Skill Challenges

Today we talk about a PnP player's worst enemy: Skill Challenges.

At worst a Skill Challenge is someone rolling his D20(or equivalent  multiple times in order to perform a single action. At best a Skill Challenge is run silently in the background of the game without the player's knowledge.

The second one doesn't sound too bad, but it has a major flaw: The player will eventually be upset at having a single dice roll seem to unravel an entire session of play. Not knowing it's a Skill Challenge makes him think he's just making normal Skill Checks and thus doesn't understand when the Baron randomly decides to not pay him.

I personally run constant hidden Skill Challenges during my games. But I don't do them the way the various guides tell me to. Instead I forego the arbitrary numbers and set a mood instead. I'll explain this in more detail in a bit. But first...

How a Skill Challenge Works:
The DM(or adventure writer) decides that the task being handled is too complicated for a single dice roll. So multiple are required. Usually it is listed as something along the lines of - Each turn you may roll the dice once. A DC/TN(Difficulty Class/Target Number) is set. If you roll high enough to succeed 5 times before failing 3 times then you pass the Skill Challenge.

In a combat situation this works great. It gives you a sense of urgency and possible failure in your task and still allows you to heal or defend yourself during the activity. Out of combat it just feels like you're rolling the dice way too much to be useful.

Dungeon Magazine and Dragon Magazine have a series of articles about making Skill Challenges more effective and fun(they are in 2010 issues). Unfortunately they don't address the fundamental flaw in Skill Challenges. The player feels like he has to roll the dice 10 times to complete a task that could have been delegated to a single roll. In D&D 3.0 this wasn't a huge issue as the entire system was overly complicated, but in most systems it feels out of place.

The best tip out there for dealing with the big flaw is to not tell the players it is a Skill Challenge. Just have them roll as the encounter or in-game day goes on. This makes them more tolerable and adds a sense of mystery to the game. But then the arbitrary numbers get in the way.

Using the earlier example of 5 successes before 3 failures, what if the PC has been sweet talking a few guards. Let's say he has successfully rolled over the DC 4 times and under 2 times. The next roll will determine if the guards let him in the castle or send him away. What if the PC decides to try and convince the guards to meet him for drinks later. A task that has nothing to do with his mission, but still follows under the rules of the Skill Challenge. If he fails to convince the guards to go for drinks, should he be denied entry into the castle?

The short answer is: No. The long answer is: Does the guard feel he's being bribed with the drinks?

When I run a Skill Challenge, I don't tell the players that it's happening unless it is during combat. I set a general mood for success and a general mood for failure. In the previous example: Success = the guard feels like the PC is both trustworthy and a decent guy. Failure = the guard feels he is being bribed or the PC is a shady character.

This seems a bit abstract, but it isn't arbitrary. Deciding that 5 successful dice rolls is more important than 4 in the grand scheme of things has no meaning. It just ratchets up the chance of failure. So rather than having to successfully roll a 15 on 5 separate Diplomacy Checks while talking to this guard, I now only have to roll as many as it takes to convince him I'm not a bad guy. Which, if I word it right, could be as little as 1 roll.

Of course I'm a big fan of the "Natural Rule". In which a Natural 1 or Natural 20 in the D20 system makes something incredible happen. This also works for Natural 3 and Natural 18 for the AGE System.

In talking to the guard for the first time, a Natural 1 basically means I looked or acted nervous and it was obvious that I was lying. He might believe me to be a spy or an assassin and attack right then. A Natural 20 on the other hand would be akin to being temporarily the world's greatest actor. The guard doesn't just let me in, he escorts me where I'm going.

All this allows me as DM to allocate a Skill Challenge without telling the players or upsetting them. And the game runs smoothly. It takes a lot of improvisation, but that is one of the great DM tips anyway.

Review - Ghost Rider: Spirit of Crank

So, I just finished watching Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance.

Now I'll start by saying that it wasn't a bad movie. I enjoyed it for what it was: a quirky action movie, with more attention payed to the visual effects and over the top acting than actual plot. And that isn't a bad thing.

Nicholas Cage was, as he always is, awesomely goofy. I've seen the man be serious before, but the movie played to his strengths. Not to say that I like when an actor is cast to play himself in a movie (rather than cast to play the character), but it works for good ol' Nick.

