Review: D&D 4th Edition Dark Sun

This is a brief take after my reading of the new campaign setting for 4th Edition Dark Sun.  I have a lot more to say, but I'm trying to be succinct.  If you have particular questions, meet me in the comment thread.

A while ago I got a copy of Dark Sun for 4th Edtion.  I've recently finished reading the complete Prism Pentad for the first time, and might talk about those in another post.  Suffice to say - the quirkly illogic of old-school D&D combined with the brutality of the setting to make an interesting read all around.  Not all of the books are equally good (the 4th one is the worst of the lot, and I might even say skip it) but I read the whole five books, which says something.

I picked up the new 4th Edition Dark Sun Campaign Setting, wondering how 4th Edition's invincible player-characters would combine with the life-is-cheap brutality of Athas.  The answer: you get a lot of 4th Edition wedded to a tiny bit of Dark Sun.

As an implementation of the Dark Sun setting, I think that the new campaign book basically fails.  There is some text about how tough Athas is, but there is very little that actually makes it tough in terms of system.  You have to spend about 5gp a day to live, and if you don't,  you start losing healing surges from lack of water and so on.  Compare this to the most physically strong character in the books, Rkard the Mul, being laid low by having to walk out in the open for three or four days, reduced to a near-dead state, and Athas really loses it's bite.

What I wanted was a grim, desperate land where travel itself, usually at best handled by a montage or a couple skill challenge, could kill you just as readily as the overwhelming collection of murderous, psionic fauna.  What you get is a way to drain 5gp a day out of your pocket.  Which, when a first level encounter might net the party hundreds of gold pieces, has little to no sting.

More than anything else, 4th Edition's take on Dark Sun convinced me that the setting needs it's own system.  D&D is not about being murdered by your harsh environment. It is not about deceit and back-stabbing and political maneuvering.  Both of these things feature prominently in the Prism Pentad books.

Where Dark Sun and 4th Edition overlap in a sweet spot is in gladiatorial combat.  I could see a game based on a cadre of gladiators in Tyr going really well - you get the monster-of-the week phenomenon without needing a lot of explanation, and you get to showcase what 4th Edition does - small-scale tactical combat with kewl powerz.

Once you leave the gladiatorial arena, though, 4th Ed falls apart as an engine for Dark Sun stories.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 shards of obsidian.

D&D 4th Edition - Character Creation + Hacks Part 2

Long ago, in ancient times, I posted about how I handled 4th Edition D&D character creation with my home group.  Since then, a fine gentleman created a document for the method that I described.  It is available for download here.

It's a good document and the method worked, for me at least.

Rightful Humiliation

Just in case anyone who reads this blog thinks, even for a moment, that they run a pretty good D&D game, you should really take a look at the kinds of things that Gabe from Penny Arcade does with his group.

Truly amazing.

D&D Game Day Sept 2009

Yesterday was D&D Game Day, celebrating the release of the Dungeon Master's Guide 2. I remain conflicted about the DMG2. On the one hand, I read through it, and it actually has a lot of good advice for running games, especially pointed toward breaking DMs out of the 'standard' mode (long supported by all traditional rpgs) - that of the DM-as-author and players-as-tactical-combatants who also sometimes get to speak a few lines.

On the other hand, I'm aggravated by the slew of extra "basic set" books that WotC seems intent on putting out there. I mean, are we going to have the PHB5? 10? Where does it stop? When will diminishing returns really kick in? I'm finding that my thinking is moving away from the traditional supplement model of rpgs.

That being said, I can recommend the DMG2 for beginner DMs who want to up their game or for anyone who wants to get a lot of solid-seeming advice on how to run games more skillfully. This is not a crunchy book at all - in fact, it is downright chewy. There is a lot in there to think about, particularly if you are new to games, or are stuck in a kick-in-the-door-kill-the-baddie rut.

For my part, I came down to the FLGS here in San Rafael and ran a little module for some eager players. It was a lot of fun, and I learned something. 4th Edition runs really well with three players. I used three of the PCs distributed by WotC for use in games running on D&D Game Day (I let the players choose from the 5 there were) and just altered the encounters I'd set up to accommodate fewer PCs. It was probably the most fun I've had running 4th Edition D&D - about 3 solid hours of fun and no dragging. Lots of ass was kicked.

So I recommend tossing out the idea of the 'classic' 4-PC D&D party for a try. Go with 3 or even 2. I think the game not only works well, but actually better, with fewer players. You can't throw as much at them, and that is it's own kind of fun; I just felt like more happened.

How I Made D&D Cooler Part 2: Characters

Here's an example of a character sheet I sketched out for one of the characters in my D&D game:
[Stolen Image from the Internet]

“Cornelius Finch” Lvl 5 Human Huckster of Evil

Str 12 Con 9 Dex 13 Int 14 Wis 10 Cha 17
HP 22 [ ] , Bloodied 10, +1 Leather 2, Initiative +4
Surges 7, Healing 4
Melee +4, Missile +6,
Fortitude 12, Reflex 17, Will 18
Feats: Smooth Talker, Dodge
Special: Extra Skill, Extra Feat

At-Will: MW Throwing Knives +6 (1d4+5) or +4 (1d4+5), Bluff +10, Diplomacy +10, History +7, Insight +6, Sailing +8, Stealth +6, Thievery +6, Default +3, Bardic Inspiration (+1 to rolls and damage), Helpful Anecdote +2

*Encounter: Entrancement +8

**Utility: Suggestion +8

***Daily: Charm +8, Lesser Geas +8

Pretty simple; I'll go through it bit by bit. A lot of this is being familiar with the D20 system and working things out organically. As I said before, this isn't a new system or anything, just a way to play D&D without having fifteen books at the table or having drawn-out rules arguments - basically, beginner-friendly with some Doug-ish twists.

“Cornelius Finch” Lvl 5 Human Huckster of Evil
The class is Huckster of Evil based on the players' description of his character concept, which most resembled a fast-talking, capitalistic Bard. Levels work the same as usual - his level is his number of "hit dice" and is also added to d20 rolls and defenses as it is in 4th Edition.

As you can see, I kept the usual clunky ability scores, where you subtract 10 and then divide by 2 for the actual bonus. This is just a D&D convention that people are used to.

+1 Leather 2
Armor in this version simply provides DR/-, or damage resistance against everything physical. In this case, I divided the listed AC bonus for leather armor by 2 and that was the DR for the armor. Because it is +1 magical armor, I add 1 to that number, for a total of 2. Easy.

