK.

This book is amazing, one of the best rpg supplements I've ever read. It really made me think about what these beings are, and what they can do. If you run CoC or indeed any of the multiple variations thereof, get this book!

As an example you get to read about what happened during OPERATION HIGHJUMP (real event by the way), as the U.S. Government investigated the aftermath of At the Mountains of Madness.

That's it for this time. When I've had the chance to read the rest, I'll post the second part.

Iä Iä and all that.

Details details

A couple of weeks ago, I talked about my experimental idea for running historical off shoot games from your main campaign.

Today, we're going to take a look at some useful tricks for running a game set sometime in the past.

Like with all projects the devil hides amongst the details, and historical gaming is no different.

Obviously there's no point in turning your campaign into a historical lecture, but you have to include enough vital facts and details to make the era come alive. Otherwise your Roman campaign is just “now but with togas”.

Most gamers will probably head to the armory first of all, and it's a good place to start. Find out what the major weapons of the time was, at least in general. What you find may surprise you. For example, the first pump action shotgun was designed in 1882, well in time to hunt Jack the Ripper with, should the need arise.

Naturally, the closer your game is to the present, the greater the availability of weaponry becomes. But assembling a list of the most popular firearms of the day, will be the first step in creating a good setting.

Next, look at clothes and fashion. This may seem as a bit of a lame thing to do, but it's vitally important unless every one in the world runs around in their birthday suits. Again, you don't need to go nuts here, but a couple of examples of what men and women wore amongst the lower, middle and upper classes should be enough. That's twelve pictures you have to hunt down and show the players. Not all that arduous eh?

Take a quick look at food and drink while your at it. This is not necessarily all that big of a deal, but as a reminder; any game set in pre Columbian Europe can not feature the humble potato. It has yet to cross the Atlantic. A small but important detail.

Next is transportation. What were people driving in, or were they driving anything at all? Again, a couple of the most prominent examples will do fine.

By now I'm sure your starting to get the idea. Thanks to the plethora of film and movies set in all kinds of cool eras, it's getting easier and easier to bring these times to life again.

Naturally it get's harder the farther back you go, but funnily enough, the same happen when you only go say, twenty years back. Take a look at a random X-files episode and look at what kind of technology is and isn't available. Remember that in 1993 cell phones were practically non existent and people actually faxed each other instead of using email. But keeping straight what happened when it's still so close is sometimes maddening.

Finally, I want to talk about the hardest detail; talking.

This is not something I enforce too rigidly in my games, as it gets very tedious after a while. Too many Prithy good Sirrah, and you will all be likely to try kill each other. I like to keep my players somewhat aware of their characters social standing at least. I don't want the Baronet of Whitlington to scream “Fuck you, I told you to waste that asshole”, when he could say “Damn you, I told you to kill that oaf” without spraining either his tongue or my ears.

That's it in a nutshell. With the easy availability of smart phones it's become very easy to quickly check years or events without holding up the game too much.

Now you just have to find a balance between what you feel your game needs and what your players will put up with!

Good gaming!

Somewhere in time

I have always been plagued by bursts of inspiration for a particular period in history. Now enjoying books or movies set in these times is easy enough, but it's harder when you want to run a campaign set in a specific historical era.

The reason I say I'm plagued is that these bursts can pass as fast as they come, usually lasting only a couple of weeks, sometimes just days. With an inspiration span this short it's difficult to keep up the enthusiasm necessary to GM a campaign, and it's rude to get your players all fired up only to tell them “Sorry, can't be bothered anymore” three sessions later.

Luckily I've come up with a solution of sorts. I've yet to test it, but I believe it'll work.

It goes a little something like this;

The players roll up a “main character” each, who together will run through an investigation, or perhaps unravel a conspiracy. Something that has been going on for a very long time, in any case.

