My thoughts on the paladin 1st-level encounter attack powers.

FireLance

Nualia is an Aasimar who was corrupted by Lamashtu, Mother of Monsters. Her left arm has been turned into a twisted demonic claw.

The encounter with her included a couple wrathspawn (q.v.), and an NPC wizard and fighter.

Ventifus

So the current group for this campaign is about to come to an end due to time and energy constraints on the part of the DM (me). I am hoping to have one to two more sessions (session 12 and 13), but then that leaves the question ...

How to wrap up plots and the group in a limited time when using a very player-driven campaign style?

I could bluntly direct them towards the secret hideout of the bad guys and have an epic fight with everyone they have been searching for ...

I could drop not so subtle hints about where to go and just hope that the party goes there

Else, I could just let the party continue to go as they please (as they have been doing up until now) and just when I need to say "enough we need to stop" have a way/excuse to have the various bad guys come to them wherever they are.


Whatever way I go, I want the players to continue a sense of control (whether they really have control or I am just making them think they have it is irrelevant)... and I also don't want to do anything that seems forced/unnatural since I have made a conscious point of making sure any/all actions on the part of the 'bad guys' fits with their schemes and motivations and knowledge -- they wouldn't do something stupid like attacking the PCs for no reason.

To add in to the mix, I have a player who isn't able to attend, as well as a guest-player to fill out the party due to the one absence. So factoring in a 'clean' way to have one PC not participate and have another PC meet the party and have a reason to stick with them are other things I'll have to work in.

I have told the players to expect one to two more sessions, though in retrospect the way I phrased it has led some people are expecting the next session to be the last one -- which wouldn't be a bad thing either considering my grad school schedule ... So a lot to play by ear to see how fluid/unobtrusive I can make it, but still end on a high note!

What have your "end of campaign AND end of group" sessions been like?

fba827

So, this being my first column for EN World, a quick welcome and introductions are in order.¹ Many of you know me already, either as "Ari Marmell" or as "Mouseferatu." I've been playing D&D since 1983, I've been working as an RPG writer since 2001, I've got a Creative Writing degree from the University of Houston, and I've been haunting these forums since they belonged to Eric Noah. Now, some of you may be asking, "That's all well and good, but what in all that qualifies you to write a monthly column, a type of writing that you've never done before in your life?"

To those folks, I say: "Look! A shiny thing!"

When Morrus first asked me to write this column, I started giving some serious thought to all sorts of topics I might cover, from campaign settings to the impact of fiction on RPGs (and vice-versa) to rules kludges and tweaks. Oh yes, I actually had a veritable list of ideas from which I figured I'd draw my first column.

And then, at the last minute, I decided to attend GenCon again this year.

Ah, GenCon. The chance to experience wonders such as the agonizing pain that comes from being a complete idiot, and only bringing new shoes to wear; or the humiliation of spending the entire first day catching up with friends, professional acquaintances, and employers, only to go back to your room that evening and discover that, at some point since you left the hotel, you've sprouted a whitehead on your left cheek roughly the size of a Brussels sprout.

In any case, I considered putting this off for a month or two, even though it meant the topic wouldn't be as timely, since I thought that starting off a regular column with a relatively negative, rantish installment might not be the best way to make a good first impression. But I decided, what the heck.²

Let's get to it.

Six Years and Counting

I think it's six, anyway. Maybe seven? It's possible my memory used to be better, but if so, I've forgotten when.

The point is, I first attended GenCon the year before it moved to Indianapolis³, and I haven't missed one since. So obviously, I'm a fan of the convention, and I don't want anyone to think that the opinions I'm about to express mean otherwise. I've had fun every year I've gone, I had a blast this year, and I'm hoping to go next year as well.

But it also means that, while I've not been to GenCon nearly as often as some of you, I have been a sufficient number of times⁴ to become aware of certain habits, patterns, and behaviors that really, really need to change.

No, I mean really.

Don't worry, I've no intention of getting into the old stereotypes of "Gamers need to bathe! Haw! Haw!" and "Nobody knows how to meet girls!" I'm not going to sink that low in my first column.⁵ These are other things that drive me batty just a little more each year. So with that understood, I present here:

Ari's Rules of GenCon

Obviously, these rules are just my opinion, and I cannot force anyone to abide by them.

Yet. But just you wait…

Rule 1: Remember Traffic

I don't mean outside on the street. I mean inside.

Do not stop in the middle of the freakin' walkways!