Surges 7, Healing 4
Surges, as I said, are a player resource to boost particular actions their characters attempt. They are like a more versatile version of the action points from Unearthed Arcana and the like. The "healing" rating is a flat number that represents the character's rate of recovery from Hit Point loss. I get the number by taking their level and adding their Con bonus - in this case, Cornelius' Con has a -1 penalty because it is a 9. So when he rests for a full night, he gets 4HP back. When someone casts Cure Ligh Wounds on him, he gets a base of 4HP back. When he spends a Surge to have a second wind, he recovers 4HP - you get the idea.

Melee +4, Missile +6
Every character has a base melee and missile attack score, just for ease of reference. In this case, the Bard is trained in either melee or missile, and Cornelius is trained in missile. That means that his melee bonus is equal to 1/2 level + Str mod + Feats, etc. and his missile bonus is level + Dex mod + Feats, etc. He has no combat feats, so the math is simple.

Fortitude 12, Reflex 17, Will 18
In keeping with D20, the Bard has trained Reflex and Will and untrained Fortitude defense. I also used the 4E convention where Fortitude can be modified by either Strength or Constitution, Reflex either Dexterity or Intelligence, and Will either Wisdom or Charisma - that's a cool little rule. So, Cornelius' Fortitude defense is 10 + 1/2 level + Str OR Con mod + Feats etc. and his Will defense is 10 + level + Wis or Cha mod + Feats, etc.

At-Will
For at-will abilities, I include basic attacks, basic (first-tier) Feats, and skills. These are all the things you can do in-game, basically, that will have some set effect on the fiction and that you don't have to pay Surges for.

Encounter
Encounter powers cost 1 Surge to use, and in this case, Entrancement works like an attack against Will defense much as it functions in the 3.5 PHb - you can use it to distract people with your performance. The difference, to make this potentially useable in combat, is that you can use it against targets even if they are threatened. They take a -2 penalty to their first action after the entrancement is broken by taking damage or a bigger distraction elsewhere.

All of the rules for these powers are made up and discussed with the player in question. I take what is in the official books as a starting point and then simplify and streamline what I find.

Utility
Cornelius' Utility power is Suggestion, and costs 2 Surges to use, like any Utility power in this system. This is also similar to the 3.5 PHb, and can have you "suggest" anything short of suicide.

Daily
Cornelius, at level 5, has 2 Daily powers, each of which cost 3 Surges to use. The first he's always had - Charm is basically Charm Person - the target becomes your best friend for a scene. The second is the new one - Lesser Geas. The player specifically requested an ability to create magically-enforced contracts to function in his scam-artistry. Again, much like what is in the books.

The way I work out how many Encounter, Utility and Daily powers a character has is pretty simple, and I use 4E as a starting-point.

1st Level: 1 Encounter and 1 Daily (and technically, here, if you use the Daily, you won't have enough Surges to also use the Encounter unless you earn one...)
2nd Level: 1 Encounter, 1 Utility and 1 Daily (and again, you have to choose, since you only have 4 Surges to start a session)
3rd Level: Move one power down on the list and replace it with another - usually move an Encounter power down to At-Will and add a new Encounter power
4th Level: 2 Encounter powers, 1 Utility and 1 Daily
5th Level: 2 Encounter powers, 1 Utility and 2 Daily
6th Level: the character automatically gets a "Prestige Class", and gets the new abilities from that class

And so on...I haven't gone past level 6, but you hopefully get the idea.

In playtesting so far, this sytem has led to much faster-paced D&D games with a lot more happening. I also really enjoy having social powers, particularly in Cornelius' case, so that a player-character can kick ass between fight scenes. Who enjoys being schooled by the local magic item salesmen at level 10? If one character can kill dragons, another should at least be able to win arguments...

How I Made D&D Cooler Part 1: The Basics

In planning to run my current D&D game, I had a few things in mind.

1. I didn't want to spend more time preparing for the game than playing the game in a given week.

2. I didn't want to spend multiple sessions teaching the players how to play their characters effectively.

3. I didn't want to use a battle mat or miniatures, but wanted action to flow quickly while still retaining some tactical detail.

4. I wanted there to be special abilities for things aside from combat, like movement and social interactions and information-finding (much like we've working into Heroes of Karia Vitalus)

In achieving what amount to game-design goals working with the skeleton of D&D, I decided to do a few general things and then work each until the details became clear. The first and most complicated of these was simplification - taking the rules and simplifying them, tossing out the necessity of a battle mat and miniatures, and boiling down the hundred-thousand variations on the rules into a few general principles.

The second, easier process was diversification- taking what I'd simplified down and working on it so that it represented what each of the players wanted to play and do with their characters.

Here's what I mean.

Simplification
The first think I decided was that there would be two kinds of abilities: trained and untrained. Trained abilities would be level + attribute modifier + other modifiers, +10 is it was a passive ability and + d20 if it was an active ability. Untrained abilities would be 1/2 level, but the rest would be the same. This counts for spells, saves, defenses, attack rolls, skills, everything.

I dropped Armor Class entirely and just used Reflex Defense in its place, adding 1 for a small shield and 2 for a large shield, and factoring in armor penalties from the 4th Edition PHB. The effect armor would have would be to reduce all incoming damage in the amount of 1/2 the armor's listed AC bonus + any magic modifier.

I wanted to add character level to all damage rolls as well - I've found that in 4th Edition in particular, but in any high-level D&D, characters and monsters can pound on each other for hours while they whittle down Hit Points with no discernible in-game effect.

Healing Surges became just Surges, and they were melded with Action Points (allowing adding 1d6 to a d20 roll). I also added an indie game twist stolen from Mouse Guard - you can spend a Surge to succeed with some kind of consequence chosen by the GM. I've gotten a lot of fun and mileage from this already, and like the rule a lot.

I kept At-will, Encounter, Utility and Daily powers from D&D 4E but changed what they meant. At-will powers cost nothing, and include skills, basic weapon attacks and some basic feats. Encounter powers cost 1 Surge to activate and include basic spells, class or racial abilities, second-tier feats (with one pre-requisite, say). Utility powers require 2 Surges to activate and include a lot of movement, social and information-gathering abilities, as well as abilities related to traveling more quickly than usual. Daily powers cost 3 Surges to activate and represent more advanced spells, feats with many pre-requisites, and other powerful abilities.

