I like hand-outs and props when I'm gaming.

I like maps, papers, all sorts of stuff. They're fun, they make the game feel real.

It's impractical to hand a party the entire treasue in physical props. It's not hard, however, to give them tangible items in smaller doses.

The easiest thing is paper hand-outs. When the party hears of a dungeon, give them a map. Now they've got something real, and they can collect a pile of them (kind of like Tasselhoff's map pouch).

It also solves a game problem, if you give them a map right away, you can spend less time describing the physical dimensions of the dungeon. Just roll open the map, and point where they are, and ask where they want to go.

When I give players a map, to make it more "realisitic" I'll often re-draw it by hand, from my version. Imprecision will creep in, and i'll leave off any GM secrets. I'll also usually rough up the paper. Fold it a bunch of times, bang up the edges. You could stain it in tea, if you want to make it look like parchment. Carry it in your book bag, if you want some real wear-n-tear on it.

Any extra effort you put into the map, beyond, printing out a player's copy of the map you generated from a computer, will make the map stand out as special to the players. That's the real point, is to make it FEEL special.


I've also done a newspaper series, for my players. That was harder. I created a basic template in word, with the mast head, and date in place, with 2 column format. Then I'd write up short articles, and fill it in. I'd write an article about a recent event PCs were involved in, one about something the PCs would know, one about a game culture/topic (basically teaching them about the game world), and one that would be about the current politics. Overall, it was about 2-4 pages.

Doing travel papers, and such is another easy one. Declare (after some security crisis) that new laws have been written requiring papers for entry/exit from any walled city. Now to travel to somewhere else, you need to see the local lord and pay for papers. Now you can hand them some.

You can also do adventuring party papers. This is one the party could do (or you could produce on behalf of the players). It might build a team spirit, as they're PC names will be on it.

If you're skilled at leather working (it's not hard, you need a cutting board, steel straight edge, razor knife, hole punch, leather stitching thread/needle, and leather), you can make a lot of cool things. Personally, I've got (my mother made some for me when I started, I've made more):

a dice bag (used the end of welding glove gauntlet)

a pencil case (like a scroll case)

a "spell book" book cover (holds 2 books, PH & DMG)

a "papers" cover (as seen in Pirates of the Carribean), a wrap that holds/protects important documents


Other easy projects: a map case, to hold all those maps and paper hand-outs you keep giving them

A tougher project is the wizards spell book prop. For one game, I built a wizards spell book, with diary entries and spells mixed in. First, I learned, the bare minimum of book making. Namely, pages are bound in units called "choruses" of about 8 sheets. The choruses are then fastened to the book cover.

So, I wrote up a ton of journal entries (they were clues) in Word, and used the Futhark font to make them secret. I used a tolkien elvin script font for the spells, which were copied straight from the SRD. This helped fill out the book, to make it worth it. I interspersed spells with journal entries, and lots of blank pages (presumably so the wizard could write more spells in). Then I printed it all out in 1/2 page format, double sided (that's 2 pages to 1 side).
Then in units of 8 pages, I folded them in half to make mini-books. These are the choruses. I stitched each chorus (the equivalent of stapling in the fold, using thread). Once each chorus was ready, I cheated, and made a spine, the length of the fold edge, and width of the stack of choruses, plus a little more. I then stitched the choruses to the spine. Once all that was done, I glued the spine into the book cover I had made and painted. Both the spine and the book cover were made of thick card-stock (the brown stuff). Overall, it worked well. I gave the book to the player who found the book in-game, and they took several weeks to decipher it (any spell they deciphered the PC could try to learn).

That's all I have time for now. It's your turn to post you prop ideas/instructions.

Janx

A recent thread about not seeing a beholder while in combat got me thinking.

I get the sense from a number of threads about combat, that the people talking about what's realistic, and such, don't have any fighting experience. Mainly because they suppose what may or may not be possible, and it doesn't jive with my actual experience.

I'm a martial artist. I earned a black belt in IshenRyu about 5 years ago. I've taken fencing classes, and I've even done the sword fighting with wooden swords thing (dangerous actually). I've got $15,000 worth of metal plates in my head from a sparring injury. I've not seen everything, I'm not the best in my class. But I've been around, and done enough to have a sense of what fighting's like. It's kind of like a forensic scientist watching CSI and seeing just how wrong they are.