Believe me, I know. One of the whole points of GenCon is to go and marvel at the cool new toys, the minis, the books, the weaponry (both padded and genuine), the jewelry, the artwork, and even the booth babes.⁶ I'll be the last person to deny anyone the opportunity to loiter and gawk. Heck, those are two of my favorite pastimes, and not necessarily in that order. But for Pete's sake, move over to the booth! Or at least take a step or two in that direction! Don't stop in the exact center of the path. Yes, it's crowded and there's not much room to move, but there's some. Take advantage of it.

(This goes triple for stopping in the middle of intersections. If you don't know which way to go, step to the side and then peer around in wide-eyed bewilderment.)

I'm not exaggerating in the slightest—and those of you who have been there know this—when I say that one person stopping in the exact center can cause slowdowns that extend for half a dozen aisles. Seriously, people, I had blisters and severe foot pain throughout most of the convention (as per the aforementioned shoe debacle); lame as I was, I should not have been having to slow down for the rest of the traffic. And while occasionally those delays were caused by amblers, as often as not they were people trying to get around other people who'd stopped cold in order to stare at or take a picture of something.

And vendors? This goes for you as well. If you're standing outside your booth or table flagging down customers or passing out free samples or fliers, do it next to the booth! Don't step halfway out into the walkway; you may get more people to stop, but I can guarantee⁷ you, you're irritating more people than you're attracting.

Rule 2: One Question, One Answer

I attended several seminars and forums in which the speakers opened the floor for questions⁸. And the overwhelming majority of said questioners were just fine. They were at least reasonably polite, and if they weren't crazy about the answer they got, they might ask for further info or clarification, but they didn't kinetically abuse deceased equines.

There were a couple, though, who just seemed unwilling to let it go. If you've asked for product/service/information X, and the speaker has explained that either

A) X is currently in the works, but they don't know when it'll be available, or

B) X is something they'd like to do, but they don't know if it'll ever happen because of reason Y, or

C) They're not going to be doing X for reason Y or Z,

Then please, please don't keep going on about how much you want X, or how much you'd appreciate X, or how much you feel you're owed X, or arguing about why they should be doing X right now.

See, you're not just annoying the speakers when you do this. You're annoying the people around you in the audience, too. You're not "making a point," and you're not looking cool for "standing up" to "the man."⁹ You're just wasting everyone's time, and making the company folks that much more defensive about the next question, which is probably something harmless like, "In this economic climate, what do you think are the ramifications of publishing collector's editions of your books printed on gold foil with condor-skin covers?"

Rule 3: Costume or No Costume

Okay, this one, even more than the others, is just a personal pet peeve. Unlike the others, you're not necessarily putting anyone else out if you break this rule. But I'm including it anyway, because it drives me up the wall, and because, hey, my column, not yours.

Look, I don't personally do GenCon in costume, but I have no objection to people who do. If you want to wander around dressed as Driz'zt, or a faerie, or Captain Reynolds, or Sailor Dwarf Planet, or a stormtrooper¹⁰, or even a Magic card¹¹, more power to you. So long as you don't mind people staring and occasionally asking to take your picture¹², have a ball.

But if you're going to wear a costume, wear a costume, not half a costume! And no, I don't mean that I'm being a stickler if you have the wrong shoes. I'm talking about the people who wander through the dealer's room dressed in a hooded cloak, a leather jerkin, blue jeans, and Converse All-Stars. The only time you should be wearing steampunk goggles and a scarf over your mouth when you're otherwise dressed like a broke college student is either

A) When you're trying them on to buy, or

B) You're planning to rob a convenience store.¹³

The whole "half costume" thing? You look goofy. I mean, even coming from a gamer who's attending GenCon, and while standing next to a grown man dressed as Naruto, you look goofy. I can only assume that either you're utterly oblivious, or really just that lazy.

I realize that there are those who would say, "Ari, aren't you just doing to them what people outside the gaming community do to us, in terms of mocking them for stylistic choices you don't agree with?"

And the answer is, yes, I'm aware of a certain level of hypocrisy here, but—and this is the important part—I don't care. It's silly looking.¹⁴

Rule 4: Push the Lever!

Every other rule in this column is negotiable. This one is not, and I would be delighted to see violators thrown out of GenCon. You ready? Here it is.

For the love of everything good and pure in this world, flush the damn toilet!

My God in Heaven. Were these people raised by Sleestaks? I should not have to risk splattering myself with someone else's post-consumer Red Bull or Mountain Dew—to say nothing of anything else—because they were too lazy to push a lever! I mean, it's not like they hide the damn things. It's right there! Shiny metal, a different color from the bowl and everything! (And even the automatics have push-buttons.)