Then, when they manage to uncover a vital clue, or some important fact, you run a side game, lasting only half a session to perhaps three sessions in length, detailing what they found. In these mini games they play pre-made characters who experience what went on in that time and place. And this is what's so great. These side games can take place at any time anywhere, as long as someone is around to document it. From the American Revolution to the beaches of Normandy. Ancient Greece to Cuba in the 60's, anything is possible!

This set up has several benefits. First off, the players don't have to sit through long briefings or read tons of documents, instead they get to play the event.

Secondly, you can illustrate what the bad guys have been doing in a more visceral way, perhaps even let the players be the bad guys, if they're into that.

Thirdly, you can play around with historical settings without the need for in depth research. Just add enough flavor to make it work. I'll discuss how I do this in a later post.

When I talked to my friend, who is also a GM, about this idea, he expressed concern about how to keep the players on track when playing these side characters. An idea that hit me, and this is where experimentation is needed, is that the main PC's only get XP when the side characters complete whatever they were supposed to do. I have no idea if this is going to work, but it might very well.

Of course, they'll need proper pre-briefs in addition to the pre-made characters.

So there you have it. My experimental solution for multi-era play without all the hassle of time travel or dedicated lengthy campaigns.

So many choices!

If you like sitting down with your friends for a night of gaming, be it an RPG or maybe a board game or perhaps a card game, you've probably encountered an all too common problem:

What to play?

Of course you can peruse some off the many lists available online, but then a new problem might arise, namely:

Is this game any good for me/us?

Fear not, dear friend, for I have found us all some help!

First up is Game Geeks.

Here you can sample the wisdom of long time GM and Professor Kurt Wiegel as he reviews RPG's and RPG supplements. Just go to Episode Guide and you can view (as I'm writing this) 214 suitably short review videos. I've enjoyed watching them all even if I'm not really all that interested in a particular game, but I have also found several new RPG's I might have to try, some I wouldn't have even heard of if not for Game Geeks.

Are you not in the mood for Role-playing, and would rather have something more relaxed? Maybe something humorous and silly to enjoy while sipping on a beer? Why not watch Beer and Board Games?

B&BG is a group of friends who sit down, drink beer, play games, get drunk and insult each other. They also improvise songs and do silly impressions. Now if you're thinking why would I want to watch that?, don't worry. That's what I thought, but I'm up to season three, and I've laughed my ass off at their shenanigans more than once. Just be warned, their language is neither child nor work appropriate.

Like Game Geeks, I've found a couple of games I'm definitely going to have to try as soon as I can lay my hands on them. I've even found a couple of different beers I'd like to try.

I should point out, that the first 2-3 episodes aren't all that good, but they quickly found their format, so either stick with it, or skip them. Your choice. 

So, have a look and a laugh, and hopefully you'll find something worth your time!

Why is it so hard?

Every now and then I stumble upon an RPG setting I just can't wait to sink my teeth into, and then promptly don't. So today I want to talk about two such settings. I've read them, I love the worlds, and I have no idea what to do with them.

It just so happens that they're both post apocalyptic, and as such are pretty grim, but the flavors are pretty different.

First up is Engel.

Engel is originally a German RPG from 2002, published in English under the d20 system. Now I like the d20 system for several different settings such as D&D and Star Wars, but in my mind it really fell flat in Engel.

The setting is pretty damn awesome though. Set in 2654, in a flooded Neo-Medieval Europe where the Angelitic Church rules all. The Church enforces it's decrees (amongst them a strong hatred of technology) with the power of the Angels (or Engel) who serve the Church and it's Pontifex Maximus in all things.

The forces of darkness usually takes the shape of gigantic intelligent insects that emerge from perpetually smoke enshrouded areas called Brandlands, to wage war against the Engel and eat people in general.

The closest we get to a neutral faction are the Junk Lords, warlords who controls a few lonely cities with the help of forbidden technology.

I can't really give the setting it's true kudos here, it really is magnificent, and well worth reading if you're not going to play it. There are several pretty big spoilers in the main book which I obviously won't mention here, so beware if you read it, you can't un-know what you know.

