Research

by David Meadows 20. August 2017 00:18

The problem with doing a game in a historical setting is that you have to know at least a little bit about the setting. You don't have to be an expert, you just need to be able to bluff it enough to convince your players that they are in the time and place you say they are.

Two things work in your favour when bluffing: (1) Your players are more interested in having fun than nit-picking, so even when you get it wrong they'll likely let it slide. (2) We are all aware that this is a fictionalised version of the past. It actually can be "wrong", if being wrong serves the story (and doesn't "cheat" the players). The main thing is to know enough to convey to the players the "flavour" of the setting, to help their suspension of disbelief. 

So for each era I have done a variable amount of research, depending on how much I already know and how much I can get away with bluffing. Sometimes this means reading history books so I can spout accurate facts, sometimes it means reading fiction set in the era and/or genre I'm playing, so I can capture the "feel" of the setting.

For a game set in World War Two, I already know quite a lot. I've got a shelf full of books of military history, and I grew up with war stories in books, comics, and films. I know who fought who and where and when and how, I can call a German tank by its correct name, I know what rude songs a British Tommy sings about Hitler, and so on. In theory, I think I could have got away without any specific research at all.

Then I decided to set the game in France right at the start of the war, and I realised that this was the campaign I actually knew least about. I knew broad details, but was lacking in the specifics, the little snippets of info I might want to throw into conversations as background detail, the exact dates and locations of battles that might happening in the background of whatever the players were doing, and so on. Knowing those details can help create story ideas, too, as I think, "Oh, that bridge was blown up? What would happen if the players were there to stop it...?"

This is when it's time to find a good book and read it in parallel with my other preparations.

This is what I found:

Part of the 22-volume "official" history series commissioned by the British government shortly after the war ended, there are over 400 pages here, concentrating on a two-month period in a small area of Belgium and northern France. More detail than any sane person could need when "it's only a game".

Excellent! Just what I need ...

Tags: , ,

Pre-Planning

by David Meadows 17. August 2017 19:42

We interrupt your scheduled blog to answer a question a reader asked in response to my last few posts. I would probably have covered all this eventually (and might repeat bits of it in future posts), but this is a good excuse to write something about it now. (Let’s be honest, I’m just excited to find I have a reader.)

“I am interested to know how much you preplan? Do you have a range of set pieces that will happen? Do you have a defined ending and work toward that? Is it a mixture of both?”

It’s a mixture of both.

I always have an ending to work towards, because I treat the game like a story, and a story needs an ending and resolution.

I have set pieces (which I define as “a key scene that must take place in the game”) worked out, but I’m fully aware that half of them won’t take place because the players will either screw up and miss them, or be brilliant and bypass them. So it turns out that some key scenes aren’t as key as I thought they were, and I actually have to have multiple redundant key scenes ready to run, just in case. The level of detail I put into each one varies, though, and some are simply minor variations on each other. And, crucially, you have to be fluid and adjust the scene on the fly depending on the exact play that leads up to it. No planned encounter survives contact with the enemy players.

The other thing I do is make the plot non-player-character ("NPC") driven. This probably works best in long campaigns, but it works in a short scenario, too. If you know what your chief baddie is doing and why, you can write the “story” of how he wins without the players getting in the way. Then when the players do get in the way, you still know what he’s aiming for so you put yourself in his mind and think, “That went wrong, what do I do next?” And the future story adjusts accordingly. You don’t need to be prepared in advance with everything he might do, though you do need to understand him and his goals well enough to be able to quickly plot his next moves on the fly (or, worst case, end the session early so you can get ready for next week).

But there are other ways of doing it -- in our early days of playing D&D, it was enough to have a huge dungeon complex full of encounters, with no goal other than killing monsters for fun and treasure. A game with a goal as simple as “The king wants these monsters cleared out and as a reward you can keep whatever treasure you find” is still a game (though not a particularly good story). To be honest I would probably suggest that approach for any beginning GM (especially one who comes from board gaming -- or wargaming, as I did), as it’s all set pieces that are simple to prepare in themselves and will work in any order. You don’t have to worry about keeping the narrative straight, remembering anyone’s motivations, or panicking when the players go the wrong way; you can just have fun hacking up monsters while learning how to play “in character”.

