Saturday, 30 September 2023

Review of Demon Bone Sarcophagus

This review came from my substack which is located here:


https://open.substack.com/pub/twilightdreams/p/critique-of-demon-bone-sarcophagus?r=48ejp&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web


----------------------------------

Demon Bone Sarcophagus (DBS) is a 129 page system neutral (although decidedly OSR) adventure by Patrick Stuart with art by Scrap Princess. Patrick Stuart is one of the more well known authors in the OSR scene, having completed several books in the past that I own and enjoy and which are highly regarded critically.


It’s with some reluctance I can’t say the same for DBS. I will get the easy things out of the way first. The highs in it are very high but the lows are very low and overall it’s a bit frustrating where the book feels about 80% complete.


There seems to be at least one editing mistake on every page. If polished a bit more it could have been very good, perhaps even a masterpiece, but as it stands it feels kind of incomplete. Beyond the simple editing mistakes, if I were to run this it would require a lot of prep to help smooth over the frustrating parts.


After reading it I have done a lot of thinking about it. To this end I’d thought I’d write a more in-depth critique rather than a simple review. Mainly, to see how I would have done things differently in my own adventure writing. So lets begin.


Backstory


To begin, DBS is the first adventure in a 3 part series (of which I do hope the other 2 do get published despite my frustrations with this first volume). DBS starts off with a 3 page history about the Nobility of Fire and the Empress of Fire. The Empress of Fire is the character within the Demon Bone Sarcophagus and is entombed in a trap and trick filled dungeon that is the main meat of this adventure.


While 3 pages may not seem like a lot for a backstory, it’s broken up into multiple sections, spans a fair amount of time with various characters, factions, and summarized historical plot points.


It’s a lot to digest and remember. So much so, that beyond the basics I really don’t remember much even after reading it twice.


Most of it seems not super pertinent to the adventure at hand. It may be referenced in the later adventures in the trilogy, but it is a fairly large information dump up front. Overall I think it would have been better to really try and modularize this information. To maybe give us the most recent events in this adventure and then as we get to the second or third adventures give us more of the backstory once we have encountered and understood the events and characters referenced in this one.


I also think the adventure could have done a little better at showing and not simply telling. That information presented at the beginning could have been broken up and presented better during the adventure. The adventure does attempt to do this to some degree. There are cultural artifacts within the dungeon that come from the Fire Nobility, but they don’t exactly exposit the presented backstory. There are NPCs you can meet within the dungeon which were involved in the history in the backstory but the text kind of just says they can answer questions regarding the history etc. The actual book doesn’t really do a lot to break up this text for you (like in bullet points or something) and I imagine involve a lot of flipping to at the table, scanning, and trying to figure out how much or how little to tell the players.


Additionally, the backstory at the beginning feels a bit self-indulgent where it feels a bit overcomplex and overwritten. Overall, I am of the opinion, that narrative in RPGs should be short, and fairly dramatic. Think Shakespearian plays. They very often only have a handful of main characters and maybe 3 intertwined plots at most. In Shakespearian plays It’s also fairly easy to determine who’s the good guy, who’s the bad guy, who’s the clown, the character relations, what everyone’s goal is, etc.


There is a fairly tight five act structure and they usually take place in one overall locale. While events may have happened in the past, there is an emphasis on the present and how things are coming to a head. While the plot and characters may seem simple when you summarize them, there’s a surprising amount of depth to them.


I think RPG narrative is best this way simply because it’s very hard to communicate complex plot to the players. Tabletop RPGs are primarily an oral tradition. So is theater in this manner where you’re watching, but mostly listening to characters dialogue and understanding a story in real time through the spoken word.


The Opening


DBS probably starts with one of the best openings I’ve read in any RPG. The adventuring party comes across the remains of a couple of factions which have mascaraed each other in the desert. It’s very obvious that there was some kind of misunderstanding, that something has gone wrong, that all hell broke loose and you’re left trying to figure out what happened.


In reality, it involves “four groups of conspirators, plus two different groups of security operatives, plus a giant sloth“. This feels like waaaay to much to me. The Alexandrian has a three clue rule. I’d like to propose some kind of inverse law. Like, the only three factions at a time rule. I find if there are any more, especially if they’re kind of entwined in some previous plot like the above listed groups, it quickly becomes very hard for the players to piece together who’s on who’s side and what the fuck is actually going on. There is such thing as too many clues, too many things going on.


