Friday, January 19, 2024

Review: Cats Have No Lord double feature

A Tomb of Twins

Sometime mid-December, Luke Simonds posted on Bluesky asking if anyone was interested in reviewing two of his games (A Tomb of Twins and Won't Someone Think of the d100 Polearms?) as he had extra physical copies of them. I said I would, he sent them off, and now here we are about a month later.

Full disclosure: these reviews are based solely off reading the zines. I have not had the opportunity to put them into play, so interpret my opinions accordingly.

A Tomb of Twins

A Tomb of Twins is a 32-page (counting the covers) low-level dungeon zine for OSR games with writing and layout by Luke Simonds, art and map by Molomoot, and editing by Allison Miller Simonds.
 
A mysterious priesthood conducts monthly rituals inside the tomb of twin necromancers while rumors abound that great treasures and wealth is locked up inside. The twist is that the treasures in question (or at least the ones that the adventure hooks center around) are the phylacteries of the twin necromancers-turned-liches, while the monthly ritual keeps them from reforming and terrorizing the region.

The tomb itself is broadly twin-themed, with mirrored left and right sides of the dungeon presenting players a choice of where to go. A band of tunneling swampkin (blue humanoids who live in a nearby swamp) have entered one side of the tomb and pose an obstacle to the PC tomb robbers as well as a way to break up two otherwise identical routes.

From a design perspective, this adventure works well as an introduction to OSR-type play for new players. There's a dungeon, treasure, some inventive traps that can be circumvented with clever play, a puzzle, monstrous enemies, and a boss battle that can either be avoided or easily decimate the characters. Nothing here is really reinventing the wheel, but it also doesn't have to. The whole adventure could be completed in 1-2 sessions, and depending on how the crawl goes there is the potential for a number of further directions:
  • Accidentally release 1-2 liches
  • Make enemies/allies of the swampkin
  • Make enemies/allies of the Thieves Assembly or Arcane Academy for failing/succeeding to bring them the vials
My favorite part of the adventure has to be its take on the random encounter. The tomb traps spirits inside it, so it's positively full to bursting with ghosts. And not just ghosts of humanoids either, there's all sorts of ghostly vermin scurrying around to add a fun atmosphere to the whole thing. These vermin could pop up as random encounters, but more frequent an intelligent ghost will appear with their own motivation and information to share (or hoard). There are wizard ghosts who want to get to the center of the tomb with you, priests who want to keep you from advancing, and goblins who just want to cause pranks. This is a slight combination of the classic random encounter + reaction roll, but it works really well as a way to spice up the delve. You can't treat every ghost the same, and you have to approach them like any other NPC in order to suss out how they feel about you.

I have two primary critiques of the adventure. First, as I said above, it doesn't feel like it's doing much that's new. I know that I said it doesn't have to, and I stand by that, but there's a lot of design space that feels unexplored here. The two halves of the dungeon didn't have to be identical, for example. They could have been themed to each of the two necromancers, or have opposite versions of the other's traps/puzzles, or require various actions to be taken exactly simultaneously. I'm not trying to say "Well this is how I would have designed it," but the overall theming of the adventure just feels like it's begging to be taken one or two steps farther.

My second critique hinges on the swampkin. They add variety to the adventure, breaking into the left half of the tomb and keeping it from being exactly the same. This is fine, and two of the first swampkin you meet pose interesting roleplaying challenges. One is floating on the ceiling, having triggered an antigravity trap and willing to give information in return for help, and the other is described as kind-hearted and fascinated by humans. These are great moments but they're completely undercut by the bestiary's description of swampkin as "ruthless and indiscriminate killers." It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth to play into the portrayal of monstrous humanoids as intrinsically savage (perhaps not evil, but certainly violent and not prone to diplomacy). And the adventure itself doesn't bear this out! The two swampkin priestesses have opposing views on their expedition into the tomb, the warlord is insecure about his position and just wants a win to shore up support, and that one grunt just wants to get off the ceiling. The stereotypical "hyper-violent monstrous humanoids" just didn't need to be in the adventure at all and seems like an archaic holdover from early dungeon-crawling games. It would be more interesting to explore how both the swampkin and players are tomb robbers, and therefore have both a natural common cause and common conflict. This is already a sensibility reflected in the random ghost encounters, where the ghost is turned from a standard combat encounter with a monster into a variety of other things. Obviously nothing is stopping you from approaching the swampkin in the same way, but if that's the case I just don't understand the description in the bestiary. Much like my first point of critique, the swampkin feel like they're begging to be pushed just a little farther beyond the standard (and boring) 'savage' enemies.