Now a side note, it's been my observation that there's a lot of military people who are gamers. There's also a lot of COmputer Science majors who take some karate as well. CompSci folks have a high % chance of being a gamer. So the hobby is filled with people who've got fighting experience of some sort. Note, fighting in a war zone is not the same as fighting in a ring, but there are valuable ideas for gaming that can come both experiences.


I'd also like to point out, that what's realistic may not make for good game play. It may bog things down, or simply not be much fun. Rules that make things take longer to resolve, or less likely to suceed, or screw the players over tend not to be good rules.

So while we get babbling about actual fighting, keep an eye out for what would be good encounter ideas, fight descriptions, and rules for combat actions and feats.

I'm going to start by just throwing down a pile of observations. Rather than calling them facts, it's simply what I've observered, based on my qualified experience. I might throw in a parenthetical note about what game rule might fit in.

Fighting Observations:
karate sparring takes place in a 20' square ring (kind of like your typical dungeon room)

combatants tend to circle each other, to keep the opponent moving and shifting (5' steps occur a lot)

It is common to reverse the circling, to throw off the enemy's movement (imagine everyone deciding their 5' step, then revealing it and resolving by initiative order)

In a typical sparring match, you score a point for hitting the front torso. Some styles may score a point for a head-shot. Some styles reward for doing a near-hit, where the attacker demonstrated the ability to hit the head, but the restraint to stop it an inch away.

Generally in sparring, you wear pads, and your attack is supposed to be controlled, and light, not hard enough to do damage.

when the enemy attacks, he might miss, you might block it with an arm or leg, or he may hit in a scoring zone, or he may hit so hard, it hurts, regardless of legal strike-zone.

Your attacker might use a side-kick or thrust kick to shove you back. The goal isn't to score a point, but the control your positioning

In a sparring match, the harder you hit, the more likely your opponent will hit harder back. It is like a nuclear war escalation.

Getting hit hard may pause you from fighting, or you may take it and fight harder. When I took a spinning heel kick to the orbital tripod (cheek bone). I saw stars, and went down to my knees. I didn't black out, but the fight stopped. I could have resumed the match after a break, but I knew something was wrong. I had 3 fractures, and could have had my eye sink into the cavity below the eye socket (going out of alignment). The white of my eye turned red over the next day. I had $15,000 in metal plates to fix the fractures, a concussion (#4 I think). I also had a headache. I took 2 excedrin a day for a week, until I had the surgery.

While fighting multiple opponents, I often try to maneuver them such that I only face 1 at a time. I've done it such that 1 guy is stuck behind the other guy (in an open ring). Having a partner helps.

In a melee fight, you will probably be moving around a lot, thus seeing a lot of the area around you (justifying the non-facing of D&D). You won't simply be looking in one direction the whole time.

Assuming similar sized opponents and allies on the level field, you won't know exact numbers of a large enemy force, because you can't truly see them all. But you will know there's a lot.

Unless it blind-sides you, you will sense a new attacker coming in at you. Might not block it, but that's what AC is for.

You will likely notice large obvious threats. So much so, that you might not notice smaller ones, because the big one draws your attention. We call that a diversion.

Using a shield makes you MUCH harder to hit. I used an aluminum sledding disc, when we used to stick fight. I barely ever got hit, compared to those I was fighting.

Hitting somebody is a matter of distraction, opportunity, and speed. Black belts get hits scored by white belts, though seldom. White belts can hit a black belt easily enough, but not necessarily a scoring blow (that difference matters in a real fight, where the entire body is legal).

If you do the same move 3 times, you establish a pattern. You can then start that same move and your opponent is likely to block it the same way, which allows you to change it to something else.

Karate is usually divided into two types, hard and soft. Hard usually means kicks and strikes. Soft usually means trips and throws.

Aikido, is a soft style, where the practitioner doesn't attack, they only react to an attack. Basically, they avoid getting hit, and can transform the movement of your attack into a throw. (in game terms, the aikidio guy never makes an attack roll, on any attack by an enemy, they would roll to do an aikido move instead of using just their AC)

A low level aikido student is beatable in a fight. They don't know that much, and it can be a speed issue (who does their move faster). A high level aikido guy is frustratingly hard to deal with. I know this from personal experience.

Arguing about who can beat who in karate is stupid. For any given attack you throw at me, I will/will not block it in time, move out of reach or counter it with my own attack or turn your attack against you, or you will pull back fast enough. If you do hit me, if you don't hit hard enough, I will of course retaliate. This also goes vice versa. It all comes down to speed plus luck (kinda like initiative).