Three factions is all you need. Three. If you have two they quickly become a duality of good guys vs bad guys. But three, that helps kind of keep some ambiguity. Six? Six, is way to much and just feels overcomplicated. Why have two different conspircies’. Just have one. If you have to much the players will have a hard time figuring out and understanding things and if they have a hard time figuring out and understanding things they’ll stop caring about things. I think less is more in this regard.


The Implied Setting

The implied setting of DBS was kind of confusing to me at first. Every adventure, whether it likes it or not has an implied setting. While I came to kind of understand it better after reading through it all, there were a couple of things that felt kind of strange and random to me about the various groups in the opening. One of them wore only wooden armor and seemed tribal themed. Another of them were agents of a powerful corporation. Another was a guy with a bunch of trained baboons.


This kind of felt incongruent to me at first. Like what’s the general level of technology? Stone age? Medieval? High renaissance? Where are we and how connected is the setting? We seem to be in the desert but the women warriors are tribal themed? Is there a jungle nearby? For the corporation, are we talking East India themed? Or like more modern as the agents kind of seem like the Pinkertons or something? What’s the general culture of the area? European? American West? Colonial?


While it may seem like I’m being nitpicky, and this is probably a critique that’s more my personal preference than anything. I always like my adventures to have a fairly understandable implied setting. Like, medieval Europe, or 17th century, or East Asia, Lord of the Rings, Dreamlands, etc. I don’t care what it is in particular, or even if it fits with my current campaign world. But something known. This is even more important for adventures that are weird, which DBS is and which I enjoy.


The reason I like this is because it provides a common language of tropes, ideas, images, and terms for me and my players to grasp onto. Everyone knows what an elf is. Everyone knows what a spaceship is. Or what a wild west town is.


Roleplaying is about creating an emerging narrative together. It’s very hard to do so if your implied setting feels very random. If it’s too random, like oh, you’re all popcorn people in a land with twin suns that was ruled over by ancient squid people, then the players don’t really have much of an opportunity to come up and set their own goals and has to kind of just go along with whatever the GM has planned. And the GM doesn’t really have much of a choice but to go on what the adventure says as there’s little for them to expand and extrapolate on with their own imagination based on what they already know.


Now to be clear, DBS isn’t that bad in this regard. Some of what I read, like the wooden armour made sense as I read further on (or well I think it does. I think some characters are wearing wooden armour because it seems like metal doesn’t work or is bad in the Zone? Which appears in a future adventure?). But overall the implied setting that I got from DBS was that of something like Dr. Who. Where it is interesting, but kind of a mishmash of a lot of different genres and things, all treated like normal.


Which to be completely honest, isn’t my favourite kind of implied setting but some people seem to like it so your mileage may vary.


The Disjointed Nature of the Adventure and Lack of Motivation

As mentioned previously the adventure starts off in the aftermath of 6 different factions facing off because of two different conspiracies. The ground breaks open during the fighting and a bunch of characters from these factions fall into the Tomb of the Empress of Fire.


These characters are all chasing each other in the Tomb of the Empress of Fire. The conspiracies they are all involved in seem to involve the Frictionless Blue Glass Merchant company and it’s very valuable frictionless blue glass. Frictionless blue glass seems to come from the plane of fire or was invented by the Fire nobility or some such thing. I


So these two discrete elements, the characters and conspiracies (active element) and the tomb (passive element) seem to be connected in a very roundabout way but as far as I can tell (I may be wholly wrong, I’ve only read through it once) I don’t think there is a direct connection.


That is to say, the conspirators just happened by random chance to fall into the tomb. They don’t know what the tomb is about or really care to be in it. What they desire is to get each other.


And while the tomb is very interesting, and probably contains a lot of information about further things in the 2nd or 3rd adventure, it’s kind of, in the present of the 1st adventure, unrelated to the conspiracies and conspirators.


This I kind of find disjointed and a bit of a problem as it provides very little motivation for the players to really explore either of these two elements. I think either they’re going to learn about and decide to get involved in the conspiracies and fuck off from the tomb which seems to be a deathtrap anyways, or they’re going to think the tomb is cool and not really care much about the characters within it who are involved in some kind of conspiracy and trying to get each other.


