The Campaign Builder's Guild

As has become my annual tradition, I shall be running an IRC game this Halloween for those who wish to drop in.  Last year I did a Sixguns, Spaceships, and Cyclopean Horrors one-shot, which was a blast, and while I plan to continue more Sixguns game I think I'll run something more newbie-friendly this Halloween given the crew's current predicament in that game...  The question is, what should I run?

I've been planning on running Tenebrous, a Gothic comic-book style game, for quite some time.  I think this could be really fun; I have a scratch-built little system for it and some scenario ideas.

It's been too long since I've run anything in my post-apocalyptic/splatterpunk setting the Cadaverous Earth, though, and I wouldn't mind returning to the Slaughterlands (or elsehwere in that gore-drenched hellscape) for a one-shot.  I might experiment with a house-ruled version of Pathfinder if we ran this.

Or I could do something totally new.  Since it's horror-related you can bet that it'll be creepy and grotesque.  Vote for this if you want to be surprised.

I'll leave the poll open, but I'll probably start work on the scenario soon, so vote sooner rather than later if you want your preferences considered :)

Thoughts and comments are welcome, and we can figure out times and such here.

Quote from: Steerpike
Or I could do something totally new.  Since it's horror-related you can bet that it'll be creepy and grotesque.  Vote for this if you want to be surprised.

Do you mean like a game where there will be no information whatsoever given on the setting, characters, etc. until it actually begins? Such a totally blind approach would be kind of extreme but also an interesting thing to try.

That's what I was imagining, yeah.

I'm not big on the "you don't know what you're getting" idea, but you come up with decent stuff, so I wouldn't complain too much, especially if it used some of the fun little rules-light systems that had gotten tossed around lately.

Cadaverous Earth!

Hallowe'en surprises from Steerpike, that sounds like phenomenal idea.

I would like to participate in this if it ends up working with my schedule. My gut reaction is to return to the beloved CE, but I'd honestly be okay with Tenebrous and I trust you enough to think you'd think up something equally great if we go with the mystery option. I'm casting my vote for CE, though.

To clarify a bit, I do have a plan (well, a firm idea at least) for what I'd be doing with the "surprise."  I just wouldn't be sharing it beforehand.  It would probably be rules-lite.

As for times, it would probably be in the early/middle parts of the day Pacific Time.  Drops-ins would be welcome in any of the three, however, as I will endeavor to have plenty of characters that can show up part-way through the various adventures.  This approach seems to have worked reasonably well in previous All-Hallows IRC ventures (for those who didn't participate, you can see examples of previous games in my Spaceships, Sixguns, and Cylcopean Horrors Log).

Quote from: Ghostman

Quote from: Steerpike
Or I could do something totally new.  Since it's horror-related you can bet that it'll be creepy and grotesque.  Vote for this if you want to be surprised.

Do you mean like a game where there will be no information whatsoever given on the setting, characters, etc. until it actually begins? Such a totally blind approach would be kind of extreme but also an interesting thing to try.

Does this include not knowing what system?

Also is this going to be run ON the 31st?  Because I would love to play, but I am unsure if I will be free on the actual day of.

It would be run on Halloween itself, yes.  I happen to have Thursdays free.  Drop-ins are welcome, so if you want to jump in (or have to leave early), that's cool.

I really think that out of all the settings, Tenebrous would be the best suited to that sort of casual, in-and-out style of game.

This is gonna be awesome.

CE seems to be the current favourite, though I'll hold off a little longer before calling it "officially"... still time for the others to shoot ahead.  Not sure what I'll do if there's a tie.

If I did do CE I think I'd run it using Pathfinder while using variant rules for Armour as Damage Reduction, Called Shots, and a lowered Massive Damage Threshhold.  And I'd make the characters myself, although I might allow people to make their own as well if they prefer.

Sounds fun... but, as for your proposed house rules, I'll let Sean K. Reynolds do my ranting for me. :grin:

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/armorasdamagereduction.html
http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/calledshots.html

His armour-as-DR-one doesn't especially bother me; he basically claims it isn't "worth the work" because he's worried about balance, which frankly I'm not that concerned with in a one-shot.  I've played in a regular game with armour as DR and it's worked fairly well.  I also feel that adding in called shots and a lowered massive damage threshold (I was thinking a threshold lowered to Con) actually negate some of his criticisms of Armour as DR.  One of his chief criticisms is that:

Quote from: Sean K. ReynoldsIf you have a wide range of DR values for armor, it means that some weapons that don't normally do a lot of damage (such as the dagger) won't be able to hurt high-DR foes unless they crit. For example, if you give full plate DR 8, it means a person with a dagger can't ever hurt someone in full plate (barring Strength and other bonuses to damage), when historically that wasn't true at all ... it was hard, but a skilled person can find the gaps in the armor.

If we have called shots and a lowered damage threshold, the situation he describes becomes more viable.  Imagine a Rogue with a Sneak attack of +4d6 and a +1d4 dagger - exactly the kind of "skilled person" who the example imagines - who flanks a heavily armoured foe (let's say they have 8 DR).  With a modicum of good luck he can deal enough damage to provoke a Fortitude save for massive damage against someone with average-to-decent Constitution even after 8 damage gets absorbed, meaning that he has the potential to one-shot them.  Add in a called shot to the neck, on a critical he deals an additional 1d6 bleed damage and makes his opponent unable to breathe, not only increasing the liklihood of provoking a massive damage check but continuing to deal damage after the hit.  A called shot to the vitals that manages to crit reduces Con, thus hugely increasing the chance of massive damage.

Likewise, having Armour as DR negates his chief criticism of called shots:

Quote from: Sean K. ReynoldsLet the hit do more damage against the unarmored face than it would against the armored body (or armored face/head). One problem with that: if hitting an unarmored face does more damage than hitting a helmed face, then any hit against an unarmored character should do more damage than a hit against an armored character; suddenly you have to recalculate damage values against unarmored creatures, and armorless characters (such as mages and most monsters) suddenly are even more vulnerable. "More damage" also includes special effects that most people associate with critical hits: blindness, stunning, crippling, tripping, instant kills, etc.

Armour as DR provides an easy means of recalculating damage values.  Since most monsters with armour as DR have natural armour that converts to DR, the monster issue is negated.  I'll admit that mages remain vulnerable, but that's partly what mage armour, shield, blur, barkskin, blink, mirror image, and a host of similar spells are for.

By using called shots in conjunction with armour as DR, the liklihood of actually managing a called shot goes up considerably, because armour class is lowered and the penalty for called shots is more manageable.  Because called shots under the Pathfinder system often have other effects than simply adding on extra raw damage, a called shot that doesn't deal a ton of damage against a heavily armoured opponent can still have other useful effects like sickening, slowing, or stunning them.

But we're getting sidetracked here  :grin: