Posted on

Drinking rant. RM Gaming Content: What’s the deal?

There is a paradoxical story about the chicken and the egg. Oh, you’ve heard it? Despite your familiarity with that age old story, gather round, young ones about content, IP and game rules.

First, let’s be clear: Terry Amthor is a creative genius and perhaps one of the most under appreciated forefathers of “golden/silver age” authors. I think part of that is due to his modest nature–did you know he wrote/designed other early rpg products under other names? Did you know he authored the sole AD&D adventure module “Thief Challenge? Read blogs. Peruse Grognardia for OSR recollections. The Golden Age of ME products–they were amazing!!! I know, I collected/bought out failing game store inventory (shrinkwrapped!!!) for their inventory at $.10 on the dollar and resold or 50x that once Jackson LOTR was announced. (email me for that story!!)

Ok, this is a drinking rant! Allow me to confuse this blog further and vaguely connect to my opening paragraph. What comes first; rules or settings/adventures? Are they simultaneous?  Why do I have the “Longstreet” SW novel as my top graphic? No idea. None whatsoever-this is a drunken rant.

I have a boatload of SW adventure content–all of it falls within the various RM Forum uploads and my own non-canon material..but…I am ever cognizant of SW flavor, theme and timeline, Everything I write is based on whether it fits SW or Terry will approve. Of course I’m not the writer or creator that Terry is, but I want to add to the milieu.  So my choices now are to publish setting agnostic material here or wait for Terry to catch up to accepted, submitted material.

While yes I crave Terry’s imprimatur, I am also closing in on 50 years old and would like 4-10 products published within the next 10. Should I create a agnostic product using my own version of skill focused, no-profession ruleset?

In the end, I’m and RM loyalist, a SW supplicant, but a frustrated author. I’ve posted over 200 file uploads in the last year + on the RM forums. The bulk of them are Spell Law files but a significant number are SW files. I have a 300 page+ modified SW Master Atlas, a 100 page plus MA creatures, a 97 page module on Ulya Shek for levels 5-25, 77 pages on Nontataku, 7 pages of outline on the Raven Queen and Chycalla War Machines and now a solid outline on the Pillar City! I’m working on my final SWARM doc (Shadow World Alteranate RoleMaster), and am close to uploading an expanded version of the Pales including environmental conditions, game play and expanded creature encounters.

I’m happy to upload any or all of this free of charge. I’m not looking for a payday–I’m guessing RPG publishing isn’t lucrative in any event. My formatting and layouts are poor (not for gameplay use for certainly for publishing). I’m thinking of putting this all up on the Forums or here on the RMBlog. OTOH, even getting one SW product published with the official “stamp of approval” is worth it. Thoughts?

And to finish the drinking rant, tonight’s was provided by Corsair Distillery (an apropos MERP /RM reference)

I will now go read a story from my favorite anthology: Dragon Tales.

Posted on

Using technology. Texting during gameplay.

A post over at Gnomestew got me thinking more about this issue. It’s pretty hard now not to have players looking at their phones during gameplay. Maybe they are bored or the story isn’t focused on their character; maybe they are just conditioned to continually check their devices. For younger players, multi-tasking with a smart phone is almost reflexive, but it can be distracting to gameplay, slow things down or work against the immersive experience of gaming.

We’ve always used post it notes during play: players send me spells they are casting, players talk to each other without the group knowing, I send players privileged info etc. Would text messaging facilitate these communications or does it take players out of the game? I’m thinking of trying it but feel that once I let that genie out of the bottle I won’t be able to put it back.

Interested in others thoughts and/or experiences with this.

Posted on

RM Forum Revisited: The Argument Against Character Classes in Rolemaster. PT 1.

Reaching into the archives! One of my first forum posts in the RM forums was way back in 2011. I posted an initial post and then several responses and subsequently have touched upon this in several RolemasterBlog.com posts. Looking back, I see my forum post suffered from push back on profession/class belief and an unrealistic acceptance of my rule proposals! Either way, I think this in a topic worth exploring and I’ve posted a slightly revised version below.