 

Tags: , ,

Figures

by David Meadows 15. August 2017 20:03

Role-playing games mostly take place in your head. You have a few statistics written down to represent your character, but everything the character does and says comes out of your own head, and all the action is purely imaginary. If your character walks across a room and opens a door, you say "I walk across the room and open the door", and every other player imagines your character doing that.

Sometimes, though, a scene gets a bit too complicated to hold in your head. This is particularly true in action scenes, where you could have a dozen or more characters interacting with each other and the environment. You can't clearly visualise all that, or if you can then you can't be certain everybody else is visualising it in the same way. It's highly annoying to say "I leap over the table and punch the man," only to be told that the table isn't where you think it is and the man is behind you ready to shoot you.

So we borrow a system from wargamers, and use table-top maps, scenery and miniature figures to represent the field of play. We can immediately see where everybody is standing, and, with a ruler and a scale (such as, "one inch represents two yards") we can see exactly how far they can move and/or shoot, and what obstacles are in their way.

My maps and scenery are very primitive -- usually a pencil sketch, often improvised on the spot, and with bits of cardboard or other improvised items to represent furniture, vehicles, and so on.

For figures, we use metal wargames miniatures. Usually in a larger size than most wargamers will use, as we don’t need to represent 1000 infantrymen but we do need to easily distinguish one character from another.

Figures are expensive, and it takes time to track down suitable designs, and hours to paint individually to personalise them (I am not a good painter). So often I'll just use something vaguely suitable from my rag-tag collection ("Let’s say this Elf is the Saracen archer"). Or sometimes, I'll put in the effort to do the job properly.

A mail-order place called Wargames Foundry (https://www.wargamesfoundry.com/) do a good range of miniatures from all eras in 28mm scale, and I've used their figures before (for Victorian-era explorers in Africa, for example). So I checked out their web site and bought a handful of German and British infantry to use in the new game. It will be touch-and-go whether I get them painted in time, but even if I have to use them unpainted they will still serve to represent characters on the tabletop.

Here are some of the Germans waiting to be painted: 
 

 

Tags: ,

New Rules

by David Meadows 13. August 2017 17:00

There are two things I need before I start a new game: a story background and a set of rules.

The story is obvious. If I don't have a story to involve the players in, I don't have a game. There's a lot to say about that, so I'll get to it later. First I’ll talk about the rules.

When I decided to run a series of discrete (though related) historical games, I knew I would need to use a different set of rules for each. Though the rules are really the least important element of a game, it’s important to have something that is capable of modelling the era correctly. You can’t just pick up a random set of rules and assume they will do what you want them to do, as rules are typically tailored to do something fairly specific and limited. If a set of rules has been written specifically to run games in the Wild West, they’re probably very good at resolving who wins the gunfight in the saloon, less good at figuring out whether a Roman Legionary can defeat the barbarian charging at him. A set of mediaeval rules will tell you how fast a horse can go, but are less useful if you’re playing in 2017 and you need to know the acceleration of your character’s Harley-Davidson (yes, you can research those details in conventional sources, but then you still have to figure out how to convert those real-world details into the game's mechanics, and it's all time and effort you don't want to spend when you really want to get on with just creating a story). 

And yes there are generic rules which (in theory) will handle every era, but they tend to be just that: generic. They don’t go into the detail you need for any specific era, forcing you to either buy extra setting-specific books from the publisher or do a lot of work to add the detail yourself. So for my purposes they give no advantage over just buying a suitable set of specific rules in the first place, really.

So before I can translate my story ideas into a workable game, I have to look for rules that will suitably model the kind of story I like to tell in the era I'm doing. I’ve never played a World War Two setting before, so I’m starting from a position of complete ignorance. Quick, Robin, to the Googlemobile!

An evening of solid research turned up a number of potential systems for playing characters in the War, but I had another problem: I needed to play super heroes in the war. And most games involving super heroes set them squarely in the modern day. 