The character of Johnny Blaze felt off though. I have no real Ghost Rider knowledge (he isn't a favorite of mine), but it felt like Johnny Blaze transformed from one movie to the next. It wasn't a massive transformation, mind you, but it was still evident throughout the movie. Which brngs me to my biggest problem with this movie...

I felt like I was watching Crank. Don't get me wrong, I liked Crank, but that isn't what I signed on for in a Superhero movie. I could tell while watching that the plot was trying to be darker and more character driven, but the director just kept getting in the way. I imagine the director responding to every argument with "But I want to make Crank!" in a childish whine. It just had that super-hyper, pack-as-much-pointless-action-as-you-can feel to it.

On the note of the supporting cast: They did well. The woman, whose name I never even learned(most likely due to the fact that I didn't care), played her part exactly how it felt it was written. The boy, Danny, felt believable as a boy who was (pardon the pun) more than meets the eye. Moreau, the priest, was entertaining. He felt like a drunk Nicholas D Wolfwood (give yourself a cookie if you get the reference). And the Roarke was a good devil. I've seen a few people play the devil in various movies, and I have to say, this guy was one of the better ones.

I wasn't happy with the character of Carrigan. I wasn't exactly disappointed with the actor, he played the part that was written okay, but I was felt like the character didn't fit in the movie. I will point out that he meshed well with the feeling of Crank, but he felt out of place in the writing of the movie.

I also enjoyed seeing a few familiar actors from older supernatural fiction. I'm mentioning specifically Anthony Head and Cristopher Lambert. I haven't seen either one in quite some time, so it was nice to remember why I liked them again.

One other cast member I'd like to mention is Youtuber Tejbz (www.youtube.com/user/tejbz): He had about half a scene to shine, which is exactly what I expected when he mentioned that he was going to be in the movie. And he did about as well as you'd expect from the role limitations and his own experience being an actor (which I'm told is almost none). Hat's off to him.

On the note of sound design: I was saddened that Ghost Rider sounded like Transformers and Predator had a baby. It sucked me out of the moment every time I heard those noises.

On the note of special effects: They were done well, by which I mean they looked nice. A lot of the effects during fight scenes felt tacked on though. Do I really need the background to go black every time Carrigan is on screen? Does Ghost Rider actually see everything emobossed like that? The movie would have been just as good, and cost less, had they stuck with good camera work instead of pointless animation effects.

Overall: The movie was an enjoyable way to waste an afternoon, but the first one was much better.

Every Story is Different

I've spent a good many years of my life trying to figure out how people have the time, or energy, or money to do things that I couldn't dream of. What possesses people to sit on their porch for hours at a time telling the same tired stories? How on Earth could someone my age, who grew up in my town, not have ever heard of Megaman?

I'll forever attempt to unravel the mysteries of life (that's the type of person I am), but after a string of recent situations I'm willing to spend less waking hours on these things.

Recently, I went on a trip to see my Grandmother. Her husband died recently and we were worried about her. Her and my mother talked about loss, grief, and remembering lost loved ones at odd times. I sat in the other room reading a book. (Most of those close to me see me as cold and callous toward death)

My mind works faster than most and allows me to focus on more than one conversation at a time (something that could come in handy if I were a spy) so I listened as they talked, ready to chime in if I felt I could help. I wasn't needed, but I realized as they spoke that there reactions to lost loved ones were drastically different than mine.

Most people who know me well see my calm demeanor toward death as a lack of caring. I'll admit that if I've never met the person I feel no pain at their death unless I witness it, but I do care. My mother talked about walking into a store and feeling pain mixed with fond memories of my father(who died several years ago) and it sounded off to me. Every memory I have of my father is a pleasant one. I know there are memories locked in my mind of things he did that I didn't like, but I can't access them. I also never feel the pain of loss when I think of him.

He is still very much alive to me. Don't get me wrong; I don't see him around me or hear his voice, but I think of him as someone I just haven't spoken to in a while. This may well have something to do with the way I treat people who actually are alive. I enjoy your company, I'll help you out or hang out with you when asked, but I enjoy every second of "me time" I can get. Yeah I'm lonely, I wish I had someone special to spend my life with, but I like being alone too. So when some calls me and asks why I haven't sent them mail or called in 3 months, I inwardly chuckle: I probably forgot they existed for a time.