And this goes double for missing. The bowl's not that small, damn it!

I wish I was joking when I say that one of the stalls I was forced to use had a streak of—oh, let's say, solid waste residue—on the wall! I can only assume that some unfortunate Con-goer was in the midst of cleaning himself when he was grabbed from below by one of the infamous Indianapolis Sewer Krakens¹⁵ and dragged through the pipes to a watery and foul-smelling grave, because frankly, that's the only excuse.

I'm going to start a fund, taking donations to pay for someone to invent and market a cheap electronic bathroom stall door that, once closed, will not open until its sensors say the toilet has been flushed and the seat is dry.

Anyone want to contribute¹⁶?

Okay, I think I'm done. That is, I'm sure I can come up with plenty more, but I think those are the ones I needed to get out of my system. I apologize again for starting off with a rant like this. Come back next month when I promise you a column far less ranty, far less irritable, and in which, rather than offending a portion of my readers by commenting on their con-going habits, I will instead endeavor my best to offend them entirely over their opinions on RPGs.

Footnotes:

¹ Or maybe they should have gone at the end, in which case they're out of order.

² So what, you may ask, changed my mind? To you, I would answer: "Look! A shiny thing!"

³ A move which, as you all know, was intended as Phase One of a malevolent scheme in which the fandoms of RPGs and Nascar would be slowly merged into a single Over-Fandom whose levels of obsession would allow a slow takeover of the entire free market and capitalist system.

⁴ For values of "sufficient" equal to or greater than "one."

⁵ Mostly because you've all heard them already.

⁶ Or is that "People of Boothful Employment" at this stage?

⁷ Not an actual guarantee.

⁸ As opposed to opening it beneath questioners, which must have been a temptation on occasion.

⁹ I am "aware" that this "sentence" has too many "quotation" "marks."

¹⁰ Although you are a little short for one…

¹¹ Yes, I actually saw this. Not the monster or character from the card, the actual card.

¹² Possibly as evidence for the restraining order.

¹³ Ari does not condone the practice of robbing convenience stores.

¹⁴ Again—my rant, not yours.

¹⁵ A species that, for all its many faults, still teaches its young to flush public toilets.

¹⁶ Arrangements pending. Don't send money yet—unless you really want to, and, uh, don't care about any actual results.

Mouseferatu

This is my 50th blog post! Huzzah! This is a milestone if there every was one! Time to celebrate. Normally for these types of things, you're suppose to do a big event or something special. I originally planed on doing a blot post about making a F.A.T.A.L character as a ridiculous promotional stunt. My experience on the internet taught me that doing things that are torturous to yourself always draws a decent crowd. However, to get the F.A.T.A.L. rule set, I need to use a torrent. I’m not comfortable using torrents so I decided to not do it. Another reason is that it’s the F.A.T.A.L. rule set! It’s considered the most horrible RPG game ever to be created! Forgive me for not wanting to subject myself to reading it. That means I’ll have to do something else.

First off, I can make a few announcements. In case you haven’t noticed, I’ve been making a few additions and changes around here. I added an intro page and new categories to make navigating my blog easier for you. Expect more improvements to randomly pop up in the future. Making these improvements means that the blog have been too meta-ish lately. Sorry about that but rest assured, more RPG-related stuff will come soon.

Now I would like to give you some random and pointless statistics about my blog. As of Augest 28, 2009, my blog is Enword’s 6th largest blog (in terms of number of blog posts). That means my blog is larger then about 97 percent of other Enworld blogs. Off the 232 blogs here on Enworld, about half of them have less then 5 blog posts. All my blog posts take up about 2.7 percent of the total number of blog post here on Enworld. Isn’t math fun?

For those of you who managed to get this far (or managed to just skip here), you efforts won’t be in vain. I also decided to celebrate my 50th blog post with a contest! This is your chance to win some RPG related material! Here are the rules…

1. Make a comment here on what I should do for my 100th Blog Post Celebration. If you can’t think of something for that, a suggestion on what else you would like to see on my blog will be fine as well.

2. At the end of October, I’ll select some winners. Winners will be selected by random selection (aka I roll some dice) and/or by the suggestion I like the best.

3. I’ll make a Blog Post announcing the winners. The winners will PM me their addresses (since I’ll need to know your address to send you your prizes) as well as what they want from the prize pool. I only got one copy of each listed prize, so it’s first come, first serve. The lower you place, the more alternatives you should have. I then mail what you picked to you.