To my rescue came something called Savage Worlds (from Pinnacle Entertainment Group, https://www.peginc.com/ ), which is, yes, “generic”. But two of the key supplemental books they had produced were a super-powers book (obviously intended to be set in the modern day) and a book called “Weird War 2”, with a setting that assumes you are ordinary soldiers fighting not just the enemy but supernatural monsters in World War Two. Take that, subtract the supernatural and insert the super powers from the other book, and it works! (I hope.)

So I bought the books and I started reading. And it really will work. The WW2 book has all the detail I need to minimise any extra research on my part, and the core rules (the "generic" part) are flexible enough that adding in both the mundane war stuff and the super-hero stuff at the same time won't distort anything (I hope). Overall, I really liked the system -- it seemed simple but still comprehensive, and it looked like it would produce the style of game I like to run. 

So, rules are sorted. And while all this rule reading is going on, I’m still writing the story background. That's something for the next post ... 

Tags: ,

World War Two

by David Meadows 11. August 2017 20:43

It's that time of year again when I have to consider the next historical era.

Since completing the Strikeforce and Heroes games, I have been running a series of different games set in different points in the history of the Game Universe, to let me explore different genres of story while filling in some of the Universe's historical background. These stories are actually summarised on the main page of the History section, here: http://dmheroes.co.uk/history/index.html .

With my "pulp era" 1930s game currently nearing a conclusion, I need to be looking ahead to plan the next era, and inevitably that era has to be World War Two -- an event so influential on modern history (in my Universe, as well as the real one) that it can't be skipped.

WW2 was a key point in the (real world) development of super-hero comics. Superman, the first true super hero, had appeared shortly before the war started, and the first "golden age" boom of super heroes occurred during the war years. In the comic book pages, everybody fought Nazis -- Superman, Wonder Woman, Captain America, all of them. So when I started writing the history of my Universe, I decided that the first great era of super heroes was in the days of World War Two. Because it feels that's how it should be.

Now, here I am running historical games as a specific antidote to being burned out after 25 years of super-hero games, and I'm again faced with an era of super heroes. What to do?

As in most things, I appeal to the players: do you want to play WW2 as super heroes or not?

Super heroes.

Hmm.

Purely military games pose some problems for role playing, as the military command structure limits players' freedom of action, so I can see the attraction of being "independent" super heroes instead. But I've been thinking of twists that will allow a WW2 game that doesn't make the players grunts in the army. I run through a number of the ideas I've had: You're a group of French Resistance fighters. You're Germans in a penal battalion on the Eastern Front. You're the British Home Guard (aka "Dad's Army") ... 

Nope. We want to be super heroes.

Hmm.

In desperation I throw out a sudden random idea to deflect them from a super-hero fixation: how about, you're paroled prisoners sent on commando missions kind of like the Dirty Dozen ...

And somebody says:

"Can we be paroled super-villains?"

And the idea is so good, I've already half written the game background in my head before I even have time to voice a disagreement.

So that's it. We're playing super-villains in World War Two.

What can possibly go wrong?

(Next: how I go about preparing the new game.)

Tags: , ,

Update (week 38)

by David Meadows 9. June 2017 23:01

As promised, something a bit different this week. The site gets an entire new section, Atlantis, documenting the beginnings of the Heroes universe.

There is a short piece of fiction -- and I do mean short, barely over 1000 words, which is shorter than any of the Strikeforce chapters -- that's only supposed to introduce the setting and key characters. As I get further into the story, expect chapters to be more reasonable lengths.

There are also supporting entries in the who's who, history, encyclopaedia, and gazetteer pages. They can all be accessed from the main Atlantis page.

There's even a map! I drew it with coloured pens and everything! Who doesn't love maps?

Next update will go back to a regular Strikeforce chapter. I'm still not sure how often I will update the Atlantean section. It will probably be intermittent.

Tags: ,

Atlantis

by David Meadows 6. June 2017 22:03

(or, "What Do You Do After Breaking The Universe - Twice?")

I'm shortly (probably next Friday, if all goes well) about to launch a third strand of fiction on the site, alongside Strikeforce and Heroes. Here, I'll try to explain why I'm doing something so insane.