For abilities I just made up, I used as a rule of thumb 2d6 damage for an Encounter ability and 3d6 for a Daily ability, though I might change this so that it is higher.

Characters start a session with level + 2 Surges and can earn further Surges from the DM by doing interesting things in-game.

I decided to give spells attack rolls like in 4E against the appropriate defense. I also split melee and missile proficiency, since I liked the idea that some classes would be better in one or the other. Fighters, Rangers and Rogues are trained in both melee and missile. Barbarians, Clerics, Druids, Paladins and Monks are trained only in melee. I made it so that Bards could choose to be trained in either melee or missile, but not both, and Sorcerers and Wizards are untrained in both. I also added spellcasting as a trained or untrained ability, to represent pure casters and hybrid casters. Paladins and Rangers are untrained but can still cast spells. As usual, Barbarians, Fighters and Rogues cannot cast spells at all. Bards, Clerics, Druids, Sorcerers and Wizards are trained of course. This means that Paladins and Rangers will be able to use support abilities, but won't be able to make attacks with pure spellcasting most of the time except against weak opponents - this made sense to me.

I gave each character a healing rate (or "stitch" rate for the one undead PC) that is equal to their level + Constitution modifier. This is the amount they heal when they take a "second wind" (which costs 1 Surge) in combat or when they have a night's rest. They heal double that amount when they have a full-day's rest (which of course never happens in D&D). Healing spells like Cure Moderate Wounds use this system - Cure Moderate Wounds heals 2x a character's healing rate + any bonuses the character has to healing spells.

I kept the Bloodied condition because I like the idea, and decided that similar to Vitality and Wounds from Unearthed Arcana 3E, when you became Bloodied you would be Fatigued or, if already Fatigued, Exhausted, until you received some kind of healing (even if it doesn't bring you back up over Bloodied).

Diversification
In this particular game, I had a few unusual characters (which is part of what I enjoy). One of them is an intelligent Ghoul. Another is a Ogre Barbarian, and a third is a Human Bard who has a number of social powers but none that are really useful in combat (the kiss of death in most D&D games).

I also had some more "normal" characters like a Halfling mage-thief, an Orc Cleric and a Human Necromancer. These were a lot closer to what you find in the various books and supplements, and were relatively easy to come up with.

The most interesting for me was the Ghoul, and I think that'll be my first example in this series. Her name is "Mr. Scram" (I'm not sure why this female Ghoul is a "Mr" but oh well) and she is actually the Human Necromancer's mother - he raised her out of loneliness but she turned out to be more intelligent and willful than he wanted, and now nags him from beyond the grave.

I decided that the Ghoul would be like a zombie from Dawn of the Dead or 28 Days Later, fast and grabby and bitey and really hard to bring down. It didn't make sense that she'd wear armor, so I gave her d12 hit dice and a high Cconstitution as well as a trained Fortitude defense and melee attack. I made her claws and infectious bite (3E MM) At-will powers, along with trained Endurance, Intimidation and Stealth. Her Encounter power has been her Paralyzing Stench (3E MM again). Her Utility power is Creep, which I invented. Basically, it lets her crawl along walls and ceilings in a freakish way like critters do in horror movies. Her Daily powers are Devour Flesh, which I invented (she eats living flesh and heals 3 "stitches" as well as cancelling ongoing negative effects) and Bilious Blood, also made up for her (when hit for an encounter, she deals 5 acid damage to her attacker).

Conclusion for Now
This is definitely a way of running D&D that is a lot of fun (more fun than "real" D&D as far as I am concerned, and the players seem to feel similarly) but I couldn't actually write up in a book or something. This is very much my project achieving my design goals - the best thing these posts can be is a sort of rough blueprint for other people whose friends want to play D&D but who don't like how much D&D bogs you down.

Next up: Using the Ghoul as an example character and looking at some more details.

What's Cool About D&D?

I've been running a D&D game for a couple of sessions now. About half of the players requested D&D, but honestly I think that D&D is too much damn work to teach and prepare for when dealing with relatively new players. I pictured session after session of pawing through the books and looking at power cards (if I dropped the cash to buy them that is, or printed them or whatever) and for a game that'll only span a half-dozen sessions, that was an apalling thought.

So what I did is I tried to boil D&D down to what I like about it, a simple enough system to teach quickly and easily, mixing what I liked about 3.x and 4e with some of my own additions. Frankly, I think this game might ruin some of the players on D&D forever, because in a session we get through a lot more play than is usual in D&D - and we don't need to use a battle mat or miniatures.

I want to talk about what I've been doing for this game, in case anyone else wants most of the coolness of D&D with about 30% of the work. To begin, I want to think about what is cool about D&D, at least to me, that I had in mind when I designed my hack/drift. When thinking about this coolness, I have in mind my own experiences playing D&D, AD&D, D&D 3e, D&D 3.5, D&D 4e, and any number of computer RPGs based on D&D since VGA graphics were cutting-edge.


What's cool about the Races?

I don't think much has to be said here. We all have, firmly implanted in our minds by any number of "high fantasy" games and books and movies out there, what the stereotypical races are like. The alcoholic Dwarf; the aloof Elf; the semi-trickster Halfling. And so on.



What's cool about the Classes?

I think 4e had a number of chances to get this right, and they did sporadically. I'm going to stick to the 'classic' 3.5 classes for this, though, looking at what I like. I also mention pitfalls I've seen over and over again associated with each class - what players do with them that, frankly, sucks.

What's cool about the Barbarian is being an angry heavy-hitter, crashing your way through foes, almost impossible to bring down even though you're peppered with arrows. Its also fun to be the primal character from the wilds, scowling at the comforts of civilization.

Barbarian pitfall: Some players take the "Rage" ability as their sole roleplaying hint, and that can get pretty damn tedious.

The Bard is cool, when the Bard is cool, for being a support class. The Bard makes others more powerful. The Bard has always been the most versatile class - some spell abilities from divine and some from arcane casters, some musical abilities, a few Rogue skills thrown in. Lastly, on the rare occasional when social skills matter, the Bard is king (or queen).

Bard pitfall: Players who sing everything and act like douches. Also, with the Bard, its hard not to end up as the guy who does everything, but doesn't do anything better than the other PCs.

The Cleric has always been cool for the powergamer. Clerics have always been overpowered, and every group needs one. Clerics lay the smackdown on undead and are basically impossible to kill.