4. The prize pool currently is: The Advanced Player’s Guide, Khyber’s Harvest, Punjar: The Tarnished Jewel, Hearts of Choas/Immortal Heros, Pathfinder’s Bonus Bestiary, and The Village of Hommlet (4th Edition Version).

5. I’m playing this by ear, so expect changes as they are needed. This includes changing rules, upgrading/changing prizes and other adjustments. As this point, I don't think I'll need to change much but you never know. Note that I don’t exactly have a large budget for this so expect modest prizes at best.

Lastly, thanks to all of you who read my blog so far. It’s nice to have people read what you wrote. I hoped you all enjoyed yourselfs so far. I’m looking forward to the next 50 blog posts.
　

MichaelSomething

On Sunday, 23 August 2009, the "Holy Steel" teleconferencing team resumed, now using the Pathfinder core book, which revises the Dungeons & Dragons Edition 3.5/D20 System Reference Document. So far, despite this rule set's complexity and the tome's heft, I like Paizo's iteration of the world's most popular fantasy role-playing game more than Wizards of the Coast's Dungeons & Dragons Fourth Edition (D&D4e)/Game System License.

Although Dexter V.H. has been too busy with family commitments to rejoin our virtual sessions as Drow Ranger "Faelonia," Byron V.O., Beruk A., and Paul J. have continued their exploration of the pyramid of Unas as Paladin "Ibrahim," Rogue "Milos," and Wizard "Derek," respectively. Their adventuring party has fought monsters and is searching for the Book of Thoth, which it believes cultists of Set are also after.


I've had to cancel two weeks' worth of D&D4e "Vanished Lands: the Faith-Based Initiative" face-to-face (F2F) games because of work. We'll probably meet again around Labor Day. After about 50 consecutive sessions, I don't think missing a few Monday nights will hurt the momentum of that party, which is investigating smugglers in the Hifalendorin human capital of Hesolin. Overall, "Holy Steel" has had more interesting investigations by Player Characters (P.C.s), and the "F.B.I." has had more action scenes. A good group has a balance of the two.

I'm still looking forward to taking a break after the "F.B.I." winds down, although that has taken longer than I expected. On the one hand, several people prefer Pathfinder or other systems to D&D4e, and the P.C.s are approaching Tenth Level, which used to be "name level" -- the midrange in power that usually marks the end of my campaigns.

On the other hand, the current Boston-area P.C.s have been gaining in experience and knowledge, and some gamers are understandably interested in maximizing their abilities. I still hope to give other Game Masters a shot and to run shorter-term steampunk, superhero, and/or space opera scenarios, most likely using a D20 variant, although I've seen mostly favorable reviews for the rules-light and pulp-flavored Savage Worlds.

I don't expect my F2F game to return to the "Vanished Lands" setting, probably using Pathfinder, until spring of 2010. Since I've been building that fictional world since 1982, I'd like to take some time to tweak it to properly challenge and entertain another party, which won't be easy because most of the current group is now familiar with it.

I ended my subscription for Lord of the Rings Online because college chums David I.S. and Dexter haven't had the time to play regularly. The "Dimensional Corps Online" supergroup for the City of Heroes multiplayer online game is still going strong, and Dex invited me to try Champions Online (now separated from the Hero System 6th Ed. license). I have, however, enjoyed Wii Sports Resort. Batman: Arkham Asylum also looks very cool, but the superhero video game isn't available for the Wii.

edemaitre

Ventifus

Gogmurt was fun to run. The PCs encounter him and his pet Owlbear in a very tight maze made of vines and brambles. Note that this "druid" was created before PHB2 came out, so I gave him abilities that "felt" like the 3e druid.

Ventifus

Okay, so we wrapped up our two year campaign of the Curse of the Crimson Throne Adventure Path, and we're starting this Sunday with the final Pathfinder rules.

I looked at running another adventure path, but I'm reluctant to do so. First, the adventure paths that I have don't totally grab me, and secondly I find the last two adventure paths I've run start high on roleplaying, but by the end are heavy on grinding through combat.

So, I've decdied I'm now the master of my own destiny.

I liked some of the concepts of the Second Darkness campaign, and I'm trying to bend that into my overall arcing campaign plot. Basically, I've decided my cthuloid alliance of abberation races (the Shebeleth) who reside underground have decided they've had enough of skulking, and to restart the Summoner's War, they're going to take a meteor and slam it into Theras, wiping out the Gith and ending their watch over the Theld, starting the Longest Night.

I also want this campaign to involve pirates, derring-do, and explore the history of my world, and the Verdraaken Empire (which fell the last time a meteor struck the center of their realm, wiping out most of humanity several hundred years ago).