So why not run Engel? First off is the system. As mentioned above, I don't want to use d20, and I'm much to lazy, ahem, busy to rewrite it to another system. The original German version had a different system called Arcana, which used Tarot like cards, but it's very free form, in fact much too free for my tastes.

Secondly, I have no bloody clue what kind of a story I'd like to run with it. None, nada. The default position assumes the players take the role of Engel, which is really nifty, but doesn't help me at all.

My second “What to do with it” game is Unhallowed Metropolis.

This incredible setting takes place in Neo-Victorian 2105, where all cities are walled to keep out huge roaming hordes of shambling undead. In a nutshell, the dead rose in 1901 and the world went to hell in a hand-basket. Pure chaos everywhere as they infect those they bite, you know, the typical Zombie plague thing. Then things got worse as large swatches of land sickened, and either died or mutated.

For 200 years or so, people have struggled to reclaim the cities, reinforce them and survive. And they've done it. But apart from some changes like equal rights between the sexes, society is still very Victorian.

This combined with the wide spread use of Tesla technologies, a semi persistent need to wear gas masks outdoors, and undead stalking their victims through poisonous smog, makes for a setting cool enough to make me drool. And yet I don't know what to do with it! Very frustrating indeed.

Like Engel, Unhallowed Metropolis is a highly entertaining read, that deserves more than I can give it here. It has things like the all female guild of Mourners who are tasked with overseeing wakes with their kukris in hand, should grandfather come back for a bite, to the soldiers of the Deathwatch, to haughty aristocrats plotting in their mansions, this setting is a nonstop Gothic gloom fest!

Selecting the Enemy

Many if not most RPG's have monsters, which is awesome. Let's face it, fighting monsters is good fun, but how to pick the right one?

I think the key lies in making them fit in the game world. In a sense, a monster being an unnatural creature, will always stand out in a way an animal wouldn't. But if that animal was wildly out of place, like finding a polar bear in a jungle, you might well think your GM has lost it. Likewise, a misplaced monster can make a player sit up and say; What?

Let's first separate the monsters into Fantasy and Horror, these being the genres that use them the most.

Broadly speaking, any monster can fit into Fantasy, but there are pitfalls. The first is to use a very thematic monster that does not belong outside it's own game, i.e. a beholder making an apperance in Warhammer. Sure, thanks to the corrupting effect of Chaos in WFRP, you could explain away a beholder in the Old World, but it is such a poster-monster for D&D, that it doesn't really fit in anywhere else.

The second pitfall is to use too many different monsters in a too rapid a succession. Goblins followed by skeletons followed by three different oozes followed by, well you get the idea. The sheer volume of available creatures can make it tempting to just throw them out there, but this can make it chaotic and confusing, and in turn lessen the wonder and impact of the monsters you really want to showcase. Less is more, as the old saying goes, and it's true. Now I'm not saying you have to be stingy with the beasties, but try not to overdo it either.

Finally, there are monsters that really need a certain type of environment to make sense. Obviously these critters need to stay in these places, or they'll look foolish. From stone giants in sewers to finding mermaids in deserts, these guys should stay at home.

Now, Horror is a slightly different kettle of fish. Horror games tend to be more thematic than their Fantasy cousins, so obviously if you're playing a zombie survival game, zombies are what you'll face. Now this means you have less options when it comes to choosing monsters for your game, and this in turn means each monster becomes more important.

There are some exceptions though, such as Call of Cthulhu, that do have lots of different monsters, but these cases pretty much follow the second Fantasy pitfall.

When I say the Horror monsters are more important, I'm talking about their impact on the mood of the game. One of the finest examples of this is not a tabletop rpg at all, but a computer game series: Silent Hill.

Every monster you encounter in Silent Hill means something to the story. From the iconic Pyramid Head, to the Nurses, not to mention the Bosses, they don't just look scary, their existence makes sense in the world. This makes their impact stronger, which in turn makes the overall horror better.