In putting these elements in competition with each other I think it does a disservice to both, especially because two other adventures are supposed to follow this one. If the players become interested in the tomb, and either disregard or kill all the conspiracy characters stumbling around the tomb, where is the motivation for them to become involved in the conspiracies involving blue glass and the Zone that seem to be present in the 2nd adventure? And likewise, if they abandon the tomb and simply head out to the Zone after siding with a character within the tomb, they probably won’t learn much about the Empress of Fire, her history, and the Fire nobility, things that seem heavily involved in the third adventure.


To some degree I think in play this might not be a huge issue. Most players probably explore the tomb a bit and explore the different characters and conspiracies enough running around in it. But I can’t help but feel that it’s going to lead to both elements half explored and the importance of stuff lost on the players, which may lead to the importance of further things lost on the players. Not so much through their own actions, but because two different elements were vying for their attention and interest and while they had no way of knowing at the time, both turned out to be of importance.


The Random Dynamicism within the Tomb


Now we’re kind of getting to the nitty-gritty. The tomb is comprised of a bunch of rooms. Every room has some kind of fixed element that (most of the time) is something the players can interact with. There is also an encounter in every room with a monster or a character involved in a conspiracy or an NPC monster. However, all these encounters are random. Where you roll on a little table and it’s like character X is doing Yin this room. Like just entering it, or fighting this other character, or investigating thing Z.


I think I kind of get what Patrick Stuart was trying to do. A bunch of characters have fallen into the tomb haphazardly. They stumbling about it and are trying to find and/or kill each other. Instead of having them in fixed locations where they ‘come alive’ when the players enter their specific room, they can be found throughout the tomb and seem to move about.


This is all fine, but when I think about what would happen in play it feels a bit frustrating. The first reason is every time the players enter a room I have to stop play, roll a dice, check on the table, see what monster/character is in the room and what they are doing. And these aren’t simple monster/characters like an angry Orc boss who is eating some mutton. They’re interesting and complex characters who all have a full page spread in a different section of the book about what they’re about and who they are allied with etc.


So most likely after rolling on the table I’m going to have to flip to their character page and be like who the fuck is this guy again? Is he allied/enemies with someone the players have met already?


Additionally, I feel like I’d kind of be on thin ice after a few rooms and repeated characters. Like oh, the players met this character two rooms ago. What if they killed them? Do I roll again? How did they just enter from the far door when the room they met that character in is behind the characters? Oh, they’re going to attack the characters again? But they had to run away last time? Or they’re supposed to attack but previously became allied with the characters.


I know the easy answer to this is just simply make stuff up based on what seems sensible. But I really kind of feel like it might get hard after a few rooms. As I’m essentially not making stuff up about what they’re doing. That would be easy. The table provides that. Instead I’m left to make stuff up about why they’re doing what the table says they’re doing. Especially when it contradicts what happened in previous interactions with the characters. Now that is much harder. Especially when these aren’t simple one or two line characters. They’re complex characters with their own backstories and motivations.


So while the dungeon may seem more dynamic because the conspiracy characters that have fallen into it are dynamically stumbling about it, the mechanism which they do so has added a lot of cognitive load to me as the GM. And I’m not sure if the effort is worth the payoff.


Fact Based Rooms


About 90% of rooms within the tomb are highly imaginative, interesting, and well designed. About 10% are not. They seem highly imaginative and interesting at first glance, but lack interaction and are basically just ‘fact’ or ‘history’ rooms.


An example that really stuck out to me is R36-Histories and Historians. The first paragraph and general read out-loud is:


“The room is lined with thick clay jars, the floor coated with a fine layer of ash.“


The text goes on further to explain that some jars are small, some large. They are all sealed. The large ones contain the ash of historians who studied the primordial Demon wars, powerful but corrupting knowledge that draws the attention of powerful beings. The small ones contain the ash of the histories of these wars. The souls of the historians are bound within these jars so they cannot be summoned etc.