I need a starting adventure, and I've decided the best way to do so is get all the party members to sign up for service on the ship the Wild Raven, captained by the fierce pirate Captain Erasmus Kreeg. The party won't meet the captain yet, just his fussy bosun/recruiter Thevenin Prust. They're signing on for service, when the waterfront tavern where the recruiting is happening is attacked by street urchins lobbing vials of alchemists' fire ...

Ideas? Thoughts? Suggestions?

Archade

Koruvus is a hulking goblin, warped and mutated by Lamashtu, the goddess of monsters. The PCs fought him in a room with many 1x1 pits, each with a chillborn at the bottom.

This monster also shows how I like Solos, and even Elites: they must have lots to do, and be as interesting as 5 other monsters, combined. (Many Elite/Solo monsters that Wizards produces are too boring, though they are getting better at this.)

Ventifus

Ventifus

This is my sort of summation answer to some of the responses in this thread: Where Has All the History Gone?



I know it has been an extremely long time (internet time anyways) since I have replied to some of the comments previously addressed to me in various threads. This is because I have been extremely busy. New work assignments and clients, the CAP, new assignments and flight camp, various trips, vacations and stuff with the family (I got a white-water rafting trip this weekend with the wife), work for church, remodeling and repairing the home, etc. have all kept me hopping. And tired.

Hopefully now that the summer is about over things will calm a'bit though my squadron has just been put on alert for hurricane season and I've still got a back-log of training materials to wade through. But I'm hoping it'll slow down a little anyhow.

But when I can and as I can I hope to go back through some of the old responses and questions directed to me and answer them as best I can. I'm thinking maybe one response a week or something like that, and hopefully I can create a new thread about once a week or so to as I've got a list of subjects I'd like to post about. We'll see what my schedule allows. Anyway stuff like this distracts and relaxes me so when I have the time it's good to divert myself from other things. I can't say when I'll get to what but I'll get to what I can as I remember about it or re-read it.

As for my response to this thread:

I think this assumption about what can be done with possessions in the game misses much of the same point as how people look at possessions in the modern world. I know that there is a tendency to look at things in the modern world (generally speaking) as being based purely upon their monetary (or cash, to "cash in") value. That is to say that everything that exists is usually assumed to have some fixed, or even floating, monetary value (in hard currency terms as a measure of liquidity and immediate usefulness, meaning an "exchange rate"). And the tendency therefore is to want the immediate value of the thing and therefore the impulse is to "liquidate everything." A desire to instantly convert whatever you have to "cash" and thereafter to exchange the cash for something else that you want more at the moment than what you originally converted into cash. You see this all of the time on shows (valuing and exchanging heirlooms for established cash rates) about old goods, and in the abominable savings and investment rates in many developed countries. People don't really prepare much for the future, build upon their assets, invest, or save (in historical times one would say the much more well understood term hoard), instead in the modern world the impulse is to immediately liquefy and then spend. This attitude is so prevalent and ubiquitous in the modern world it is rarely even questioned and even rarer is the analysis and consideration of the fact that it has not always been so. As a matter of fact, hieratically speaking, it is only recently so.

Now I could say a lot about what I think the value, or true lack of value is, in such an approach to assets, properties, goods, savings (hoarded treasure in historical times), estates and lands, heirlooms, etc. But suffice it to say I think that the attitude that you liquefy or covert all of your possessions, treasure, heirlooms, relics, artifacts, family objects, etc. into immediate cash is not an attitude that would be common in historical times (especially not medieval), nor would it be common to many settings based upon a semi-fictional or fictional alternative fantasy world, for obvious societal and economic reasons. It is rather simply a modern attitude superimposed upon a gaming structure based upon historical antecedents that would not have really worked at all in any way similar to modern economic principles (especially regarding cash) or interests. It is like taking a Dorian culture, superimposing upon it Victorian morals and social customs, and saying, well, a fantasy based Dorian society would therefore look a lot more like London than Greece, wouldn't it?

In historical times, just to use an example of what I mean, titles, historical precedents, class structure (not as the game uses the term, most of the classes in D&D are not classes at all, but professions, and very unusual and extra-class professions at that, as the term is commonly used), treasure hoards, etc. were far more effective components of power and wealth and influence than was mere cash. Indeed it is only into rather modern times at all that cash alone was seen as real power to obtain and do things in the world. Cash alone, and even up until the industrial revolution, was seen merely as a means to obtain titles, power, real wealth (and cash alone was not real wealth), lands and estates, investments, properties - in other words things that were seen of real value and which offered an on-going income. (Cash did not really become psychologically associated with the idea of being a "hard asset in and of itself" until very recent times. Until then it was a method of obtaining things that made you wealthy or powerful or influential.)

