Seed: Fourth World

LogoSince its creation in 1993, the fantasy world of Earthdawn pushed my buttons. Now, the recent kickstarter to fund the game’s fourth edition has rekindled my enthusiasm for the game. Yet, as eagerly as I backed the kickstarter and long to play in that world again, my interest in going back to those mechanics, even in updated form, approaches zero.

Therefore, this seed, suggesting ways to alter Dungeon World to fit into this rich high-fantasy setting. Like all DivNull Seeds, this one isn’t fully grown. If it plants a fire in your belly to do something with the idea, go for it. But, please, share what you make of it with the rest of us.

This hack sticks to the standard Dungeon World rules as much as it can, but all of the standard playbooks (Fighter, Thief, etc.) have been cut up and reassembled into the fifteen Earthdawn disciplines, adding custom bits to fill in the gaps. Had this work not largely been completed before the release of Class Warfare, the disciplines would probably have been built using those more modular rules instead. I contemplated going back and redoing them all, but by then the disciplines had sort of mutated into their own thing and it didn’t seem worth changing.

If you want to have a go at this hack, here are some possibilities you might try:

  • Actually do use Class Warfare to make the disciplines.
  • Instead of shuffling around existing moves, rebuild each discipline from he ground up, based more strongly on the Earthdawn originals.
  • Expand the hack with conversions of Earthdawn monsters, mounts, ships, relics, etc.
  • Convert more existing Earthdawn adventures to fronts.
  • Expand areas that I glossed over a bit, like horrors, blood magic or astral space.
  • Build obsessions (compendium classes) based around species or nationality or whatever else.
  • Anything else.

As I do not plan to do any of the above myself, I’m making the source files (except the fonts, which I lack the rights to distribute) available as well. Post a comment here if you turn them into anything You can download the lot here:

Update: A more recent version of this document exists here.

Pocket Danger Patrol cards

Danger Patrol CardsI’m looking to play John Harper‘s Danger Patrol (Pocket Edition) with my group, but I really loved the idea from the beta edition of each player selecting two “cards” which fit together to make their character sheet. So, I built a file with cards appropriate to the pocket edition (that is, very trimmed down from the beta versions).

In keeping with the flavor of the pocket edition each card is rendered at index card size (3"×5"), one page per card. You’ll likely need to experiment with settings if you want to print them. You can also print multi-page, or even build custom sheets by selecting to print two pages on one piece of paper, then selecting just the two pages you are mixing together (e.g. to get something like the image shown above, you’d set the pages field to “2,15”).

I built these in like an hour, so they are not the highest quality things I’ve ever done. Like Danger Patrol they are released under the Creative Commons attribution- Noncommercial-share alike 3.0 United states license.

By the way, if you like Danger Patrol, consider backing the author’s Patreon.

Vector demonweb

demonwebFor various important reasons (ok, not really, I just wanted a skin for my new phone) I needed a crisp version of the map in the Queen of the Demonweb Pits, but all I could find were various beaten up, not great resolution scans. So, I built a quick vector based version.

This should scale to any size you like. There wasn’t much in the way of quality control when I made it, so it very likely has errors. Let me know if you find any. I also don’t own the correct weight of Franklin Gothic to exactly replicate the labels of the original. Let me know if you use these files to make something else.

Seed: Goth Gulgamel

Goth Gulgamel IsometricSince the Bundle of Holding is offering a great deal for the Ptolus setting for the next few days, this seems like a good time to post something I’ve been working on, but am not going to do much more with: a revision/hack of one of the dungeons within that setting.

For reasons explained in more detail in the documents below, I was a bit unsatisfied with this location. I was also intrigued by Justin Alexander’s article on “Jaquaying the Dungeon”, a method of using design ideas from the dungeons designed by Jennell Jaquays to make dungeons more interesting. I was also keen on messing with isometric maps in Adobe Illustrator.

As with all DivNull Seeds, this is work isn’t entirely finished, but is in a decent enough state to be used. Feel free to pick up where I left off, but please share the results with everyone. With most seeds, I’ve posted things I’ve learned along the way, but this one, I kept a log of progress on the Cartographer’s Guild which contains most of the stuff I want to remember. That forum thread also lists the goals of this project.