Cleric pitfall: Like I said, the Cleric has always been overpowered. 4e tried to solve this by making the Cleric uninteresting, and this was not quite a win I'm afraid. Its also sort of hard to justify the highest experssion of a religion being plate armor and a blood-stained mace.

A Druid is cool by being the caster version of the Barbarian - the interloper from the wilds, but this time with more teeth. The Druid is a ferocious act of nature, and very versatile with shapechanging, spellcasting, and their animal companion.

Druid pitfall: The Druid has a similar pitfall to the Cleric, though some restrictions on their armor and weaponry help. Druid players also often end up having their characters never set foot in a city, meaning they are pouting whenever the party goes to the city to do the usual tavern-wenching-and-buying-stuff.

Ok, the Fighter's claim to cool is easy. The Fighter is the indomidable force on the battlefield. It is cool to play a fighter, to have an opponent throw everything he has at you, and when the smoke clears, you're still standing.

Fighter pitfall: the Fighter is often the new player's starter character, named Fi-tor or something (with thanks to Fear the Boot), who sulks in the corner until there's a fight, then stomps around and makes basic attacks.

If you can't see how the Monk is cool, you're a lost cause. If Jet Li and Jackie Chan and Michelle Yeoh are cool, then the Monk is cool. It is cool to leap across the room and plant your foot in someone's face. It is cool to slip unarmored and untouched through the battlefield.

Monk pitfall: often, monks haven't kicked enough ass. I've played plenty of Monks who just didn't stand up in combat. They have other cool skills, but also tend to have low hit points, since they need Strength, Dexterity and Wisdom to get by. We'll see if 4e fixes this.

Ah, holy Paladin. The Paladin is cool for kicking the asses of evil critters everywhere. It matches with ides of the mounted chivalric hero. But there's a big pitfall to go with that.

Paladin pitfall: a lot of players play Paladins as complete self-righteous douchebags. I think we have "classic" D&D to blame for this, with the Lawful Good restriction, but honestly, I think that the Paladin just attracts dick players. Just my experience.

The Ranger is cool on the trail of his quarry, hunting something down and filling it with arrows, then finishing it off with some two-weapon work. For some reason, I think of Last of the Mohicans when I think of the Ranger.

Ranger pitfall: I'm not sure there is one. The Ranger is what it is.

In many ways, the Rogue exudes cool. Slick, invisible, agile, and deadly. Good times.

Rogue pitfall: there's something about the Rogue that encourages players to steal from other player-characters. That is aggravating as fuck. Stop it.

Sorcerers are cool as an alternative to Wizards for people who don't want quite as much book-keeping but who still want the fun of the arcane-casting powerhouse.

Sorcerer pitfall: again, not sure there is one here. Most Sorcerer-types I've seen played are pretty cool.

Wizards are cool - they got game like Gandalf. I think that, generally speaking, D&D's magic system has always been apallingly bad, but given that, the Wizard is the geek of high fantasy.

Wizard pitfall: page-leafing. The book-keeping for a Wizard player is astronomical, and you really need to be the kind of person who likes that. To me, t hat's what makes the Sorcerer so key.


What's cool about the Magic?

If you can shut down your frontal cortex and accept D&D magic overall, the only real cool thing about it is that it is like a toolbox. It doesn't require much creativity or invention at all - you look at the spell lists like a menu and pick what looks cool to you.

In my experience, this means that 90% of the spell lists in even the basic PHB are never touched. 4e has addressed this to some degree...by cutting 90% of the spells and then expanding iterations of the ones that were left.



What's cool about the System?

The best the system does is when you treat it like a miniatures wargame. If you like sliding around a checkered map, D&D is obviously the game for you. If you want to do anything else, you need to drift the rules - in 3e drift a little, in 4e drift a lot. You can check out my other posts on this topic to get more of my views.

For a roleplaying game, you will probably spend the most time in D&D doing things you don't want to do, or checking out because it isn't your turnin combat. My last session, there were three conversations going on and two players were playing with a dog during the big combat finale. This is not changed at all in 4e - at last not in the first half-dozen sessions or so.

What I like about the rules is the places where it attempts to simulate, in detail, combat situations. It does so, and has always done so, inelegantly and with dizzying complexity of jargon and rules, but I respect the attempt.


So, that's that. What do you think is cool about D&D?

Next up, what I did to change it, and why.

D&D 4th Edition: from Healing Surges to simply Surges

I think that healing surges in D&D 4th Edition are too limited as they are written. Putting my thoughts about having them overall aside (which I talked about in a previous post) if we must have them, I wish they did more. Part of this is from my experience of running D&D 4th Edition where all of the characters ended the action-packed session with most of their healing surges unspent - except for the defender, who had used all but 4 of his. I also like fiddling with systems to make them more fun for me to play and run.

It is implied that a healing surge represents a bit of extra effort - one recommendation in the DMG is that you have failed skill challenges in the wild cost healing surges, representing the party getting banged up and having to spend some of their reserves recovering. I'd like to go further, however, and shoe-horn in a but of the Action Points of the previous edition. I like systems that give the players a way to give one roll more "weight" than another - a way to say "as a player, I want this roll to be more likely to succeed, or to e more baddass if it does succeed". This gives players some say in creating drama when they want it, even in a traditional game like D&D where the DM comes with a bag-full of "story" which is unloaded on the players, who function as a participatory audience.

So, instead of healing surges, let's just call them "surges" - they could be surges of adrenaline, or surges of inspiration, or surges of willpower, or whatever. You get the same number of them per day as is listed for healing surges in the PHB, but there's more you can do with them. What a surge represents is extra oomph, extra effort, loaded into an action. In combat, these surges can be used to catch a second wind just as written. Some powers require that they be spent or lost in order for the character to benefit from them. All that remains the same as written for healing surges.

In addition, (1) you can spend a surge to add a d6 to any d20 roll you make. You have to choose before you make the roll, but it can give you just the little edge you need. (2) You can also spend a surge to add one die to a damage roll of the same type you're rolling anyway - just like the first use, this is a little extra oomph, and you can spend this surge after you know whether the attack roll succeeds or not. Lastly, (3) you can spend a surge to "fail forward". If you fail a roll that means catastrophe for your character, you can spend the surge and move the bad news one step back. Instead of dead, your character is unconscious from damage. Instead of in a horrible spot, your character is dangling by their fingertips. The requirement here is that your character must require outside assistance to get out of their predicament. This solves the problem of succeed-or-die skill rolls, and also pulls at least one other player-character into the fun you're having...