Always assume anybody you meet is a black belt and can beat you. Much like treating a texan like he's always got a gun. It's polite. And you will never under estimate their ability to beat you. Additionally, you never know when they'll get a lucky shot in, even if they do suck at fighting.

Most unarmed fights end up on the ground. Watch a few bar fights and you'll see. After a few punches, they start grappling, they go down, and then it's wrestling. I actually took a ground fighting seminar, as part of my training.

Hitting a guy in the head is dangerous. There are legal issues (might be construed as intent to kill, rather than self defense). There are countless instances of where a serious blow to the head did not incapacitate and made him even more dangerous. Even more so, there appears to be a gender difference. Many boys have been in a fight or two. Most girls have not. By adulthood, a man isn't as shocked to be hit in the face as a girl might (or anyone who hasn't been in some fights). Additionally, a blow to the face will probably enrage the man (if it isn't strong enough to hurt him, like my injury). This is why it IS REALLY DUMB for a woman to slap their boyfriend when she's mad at him. It's like angering a bull in his pen. I have no idea how it is for the other gender (I don't plan on slapping women to find out). This is why the stereotypical ritual of challenging for a duel involves slapping the challenged with a glove.

Go for the joints. I know women all think the first target is the groin. Boys have had many attempts on their jewels. They're not stupid, and their first reflex will be to block with a thigh or hand. Knees however, are easy to kick, and easy to injure, especially if you can attack from the side (the way they don't bend). Point of fact, I don't think I've ever been groined in a sparring match. I did have one student who twice forgot his cup, and both times, got groined. He wasn't very bright.

My experience on ranged combat is limited to video games. It ain't the same, though I apply my training to it (yes it works, I kill well).

Friendly fire (in my experience FPS games) happens because I tend to shoot moving objects that I see entering my area. It especially happens when someone on my team leaves my area, and comes back through a different vector. Meaning, if you were always on my right, I'm not likely to shoot you when I spin to the right to take out a new attacker. I am likely to shoot you, because you wandered off, and when I come across you again, at a distance, you're just a moving target.

I'm less likely to FF in melee, because of the proximity. It's at a distance, with a ranged weapon, especially on first viewing. If for some reason I don't fire, and you don't fire at me, it gives me time to determine you are a friend.

So FF is a matter of how much time I've got to determine if you are a threat (we're talking miliseconds here). It's also a matter of vector. If I come across from the side, 2 parties shooting back and forth, it's obvious one side may be may allies, and I will pause to verify.

If I'm running down a corridor and turn a corner and there's movement down at the end, I'm likely to shoot first, identify body later.

I would hope that military folks get better training on this, but I imagine that left to their own devices, it happens the same way. (any military folks wanna comment on FF, and ranged combat...please do).



That's a whole slew of thoughts. I'd like to open up the floor, in the following fashion. If you have a question about real fighting, post it here. I'd like to limit answers about fighting to people with real training of any kind (martial arts, police, military). Please briefly state your background, and feel free to answer based on your observations (meaning there may be multiple viewpoints, neither wrong). I'd like to avoid answers from arm-chair warriors with no training or experience, because that's exactly what I'm trying to resolve here.

Janx

I've categorized today's article under my Real2RPG (bringing real life stuff into your campaign) and RPG Philosophy (what I think about RPGs).

I think there's a real cross-over effect of what your know, and its impact on the game. It think there's two categories of this. The first category is Knowledge skills (things I learned that a normal, basic PC might not know). The second category is skills I have that immediately help my PC, compared to another player that doesn't have those skills.

The age old idea of "if I know how to make gun powder, can my PC invent it?" comes into mind, for a knowledge skill. Basically, bringing your real life knowledge into things to try in the game (be it med school, herbology, engineering, etc). The most blatant attempts at this is the gun powder trick. Where the player says, "I mix charcoal, sulfur and saltpeter and then light it, what happens?" The GM usually comes up with some lame counter of "nothing, science doesn't work in this world".

I think this is the wrong approach for the player. Instead, think about putting ranks in a skill that you know a lot about, and then using your knowledge to explain what your PC is doing when he uses that skill. Even with my meager guitar skills, my knowledge of playing will let me better describe what my bard is doing than my musically challenged DM. Using your real knowledge this way adds flavor, but doesn't give your PC an advantage.

