Fluff...

...is the stuff which either fills in space or just becomes the very space which makes something either lightweight or pretty filled in the right places.

Just cruised around the forum boards of RPG.NET for any interesting reading for ideas and reviews and came across this thread. The mention of crunch (game mechanics, rules and math for the not-so-gamer savvy) made me recall an entry I did on my blog here. Its a bit of debate necromancy as to the GNS model of gaming since time immemorial when critical analysis of games have brought to bear on how games were conducting in spite its very obvious and earlier tabletop wargaming roots. But anyways I will not dwell on something that's been-there, done-that and the ever usual spark of violent combustibility for a flamewar of sorts, I'll just examine and discuss what fluff would do or help in the arsenal of items a GM would use besides the toolbox of his ruleset of choice.

Fluff which is usually defined in the gamer community usually connotes to the background and setting info which would cover a lot of info regarding the game world from macro to micro aspects of existence and its many inhabitants. This is usually taken as is by the GM and players to use and base their decisions on the PCs and how NPCs and campaigns are forged. In other cases, the fluff would be very dry or light in material which leaves a lot of interpretation or guesswork to do for the GM to wrack his brains over to no end and also leaves a potentially big loophole for some enterprising PCs to exploit and manipulate to no end besides their apparent abuse of the system they know inside and out, especially if the GM is not fast on the uptake with this. A better way to approach it is that fluff and crunch have to go hand in hand in some measure to better illustrate how it works in the game setting and how the game rules or stat illustrate it without being overpowered by either end of fluff or crunch.

Some sourcebooks for what appears to be for exclusive game systems it operates under can basically be retreaded into other game systems of a more suitable preference, if systems would allow for it in-genre of course. Example of such books to idea mine, port and transfer would be like Century Station Sourcebook for Heroes Unlimited by Palladium Books, Unnecessary Evil for Savage Worlds by Pinnacle Entertainment Group,
Transhuman Space for GURPS and standalone (with built-in GURPS Lite) by Steve Jackson Games, Centauri Knights for BESM by no-longer-active publisher Guardians of Order. Sometimes a genre-specific tie-in would help ease the transitioning to some manner as long as conversion issues are not to problematic like example of transplanting a superhero setting or ideas from its native system to a more familiar system of the GM's choosing, complexity taken into account as well.

So basically fluff can be both an attraction and a deterrent as well the way the system or crunch would be in the presentation of a given game. If done in the right proportion or properly moderated or presented, it wouldn't prove to complicated or daunting for the reader, whether it be prospective GM or player.

Dungeons & Dragons and Role Playing Games

Barry Osser, the owner of North Coast Role Playing in Eureka, California talks about the history of role playing games, the types of RPGs, genres, and lots of interesting tidbits in his video series How to Play Dungeons & Dragons and Role Playing Games.

A touching film about Role Playing

A short film on role playing with a bite. Roleplayed was written and directed by Chad Peter.