Since its introduction, Rolemaster’s appeal was as a versatile system add-on integrated into traditional  Dungeons & Dragons.  In RM there are supposedly no class limitations: a fighter could learn spells, and a magic user could wield a sword.  At the time (c. 1982) this was a revolutionary feature in fantasy role-playing compared to the strict restrictions imposed in DnD and other gaming systems.  The wide adoption of a class based systems was driven by fantasy literature but ultimately led to a creative dead end for the following reasons:

1.   Character classes reinforce fantasy tropes.  By continuing to use class titles, RM has ultimately embraced a model it was attempting to challenge.  Over time, it made it harder to differentiate RM from other established gaming systems as they in turn have adopted some of RM’s ideas.
2.   Character classes tend to reinforce the need for the balanced party.  While the adventure group is a foundation of traditional fantasy role-playing, it may also pigeon holes players into class defined roles. Furthermore the game balance then breaks down when there are less than 4 players or there is an odd mixture of player classes in the group.
3.   Character classes should be driven by the setting, not the other way around.  RPG classes have become solid memes: each profession carrying fixed conceptions of its abilities, behavior, appearance or power.  The term wizard or magician may conjure up personal fantasy motifs that can overwhelm a GMs unique campaign setting or dispose us to specific actions based on our understanding of that class.

Rolemaster has always identified itself as a skill based system but it didn’t take the concept far enough.  The fantasy RPG genre is now a mature industry and new game systems and literature are trying to innovate.  Now may be the time for Rolemaster to fully embrace its original mandate: to become a system where a character is truly defined by the sum of his skills and not by accepted class restrictions and aptitudes.  By doing so, RMs system can be more easily adapted to any fantasy setting, regardless of its similarities (or lack thereof) to Middle Earth, Greyhawk or any other high fantasy setting.

Discarding character classes does not make the dozens of professions already defined in the original rule set or companions obsolescent: these professions can always be used as Templates.   The question of what character class fits into any given world setting never need be asked; instead GMs can create or choose skill cost sets that fit the society, guild, group or organization rather than trying to shoehorn RM character class into their setting

Do you really need different professions for a fighter and barbarian?  Are not those differences more defined by racial type, dress, armament and behavior than skill costs?  Do you need 3 different classes for magician, alchemist and illusionist? All are Essence users, defined by the family of spells they specialize in rather than a few arbitrary differences in skill costs.

A basic examination shows that skill development costs are still driven by the very tropes that RM should avoid:  thieves are weak fighters that rely on stealth; clerics are good and heal; magic users can’ t wear armor etc.  If the goal is to eliminate class limitations, then why reinforce fantasy stereotypes or channel character development into these stereotypes?

Problems with my approach.

Moving to a classless system would alienate current RM players.  There are already several versions of RM on the market that players can continue to use.  Personally, I’ve always used the original RM system and never chose to adopt the new versions.  However in terms of changing markets and ultimately RM as  a commercial product; does it make sense to undergo a system evolution rather than just another iteration?  The development discussion around Arms Law is more than a polishing so why not take a new approach to Character Law?

There is some comfort is settling into traditional gaming roles.

We are currently playing through an Expert D&D module using Castles & Crusades rules.  While it feels like putting on a comfortable pair of slippers, its lack of flexibility is already apparent to our group of experienced players.  It may just be that if you played a long time, eliminating these stereotypes and expectations can lead to a novel gaming experience.   Certainly the latest fantasy literature is moving away from these traditional memes: Erickson, Lynch, Rothfuss are all good examples and it is popular literature that can drive contemporary game design.

There is a strong argument for classes, predispositions etc.

Eliminating classes would homogenize characters and/or create the optimized (min/max)  profession.  While I haven’t gotten to some suggested solutions yet, I see a place for both a classless system and classes as templates.   And no, I’m not suggesting the No Profession option already included in the rule set.  There seems to be a belief that an open skill system would lead to player optimization: maximizing key spells, weapons and a few other skills to produce the ideal character.  While new rules can still account for that, I would argue that this  already occurs under the current system.  A quick review of the new character classes, optional rules, talents and background options all point towards the trend to balance individual classes out and then expand their abilities beyond their designed skill cost assignments.   In the end you have an exhausting list of optional rules and exceptions that complicates the system and perhaps leads to game imbalance.  And all of it really driven by one base motivation: more character flexibility.

A few last thoughts:  Is there any really guidance, rules or balance to the current character class generation process?  Besides an arbitrary assignment of perceived primary abilities is there a really way to balance classes?   Does anyone believe that character classes are equal in balance and playability?