The original Strikeforce game lasted 300 playing sessions over about 7 years. After I "broke" the universe with the Event, I re-started it as the Heroes game, and that ran almost 20 years, bringing the total number of playing sessions to 1000, when I managed to break the universe a second time and bring the whole Game to an end. I was burned out. I had been creating stories in the same universe for 25 years, 1000 "chapters" of a story that, if I ever finish adapting it, is going to be the equivalent a five-million-word novel. (The Bible is three-quarters of a million words. The combined Harry Potter books are slightly over a million. Me and my players have written a BIG story.)

So that was it, I'd had enough of writing superhero plots. I finished on what I hoped was a bang, with a big storyline that tied off as many loose ends as I could manage and literally ended the universe, so I couldn't change my mind later. Then I sat back and put my feet up.

I was out of the hero business.

For a couple of weeks. 

Then I needed to create things again. I can't help it. It's what I do.

I approached my players and asked if they'd like to try a fantasy-style game. No superheroes, just knights and wizards and thieves in a clichéd pseudo-mediaeval setting. They said yes, and I started creating a setting, characters, plots, and everything else a game world needed. I picked a set of rules that I'd first played decades ago and had always wanted to run my own game with: Dragonquest

Image result for dragonquest rpg

The rules date from the early 80s, and by modern standards are pretty creaky and over-complex. But in play, they actually work really well, they give you a lot of options (a lot more than the primitive Dungeons & Dragons rules, for example) and don't attempt to impose any specific background on the game. Which is what I wanted. I'm not interested in modern systems which present a fully-developed world for you to play your games in. Developing the world is what I do.

I already knew the world I would use: the world of mythical Atlantis, shortly before it sank beneath the waves. Taking whatever elements I wanted from the myths, and adding elements of my own, I pretty soon had an entire world sketched out, a main plot arc for the players to follow, and plenty of peripheral characters and plots to allow a theoretically open-ended campaign. I could run 25 years of games in Atlantis, if I wanted to.

But -- this wasn't a new game universe. I didn't tell the players (they fairly soon figured it out for themselves), but this game was taking place in the past of the Strikeforce universe. And during the game, I would be explaining the history of some of the key mysteries of the Strikeforce universe: magic, demons, Avatar's Amulet of Karoona, and more. This game wasn't just Atlantis. It was Strikeforce: Atlantis.

So I had managed to suck myself back in again. There's something about Strikeforce. I try to move on, but they keep pulling me back. They have become a millstone around my neck.

And I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

Tags:

Suddenly, One Year Later...

by David Meadows 27. May 2017 01:17

It's exactly one year since I started this web site. In the last year, I have made 37 weekly updates. Ok, the mathematicians among you might work out that if they really were weekly there would have been 52 of them. I had more skip weeks than I wanted (including this one, sorry), but I'm happy enough with 37. I'll see if I can beat that total in the second year.

There are now 152 pages on the site in total. That's around three pages a week, every week of the year. Some of those pages might only be a few lines long, but others are 5000-word Strikeforce chapters, so that's a lot of words. I think there must be close to 200,000  words on the site, so I've written enough for a respectable novel. Let's see if I can beat that in the second year, too.

In additon to the actual site updates I've got 80 posts on this blog, many of them trivial but I've basically achieved my initial goal of documenting the behind-the-scenes look at what this site is all about. Specifically the set of eight pages in the "Start here" list at the right ---> , which is probably now complete (I can't think of any more major things I need to explain).

Plans for the forthcoming year is to launch a new strand of fiction, in fact I'm currently on schedule for launching it in the next update, which should be in a couple of weeks. I'm not sure that it's sensible to run three stories in parallel, and in fact the "third strand" might be irregular, but I'll see how it goes.

So, that's how things stand. Onward and upward.

Tags: ,

Best plan ever?

by David Meadows 21. May 2017 23:03

Sometimes in a Game you throw a no-win situation at the players. I don't mean you kill them all with an undefeatable monster (though actually... I've done that too), but you give them a dilemma in which every solution has unpalatable consequences, so you're forcing them to make a moral choice to decide which is the lesser of two evils. Depending on what they choose, you follow through with the consequences and the Game changes as a result.