Now overall this is a fantastic and interesting idea. But it feels more like the kernel of an idea than a fully fleshed out room. As so far we’ve simply provided some background facts or history for what in reality, and more importantly, what the players will immediately experience, is just a room full of clay jars.


There’s really not much to telegraph the history of these jars or suggest possible avenues of interaction. Yes, I can probably improvise if the players decide to do stuff like cast speak with dead on the ash. But as far as I can tell there’s really nothing about the lay jars that even suggest there’s the ash of important people in them.


Very little of the interesting things about this room is telegraphed to the players. And very little support is given for further implications. It’s all very abstract. Like if a player does cast speak with dead on the ash of the historian, what does the historian look like? What languages do they speak? Will they willingly divulge what they know? Does speaking what they know cause a demon to appear?


Yeah I can make all this up, and yeah the initial idea is very interesting, but in general the details of the room are written more in a fact based way than a perspective of someone who is seeing the room for the firs time and interacting with shit.


Should I buy this?


Overall I don’t regret buying DBS. I love Patrick Stuart’s work and as frustrating as DBS is, it’s still very imaginative. I also know DBS had a very troubled production history. Multiple things went wrong outside of Patrick Stuart and Scrap Princess’ control and I get the feeling it left them burnt out and probably not making a ton of money off this project. However, I also kind of feel like it unfortunately kind of comes across in the end result.


The book isn’t necessarily bad, poorly written, or poorly designed, as much as it just simply feels unfinished. If more attention had been paid to the various editing errors, more rooms been polished a bit more, more feedback given to some of the design, I think it could have been a masterpiece. But as it stands now, it’s simply not.


I do truly hope that Patrick Stuart does the other two books in this trilogy. I don’t know if I’d ever run the first as it stands now. It would require a fair amount of prep and I’m not sure if it would be worth the payoff. However, if this adventure did lead into other more polished adventures I could see it being worth it. I also feel like if I had the full arc of the three adventures it would be easier to see what I could tweak and re-arrange and scrap without the whole house coming down.


Still it’s worth the read. It’s one of the more imaginative things I’ve read all year and does kind of stick in your head.

Thursday, 14 September 2023

Substack Blog

To all those who follow this blog or happen to come across it. I have decided to create a substack account and continue this blog there. It seems to have a much better interface and makes subscribing easy. I've begun subscribing to other substack blogs and enjoy getting their posts emailed to me. To all those who wish to follow me you can do so here: Twilight Dreams

Wednesday, 16 February 2022

How to Conduct Research when Worldbuilding

I prefer to run my games in a quasi-historical 17th century setting.

I have read a fair amount about the 17th century in order to try and make my settings more interesting.

I have also seen a lot of products that use the 17th century as a setting or incorporate historical things into their adventure.

Some of them are good, in my opinion many of them are not. Well, most often not bad, just not good, just kind of average despite the work that went into them.

I've been doing a lot of thinking lately about how to incorporate research into an adventure, campaign, or setting.

I think most products that try to incorporate real world research aren't that great because a lot of people approach research the wrong way. I think there are two main things to consider if you want to do some research to incorporate into your setting/adventure/campaign, regardless of what that setting/campaign/adventure is. 

1. What information are you going to present?

2. How are you going to present this information?



What information are you going to present

You're first goal when deciding to do some research should be to figure out how much you want to do and what information you want to narrow in on.

One thing I always keep on returning to is this image from the book Booklife by Jeff VanderMeer. 


Booklife is a book about writing, traditional story writing. It's an interesting book, and the above picture always stuck in my mind when thinking about RPGs.

It kind of illustrates how in any given place there is almost an infinite amount of things to know about a place.

This knowledge is often collected into overlapping abstract frameworks, each framework acting like a 'slice' of understanding. They are, of course, all kind of interconnected, but things are much more manageable when examined slice by slice.

I think one of the biggest mistakes when doing some research is people research indiscriminately. They'll cast a wide net and try to incorporate as many facts about a place and time into their product as they can.

I find the best RPG books that involve research don't just present facts. They present systems: slices of in-depth knowledge that the players have to figure out, figure out how the things in the framework are connected, can be manipulated.

The best example of this I can think of is Veins of the Earth. Based on Patrick Stuart's bibliography he read a lot of stuff about caves and spelunking. He choose to really hone in on this, on what it's like to actually explore an underground cavern system. He picked one system of knowledge, geology, and incorporated it really well into his RPG product. 

