Representing the OSR

Next month, Scott, Rowan and Shane are hosting Busan Con 2026, a two-day (maybe three with the Buddha's birthday being a holiday on that Monday) event. Aside from volunteering to help out with whatever needs doing, I'll be running a Star Wars d6 game for sure (This is the May), and probably a Missions & Mayhem game if I can get something together in time. The deadline to sign up to run games in the 19th. 

A guy named Dave, who I've only interacted with online, wants to run a workshop for new GMs. He asked for any experienced GMs to volunteer to be on his panel. It seems like most folks in and around Busan these days run very story-centric games, whether they're using 5E, PF2E, Daggerheart, or any of a myriad of indie games. And most people who'd sign up to share their GMing wisdom would be in that school of gaming. I signed up to be the OSR guy on the panel. 

Unlike some die hard OSR folks, I don't mind the more story-focused gaming crowd. It's not exactly my thing, as I've blogged about before. But at the same time, I see lots of people having fun with a game that prioritizes the PCs' character growth and playing out a storyline. Honestly, my Star Wars game has been fairly story-oriented, although not so much about a PC living out their "story." Missions & Mayhem is also very mission based, obviously, so each session I'm pretty much dropping the players into an ongoing story. I'm not demanding any particular sort of ending for the missions, though. That's up to the players to determine. 

For the workshop, Dave and I chatted a bit yesterday. He said he'd like each GM on the panel to give a 7-8 minute presentation on their DMing style, then he'll have us field some questions from him, then open it up to the audience. And if there's time, maybe one of the GMs can run a quick impromptu game with the folks to show off their style. 

Being an OSR representative, I'll probably be focused on the notion that sandbox play doesn't need tons of prep like many people think. Random tables and stocking procedures can save you a lot of time. And making an open world with situations, rather than story lines. I'll probably also get in a bit about backstory getting in the way of action, and how Gygax is reputed to have said something like "The first three levels of your PC ARE your backstory." 

I should look up to see what Gygax's actual quote was, or if that's even something he said and not just internet apocrypha.  

It should be fun! 

Runaround and a Red Herring Avoided

Just finished up a session of Missions & Mayhem: Cryptids & Conspiracy. 

The mission was to investigate strange things going on in a small Indiana town. Why Indiana? Well, first of all I went to college there so it's an area I know well. Second, Indiana is sort of the liminal space of U.S. states. It's just so bloody normal that you know weird things have got to be going on there. 

Anyway, for this mission, there were obvious attempts by the shadowy conspiracy group to divert them from their mission. Also, competition to solve the mystery first. There didn't end up being a showdown with agents of the conspiracy, but the party fairly quickly diverted from the red herring (not knowing yet that it was a red herring) into the clues that led to the actual mystery. 

It was a lot of talking, and not much die rolling. I got to play a bunch of quirky small town NPCs (many based on or at least inspired by folks I knew either growing up in Illinois or from my uni years in Evansville). The players seemed to enjoy it, especially when one of my NPCs struck a chord and they could recognize that exact sort of person from their own experience. I did a few voices, but mostly stuck to impressions of mannerisms and different speech patterns to differentiate the various NPCs. It was pretty fun for me, too. 

Before we got into the adventure, we went over the Cryptids & Conspiracy advanced classes. Jada's Hero (PC) Sarah doesn't qualify yet, but she's interested in taking the Occultist class to get some ability with magic. We haven't done any occult/spiritual/undead adventures yet, but that will probably be coming soon. Next adventure, I want to lean into the psychic ability rules. Justin suggested they all make new psychic powered PCs and we do a power battle. 

I could probably run with something like that. Maybe the psychics and battle minds have to escape from captivity in a secret research institute run by the conspiracy group. Then we could go back to the regular PCs who are investigating. The players will have new knowledge of the conspiracy group, like when we get to see scenes in a book or movie from the bad guys' perspective. 

The Netrun is Just Another Dungeon (and That's a Good Thing)

I'll admit I have very little experience with cyberpunk themed RPGs. My cousin borrowed Shadowrun from a friend back in the early 90s and we looked through the book. Maybe made characters? And that was it. In the 00s, my buddy Steve had some Forge-inspired story-first games he was developing, and we did some cyberpunk themed games with that. Alex tried to get a RIFTS game going around 10 years ago, which had some cyberpunk elements but was really more superheroic/mecha oriented. More recently, at the Busan Tabletop Gaming Con, I got to play in Keith's Cyberpunk RED game, which was a lot of fun. I think that's about it. 

And yet, while cyberpunk is not my go-to sci fi subgenre, I do really enjoy the themes and aesthetics of it. And I've got some (I think) good ideas for my Missions & Mayhem cyberpunk campaign module, which for now I think will be titled Neon & Nihilism. (Unless I can think of something better in the meantime). 

In M&M's base rules, computer hacking is designed to be relatively quick and painless for the group, as most often only one Hero will be hacking while the others wait around. Make a few quick choices, a few quick rolls, and maybe have to deal with some complications before you succeed or fail. 

For N&N, though, the netrun is probably going to be a fairly important aspect of the campaign. And one complaint I've read about with that in other games is exactly what I was trying to avoid with the main game's hacking rules -- one player taking up a large amount of the game session on the hack/netrun, while the other players sit around twiddling their fingers or scrolling on their phones. 

For N&N, I think I've got a good idea to handle this and get everyone involved. Each Hero (PC) will have a net avatar. This is a secondary character that represents the Hero in cyberspace. The Avatar will have its own class (I'm thinking a Fighter/Thief/Wizard style trio). And the Net will be dungeons. In order to hack into a company's system, the Avatar adventuring party will have to brave the dangers of the dungeon to collect the treasure (whatever info or sabotage they have planned for the netrun). 

The Fighter type class (Cyber-Samurai?) is there to battle security modules and sentient programs to protect the other runners. 

The Thief type class (Shadow Slicer?) is there to retrieve (or plant) whatever needs retrieving, as well as outwitting security programs. 

The Wizard type class (Code Mage?) is there to try and rearrange the virtual environment to the runners' advantage, and will have some limited specials (spells) that can help with combat or infiltration/exfiltration. 

A corporate computer system, internet construct, or AI becomes a series of encounter areas with various challenges meant to keep the party OUT, or eliminate them once they get IN. And somewhere in the maze of programs, data files, subroutines, and whatnot is whatever goal the netrunners are after.  

So pretty much like a D&D dungeon crawl. 

The upside is that the netrun becomes its own adventure, and everyone participates. The downside is that the netrun becomes a dungeon that needs to be prepared, and that players will need two separate character sheets for the campaign. 

I'm also not sure yet how advancement of the meatspace Hero will affect the netrunner Avatar, and vice versa.  

Luckily for me, our modern age isn't that far removed from the typical dystopian cyberpunk setting. Late-stage capitalist megacorps, invasive surveillance tech, government controlled by the oligarchs, and the masses mostly sheep willing to stare at their screens all day waiting for the next dopamine hit. So I won't need to add a lot to the meatspace side of the rules (maybe some replicants, a few gene-splice mods, some cyberware, a bit more near-future tech). M&M can already handle a lot of that. Most of the focus of the book can be on the netrun aspect of the campaign. 

The Boring Math Post

 I've mentioned already that for Missions & Mayhem, I came up with what may not be a novel mechanic for general proficiency checks, but at least one that's fairly uncommon in my experience. Characters all start with Basic level proficiency in all areas. This is both due to action movie logic (everyone has a chance to fly that helicopter), but also for game expedience. One problem with d20 Modern (and other 3E-forward games) is the way feats and skill training can prevent you from doing things that maybe every character should at least be able to try. 