Letting a game freely roam

Unexpected line of thought after reading this entry and some discussion with the blog writer who made that entry. It got me thinking in retrospect along with the left turn agenda as well as I look back in my high school game which I GM'd back then.
To put it simply, this is to elaborate on the usual model of RPing as opposed to the more free-form or sandlot type of gaming.
The usual style goes like: Crawl through the adventure locale, kill encounters and take its stuff, cash in xp/advancement point/etc paycheck and call it a session done. The variation on this would analogized to a by-the-rails format of gaming, a concept I borrowed from by-the-rail shooter games like most light gun arcade games go. The limitation in the above-mentioned example is that, the grind or process of accruing the wealth and advancement points would be a tedious time consuming affair. It sets goals but more of a selfish variety in regarding to personal advancement as well as wealth and materials advancement.
The free-form or sandlot game would be considered for the experienced GM and a decently seasoned group of players in his handling. The free-form or sandlot game is where the need to do the usual grind process is eliminated and the focus or priority is more to smoother game handling and role-playing aspects. Given that its free-form or likened to a sandlot style of gaming with the likes of the GTA videogame series, Mercenaries games or the Fallout series especially. This format is giving the players complete autonomy to do what they want in the game setting and nothing is heavily forced onto them. The experienced GM is a must to handle it since story elements would just be triggered and other details would be enabled on the fly. Pre-made stuff would be the order of the day to cover all the bases in case the players desire a certain encounter or action to be met by opposition. It also eliminates the matter of origins and other stumbling blocks of coming of age and such because you have unlocked all the potentials and possibilities that the player's imagination would conceive of. This frees up the doldrums of grinding away and having to deal with beyond/over the horizon goals of getting to that level of character advancement while the pacing is slow in handling due to a number of things. Its also a trust issue for the GM and the players to commit in an unspoken agreement to make the story go smoothly without giving each other grief.
With a synergy of GM and players going with the common goal of having fun, the results speak for themselves in terms of memorable storytelling since the tedium of a traditional dungeon/building crawl of a game is rendered nil or minimized. Its all in the story and character development which makes me very enjoyable in the long run.
Its all a matter of fiddling with system switches and dials to crank up maximum fun with the system. Texture of game system would also be a deciding factor in making such an endeavor fly and roam. I say this because sandlot games would have a moderate to minimum level of crunchiness because a overly crunchy game system would bog things down due to the GM processing done. A rules-light with a eye to cinematic gaming would be key in making this happen.
GMs can be agoraphiles in the context of this topic because we always have this affinity for freedom that makes possible our imaginations to roam and explore. That's it for now on this entry. Happy gaming!

RPG Game Reviews on Youtube.com

The post title says it all. The video reviews of a number of tabletop RPGs, whether they be major franchises or obscure are located here. It covers a gamut of game genres and settings indicated in its review. The reviews are pretty straightforward and not without much bias or preference and the reviewer Kurt Wiegel handles it well with his own honesty in the review of the games he has covered. Its a refreshing take on a game review without the dripping snarkiness that can be said for certain videogame review shows. All in all, a highly recommended view on this video reviews that can help you pick and choose games for your preference.

Making your game feel awesome as it should be (or whatever sales pitch you marketed it to be)

Just browsing through threads at this forum and this thread caught my eye. The deeper I read into it, it appears more in line with the left turn agenda I have come to realize and apppreciate.

The thread mentioned happens to start the semi-rant of the thread creator about how come the games he's been in doesn't have that sense of awe in spite the efforts put into the game by players and GM. Further responses and feeling some sense of familiarity brings it to the fore.

Its about the emotional investment for the players with regards to the stories they offer and play out in the campaign whether as mainline plot or subplot. Plot and/or subplot can be addressed with decent storyhandling skills of the GM but part of the equation has to come from the player in terms of input and what story elements he/she offers.

I would surmise enough that it has to start from the campaign's creation and the players who'll be interacting with it. The other element that would make this work further is that players have to trust GM in the handling of the story elements brought into the campaign's mix and secondly, GM and Players should not downplay or ridicule any emotional spotlighting that can happen in the course of the session or campaign itself.

I would have to treat the matter as a theatrical production which is done by the table and not on the stage. Another thing to note is that some enticement or incentive from the GM would help matters along to encourage players to act out the parts more or give meaning to the very personas they are playing. Without such, it always come out trite and just another mundane routine of scenario crawling and bashing usually perpetuated by incentives of earthly rewards achieved by the brief thrill of rolling dice.

To get your own brand of awesome into the game, it will require planning, cooperation and time to get it out. This is like locating and mining the really hard-to-find stuff which you can use to make your magic bullet of creation (This is a metaphorical reference based on this entry writer's post.). The payoff from this in the long run would be great stories that reflect on the session itself and moreso for the campaign in terms of memories and its highlights.

All in all, like a movie, investment is one part of it and the rest has to be handled competently by its production and cast in order to produce a movie of good story and presentation.

d20 Modern SRD Home

Modern SRD Home is your OGL d20 Modern reference, hosted at 12 To Midnight creators of Fear Effects, Brainwashed, Last Rites, Bloodlines, Fire in the Hole, Jerry's Midnight tales, Skinwalker, Innana's Kiss and others.

d20 Hypertext

The Hypertext d20 SRD (v3.5 d20 System Reference Document) is very useful tool for DMs and players using d20 D&D in their games online or off. A very useful tool that I like is the Firefox search plug-in which really enhances the usability of the site. Check out the "Site Utilities" for other tools.