I think in this manner it's best to pick 1 or 2 slices of knowledge about a time/place and really use it to highlight what makes that particular time/place interesting. 

If I were to do an ocean going campaign about exploring the south pacific I'd probably do botany and biology, all the flora and fauna the players might encounter, how they can use it, what may harm them, etc. In this case I'd probably have the tribes and peoples there encountering be a little more generic and make the campaign more about mapping and specimen gathering.

Or I could flip this and have the flora and fauna more generic, more just background, and make anthropology the slice I'm choosing to focus on. Where the Players, if they hope to survive, will have to interact with various native tribes who have unique customs and may or may not be hostile. Where they find themselves on the edge of colliding worldviews.  

Both games could be interesting, deeply so, but I think because they choose to deeply explore a narrow topic. Like an iceberg they present systems the players don't know much about, or have a general conception of, and force them to explore them.

I don't think the particular system of knowledge matters much as long as you explore it in a deep way. Fashion, crops and bugs, the trade of pottery and glassware, beekeeping, weapons and blacksmithing; they may all seem mundane on the surface but if you present the players with an interesting dynamic historically informed system to explore and manipulate, it'll become interesting as they come up with ideas, try out hypothesis, and deal with the consequences. 

I also think by honing in on just one system of knowledge if helps make the system overall more believable and the game better. To make a setting work you're going to need aspects of it that are generic, that may not be historical accurate, that are just kind of background elements. If you try to have everything too historical or incorporate too much research your game either becomes very dry, or very confusing. By choosing what to focus on and letting all else just recede the game is much more manageable and general themes can emerge. 



How are you going to present information?

Once you've figured out the 1 or 2 topics you want to research and make the game about I think the next step is figuring out how present this information.

D&D at heart is a conversation. It's how the content is conveyed in the medium of TTRPGs. This conversation most often deals with describing immediate things.

This is in contrast to something like literature. It's fine to read a book with long passages with interioralism, where you hear the characters thoughts and feelings. 

Or in contrast to film which is very visual and can present information in sweeping shots or scenes cut together where space and time don't matter much.

But it's harder to convey information about the world or story this way in D&D. D&D happens in real time. In D&D you are trapped to the viewpoint of the characters. There is no cutting away. Additionally, you are trapped to the external reality of the characters. It's generally considered bad form to tell a character what they're thinking or feeling or just tell them what NPCs are thinking or feeling.

Most information conveyed to players is going to be conveyed through their immediate reality. To this end I think when you have done some research, or when doing research you have to be continually thinking, how does this manifest physically? 

As it's the most immediate, physical manifestation, that characters will be interacting with. Knowing or getting right the name of the King at the time to me is less important than knowing who the players want to talk to if they want to talk to some representative of the king and how exactly one goes about interacting with the nobility.

To this end based on the picture above I think you can present the general layers of knowledge in some of the following ways:

Anthropology

Folklore about monsters, common religious rituals, social attitudes and taboos, etc.

Archaeology

Material culture, historical sites, architecture, ruins, treasure, valuable objects, etc.

Biology

Medicine and healing, farm animals, monsters, etc.

Botany

Crops and farming, flora in area, seasons and growth, etc.

Geology

Landscape and travelling, weather, metals and weapons available, etc.

Historiology

How history of place is chronicled, how much is known vs how much has been lost or remains unknown, propaganda vs history, who determines what is historically important, etc.

Political Science

Political structures and how to petition the people in them, basis of political power, how many factions there are, etc.

Psychology

Common beliefs about the nature of mind/body/soul, common behaviours, etc.

Sociology

What drives people in the society, how people are organized, etiquette, crime and punishment, etc.


It can take some practice, and I don't think even the above list is super refined, but learning to really translate a system of abstract knowledge into it's most immediate physical manifestation can be hard at times but I think is key to making a good TTRPG product.


Saturday, 22 January 2022

Social Currency in your campaign world





I've had an idea tumbling around in the back of my head ever since I read Patrick Stuarts post about using food as a means of granting XP instead of gold:

Optional Rule - XP for served food. I strikes me that one diegetic element which serves this softer play in a manner similar to that in which Gold serves standard Old-School play (encouraging ambition, conflict but also lateral thinking and problem solving), is food.