At Basic level, if you want to perform an action covered by a proficiency in combat or other tense situations (usually no or few rolls in non-tense situations), you roll 2d4. 

At Skilled level, you roll 2d6.

At Advanced level, you roll 2d8. 

Difficulties for most tasks range up the odd numbers from 5 to 13. I haven't put anything at 15 yet, but that's still a possibility. There may be one or two things on an even number (an 8, for example), but mostly I've used the odd numbers since that's what the Classic D&D Turn Undead chart uses. 

Certain situational factors may give advantage or disadvantage on rolls. For these general proficiency 2dX rolls, advantage means rolling three dice and taking the best two. Disadvantage is rolling three dice and taking the worst two. I messed around with rolling 2d6 and 2d6 but it's easier to just add one die to the roll than have people roll twice (or roll four dice in two different colors). 

Using anydice.com to calculate these, I have the following percent chances of success for the various task difficulties: 

 

Difficulty:	5	7	9	11	13	15
2d4	62.50	18.75	–	–	–	–
2d4 Advantage	82.81	39.06	–	–	–	–
2d4 Disadvantage	35.94	6.25	–	–	–	–
2d6	83.33	58.33	27.78	8.33	–	–
2d6 Advantage	94.15	80.56	52.31	19.91	–	–
2d6 Disadvantage	64.35	31.94	10.65	1.85	–	–
2d8	90.63	76.56	56.25	32.81	15.63	4.69
2d8 Advantage	97.85	91.80	79.30	58.59	33.78	11.91
2d8 Disadvantage	77.93	53.71	30.08	13.48	4.49	0.78

 

One more factor to consider is that there is a Gamble mechanic.  I came up with this as a way to add some player choice into the chase mechanic (which is best 3 of 5 contested rolls). Then I realized it also works for other 2dX checks. Why not gamble when trying to defuse a bomb, hoodwink the Prime Minister, or land a plane after the pilot passed out from eating bad fish? 

For the Gamble, players can pick one of their ability scores. They roll a d20. If they get their score or less, they get a +1 on the related general proficiency check. If they roll over, they get a -1 penalty to the check. A character can gamble on each ability score once per game session. 

This way, even if you're rolling 2d4, you've got a slight chance to get a 9 if you need it. Or a 13 if you're rolling 2d6.  

Lock and Load

 A few weeks ago, I posted about the double-tap, burst fire, and spray fire rules I was working on for Missions & Mayhem. 

If you don't want to click the link, the gist is that following d20 Modern, I had the attacks take a penalty which then resulted in greater damage on a hit. Game mechanics wise, that makes sense. But both as a simulation and as a player trade-off decision point, my players were not happy and I was OK with it, but not in love with the mechanic, either. 

I'd considered, and several players said they agreed, that a bonus to hit but normal damage and extra ammo expended would make for a better trade-off in game, as well as being more realistic.

Reader Avi suggested in a comment that the damage bonus should only apply at short range. 

Considering all this feedback, my new rules for firearms use look like this: 

Basic Ranged Weapon proficiency: use basic ranged weapons at no penalty. -2 to hit with firearms (single shot/semi-auto mode), -4 to hit with military (autofire mode firearms, launcher) weapons. 

Skilled Ranged Weapon proficiency: use basic and firearms weapons at no penalty.  -4 to hit with military weapons. Double-Tap and Suppression Fire can be performed. 

Advanced Ranged Weapon proficiency: use any ranged weapon at no penalty. Burst Fire and Spray Fire can be performed. 

Double-Tap: Fire two rounds as one attack, with a +2 bonus to hit. At short range, the attack deals +1 die of damage. Normal damage at medium or long range.

Suppression Fire: Empty the current magazine (minimum 5 rounds, belt-fed machine guns use 20 rounds) in one direction, targeting the area (AC 11). On a hit, all characters within short or medium range in that field of fire must make a will saving throw or dive for cover, losing their actions for this round.

Burst Fire: Using a weapon with autofire capability, fire five rounds at a single target as one attack, with a +4 bonus to hit. At short range, the attack deals +2 dice of damage. Normal damage at medium or long range. 

Spray Fire: Using a weapon with autofire capability, fire ten rounds as a single attack targeting a 10' square or 5x20' line (AC 11). All in the area must make a reflex save or take normal damage.

I'll see how this works on Sunday as the party continues their exploration of Dinosaur Island. Well, I suppose they probably won't try to use suppression fire on dinosaurs...but maybe they will?

Infinite Cryptids!

 For Cryptids & Conspiracy, the first campaign module I'm working on for Missions & Mayhem, I want to keep things brief. For this reason, I've got only a handful of cryptids, aliens, paranormal entities, and prehistoric beasties statted up for the game. 

However, I've got a "Create-A-Cryptid" system for GMs to make their own. It's got guidelines for giving the creatures stats, and also several random tables for the cryptid's appearance and behaviors. With that, a GM will never run out of strange creatures for their Heroes to investigate. 

I finally finished up the creature section. Yesterday, I wrote some guidelines for how to structure missions (adventures) in the game. Most cryptid hunts won't be "dungeon" adventures, although a haunted house could be. So I've got guidelines for using the 5-Room Dungeon narrative structure in a more loose sense to stage not five encounters in five locations in a row, but five stages of a mission with some advice on the types of possible encounters that could happen in each stage. 

So, to keep score, I've got complete: 

Advice on what sort of campaign this is (or could be with modification)

3 Advanced Classes

Psychic Powers

Relevant Gear/Vehicles/Weapons

Guideline for creating Conspiracy groups

Creatures

XP guidelines

Mission creation guidelines 

 

What I still need to finish: 

Freelancers/Hirelings/Services (halfway done)

Occult and Alien Devices (notes only) 

Example Missions (I plan to include two or three short ones)

___________________________

So I'm almost done with this. Of course, I still haven't finished the Mission Creation Guidelines for the main rule book. Need to work on that, too. That and a bit of a better introduction/explanation of the game at the start are all I need still to work on for the main game. Well, of course there will still be some adjustments as I continue to play test it.  

After Cryptids & Conspiracy, I'll probably start working on Bughunts & Bedlam, the military sci-fi/horror module (based on Aliens, Starship Troopers, The Forever War, Terminator's Future War, etc.). I'd like to have three modules done before I start getting the main book finalized and laid out for release. But who knows, maybe I'll have all five of my planned modules done in time. 

Dinosaur Island

Another successful play test of Missions & Mayhem. 

Even though the rules aren't complete yet, I used the Cryptids & Conspiracy module to prepare for today's play test game. 

I was inspired by a board game I had as a kid, called Dinosaur Island. There's a newer game with the same name, riffing off of the Jurassic Park franchise. The 80s game wasn't a very good game, but as an 8 year old, it was fun. The idea is that players go around the island, trying to get the best photos of dinosaurs. The player with the best photos at the end is the winner. No need to hash out the problems with the original game (which even as 8-10 year olds, we realized wasn't that fun after one or two games unless we put some toy dinosaurs on the board to spice things up). 

The concept was good enough. I grabbed an island map made by the Welsh Piper (thanks!). Then I started to make some random encounter charts, but I realized I needed a rationale for why an island full of dinosaurs would be undiscovered in 2026. So one LOST style anomaly and a missing expedition party later, I had my set-up. 

In C&C, I have a suggested organization that Heroes can work for, the Fortean Investigations Association (FIA). In my game, it's an NGO but I suggest it could be a governmental organization, or even a loose collection of amateurs sharing findings, depending on the campaign. The FIA sent a team to investigate the anomaly. They found a way through, but their signal was cut off. The final message was one of the team members saying, "Is that a dinosaur?"