I targeted legal-sized paper for most of these maps, as it is the largest paper most home printers in the US can easily use. I also tried to set up the battlemaps to use as little paper as possible, with locations rendered separately. In play, I would tend to only put the parts of the map the characters could see on the table at any given time.

I also decided to try to make a couple of poster sized maps (the large centerpiece location, for example, is a 24″×36″ poster), and used on-line print services (Vivyx printing in this case) to make hard copies. This worked pretty well, though uploading could be a challenge (had to resort to downsampled PNG files in one case).

The upshot of these last two points is that you might need to experiment to print these things.
The files for this are pretty large, so please download and read the first one before deciding if you want to download the rest. It is a guide that tells you about the location and what I’ve done with the place. If you’d like the Adobe Illustrator and InDesign sources for these documents, drop me a line here and I can get them to you.

Thanks to Monte Cook for allowing me to make use of his intellectual property, yet again.

Visualizing probabilities in player defense rolls

Many crunchy, combat-focused roleplaying games (including various editions of Dungeons & Dragons) run combat by having the attacker roll some dice to attack, add some sort of modifiers and compare the result to a defense number (usually calculated by some formula, but typically a fixed in value for the duration of a combat). This is part of the fun for players, rolling dice and seeing how you do. It can be a bit of a chore for the game moderator, though. If, for example, four protagonists (one for each player) are fighting, say, eight antagonists (all controlled by the GM), that’s a lot of rolling for the GM when the antagonists follow the same system as the protagonists.

To alleviate this you can find suggestions for a lot of these games for breaking this symmetry and putting the players in charge of seeing if the antagonists damage their characters. The idea is usually that, instead of the antagonists rolling an attack, the protagonists roll a defense. This involves a bit of shifting some numbers around in most cases but, ideally, when you invert the control like this, you want to make the probability of the protagonist getting hit remain the same. This is especially true if you have a complex combat system with a lot of interlocking parts, as small probability changes can accidentally mess the system up.

A typical example of a house rule to give the players defense rolls comes from the Players Roll All the Dice variation suggested in the d20 SRD. I say “typical” because this example contains two large flaws that seem to be present in every other variation that does this that I have seen.

The first problem is adding needless complication. Let’s look at the d20 suggestion to illustrate. In normal rules in this game, an attacker hits when:

1d20 + attack bonus ≥ target AC

The two main traits used in this formula turn out to be derived in a somewhat complicated way. The target AC, for example, is calculated like this:

target AC = 10 + various armor modifiers

…which complicates even further to something like this:

target AC = 10 + armor bonus + dex bonus + size bonus + natural bonus + etc.

This turns out not to be that big of a problem in play, however, because the AC is pre-calculated and written on the character sheet. (Some sheets might also list some or all of the bonus individually, too, but all of them will list AC.)

The variation in the SRD, however, undermines this, attempting to invert the math and ending up with a defense roll where the protagonist avoids getting hit if:

1d20 + various armor modifiers ≥ 11 + attack bonus

What happened to the nice, pre-calculated AC number, that every player already knows how to use? Fortunately, this is easy to fix, given the definition of AC above, by adding 10 to both sides of the equation:

1d20 + 10 + various armor modifiers ≥ 11 + 10 + attack bonus

1d20 + AC ≥ 21 + attack bonus

This may seem like picking nits, but this actually makes a huge difference at the table, because it allows players to use numbers they already know, without modification. (If you use software character sheets and such, it also means that you don’t have to customize the software to display some new number, but can just use what is already there.)

The second problem, however, is a lot worse: the formula suggested doesn’t preserve the probability of being hit. It’s off by five percent.

Now, while the probabilities involved are not that complicated, this is sort of hard to see. The point of this post is provide a visual way to illustrate what is happening. The key, as is often the case in probability, is to focus on the number of outcomes that result in a hit. That is, of the numbers on the die being rolled, how many cause a hit?

