Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Problems with Campaign Conversion

I've reached that time in my gaming career when I've pretty much explored all I wanted to explore and used enough game systems to find all the flaws they contain. There is no one perfect version of the game I love (D&D) although there are a few that come close. Although it is human nature to dwell on details, I find that the best games are the ones that gloss over the details and exist with their own set of rules which are meant to be immutable regardless of reality.

I'm mainly having a problem resolving issues with my conversion of Thuin/Sturmgard to Basic/Expert D&D. The alignment thing and several other sticking issues have me thinking that it's not worth the effort to convert if I  have to compromise too much. That and all the backstory of the campaigns I've run leads me to just say "screw it."

So if I don't keep anything I've done in the past, how should I proceed? I've tried to run campaign-generic settings in the past and they require little effort to set up, but inevitably questions arise as to deities, leaders of kingdoms, important NPCs in the area, etc. Now I could cop out and allow anything the players desire in the world, making it a mish-mash of various settings (dragonlances, Norse deities, greyhawk-style clerical orders, Forgotten Realms variety moon elves, etc.) but I think that cheapens the experience. Basic/Expert rules are run more generically and allow the player to come up with their own details about their character.

So, I've been thinking about a completely new campaign. The problem here is that I have 30 years of previous campaign materials covering roughly a dozen binders or so (for D&D alone) and several computer files. Surely something must exist someplace for me to start from and work with. My problem is that I tend to snatch info from one source and then expand greatly upon it, essentially making a campaign out of a one-shot. I did this with Greyhawk I campaign, Greyhawk II campaign, and my current Mystara campaign. My Thuin campaign emerged from a desire to return to original AD&D and mutated into a 2nd edition mess. Nothing I've done in D&D 3.5 has amounted to very much and I eventually gave up trying and reverted to using pre-published adventures loosely woven together into a patchwork campaign which imploded in the end.

I've been enamored of the brutal "dogma D&D" style of late. One of the forums I read has had a campaign thread listing the adventures of the "Companions of the Bling," a sort of Tolkienesque tribute campaign where low-level characters try to survive the random starter dungeons generated by a computer program while attempting to make name level and start their real quest (the destruction of the One Ring). The characters are all modeled after Lord of the Rings characters, but the rules as written are obeyed to the letter - no house rules, no holds barred, and no mercy. Hit points are rolled as is. Ability scores are generated using 3d6 in order rolled, no re-rolls. Characters have to qualify for race and class as usual. They are all generally poor but the lack of resources and danger has led to a surprising level of role-playing among the players, and the reports are amazing to read. Many characters don't survive their fist encounter and those that do become cherished members. When such members later perish, great pains are taken to either retrieve them with overpriced magic or else bury them with loving care. Almost all of these characters are cherished and supported by the other players as well. Even the NPCs are treated with more dignity, especially those that are particularly helpful to the party's survival!

I can really see this as a great way to play the game more casually and yet build details of a campaign world. I would keep religion more generic (Light vs. Dark) and stick obsessively to the rules as written without adding pages of house rules. Basically, if the action is not covered in the rules, don't even try it. Accept the rules as written and agree to abide by them at all times and in all circumstances. So what does this mean for a campaign setting?

Demi-humans are considered to be classes in Basic/Expert. They are also limited in the level they can attain. Most also require much more experience points than the other classes. Therefore, humans will more likely survive to see the higher levels. I think that having an endgame in place for the characters who reach level 14 is also necessary. It is my belief that the unpublished Companion Rules would have added in all the AD&D material to the mix - a direction that would have been unnecessary given the rules published at the time. Adding psionics, more classes, more races, and/or strange rules just serves to complicate an otherwise cohesive set of rules. Ending spells at 6th level of power actually makes some sense to me. Not complicating matters by adding in druids, paladins, assassins, rangers, or illusionists also makes sense. Simply play the base character the way you think they should be played. Granted, druids had abilities that made them vastly different, but you can't have everything.

I could see this as a fun exercise that can last a good long time. A long dungeon spanning the first three levels of play, followed by a series of wilderness/dungeon adventures, leading to name level adventures, and later land development for the characters really could be quite fun. I would need players that don't see the game as a progressive waste of time, but rather as an enjoyment of the journey. Many early characters would be lost, and probably a few later characters would also be lost, but each character would be kept and cherished throughout the campaign.

Friday, July 5, 2013

Inventory Tracker: Character Object

I'm really new to object-oriented programming (OOP) but I'm trying to see how it could be accomplished in a programming language I know and understand a little, namely C. I've worked up a list of all the "objects" I would need for the program to work. The overhead on the memory side is going to be taken up by the graphical needs for all the icons and storage for important data. Ideally I would love to have ALL the info required to run a game attached to this program, but for now inventory is my main concern.