Finally, Horror monsters need better timing than their Fantasy counterparts, since over use lessens the impact. You could argue that the monsters in Silent Hill appear too frequently for a tabletop horror RPG, and you'd be right. However, computer games use a very different dynamic than ”regular” rpgs. When it comes to good horror timing, movies are a better guide than electronic games.

So pick your monsters with care, and happy gaming!

Keeping your Villain in good health

As a rule, most villains are great at what they do. But so are the heroes. And what do heroes do? They defeat villains, that's what. And this usually means one dead antagonist. Or does it?

All GM's have felt the pain of having their lovingly crafted villain get minced in the first round, and the temptation to have him use some unknown immunity talisman and then teleport away shaking his fist, is tremendous. Sure, this is viable, but only if the PC's genuinely had no idea he could do that (or failed to take it into consideration), and if it is used consistently in the campaign. Otherwise the players will feel cheated. And rightly so, because you would be cheating.

A competent villain must of course have a good array of defenses, unless he is supremely overconfident that he can't be bested. The trick to these defenses is to have them clear in your mind from the start, and to use them fairly. If a PC can stop teleportation, so be it.

So how do you keep Mr. B. Adguy alive?

Of course, it depends a bit on the type of villain he is, but let the him go about his business in peace. He really shouldn't care about the PC's until they have foiled his schemes enough times. If the campaign devolves into nothing but the bad guy chasing the characters around, trying his level best to kill them, you will either get a TPK or your villain will go splat. Game over in any case.

And when he does notice, use mooks, goons and thugs with the occasionally more powerful henchman. After all, there are evil plans to organize! He can't be expected to chase after just anybody. Imagine Emperor Palpatine standing at the arrivals gate on some planet, checking passports just to catch rebels... it's just not on, right?

The added benefit to this, is not only keeping your villain in one piece, but it will make the final, encounter more dramatic. As the old adage goes: Familiarity breeds contempt. The Lord of Doom shouldn't frequent the same coffee shop the PC's do, at least not in his Doom-ly regalia.

In other words, don't over use him. It's cool if he shows up now and then, but be aware that the players will most likely try to kill him given half a chance. And there is nothing more devious than a determined group of players.

Besides, defeating an awesome right hand man makes for a good middle-of-the-story victory.

Let me finish with an example; In the old Transformers cartoon, the evil Decepticons were usually busy trying to steal energon cubes, or whatever, and the Autobots would inevitably show up to stop them. Fight ensues, Decepticons flee. If the show had been all about pure confrontation, it would have been a very short show indeed.

Roll for Initiative

During the past several months, I've been thinking a lot about the mechanics of rpg's.

A long time ago, I read an article written by Justin Achilli, in which he talked about the art of designing character sheets. He said that every skill you put on it, communicates with the players about what kind of characters the game is meant to have.

As an example, he mentioned the computer skill that snuk it's way onto all the OWoD sheets. This in turn led to hacker werewolves. That was never really in the game designers heads. But since it was on the character sheet, it was obviously ment to be used. So you get ferocious, nerdy, H4xx0r werewolves... Yeah. I have a hard time picturing it too.

But it made me think more about the things we take for granted when we home-brew our systems. In this particular case, Initiative, and whether or not we should get rid of it.

Not in all systems of course, but in some. If you're running a very combat-heavy game, you will need Initiative like you need Oxygen, but I'm starting to think it has no place in horror games. Now before you start screaming obscenities at your screen, or phoning the asylum to have me committed, let me explain.

Initiative is great for keeping track of combat, it's true, but it also creates a probability curve of success that is bad for suspense. If you want your character to be good at fighting, step one is always a high initiative, followed by a good combat skill, and finally you round off with lots of damage. Presto, an almost unbeatable war machine.

But take away Inititative, and suddenly things get scarier. It doesn't matter if you hit like a truck, or have the unerring accuracy of a laser if you're dead before you can swing. Suddenly every fight becomes edgy and uncertain. As a fight should be in a horror game.