Green Ronin Rejects D&D 4th Edition

Apparently, Green Ronin has decided to follow in the footsteps of Paizo Publishing in rejecting 4th Edition D&D for their product lines. I had a feeling this might happen, having gone over the new GSL and reading responses to it. It looks like it is a less open liscence than 3rd Edition was, and I understand publishers not wanting to follow Wizards of the Coast into 4th Edition territory.

It's unfortunate, though. I like a lot of what Green Ronin does, and I was interested to see what they'd come up with for the 4th Edition rules set. The good thing is that Green Ronin will keep on publishing as they have been, and for those D&D fans who still prefer 3/3.5, there'll be plenty of quality content and support for years to come.

D&D Insider - WTF?

D&D Insider was supposed to go live when 4th Edition dropped - but its still "Coming Soon" according to their website. I have to wonder what the hell is taking so long? I mean, I wasn't excited to learn about the deaths of Dungeon and Dragon, to be replaced with a WoW-style online subscription model, but WotC seemed to be excited. And now they've just fostering frustrated fans one day at a time.

The lack of D&D Insider also means that organized play isn't happening in 4th Edition - no Living Forgotten Realms yet, and no Dungeon Delves. What this means for the game store I work for is that we've needing to designing our own Delves, and our organized play just...isn't happening yet.

In case you're having a similar problem, or are just interested, we're going to be posting about our Delve scenarios that we come up with. They sound pretty interesting so far - one is based on demonstrating how easy it is to make D&D 4th Edition look exactly like WoW, with a Delve based around the Scarlet Monastery using characters based on our WoW characters. Another is going to be based on Godzilla, with the Tarrasque attacking Sharn. I've come up with one that just uses the 4th Edition D&D minis that you get in the new starter set. We're trying to base them around groups of all sizes and all classes and levels, and to give them all interesting hooks.

There'll be more on what we come up with as we flesh them out.

In the meantime - WotC, get off your ass and have D&D Insider go live. After all that fanfare at last year's GenCon, you've got nothing? Really?

4th Edition D&D - Warlocks and Wizards

Last night, running my little 4th Edition D&D game, I noticed something that I had suspected would be the case. The Warlock blew through all of her Encounter powers and never made a single successful attack. Part of this was because the encounter was scaled to test how much the PCs could handle, but the fact is that the attack bonus for Warlocks and Wizards (and Clerics as well) is 2 or 3 points lower than those for Fighters, Paladins, Rogues and so on.

The reason for this is that classes using a missile or melee weapon get a proficiency bonus with the weapon in question, either 2 or 3, added to their attack values, whereas the 'pure casters' do not.

This means that for melee/missile classes, their attack value is around: Ability modifier + 1/2 level + proficiency modifier,

Whereas the casters only get: Ability modifier + 1/2 level.

If your game is low-level, without many magic items, then that proficiency bonus is going to be a huge difference. In this case, it meant the Range hitting all the time and the Warlock only hitting once, with her Daily spell.

So, I instituted another house rule. Warlocks get a proficiency bonus of +2 for using either the wand or rod that they have as their arcane implement, and Wizards get the same proficiency bonus for whichever implement they choose to focus on as well. I realize that the Wizard's AoE spells especially can be quite powerful, but they also have fewer hit points and less armor, and making it so that they hit significantly less often as well just takes a lot of the fun out of the game in my opinion.

So, in theory, the next session should be a lot more exciting for the Warlock, and I imagine the Wizard will also be a lot happier.

4th Edition D&D - Milestones - House Rule

I think I found a way to adapt my ideas about alignment - be devouring and co-opting the 4th Edition milestone rule. I want to steal the Milestone idea, and make it a lot more meaningful.

In the current rules as written, your character reaches a Milestone when she has completed two encounters without taking an extended rest. When you reach a milestone, you receive an Action Point, which can be spent to take an extra action in an encounter or to activate some Feats or Paragon powers. Essentially, the system is rewarding you for not resting after every encounter, the classic tactic from 3.5. I think this is frankly sort of unnecessary.

Now, when I think "Milestone", I think of some kind of important stage in someone's development. A Milestone is something like graduation or marriage or the birth of your first child - not room #2 in a dungeon delve.

I think that, once a player has defined her character's Alignment, she should then define four Milestones that are related to that Alignment. Her Action Point pool is equal to the number of Milestones she has achieved. These Milestones should be ranked in order of difficulty or importance, so that each successive one is a greater challenge than the past.

A Milestone should probably be some kind of really important decision or challenge that the Alignment will force on the character.

I need to give this more thought, but I like the germ of the idea.

D&D 4th Edition - Character Creation + Hacks

I recently sat down with my home group to create some characters for 4th Edition D&D. I've got a wide range of players, from those who are really interested in rules and systems and even number-crunching once in a while, to players like my lovely wife who couldn't care less about system and has fun playing off the top of her head and improvising. She'll take notes on the setting, draw maps and little pictures of what is going on, write down NPC names, but mostly ignore her character sheet.

Considering this, I thought that just sitting down with the very detailed D&D character sheets for number-crunching wouldn't work so well, so I came up with a worksheet for character creation. It basically lists all of the big decisions you have to make as a player creating a character, and using it I can do the number-crunching for my two players who just won't have fun doing it themselves. (In case you couldn't tell, I'm on the end of the spectrum that is excited about systems and I don't mind having an excuse to create more characters.

The worksheet had a very simple layout (I suck at layout something fierce) and had the following prompts on it with lines after them (italics mark house rule elements):

Character workseet for

Who will be playing

Ability scores

Alignment: As mentioned before, I'm looking at ways to rework alignment so that it...doesn't completely suck, or at least cease to actively hinder good roleplaying

Character race

Character keywords: I wanted players to choose keywords from their racial description or class description, or just come up with them. I had three blanks for these, and got things like Determined, Terse, Pragmatic - good stuff

Character class
Class subtype
Role

At-will abilities chosen

Encounter abilities chosen

Daily ability chosen

Trained skills

Feats

Equipment

Monthly upkeep: I don't love dealing with detailed equipment, so I lumped food, ammunition, shelter or tents, camping gear and an adventurer's kit into a lump monthly sum that represents how well you've living. The levers were Squalor 20gp, Poor 30gp, Relative Comfort 50gp (the most popular choice), Easy Life 100gp, and High Roller 500gp (pun intended). If these totals seem high, I came up with them using the PhB equipment section to estimate what you'd go through in a month of semi-active adventuring, and added in the fact that adventurers sleep in inns a lot and don't cook much for themselves, which is a really expensive way to live.