So let’s move on to few ideas.

Step 1.  Skill Bonuses.

Before we tackle a skill driven based system we need to look at both skill progression and costs.  Perceived character balance is created by the careful structuring of skill costs but may not take into account player motivations.  These decision points can be simplified as the sum of three components

1.   Additional benefit = (skill bonus increase)
2.   Cost of additional benefit  = (development point cost)
3.   Opportunity Cost = (decision to forego a different skill)

The three of these act as a measure of Marginal Utility, a common economic measurement of consumption and decision making.  In simple terms, players look at the cost of a skill, the additional bonus against other skills they may need or want when making their skill picks.  Even with high DP costs, most players can afford a versatile selection of skills.  That’s because the first 10 ranks offer the highest marginal utility per DP cost AND most skills are limited by a maximum gain of 2 ranks per level.  By capping skill rank increases per level you force players to choose the skills that provides them better cost/benefit than CORE skills.  In effect this system has an unintended consequence of reinforcing character classes/tropes. So the marketing effort is ‘no limitations’ but is really ‘play by the common rules’.

One way to address this is to modify the skill rank bonus progression.  The current system is simple: +5 for ranks 1-10, +2 for ranks 11-20.  I would suggest a different approach, starting with Rank 1 a bonus of: +1, +2, +3, +4…..+8, +7, +6, +5, +4 down to +1/2 after Rank 20.  Ultimately this gives you the same bonus at Rank 20 you have under the current system.  Not only would this change players skill picks since buying 1 rank of a new skill has less utility,  but the progression has a more intuitive curve.

As discussed previously, a change to the skill bonus chart will have an affect on player skill picks.  This would then be combined with a change to the skill DP costs: basically making skill acquisition limitless at each level with a marginal cost increase per rank per character level.

So while this system can allow a player to increase a skill at a much faster pace than the current system it comes with a much greater DP and opportunity cost.    If Caylis had chosen to gain 1 rank per experience level his total DP cost for 8 ranks of that skill would be 16.  Instead he used 29.  The combined effect of this change to the skill rank bonus and DP cost adds a third dimension to decision making.  A player that wants to excel at a particular skill early will be able to do so, but at a substantial opportunity cost of other skills.

The added benefit to this system is that it can not only standardizes character class creation but also allows for a classless system as well.  The best of both worlds.

In response to forum feedback:

Despite the thread title, which was meant to be evocative, I’ve carefully stated that this system works for both a skill driven system or applied to the current RM classes.  I did skill cost allocations for all of the original 18 classes in about 45 minutes.  If players/GM’s want to use the existing classes then it’s easy and quick to adapt.  If a GM wants to generate a new class based on his campaign setting then he has a toolkit that allows for an efficient and flexible method.  If a player wants to tweak the skill costs on his character than there is baseline for doing so(in this case 162 pts to allocate as skill costs assignments).

 

I was never arguing removing professions.  “Argument against Professions” was meant to strip away preconceptions and then rebuild the class/skill/cost framework consistent with the rules and spirit of the original RM.

 

Posted on

‘Appy Inspiration

I have been gallivanting around Iceland for the past week or so and being surrounded by reminders of elves, known locally as the hidden people, trolls and giants is quite good for gaming inspiration.

Ironically possibly the best bit of inspiration that came to me was nothing to do with the fantasy rich local culture but from my mobile phone.

We all recognise that magic items are not just about +15 weapons, daily spell items and multipliers. It is the more colourful items that can give a campaign its flavour.

I installed a Aurora Borealis forecasting app on my phone as soon as I arrived and it was pretty good and we did indeed see the lights display when forecast. When you see the northern lights it begs the question of what on earth must the first people to see it have thought. No wonder so many cultures have myths and legends of magic. Without our scientific understanding of ionisation and solar winds magic would probably be the next most logical rationalisation.

So if these displays of lights are created by magic then surely you could either tap into that source of essence or read from them some heavenly enlightenment or foreknowledge. Knowing when they were going to appear and where would be really useful and I am sure many a seer or astrologer would want a magical device that could predict the northern lights. A sort of ‘orb of the heavens’ sort of thing.

So this set off a train of thought. In our culture ‘there’s an app for that’ is a bit of a joke but what if for every app there was a magical item?