If you're looking for a game to introduce players to the OSR, this is a fine choice. But if you're already familiar with the playstyle, I don't know how much will be here for you.

Won't Someone Think of the d100 Polearms?

Won't Someone Think of the d100 Polearms? is a 16-page (counting covers) system-neutral zine for crafting your own unique polearms with writing and layout by Luke Simonds, character illustrations by Evlyn Moreau, and editing by Allison Miller Simonds.

Quite simply, the whole zine is three d100 tables you can use to make 1,000,000 unique polearms. Granted, most of these variants are completely cosmetic (one table is for the design of the blade and one describes the decoration on the shaft), but don't knock the cosmetic elements of this zine. The blade design table is 100 silhouettes of polearm blades, all illustrated by Luke Simonds. If you scan these silhouettes onto a computer, it's an incredible resource for giving out polearms that players can see and get really attached to.
I know that I'd be more attached to something like 36 or 50 than the generic idea of a polearm.

The table describing the shaft's appearance is a little more repetitive (a lot of different colors, a lot of different inlaid items), but again, being able to grab some descriptive inspiration for a magic item is great.

But it's the "What Makes It Special?" table that really makes this zine, well, special. 100 (mostly) very different abilities, some good, some bad, some ludicrous, but all very different than a +1 polearm. For example, you could get a polearm where the blade functions like a camera, or the shaft turns into a ladder, or it smells really bad, or it gives you the ability to command stags (but they'll seek revenge afterwards). There's really something there for everyone and every type of game, from the serious to the comedic to the gonzo.

It's a good zine Bob!

Friday, January 12, 2024

Interview with ttrpgbrackets

Section of Raphael's "The School of Athens": Greek philosophers (white men of varying ages in colored robes) in deep conversation

Recently, a very cool project on tumblr reached its conclusion: the TTRPG Ability Bracket (won by "Survivor Final Ability" from Shxll Casxings by Legendary Vermin). I thought it would be interesting to interview the person behind this project, see what inspired it, and ask about their plans for the future. What follows is that interview (edited and condensed for space).
__________________________________________________________________________

ttrpgspider: Let’s jump right into it! I’m trying to think, I don’t remember when I even first saw the blog on tumblr, but can you tell me a little bit about when you had the idea for it, when you started it, what the whole timeline of it has been?

ttrpgbrackets: You know what, I can actually give you an exact day because I messaged a friend and said, “I have this idea.” Looks like it would’ve been late September when I came up with this idea. I started bouncing things around in my head, and I believe it was mid-October or so when I launched it because I know I started doing the polls in November.


For people who have no idea what this was, what was the TTRPG ability bracket? What was the point of it, what was the structure of it?

To be completely honest, I didn’t expect it to get the attention it did. Once the authors of the games involved started reblogging things, I was like: Whoa. It kinda spun out of the current tumblr zeitgeist of fun little popularity brackets. There are a million of them right now: best villain song in a musical, best duo, best little meow-meow who did nothing wrong. And then it hit me that I was seeing some about cartoons and video games but none about TTRPGs. So I started thinking, what would I like that bracket to be about?


And how did you decide on abilities specifically?

Part of it was that I wanted to submit something that wouldn’t have fit my original idea of “TTRPG classes.” When I was thinking about what I would submit, I really love a lot of games that don’t really have classes. And specifically, one of my favorite games I was thinking about was Exalted, which has some of the most insane abilities that I personally knew at the time. And I was like, I bet there are a million games out there like Exalted and I want to know more of those.


So how did you go about collecting submissions?

I submitted the first couple, just because once I made it I had five or six I wanted to throw in there. And then towards the end, submissions started to peter out and I realized I was about 8 short of another tier. So I did another 8 or 9 myself and the rest were submitted through a Google Form that I threw up when I started the bracket. It was just a post that said “Hey, here’s some guidelines on things I do and don’t want to see in here,” and a little bit of rules about how I was going to be selecting things if I did have to cut stuff. Mainly I had a rule that I didn’t want more than two abilities per game.


Beyond cutting - well, even with cutting the stuff from the popular games - how did you go about making decisions? Both which 2 abilities you kept in and how you decided on the brackets?