Armor and shields
Weapons
Adventuring gear

Informational Contacts: I had the players come up with one informational contact, an NPC who would be in the game, for every point of Intelligence bonus they had. I just used this as a way to help me produce NPCs for what was a custom setting

Family/Mentor Contacts: for each point of Wisdom modifier, I had the player choose one family or mentor contact. Not sure why I keyed this to Wisdom - it just seemed to make sense. Wise people are probably on good terms with family and keep up helpful relationships with teachers...I guess

Social Contacts: obviously, this was one for every point of Charisma bonus they player-character had. I also encouraged them players to choose the same contacts so that they would have connections starting off. For each extra PC who had the same contact, the contact basically become twice as useful.

Starting Situation: We brainstormed the situation together. Thank God the players were motivated to do this. It could've been a disaster, but I wanted them to feel like they were participating, like they had ownership of the game overall, and weren't just being fed it.

Starting Setting: the setting brainstorming session was awesome. I think our setting is cool. It is basically a large and once-powerful island colony 99 years after a huge tsunami wiped out most of the main city. The survivors are now cut off from the empire that founded them. The island is a huge volcanic caldera millions of years old - the interior of the caldera is entirely uncharted, and much of it lies in the Feywild. The main city, Good Hope (going for a South African theme of sorts) has a large Tiefling population and a large Halfling population - Halflings were brought in by the drove as indentured servants to work in the colony, and have since liberated themselves and now control most of the agriculture on the island.

Color: this didn't happen, but I wanted some key words or terms from teh players about what kind of setting they wanted this to be. I got some color during the other brainstorming sessions, though, so I think it'll be something they're interested in. We'll see.

D&D 4th Edition, 3.5, 3 etc. - Alignment House Rule

I've been thinking about alignment and how to 'fix' it so that it is something that I want to bother putting in my game. I've already talked about D&D alignment in the past a few times, and have laid out the problems with its various iterations.

I came up with a fix, while hanging out with Aric at work today (another author on this blog), and I kind of like it. I want to see how it works in an actual D&D game, because I'll be damned if I'm using the alignment 'system' that 4th Edition has in place. In order to use this alignment system, I end up changing alignment to feed into an action-point mechanic. (As I imagine how this works, the closest thing I can come up with is Burning Wheel's Artha mechanic. I'm also thinking about H. Richard Niebuhr, as it turns out.)

What goes in the alignment slot on your character is what I'll call your "center of value". That is, it is what your character values most. This should be relatively abstract, so that it can be interpreted a few different ways during the game. Some examples we came up with could be "Personal Gain" or "My Code of Honor" or "Peace Between my People and X Neighbor".

You will regenerate action points when this center of value, this alignment, is threatened in some way in the game. What this does is it rewards the players for putting their characters into situations where their center of value is threatened. This also provides the DM with a source of ideas of ways to push the characters and challenge them in dramatic ways.

Now, once your alignment is set, you have three more things to write down.

1. The first thing to write down is a specific goal that is related to your alignment. This has to be something achieveable in-game, and the DM and other players have to agree to it, because you're obviously not going after these goals alone.
2. The second thing to write down is one important thing you are willing to sacrifice for the sake of your alignment.
3. The third thing two write down is one thing you are not willing to sacrifice or compromise for the sake of your alignment.

When you achieve the first goal, you add one to your action point pool, meaning you can have more than one action point saved at any given time.

When you face an opportunity to make the sacrifice you wrote down, you increase your total pool of action points.

When you betray something important for the sake of your alignment

So, here's an example.

Alignment: "Personal Gain"
Whenever this character sacrifices their personal gain for the sake of something else, they get an action point. So, if they donate their money to a village so it can buy medicine to halt a plague, that is worth an action point.

1. "I will become the most renowned rogue in the city."
When you become the most renowned rogue in the city, you increase your action point pool.

2. "I am willing to sacrifice my family's good name for the sake of personal gain."
When you have destroyed your family's good name for the sake of personal gain, you increase your action point total by one.

3. "I am not willing to betray loyal allies for the sake of personal gain."
This one will work whether you betray a loyal ally or not. If you betray the ally, then you increase your action point total. If you decide at the last moment to remain true to your ally and suffer the consequences, you also increase your action point total by one.

Without talking about these ideas in game-jargon - what the intent behind this is to reward players for doing cool things in game, for causing their characters trouble, for making the DM's job easier, and for keeping foremost in their minds what it is that their characters value most, what it is that drives them to be adventurers rather than shepherds or cobblers.

Right now this not a final idea. I might come up with better things to put beneath alignment. Maybe one thing at a time would be better. One important aspect of this house rule is that the players and DM come up with these as a group when you are designing character concepts. This way, your alignments will fit together well and will hopefully feed off of each other in dramatic ways.

I also want to have the option of "Unaligned", meaning you don't have strong values and are sort of easygoing and blow with the wind. This will mean that you won't regenerate action points at all, but I should add some kind of mechanic which will enable the Unaligned character to have action points as well.

As I said, this alignment hack needs some more thought.

4th Edition D&D - On the Offense of Omitting Gnomes

One of the announcements prior to the launch of 4e which generated the most uproar was the announcement that they would be leaving Gnomes out of the PHB and putting them in the Monster Manual instead. While there are plenty of people who are either indifferent or actively despise the Gnome there are also people who are passionate Gnome-lovers. Regardless of where you stand the Gnome has been with the game for a long time and many folks (including me) were more than a tad miffed to hear that the Gnome had been replaced by the laughable upstart races of Eladrin, Dragonborn (WTF!), and Tiefling.

While I still think this was a lame move, the edge of my complaint has been substantially blunted by the inclusion at the back of the Monster Manual of the four best pages in the whole damn core rulebook set - a variety of "monsters" done up in brief format as playable character races eliminating the loathsome Level Adjustment typical of such hacks in 3e. Since the flavor text in the PHB is such crap anyway (play an elf if you want to sling gobs of arrows!) these mini stat blocks are basically the exact same content as the official player character races in the PHB. In other words - play a Gnome if you bloody want to (I intend to!).