Sharing food with someone, being tolerated in their personal space, talking to them, being invited to share, are all major social milestones.

Kids bloody love food, as any kids series will show (I am also a fan myself). Getting special foods, and especially being *served* special foods, and sharing food and certain drinks, is almost a marker of your integration into local societies and your ability to integrate others.

If the old witch serves you Tea, that’s one point, if you can get her to bake you a cake, that’s another, or provide a feast for the Village, that’s a treasure hoard.

It's kind of percolated into the idea of having a social currency in your campaign/setting world that is different from the hard currency like gold or silver or whatever. Partially as a means to add an interesting dimension to your setting and partially because I think it fits in well with how most player/NPC interaction tends to go where it's transactional.

Or well in most of my games it tends to be transactional. If the NPC has no reason to not tell the players something I tend to just tell them whatever they want to know. As, the more information the players have the better decisions they can make and the more interesting the game is. I tend to not hide information from players.

If the NPC does have a good reason for wanting to withhold information, the players usually have to make some kind of deal with the NPC to get it. In a lot of games this tends to end up as vague favors or deals that they owe the NPC. So in this sense there is already an unintentional sense of social currency, the "favor".

However, I also find that most of the time favors aren't really followed up on and tend to be vague. I think it's much more interesting to define an explicit social currency for your setting. 

This could be something simple like food. Where, as mentioned in the False Machine post, each NPC is a simple village person who has a favorite food. Getting to know people's favorite foods and getting them for them goes a long way to getting them to open up and deal with you. Food in this way functions as a social currency and gives the setting a certain theme and aesthetic. 

But a social currency doesn't have to be food. It could be something like humiliations. Like if you're setting is a high court full of scheming lords and ladies they might want to have nothing to do with you unless you humiliate a rival lord, the more public the better.  The players then have to think up a creative way to humiliate a rival NPC and get away with it. Performing humiliations has a social value in the setting and grants it an interesting theme.

Or if you want to go a more classic route, you could use true names. Where characters or monsters or spirts have a true name. When you discover somethings true name it serves as a bit of a commodity, where you can let others know it in order to gain something you want, perhaps at the risk of betraying the persons whose true name you know.

Another one could be secrets. Where each NPC has a dark secret and if you find it out and tell other NPCs you can gain their trust. Although I find secrets a bit abstract. I think it's better to try to have something with a bit of tangibility to it.

Like maybe signet rings or letters of renown which signify official trust? Or handkerchiefs from maidens who have chosen the party as their champions? Or medals? There are a ton of things in the real world that we use to signify things socially to each other. 

Overall by having a defined social currency, maybe even a list of them if it's something like letters of renown, I think can really flavour a campaign and make it interesting. It gives the players something to look out for that they know will give them an edge in social interactions that are transactional in nature. 

I think the most important part is having the social currency recognized as being valuable by more than one NPC. It stops the players from having to do a boring favor for one NPC they want something from and then another favor for the next boring NPC to gain their trust. They can come up with their own schemes and ideas on how to get the social currency and drive the adventure that way and then 'spend' the social currency on whomever they want. 


Tuesday, 11 January 2022

17th Century Character Starter



So I've decided to start a new campaign. I like to run my campaigns in a quasi-historical earth set in the 17th century. Kind of low magic, gritty at times, a sense of pitiful or pathetic characters who are trying to get by, rather than heroes.

It includes things like:

  • Random nationality chart including sample names.
  • Comprehensive system to handle languages.
  • A way to generate the base 6 stats that creates an interesting backstory at the same time (based off of 5 Torches Deep Origins).
  • Some starting equipment packages by class.
  • A list of 117 interesting starting items to roll on in addition to basic starting equipment. This list was largely taken from (http://udan-adan.blogspot.com/2018/02/when-all-you-have-is-hammer-item-based.html). The items in it are non-magical items meant to help in out of the box problem solving.