I’m going to be completely honest and say that I didn’t put that much thought into the seeding portion of it. Once I had the entries in, I just randomized the seed until nothing was going against itself in Round 1 and that was good enough for me. But as far as cutting things down, I didn’t have to do a lot of that. I think I only ended up cutting maybe 5 things total. I got 3 submissions from Pathfinder, and I got 12 different people submitting things for Lancer. But that was kinda easy because 8 of them submitted the same ability so that was a shoo-in.


Do you remember what ability that was?

Castigate the Enemies of the Godhead. It’s a Manticore ability where you basically declare “Until the end of the round if anything kills me I vaporize my mech and everything in a 30-yard radius.” Then there were two others where 3 or 4 people submitted each one. It was either Ushabti Omnigun or the other one that’s on the Pegasus, and for that one I just went with whatever was the most elegant or eloquent propaganda that was submitted with it.


Tell me a little bit more about the “propaganda,” which is such a funny way to talk about that.

Full disclosure, I follow a lot of these bracket-type things and most of them refer to any kind of - if anyone reblogs it with “hey, here’s why you should vote for this one,” they’ll reblog it and say “look, propaganda.” I felt like it was especially important for something rpg-related to have that aspect of it. Especially with indie TTRPG abilities, you might not understand what’s so cool about the ability if you don’t know the context of the game it’s from.


Yeah, I was scrolling through the blog and saw “Man with a Gun” from Spire, and it’s not just ‘a man with a gun comes into the room,’ it’s ‘you’re a pulp novelist wizard writing tropes into reality.’

Yeah, it gets you that context of “Oh, this is a weird thing.” You don’t just have a friend that shows up, you’re messing with reality.


Now I’m going to declare you a minor expert in minor TTRPG abilities - 

Appreciate it.

- and as such what do you think (personally or based on observed voting trends) makes a good TTRPG ability?

At least in terms of what makes it interesting (as opposed to what makes it powerful), the ones that did the best were the ones that pushed the fiction forward the most. All of the ones that gave a +2 to doing something got buried out behind the shed very quickly. Most that made it past the second round did something special within the world of the game.

For example, there’s this Pathfinder ability that essentially lets you say, “Well I’m not a doctor but I’ve seen one on TV” and once a day you get to pick an ability from another class that you can use for the day. Like, “I may not be a barbarian but I can figure out how to rage.” And that ability made it to round 2 or 3.

The Omnigun from Lancer also made it pretty far, which is funny because it’s just a gun that automatically does one damage every turn. But it was the wording of the book that got it that far. Its gimmick is that it always deals one damage no matter what, armor-piercing, can’t be dodged, but there’s a line that a lot of people seemed to like. It ends with the line “This cannot be superseded by any ability in this or any future book.”


Yeah, it’s interesting because when I think about TTRPG abilities (and obviously not every game has them), I think about D&D, Pathfinder, Lancer, those kinda crunchy, trad, modular games. And yeah, they have so many abilities, but by that same logic they can’t be as interesting or impactful and, say, give someone something entirely new they couldn’t do before.

I think that’s why we got so many submissions from PBTA and Forged in the Dark games. You get three things to do in those games, so they all need to be really cool. There’s no room in the book for a +1.


You don’t advance very quickly or that much, and even when you do advance you don’t take that many new moves.

A lot of characters in those games are in their final form at the start of the game. You’ve already hit that fantasy!

A lot of indie games also emphasize shorter campaigns, they’re not assuming the big 4-year Lord of the Rings campaign. You sit down, you make characters, and you play one season of a TV show. With how much a lot of these games lean into genre, a lot of these moves are very much, “Yeah, this is a thing I’ve seen in that show before.” One of the moves that made it a little farther was Beam Saber, one of the more anime dramatic Gundam mecha rather than something super tactical, was an ability that gave you bonus dice if you reveal a dramatic secret to someone and immediately use it against them.


Having done this whole bracket, how important are abilities in terms of what you’re looking for in a game?

Personally, I love them. I enjoy a good Honey Heist, but I like looking through abilities and seeing what pushes my character in a specific way. They’re not necessarily required for a good game, but I find they do a lot in games with more mechanics or character options. Having these unique abilities, especially with newer players, helps them see what their character can be, what they can do. I’ve often found with newer players that introducing them into a game they’ve never played a lot of times the big question is “Ok, but what can I do? My character has 3 Strength and 2 Charisma, what does that mean?” Sometimes players like to have the direction of, “Oh, that’s what I do! That’s my thing!” Even something as simple as getting a +1 in a particular situation encourages you to put yourself in that situation, to build a character who would want to do that.