Let's take a Jasonesque slasher villain as an example. How scary is he if;

1. you know you how likely you are to hit first?
2. you know the amount of damage you can pull off in a single round?

You now know if you should take him on or not. The best tactic has crystallized itself in your mind, and a good portion of the suspense is now dead.

If Initiative is a part of the rules, the usual way to resolve this dilemma is to make Jason very hard to kill, but in my experience, a ridiculously tough enemy is more annoying than frightening.

Getting rid of Initiative has the added benefit of making minor monsters nastier. You can't just yawn and mow down the gremlings, if you can't be certain to hit first.

This is the key, right here. The death of certainty and apathy.

Picture all the good horror movies you've seen. Or most good movies over all. Most have a scene where an unlikely person gets in a telling hit that changes the direction things are going. Translated to the table-top, this means that the Psychotic Granny actually becomes dangerous, without you having to explain why she had 6d10 Initiative!

The flip side is that characters who are not Masters of the Seven Secrets of Doom, can now make more of a difference in a desperate fight, than when they know for a fact that the villain will mulch them in the first round. Sure it's likely, but you can't be certain!

The problem really, is that I have no idea how to mechanically make combat work without the damn thing. But I'm working on it, and when I know, you'll know!

The Physics of Fear

Let me start off by explaining that I have been a horror fan my entire life. I didn't watch scary movies as a child, so it was only later that I got into serious horror. Even so, as a kid, I loved ghost stories, the spookier the better. I must have read every collection of ghost stories the local library had.

Later on, in my early teens, my friends and I would watch with great glee, what are now some of the most iconic horror movies in cinematic history. Movies like The Exorcist (1973), Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) and Hellraiser (1987) are now classics. But back in those days there was nothing cooler. We devoured every scream, every splash of blood, every demonic gurgle emanating from below the stairs. Over the years, we watched so many gruesome movies, I can't recall half of them.

However, I can honestly say I was never scared. It's only in recent years that I found myself being affected by horror movies. This has made me reflect more on the philosophy of horror, and that is what this is about.

My personal take on the physics of fear, not as a scientist or a doctor, as I am neither, but as both a fan and a creator of horror.

H. P. Lovecraft wrote: ”The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown”. He was so right. A monster is always scariest before we see it, when our imagination fills in the blanks. This is what makes horror so difficult to create. What one person finds terrifying is trivial, perhaps even laughable, to someone else. You can't please everyone all the time, but if you can scare the majority, you're on to something.

In the late 90's, I ran a horror game for a couple of friends, who were an item at the time. We played in her kitchen late into the night. When we were done, he walked me to the bus stop while we chatted. He told me he thought the game was cool, and he'd had a good time. It was only later she told me that she was so scared she refused to leave the kitchen until he came back. I was incredibly flattered. I had succeeded in genuinely scaring someone. I'm not telling this to brag, but to illustrate an example. My friend liked my game, but wasn't really scared, but his girlfriend found the same game terrifying.

Fear is an intensly personal thing, and in order to be really scary, you have to push buttons.

The perhaps most basic trick to accomplish this, is to make horror relatable. If the story is too alien it looses a great deal of power. The most popular, and therefore most effective horror stories are all relatable somehow. It's all about making people think What if? Could this happen to me? Even if you rationally know it can't happen, that it's just a book, a movie or a game, the killer could be in your bathroom, right now. That makes it scary. The rest comes down to trappings.

Let's take Freddy Krueger from Elm Street as an example. Sure he looks scary, but that's not what makes the movie so creepy. It's the fact that you have to sleep for real that makes him frightening. Not the burned face and knife-glove, but the idea that you'll see him in your dreams tonight.

In The Grudge, a victim hiding in her own bed is taken by the ghost. Michael Myers of Halloween fame stalks you in your own house. This makes these creatures so effective, the fact that you aren't safe in your own home, in your own bed. You, not just the characters, are not safe. Period.