The Heroes were sent in to try to find/rescue the first party, and also collect evidence of any dinosaurs, cryptids, or other weird things. 

I won't go into too much detail, because I will probably include the adventure as an example in the finished book. But of course their first encounter with a dinosaur on the island, via random roll, was with a T-Rex! 

No one has been eaten yet, but we stopped in the middle of the adventure and will pick up more next time. They all had fun, and we got to test out the money/shopping system (semi-abstract seems to work well), the encumbrance rules, a chase (with gambling), a little bit of combat, some investigation work, some exploration, and some clever thinking. 

Missions & Mayhem Module 1: Cryptids & Conspiracy

 The draft for Cryptids & Conspiracy is coming along fairly quickly. Over the long weekend (Chinese/Lunar New Year), despite lots of family stuff to attend to, I've managed to write up quite a bit.

The conceit for this campaign setting is that the Heroes investigate rumors or reports of cryptids, paranormal activity, and the like. In the background, one or more conspiratorial adversaries are working against them. So basically...

 Of course, me being me, and flexibility being a design goal of Missions & Mayhem, I've got advice for limiting the types of weirdness the Heroes explore, running the game without conspiracies working as adversaries, or running the game with the conspiracies but not the weirdness. 

There are three advanced classes, adapted from ones in the d20 Modern core book. I've shortened them to 5 level classes, because the originals had five dead levels. They are the Battle Mind, Occultist, and Telepath. These are all optional, if GMs want to allow Heroes to have these powers. 

Battle Minds use psychic powers to improve their combat potential, including making weapons or shields of psychic energy.

Pretty much this.

Occultists study and learn about magic, but they're not spellcasters but they can employ magic items limited to spellcasters. They do get (in my version) to Turn Undead and get an occult creature sidekick at higher levels. 

Using this picture instead of the comics, because comics Constantine is more of a sorcerer. Keanu version mostly used items and knowledge, IIRC

Finally, Telepaths are the pure psychic class. They get a wider array of powers to choose from than the Battle Mind, but aren't as combat capable. 

Not this powerful, but you get the idea.

 

In addition to the advanced classes, I've got the equipment sorted (a few weapons, gear, vehicles useful for cryptid hunting or paranormal investigations). 

I've got advice on creating conspiracy groups and using them as opposition (occasionally allies), including a random 6-step d12 chart for the Who/What/When/Where/Why/How of conspiracy groups. 

I've got a list of a bunch of cryptids, ghosts, urban legends, and prehistoric beasties, but I haven't statted them all up yet. Quite a few I can borrow from d20 Modern books or my own TS&R books, but a few will be original. No one had heard of Slender Man or the Hat Man when d20 M came out. 

After that, I'll have more notes on creating missions (adventures), as well as two or three short sample adventures. 

_______

I've already referenced the more fantastic Van Helsing/Dark Shadows/Stranger Things-ish module I have planned called Hellspawn & Horror, so that one should be next. But I'll probably do the sci-fi Bughunts & Bedlam next, just because I love the genre of sci-fi action/horror. 

Guns Blazing (or maybe not?)

 Yesterday, I ran a relatively straightforward combat mission for Missions & Mayhem to play test some of the combat rules. And of course, as we got started, the players were looking for ways they could solve the mission without resorting to combat. But after straight up telling them I needed to test the combat rules, they went with it. 

The players went in with a good tactical plan, hired mercenaries for extra firepower support (old school D&D players want their men-at-arms, you know!), and good use of the "I Know a Guy" rule to get access to night-vision goggles. 

We were able to test out surprise and initiative (just like Classic D&D, and they work just as well), regular attacks and the special double-tap, burst, and spray autofire rules, grenades/explosives, and the first aid rules. 

One area I had been wondering about were the double-tap and burst rules, which I'd imported directly from d20 Modern. For both of these, in d20 Modern, you sacrifice accuracy and ammunition for increased potential damage. As a game mechanic, it's elegant. Firearms all deal 2dX damage. With a double-tap, you fire two rounds and take a -2 to hit, and deal an extra die of damage (3dX). With burst autofire, you fire five rounds and take a -4 to hit, and deal an extra two dice of damage (4dX). 

However, in M&M, it's not as easy to get bonuses to hit (no feats). Also, there's less hit point inflation, because NPCs/creatures have mostly flat hit dice, not bonuses to each die for Constitution scores. When I ran the solo test with Jeremy a few weeks back, we'd discussed the option to change double-tap and burst autofire to be a bonus to hit, rather than a penalty, but deal standard damage on a hit. The thing that holds me back is that ammo expenditure becomes the only reason NOT to double-tap or use burst fire if you have the proficiency for it. 

The rules for spray autofire (expend 10 rounds, trying to target several people with one attack) works similarly to the explosives rules. You only need to hit AC 11 (ascending AC) with your attack roll, but the targets in the area get to make a reflex saving throw. In the case of spray autofire, they take no damage on a save. With explosives, they take 1/2 damage (like fireball in D&D). This seemed to work well. No need for a change. 

I do have notes for figuring out where a grenade or other thrown explosive goes off on a miss. I think I need to also implement them for both burst and spray autofire. We had one instance where a burst attack missed a terrorist standing among the hostages. On the spot, I had the player roll a reflex save to avoid the bullets striking a hostage (failure! But the hostage survived with 1 hit point). That worked, but since I already have rules for how to determine where an explosive goes off (and it may still affect the intended target if you're lucky), it's easier to implement those for missed autofire attacks in crowded areas as well. 

We didn't get to test out the suppression fire rules (empty your magazine in one direction, opponents must make will saves or dive for cover/lose their actions for the round), but everything else went fairly well. 

Right now, I'm working on the first campaign module: Cryptids & Conspiracy. Basically, X-Files, but with potential for psychic or occult Heroes (and villains). I've got the advanced classes and psychic powers done. I need to write up a system/advice for creating and running conspiracy groups as opponents, and of course stats for a bunch of cryptids, alien visitors, and ghosts/demons that can be investigated. Once those are all done, I'll add some mission design guidelines and XP award guidelines. I'll likely include a few sample missions as well.

So still early in the process, but so far I'm happy with what I've done. 

Should I put the chocolate in the peanut butter?

I think my base rules for Missions & Mayhem are done. At least, the heavy lifting is done. I've got rules that seem to work for all the areas of play I think a modern (action/adventure/investigation) setting RPG should probably cover. That doesn't mean I won't continue to tweak things here and there, but for the most part it seems good. 

Now, I've got to start work on rules for fantasy, sci-fi, horror, etc. that go along with this. Some of that won't be too hard. d20 Modern has d20 Future, d20 Past, d20 Apocalypse, etc. to draw from for ideas. And there's all of the WotC and OSR output to draw on for creatures, magic/sci-fi items, etc. 

Originally, I planned to just release the base rules as a stand-alone set. Then I'd release adventure modules or campaign settings that had the rules for adding in cryptids, horror creatures, normal D&D type fantasy creatures, near-future (utopian or dystopian) sci-fi, space opera sci-fi, post-apoc stuff, etc. as their own supplements. 

But d20 Modern core rules did include three "FX" campaign settings. One is about D&D monsters living/hiding in the real world (like Shadowrun, but modern world instead of near future), one is psychics and government conspiracies (X-Files meets X-Men), and one is hunting down the monsters that secretly lurk in the shadows (Call of Cthulhu-ish, but assuming you can and will kick the monsters' asses). 

Should I include a few tastes of the fantastic in the base rules? Or should I stick to my original plan? If you have a preference, let me know in the comments. 

I know some of my players have been waiting for me to start adding in the alien invasion/zombie apocalypse/monster hunting aspects into the game. We gamers do love our speculative fiction. I'll probably start working some of these ideas into my play tests in a month or two.  

In Search of Elegant Design

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstein (apocryphal) 

 I haven't made a lot of progress on Missions & Mayhem this week, but what I have done feels elegant. 

When I started out, I tried to pare down d20 Modern to the bare essentials. 

Then, I started pulling in systems and ideas from other old school games to fill out systems where I didn't want to rely on a d20 system mechanic. Because d20+mods isn't always the best roll to make for every situation, and the scaling DC system gets progress backwards. 

But I quickly realized I had a mishmash of disparate game systems, and they didn't work well together. So the past few weeks have been about simplifying and trying to find elegant solutions to problems. 

I feel like that's what I've done recently. On the first page of my playtest document, which I share with my players, I've been putting a rundown of the various mechanics involved in the game. I'm not sure if they're reading it (I should ask), but for me it helps me keep track of what the game does and doesn't do. I'll copy/paste it here: 

 

Die Rolls: The following types of die rolls may be made in this game.

Ability Scores (character creation): 4d6, drop lowest single die. Roll six times to set ability scores.

Wealth Status (character creation, level up): 3d6, sets or modifies status level. Rolled at character creation to set initial status, and checked when a level is gained for possible changes.

Funds on hand: at the start of a mission, roll 2d4 or 3d6, multiplied by a modifier to determine additional cash/credit available for this mission.

General Proficiency Check: non-proficient 2d4, proficient 2d6, advanced 2d8, roll target number or higher. Possibly with modifiers depending on talents or Gambles.

Attacks, saving throws: 1d20+modifiers (Str for melee attacks, Dex for ranged attacks), roll Armor Class or save number or higher. Situational modifiers may also apply to attacks or saving throws.

Damage rolls: various, depends on the type of attack. Strength modifiers affect damage for all unarmed/melee weapons and some ranged weapons.

Gamble: In chases and some other emergency situations involving a general proficiency check, a player may roll 1d20 trying to roll equal or below one of their ability scores to gain a +1 bonus to a check. If they fail, they get a -1 penalty. How that ability may help must be described before the roll.

I Know a Guy: 1-2/d6 chance to know a guy in general, 1-4/d6 to know a guy related to occupation. If successful, the Hero gains information, access, or a favor.

 

I've described in previous posts how the proficiency system works, but here's a brief summary. There are combat proficiencies (access to weapons/armor, removes penalties for their use) and general proficiencies (replace skills/feats from the d20 system). Players get 2 proficiencies from their Starting Occupation (background), four or five from their level 1 character class, and if they have a high Wisdom, 1 to 3 bonus proficiencies. They gain more proficiencies at every 3rd level. Everyone starts with basic proficiency in ALL of them, and the proficiencies gained above are improvements to Skilled or Advanced levels. 

For the most part, difficulties are set. They don't scale with level as the PCs go up. That way leads to the backward progress I mentioned above. If your Hero has basic level infiltration proficiency, they roll 2d4. They can't disable any security devices with a difficulty of 9 (unless they gamble and get lucky, or get a bonus from one of their class talents and get lucky). After a few levels, if they boost infiltration to skilled, they now roll 2d6 and they've got a chance to disable that security device. A few levels more, they can boost it to advanced and roll 2d8, and have a pretty good shot at disabling that type of device. 

On the GM side, as well, the 2d4/2d6/2d8 scale, and 5/7/9/11/13 difficulty levels have been useful for a variety of systems. 

One more system that I keep finding useful is the I Know a Guy mechanic. Yes, it's a metagame mechanic. Yes, it shifts (not quite retcons) what's "known" in the fictional world. But it's goddamn useful! 

"Do we know the layout of the compound?" You do if you know a guy. 

"Can we get some uniforms to disguise ourselves?" You do if you know a guy.

"We need to get into the Grammy after party to find evidence." If you know a guy, he can get you in. 

Earlier in the design process, I had borrowed from d20 Modern the idea of equipment being unlicensed, licensed, restricted, or illegal. But it was a complex mess in play, and players were getting confused about needing both proficiency and permits to have certain types of weapons. Technically, they needed proficiency to use the weapons efficiently, and permits to legally own the weapons. They could have owned them illegally, or legally owned them without being very good at using them....

Anyway, I was working on a black market system related to this, and the abstract purchasing system (another hold-over from d20 Modern), and a Wanted Status system (with varying levels of "wantedness") for adding complications when the authorities are onto PC activities. Overly complex. 

This week, I added back in the Wanted Status, but it's binary. You're wanted or you're clear. No more "of interest" "suspect" "wanted" and "fugitive" levels. And if you're wanted, there are random encounter checks made once per mission/session, and at times when the party runs into the authorities, to see if some complication develops. 

For the black market, the I Know a Guy rule solves a lot of problems. If you're wanted, you can't buy certain items that would require you to present identification (firearms, explosives, new cars, surveillance gear) without triggering an automatic complication. But if you know a guy, you can buy from a black market source for a small mark-up in price. 

Clean, simple, elegant, and works with something I've already been developing in the rules.  

Another Successful Play Test

 This afternoon, I ran Steven (my younger) and my friends Denis and Charles through a stealth/subterfuge infiltration mission with Missions & Mayhem. Well, first we needed to update Charles and Denis' Heroes to the new rules. That went pretty well, with minimal fuss and only a few things fudged to match what came before to what they have now. 

The rules worked well. They were simple for me to run, with minimal referencing to the rules (they're written by me, but in flux so my mental model of the game doesn't always update to my latest ideas). The new proficiency system (2d4/2d6/2d8) was simple and easy for them to grasp, and very easy to implement in play. Yes, it is basically a skill system. But it's independent of class/level for its power growth, and it's limited to just the three levels. 

The new version of the "I know a guy" rules came into play, and worked in the group's favor so they were happy with that. In this case, they decided to pose as OSHA inspectors, and Steven's "I know a guy" roll showed that his hero did know a guy who could get them OSHA uniforms. A bit of forgery here, paying to have the rich hero's helicopter (Charles's) decorated with OSHA livery there, a little shopping, and they were set for their mission. 

A few things did come up in play that either hadn't been addressed yet, or I'd dropped from the rules. In particular at the end of the mission, they noticed the hidden security camera only AFTER they'd hacked the computer system. But their cover wasn't yet blown so they decided on a quick retreat rather than deal with that. In a campaign, this is the sort of thing that would bring them heat. At the moment, I've dropped the "wanted status" but the players today seemed to think it should come back.  

We also discussed a few ways to make it work. For one thing, they suggested that random encounter chances could be pegged to a character's (or group's) wanted status. Every few game hours, or once per scene/setting, roll to see if someone recognizes the wanted PC and alerts the authorities. I'd need to work out how that system plays out, something I hadn't finalized before dropping the original idea. 

To complete it, I'll need to decide exactly what sorts of complications might arise from being wanted, how likely they are to occur, what are the effects of each possible complication, and what players can do to lower their heat. 

There was hardly any combat this session. The manager in the office was already suspicious of them, and when they came in to "monitor the computer system for safety reasons" he wouldn't buy their story. So they tasered him. While he was out, they hacked the computer and got the information they were after. 

Which reminds me, the computer hacking rules worked OK, but I think I need to increase the chances of automated responses to actions while hacking. Most of the actions have low percentages, and there weren't any reactions or complications from the hack. To spice things up, I need to bump them up a bit. Not too much, or no one will try hacking. 