OBJECT 1: CHARACTER
This is the main object of the system, and each user should be able to store multiple instances of other objects on this unique object. All data will be saved with this unique object name (Character Name). This object will have some predefined (drop-box) entries, and some user-input data used to determine what other objects can be equipped in certain slots. Specifically these are:
  • Race: determines size and type of character
  • Height: determines maximum size of weapons that can be wielded.
  • Weight: used in determining maximum weight allowance.
  • Strength: main determinant for weight allowance.

More or less, the D&D game assumes that a character is man-sized (roughly 6'0") and weight (roughly 180 pounds for an average male). Those races shorter than this can only carry a fraction of the maximum allowance. Those whose strength is not typical for their race also have adjustments to what they can carry. All of this eventually affects movement rate so it is important to note.

We have established in our game that the encumbrance of a normal human of average strength is 500 coins of gear (roughly 50 lb) with no penalty to movement. Penalties from armor supersede this amount regardless of what is carried. Therefore, if the fighter is carrying nothing more than a few pounds of gear and his weapons, but is wearing chain mail armor, then his base move is 9" by default, regardless of strength. When the encumbrance penalty exceeds the movement penalty of the armor, then the movement rate decreases. So if the same fighter picks up enough loot to be down to 9", he is still only moving at 9" because his armor only allows him to move so fast.

Encumbrance drops by fourths. Therefore, an average strength adult male human carries up to 500 coins without penalty (12" movement), up to 1000 coins with reduced speed (9" movement), and up to 1500 coins with severely reduced speed (6" movement). Although it is not written in the game anywhere, I max out the load one can carry at their own body weight (3" movement). It seems silly that someone the size of Arnold Schwartzenegger could carry more than his own body weight for any length of time and still fight off attackers! This above value is adjusted for strength, which allows for someone to carry more than they normally could. The problem here is that SIZE of the character was never integrated into this formula. A smaller person (male or female) could not possibly carry the same amount as someone much larger than they are. Similarly, a halfling or gnome has no right carrying as much as a human could, seeing as they weigh less than half the weight to begin with. This is why I tend to limit maximum weight carried as body weight and adjust according. I would say that scaling the carrying capacity to the body weight of the character is the way to go. So an average character may only carry a percentage of his own weight and still move at full movement.

For example, an average human male, weighing 180 pounds and standing 6'0" could carry a maximum of 1800 coin encumbrance. Divide this into fourths, so normal movement (12" base) is up to 450 coins. This is fine so long as the character is of normal strength. At the upper level of strength, say 18/00%, this adds about 3,000 more coins to the weight allowance. Assuming that this stronger person also weighs significantly more (about 250 lbs. or so), their carrying capacity would be 5,500 coins or 550 lbs! WAYYYY too much for any mere mortal to carry. Therefore, perhaps the strength chart needs to be fixed to reflect a more curved increase, topping out at some maximum regardless of strength. Again, I have no definite answers here, but I'm certain that no character can carry 550 pounds of gear and loot and still move! Sure, I've seen the World's Strongest Man competitions but those are held under "near optimal" conditions and the feats of strength require a few minutes at most. We're talking about lugging treasure and gear though dangerous conditions that are less than sub-optimal.

So, do I base encumbrance on body weight alone or modified by strength? It would seem that running around with 50 lbs. on your back and body is encumbering enough for even the mighty men of the military. It can be done, but it backbreaking work. Then again, greed is a great motivator!

I could always go with the formula developed for Villains & Vigilantes which also takes Constitution into consideration. That formula was ((str/10)^3 + (con/10)) * (half body weight). This amount was how much a character could lift and remain standing. Using the above example of 180 lb. man and Str 11 with Con 10, would give us ((1.1)^3 + 1.0) * 90 = 210 lbs. A similar man weighing 250 lbs. with an 18/00% strength and 18 constitution would be able to lift ((1.8)^3 + 1.8) * 125 = 954 lbs! My God, that's a lot of weight, but 1/4 ton is MUCH  heavier than the current world record (580 lb by gold medalist Hossein R. of Iran who weighs 340 lb  at 6'1" himself). SO apparently that formula won't work.

My gut tells me that lifting and carrying on your person that much weight leads to exhaustion quickly. So what should be the maximum weight one can carry and still move relatively freely? My guess is that moving around with only 55% of one's maximum press should be more than sufficient as a maximum. For the 180 lb guy, this means that they can carry about 100 lbs. and move at a crawl (that's 1000 coins). Using the "fourths" rule, unencumbered weight is up to 250 coins, medium load, is up to 500 coins, heavy load is up to 750 coins and overloaded would be up to 1000 coins. Does this work for the upper bounds of human strength? Assuming that each point of Strength above 10 adds roughly 10 pounds to the person's frame (+10 pounds per bracket of percentile strength), a person with 18/00% strength would weigh roughly 300 lbs and could carry about 1650 coins of weight. Breaking this down, that's up to 412 coins at unencumbered, 825 coins at medium, 1237 coins at heavy, and 1650 at maximum. Remember, maximum encumbrance means carry and still move (even at 3" rate). Obviously, such a person should be able to lift their own body weight in bench press.

