The Geek Emporium

The Great Geek Revolution is NOW!

Keeping Up With the Indiana Joneses

Through gaming, I’ve visited ancient tombs, ruins of great civilizations.  I’ve hacked my way through jungle, slogged through swamp, and nearly died in the desert.  I’ve ridden horses across the plains, and sailed across the oceans.  My characters seem like they’ve done it all, and are still ready for more.

But theres one trick I personally don’t see used enough.  It’s a little late for the current campaign I’m playing in to try it, but it’s something I may keep in mind for the next campaign I run.  Why don’t more adventuring parties have rival parties?  Not necessarily enemies mind you, but straight rivals?  Here’s how I see it shaping up.

First, the party would have to be similar in make up to the PCs.  Otherwise, and advantages the new group would have would be discounted to that difference alone.  That would be bad.  PCs need to understand that these guys are just good.  Nothing more, nothing less.  If there isn’t a PC rogue, then the rivals shouldn’t have one either.

Make them arrogant, loud, obnoxious, whatever you have to do to make sure the players don’t like the rivals.  Friendly rivals is fine, but to really have fun with it, you need someone they hate.  Remember, they don’t have to be evil, just annoying competition.  Once you’ve done that, they’re ready to go.

Now, how you deploy them is really fun.  Let’s say the PCs are dragging their butts getting to the Liches lair.  NPCs keep advising them that they need to hurry, he’s almost done with the ritual, but they’ve been saying it for days (in-game time…but out of game time is possible to with some groups I’ve played with ;)).  No matter what, they still keep dragging their butts.  They know that the DM won’t let the Mondo-Bad-Thing-Monster-Beasty out into their precious homebrew world, so they’re not sweating it one bit.

Then, finally they decide to enter the Liches lair.  They’ve buffed up, readied a plan, and bust through the door…

…only to find their rivals have already dispatched the Lich and are looting the room.  Perhaps they make some quip about the PCs being late to the party, or even thanking them for clearing the way to the Lich, but leaving the fun stuff for them.

Now, in future games, the PCs will have the idea that time really is important because otherwise the rivals will get the XP and loot.  Even the metagamers in the group will start acting with some haste now.  After all, now there’s something they can’t account for, either in game or out of game.

The most important thing a DM must understand is how rarely to use this tool.  Frankly, using it will piss off the players if you use them in the way described above.  That should really be the “nuclear option” as a DM, so keep it in reserve for only the most dire of times.  Either that, or it’s a hook for something else.  Other ways the rivals can be used, and will make sure the rivals are kept in the PCs minds is:

  • PC mistakes are retold as stories in taverns all over the lands, making them look bad.
  • PCs often have to make moral choices.  The rival group can take the path the PCs don’t, then make them look bad by not taking that path.
  • The rivals can convince the local ruler that the PCs are evil adventurers looking to overthrow their rule.

Those are just a few.  The possibilities are endless.  They can provide a foil for the PCs that they can’t just outright kill (unless they want to deal with the results of such an act).  Even creating a situation where the PCs need the help of the rivals can be a blast as well.  Just don’t over use the rivals, or else the players will resent the hell out of them and you.

So, if your group is one that could benefit from this idea, give it a try.  It could be just what the Doctor (Jones) ordered 😉

September 10, 2008 Posted by | RPG | , | 2 Comments

Required for Fun: Do We Need All That We Think We Do?

Yesterday, while talking about the future of gaming, the question was asked by Ravyn if all the technology I mentioned was really necessary.  Obviously, the answer is “no, it’s not needed at all.”  However, that got me to thinking, which is always a scary thing.  What do we need to role play?

Role play is quite possibly the oldest form of play in our lives, if not in history.  Early role playing games for many of us were the classics: Cops & Robbers, Cowboys & Indians, etc.  Rules consistent of nothing.  The arguement we all heard started with “Bang! You’re dead!”  And was followed with the inevitable “No I’m not” response.  The typically female equivelant was playing mother to their dolls (even then, girls were ahead of the curve!  They played with miniatures while us boys were LARPing ;)).  Even with the freeform nature of what we were doing, we loved it in spite of the arguments.

All we needed was a rain-free day, some friends, and plenty of time before the street lights came on.  We might have props (toy gun for example), but we adapted well enough without it (fingers make good enough guns after all).  Rule disputes were handled simply by letting it go.  We could do anything we wanted to so long as the laws of physics were obeyed.  After all, 8 year old kids tend to not defy gravity very often.

With the lack of crunch, we all enjoyed ourselves.  It was the purest form of role play, and it planted the seed that lead many of us to take up role playing as a hobby.  We didn’t need dice to tell us if we shot the bad guy, we just shot him.  We needed need a DM to determine if we could do something, we just did it (or said we did it).  We needed need to reference books to see what spells we could cast, we just cast them.

Amid all the edition wars, both on this blog and others (and I’m just as responsible as anyone else),  I think we’ve lost sight of the simple fact that we play a game.  Nothing else matters so long as we have fun and don’t ruin anyone else’s fun along the way.  So long as we do that, we’ll be in good shape.  Not just for today, but for ages to come.

September 10, 2008 Posted by | RPG | , | 13 Comments

More X-Men and Another Daredevil?

According to an article in Variety, Fox didn’t have such a good summer this year.  That’s never good for a studio.  So, they’re taking a look at what they can do to spice things up.

Though Fox has no plans for a major overhaul, the studio has scheduled a strategy meeting to assess the status of its superheroes, a group sorely missed this summer. On the agenda, Fox will mull the possibility of more “X-Men” spinoffs, including a young-X-Men project as well as “Deadpool,” based on a character played by Ryan Reynolds in “Wolverine.” The studio is even considering reviving the “Daredevil” property.

Now, I’m a huge fan of Deadpool as a character, and Ryan Reynolds sounds to me like a great choice to play him.  The X-Men movies are second only to Christopher Nolan’s Batman franchise in my scale of awesome comic-to-movie conversions, so a new X-Men spinoff could be awesome.

As for a new Daredevil movie, I’m seriously down with that one as well.  I didn’t think the Ben Affleck movie was that bad, over all.  Sure, it’s wasn’t Batman Begins by any stretch, but it was a solid movie that was well above even the old Superman movies with the late Christopher Reeves IMHO. 

So good luck to Fox!  I hope they follow through on these concepts!  It’ll give me something to be excited about until the Thor movie comes out in July, 2010!

September 10, 2008 Posted by | Movies | , | Leave a comment