The important thing is, the entire hack was quick, and the other players weren't bored while it happened. So that's a success. 

My take-away: The basic combat rules are good. The proficiency system is good. Most of the resolution mechanics are easy to run. I need to tinker with a few probabilities and add/refine a few systems. 

We also leveled up everyone's heroes to 3rd level. Charles stuck with Fast Hero 3, but Denis multiclassed into Strong 2/Tough 1. Steven decided to do the changes later, but he will go Fast 2/Smart 1. Charles was a little confused by getting both a talent from his class, and a free proficiency slot from being 3rd character level, but we got that sorted quickly. Denis leveled up with no problem, but a complaint. When he rolled for hit points, the die slipped when he picked it up. It was a 2. I saw that it obviously slipped from his hand, so I let him re-roll it. He got a 1. 

Next time, I will run a combat heavy mission, in order to test out some of the more advanced combat rules (the autofire rules, explosives, etc.). We expect some or all of the heroes to die, but since it's a play test not a regular campaign, they'll resurrect if that happens. Charles didn't roll very well for hit points either, so they're all feeling a bit uneasy about a heavy combat mission. Should be fun!

The Final Puzzle Piece (yeah, nah, probably not final)

Last night, my son and I were going over the recent rule changes and updates to Missions & Mayhem, and I was explaining what would be different for his character. He should have been in bed already, but he said he wasn't sleepy. Well, talking about boring rules sure did the trick! He was a sleep within half an hour. 

 While we were talking, I realized something. I've taken away ability score modifiers to the proficiency checks. Like old school D&D, the ability scores have their effects but they're limited. One of the big problems with WotC's editions of D&D, for me at least, is that EVERYTHING depends on the ability scores. They're important, but shouldn't be that important. Besides, the character classes in this game already focus on one ability score each. 

Because the modifiers don't (normally*) affect the rolls, that left Intelligence as only modifying linguistic ability. And while a globe-hopping treasure hunter or superspy may need to know lots of languages, your typical 80s muscleman with machinegun or quaint New England murder detective or long-haul trucker running moonshine from Georgia probably doesn't. 

The ability scores affected these areas before last night's epiphany: 

Strength: melee combat (hit and damage), carrying capacity

Dexterity: ranged combat (hit only), AC, reflex saving throws

Constitution: hit points, fortitude saving throws

Intelligence: languages known (or limited communication ability if low)

Wisdom: bonus proficiency slots, will saving throws

Charisma: reaction checks, follower morale 

So all the scores except Int cover at least two mechanical areas. Well, I figured out what Int should do besides linguistics: bonus XP! 

Since the base classes are functional rather than professional, and multiclassing is not just easy, it's expected, it doesn't make sense for each class to get different bonuses to XP for high ability scores like D&D's prime requisites. If a Strong/Dedicated Hero has both high Str and Wis, does she get to double dip in the XP bonus? That's not good design. So I'd left it out. 

But last night, it hit me that Intelligence equals ability to learn, so that should be the general "prime requisite" ability score. 

So I'll be adding to the rules a little bit: 

"Intelligence modifies how well you learn from your experiences. Heroes with high Int learn faster, and those with low Int need to put in a little more effort." 

Int 3 to 5: -10% XP

Int 6-8: -5% XP

Int 9-12: no change

Int 13-15: +5% XP

Int 16-18: +10% XP

 

I know in previous discussions of D&D's prime requisite bonuses here and on other blogs, people have expressed the opinion that the small percentages don't really make that big of a difference. And in my opinion, that's a good thing. It's a nice little treat for a player who puts a high score in Int, and it's a small annoyance for a character who uses Int as a dump stat. But it won't have massive effects on the comparative power between PCs. And it gives me one small mechanical boost to the one ability score that didn't do very much. 

*One area where ability scores CAN modify proficiency rolls is in the Gamble mechanic. I developed this for chases, but may allow it in other areas as well. In a chase, each side rolls against the other, in a best three out of five framework. But on any particular roll, a player can try to gamble with their ability score. If they gamble, they roll 1d20, trying to get their score or lower. If they succeed, they get a +1 bonus on the chase roll for that round. If they fail, they get -1 to the roll. 

I'm considering allowing this for other areas of contested rolls, like with computer hacking. And maybe just a general rule for any Proficiency check.  

Decision Points

The current iteration of Missions & Mayhem has much simpler character generation than its parent game, d20 Modern. That was the big impetus for me to create this, actually. Could I create a version of the game that has simple mechanics for the DM (the reason I will play newer WotC games as a player, but not DM anymore), and simple player character mechanics, but keep the flexibility of character concept creation? 

I think I've done it. The iteration I'm working on this week has a revision of the proficiency system (which doubles as both feats/skills for the game), which manages to plug a few holes I had in the system, and reduces the need for so many different mechanics. But I went over that in my previous post. 

What I want to talk about today is how I've come up with suites of proficiencies for each class to streamline character creation a bit more. This also brings it a little closer to old school D&D type games. Jeremy suggested that I still allow the option for carte blanche proficiency selection, but I don't think I need to add that to the rules officially. GMs worth their salt will know that they can house rule that for their game if they like. 

The char-gen guidelines, simplified, has seven steps listed, but one of them is math and not really a decision point. They are: 

To create a Hero, follow these steps: 

1. Roll Six Ability Scores [Place scores as desired. Note modifiers for each.]

2. Select Staring Occupation [Check prerequisites, note talent, proficiencies, starting gear.] p. 6-9

3. Select Character Class [Gain +1 to Ability Score. Select proficiency suite, and a talent.] p. 10-15

4. Modify Combat Values. [Note armor class (AC), hit points (HP), base attack bonus (BAB), massive damage threshold (MAS). Subtract modifiers from saving throws.] p. 10-15

5. If additional languages for high Int or proficiencies for high Wis are gained, select them. p. 24-29

6. Roll Wealth Level and Funds on Hand. Note starting vehicle. Buy additional equipment. p. 16-23

7. Give your Hero a name, description, and a few personality traits.

This gives us seven decision points, with one of them (#5 on the list but actually 6) being situational. 

Decision Point 1: Roll your ability scores, then decide where to place them. This is the same as with d20 Modern. Even if you use a standard array instead of rolling, you need to decide where the numbers go. And it's much faster than point buy. 

Decision Point 2:  There are 19 starting occupations. I didn't modify the list from d20 Modern, just the mechanics for what they do/provide a character. Players will need to consider character concept, how the talent, proficiencies and starting gear provided reinforce or round out a concept when combined with a class, and in a few cases which of two proficiencies or a language to take (decision point 2.5?). Not overly complex, as a lot of players will rule out certain occupations out of hand. And again, the same number as in d20 Modern, so no extra burden. 

Decision Point 3: There are six character classes to choose from. Based on the ability score distribution and starting occupation, most players probably already have this decided. But it is still a choice to make. And it's the same six classes from d20 Modern. 

Decision Point 4: Here is where we finally streamline the process over the original. Each character class has three suites of proficiencies (given convenient labels). Two of the options are based on the standard advanced classes of d20 Modern (not the FX advanced classes, saving those for supplements). The third for each I just thought about what other concepts work well with each ability-score themed class. This replaces both going through a list of 41 skills and 94 feats. Well, not all of those 94 feats can be selected at 1st level, but that's how many are in the game. And experienced players know that you need to think ahead about feat trees and advanced/prestige class requirements, etc. I just counted, and there are 54 feats available to starting characters. That's a lot of comparison and deliberation. 

My version, pick one of three options, and get these four proficiencies (five if you're a Smart Hero). 