The next step, is to use your real knowledge and appropriate ranks in a skill to advance the state of the art in the world. The trick is to start primitive. Really primitive. You can't jump in and do open heart surgey, just because you have 9 ranks in Healing. But you can start introducing the idea of sterilizing bandages, cleaning wounds and tools, as well as washing your hands before an after, to reduce infection, which might get you a +1 to your roll.

And you can justify it by "my PC has noticed that wounds tend to get red and worsen when the environment is dirty through years of tending to the wounded".


The second type of skills, is trickier. These are skills that not all players have, and you can't necessarily go to school for (though some folks have managed to improve). Two obvious ones to me are social skills and combat related skills.

Let's talk about social skills first. I take it as a fact that a persuasive person is more likely to get their way with a GM, than a non-persuasive person. Arguing with this is like arguing with the definition of "persuasive", it means to get your way with someone.

This means, that PC skills aside, a persuasive player will be more likely to convince an NPC to do someting, or get an in-game effect from the GM. This is a social skill. Not all people are good at it.

In the old days (1E), players had to be nice to NPCs and persuasive to get what they wanted. Rude and terse players seldom convinced the king to be nice to them, because the GM reacted to the player. Nowadays, (3E or higher), a tactless player can just make a Diplomacy roll. But here's the catch, a GM will probably forget to require a roll (or grant a bonus) to the socially adept player. Whereas, the tactless player will probably get asked for rolls with every rude sentence his PC utters. In short, real life skill impacts the game.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the social skills in the game. I prefer the player to role-play it out. It is jarring when a tactless player says tries to schmooze the king badly, and then says, "I rolled an 18, does he give me what I want?" There's a camp that says this is OK, because it opens the social characters up to the non-social players. I think this is hogwash, as combat skills suffer the exact same defect, yet nobody argues that the game balances it for tactical idiots.

Here's why tactical geniuses have an easier time, compared to non-tactical folks. 3E's use of the battle-grid helps reveal it. The short of it is, a tactically adept player will make better moves, get more flank opportunities, better coordinate attacks, and avoid attacks of opportunity, compared to the less combat saavy.

How many times have you played, and watched a player do things that were "stupid" compared to what you would have done, and seen that those actions incurred more damage and risk? Now some of this is due to experience, and rules knowledge, but that's my point, it's things you know and think about in a game fight, that they do not, that gives you an edge.

Here's a fun example: I played a game where our 1st level party were in a kobold tree city (think evil ewoks). The kobolds started cutting bridges. We're 60 feet up. My friend gets the idea to run and jump his dwarven monk 30' to the next platform. I tried to pause him and say "wait, tie a ...", but he thought I was trying to tell him what to do. Luckily the GM was nice enough to talk him down. The point being, I was always mindful of the tactical situation (we're high in a tree, that's a farther gap than we can jump), my friend was impulsive, and was not paying attention to such details (a common problem). My point, left to our own devices, I do fewer stupid things with my PC than he does, and with a crueler DM, my PCs would live longer.

Now being a tactical genius doesn't mean dawdling all day planning, it just means using your awareness of the situation to your advantage. Strategic geniuses are the ones who plan.


What all this means is, your social skills will help you with NPCs. Your tactical skills (knowldege of game rules, chess, situational awareness) will help you in combat. Those who don't have these real skills but have the same game scores as you are at an disadvantage.

From a role-playing perspective (as in playing a personality, not a group function), I try to act the way my PC's scores are. Low social stats, means doing less diplomacy and talking to NPCs. Lower intelligence, I tend to coordinate less with the group in combat (though I still avoid doing dumb things). I don't believe in taking sub-optimal actions just because I have bad stats. I simply avoid acting counter to those stats. Meaning the dumb guy with low charisma doesn't act as the effective leader or persuasive diplomat. I let others do it, I simply follow, in those cases. My fellow players get the impression that my PC isn't smart or suave, but I don't cause problems because of it.


In the end, my gaming philosophy is that the game need only simulate events that can't be handled in the real world. Combat and spell casting are examples. I need rules to simulate how strong my PC is and how much damage he does. I don't need rules to simulate if I out-maneuvered you in combat, because if I'm skilled and you're not, I will.

A counter-argument to this logic is, that if the game has rules so I can have a strength level that allows me to pick up cars (something I personally can't do), there should be rules to allow someone else to schmooze the king (something he can't do). That's probably fair. I'd just like it to not be jarring to my sensibility.

Janx

MythBusters is a source of great ideas for tricks to use in a modern campaign.