In fact, I actually like how they've done Gnomes in this edition. Previous editions of Gnomes always had a variety of silly little powers that basically never came up in gameplay and served almost no purpose. Remember how 3e had a hard time figuring out which class Gnomes should favor (illusionist? That's not even a class!). Basically Gnomes were suffering from an identity crisis. This is not true at all in 4e where Gnomes are sneaky little buggers with an awesome flavorful power "Fade Away" which allows them to become invisible if they ever take damage. It's a delicious little power that would compliment a Fey Pact Warlock very well. With a plethora of ways to be concealed or invisible, to teleport and to blind targets such a character would be all kinds of broken. Enjoy the expression of disappointment on your DM's face when he realizes he can't find or hit your character with any of his monsters!

Frankly, I hope 4e continues the trend established by those 4 delicious little pages and releases a slew of playable races in such a simple intuitive format. Since WoTC has clearly abandoned any attempt to provide deep and interesting fluff we can just embrace the fluid mechanics and make up our own fluff to cover the deficiencies. Gnomes are back baby!

4th Edition D&D vs. 4th Edition GURPS

It had to happen - a comparison between the 4th Editions of two major gaming systems. GURPS is not as big as D&D, of course, because no RPG is, but it is up there among the main systems that one would think of if asked to list some off the top of their head.

GURPS 4th came out a few years ago of course, and it is only coincidence that D&D, an older game, is also in its 4th edition at the moment. Still, I thought a comparison could be interesting. Rather than compare the games to each other (since they are different games in a lot of ways), I thought I might compare them to their predecessors.

Continuity

GURPS is one system that has a strong identity and hasn't changed radically in any of its editions. Point-based character creation, long lists of skills that represent task resolution, Advantages and Disadvantages, variable Magic system, lots of customizeability, etc. 4th Edition GURPS has a lot in common with 3rd Edition. It keeps all of the tropes of the previous editions and, in general, improvees on them or simplifies them slightly.

D&D, in contrast, underwent a big change with 3rd Edition, and in my opinion an even larger change in 4th Edition. Monks, Druids and Bards, who have been with D&D from the beginning, are no longer found in the core rulebooks. Gnomes are now monsters, and Eladrin, Dragonborn and Tieflings have been added to the core race list where they have never been found before. Rules changes are more significant than even 3rd Edition compared to AD&D 2nd Edition, in my opinion. In some cases these are simplifications or improvements, and in other cases I think the step was a step backwards.

Rules Changes

As mentioned above, the rules changes in GURPS 4th Edition were basically improvements on the previous rules set. Costs of some Attributes and Skills are changed and more templates are available in the basic books. Defenses are simplified slightly. Really, its the same game, overhauled.

D&D has changed a lot with the 4th Edition. Races, Classes, Skills, levels and leveling, class abilities, magic items, entries in the MM, encounter-building, fixed Fort, Reflex and Will defenses, 50/50 saving throws...this is not just building on 3rd Edition, this is a different game in many significant ways.

Production Values

Both 4th Editions were marked improvements on previous editions in terms of production values. The 4th Edition D&D core rulebooks are beautiful with better art and better layouts. They have better covers with glossy and matte surfaces. The use things like color-coding to help cue what abilities are and how they function, and their layout is a bit more logical than it has been in the past. There is also an improvement in the writing style and quality in some cases. 4th Edition GURPS also uses color coding, as well as little visual icons marking various types of Advantage or Disadvantage.

Overall, production values for the new D&D books are higher than everything out right now except for the new White Wolf Clanbooks, which are freakishly beautiful and well-done. But you really can't compete with White Wolf when it comes to production values and sheer beauty of their books. GURPS production values are much higher than 3rd Edition, but you can't expect Steve Jackson Games to keep up with Hasbro.

My Reactions

My first reaction when I read through the new GURPS 4th Edition books was "Wow, they improved everything and added almost everything I had as a house rule." I really liked the books. They took what GURPS does well and they did it better. I bought the two main books and the Fantasy book outright even knowing that my current group doesn't even like GURPS. I read them all and enjoyed them.

My first reaction to the new 4th Edition D&D books improved as I moved from the PhB to the DMG and finally to the MM. I thought "these are beautiful books that contain a different game from 3rd Edition rather than an improvement." The PhB hit me as a superbly-presented sideways move. They got rid of some good things and added some bad things, and vise-versa. The DMG went over a little better - actually, its the one I've read the least at this point, but I thought "Ok, this is a very good DMG; better than the last ones." The MM I really enjoyed. I liked the thoughtful and interesting re-builds of all of the creatures I've read so far, the new more efficient layout, the new art, and the racial stats in the back for all of the creatures I could think of wanting to play as a PC.

Conclusion

GURPS and D&D are very different games which have made very different moves with their 4th Edition offerings. GURPS takes the past and improves on it across the board. D&D takes the skeleton of 3rd Edition and builds what is essentially a new game. I'm pretty sure I like the new game a little better than I did 3.5, but it isn't an overwhelming conversion. I'm still running a 3.5/Pathfinder module for Free RPG Day, and I really like what Paizo is putting out for 3.5. As for GURPS, on the other hand, there's no reason whatsoever to keep using 3rd Edition unless you're too broke to buy 4th Edition.

4th Edition D&D - Holy Typos, Batman!

I've noticed a massive number of typos in the Monster Manual for the ability scores of the creatures listed. Ogres are a great example - a +2 bonus for an Intelligence of 4? +14 for a Strength of 23? These errors are all over the place in multiple entries, almost to the point where the mistakes are the rule rather than the other way around.

I'm sure they'll post corrections to D&D Insider once it is up and running, but wow, those are a lot of mistakes.

4th Edition D&D - Reivews - Kobolds

Like Goblins, Kobolds have been reworked in the 4th Edition Monster Manual, and I really like the change.

Kobolds

Like Goblins, Kobolds can also shift 1 square with a minor action at will. Kobold Skirmishers and Kobold Dragonshields have an extra ability called Mob Attack. What Mob Attack means is that these Kobolds get a +1 to all attacks for every Kobold that is adjacent to the target they are attacking. You can easily see how this will be bad news for a race that loves to set traps and then swarm all over you in large numbers.

But there's more. There is the Kobold Slinger who has his special shot. He can hit you with a Stinkpot, which deals damage and and imposes a -2 penalty to attack rolls until you make your save. He can also hit you with a Firepot, which deals damage and then deals a little bit of ongoing fire damage until you make a save. Lastly, there is the Gluepot, which immobilizes you.

So here's how this goes. First, at range, a bunch of slingers sling you, so that you are potentially at -2, on fire, or immobilized. Preferably, all three. Then, you are swarmed by Kobolds who are getting bonuses for every other Kobold near you. This swarming means that your Wizard or other Controller will have a lot of trouble clearing out Minions with blasts of arcane energy.