I guess that sounds mean and heartless... I'm not. I care very much for those closest to me (even when they're being an ass), but my mind doesn't sit still. Every second of the day I'm focused on something; a fictional universe, song lyrics, a friend. I am completely unable to sit and "veg" (which sucks because I would like to meditate). I can not "clear the storm of my mind" as I've been instructed in the past.

So I thought about what my mother said, while reading a book in which the main character discovers his mother has died, and it hit me: Everyone has different reactions to loss. A simple notion that maybe I should have picked up on years ago, but there it is.

And I realized that notion carries to life in general.

My brother is an excellent storyteller. When he gives me something he wrote, my only complaints upon first reading are technical complaints(spelling errors, grammar, etc.). It's not that he's the best author I've read, but he pulls me in; he weaves a world that I want to be a part of.

A friend of his, who is also a writer, mentioned to me how he'd been trying to get his authoring career off the ground for 10 years with limited success. He told me once (upon a request for his input on one of my works) of a website where I could get honest unbiased feedback for my writing. He told me of how the two guys he was sending me to ripped his work apart, and made him a better writer for it.

I write the previous 2 paragraphs to say this: I entered a writing contest and one 1st place out of 40 entries (1 of whom was my brother). I was paid and the work was published. I entered the story feeling like it was mediocre at best, but with a solid idea. I didn't expect to get mentioned, let alone win. And my brother wasn't even a top 3 winner. The event confused me and made me feel bad. I had just received accolades for doing something well, that I felt my brother was better at.

And the website for reviews? One of the two reviewers praised me, giving me tips on how better to draw a reader in, and telling me how much he loved the story. The other guy told me how he could tell that I was confused about who the story was really about, and that it made the story harder to like. But there was no ripping, no harsh criticisms.

I have been blessed with a great gift of Technical Writing (I'm good with the stuff editors hate to deal with), but I don't feel like I'm a great storyteller yet. And I've been so lucky in just the few months that I've begun putting my work out there for the world.

But two writers that work harder, and I feel should be praised harder, have had to struggle and work for their places in the writing community.

I have no big head, and don't expect any success in the future (though I of course HOPE for it). I'm not saying that you'll see my novels lining the shelves at some book store soon. But I have finally experienced the other side of life. I usually struggle for every inch I get in anything, wondering how come that guy gets it so easy, or why does she not have to try? But I finally see myself as the lucky one, the one someone is cursing for being in the right place at the right time.

This drove it home for me. These two seemingly separate events have forever marked me. People are different, yes; but the events surrounding them, shaping them are also different. My life, my odd way of thinking, makes me who I am. And though I've never felt the need to change myself, I now aspire to stop trying to change others.

Because your story isn't mine. I don't write it, I don't even likely have a starring role in it. I'm just a reader... And I want to hear your story.

Improvisation: Make S*#t up!

The best advice a DM will ever hear:

Improvise!

I can fondly remember a session of The Alliance(My home-brew Superhero game) in which I introduced a guy on death row to the party. When they met him they didn't know who he was, but they saved him from an explosion. Once they found out who he was, his purpose in the adventure was to stand between them and a monster so the party could escape. One of my players decided he couldn't allow that; even a serial killer didn't deserve to die at the hands of an alien monster.

The party had met at a gas station earlier in the session so the player asked me "Would it be acceptable if I had bought a bottle of water while I was there?" I said sure. The monster chasing them was on fire. He said "I take some of my extra bow string and tie the water bottle to one of my arrows." Green Arrow wannabe looks at me expectantly. "Will this even work?"

Rookie DM moment. I froze. Nothing in the rules covered water bottles tied to arrows, or spraying water on this particular monster. I hadn't specifically given the monster a weakness to water, but I could see the logic in it slowing him down. I shrugged my shoulders "Roll to see if you hit." As he totaled up his numbers, I panic planned. What do I do if it hits? What do I do if it misses? I obviously didn't want one of the party members to die just yet, but I couldn't let him truly damage this thing until the time was right.

"16?" He looks to me. I check the stat block. "Hit." Improvise mode engaged. "As the arrow hits, the plastic bottle melts and water sprays across his face. He stumbles back. You should probably run before he recovers."

I also remember him saving the convict 2 more times in the same session. He wouldn't let me kill him. Which leads to another tip. Even if he's meant to die in one encounter, give all friendly NPCs at least a simple background and personality. Because your players are going to do everything in their power to screw you over.

A truly harsh DM might have let the hero die right there. In fact had it been a Dark Fantasy I might have. But it was a superhero game, and superheroes do extraordinary things all the time.

