Appendix N Recommendations and Adventuring Parties

[kataskicana]

I have a question for everyone about Appendix N literature. I haven't read all of appendix N, but am probably around 80%. Unfortunately, less than 30% in the last 5 years or so... and I've slept since reading any of it. So....

What are some examples of actual adventurers that work in groups in Appendix N? I mostly recall solo heroes and two man teams. I don't really recall any full groups off the top of my head other than Tolkien and they spent most of the trilogy in 2-3 man groups too.

I'd also like to read some of the more obscure 20% I haven't read... so any recommendations would be appreciated. (featuring groups or otherwise)

Thanks!

[geordie racer]

I think Hiero's Journey has the oddest team - a psionic warrior-priest, a runaway princess, a bear and a giant moose.

[GnomeBoy]

I think Hiero's Journey has the oddest team - a psionic warrior-priest, a runaway princess, a bear and a giant moose.

Mind you, moose bites can be pretty nasty...

[geordie racer]

The moose is the most sympathic character in the novel.

I think most of the 'teams' in the books actually work as duos or trios. Also there aren't many hirelings at low level, although loads of subjects at high level (King Conan, Corwin in Amber etc).

Even the Fellowship itself is like 4 PC hobbits aided by higher-level NPCs and the DM's fave unkillable NPC wizard.

[mshensley]

In The Hobbit, there is only one pc with his thirteen dwarf followers.

[finarvyn]

Honestly, I think one of the biggest differences between books/movies and games is the individual vs party concept.

Books and movies tend to gravitate to individuals or pairs. (Hero-hero or hero-sidekick.) I suspect it's because it's hard to give everyone "air time" if there are too many characters. Think about the X-Men or Fantastic Four or other "pack of heroes" movie and often a given movie tends to develop a plotline with one or two heroes in the spotlight more than the rest. I guess Star Wars managed to juggle quite a few characters around a lot, but they often split the party into small group rather than having everyone run around as a mob.

Contrast this with a game, where a "turn" lasts only a few minutes and each character can trade off the spotlight a lot faster. There might not be serious in-depth plotlines for a single character, but instead a party plotline to move the entire group along.

I think that many of the books with the "party" mentality, such as DragonLance, came out after D&D was created instead of before. At least, I can't come up with a lot of examples from Appendix N to support the "party" dynamic.

[finarvyn]

In The Hobbit, there is only one pc with his thirteen dwarf followers.

Agreed. While the dwarves are all named, there are limited player characters in the group.

Bilbo, of course, and perhaps you could argue that Thorin Oakenshield would have been a PC. Gandalf might be one, but he's pretty powerful and in many ways overshadowed the rest.

[mythfish]

In The Hobbit, there is only one pc with his thirteen dwarf followers.

Agreed. While the dwarves are all named, there are limited player characters in the group.

Bilbo, of course, and perhaps you could argue that Thorin Oakenshield would have been a PC. Gandalf might be one, but he's pretty powerful and in many ways overshadowed the rest.

Bard was a totally min-maxed PC who only showed up for one session.

[finarvyn]

Bard was a totally min-maxed PC who only showed up for one session.

Nice catch!

[geordie racer]

Though The Moon Pool is mostly centred around a duo, by the end the team consists of a scholar, a rogue, a priestess and a barbarian. Vaguely D&D-ish, I suppose.

[trancejeremy]

I just don't think adventure fiction works very well with groups.

Doc Savage is a great example - at the start of the series, he had 5 assistants, but almost immediately only half of them were used in subsequent novels I guess because it just proved unwieldy. Usually just Doc + Ham + Monk + Monk's pig + woman as a foil (generally a new one for the story, but often his cousin).

[jmucchiello]

I just don't think adventure fiction works very well with groups.

Superhero groups are as close as you get.

And they don't map onto adventuring very well. Adventuring is pro-active: Let's go into the Tomb of Doom and find some loot. Superheroes are reactive: Doc Doom is doing what? Let's stop him.

[mshensley]

I just don't think adventure fiction works very well with groups.

It depends on the fiction. The Joe Abercrombie books I just finished reading had some rather large parties of characters through most of the stories. Best Served Cold had a great group - two fighters, a barbarian, two poisoners, and an autistic thug. And they all hated each other.

[mshensley]

Superheroes are reactive: Doc Doom is doing what? Let's stop him.

Almost all rpg modules are reactive too. The goblins are raiding the village. Let's stop them.

[jmucchiello]

Superheroes are reactive: Doc Doom is doing what? Let's stop him.

Almost all rpg modules are reactive too. The goblins are raiding the village. Let's stop them.

No, Most RPG modules are home invasions. Doing a home invasion is rarely "reactive".

Goblin raiders are usually dealt with by "hunting every last one of them down and killing them." The response may be in reaction to a village being attacked but the genocide that follows is proactive.

[geordie racer]

Mazirian the Magician, now that dude needed backup.