Goodman Games

finarvyn wrote:The playtest file is around 300 pages in length and has no campaign information at all in it.

Having not seen the playtest file I can only assume it's a Word file with a single 6"-6.5" column and 12 point fonts throughout. 3 or so of those pages can easily fit onto a normal RPG page.

Of course that assumes one doesn't put just a single spell on each page in the spell section.

smathis wrote:

goodmangames wrote:There have to be planes. Lots of them.

And can there be snakes?

On those planes?

The house rules document now has its first setting, "The Ethereal Plane of Snakes."

dkeester wrote:The house rules document now has its first setting, "The Ethereal Plane of Snakes."

All just a lead up to my character saying: "I'm tired of these Monkey Fighting Snakes on this Monday-to-Friday Plane!"

smathis wrote:

goodmangames wrote:There have to be planes. Lots of them.

And can there be snakes?

On those planes?

And here I was hoping no mithril-flippin' poster would mention that mithril-flippin' movie...!

smathis wrote:

goodmangames wrote:There have to be planes. Lots of them.

And can there be snakes?

On those planes?

The Conan setting is loaded with snakes, so there is an Appendix N precident set there. And Elric moves from one plane to another frequently. No reason I can see why we couldn't blend the two and have snakes on those planes.

I say we do it!

Plane: Ethereal Plane of Snakes
Location: Outer Planes
Inhabitants: Spirits of deceases serpents

Description:
The Plane of Snakes is the creation of the serpent god Set as a resting place for deceased serpents. Whenever a snake dies its spirit flies to the this plane where it is judged by Set. The plane is divided into two regions, the upper and the lower.

The upper region is the habitat of snakes whose life was pleasing to Set. There, with Set, they enjoy all manner of serpentine delights. There are many continents, oceans, lakes, and rivers in the upper region encompassing the multitude of environments where snakes often make their homes.

The lower region is the habitat of snakes that have earned the displeasure of Set. It is ruled by Neville Flynn. Flynn is commonly known in the religion that all snakes share, as the Anti-Snake. The lower region is composed of a single continent, which is shaped roughly like the fuselage of a 747. There the snakes suffer a myriad of unpleasantness until such time as they once again find favor with Set.

dkeester wrote:The lower region is the habitat of snakes that have earned the displeasure of Set. It is ruled by Neville Flynn. Flynn is commonly known in the religion that all snakes share, as the Anti-Snake. The lower region is composed of a single continent, which is shaped roughly like the fuselage of a 747. There the snakes suffer a myriad of unpleasantness until such time as they once again find favor with Set.

Lol. Awesome.

While the snake discussion is awesome, I want to post something about the first topic.

First of all, I do not like the way 4e changed the cosmology. I am not sure how to explain it, but it just rubs me the wrong way. I know that is a weak description, but it is all that I have for you.

I do like the wheel concept, not because it is accurate but because it is something that people can visualize AND it ties together so many of the various mythologies out there. It does not do it very well because if you are running a campaign based on Norse mythology, then it is useless. But in many of the campaigns I ran, I used to let them pick whatever deity of out the Deity and Demigods book they wanted. So there was always a miss mash of deities in the world. Since there were infinite planes (737, 707, 747, etc...), any god or goddess could have followers in any of the multitude of prime material planes.

So is the wheel the best? No. Something tailored to your individual campaign would be best. Based on the gods you worship. If you are in a Greek mythology, then most of the planes are meaningless. If you are in a more classic DnD type campaign, then the planes have some sort of value. Plus, there is always something entertaining about delving into the depths of hell for something!

I'm not that familiar with Áereth (I couldn't afford it - please no more expensive box sets), but would it have to be changed to better fit with the Appendix N feel they are going for?

Hamakto wrote:While the snake discussion is awesome, I want to post something about the first topic.

First of all, I do not like the way 4e changed the cosmology. I am not sure how to explain it, but it just rubs me the wrong way. I know that is a weak description, but it is all that I have for you.

I do like the wheel concept, not because it is accurate but because it is something that people can visualize AND it ties together so many of the various mythologies out there. It does not do it very well because if you are running a campaign based on Norse mythology, then it is useless. But in many of the campaigns I ran, I used to let them pick whatever deity of out the Deity and Demigods book they wanted. So there was always a miss mash of deities in the world. Since there were infinite planes (737, 707, 747, etc...), any god or goddess could have followers in any of the multitude of prime material planes.

So is the wheel the best? No. Something tailored to your individual campaign would be best. Based on the gods you worship. If you are in a Greek mythology, then most of the planes are meaningless. If you are in a more classic DnD type campaign, then the planes have some sort of value. Plus, there is always something entertaining about delving into the depths of hell for something!