An example from the player's side. Recently in our 4e game we faced a Lich. I was planning to take the Ritual Caster Feat and when we beat the Lich an idea struck. Lich Dust could be used for some powerful rituals if the DM is willing to use his imagination. So I scooped up a handful of the dust and put in one of my empty coin purses. The DM looked at me like I had 2 heads. What did I think I could do with it? I respectfully explained that I had an idea I would tell him later and maybe having the dust would mean the Lich couldn't raise itself or would raise with a piece missing. I wasn't sure how Lich raising worked so why not give it a shot.

I also happen to be a bit of a backstory whore. I can't make a character without coming up with how his grandparents met and why he doesn't like the taste of fish. The backstory I had come up with for my 4e character left me with a lot of things I threw at the DM for possible use in the campaign. I don't expect him to use it, but I love when my players give me a way to incorporate their characters into the campaign. So its there if he needs it, and I'll play as if it was happening if he doesn't.

For instance Damasei(My Tiefling Swordmage) serves a Devil. An intelligent Pit Fiend named Medja. He didn't make a pact with this Devil, he was forced into it by a pact his father had made. Damasei learned of the pact when he was a teen and has been using the power he recieved ever since. He aims to destroy the Devil and his contract someday. Medja, however, knows and expects this. So he sent a lesser Devil to keep watch over the Tiefling and make sure he continued to follow orders. This lesser Devil comes in the form of my Arcane Familiar. And now that I've hit level 4 I've gained a new Feat in which I transform into a creature of evil similar to a Devil for one encounter per day. I asked the DM if I could absorb the lesser Devil into me in order to activate the transformation. It sounded cool, and I found I don't really like keeping track of my Familiar in the heat of battle as much as having him around during conversations. So absorbing him keeps him out of my mind for the fight.

DM incorporated the absorbing thing a couple sessions ago, before I even hit level 4. I nearly jumped for joy.

Improvisation is fun, and neccessary, for the DM to be good at what he does. It also makes the game feel more alive.

D&D Next Thoughts

My thoughts on the D&D Next 05/24/12 Playtest:

I will post my thoughts on D&D Next, as I experienced it, in several sections. Each section will focus on a different aspect of the playtest material(magic, non-magical characters, monster creation, character creation, skill tests/challenges, simplicity vs expansive rules, and a summary of changes I'd like to see made).


Magic:
My first thought was how annoying Vancian Magic is. For those who don't know, Vancian Magic is a gameplay feature that limits a mage's spells to a small number per day. For instance: In D&D Next, a level 1 Wizard can cast 3 spells per day... and nothing can grant him more.
Now I understand the goal of semi-realism(No amount of training can grant you infinite usage of magic), but this style of magic usage detracts from the only good point of being a Wizard outside of pure role-playing.
In combat a magic wielding character is useless without magic, and outside of combat there are a variety of situations in which magic makes the game more enjoyable. By limiting me to a few spells per day, I am forced to sit in the back and hurl insults while my friends actually play the game.

To be fair, let me point out the GOOD and the BAD points of different magic types in Tabletop RPGs: Vancian Magic(D&D 3.0, Next Playtest), Magic Points(Dragon Age), Power Cards(D&D 4e)

Vancian Magic - Good
There is a feel of semi-realism. In a "Dungeon Crawl" session you feel good when you unleash a powerful spell against a mini-boss, only to have your spells back next session.
Vancian Magic - Bad
Most adventures span multiple encounters during a single day, leaving the mage as useless dead weight for most of the adventure. You feel like a fresh-off-the-bus magic student ready to learn how to light a candle with your magic, when in fact you're supposed to be a well trained apprentice ready to set out into the world. You have to judge which spells are going to be most effective at the start of each day, predicting the future.

Magic Points - Good
You can decide which spells are more important in the middle of encounters. Magic Points can be regained, through the use of potions or even a quick 30 minute nap in some systems.
Magic Points - Bad
Math. Extra Micro-management(always a drawback for new players). Depending upon how brazen you are when selecting spells, can lead to less spells per day than Vancian Magic at early levels.

Power Cards - Good
Minor spells can be cast mutiple times throughout the day, while powerful spells are limited to 1 time use. Spells are easy to read and remember. A level 1 Wizard actually feels like a real Wizard.
Power Cards - Bad
High Fantasy feel(not always bad). Brings a staleness to the group when used for things non-magical, such as a Fighter's Martial abilites.