The author notes that all the content on the site are only open content released under the Open Gaming License (OGL), which includes OGL content from the following books: Player's Handbook, DM guide, Monster Manual, Epic Level Handbook, Deities and Demigods, the Expanded Psionics Handbook. Check out the FAQ for items included and not.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Escapist

Have you ever found yourself hear certain people claim that Harry Potter and D&D books contain real spells? Read The Escapist - Random Encounter - It's just my opinion, I could be wrong..., it's funny!

Gaming then and now

This is a post of Marc and I's Y!M conversation last Sunday which was posted on my blog. Follow the link here.

Anytime, anywhere, anyplace...

The title of this post seems to be the catchphrase or buzzwords to fit a so-called universal RPG system. Of course, it sounds like the Rosetta Stone to modelling reality for whatever setting it will played in whether by location, genre or theme.

Besides its claims of modelling everything under the sun including the kitchen sink matters, there is also a matter of the level of granularity of the system. This is decided whether te system in question is crunchy or gooey in terms of stats and mechanics.

This post came about from perusing a number of threads on RPG.NET of late. I've seen many cases where gamers would fit setting A into system B which initially fashioned in system C and ad nauseum. Each of the proactives of their fave system would indicate mechanics which best suit or simulate the myriad aspects and details for a setting or idea presented.

Back in the earlier days, the most often go-to system would GURPS which happens to be what it was intended for the purpose, though it entails a major library expansion to accommodate the needed source/genre books to get the most of it. The current trend now is toward so-called "toolkit systems" which just happens to be a big tome of rulesets and a number of suggestions how to make use of this ruleset. HERO system happens to go with this. I was about to mention D20 system as such since it has become all too pervasive in gaming circles which I would call the Microsoft of Gaming systems or in Trekkie parlance, The Borg.

On one spectrum of the rule heavy mechanics of toolkit systems the opposite of it would be the rule lite systems which covers a more fuzzier feel of game mechanics and modelling of reality. BESM is one such system as well as other indie systems to best address nebulous system requirements.

It was like a running lobby for which system rules them all kind of thought to cover whatever genre or setting.

What I have observed in my years of gaming and collecting game systems just boils down to this: a rpg book would be comprised of two sections, the game mechanics and the fluff material. My experience would be to get what the fluff material has to present and then proceed to what system would work best based on experience and ease of play and preparation. That's my two cents about the matter.

Hybrid Gaming

I just thought about this topic recently given how RPG topics of late somehow point to some innovation or other in terms of game mechanics or fluff content. It was a thought that was niggling in my mind when I recalled an old issue of Videogaming Illustrated in the 80's. That magazine was published during the height of old school consoles like the Atari 2600, Intellivision, Colecovision and PC gaming was still in its infancy with machines like the Apple II, Commodore 64 and Sinclair computers. Arcade gaming was pretty much a mainstay even till now but the current generation gaming consoles have games which port over from its arcade machine siblings. I read an article in that magazine, unable to recall that particular issue, there was a way to use console games to support, augment or assist visualization for a tabletop RPG, whether it be an off-the-shelf RPG system or a homebrew. The article mentions how an enterprising GM would use the console game as an alternative to task resolution via die rolls or as interactive aid to get the player more immersed into the setting of the game as well do the needed resolution.

That article was back in the late 80's. Fast forward now to 2005 or soon-to-be 2006. The current generation of console games are pretty much interactive and a game unto itself to grab the imagination and attention of the player as compared to before since imagination doesn't fill in the blanks compared to its cruder ancestors. The thought of adding a new generation console game into the presentation process would be either a enhancement or a distraction, depending on how the enterprising GM would intend for the use of the game in question, whether it be for visual references, to better illustrate the task involved for the campaign or just adding a touch of fun for it. Its just quite a thought to ponder. It might also bring some life back to some of those old games gathering dust somewhere in your own home. It is an avenue t further interactivity to be considered.

Diceless RPG

What is diceless rpg?
“Diceless” is roleplaying without the use of any sort of dice or randomizers such as cards. They are “minimalist systems where the GM decides on the results of actions without the help of randomizers, tables, or explicit quantified mechanics.”There are already diceless systems out on the market, among them is the well known Amber Diceless RPG.