Looking in the itunes store at the most popular apps I see that a QR reader is one of the most popular apps. I can easily see that materialising as a crystal of attunement (runes).

Spirit level apps seem popular and in magical terms imagine an item that combined the low level spells of mannish scale and the lay healer diagnosis spells that could tell you so much about the target. What form it would take is open to interpretation. I am personally envisioning a set of lenses and crystals through which the user peers.

There are countless musical instrument tuning apps and they would make great magical items that any bard would love.

Voice changer apps can be reimagined as Sound Mirage based items.

The more I look at the range of apps available the more I possibilities I can see and for the most part based upon first through third level spells. Not that everything has to be tied directly to a spell in spell law but items that are simply useful whilst not being exceptionally powerful are easier for the alchemists of the world to create and are more likely to be created if they do not cost the earth or take forever.

I think the take away from this is that if you are looking for ideas to perk up a treasure horde or to make an NPC a bit more interesting then you can get some interesting ideas from either itunes or Googles app store.

Posted on

Retrospective: the genesis of the Rolemasterblog.com.

So, this is my 3rd blog of the day! Since I have some renovations this weekend and I’m feeling like writing, I thought I would post up a few posts now and not worry if I can’t post this weekend!

This one is short, but worth the review. A few years ago, a discussion was stared on the RM Forums about blogging–specifically about Rolemaster. I happened to read it again and found it interesting to see Peter’s first thoughts and ideas, and now, a few years later how the actual RM Blog has developed in terms of those early thoughts and actual performance.

Read that original blog linked above and share your thoughts. Inez…where did you go? I’m going to blog about your blog in the next few days or weeks. Come to the light and blog here occasionally! Peter, what are your thoughts, reflections or feedback on your blog?

Posted on

Random Reading: Red Sister

This is not a book review…I recently started reading a great book, Red Sister by Mark Lawrence. Mark is the author of 2 other series: The Broken Empire and the Red Queens War. Like his other series, Red Sister takes place in a fantasy world with a lost high tech heritage—a bit like Shadow World!

When I’m reading a new fantasy series with a magic system I try to figure out if the portrayed system can be based on Spell Law/Rolemaster or if there are any cool spell ideas I can incorporate into Project BASiL. Having read quite a bit, I can say that many of favorite spells and lists were inspired by fantasy fiction.

Red Sister offers up several ideas that feed into recent discussion and posts here on Rolemasterblog. First is the idea that setting drives the rules and second, that Channeling could be rolled into Esssence (or eliminate realms entirely).

Of particular note in the book (no spoilers)

Races. The population was descended from 4 races. One that had great size and strength; one that had incredible speed, one that could tap into lesser magics and one that could tap greater magics. While this is a common trope, sometimes I do miss more differentiation between the races in RM and SW. Barring some stat bonuses (whose impact are minimized at higher levels) most races are defined by physical characterization than special abilities or extremes of nature.

Religion. The story focuses on a convent, one that trains young women in the esoteric arts. Holy Sisters, the most common are focused on maintaining the faith. Grey Sisters focus on stealth and poisons and have a talent for “Shadow Work” (mentalism?). Mystic Sisters manipulate threads (magic) and Red Sisters excel on armed and unarmed combat (warrior monks). What I like, and what’s been discussed here on this blog, is the idea of “agnostic magic”—magic defined by aspect, focus or effect rather than Essence, Mentalism and Channeling. Religions and churches train in magic and have access to this special knowledge, but magic use isn’t tied to or dependent on a diety.

So far it’s been a good read. If you like “Monk” stories I would also recommend Witches Blood.

Any books you’ve read that could fit the Rolemaster/Spell Law system?

Posted on

Drinking and RPG Blogging.

Welcome to my new blog topic! This is where I had a hellacious work day and needed to vent my energy on table top RPG bloggers! Yeah! ‘Murica! And because I’m drinking bourbon, I have no idea if this makes any sense! If not, you lose. I only post amazing blogs, they are the best, and they WIN! You read my blogs, you will only WIN, in fact, you’ll be tired of WINNING. If you don’t feel that way. SAD!

So we have a  nexus of issues! Between RolemasterBlog, RM Forums, history, fantasy economies and the prevalence of magic in a world. I thought I would respond to JDales comments. For non RMForum members, JDale is part of the development team for RMU–the newest edition of RM.