One such trick is blocking cellphones and other wireless devices, so you can't be spied on. Think the lead-lined room to block crystal balls in D&D...

While building your base of operations, setup one room where brass netting (kind of like screen door netting) is applied to all the walls on the 2x4s. Then install the normal walls (sheet-rock, plywood) over them and paint as normal.

The metal netting blocks wireless signals and is cheaper than full metal shielding. Mythbusters used this while debunking the cellphones cause fires at the pump myth.

Having a room prepared like this would be useful for a secure meeting room (have a simple wired landline installed for phone use, perhaps). You would know that nobody could bring a bug into the room to transmit proceedings.

Janx

A long time ago, in a 2E game, one of my wizard PCs invented the talk-rock. Each PC or NPC was given one, and it was enchanted to transmit sound if you held it. Basically, a magic walkie-talkie.

This actually solved a real world problem. Most GMs get annoyed when players split up, then act on knowledge about what's happening to the other group. The talk rocks simply make it possible for both groups to generally know what's going on, justifying a rush to help, or a coordinated attack, etc.

I worked out the idea because my PC had a habit of taking ordinary things, and using a few low-level spells, turning them into useful products. For instance, he had a business (using low level wizards) of enchanting small metal rods with Continual Light. These rods were inserted into nice lamps (think living room lamps, not lanterns or torches), and sold as products.

The talk-rock was a similar concept. A spell was cast on a stone, which left a symbol on the stone. If you held the stone, you could hear what was going on around any other stone with the same symbol. We set the spell level high enough to make it permanent, like Continual Light. Even so, the spell wasn't that high, because it didn't do that much.

It's had some handy impact, you could place one as a listening device. Otherwise, it simply justified knowledge that players already had (since they're all sitting there waiting for their turn).

Janx

Hurricane Dolly is bearing down somewhere on the texas coast. With any luck, I'll get some rain. Whenever hurricanes wander by, I start thinking I should do some preparation. But frankly, hurricanes don't get people to prepare as much (except at the last second). It turns out, zombie invasion planning and hurricane preparation are very nearly the same thing.

So, I invite you to work on your Zombie Defense Plan, which coincidentally doubles as a nuclear attack, biological terror, hurricane disaster, blizzard white-out plan. Some elements may differ, per problem.

step 0: first aid kit
get a larger than 1 gallon plastic sealable container (tuppermaid)
throw in a normal first aid kit, ace bandages, all the band aids you have
throw in a pair of scissors, SHARP pocket knife, lighter, pencil, notepad, flashlight
Label the container FIRST AID, and paint a big red PLUS on it (first aid sign)
throw in a old t-shirt (bandage or spare shirt)
toss in 2 straight sticks (making splints)

Step 1: Car
always keep at least 1/2 tank of gas in car
keep a spare gas can around, with some gas
keep a smaller first aid kit in car (with same stuff)
keep a blanket in car
keep a state/county roadmap in car

Step 2: house
keep plywood window cut-outs for barring up windows
fill freezers with sealable containers filled with water (helps keep things cold in power outage)
fill garbage cans that don't leak half-full of water (keep in garage in case they leak)
fill tubs with water
fill EVERY tuppermaid container/ice cream bucket with water
Keep at least 1 full box of ammo per gun model owned
keep a full case of water or some gallon jugs of water

On the water, a full freezer will keep frozen longer, with no power. Filling it with ice, solves 2 problems, keeps your stuff safe longer, and gives you more water.

The garbage cans with water trick supplies you with more water for flushing toilets.

Don't guzzle the water. Minimize your activities to what's needed, so you don't sweat as much. A human does NOT need as much water unless they get stupid.

With guns, if you carry a gun, you'll be inclined to pull it out, and that means using it. Don't get stupid. Take training and safety classes. Guns are for killing zombies (headshots) and stopping human marauders (main body mass). Not playing out a western fantasy.

The first aid kit, is probably the smartest thing on here. Putting all your stuff in one kit (or two if you like redundancy if the zombies have claimed the first floor), makes it easier to tell somebody else to go fetch it. The extra items like scissors and lighter come in handy. Using a larger container than those small first aid kits means you can stuff in extra bandages, medicines, etc.

All of this is useful for real world disaster. It's also useful for a PC to have on his list of "automatic tasks" that he always does. In this way, when your GM throws in a natural disaster during the adventure, you're less screwed, because you didn't happen to have all these common items prepared.

Janx