While being swarmed, you are still being attacked by the Slingers, who continue to shift to better positions and rain down stink, fire and glue for the duration of the battle.

You'd better hope there is no Kobold Wyrmpriest with them, because as an encounter power which is a minor action, he can Incite Faith, granting all Kobold allies within a close burst of 10 5 temporary hit points and letting them all shift one square as an immediate action.

Covered in poo, on fire, glued to the floor, and swarmed by shifty Kobolds who get stronger the more of them there are fighting you. Sounds like quite the way to die.

4th Edition D&D - Reviews - Goblins

These reviews are just going in whatever order interests me. If there's something else anyone wants to talk about, lemme know in the comments.

Goblins and Kobolds are two of the quintessential races for low-level PCs to pound on in D&D. Both races have been reworked in the 4th Edition Monster Manual, which I think is the best of the three core books by a significant margin.

Goblins

The entry for Goblins includes Bugbears and Hobgoblins. Bugbears have kind of a brutish, thug appeal. The Bugbear Warrior has the Skullthumper encounter ability which enables him to knock you flat and daze you until you can make a save. The Bugbear Strangler has the Strangle at-will ability that is basically a high-bonus grab followed by an ongoing 1d10+4 damage until the target overcomes its -4 penalty and breaks the hold. Bad news, and fun twists on the biggest Goblinoid.

The Hobgoblin has the usual soldier feel, with phalanx-fighting and formation-fighting abilities to use when fighting in military units. They also have Hobgoblin Resilience, which allows them to roll an immediate save against an effect that allows saves once per encounter.

The Goblins, however, have the scariest combination in my opinion. All Goblins have Goblin Tactics, which is an at-will immediate reaction to being missed by a melee attack. When missed, they can shift 1 square. Big deal, right? But incomes the Goblin Hexer, who has Incite Bravery. This allows the Hexer, as an immediate reaction, at will, to shift a Goblin ally another 2 squares whenever it uses Goblin Tactics. The shift is followed by an immediate attack.

So if there is a Goblin Hexer in your combat, every time you miss one of the Goblins within 10 squares of him, that Goblin can immediately shift 3 squares and make an attack. Goblin ACs are between 15 and about 17, so that means at 1st or 2nd or even maybe 3rd level, you'll miss a given Goblin 1/2 the time. So half of the Goblins you're facing get to shift an extra 3 squares and attack you.

That sounds like a lot of fun - for the Goblins.

Oh, did I mention that the Hexer can also Blind you with an at-will power that also deals damage? Because he can do that too.

Coming next - Kobolds!

4th Edition D&D - Reviews - Alignment

Alignment is one of those things that I've thought of as broken for a long time. I've talked about it before, though the thinking didn't really go anywhere at the time. The best use of it alignment, to me at least, was in the original Dragonlance setting (and it still left something to be desired). That is one setting that left a mark on me in my formative gaming years during early adolescence, and it made alignment overt through two basic means - the Towers of High Sorcery and the Holy Orders of the Stars.

In the original AD&D campaign guide for Dragonlance, the one with Tanis on the cover having just killed the Dragon Highlord and taken his crown, there was actually a sort of chart that the DM was to use to track alignment changes. At the left-hand side was Good and on the right-hand side was Evil, with Neutral in the middle. Between each range was a grey "Transition" area. Each major act a PC committed would either keep them where they are or move them in one direction or another. When in the Transition area, the DM was supposed to give hints that they were slipping - toward a fall, or perhaps redemption.

The reason this mattered was that for Wizards and Clerics, alignment was key. Wizards had three orders, one committed to Good, one to Neutral, and one to Evil. The gods of Krynn were the same way - Good, Neutral and Evil sub-pantheons. The Krynn setting was all about balance, and Neutral usually functioned to throw its lot in with either of the moral poles when the other one became too powerful to be balanced.

Anyway, to make a long story short, that's as good as I've seen for alignment. Aside from that, players don't take it very seriously, except for the occasional jerk who wants to sandbag your game by playing Chaotic Neutral all the time, or the other kind of jerk who frustrates everyone by playing a Lawful Schmuck Paladin. (It doesn't have to be bad, but it usually is)

In 4th Edition D&D, the alignment system has been pared down to five options - Lawful Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil and Chaotic Evil. Not having their rationale in front of me, my first reaction to this is that it is, how do you say, "stupid". They have turned a weak-but-traditional alignment system into a weaker one that is a break from D&D's past. In fact, it seems to frankly be double-stupid.

No freedom-loving Chaotic Good heroes? No tyrannical Lawful Evil villains? No disciplined Lawful Neutral monks? No Chaotic Neutral lunatics played by obnoxious players? It seems like they have taken a weak system and hamstrung it.

They could have gone with what they have instituted with the Minis game, where there are Good, Unaligned and Evil alignments for each card, and you can't mix Good and Evil in the same army. That's simple, basic, and it makes some kind of sense, and it serves as a counter-point to the faction system they're using, of Civilization, Borderlands, Wild and Underdark.

From their description of the reasons for the change, I get the impression that Good has swallowed up Chaotic Good and Evil has swallowed up Lawful Evil. This just doesn't make sense, however. I like alignment better, if there must be a spectrum, as a double-spectrum of Good-Evil and Law-Chaos. It just has more potential to be descriptive and interesting.

The only good thing about the change is Unaligned. I like that idea, though in play so far, the players of Unaligned characters are basically treating it like Chaotic Neutral used to be - the quintessential alignment for doing random things and pretending that they make sense because they're 'in character'. In theory, however, I like the option of just being someone who doesn't have strong moral commitments either way - unlike True Neutral, which is often depicted as a commitment to balance of some kind.

My proposal:

I think that with this change, I'll feel more inclined to jettison the 'official' take on alignment entirely, and replace it with something else. What I'm thinking of is to have your "alignment" be the thing which is most important to you. Then, once you've said what that most-important thing is, I want to use an indie-game trick and reward you for putting that thing in jeopardy or putting it at risk in some way. That could be the way to earn a little bonus XP maybe, or perhaps the way to earn Action Points (which I've long used as a reward rather than a boring rechargeable point-pool). It is also a good way to find out, in a single word, how you might get the player's and character's attention in the game early on. You know where to start pushing at least, and that's an improvement on the system 4th Edition presents us with.