You can view it all here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14YD565KW862IdoNdNEaQoc8SF9UwkkwF/view

I've put everything in the PDF as it is way easier to display that way rather than copy-pasting it all into my blog which tends to format all the tables wrong anyways. But you can view a sampling of some of the tables the PDF contains:

Nationality


(Continued from above)

7

Holy Roman Empire

Austrian or Prussian or Bavarian

German

Adam, Benke, Eggerd, Ewald, Hans, Heinz, Hermann, Jakob, Johann, Kurt, Lutke, Mathias, Michael, Thomas, Volrad, Wulff

Angnes, Beatrix, Clare, Dorothea, Elsebeth, Engel, Fye, Katherina, Margarete, Gretel, Martha, Ursula, Walpurg

Asch, Bärendorf, Blumberg, Dietrich, Dürnbach, Faust, Frankenhamer, Gottschau, Hart, Kelheim, Leipzig, Martin, Raun, Schlaggenwald, Stein, Wildstein

8

The Mugal Empire

Indian

Persian or Hindi

Aamir, Abhay, Adnan, Ajit, Ashwin, Asim, Beibek, Chandan, Darshan, Deepak, Farrukh, Gohar, Haroon, Jagdish, Kavi, Mandeep, Nadeem, Naveen, Pardeep, Raja, Sandip, Sujay, Vasu, Vivek

Aarthi, Anisha, Chandra, Diksha, Gita, Hira, Indrani, Jayanti, Kala, Kasi, Leela, Mitra, Nilima, Rina, Sadia, Shanta, Sona, Tara, Zarina

Atwal, Babu, Balay, Chatterjee, Johal, Kapoor, Kumar, Madan, Raval, Saraf, Shetty, Walia

9

Principality of Transylvania

Transylvanian

Romanian or Hungarian

Anton, Apostol, Cezar, Cosmin, Costache, Dacian, Darius, Dorin, Fane, Filip, Florin, Grigore, Ivan, Leonard, Mihai, Sebastian, Stan, Valerian, Vlad

Adriana, Amalia, Anca, Bogdana, Cecilia, Corina, Emanuela, Lavinia, Magda, Monica, Rodica, Sofia, Violeta

Adam, Alexandrescu, Barbu, Cojocaru, David, Fischer, Gheata, Grosu, Hofer, Ion, Lupu, Matei, Muller, Popa, Zamfir

10

Maritime Republic of Venice, or Genoa, or Ragusa

Venetian, Genoan, or Ragusan.

Italian or Croatian

Achille, Alberto, Amore, Battista, Bernardo, Carlo, Cleto, Dino, Enzo, Fabio, Franco, Giacomo, Giovanni, Giuseppe, Leone, Nero, Omar, Peppi, Roberto, Teo

Agata, Ambra, Ave, Celeste, Concetta, Diana, Dina, Elvira, Felicita, Flora, Gisella, Leonara, Lisa, Luna, Orietta, Rina, Rosanna, Silvia, Teresa, Vita

Accardi, Ajello, Barone, Bianco, Bruno, Costa, De Luca, DeVille, Fabbri, Fontana, Guiluliani, Longo, Marino, Pepe, Sartori, Vinci

11

Kingdom of France

French

French

Adrian, Baptiste, Benoit, Claude, François, Frédéric, Guillaume, Hubert, Jacques, Jean, Martin, Pierre, Philippe, Simon, Valentin

Aimée, Ambroise, Béatrix, Catherine, Colette, Dauphine, Éloise, Hélène, Jacqueline, Judith, Louise, Madeleine, Olive, Rachel, Rose, Robine, Yolande,

Bascon, Bertrand, Boucher, Chevalier, d'Aigneville, de Bessay, de Champanges, de Fumechon, de Lagny-sur-Marne, Dumont, Dupré, Gasteau, Martin, Pichon, Rousselle, Thiboust

12

Ottoman Empire

Ottoman

Greek or Arabic or Turkish or Persian

Abd al-Aziz, Abdul, Alekos, Abu Bakr, Akram, Anwar, Asif, Bassam, Fareed, Gamil, Hamid, Jaffar, Kareem, Mehmed, Noor, Omar, Kara, Raheem, Saeed, Wael


Alekos, Angelos, Costas, Giannis, Lazaros, Nikos, Silas, Stavros, Stephanos, Thomas

Adila, Aya, Farah, Fatima, Hadya, Jameela, Latifah, Raja, Safiya, Waheeda, Yara, Yasmin, Zakiah,