The next step is figuring out the combat values (AC, HP, saves, BAB), but that's just a bit of simple math. Take the base numbers and adjust them by the ability score modifiers.  No decisions to make. 

Decision Point 5 (Situational): If you have average or low scores in Int and Wis, there's nothing to decide. If you have high scores in either, you have some choices to make. For high Int, you get one to three extra languages. And granted, it assumes a real world setting so you have thousands of options, from the common UN languages to any world language, including sign language (take your pick), Esperanto, conlangs like Klingon or Sindarin, or even dead languages like Latin and Aramaic. This is part of the decision process for d20 Modern, only it's folded into the skills. So in a way, those 41 skill options become many many more when you factor language. And d20 Modern makes you take Read/Write and Speak as separate skills! I originally had languages as part of the stepped proficiency system (that's what my day job is all about after all), but I realized it's just a game and it's not usually fun to have to roll to see how much of the conversation in a foreign language you can understand. If you pick a language, you're fluent in it.

If you have above average Wisdom, you can pick one to three bonus proficiencies. As I mentioned in the previous post, all of the proficiencies have three levels: Basic, Skilled, Advanced. Everyone now starts with Basic level in all proficiencies. You get two from Occupation, four (or five) from Class, at Skilled level. But if occupation and class give you the same proficiency, it bumps up to Advanced. If you get these bonus proficiency slots, you can take more proficiencies at Skilled, or bump ones you have at Skilled to Advanced to start. There are 19 proficiency areas. Five for combat, fourteen for general. You'll already have up to six (or seven...go for it, Gen Alpha!) at Skilled, but if you have one or two at advanced, they're already maxed out. So it shouldn't be too much mental strain to make these decisions. 

And again, not every character will have decisions to make in this area. 

Decision Point 6: You roll for a Wealth Status level, using a 3d6 roll weighted to Middle Class. That determines what dice you roll with a multiplier for your starting Funds on Hand. Everyone gets a bit of gear from their Starting Occupation and from their Class, and the Wealth Status provides a vehicle (or two if you're Rich). And it's Shopping Time! I have made some modifications to the equipment lists, removing some obsolete or redundant items. I simplified weapons and vehicles to types rather than specific models. I'll probably truncate the lists even more before I'm done as there are still redundancies (day packs, range packs and backpacks are all different items for some reason? [They do have different capacities, but this is probably unnecessary detail.]) I've of course added some items to the list as well, things that hadn't been invented in 2001 when d20 Modern was designed, and things they just didn't include (no WD-40 style spray lubricant? That's useful stuff for an adventurer!). 

So how does this compare to d20 Modern? A bit simpler thanks to the weapon/vehicle simplification. But with hard cash/credit numbers rather than rolling against target numbers, it requires a bit more thought. The fact that you're actually spending a set amount of money, rather than just grabbing everything you like under your "wealth score" probably makes this a bit faster. 

Decision Point 7: Decide on a name, description, and a bit of personality. Standard for almost any RPG. And no, I'm not going to do the NuSR thing of making everyone roll for a random feature or three. Players can stretch their imaginations a bit, and besides the name, it's not so vital at the start of a PC's career. 

 

 

A collection of mini-games

 Up until 3rd edition, every edition of Dungeons & Dragons has been a collection of mini-games. Combat is d20 rolls. Interaction (reaction rolls, morale, recruiting hirelings) and turn undead are 2d6. Lots of exploration abilities are x/d6 (or x/d10). Thief skills are d%. Magic is Vancian. The adventure day (wilderness), the exploration turn (dungeons), and the combat round are all procedural mini-games. If there are rules for strongholds, followers, magic item creation for high level play, they probably have their own bespoke mechanics. 

These days, most OSR games that come out that aren't close clones of an older edition tend to strive for the unified mechanic idea. Especially the "rules lite" games like Black Hack, PBTA, etc. 

I'm taking a game with a unified mechanic (d20 Modern) and trying to backwards engineer it into a game with a collection of mini-games. And it's interesting where I'm finding the lines to draw. 

I want Missions & Mayhem to be simple and easy to run and play. So far, I seem to be hitting that goal. A week ago, we did a play test of a mystery (no combat, although there was potential for it depending on how it might have played out). Before we started, a few players needed to bump their PCs up to level 2. Denis added a second level of Strong Hero to his PC, so that was easy. Justin decided to add a level of Charismatic Hero to his Dedicated Hero PC, but that turned out to be really simple and easy as well! 

Playing the adventure, things went smoothly for the most part, but I'd realized something I'd added in the edit was overly complicated. So this week, I'm taking it out. This has me streamlining how to run all the general proficiencies, and it's become a unified mechanic for those tasks (combat is still run differently, as are a few other bits and pieces). 

The bit I added then took out were "Basic Tasks" that any PC could do. They were % based, each starting at 20% but modified by ability score modifiers and character class. I realized, though that having all of the General Proficiency areas start at a Basic Level (roll 2d4), then have them progress to Skilled (roll 2d6) and Advanced (roll 2d8) would work better than having % basic tasks, some proficiencies at 2d6, others at x/d6 chances. 

Of course, that means I had to revise the General Proficiency list, and also now I'm revising the mechanics to how to run/adjudicate these actions. It's a fairly big overhaul, since I need to be on the lookout for areas that might be influenced by the new proficiency areas I added. But in the end, the streamlining will hopefully make the game even easier to explain and run. 

And this is just the base "tool box" rules. Once I add campaign settings (modern-day monster hunters, cyberpunk, zombie (or regular) apocalypse, X-Files/Stranger Things style aliens/dimensions weirdness, etc.), there will be more mini-games added to cover certain areas. So it will get worse. But hopefully, having familiar old-school D&D combat, and these simple 2dX general proficiency rules as the base, it will be easy to graft on other systems as needed. 

More Play Testing - One-on-One!

 About an hour ago, Jeremy and I wrapped up a one-on-one play test of Missions & Mayhem. 

He rolled up a Fast Hero, which has been a popular choice. Steven, Charles, and Nate also all picked the Fast Hero as their level 1 class. And for a talent, Steven picked fast hands (pick pockets), while the other three all decided that dodge (AC bonus) was the optimal starting talent. I may have to tweak that. It might be too good the way it is right now. 

I ran him through the same adventure that I ran Charles and Jada through a week and a half ago. It went well, even with only one hero. The potential fight that could have ended both games was averted through bargaining and interaction with the NPCs rather than a gunfight both times. 

My dice kinda sucked. In the chase scene, I rolled really low the first two rounds, and decent the third, but Jeremy waited to leverage his Dex score in a gamble to gain a bonus, and succeeded on the gamble and the chase roll. 

In general, Jeremy thought it was fun but that there are maybe too many mini-games mushed together for this. He'd prefer not so much a unified mechanic for the whole game, but maybe one system for combat and another for non-combat tasks. 

Right now, I've got standard roll d20 to hit vs AC combat, with roll d20 over set value saving throws. But for out of combat tasks, some things are on an x in d6 chance (roll low), some are x or more on 2d6 (roll high), some are d20 vs ability score (roll low), and some are d% (roll low). 

I may have gone overboard with that. I will definitely keep D&D style d20 based combat. But I may make some changes to make every non-combat action that requires a roll to be on 2d6 (I like the bell curve results) or d%. 

I also need to be more precise in the character generation rules. I'm far from finalizing the text (still trying to get mechanics to work in a way that I'm satisfied), but Jeremy made his PC by himself and had a few small errors. Both of them were areas where I'm sure I wasn't clear in the text, but every other time players have made PCs I've been there to answer questions. 