As you can see, the magic systems that I have used each have strong and weak points. In keeping with the Vancian Magic feel that D&D Next is shooting for(to appeal to old-school gamers), I offer this suggestion:
Keep the Vancian Magic with a twist. Allow each magical class(Wizard, Cleric, etc...) to gain a single Encounter Spell(4e style) at level 2 or 3. There can be a set of 3 or so Encounter spells to choose from at first which grows every five or so levels. Having a single Encounter Spell makes the magic class feel useful during most encounters, but does not take away the Vancian feel for the most part.

Since D&D Next is supposed to bring old-school gamers and 4e gamers together in compromise, I feel that this magic approach may do exactly that; compromise.


Non-magical characters:
As with most Tabletop RPG systems, the Warrior and Rogue become generic cardboard cut-outs. The Warrior hits things and gets little else to do the entire game. The Rogue is good at stealing things and picking locks, and DPS fighting to an extent.
Now I'm aware of some things (like themes and backgrounds) that add some flavor and usefulness to these classes, but I'll cover that in the Character Creation post. As for now, I'd like to point out my favorite thing about D&D 4e: Non-combat powers.
If D&D Next does one thing for the non-magical classes, let it be the inclusion of varied powers for them. For instance: Things like Endure Pain(From 4e) or a special Intimidate option just for Martial characters. I understand the desire to distance the Martial characters from the feeling of "spells" that 4e had, but keeping the Utility Powers around in some manner would greatly benefit them. One of the reasons I never play a Warrior is that all they are good for is swinging their weapon. I like a bit of variety in my gameplay.
I also like my rogues to be less thief and more acrobat. It's a personal preference, but it is a valid request. As stated previously, the Themes and Background options in Next seem like they might make this available to me. I'll just have to wait until the next playtest to see.

All that being said; I think Next is headed in an acceptible direction for Non-magical characters. I just hope that they look at all the options before slapping a cookie-cutter class at me.


Monster Creation:
Nothing is given on the monster creation process, but I thought I'd give my thoughts on monsters in general. So far it seems like we've gone back to old school monsters. Now for me this isn't a problem, as I have been creating my own monsters for years and have an easy system in place regardless of the game. Unfortunately, not everyone is as lucky, or driven to devise their own monster creation system.
Monster creation was one of the main aspects of 4e that they put a lot of effort into. While I wasn't super impressed with 4e's way of monster creation either, it was nice that they worked so hard on it. I hope that as time goes by, they put as much effort into Next's monster creation system as well. I will be sorely disappointed if they just slap a bunch of monsters together and expect us to use them, like in older versions of the game.
One of my biggest complaints about pre-generated monsters in Tabletop RPGs is the lack of explanations. The monster stat block might go into super detail about where the monster comes from and how many languages it speaks, but offer no reason for why it gets a random +2 to its attack roll. A good example is the Bugbear in the Next playtest: The page mentions what it looks like, what it sounds like, what languages it speaks, its combat strategies, its society and culture, specialized lore... but no explanation for why it recieves a +4 to attack rolls with a javelin when it only has +2 DEX modifier. As a veteren player, I assume it has proficiency with the javelins, granting it extra attack. Unfortunately, my assumptions can not be proven to someone who asks for an explanation. If I were a new DM I might never understand how to create my own monsters if I'm never told why certain stats exist.
Using the Bugbears as an example again, let's take a look at something odd. Take the following sentence straight from the Tactics section of the page: Often, they send scouts ahead to gain information about their prey and then coordinate an attack using sound, if not brilliant, tactics.
Keyword "brilliant". So why does a Bugbear have an Intelligence of 8(-1 modifier)? Maybe military tactics fall under Wisdom? 10(0 modifer). Nope, they still don't seem "brilliant". Sometimes looking at monster stats, in a multitude of games, it just seems like someone threw together random numbers and assigned a name to those numbers. Balanced stats is one thing, but forgoing continuity in an effort to keep the monster low-leveled is just inexcusable.