For instance if you got cash through adventure or warfare you immediately set about getting lands, properties, and if possible sponsorship and titles. Cash alone was meaningless because it could, unless you were careful, be so easily removed from your possession by someone having far more influence, authority, or power. (Laws and systems of justice, like economic systems, were also far different than in contemporary times.) It was these things, these hard assets, which gave you an opportunity for advenancement and for a steady source of future income, not cash, though cash might contribute to your overall opportunities for advancement. People did not take cash and invest it as an abstract investment vehicle to make more cash because things like modern businesses and stock markets and industries do not exist as we think of them today. The entire economic system rested upon entirely different premises and as a result it worked in entirely different ways than is common in modern times.

(As a matter of fact one of the very ideas underlying D&D and many fantasy based games is that the more powerful party can relieve others of their money by strength of arms. As often also happened in the real world. It was however much more difficult to relieve a man of his fortified and well armed and well-soldiered lands and estates. Or a baron of his region, or a king of his nation. Meaning cash and money were assets easy to lose, more important treasures could and would be secured in far better ways. To own something didn't mean others couldn't take it away from you, it meant that to keep it you had to be strong enough or clever enough to keep it. And you couldn't do that with cash. Cash had no built in method of self-defense from the ambition of others, as an estate or castle or keep might. In games for instance it is common for PCs to take or even steal from others. But if such a world were real then believe me others would be at least attempting to take back or to take from the PCs as often as opportunity presented itself. Kings and nobles would seize, thieves steal, more powerful warlords loot. You could not assure your own safety or property through the power of cash. Cash would simply be a lure for attack and ambush and forcible seizure. Unless your treasure was well-hidden, or in some better and more secure form than cash or money then you'd be spending as much time defending what you possessed, as hoping to add the possession of others to what you already owned.)

If an individual did obtain cash it was immediately set to work at the getting of real and physical things that would thereby grant power and influence to the owner. Things were not liquidated in order to obtain cash, cash was expended in order to get productive and important things, and it was in that way that one became powerful, influential, and ultimately wealthy and successful. In many ways that economic system was the exact polar opposite, or at least the very obverse image of our own. Therefore the intent of those types of economies were not to sell things to get cash, but to use cash to get things. I don't know if I can explain this any more explicitly but those types of comic systems were very different from our own, operated by entirely different principles, and has entirely different aims. Cash was not King, but rather Kings used lands and estates and properties and the law and influence to make cash. It didn't operate the other way around. Few people bought kingdoms know matter how wealthy they were or could become, and few could become wealthy by cash alone because there were precious few ways to make it or spend it compared to modern methods. And because there were few ways to make and spend it it tended to be hoarded or accumulated to use at really big projects like public building, and warfare. But cash was not used to make more cash, and things were not sold to get cash, rather cash was expended to obtain or maintain power or to get things or positions or titles or influence. Wealth did not rest upon cash, cash resulted from wealth, which was a far more long term and dangerous project and prospect than is the case today. Money in societies that used it has always been useful, of course, but it has up until very recent times not been the chief determination of power. And that is what is being entirely missed with the idea of superimposing modern economic systems based upon modern societal and cultural paradigms and mores and economic concerns, such as the industrial or high tech based economy, upon a basically medieval fantasy model. (Now of course some fantasy models do to some extent mimic the modern world more closely than others, but when you have a society in which individuals are running around toting swords and spears and bows instead of mass produced guns and plastic credit cards then it only makes sense that the economic system will operate upon entirely different principles and models.)

In an historical and basically fantasy-historical model it is far more likely that gold will be given as presents (such as the Vikings did with rings and bands) to faithful underlings, that treasure will be spread around to impress allies and rivals alike and to maintain a power base, and that important heirlooms will be closely guarded and protected to maintain lines of legitimacy and historical claim than it would that such things would be liquidated and converted into cash to buy a new suit of armor. What men did intend was buy lands and estates and then attract local smiths and their families seeking the protection of the landowner, and the smith then lived on the property to make armor and weapons as his keep or payment to the landowner (sometimes earning money which was often then reseized through the tax base). And thereby having that system established the landowner would thereafter attract followers and soldiers and the system then would continue to grow and feed itself, unless of course the owner lost out to a more powerful competitor. But rare was the occasion when an enemy could be bought off with cash for any length of time. Oh, they could be bought off alright, for maybe a year or so till they wanted more, but what could be done with real wealth was attract followers to protect what you owned. Which wasn't a big pile of cash. Rather it was far more important things through which you could generate cash, if necessary. Most of the time cash wasn't necessary. Men and servants and animals and crops and soldiers were. And you kept them through power, and influence, and property, not cash. That idea came about much, much later.