Here is his comment.

Here is my response below. btw I don’t see this as adversarial and I’ve never met Jonathan (but we should, given that you are in New England)? btw Peter, “New England” is a reference to the NE area of the “colonies” and now the rich source of true craft beer brewing and homespun problem solving! and we drink coffee not tea and don’t need times set aside for “tea drinking” which allows us higher productivity.

My response to JDale (aside.. I have no idea how any of you track mechanistic changes to erudite rules)

I suspect my initial assumptions were based on the Sel-Kai economy than the euro-medieval model of traditional fantasy trope (warhorses and castles). In SW, nobles and powerful individuals wield clear or colored LAEN swords; garb themselves in high tech and stylistic garb (Duranaki anyone?) and access a fusion of magic/tech that is mostly tech. I see SW as more Star Wars than Game of Thrones. Most of the powerbrokers in SW are immortal, immensely wealthy, high powered individuals, groups or secret societies.

With that said, there is a whole other level of antiquities that are based on a more attainable category of collectibles: 2nd Era and 3rd Era objects. That still covers 8000 plus years (comparably now until before the Mesopotania cultures!). Gobleki Tepi, 10,000 years old and well beyond historic paradigms is still relatively crude compared to Shadow World’s Interregnum–that would be 100k years after Gobleki in our time scale and doesn’t cover the 1st Era.

These objects are like pre-history, pre-history. In our world this would be like the Papyrus of Turin or the Sumerian Kings List which trace rules back 10-40K years. So long ago that it’s dismissed as superstition and story telling.

So what the hell does all this mean? 100,000 years of civilization is a LONG TIME. Most fantasy RPG’s treat all past civilizations as “the relative, commercial value of their treasure”. Everything is measured in a GP standard. We’ve seen that before: the Spaniards melted down priceless objects, hammered walls of gold and precious written histories for the base value of the metal.

So, my valuations seem high compared to a feudalistic society but this is for “museum quality” historical artifacts in a society that accepts either high “tech” or metaphysical phenomena. So the argument is really whether this a BUYER pool to justify these values rather than  a supply argument? btw,  for those in the know, this mirrors the current valuation for air-cooled 911’s o r 80’s super cars? (check Haggerty Insurance valuations). Is this rational?

Wait, what? This seems like a very modern argument. Yes? But..the the vast majority of power brokers are Ka’ta’viir or descendants or off-world visitors. Economics was well developed in the late middle ages; commerce, fiat currency, debt etc. A modern understanding of economics lifts a culture past feudalistic tendencies?

Does these high antique valuations “break the game”? No, I’m a firm believer in money sinks: breakage, overhead, research, outfitting, training etc.

Let’s tie this all together? I can’t, I’ve been drinking bourbon. I just wrote a “stream of conscious” and not even sure it make sense. Your comments on any of this? I am open to criticism and scorn, but more interested in insightful observation. Or, thoughts on American bourbon or single malt scotch!

 

Posted on

Rolemaster: Outside Looking In.

I’ve been reading quite a few RPG blogs lately, and as you might imagine most of them discuss DnD or one of it’s near variants. Some of it is nostalgia (OSR), part curiosity, and general interest in other viewpoints and experiences. One thing I notice over and over–most of these other blogs and forums don’t spend too much time on rule litigation/arbitration. Most blog posts are:

  1. Product reviews or retrospectives
  2. In game experiences
  3. General advice on creating content or running games.

That made me wonder what non-RM rpg players see when they encounter online RM content. First, if you google “rolemaster, blog” you won’t get that many results. Some of it is older forum discussion on “chartmaster”, “rulesmaster” or the complexity of playing. That’s probably not best foot foward. So how about the people that check out the RM Forums? What do they see or what impression do they get? If they aren’t a member they won’t see the RMU development forums (that may not be a bad thing–those discussions really get in the weeds). If you are active on the RM Forums, take a step back and look at it through the lense of a new user.

One of the most active thread topics of course is “Rolemaster”. What are the current topics? “Withdrawing from Melee”, “How to teleport into a moving target”, “how to handle Perception/Stalking”, “monster orientation roles”. These threads and many, many more are adjudication topics–“How do I handle this or interpret the ruleset”?