I don't plan to make any big sweeping changes just yet. I want to run another play test with the local gang, or at least as many folks that aren't busy with vacations or winter camps or whatnot. I've got a detective style mystery to solve and I think it might be fun. It will give me a chance to test out more of the non-combat systems and decide how to modify them, if necessary.  

Computer Hacking in RPGs

 I'm finally working on some computer hacking rules for Missions & Mayhem. I've heard before from fellow gamers, and reading a lot on the internet about how many games try to make hacking fun and exciting, or make it fairly realistic, but it turns into a mini-game that one player is playing while everyone else sits and twiddles their thumbs. Or, it just gets made into a single skill check that is not very exciting. 

There's got to be a sweet spot of just complex enough (providing choice/strategy to the hacker PC) while not bogging down into 30+ minutes of solo play. And as always for M&M, I am trying to follow the KISS principle. Don't make any mechanic more complex than it needs to be. 

Or as Einstein (I think) once said, "Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler." 

Right now, I've got two ideas in mind. One is for hacker vs hacker scenes, as you might see in a spy or superhero movie/show. The other is for simple player vs system checks, but could also be used for hacker vs hacker stuff. 

My original idea was to try and make a strategy vs strategy results chart, similar to the Chainmail jousting rules. The PC hacker selects a strategy. The opposing NPC hacker (or the system being hacked) selects a countermeasure strategy. Cross reference on the table to see what happens. 

But I'd really need to test and refine that chart. I remember Delta analyzed the Nash equilibrium of the Chainmail joust, and there is definitely a single dominant strategy to it that will more often than not result in a win. And that's boring if you always know the optimal options to select. 

So my current thinking is to use the second option, which would break hacking a system into three phases. 

Phase 1: Entry. Hacking into the system. Make a roll to get into the system. If the roll succeeds, you're in. Either way, make a check to see if the attempt was noticed.

This phase could be made much easier with some other character talents. One Charismatic Hero class talent, and several of the starting occupation talents allow for a check to get "information, access, or a favor" from an NPC or organization. This could be done to represent social engineering before the hack.

Phase 2: Manipulation. Depending on the security level of the system, this might be automatic for unsecured systems, or require a check/counter-check. Either way, once you're in, you can search for information (including physical location if unknown), download or copy information, attempt to reprogram the computer system, control connected (security) devices, or try to sabotage the system. The longer the PCs stay in the system (each additional check after the first) increases the odds of being noticed/having countermeasures triggered.

If the attempt to enter was noticed, countermeasures will be in place (if there are any). If not, each action runs the risk of being noticed, and triggering countermeasures. If there's an opposing hacker, the hacker can attempt to reverse hack the PCs and direct the countermeasures. And of course, this could all be reversed, with an NPC trying to hack the PCs' computer system.  

Phase 3: Exit. Attempt to cover your trace as you log out of the system. Depending on the countermeasure response, this might not be necessary as your cover could already be blown or you could have already been booted from the system. But it would be a simple check at the end. 

 Computer systems will have three categories. Unsecured systems are your typical home/office PC. Sure, they may have some passwords or firewalls, but nothing unusual, and no countermeasures unless an NPC hacker is on them. A lot of IoT devices will also be unsecured. 

Secured systems will have some automated countermeasures in place that can be triggered, and are harder to hack into during entry or exit cleanly. Unless an NPC hacker is working against the intrusion, though, the responses will be preprogrammed/limited. Most small to medium size businesses and non-military/intelligence government agencies would have this level of computer system.

Hardened systems will be the hardest to enter or have a clean exit, and will have responsive AI countermeasures that act as an NPC hacker even if none is present. This is what megacorps, militaries, and intelligence agencies use. 

OSR Modern Play Testing and a Title!

OSR Modern was a placeholder name, and I finally have a decent name for my simplification/revision of d20 Modern: Missions & Mayhem. 

A few days ago, I tried turning to ChatGPT for title ideas. Flynn, my older son, is in a school "CEO program," and the teacher had made an optimized GPT for help with branding, marketing and whatnot. So he suggested I try it. Honestly, all of the ideas it came up with were so-so at best. That's par for the course for gen-AI. But it did inspire me with a few ideas of my own. I tried an online random action movie generator, and again, so-so but gave me a few more ideas. I pitched my ideas to some of my players, and M&M was their favorite. It was in my top two, so I'm sticking with it. 

Today, we did our second play test. Only two players could show up (due to vacations, winter camp work -- I'm not doing the camp this winter, and illness), but I ran them through a small action movie mission to rescue a kidnapped girl. They used some combat, some chase mechanics, some medical treatment mechanics, and some of the social interaction rules. They all played smoothly, although I forgot a wrinkle I'd added to the social interaction rules. It was fine, though, as they worked well without the need to push the results. 

I realized at first that the chase mechanics I'd come up with gave out a LOT of XP for 1st level characters. But they're set values for a chase at any level of play. So while low level PCs will get a big boost out of any chase encounter, after a few levels the XP will not be overpowering. And at high levels it will barely register. I suppose another factor is that the XP for the two chases in this session were only divided between two PCs, not four or five. So I think they will be fine in the end. 

It seems that modern group sizes (around 4 PCs) may be optimal for this game. Two weeks ago, at the first play test, we had six PCs. We ran through a fist-fight (and of course dynamite, knives, and a few guns were brought into it) which went really long. 

I've been considering ways to make fist fights go a bit faster. In real life, yes, they can drag on without much serious damage (at least among amateurs in a street/bar fight), and in action movies the heroes can get into epic fights (like the alley fight in They Live), but a lot of the time a fist fight with mooks should be over fairly quickly. So I added a rule where any subdual damage over a certain threshold triggers a fortitude saving throw to avoid being knocked out. If all damage is low, or all saves pass, you are KOed when your subdual damage equals your current hit points. 

I haven't tested this new version, as today's fights were either interrupted by intimidation or were gun fights.

With two chases (one on foot, one boat), some interactions, general tasks, and one gun fight (during the boat chase), and some loot/reward money, they earned 2nd level. We leveled up their PCs. Neither player decided to multiclass. They thought it would be better to get their BAB/saves up, and be a step closer to their second class talent. I'll have the other players also bump up to level 2 next time to see what they do. 

Next time, I plan to present the players with a mystery to solve, which will involve some breaking and entering. This will allow me to test out the investigation/clue finding rules, and the sneaking & avoiding/deactivating security devices rules. Plus probably more social interaction to test out the pushing mechanic, and some other non-combat challenges. Maybe we'll work a few fist fights into it as well. 

For today, I had a small scenario that was fairly linear, but with several off-ramps. I figured that since I'm only play testing at the moment, and we'll make new characters for any future campaign I run, that these play test sessions should be like Choose-Your-Own-Adventure or Endless Quest books. If you get a "bad" ending, you just flip back to page 42 and select another option. So no need to make them too elaborate. If I revise them for release, I'll add more detail and more options for non-linear play.  

Now, I need to figure out some good computer hacking rules that have enough options to make it useful, but not too much to be overpowering or confusing. Also, I've switched from wealth rolls for shopping to cold hard cash, and I have starting wealth levels and starting cash worked out, but I need to add some equipment to the starting occupations and character classes (or proficiencies).  

Axioms and Game Design

 I have this piece of paper in my desk with three game design axioms written on it. I can't remember where I copied this from. Google search leads me to BX Blackrazor for the first one, and that's no surprise. But I can't find where I got the other two from. I assumed they were also from JB, but I haven't found them on his blog anywhere. I've had them in mind as I'm working on both Flying Swordsmen 2E (expect delays) and OSR Modern (play testing starts tomorrow). 