What I find interesting about them is their way of dealing with situations you would normally use dice. The most obvious is combat. It may be very descriptive or brief; it may involve a few game mechanic or none at all and sometimes a bit of railroading. But the way it’s done or presented is sometimes dependent on the spirit of the specific game world, its mechanic, game reality and the individual GMs style. Here’s part of John Kims’s FAQ for a better explanation:

"2) Does it work?
Yes. There are plenty of people who have been playing without dice even long before the above systems were published. At least for these people, it can be just as exciting as diced gaming, and at least competitive in realism with many diced games. It generally results in much more emphasis on player and GM descriptions, and much less emphasis on rules.

3) How does the GM make decisions?
That varies with the system, the GM, the group contract, and so forth. In general, action resolution can be based on a great variety of input factors. What follows is an outline of some of the factors which can go into action resolution -

[A] Reality/Genre: This is just the GM's judgement of what is the most reasonable outcome given the understood "reality" of the situation - including genre and setting-specific laws (like magic). This is actually the most common form of resolution in any game - if a character tries to walk through the woods, the GM just says it happens.
[B] Mechanics: This is game-mechanical constructs (which may represent the genre-reality, but which are more than just a general understanding).
Note that this does *not* have to involve dice. CORPS and _Vampire_ both use some diceless, mechanical action resolution. Spending Plot Points (or Hero Points, Willpower, etc.) is also a mechanic.
[C] Description: In this case, _how_ the player describes his character's action has a big effect on the outcome. This involves the player heavily in the action -- but it also tends to emphasize player skill rather than character skill (i.e. if a given player is very good at describing combat tactics, then his character is better at combat).
[D] Plot: As _Theatrix_ describes it, "Does the plot require a given outcome?" The GM sets up a plot beforehand, and if a given result is required for the plot to work, he chooses that result. This is the factor most often associated with "railroading".
[E] Drama: This is a free-wheeling sense of drama or comedy/fun, as mediated by the GM. For example, a chandelier swing in a swashbuckling game may naturally succeed because it is dramatically appropriate. It has nothing to do with the written plot, but it fits.
[F] Meta-game: This is a catch-all category for concerns of the GM and players. A gamble may succeed because it is getting late in the evening and people want to go home. Certain issues may be avoided because some players find them offensive. A PC may disappear because the player can't show Etcetera.
[G] Group Consensus (from Sarah Kahn): This is a sort of combination of Reality and Description resolution, in which the entire group combines efforts to determine what the "expert swordsman's" best strategy really would BE when the player of the swordsman knows nothing of combat. It is often use to counteract the problems of "description" resolution. It often takes the form of "he who knows the subject best is empowered to define the reality."
[H] Dice: Technically dice will not be used in a "diceless" game, but I included them to be completist, and to show how they are just one among a large number of factors. Dice can be used as additional input into any number of resolutions. Mechanics often call for die rolls, but a mechanicless game can also use dice to represent random factors (The rule being, say, "High good, low bad").

Besides the variety of input, action resolution can be different in method or style of handling -- like how the results are presented. For example, even if two GM's use the same mechanics and die rolls: one might describe to players using only descriptive terms, and he keeps the character sheet and die rolls to himself.

4) Is this fair to the players?
Well, that depends. The advantage of diceless role-playing on this front is that it encourages greater feedback and communication with the GM. Yes, in principle, a diceless GM can shoot down whatever player plans he doesn't like by ruling that they fail. However, the idea is that it will be very clear to the players that he is doing this -- since the GM decides everything, he also takes all the blame.
Diceless play requires a large amount of trust in the GM -- but the theory is that it also makes it more clear when the GM has broken that trust.

5) Can it simulate "realistic" randomness?
Well, that depends on the GM and the situation. Theoretically, a die-roll can certainly provide a more statistically random sequence than GM whim. However, within the context of the game, there are very few runs of statistically-analyzable events.