With that being said as prelude treasure (and I use that term to cover all things like properties, lands, estates, treasure and treasure hoards, important heirlooms - that more often than not implied some historical connection to power or nobility or influence - legacies, and all such related things) would not be converted to cash in order to achieve some more immediate and consumer-based end. (Indeed the very idea of consuming, in the modern sense, was not as we think of it today since so few resources were converted into consumer goods because the number and variety of consumer goods was necessarily limited in comparison to our world. You might have a large variety of a few basic items but not a real variety of goods and items compared to us.) Instead treasure would be put to use to achieve other and more concrete ends and purposes.

Such as, but not limited to:

Storage and Hoarding - This would have numerous advantages. Give it away to assure loyalty as was the case with Vikings, who along with most ancient and medieval societies did not often give presents of pure money but gave presents of things, created and already worked and fashioned things, because of the simple reason that good craftsmen and artisans were in relatively short supply so one assured one's prestige in gift giving not by giving money but by giving impressively worked and crafted goods and items. One also used treasure to buy stores in case of emergency or preparation for war, famine, disease, etc. But once again you didn't exchange things for money but rather you used money to buy important resources, which were always in demand (it was very rare for supply to exceed demand in non-theological societies, because it took a long time make things - this is a consideration that should not be overlooked - because in the modern world we often have supplies that exceed demand - non-technological societies have the opposite problem - so they look at wealth not as money but as commodities).

Attraction and Influence - Treasure and land and estates and titles and important things attracted followers and those eager to sell their good sand skills for protection, and a chance to work and live in relatively safety. This is something basic and fundamental to ancient (the importance of the Pax Romana) and medieval societies that we moderns are mostly oblivious of. Safety from war, death, starvation, invasion, rape, terror, and disease were all far more valuable than mere money, which could assure security form none of these malignant influences. Often treasure and nobility and estates could not either, but they were considered far more secure than money as defensive systems. In addition treasure equated to influence and power. Money itself did not.

Income - The very term income means to come-in. (People nowadays think of it as their earnings or wages, it was not - it was something you got off your lands or estates or investments.) It did not mean money as we think of it today. It meant food and crops, resources, labor, trade-able things and objects and items, as well as money. But in time of real famine and disease money was useless. It was often also useless in time of war, unless it had previously been used to purchase troops, because the enemy would often either not take your money (knowing he would get it by conquering you anyway) or simply agree to the ransom or payment then conquer and kill you anyway. But things, important things like estates, and lands, etc. could be used to generate income. So the system worked in reverse to our modern way of looking at money, which is basically abstract.

Fame - Fame was often nearly as important as power and influence. Sometimes it was a source of power and influence. It assured nothing in itself, which again is often the opposite of our society, but fame could be used to exchange to gain some influence with those who did have real power. Fame could derive from achievement (extraordinary genius, like that of Archimedes, though it did not save Archimedes), or through historical ties or ties to those in power. You couldn't buy such ties with money alone and attempting to do so was looked upon in most cases as foolish and often beneath contempt, but historical ties could be linked to money or wealth to try and gain more power and influence over those with greater power. Hence the vast importance of historical legacies.

So, that is my response to this in a nutshell. Medieval and ancient societies do not have the same types or kinds of economic systems or interests or concerns that we do and therefore they did not look at money in the same way that we do, and they had much more respect for and placed far more importance on things like legacies, heirlooms, hard assets and treasures of all kinds than we do, who tend to think of such things as little more than their corresponding monetary value. And therefore fantasy gaming worlds, derived basically far more often than not from medieval and ancient backgrounds and models than from modern ones would also tend to have systems that are far more like historical models than modern ones. Modern ones concerning "money" as we think of it wouldn't even make sense in the context of most non-tehcnolical and non-modern societies.

Now of course the details would vary depending upon which exact era you are discussing and what geopgrhaical or cultural point you want to investigate, but the basics remain the same. Most people would have been far better served to inherit an estate and a legacy than a wad of cash, which could in such societies far more easily stolen and would be far harder to protect and really prosper from by the way.

Well, I'm sure I made plenty of typos but I got other things to do. I edited as best I could.

Jack7

These are my interpretation of the basic pathfinder-style goblins. Not too scary (although they can do decent damage when they surround you), but loads of fun when you roll a "1".