Let’s look at an example of what we are trying to model, the probability of the original rules. Lets say an antagonist with an attack bonus of +5 is attempting to hit a protagonist with an AC of 15. This would mean the attacker adds 5 and has to get a 15 or higher to hit. It would look something like this, with the outcomes shown in bold text with a red background indicating a hit:

d20 roll 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
attack result 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
outcome miss hit
9/20=45% 11/20=55%

Now, lets create a mirror to the table showing the suggested house rule. Remember that succeeding on this defense roll means that attack misses, so the defender adds 15 to a roll and needs to get 26 or more to defend (21+attack bonus 5). Let’s still color the results such that bold, red background numbers show cases where the protagonist is hit (meaning a roll of 25 or less). To line up the results, lets display the numbers running the opposite direction:

d20 roll 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
attack result 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
outcome miss hit
9/20=45% 11/20=55%
10/20=50% 10/20=50% outcome
miss hit
35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 defense result
20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 d20 roll

By laying out the numbers like this, it is immediately obvious that the defense formula has a problem. Granted, that problem is in favor of the players, so it could be worse. To match the probability of the original rules, however, you need an adjustment of +1 to the target, so:

1d20 + AC ≥ 22 + attack bonus

This kind of “off by one” mistake is easy to make in systems that use “equal to or greater than” resolution. When inverting an “equal to or greater than” rule, the result must be “greater than” or you have to adjust the numbers. For example, instead of adding +1 to the target, we could have adjusted the comparison operator:

1d20 + AC > 21 + attack bonus

In this particular game, this would be a bad idea, though, because all the rest of the mechanics use “equal to or greater than” style checks. Better to have one slightly odd constant than to have a divergent comparison.

Some additional scenarios comparing the original probability to the “players roll defense” variation can be found in this spreadsheet.

Murky Dealings

Dealings mapI am entering Murky Dealings into the One Page Dungeon Contest 2014, even though it turned out a lot different than I had original intended it. As with my prior entries, I’ve left specific details deliberately vague. When I actually use a published dungeon (one page or otherwise), I usually only make use of the skeleton anyway, and replace the rest with campaign-specific stuff. I assume everyone else does the same thing, so just try to provide a feel to a place and let the reader fill in the blanks with stuff specific to their own game. (In the past, this approach has irritated some judges, but so be it.)

I also think this is more in keeping with the system neutrality which supposedly governs the contest, making it easier to, for example, use the map in a sci-fi game. Settings which don’t allow flying will make this dungeon significantly more difficult (would work well as a final challenge for a modern tomb raiding type game, for example). Another variation is to play with just how dark is “dark”. If you ran it in the Ptolus setting’s Utterdark, for example, everyone would basically be totally blind between the rooms. Even if it is normal darkness, the “see in the dark” magic of most fantasy systems will (intentionally) only be able to see one or two rooms nearest to the one you are in, sometimes none.

I continue to use vector software for maps, though this one also made use of a 3d modelling system to get the shapes right. This dungeon is significantly shorter than what I’ve done in the past, and better suited to a single night’s play. Like my 2012 entry, this is also another attempt to build a dungeon that is not a directional graph.

Seed: Bladechapel battlemap

Bladechapel is the headquarters of a knightly order dedicated to fighting evil threats from other planes in Monte Cook’s urban setting, Ptolus. Since no detailed plans of this fictional building seem to exist, and I wanted to confront my players with devils and demons ransacking the place during a zombie plague (long story), I set about making maps of my own. While I have progressed reasonably far, I’m to the point where I likely won’t be updating it any further. The map is functional, but not what I’d call “done”. As such, I’m releasing what I’ve got as a DivNull seed.


When it comes to maps, I prefer using vector tools like Illustrator over raster tools like Photoshop. This makes me a bit of the odd man out when it comes to making battlemaps, which is largely a raster pastime, but one of the reasons I wanted to make this map in the first place is to see how far I could push the vector tools. I posted progress notes for this map to a gaming cartography forum, if you are interested in more step-by-step stuff. My take aways from this project are:

  • One big goal was to learn how to use Illustrator’s mesh tool. Mission accomplished there. It is powerful and capable of doing things you can’t do any other way, but a bit clunky. I didn’t get really great at using this tool, but I least I understand what I’m doing now.
  • Live tracing seamless textures can build decent fill brushes that give objects more depth. (Vector maps are often very flat and blocky.)
  • Really decent textured fill brushes push Illustrator CS5 to the breaking point. On more than one occasion, I used up all the memory that Illustrator’s 32-bit limit could handle, causing it to die a horrible death. This transformed the project from learning about vector mapping to tiptoeing around the limitations of the software I was using, and is a big contributor to my not finishing the map. The newer 64-bit version might not have this problem.
  • Illustrator has the ability to print by tiling the output across multiple pages in an easy to understand way, but doesn’t extend this functionality to exporting PDFs. If you want to export to a multi-page PDF, you have to create individual artboards, and overlap them manually. The artboard tool makes this possible, but could be easier (allowing selection of multiple boards and editing, say, the X position of all of them at once would be very helpful, for example). I didn’t know any of this before starting this project, so learning it has been useful.
  • I also mostly just ran out of time. My desire to run a game using this map, and the pace of the game itself, overshadowed the need to do the map “right”.

