@
Imaro Going to digest and comment/question in pieces.
1 - Your usage of mandated story for deployment of Backgrounds in non-combat conflict resolution was absolutely excellent. The perfect marriage of system and refined GMing technique. Great stuff. You mention concern about the length of time required for your players to accomplish this. Couple thoughts here:
A - Do you think it likely that they will hone their proficiency at impromptu Background justification as story with time/practice/experience? I suspect you'll see the story:unit of time ratio contract and they'll likely create better stories to boot.
B - If it doesn't improve appreciably, do you think the backstory they create while doing so (and thus the content/cues for you to engage with in the future) is worth the time investment (whatever it turns out to be) or do you feel that the pacing ramifications will be too punitive.
Thanks for the compliment. Let's see if I can provide some answers to your questions...
A. I think so, but I also think that there are times where a story just isn't necessary... unless the players want to use it to fill in some background for themselves. In these cases I think (again unless the player specifically wants this story known) it may be a waste of time and effort to require it. as an example, the player who is running Link has a "demon hunter" background in his case I wouldn't necessarily require a story (after the first time to establish the background) every time they want to identify a type of demon throughout the campaign. Now if something in a particular identification scene resonates with the player or it is an opportunity they want to take to establish something about their character then I also won't stop them either.
B. Well I think you have a good point here but we are going outside the rules of 13th Age in having the players create a level appropriate (no killing a god at first level) goal for their character to accomplish over the span of each level. Then I and Je will select an equal number randomly and work them into the adventures we run. I think this will definitely alleviate some of the ramifications of not having as much story material to work with while giving the players a chance to communicate to us what they want to accomplish. I guess I see the stories as flavoring, context, etc. I can use to enrich the goal they directly want to achieve.
2 - Mook rules in 13th Age seem to functionally serve much the same mechanical (but not fully) and fully the same narrative space as swarms in 4e. Free descriptor Mook slaying per attack is how 4e swarm combat works out in play. Did you play with many swarms when you played 4e and is that pretty much the sense that you got (that within the fiction they map 1:1).
Wow I had to go back and look up swarms in 4e... Now that I remember what they are I can honestly say I used them sparingly in 4e. I'll go ahead and say, after a refresher that I don't believe they occupy the same mechanical or narrative space.
Fictionally (and I am only going by the 1st MM here) swarms in 4e seem to be tiny creatures that cluster in a large group and would (as individuals) otherwise be ineffective at hurting a character (regular bats, spiders, rats, etc.). Mooks on the other hand are presented as individuals who are fully capable of hurting a character in the fiction, though nowhere near as capable as a standard monster/PC... i guess in the fiction i see it as the difference between a single bat in a swarm vs. a single mook goblin.
On a mechanical level the swarm only gets one attack, while the group of mooks gets an attack for every mook that is still alive in the group. Also a swarm is either effective (has hp's) or not (is dead), while a group of mooks in 13th Age has their effectiveness diminished as you attack more and do more damage to them. In other words the swarm very much acts as a single entity, while the mooks take damage as a single entity but otherwise are, for all practical purposes individuals.
3 - I'm assuming you used stock monsters from the book. If so, have you considered a random encounter paradigm whereby you could just have a pool of stock features for various antagonists (1 feature per Race and 1 feature that facilitate various Combat Roles; eg controller, leader, skirmisher, soldier) and try out the of-level Monster Math, bolt on 2 features (one for Race, 1 for Role), fill out the encounter budget and give that a go? I'm curious how the "off the cuff" monster creation/math functions.
Well making monsters in 13th Age is pretty simple and similar (though not the same ) as 4e. I did use one custom monster in our third session where the PC's were able to sneak into the goblin wagon village and attempted to destroy the 3 elemental stones that were powering it's approach to Mistwood. There they encountered a goblin shaman who summoned a "filth demon", though admittedly this wasn't off the cuff design.
I won't go into all the details but here's the quick and dirty on do-it-yourself monster creation in 13th Age...
1. There are rules to level up or down pre-made monsters (there are even rules in case you only want to partially level up certain stats for a monster)
2. There is a chart that gives you appropriate attack bonus, damage, hp, AC, defenses, fear threshold and (indirectly) hit points. However 13th Age is very clear in that these are just guidelines and the GM is free to do as he sees fit.
3. There is discussion as to what powers should be avoided though not much if anything on how to design your own powers. (Side Note: I think the creating and assigning of powers is the probably weakest part of DIY monster creation since there really isn't any guidance as to how to create them... but them again
3. There are monster categorization but it is different from the 4e version. There are standard, large and huge monsters (with a large monster being roughly equal to a 4e elite and a huge monster being roughly equal to a 4e solo). There are also monster roles, but these skew away from the 4e versions much more than the categorizations and they are...
Archers are ranged attackers who use weapons rather than spells.
Blockers have abilities that help them protect their allies.
Casters are magician-types who need space to cast their
spells properly. They’re capable of anything.
Leaders have abilities that help other monster allies fight better.
Mooks are minor monsters that are good cannon fodder.
Five mooks are the equivalent of one normal monster (except at
low levels, as explained on page 186).
Spoilers mess the PCs up with attacks that inflict harmful
effects instead of or in addition to hit point damage.
Troops are the default monster type. They’re nothing superspecial,
aiming to hurt PCs via hit point damage.
Wreckers really bring the pain. Sometimes they work alone.
Enemy groups containing only wreckers will be very dangerous
to the PCs.
And I believe that's about it. If you have any more questions just shoot them my way.