Alright, I think that basically wraps it up! Last question: what’s next for ttrpgbrackets?

Right now submissions are open for the TTRPG class bracket. Any kind of character archetypes or classes or suggested builds are an option. Depending on how many I get, that could take a couple of months, I like to leave them up for a while to get votes in. After that, I might go back to another round of abilities and just disqualify anything that made it past round 3 because I got a lot of message toward the end of people saying they would have submitted or voted for something. I’ve also thought about setting up something for board games because I’m a big fan of those and I think there’s a lot of crossover there.

__________________________________________________________________________

If you're interested in submitting something to the TTRPG Class Bracket, you can do so here.

Monday, January 8, 2024

December 2023 TTRPG Crowdfunding Retrospective

Mashup of Backerkit, Crowdfundr, and Kickstarter logos reading: BACKfundER


For an overview of my methodology, please refer to my original
November post. The only addition this month is tracking what campaigns feature AI.

As always, the raw data are available for you to peruse at your leisure.

The big picture statistics:

  • 119 campaigns
    • 7 Backerkit
    • 0 Crowdfundr
    • 112 Kickstarter
  • $3,178,874.35 raised
    • $116,631.00 on Backerkit
    • $3,062,243.35 on Kickstarter
  • Types of campaigns
    • 9 accessories
    • 40 adventures
    • 10 campaign settings
    • 35 supplements
    • 24 systems
  • 24 distinct systems used
    • 48 campaigns (40.34%) used D&D 5E and raised $999,475.20 (31.44% of all money raised in December)
  • 32 campaigns featured AI
    • 24 of these were D&D 5E campaigns, accounting for 50% of all 5E crowdfunding campaigns

Kickstarter's December

The top 5 TTRPG campaigns were:
Overall, an interesting bunch of highly successful campaigns! Still largely dominated by D&D (outperforms the next best by over $200,000) and sequels to preexisting games/products (I'm including Knock! Issue 4 here), but this is more or less to be expected. The most interesting factor here is the big dip in money ($9,018,619.50 vs $3,062,243.35) and campaigns (164 vs 112) from November to December. I'm inclined to attribute this to holiday fatigue (as I certainly wouldn't really want to be running a campaign in the leadup to Christmas) and money being spent in other places (such as on gifts for family/friends), but these are complete speculation.

Backerkit's December

The top 3 TTRPG campaigns were:
HUGE dropoff in money ($1,256,857.98 vs $116,631.00) but not in campaigns (10 vs 7) between November and December. None of the 3 campaigns mentioned above would have cracked the top half of last month's campaigns. This time around, it seems like there's a lack of big company names (Possum Creek and Bully Pulpit are big for indies, but don't compare to Monte Cook or Goodman Games) to drive traffic and money to Backerkit.

Crowdfundr's December

Literally nothing. Probably won't be much until Zine Month 2024/Tabletop Nonstop in February. Time will tell if Crowdfundr will become any kind of major player in this space.

Graph Time

Once again, we must ask: is D&D 5E a sure bet? The average money raised by a 5E campaign in December 2023 was $2934.00, not far off from the median value of $2868.75. Once again, there was a big outlier campaign so I'm excluding that from the jump. 

Histogram showing the following distribution: 38 units in the $92-$12092 range, 5 units in the $12092-$24092 range, 2 units in the $24092-$36092 range, 1 unit in the $36092-$48092 range, and 1 unit in the $60092-$70092 range

But the bigger question I have is: does using AI have a significant impact on the results?

Bar and whisker plot with 2 bars. The left bar has a lower average and lower upper bound than the right bar, as well as outliers with less value

This graph shows the difference in money raised between the groups of 5E campaigns using AI vs not (once again, the most successful campaign has been removed for ease of visualization, but the statistics are calculated still involving it). The average AI campaign raised $5,226.51 while the average non-AI campaign raised $36,418.29 ($10,708.13 without the most successful campaign). But even with the most successful campaign included, there is not a significant difference between the two averages (two-tail paired t-test p-value was 0.224, way over the significance cut-off of 0.05), meaning that we can't say for sure whether AI helps or hurts a 5E campaign.


No big takeaways this month, but stay tuned for a big 2023 retrospective.

November TTRPG Crowdfunding Retrospective

 We're riding this wave of productivity folks! The November data  are  (yes, I am one of those pedants who insists [correctly] that ...