I wound up with maps of five different “floors” of the building, in the end. They are big, as battlemaps go (roughly 50 squares by 60 squares, at an inch per square). Maps are available in two different formats. The PNG files contain the whole floor as a single image, at 150 pixels per inch. The PDFs divide the map onto pages of legal sized paper (the largest paper that the majority of home printers can handle), with a bit of content overlap. Note that all of these files are huge. You might want to look at the bladechapel-key.pdf file first. It gives a decent overview of the building layout and such.

Sources for this map are a bit tricky. I’m not going to post them, because the Illustrator sources are gigantic (the ground floor is over a gigabyte); however, if you are really want to play with them, drop me a comment to this post and we’ll figure something out.

Many of the objects on these maps (tables, chairs, etc.) are bitmaps intended for use with Dundjinni, and credit for them goes to their creators. Likewise, the name “Bladechapel”, “Knights of the Pale” and other aspects of this map are ©2006-2007 Monte J. Cook, used with permission. The textures originated from Seamless Pixels. Everything else should be considered released under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License:

Creative Commons License

The Pandemonium Deck

The world doesn’t really need another variation of the deck of many things, but I built one anyway. I wanted to add something like it to my Ptolus/Pathfinder campaign, but had some slightly different objectives than I’d seen from other variations:

  • based on the Decktet deck
  • focus on individual cards instead of the whole deck, somewhat like Madness at Gardmore Abbey does
  • make assembling and drawing from the deck something the players would have to go out of their way to accomplish, instead of just lobbing the full-power, completed deck into a campaign
  • make drawing cards more difficult, but even more campaign altering than the original deck of many things if the players buy into it.

Though I requested some assistance with the deck from Story Games, I didn’t expect this to bear much fruit. My expectations were met.

If you have read this far, you probably know the deck of many things has a well-deserved reputation for breaking campaigns, where the result of one card would could derail all the action into some odd (and, to the group, inconvenient) place. There have been a number of variations of the deck, most of which seek to solve this problem by gimping the effects of drawing cards.

I wanted the pandemonium deck to go a different direction: rather than avoid the campaign derail, embrace it, but set things up so that everyone is expecting, even demanding, the derail. In broad strokes:

  • No one ever finds the ”deck” whole. People find individual cards.
  • If cards are present at a battle, one of them exerts an “influence” on the battle providing a moderate benefit that moves at random around the battlefield. (There are other assorted tricks, like forcing your card to be the influencing one, etc.)
  • Gathering more cards provides the owner with bennies.
  • If the players decide to make tracking down cards a thing they care about, at a certain point, mechanics kick in that accelerate this process (abilities to locate cards, communicate with those that have them, etc.)
  • Once the entire deck is assembled (presumably after quite a bit of effort), a ritual allows the more classic “drawing a card from the deck” major mojo. There is a slight bit of player control here (draw three, but choose the one that takes effect, etc.).
  • Drawn cards disintegrate and reform at random elsewhere, so must be collected again before another draw can be made.

The resulting deck can be found here: Pandemonium Deck

My favorite review of ’inkadia

Johathan Lavallee reviewed every Game Chef 2012 entry, giving each game four paragraphs about “the good”, “the bad”, “the other” and “would I play it”.

He said this about ’inkadia:

The Good: *stares at the work in shock, jaw on the floor* This is art imitating game.

The Bad: *stares at the work in shock, jaw on the floor* This is at times avant guard art imitating a game.

The Other: *stares at the work in shock, jaw on the floor* This is a dinner party, right? Also, moderately price game for a one time thing.

Would I play it? *stares at the work in shock, jaw on the floor*

I reply:
Totally nailed it.