The trappings, while not as vital as the relatability, are none the less very important. Like mentioned above, Freddy has his sweater, hat and glove. Myers has his blank mask, which incidentally hightens the unknown nature of the monster. The Grudge ghosts are horribly pale and move in unnatural jerking movements. Without these trappings, they wouldn't be interesting, they wouldn't be as frightening. The story can't stand on trappings alone, but they are essential. They are like spices. You can't cook dinner on just spices, but without them you have a very bland meal. It's getting the combination right that's so hard.

John Carpenter said that there are fundamentally only two kinds of horror stories; the external horror, i.e. the evil is out there, and the internal horror, i.e. the horror is inside us all.

The umbrella of horror covers a great many sub-genres, from pure gore fests to slow, subtle mood pieces. I love the fact, that when Bela Lugosi's Dracula appeared in cinemas in 1931, they had nurses in the theaters to take care of people who got so scared they fainted. I was about sixteen when I saw that version of Dracula for the first time, and I couldn't believe how cheesy it was. But it illustrates really well in my mind, how our reaction to horror can and will evolve over time.

Merits and Flaws, a few thoughts

The phenomenon of taking flaws and merits for your character, isn't exactly a new one. They come in many names, but gained popularity in the 90's, and are still used in many systems today. They have always split opinions amongst GM's and players alike, and I thought we could take a look at them.

The idea is that the merits and flaws allow you to customize your character to make her stand out and make her unique. In every system I have ever read that contains them, you take a certain amount of flaws worth a number of points, and then spend these points on either merits or on rounding out skills and attributes.

In general this is a great idea, but it can be abused by power hungry players, so you the GM really need to be on his toes.

So how does one abuse merits & flaws?

The first way is to take a flaw that would really derail the campaign if the GM ever decides to invoke it. The classic example is the powerful enemy flaw. In all likelyhood, this enemy is much more powerful than the character, potentially even more powerful than the entire party. An attack by such an enemy will probably mean a total party kill, which would be extremely unfair to the other players, thus prohibiting the GM from using him. Of course, the enemy can focus on just the relevant character, but why allow it, if it means certain, unavoidable death. Suddenly, Sauron steps around the corner, and murders your hobbit. Any questions?

The second method entails taking a flaw that is technically lethal, but won't affect the character until the campaign is over, or the character dies from some other cause. A typical example is to take a disease that kills slowly in a game famous for a high mortality rate, i.e. claiming the character has syphilis in a game set on the eastern front in WW II. Sure, he may have the disease, but it can take up to twenty years to kill, so it shouldn't be considered lethal for the campaign.

In third place, we have the ridicilously unlikely flaw, like having a major phobia of something the character will likely never encounter, like an alien in a historical campaign without supernatural elements, or something that's absolutely redundant, like being terrified of erupting volcanoes. Who isn't terrified of them?

The key to managing the flaws, is to first make sure they actually mean something to the characters, so that they aren't taken just for the points. And secondly to put players who try to abuse the system on the spot. Don't let them get away with this, it ruins the fun for everyone. Remember, flaws are always optional. If no flaw fits a character, he shouldn't have any.

Let's turn to the merits now. These are much less likely to be a problem, since the game designers have already been over them to make sure they aren't overpowered. But do keep in mind that the designers are but falliable humans and may have overlooked something. The only real concern here, is that a particular merit may be too powerful for a given campaign. Like some kind of photographic or eidetic memory in a mystery game. A character that is unable to forget anything ever, could well skew the mystery you have planned.

In closing, I'd like to point out that I have nothing against the merits and flaws. They really do fill a useful niche, but they can be problematic, and they aren't always neccessary. As with all things in the wide wonderful world of RPG's, it's up to you how you want it.

Choosing the System

Choosing the right system, a.k.a. The Rules, can be just as crucial as getting the right setting. For some players the system is of no matter as long as they understand it, for others it's life or death.

Since there are so many different systems, D20, D10, percentage (D100), ORE, D6, etc. it pays off to discuss which system to use with your players well in advance. Some players are pretty indifferent, while others can harbor a deep dislike for certain mechanics.