Here they are: 

Axiom #1: Good game design only incorporates rules integral to game play.  

Axiom #2: Good game design requires rules that set clear objectives for players.

Axiom #3: Good game design rewards behavior meeting the objectives of play. 

 

Trying to track these other two down gets me things in groups of three like: Laws of Function/Immersion/Balance, Goals/Rules/Voluntary engagement,  Mechanics/Gameplay/Experience. 

I also find a lot of the game theory stuff that I was reading a few years back, like Juul, Crawford, Salen & Zimmerman, etc. But I can't find where I got these other two axioms. 

 

Regardless of where they came from, I'm trying to design OSR Modern with these principles in front of me. 

What is the bare minimum of rules systems needed for this game? (Axiom #1) Some that I have more or less worked out and will be testing include: combat, NPC interactions, chases, shopping for gear, crafting/creating/upgrading items, dealing with security devices.  

Some that I have been working on but haven't completed include: investigation, computer hacking, vehicle stunts/combat, being wanted by the law.  

I think that may even be too much, but for now I've got simple systems for the above list and concepts for the below list. 

But do these set clear objectives for play? (Axiom #2) That's something I'll start investigating tomorrow. It will depend on the PCs the players create, and which systems we test out that they react well to. In addition to gaining levels for the better combat/ability boosts, each level gained comes with an opportunity to improve the abstract wealth level, so that may be enough to encourage adventuring play. We'll see.  

What I envision as objectives of play: action movie stuff (rescue hostages, get revenge, infiltrate and exfiltrate strongholds, car chases, bombs, etc), detective/spy stuff (gather information, work sources, search crime scenes for clues/leads, etc.), and car/chase stuff (competitive driving, vehicle combat, running from the fuzz, etc.). 

Maybe I'll end up focusing it just on the action movie stuff in the end, as that's probably the biggest inspiration. The detective/spy stuff and the car stuff also seem like they would be fun for play. However, that may muddle the game objectives.  

Are the various actions listed above rewarded in game play? (Axiom #3) Well, combat, chases, and NPC interactions, and security devices can award XP based on the opposition overcome (I have a bunch of stock NPC types, animal opponents, and locks/security systems with XP values). But for chases, at least vehicle chases, I'm not sure if just using the opposing driver's XP value is good enough reward. 

A few actions, like creating or upgrading gear, provide their own in-game reward, but I may find a way to award XP for that sort of thing as well.  Shopping provides its award with whatever gear has been purchased. I don't see the need to award XP for shopping. 

Computer hacking and gathering clues/leads both need a system of how they work developed (I have sketchy rules for both), and what sorts of awards (XP or in-game) they will provide. 

Being wanted should provide additional challenge (higher chances to be noticed, hassled by law enforcement, or even actively hunted down). I have the levels set, but I'm still sketchy on how they impact character actions and how to model raising or lowering them. I think these will definitely motivate play (axiom #2) but pretty much the reward would be limited to lowering your "heat". 

I have a placeholder "challenge" award system in the book to cover the areas that don't yet have their own set XP reward mechanics done, but it's vague and wishy-washy and really too mother-may-I for my tastes. It's a stopgap for play testing, and I hope to get more concrete rewards for each element of game play from these test sessions.  

Maybe I'll find out I don't need all of these systems, and I can simplify my games. Maybe my players will want more. We'll see. I'm looking forward to the test tomorrow to see how it goes.  

On Track

 After a frustrating at times past 24 hours, we have our table rosters set for the 2025 Busan Tabletop Game Con. Nine tables open, and around 23 total participants. Small, but close to what we were shooting for. We had hoped for around 30 people to participate. Close. [I need to update the webpage game rosters, we had a few changes/additions during the day.]

Next Sunday, we'll be gaming it up. I'm running Classic D&D and Gamma World (4th). I was going to play in the Mothership game in the afternoon, but John M. didn't get anyone signing up for his evening board game, and we got a request from John D. to also join that game. I was gonna hop over into Cyberpunk Red, but then the last guy to sign up on the official form before I closed it wanted that spot, so I'll be free in the middle of the con. That's actually alright with me. I can troubleshoot any problems, take pictures to document the event (I'll probably do a write-up for the local expat scene mag Busan HAPS), and just get a bit of rest between my games. 

We're using the Discord server used for last summer's Daegu One-shot Extravaganza and also for the Online Summer Con. That ended up being a bit of a headache, because Rowan, who owns the server, and Scott, who is an admin, both know Discord functions way more than Justin and I. So they kept hinting at things we needed to do, saying it was simple - just watch/read a tutorial, and then letting us fumble through things until they had to step in and fix our mess. [Hence the past 24 hours' frustrations.] But we've got it done. We've got players all sorted with their GMs, and everyone has both a Discord channel on the server and a KakaoTalk (Korean version of What'sApp) group chat for their games. 

All my pre-gens for both Classic D&D and Gamma World are on my work computer, so I'll be posting them for players to look over and discuss over the next week. I also (on Friday) sorted through minis to get some suitable ones ready for Gamma World. Not all of them are the right fit, but close enough. Various D&D minis, cheap-o toys from Japan and the U.S., old MUSCLE wrestlers and Battle Beast toys... I think I will sort out minis for the D&D game as well. 

After all the organizing was done (and a few family errands), I sat down to consider my OSR Modern game design. I'm still tinkering with the Starting Occupations and class Talents, but I think I'm getting closer. I also made a list of things that probably need rules for resolution in the game (and could potentially be used to earn XP). Here's the list so far: 

What do people do in this game that require mechanics (and might earn XP)?

Movement (jump, run, swim, drive, climb)

Investigate/Gather information

Socialize/Intimidate/Bluff

Get permission/authorization/shopping

Sneak/infiltrate/avoid ambush

Drive/Travel

Hack Computers

Fist Fight/Sword Fight

Gun Fight

Car Fight

Chase/Escape

Sabotage/Destroy

Repair/Build

Heal/Treat Illness

 I plan to implement a set of Challenge Awards in addition to XP for combat. Since it's a modern setting, I want it to be able to implement genres where fist fights or car chases are more prominent than gun fights just as easily as those that do feature prominent gun fights/explosions. For Challenge Awards, I'm thinking 5% or 10% of the amount needed to gain a level for small goals, and 25% for large goals. 

And speaking of genres, I've got a list of adventure/encounter types that I want to give examples of in the book: 

Encounter/Adventure Types

Wandering Do-Gooders

Cops & Robbers

Special Forces

Hot Rodders

The Big Heist

Investigators

Explorers

On the Run

Home for Christmas

X-Treme Action

From Sea to Shining Sea

Out for Vengeance

The Conspiracy

All in “The Family”

 And while I mainly plan to keep things mundane (well, Action Movie heightened reality), I will have some notes on adding some fantasy/sci-fi to the game: 

Mundane, Paranormal, Supernatural, Sci-Fi

Setting the campaign tone. PCs are all normal (heightened reality) characters, but the world also contains: 

Mundane: heightened realism, but otherwise normal (Die Hard, Rambo, Dirty Harry, A-Team, MacGuyver, Cannonball Run, Murder She Wrote, Goodfellas, The Goonies)

Paranormal: cryptids, psychics, ghosts, aliens (X-Files, Lost, The Shining, Scanners, E.T.)

Supernatural: magic, monsters, demons, other realms (Interview with the Vampire, Stranger Things, Indiana Jones, Nightmare on Elm Street)

Sci-Fi: clones, aliens, high tech, superscience (Knight Rider, Blade Runner, Predator, V, Terminator, The Island, Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure)

 This should give everyone an idea of where I'm going with this idea.