Ventifus

The time has come once again to reveal a little more about Risen, that 4E book you’ve heard so much about from friends at Gencon. You remember it, right? It’s the one that’s all the rave right now, the much discussed splatbook bringing your favourite characters back from the dead with new powers and path features unlike anything you’ve ever seen before.

This month’s preview offers something traditional and something way off the beaten path. The firebird draws its resurrection from the phoenix, a staple of regeneration in fantasy and mythology, while the chaostician uses the bizarre Far Realm to warp your character’s body at a genetic level.

Let’s begin.

Wrath of the Firebird
When a phoenix dies, it bursts into flames and a new body rises out of the ashes. This is not immortality by the truest definition of the word, but a defiance of death and its strangehold over all living creatures.

The idea for the firebird actually came from my girlfriend. I was trying to conceive a primal-based resurrection path merging a resurrected character with a legendary beast: unicorns, pegasus, even dragons. When she came into the office and asked what I was up to, I told what I was trying to come up. “Something really mythical, ya know?” “What about a phoenix?” she asked. “Don’t they come back from the dead?” And so our one fleeting moment of sharing D&D came… and went. (She’s not a roleplayer and I’ve given up all hope of even a drunken night of curiosity. Pobody’s nerfect.)

The phoenix wages a personal war against its primordial brothers and sisters, abhored by their desire to destroy the gods’ creation with vengeful rage. Firebirds carry on this quest in their honor. They seek out primordials scattered throughout the Known World and beyond to make sure they never rise again. Chosen for their dedication to the gods or merely fallen victim to a primordial’s wrath, the phoenix endows a fraction of its power to the firebird and returns him or her from the dead in a powerful new form.

There are three facets to a firebird’s powers: fire, healing, and flight. That’s right, flight. Beginning at 12th level, the firebird has a limited ability to hover and can eventually fly for a short period of time. Aside from a resistance to fire damage, the firebird distinguishes a unique mark across their chest of fiery wings growing in size as the character reaches higher levels and can provide healing surges to his allies in battle. Yet these were just physical features designed to mimic the spirit of the phoenix. When it comes down to it, it is the passionate defense of life that gives the firebird its drive and ambition to live once more. For a better tase of the firebird, check out the bonus preview in CA12.

The Many Forms of the Chaostician
This path was a last minute addition to the mix and I wanted to design something crazy. Something with powers and path features far beyond the norm that would make a player cry out “It does what?!!” Amazingly enough, the chaostician was the easiest resurrection path to build.

After dying on the Far Realm, the chaostician’s soul merges with the chaotic plane and takes on a new, improved body. More importantly, it assumes a morphing form capable of extending its reach, slipping through tight spaces by convering solid bone into transmutable goo, or phasing through walls as a ghost. Tossed in with powers to disrupt opponents with an upsetting aura and brief teleportations to the Far Realm, the chaostician thrives on breaking the mould of most heroes. I’ve always thought of him as the hero who looks like a villain.

My personal favourite is the extended reach and I’m hoping it’ll be a fan fave too. Picture your character standing just out of reach of a pit fiend. If you stand adjacent to the devil, you’re burned in the hellfire covering its body while the fiend has a reach of 2. No problem. With your sword still in hand, your arms instantly stretch out to twice their normal length and strike the pit friend across the temple. Better yet, picture the look on your GM’s face when he suddenly remembers you have that ability.

The real catch to the chaostician is the life quest: he or she has sworn an oath to use these bizarre powers to fend off the approach of the Far Realm. Many wizards and planewalkers theorize the plane is a sentient being, consciously seeking to claim the lawful, organized multiverse as we know it through unprotected portals and its minions, such as the infamous mind flayers. Witness to the horrors of the Realm, a chaostician will use everything in their disposal to prevent this armageddon.

For Our Last Installment…
Next month will feature my co-author, Shawn O’Leary, talking about his inspiration for two of his additions to Risen: the cuardach and the sword of heaven. These are rather unqiue spins on a more heroic translation of resurrection paths and the cuardach is one of my personal faves. We’ll have more previews, teasers, and other goodies coming throughout September and October until the official release in PDF and POD, so stay tuned.

Todd Crapper (that's right) is the Head Honcho for Emerald Press PDF Publishing and author of the upcoming 4e adventure, The Key of the Fey (releasing December 2009), and co-author of Risen: The Guide to Resurrected Characters (October 2009). He wrote this blog because there was no one around to stop him, not even those meddling kids and their mangy mutt.

EP

Another incendiary monster, this time from the first Pathfinder module, Burnt Offerings.

Ventifus