Angela, Domna, Eleonora, Evi, Fotini, Ioanna, Kilo, Olympia,

Sophia, Tasia, Thalia, Zoi

Ahmad, Ali, Ayad, Burhan, Darwish, Faez, Habib, Hakim, Hussein, Jabal, Kazem, Maamoun, Taleb, Zaman


Alexopoulos, Artino, Cirillo, Drakos, Hatzi, Kazan, Leos, Lykaios, Nephus, Othonos, Tsitak


Lifepaths

Each character starts off with 8 in each ability score. Then they make three lifepath rolls to determine their past history which modifies their ability scores accordingly. Each lifepath roll beyond three forces a roll on the Misfortune table. Players can roll a maximum of five times.

Lifepath Rolls:

  • Drive + Early Life
  • Drive + Failed Career
  • Drive + Fallen in With


1d6

What drove you onward...

Modifier

1

Salvation and Redemption

+2 WIS, +1 CON,

2

Love and Passion

+2 CON, +1 CHA

3

Restlessness and Curiosity

+2 DEX, +1 INT

4

Boredom and Apathy

+2 INT, +1 STR

5

Misery and Suffering

+2 STR, +1 WIS

6

Ambition and Delusions of Grandeur

+2 CHA, +1 DEX


Early Life

1d12

Description

Modifier

1

Militaristic: coming from a long line of men who have served, you grew up playing with toy soldiers and hearing stories of war. You longed for the day when you could serve gallantly and bring honour to your family.

+2 STR

2

Itinerant: you grew up with your family living in a wagon, trading items here and there, your father doing odd jobs where he could find them. Whether because of persecution, or the call of the open road, your family lived in many places and spoke many languages.

+2 CHA

3

Servant: your mother was a scullery maid, your father unknown. You grew up in servants halls of your employer. Working for them just as your mother did, always seen, never heard, until you decided enough was enough.

+2 DEX

4

Seafaring: you grew up on a small town or village on the coast. The open sea called to you every morning and the gulls awoke you. Songs were sung as the catch of the day was delivered and all eyed the ocean carefully when storms rolled in.

+2 DEX

5

Agricultural: you grew up in one of the many small agricultural villages that dot the land. One of many brothers and sisters, you worked the farm and life was hard. Life was dictated by the seasons, both spiritual and earthly, a time and place for everything.


+2 WIS

6

Nomadic: you grew up taking care of your families herds. Moving with the seasons, you brought them to graze upon the open grasslands in the summer and sheltered in the forested vales in the winter.

+2 CON

7

Nobility: once upon a time you had it all. You lived in an ancestral hall with a silver spoon in your mouth. Then one day it was gone, the rest of your family killed.

+2 CHA

8

Religious Urban: you grew up cloistered in a tight knit religious community. You attended religious schools and celebrated religious holidays with your community. At times persecuted, the pain of one was shared by all within the community.

+2 INT

9

Mountain Folk: you are from the mountains and the proud folk that fill them. Forestry, mining, it doesn't matter, you learned much from the hard but friendly folk that you grew up among.

+2 STR

10

Town: you grew up in a tall house in town. Your father was a tradesman and your life was filled with the teachings and gossip of the town.

+2 INT

11

Impoverished: you grew up in the streets of a big stinking city. Wild dogs your only friends, cats your competitors, other orphans your comrades.

+2 CON

12

Pastoral: you took care of your family's flocks, letting them graze upon the hilly meadows in your youth. Long hours you spent guiding them, watching life slowly move by.

+2 WIS


Fallen in with...
1d12
Description
Change
1
Musketeers of the Guard
+2 STR
2
Conspiracy of the Black Hand
+2 DEX
3
The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge
+2 INT
4
East India Trading Company
+2 DEX
5
Church of Starry Wisdom
+2 WIS
6
The Merry Mountaineers
+2 CON
7
The Butterfly Troupe
+2 CHA
8
The Cult of Diana
+2 CHA
9
Veterans of The Thirty Years' War
+2 STR
10
Grand Freemason Lodge of Scotland
+2 INT
11
Northern Outfitters
+2 CON
12
Society of Jesus, The Jesuits
+2 WIS