Character Creation:
I'm more than a little excited for the next playtest, if only to see some character creation options. At least I hope they include them. They claim that the reason character creation was excluded from the first playtest is because they want to be sure that the core rules are working. Character creation is part of the core rules. Without it, the rules mean nothing.
I spend more time creating characters than most, and I can assure you that pouring over the different abilities and powers and themes and weapons and whatever else is the best way to test most rules. Yes I need to enter a battle at some point, and yes I need to interact with an NPC; but those are only part of it. And without having selected what character I'm using, combat and role-playing are pointless and not fun.
What sounds good about character creation in Next is the Background and Theme options. I'm not sure if Backgrounds are going to be optional like in previous editions, but the Themes seem to fill a void I never noticed was empty before. In a previous edition I might have decided to make a Warrior who acts as a wall between his allies and the enemies, or a Warrior who kills things fast. The choice was usually a role-playing one, and had little effect on how the character performed in battle: All Warriors were basically the same. 4e took a good step in seperating different playstyles, but fell a bit short with the generic "Role" system (Defender, Striker, Controller, etc.). It seems that Next is taking that generic system and allowing you to choose for yourself.
I have yet to see; but it looks like I may be able to create a Wizard who acts as a Defender Role, or a Warrior who acts as a Controller Role. While the Themes are a bit more advanced than that, you get the idea. How much fun does it sound like to have you frontline fighter dictating where and when the enemies can move. (4e's Warlord and Swordmage could pull this off to an extent if you built them right.)


Skill tests/challenges:
Not much has changed in this department for as long as I've been playing. I still like Skill Checks and dislike Skill Challenges. For more on my feelings toward Skill Challenges, see my future Blog post about them specifically.
As far as I'm concerned, unless they decide to copy my idea for how to resolve Skill Challenges that I'll mention another day, there isn't anything more they can do for this gameplay mechanic.


Simplicity vs Expansive Rules:
4e was a simplistic rule set. 3.0/3.5 was an expansive rule set. Each system had its own strengths and weakness, but they shared a core experience that was fun for the players. 4e was very newbie friendly and very new DM friendly. As far as I'm concerned this is the best system for people who want to try it, but don't want to micro-manage. As a DM I hate micro-managing, but as a player I don't mind so much. So I am good with almost every Tabletop system I've ever tried, including a few broken ones. 3.0 was overly complicated in my opinion, but it was a lot of fun as a player. 3.5 supposedly fixed a lot of issues, but it still felt like the same game to me. If you ask me, the choice to make 4e was a good one, even if gamers weren't super happy with it.
Sometimes you want complicated, expansive gameplay. Sometimes you want simple. Having both available to you is a good thing. I personally think that Next should attempt one last time to make the perfect system. And when it fails(because "perfect" doesn't exist) they should focus on producing adventures and miniatures for the three biggest systems in their franchise. Lord knows there aren't nearly enough official miniatures for 4e; and 3.0, 4e, and Next gamers will always want more adventures. How about working on adventure seeds (the likes of the time traveling party in the 4e DM guide, or the Blood in Ferelden book for Dragon Age). I could get behind buying a book of adventures and seeds for multiple systems, some old and some new. Creating adventures for the newest system and converting them to the more popular ones would make Wizard money for decades. And reprinting the core books once in a while.


A summary of changes I'd like to see made to D&D Next for the next playtest:
 - Keep the Vancian Magic with a twist. Allow each magical class(Wizard, Cleric, etc...) to gain a single Encounter Spell(4e style) at level 2 or 3.
 - If D&D Next does one thing for the non-magical classes, let it be the inclusion of varied powers for them.
 - Give more detailed explanations for monster stats and why they exist.


Most of the issue with 4e was sales, caused by bad marketing stategy and stubborn gamers. You can't do anything about the latter except call them stupid for being narrow-minded, but the marketing can be fixed easily. With what they learned from 4e, I have full faith that Next can be the next big thing in Tabletop gaming, as long as they get the right rule system in place.
Here's to hoping they get it right.

My journey to becoming a Hands-On Deity.

Everyone has a story. Not every journey is long; I have a friend who began playing D&D simply because the whole school viewed him as a nerd and assumed he already played, so he gave it a shot.

Me? I looked down on D&D when I was young. I thought PnP RPGs and TCGs were stupid because they required that one spend obscene amounts of money buying stuff to even be able to play. Until my brother brought home the Star Wars TCG Starter Set. That was when I first learned of how easy it was to get into... and cheap. All the extra stuff turned out to be unneccessary to play, just to expand. So I spent months bugging him to let me play with him. He thought I was too young to understand the complexities of the game, but I couldn't wait to try my hand. In the end he eventually taught me how to play the Pokemon TCG, which was simpler, as my first card game.