I’ve made the analogy before comparing Rolemaster to DOS and other game systems to MAC OS. DOS users love to tinker and program while MAC users just want a packaged user experience. While I consider the “rule programming” of RM a plus, I often wonder if it has been at the cost of user experiences (game content). Obviously Terry can only write so much, so fast. MERP is in permanent stasis, Cyradon and Echoes of Heaven are…(I have no idea really)? When people do wax nostalgic about RM it’s usually about the old MERP modules: artwork, maps etc and of course the cool critical tables. How do you create more content? Does opening up to third parties help? Is there even a large enough user base?

When I read about cool new content and modules in other RPG blogs, I sometimes feel like an outsider. What do other players see when they look at RM now?

Posted on

Weekend Roundup: March 25, 2017

Welcome back to the “Weekend Roundup”! It’s been several weeks since I’ve done one; it’s been hard to scan the news here in the U.S.A. without getting bogged down in political crazy. In the interim, I got a message on the RM Forums:

BHanson: Do you think you could post more roleplaying news rather than obscure or fringe stories?

To clarify, the ‘Roundup’ is more a collection of news, stories or facts that grab my attention or give me an idea or hook for my own RM/Shadow World campaign. Sometimes a story just clicks, I make a note of it and when I get enough of them, put them up on the ‘Blog. I was hoping for more comments–just curious if any of the links spark a similar thought, idea or creative path for anyone else. I think I just posted up general RPG news, it would a. be topics covered at other bog sites, b. rarely be about RM or SW! So with that said, let’s begin.

Keron, Eog, Laen, Ithloss…..ORICHALCUM????

I was doing research and found these real life Roman SUPER SHIPS!

Syrkakar Armor?

Something found in a Wizards Tower. In an RPG, THIS would have to be a powerful artifact!

Detailed and Mystical Statues.

Real life Arms Law

 

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Sweet Jesus!  #$&@!& more Elvish crap!

Legacy of the Earthwardens: Cultural transmission of knowledge.

No Elves…how ’bout Gnomes?!

It’s been 5 years, but still a great reservoir of RPG blog posts.

Now I’m enjoying this RPG blog.

Speaking of “Longskulls”….The HUN also practiced skull elongation….

Good advice for the Next Generation.

I’ve posted up quite a few files on the RM Forums and linked to them on various posts on this blog. For those that asked–you need to have a RM Forum account to SEE and DOWNLOAD files and see the RMU development forums. JOIN! REGISTER NOW

Posted on

Channeling, it’s not just for Gods anymore?

Why do I keep coming back to Channeling? Tackling Spell Law deconstruction and rewrite forced me to look at all the underlying assumptions around the magic system—not just RM but other games as well. I think Essence (generic magic) is easy: as long as you allow for the phenomena, then simple rules allow for casting spells. Mentalism is not much different than Essence and often conflated as Psionics. Channeling is a whole other can of worms: God given magic REALLY needs to work in a completely different way. We’ve discussed Channeling in depth in several blogs HERE, HERE and HERE.

How might Channeling be different than the other two magic Realms?

Spell Acquisition. Unlike Essence or Mentalism, a PC can’t just go to a library, secure a scroll, learn a spell list and then cast a channeling spell. A “God” must give at least tacit approval for someone to cast a channeling spell. Additionally, you could argue that no learning is really needed—spells could be directly granted by the Diety. This changes the standard process of spell acquisition.

Spell Effects. Common sense would dictate that a caster might not be able to provide magical buffs, benefits or spell effects to targets of an opposing Diety. Unlike Essence which is agnostic, Channeling is driven by an ethos, aspect or belief system. You shouldn’t be able to heal a follower of a mortal foe of your God…right? So the whole group dynamic might be complicated when the Cleric is the primary “buffer” and healer for the group but the other members of the group worship different gods.

Force Majeure. RM Channeling description suggests that PP’s are funneled to the caster and in my BASiL project the spell itself is funneled to the caster (ie like a software download). Either way, the Diety is providing, approving or allowing part of the casting formula. That requires SOMETHING in return on the part of the caster: certain behavior, loyalty, tribute, sacrifice, tithing etc.