Darn you for keeping us on topic.

You make a good argument for having cosmology and the pantheon be setting dependent. Sometimes the DM might not want to have a Multiverse to play in.

mshensley wrote:I'm not that familiar with Áereth (I couldn't afford it - please no more expensive box sets), but would it have to be changed to better fit with the Appendix N feel they are going for?

It's a mix of S&S and high fantasy with a rich and bloody history. In the present period the great empires have fallen and mankind is on the brink of ruin. Knightly orders (good and bad), lizard-riding barbarians, a secret cabal of demon-blooded Priest Kings, tattooed Northlanders, ancient mysteries, distant lands of Aztec and Samurai type cultures.

So it does fantasy well enough. I'm sure with planes and alternate dimensions you can bring in the more science fantasy elements of Appendix N - or they could be threaded into the setting in a 'Barrier Peaks' fashion.

But

I'm a big believer of setting working at it's best when it develops through adventure modules rather than large gazetters. It leads to a greater sense of things being unknown and more anticipation in the consumer - rather than the 'I have the setting book, it's all there' attitude that keeps the setting static.

geordie racer wrote:I'm a big believer of setting working at it's best when it develops through adventure modules rather than large gazetters. It leads to a greater sense of things being unknown and more anticipation in the consumer - rather than the 'I have the setting book, it's all there' attitude that keeps the setting static.

+1 to that

geordie racer wrote:I'm a big believer of setting working at it's best when it develops through adventure modules rather than large gazetters. It leads to a greater sense of things being unknown and more anticipation in the consumer - rather than the 'I have the setting book, it's all there' attitude that keeps the setting static.

When you think about it, that's really the Appendix N way of doing things, which makes it prefect for the DCC RPG.

Conan, for example, seems like a coherent setting now but when it was written as a collection of short stories not told in chronological order. It wasn't made into a logical timeline setting until the 1960's when DeCamp and Carter did it (and added stories of their own in the middle to make the sequence follow correctly).

Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser were similar, with a bunch of short story adventures that may or may not have a "best" order. Elric, same thing. Go down the list and pretty much everything was written in this style, often without maps or anything like that to guide a reader from adventure to adventure.

Tolkien's elaborate detail in his setting was the exception and not the rule, and having fully-detailed settings really isn't "Appendix N" in style overall.

IMO, one of the most "Appendix N"-feel published setting is Judges Guild's Wilderlands. It is sparsely-detailed and was released piece-by-piece over a span of years.

Geoffrey wrote:IMO, one of the most "Appendix N"-feel published setting is Judges Guild's Wilderlands. It is sparsely-detailed and was released piece-by-piece over a span of years.

Since february I've bought some old Judges Guild stuff for my S&W campaign (Wilderlands of High Fantasy, Modron, Ready Ref Sheets), and they are simply awesome. Especially the maps. They look sturdy enough to survive a nuclear blast.

Oh man, I LOVE the Wilderlands stuff.

Nice little adventure hooks on a mostly empty map.

Enough to get you started, then the rest is up to you.

I'd LOVE to see something along those lines for this game. Haven't looked at the Aerth boxed set, so, sorry if it;s like that already...

Geoffrey wrote:IMO, one of the most "Appendix N"-feel published setting is Judges Guild's Wilderlands. It is sparsely-detailed and was released piece-by-piece over a span of years.

I agree. I started out D&D with that stuff in the 1970's and thing the setting is really great. Just enough detail to be useful, not so much detail as to be overwhelming. And with the First Fantasy Campaign book you can blend the Wilderlands together with Arneson's Blackmoor! Fantastic!

finarvyn wrote:

geordie racer wrote:I'm a big believer of setting working at it's best when it develops through adventure modules rather than large gazetters. It leads to a greater sense of things being unknown and more anticipation in the consumer - rather than the 'I have the setting book, it's all there' attitude that keeps the setting static.

When you think about it, that's really the Appendix N way of doing things, which makes it prefect for the DCC RPG.

Conan, for example, seems like a coherent setting now but when it was written as a collection of short stories not told in chronological order. It wasn't made into a logical timeline setting until the 1960's when DeCamp and Carter did it (and added stories of their own in the middle to make the sequence follow correctly).

Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser were similar, with a bunch of short story adventures that may or may not have a "best" order. Elric, same thing. Go down the list and pretty much everything was written in this style, often without maps or anything like that to guide a reader from adventure to adventure.

Well, that is more or less how Aereth came to be a coherent setting too. Even after it became an "official setting" I don't think anyone set out to write adventures that took place in that setting. They wrote adventures they wanted to write and then found a way to fit them in the setting. I suspect very little will change in that regard from the old DCC modules and the DCC RPG ones.