Sometimes, you wait for them to realise that they have two unpalatable options, and out of the blue they come up with a third way you've never even considered, one which you hadn't planned for and probably shouldn't allow, but which is so awesomely argued (all in character, no "cheating" with knowledge the characters shouldn't have) that you just have to allow it, even if it means completely chucking out future plot lines that you've spent weeks working out in anticipation of the "defeat".

This is one such plan proposed by a player's character in the Game. In his own words:

 

"Perhaps either the Event Field is 'indestructible' and interference is pointless, or the consequences to the Universe itself will be far worse than mere interstellar conflict if it's artificially extinguished. So I'd like to propose a compromise, a third alternative. Why don't you utilise the Dream Weaver Device to divert rather than eliminate the effect? I propose a three stage process, which will necessarily require use of the Device and the absolute trust and co-operation of everybody involved. Firstly, over the area of space-time encompassing the Event horizon itself, amend a basic Physical Law. Instead of being Mass multiplied by Velocity, briefly define Momentum as being equal to Mass multiplied by Speed. Secondly, curve that area of space time, nudging the direction of travel of the Event in space by ninety degrees i.e. perpendicular to its previous direction of travel. Thus we would have a rotating rather than an expanding phenomenon around the Earth. With our adjusted definition of Momentum, the direction component of velocity is not an issue thus Conservation of Momentum / Energy is conserved. Thirdly, restore the previous definition of Momentum to the area of space time previously affected. The Event phenomenon has not been destroyed, merely 'steered' and contained into a constantly rotating and non expanding configuration! The Event itself isn't to be targeted, merely the area of space-time it occupies."

 

Best. Players. Ever.

Tags: ,

Haven

by David Meadows 21. May 2017 22:09
One day many years ago, probably in the pub after a Game session, and possibly under the influence of alcohol, I said to the players:
 
"Haven is where everything touches but never meets, while the Parallax is where everything meets but never touches."
 
If I'm honest, I don't think I had any idea what that meant. It just sounded cool. My ideas of multi-universal cosmology were still a work in progress. But from that statement, or rather, from trying to subsequently justify that statement and make it true, came the so-called "Beermat" model of the multiverse, the five demons, and basically everything that underpinned the big concepts of my Game universe and drove stories for the next 25 years.
 
I was just reminded of this today when reading some old notes and came across this (reasonably accurate) transcript of a conversation between the players arguing in-character during the course of a Game:
 

"Supposing you're right and the Demon itself wasn't destroyed during the Event. What you seem to be implying is that it's fleeing from Earth at the speed of light consuming whatever 'magic' it encounters, growing stronger as it expands. If this is the case it will have the power it needs to achieve criticality and complete its takeover of the universe long before it engulfs the entire galaxy. Considering the situation, we don't see any other choice but to utilise the Doomsday Device against the Event field!"

 "You are missing the point! The Demon is the outside of the Event! The Event itself is non-Demon. It is a purging/pushing/repelling field, not an all powerful Demon containment field! Look, the Event MUST survive to progress through the whole universe before the end of Time so that the entirety of the Demon energy is destroyed before the Universe restarts!"

"You possess absolutely no evidence to support that hypothesis! As has been proven by subsequent events the Event field is self contained and has no link to Earth. Besides which, it's not an anti-Demon field! It's an improbability manipulation spell!"

 
(And there was a lot more of it, it goes on for pages) 
 
Bear in mind that this isn't me writing the argument, it's players with differing interpretation of how the universe -- my universe -- works, each trying to convince the other they are right, without reference to me.
 
This is why I love the Game. It's the player input. They really care about it to the extent that they don't just listen to my explanations of stuff, they think about them in character and have their characters come up with new theories to explain the facts they've been given. 
 
And then they argue with each other about them. 
 
It's awesome.
 
I have the best players.

Tags: , ,

About this blog

The Heroes Universe is an ongoing work of fiction, conceived and chiefly plotted by David Meadows, with help from a group of friends, over a 30-year period.

I am slowly documenting the Universe on this web site.

This blog is a behind-the-scenes look at the creation of that history.

If you're new here, the series of posts listed below will explain what it's all about. I hope...

Post history

Recent comments

Comment RSS