The GM can take into account a wide variety of in-game factors for each individual decision which will differentiate them. Of course, unless he is a skilled expert in that field, common sense only carries you so far -- some of the choices will either be arbitrary, or be based on meta-game factors like Drama...
As an example: the PC's fire a volley of arrows at a distant enemy. The GM has to decide if they hit any vital spots, taking out some of the enemy. At a detail-by-detail level, the GM's choice is arbitrary -- but he can try adjust things to make sure that overall, the archers are about as effective as they should be.

Using dice is better able to simulate the randomness that often occurs in real world. However, the mechanics are only able to take into account a few of the relevant variables. In dice-using or diceless games, the GM can take into account far more of the actual (i.e. game-world) situation.

6) What difference does it make?
Well, I'll defer at this point to Alain Lapalme, who described in an article what he considered to be the diceless "paradigm shift" for him...
It is clear to me that I don't understand the dice/diceless paradigm shift (I used tothink I did, but I'm no longer so sure).
To summarize my views on the diceless shift:

1. explicit trust in the GM
2. can't hide behind bad/good rolls
3. forces players to take responsability for their actions
4. changes the player/gm communication style from mechanistic to more descriptive
5. increases subjectivity
6. changes the whole nature of combat

But of course this is different for every person..."

Gaming Style

You scored as Storyteller. You're more inclined toward the role playing side of the equation and less interested in numbers or experience points. You're quick to compromise if you can help move the story forward, and get bored when the game slows down for a long planning session. You want to play out a story that moves like it's orchestrated by a skilled novelist or film director. Storyteller 92% Method Actor 83% Butt-Kicker 67% Tactician 67% Power Gamer 50% Specialist 50% Casual Gamer 17% Law's Game Style created with QuizFarm.com

GMing Epiphany a.k.a. My Left Turn

It was during my friend Alex’s DC Heroes (now called Blood of Heroes) game that I experienced ‘my left turn’. It would change the way I conducted my RPGs. My friend’s approach was revolutionary - for me at least, that I rethought mine. I started to research stuff regarding storytelling approaches and how it could be applied to my current campaigns.

Marc introduced me to White Wolf’s Storyteller system and then later to an article about storytelling (also published by White Wolf). I was intrigued and excited about the ideas presented in those materials. A few more research into those and into diceless systems (more on them on an upcoming post) then I began implementing them into my campaigns; and I’m happy to say it was successful. My players enjoyed the new approach and so did I. It was, as they say a ‘turning point’ – a ‘left turn’.

Superhero Types

Found this item on my usual websurfing rounds. This is with regards to the kinds or classifications a hero is tacked under, usually in role-playing game conventions. I copy the relevant section taken from Wikipedia.com's entry for superhero.

In superhero role-playing games (particularly Champions), superheroes are informally organized into categories based on their skills and abilities:

• "Brick": A character with a superhuman degree of strength and endurance and usually an oversized, muscular body, e.g., The Thing, The Incredible Hulk, Colossus, Savage Dragon
  
• "Blaster": A hero whose main power is a distance attack, e.g., Cyclops, Starfire, Static
  
  
  
  • "Archer": A subvariant of this type who uses bow and arrow-like weapons that have a variety of specialized functions like explosives, glue, nets, rotary drill, etc., e.g., Green Arrow, Hawkeye
    
  • "Mage": A subvariant of this type that is trained in the use of magic, which partially or wholly involves ranged attacks., e.g., Doctor Strange, Doctor Fate
  
  
• "Martial Artist": A hero whose physical abilities are mostly human rather than superhuman but whose combat skills are phenomenal. Some of these characters are actually superhuman (Captain America, Daredevil) while others are normal human beings who are extremely skilled and athletic (Batman, Black Widow)
  
• "Gadgeteer": A hero who invents special equipment that often imitates superpowers, e.g., Forge, Nite Owl
  
  
  
  • "Armored Hero": A gadgeteer whose powers are derived from a suit of powered armor, e.g., Iron Man, Steel
    
  • "Dominus": A hero that uses a giant robot to combat villains, e.g., Big Guy, Roger Smith of Big O and members of the team Super Sentai; common in Japanese superhero series
    
  
  
• "Speedster": A hero possessing superhuman speed and reflexes, e.g., The Flash, Quicksilver.
  