Does this translate to the smaller races? Well, dwarves are built similarly to humans, and even weigh about the same, so yeah, this could work just fine the same for dwarves. Halflings weigh on average about 60 lbs. This means that an average halfling male standing 3'0" tall can carry only 33 lbs. and is considered overloaded at that point. This breaks down as up to 83 coins for unencumbered, 165 coins for medium, 248 coins for heavy, and up to 330 coins for overloaded. A max strength halfling (17 Str) probably only gain 3 lbs per point over 10, so their body weight would be around 75 lb. and carrying capacity at 41 lb. Breakdown for this would be unencumbered up to 103 coins, medium at up to 205 coins, heavy at up to 307 coins, and overloaded up to 410 coins. The same thing would apply to gnomes. That's not very much, but more in line with the current method of calculating encumbrance!

At the risk of sounding sexist, I will not break this out for women. However, I would assume that Gygax would not have women as equal to men if only because they are less naturally muscular. There are exceptions to be sure, and I'm sure that dwarven or half-orc women are equal in this regard, but women are also smaller in stature so their frames are not as strong. Also, seeing a 18/75% strength  woman weighing close to 300 lbs seems excessive. I would say that women pack on only +5 pounds of muscle per point of Strength over 12 and that once they get to the upper brackets they are simply trading fat deposits for muscle weight so no extra weight gain at percentile strength. Small female gnomes and halflings probably only add in 1 pound per strength point over 12.

This is exhausting just thinking about it! Now I have to revamp my views and maybe talk to the others in the group to see what they think. Having an established chart on each character will likely help me decide if this makes sense or not. It will also help determine if this app is worthwhile. More at a later time!

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Inventory Tracker for AD&D Characters

We run into the same problem every session we play: where are you keeping all those items you keep pulling out of your bags? I myself have been guilty of "hoarding syndrome", which has only gotten worse with the advent of computer games and virtual bag space. Players dislike having to account for all their gear and loot, with the limitations placed on them from Strength and general physical limits of volume and material strength. However, when the players are attempting to remove hauls of epic proportions from giant lairs, they NEED to account for the placement of every copper piece and stowed dagger!

In the interests of coming up with a better way to track all of this inventory, I recommend the creation of an Inventory Tracker for AD&D characters. Using some graphic object-oriented language and small images of containers and standard items, the player can use a computer or tablet to track all inventory quickly and easily, as well as total weight allowances and movement rates. This way, when I ask where something is located I can get a straight answer and not look through about 30 pages of past notes to determine that the item they thought they were carrying was sold off 5 sessions ago...

What is needed:

  • A solid programming language that allows me to easily use drag-and-drop icons to move virtual items from one container to another, probably with stacking of similar items such as torches, coins, oil flasks, etc. with a means of adjusting quantities in a bundle.
  • A library of established icons that are easy to identify as containers and items, including food items, bags, backpacks, pouches, saddle-bags, chests, coins, weapons, armor, gems, jewelry, etc.
  • A paper-doll model of the character showing inventory slots and sub-slots, including spots for helms, rings, necklaces, armor, weapons, backpacks, pouches, bracers, belts, boots, gloves, eye-pieces, and even earrings. Opening a container would reveal a window with contents, total weight carried and remaining space options, etc.
  • A mathematical model that allows all inventory equipped to subtract from available weight allowance, adjusted for current strength and fatigue levels.
  • Addition of mount/mule storage for accounting of surplus party supplies, stowed treasures, and personal items such as spell books.
  • The containers should have their own weight included in the total, and an adjustable amount of volume that can be used to fix each unique container's carrying capacity (once established this amount become fixed and immutable).
  • Items held in place by other items have to be accounted for as well (i.e. a wand or scroll tucked securely under a wizard's belt, a quiver strapped to a backpack, a hood covering a helm, a sack covering a magic lantern, etc.)
  • Ideally it would be great to have a player's version and a DM's version that monitors the player versions.
  • Based on total weight carried, the character's current movement and burden penalties to combat would automatically be displayed. Allowances must be made for magic armor which has encumbrance but is not counted when determining movement.
  • Weapon or item in hand should automatically display when any changes are made (i.e. dropped weapons, holding lanterns, material components, etc.)

I'm not exactly sure how this would be done. I have a smattering of experience with C scripting for Neverwinter Nights, but nothing of this magnitude. I would love to see the icons listed for World of Warcraft used in such an application since they have already made a myriad of multi-colored, generic icons for the thousands of objects in their game. Allowing the characters to select the icons they want may not be the way to go. Allowing the DM to predetermine all the standard objects in the Player's Handbook and some magic items, then import them to a waiting treasure cache on the player's side seems to be the more likely method, although I have no network programming experience and have no idea how to accomplish this.

B2: Of Monsters and Gygaxian Wisdom

I know it's been a while since I've posted anything on this blog, and I apologize. The last six months have been a whirlwind of acti...