Certainly much of this relies on the setting. These may seem like niggling over fine points; and you can certainly hand-wave away any needed explanation—it is religion after all. But RM and RM users take a certain pride in quantifying effects into game mechanics: detailed herbs and spells for healing; complicated Alchemy rules for magic item creation; math driven charts for modelling weapons and armor effects. If Channeling raises some broader questions about its use, than why not establish this in the game rules?

Personally, I’ve come down to two broad options:

Option 1. Disconnect the Channeling mechanism between a caster and a Diety. As Peter argued, Channeling could just be rolled into Essence as “general magic”. That makes sense. Just disconnecting Dieties from spell casting mechanics eliminates all of the awkward questions that Channeling raise in the above examples. If you were you to do that, what then would be the purpose of Dieties?

  1. They can still bestow “beneficence” in answer to prayers for held or assistance.
  2. Lead, create and direct religious organizations.
  3. Control the dissemination of hidden knowledge (spell lists and certain skills).
  4. Interfere in the mortal world

Under this option, Gods are still supreme entities, still have the same powers, play the same role in the world but just don’t act as a conduit for Channeling spells.

Option 2. Go “all in”. Further develop Channeling as a relationship between a powerful being and a follower. If we accept that channeling magic is controlled, allowed, or provided by a Diety than how should that work? More importantly, what prohibits anyone from being having followers and Channeling spells/power to them? I’ve touched upon this with my BASiL Channeling project—spells that only work with designated targets: loyal followers, henchmen, oathbound etc.

The idea goes back to the issues explored earlier—that a Cleric can provide powerful benefits, but only to followers of the same Diety. For Holy Warriors, it becomes even more specific—benefits are only bestowed upon the group, militia or organization of the Holy Warrior. (ie High Templars cast spells to the benefit of his soldiers and/or followers).

The Gods of Shadow World aren’t really gods—just very powerful entities from another dimension. How do they parse out spells/powers? Do they control the entry point of Essaence into Kulthea? Did they devise spells and teach them to their followers? If they are just powerful beings, then can any powerful PC or NPC also grant similar spell ability to their followers? Popular fiction is replete with “Lords” or “Archmages” bestowing their hirelings and henchmen with special abilities—isn’t this Channeling? How about the Dragonlords? Are they powerful enough to act as Minor Gods? Can Minor Gods in Kulthea also provide Channeling to their followers?

At what point can a person bestow spells or power to another? RM already establishes a base mechanism for transferring PP’s or spells  with the Channeling SKILL. I would take it a step further: a formalized process of creating a relationship between “god/lord/being” and “followers”. I played around with an initial spell list concept I uploaded HERE. (RM Forum account needed to access the list). Conceptually, the mechanics of a Channeling process should include:

  1. Bond, link or loyalty or obligations between a god & a follower.
  2. Mutual benefits to both parties. (follower gets spells/benefits, God gets…?)
  3. A substantial downside if the bond is broken, destroyed or a party is killed.

My list needs a lot more work (more specifics on penalties and drains–comments welcome) and is just one possibility of many. (Perhaps the Lords of Orhan use a similar but different spell list). But the framework is there and I like the possibilities for a number of reasons:

  1. It allows a PC/NPC to grow in power outside of the normal experience/level/skill paradigm.
  2. Establishes a known process for Gods to be created/and or a player to ascend to a demi or minor god.
  3. Creates a mechanism for a powerful lord/being/god to influence a local event or encounter.
  4. Provides benefits for a player to pledge to a lord/God.
  5. Balances risk and reward for such a relationship. (need some more work on this)
  6. Acts as an adventure hook.

Is the list too powerful? It certainly wouldn’t be readily available, but let’s review the cost/benefit analysis to a PC using the list:

  1. A follower would have to forgo any other Channeling relationship. (no other god)
  2. The player would need to offer a real benefit to a follower to justify their fealty.
  3. Followers would be a liability. An adversary would target a player’s followers knowing that would weaken or harm the player.
  4. Each follower will require a resource drain on the player.
  5. The benefit would be a growing pool of devoted followers which the player can enact agency through and receive some benefit (HP, PP, stat points?—needs some more thought)

Ultimately Options 1 and 2 aren’t mutually exclusive. I can still disconnect Channeling realm from Dieties and still have the Channeling list and mechanics. Anyway, this went from a thought experiment: “how should Channeling Realm work” to the start of an interesting game mechanic for my SW campaign. Channeling isn’t just for Gods anymore!