If you really like a setting, but the system is in the way, you can always divorce the two, and use a system from another game. Not always an easy task, but it can readily be done. A quick google search can sometimes reveal that others have already done it for you, so do check before you put down hours of unneccesary work.

Which ever system you end up using, try to learn the rules as thoroughly as possible, and be prepared to house rule a little bit. No rule is so important that it can't be modified a bit or just eliminated. The most important thing is that everyone is on the same page, and are having fun.

What else is there to consider? Lots. Is it a level based system with hitpoints and a set of skills gained per level or is it more fluid? Again, your players will have opinions, and this is important. You don't want to end up having an unhappy player endlessly complain throughout the game. It'll kill the mood in no time.

Of course, certain systems lend themselves to different kinds of games more readily than others. Take D&D as an example. It's old school, with classes, hitpoints, spells per level and all that, but for a quick pick up game with little or no notice, it's rather good. No need to worry about what to play and where to put skill points. It's 1-2-3 and play can start.

The flipside for many is the lack of ready customisation options to make just the right character. Yeah, D&D can do that, but the class/level boundaries makes it harder. Other systems will come out to shine if that's what you and your group wants. Ultimately you should go with what feels right.

Finally, some GM's find after a while that they are dissatisfied with all their published systems, and that mere house rules aren't enough anymore. For these brave souls, writing their own system from scratch is the only logical course of action.

The process of creating your own system is tough, and it will probably never be quite finished. As you get used to thinking creatively about rules, you will most likely not be able to stop. There is always a greener rule on the other side of the fence.

So why do it? The short answer is that you will likely end up with a system that's ideal for the playstyle of your group. The long answer, only you will ever really know. What ever your motivation may be, you should prepare yourself for long debates with your players. Maybe it's something in our psyches that makes us more likely to gripe and complain about minute things if we know the author of the rules personally, but players who will happily live with ”official” rules they don't like, will argue for hours with you about the smalles minutiae.

Don't take it personally though, all creative processes require feedback.

Happy gaming!

GM Tips, Choosing a setting

So you've decided to be a GM, but you're not sure which game to master. What to do? Basically you have to make a decision between four alternatives.

1. You can choose one of the many published game settings, such as the World of Darkness games, i.e. Vampire, Mage, etc, a D&D setting like Forgotten Realms or Dark Sun, or many many more. There are so many games to choose from you are almost certain to find something you like.

2. There are also many published settings taken from intellectual properties outside ”pure” game worlds. Star Wars, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, A Song of Ice and Fire, Firefly, etc. The list is enormous.

3. You can make up your own world and rules.

4. Finally you can take the setting from one game and the rules from another. Or make up either one.

The easiest option is without a doubt, number one. Everything is premade for your convenience, all you have to do is learn the rules, familiarize yourself with the setting and off you go. Keep in mind though that some players love certain settings so much that they technically fall into category two.

It should also be pointed out that some games and their systems can be...eccentric. But there's a game out there for almost everyone.

Option number two is similar to number one in many aspects. Indeed you could argue that Dungeons & Dragons 3rd ed. is the same as Star Wars d20. And they are similar, but the difference is still huge.

Any game that's based on an established (and often hugely popular) IP, has an external authority that you as a GM not only has to be aware of but also has to answer to. Let's take Star Wars as an example.

With six movies and countless novels and comic books, fans have an enormous wealth of canon to look to. Let's say you choose to run your game in the classic Rebellion era. You have to keep in mind all major happenings that takes place, because your players surely will. That means that should they say, encounter Darth Vader, they know he's immune from dying, as he's destined to die later. Likewise you can't just claim Alderaan was never blown to pieces.

You can of course go against the grain, and just keep the setting without the major events, but you will have to inform you players before hand. Otherwise you may have some very disgruntled players who were expecting a very different game.

Gamemastering a well loved IP can be very rewarding, but it does come with a lot of baggage. And should you choose to do so, make sure you choose one that has room for the players to be the heroes. There's little point following in the foot steps of Indiana Jones or James Bond. Their tales are told, it's the PC's time to shine.