I had been bitten by the bug. I knew from the beginning that Pokemon wasn't an awesome card game, but it taught me something about myself: I am a tactician. By this point I had been playing Final Fantasy for a couple years and I already knew that I was a Power Gamer. And I had been playing games in general for most of my life, and I knew I cared more for fun than winning. But deck building was an art form, an art form I was good at.

I spent days building the best deck I could with the hundred or so cards my brother had given me. Not an easy task when the deck had to be 60 cards. That tradition kept throughout the years as I gained more cards and got into Yu-Gi-Oh!. Now I had a good card game with a lot of options to work with... And I finally had the money to expand. I went to the Yu-Gi-Oh! League at the local mall and participated in tournaments. I developed a reputation there as a Rules Lawyer and a master Deck Builder. People knew(even older kids) that I could make a winning deck out of any amount of cards. And I reveled in the challenge.

As more time went by I got into Magic: The Gathering - An even more detailed and good game than I had been playing. And by this point I was obsessed with a PS1 gem called Final Fantasy Tactics. My favorite non-numbered Final Fantasy. The story was kind of hokey and the translation was sub-par, but the combat! The combat system was incredible. Not only had they perfected the Job system from previous games as best as they probably ever would, but the grid style movement and tactical fights were so awesome.

Then one day, several years later, I moved up north with a friend of mine. He and his friends played PnP RPGs every week. Sure it was mostly home-brew systems(they weren't happy with D&D 3.0 and I don't blame them), but they had 3 games going at once so there would always be one to play. So he invited me to come and I did. I mean, I loved the combat style already, and I was aware that FFT had its roots in PnP.

And I fell in love all over again. The two home-brew games were awesome and open ended in the amount of character classes(if we could think it up, the DM would make it work). And the D&D 3.0 game was fun too, if overly complicated in my opinion. I immediately went home after session 2 and began writing up my own universe to play in. I started modifying rules to work the way I thought they should, and changing races and classes. To this day I've never played in that world, but it sits on my external hard drive ready to be thrown into action when I feel the time is right.

So that was my first official foray into PnP RPGs. But what about my first time as a DM?

When Green Ronin released the Dragon Age PnP RPG as a companion piece to Bioware's video games, my brother was right there with the starter set. He said: "It looked interesting and we both like Dragon Age. You wanna play?" I said hell yes. So we grabbed his two sons and rolled up some characters. We fought some Blight Wolves(which we had almost no difficulty with, despite how hard the gaming community thinks that fight is), saved a dying elf, and made our way to town. A good first session considering most of the party hadn't played PnP before.

It took us a few months to finish that adventure due to work and school schedules, but by then my brother had decided he liked being the DM. When it came time for the next session, we didn't have anything ready just yet. Fortunately for us, I had come across a copy of White Plume Mountain for D&D 3.0 and loved what I had read. So I converted the monsters and loot to the AGE System and our party ran through 2/3 of it. Being that I had already read the whole adventure, I was temporary DM; and I loved it. The rush of knowing that you control the whole world, the power of sending enemies after your friends. And the ability to play multiple characters at once.

By this point in my PnP career, I was well aware of my desire to play every class/race combination in every game. So being DM made that really easy. And, like my brother, I found the ability to be creative with the story a great thing. We are both writers and writing stories for PnP games lets us do what we love, even when we are stuck with our novels.

Currently: I am DM for a Dragon Age game with my regular Sunday night group and a home-brew superhero game with the family group; and a player in our original family Dragon Age game as well as a D&D 4e game with our regular Sunday group.

As a player I control an Elven Circle Mage(Support magic) named Liandra(Female) and a Human Apostate posing as a Warrior(Male) in Dragon Age. In 4e I play a Tiefling Swordmage named Damasei(Male) who focuses on teleportation powers. In the games I played while I lived up north I played a Gnome Samurai(Akara/Male), a Wind Magic Monk(name escapes me/Female), a Mugwai/Gremlin(Rosco/Male), a Human Jedi(Shiori Jesra/Male), and a Human Druid(Kutal/Male).

So there you have it: This blog is called Advice from a Hands-On Deity because I am both the Voice in the Sky and a lowly Adventurer. And I plan on dispensing all the knowledge I have gained in these roles, some of which I had to learn on my own.