As I mentioned above, some official game settings become so popular that they take on the traits of the IP based games. The older they are, the likelier this becomes.

A good example of this is Vampire the Masquerade by White Wolf. The twin ”pitfalls” here are the gigantic mass of sourcebooks the were published. No GM (or ST as it were) had the money and time to read them all. This invariably led to players bringing parts of the canon to the table the GM never even heard of. The second part was the mass of fan creations and fan interpretations often viewed as canon. Most Vampire GM's have had to say ”I don't care what you've read, this is my game”. Or the player who says ”There's no way Elminster would do that”.

Naturally this is different from the Star Wars example, but it's worth keeping in mind.

Another point about IP based games I feel is worth bringing up is the danger of the setting characters stealing the lime light. Jaime Lannister and Luke Skywalker are both cool characters, and there's nothing wrong with having them do a cameo in your game once or twice, after all they are expected to pop up sometime, but if Luke shows up every other game to save the day, your players will likely toss you in a pit filled with d4's. They should occupy the limelight, not Buffy.

So with all this, why use an IP based game? Because they can be so awesome! Both you and your players have a common base to stand on. When you look at them and say ”An Imperial Star Destroyer jumps into the system”, you can see their instant reaction, and it's great. (Besides it's easy to get players interested when they already love the world).

I'll discuss building your own world and designing your own rules in a future post.

GM Techniques part 1

Without a doubt, the most important thing is the communitcation between the players and the Gm, and between the players themselves. This goes double during character creation and the campaign start.

The players can be divided into three groups at this stage; 1. those who know what they want to play, 2. those who don't know what they want, and 3. those who know what they want, but what they want is either unsuitable or impossible.

It's usually advisable to keep an eye on what kind of characters the players are making, but besides the obvious cases like the Str 32, Int 3 barbarians, there are more subtle dangers:

• The character who is just like another character but better in every way.
• The annoying lonewolf
• the ”I thought this would be funny” character.

The point is that every character has to fit into the concept of the campaign somehow.

Group 1 needs very little help if they know the system and the setting.

Group 2 needs moderate amounts of help. Usually the best thing to do is to suggest alternatives and let the players imagination do the rest.

Group 3 is the potential troublemaker. This player knows what he wants, but for various reasons you either can't or won't allow his character concept. Handling this conflict correctly is crucial.

Few things pisses off a player as much as getting a flat out NO from the GM. Sometimes the player is just testing you to see what he can get by you with the crazy concepts, either as a joke or as a strategy. He will usually understand your denial, sometimes even expect it. However, some players will be offended at a cold refusal of what they see as a genuine creative concept.

How to handle this? In my experience there are three useful solutions; ”no-but”, ”yes-but” and ”interesting idea, but not this time”.

No-but You turn down the suggestion but offer one of your own.

Yes-but You accept the suggestion but with certain conditions or parameters.

Int. Idea You and the player postpone the idea for another campaign. Most often the player then moves into group 2.

These three methods can work wonders and are infinitely better than just saying No. If you can't use any of the three, at least make sure you say ”No, and here's why”.

Before the whole circus of character creation can begin, you have to sell the campaign. It's absolutely crucial that you inform the players of what the campaign is all about, and what kind of characters are needed. After all, it would be pretty silly if you have planned a campaign about subtle intrigue and commerce, and the smartest PC can barely outsmart a mossy rock. The players have to know before they can do, and it's your job to inform them. Sometimes however you have a special campaign in mind and you can't really explain the premise without ruining the surprise. In this case, you instead have to explain the most usefull kind of roles, i.e. is the campaign action heavy or are technical skills usefull?

One can not overstress the importance of listening to the players. Wether they have a concern, a complaint or a suggestion. You have to take what they say seriously. That's not to say that you should let the players run the game! Quite the contrary. But actually listening to them is the crucial part of communication. After all, if you don't listen to them, why should they listen to you?