• "Mentalist": A hero who possesses psionic abilities, such as telekinesis, telepathy and extra-sensory perception, e.g., Professor X and Jean Grey of the X-Men, Saturn Girl of the Legion of Super-Heroes.
  
• "Shapechanger": A hero who can manipulate his/her own body to suit his/her needs, such as stretching (Mister Fantastic, Plastic Man) or disguise (Changeling, Chameleon)
  
  
  • "Substance oriented Bodychanger - A shapechanger who can change his/her body into the equivalent of a mass of a substance that can have variable density such as sand or water. e.g., Sand, Husk.
    
  • "Sizechanger": A shapechanger who can alter his/her size, e.g., the Atom (shrinking only), Colossal Boy (growth only), Hank Pym (both).
    
  
  

These categories often overlap. For instance, Batman is a martial artist and a gadgeteer, and Superman is extremely strong and damage resistant like a brick and also has ranged attacks (heat vision, superbreath) like an energy blaster and can move quickly like a speedster.

The above mentioned item kinda pigeonhole the kind of hero one creates for an RPG or moreso for a comicbook project. Of course, it makes sense in terms of streamlining the concept of the character. It prevents or cuts down the occurences of making the idea of swiss-army knife heroes or jack-of-all-trades heroes which can put a serious crimp to whatever the GM has in mind for such a player in terms of complications, opposition and traps. Of course some heroes with slight overlaps are possible based on the earlier mentioned heroes Batman and Superman.

It is an interesting look into the conceptual outline of creating a hero in terms or abilities with or without the semblance of powers in the mix.

Merits of good and/or great gaming people

Looked around for some usseful stuff to post and reflect on in the matter of things RP related. I came across this item when reading it off from another blog. I backtracked it back to the actual forum item where it came from. Its located here.

Now, technically speaking, this is about good/great groups, not good/great players. But really, it all comes down to the players (if one counts the GM as a specialized player), so this got me thinking about the differences between good players and great players... Those bits of extra effort great players put into gaming that contribute to the overall experience.

Then I thought that listing some of the differences between the two could be a fun mental exercise. So that's what I'm doing here.

Note that this isn't about bad players; those are easy to spot, and there are all kinds of articles delineating the differences between bad and good players. Nor is this really about GMs, since there's likewise plenty of articles/threads enumerating the different species of GM that roam the world of gaming. I'm specifically looking at good vs. great players.

In addition to the above, this is what I've come up with so far, after about 30 minutes of off-and-on musing:

A good player will think about what his character would do before he acts.

A great player will think ways to make his character realistically take actions that benefit the game.

A good player will seek out opportunities to get his character involved in things.

A great player will seek out opportunities to have his character help others get involved.

A good player will avoid doing things that makes the GM's job more difficult.

A great player will look for ways to make the GM's job easier.

A good player will make an effort to learn the rules.

A great player will remember that the rules must sometimes be broken for purposes of flavour or story.

A good player will seek out ways to build his character's story.

A great player will know when to let his character’s story end.

A good player understands that winning means having fun.

A great player understands that winning doesn’t mean much unless everybody wins.

The above mentioned list pretty proves some things which players should aspire or improve as time progresses from lessons learned in the many campaigns and game systems experienced. I know that enough from experience. Feel free to ponder on these things. I'll have more stuff to put on here when I have time. Ciao.

My first left turn

I was running an post-atomic holocaust game called Gamma World (2nd Ed as of its printing and acquisition) back in high school. It was going ok for a bit while I was churning out my own creations. Though the campaign was slipping fast as a greased pig in terms of attention that I had to think of something to jump-start the floundering campaign of sorts.

This link will provide the inside track as to what revitalized the campaign though on a radical vector away from its parent setting.

That particular departure later became the Twilight Empires as my friend, former gamer and fellow creator Vincent is now developing as a publishing project. I offered the suggestion of creating a sidestory project set in that universe.

That particular left turn spawned a small number of left turns as to the GM experience is concerned during its span in high school. I'll elaborate more next time as more of those epiphanies or enlightening moment in my gaming career.

Disposable Campaign

Once upon a time, the guys and I wanted to play RPG. But I was saddled with the concern that if we get the campaign off the ground I would be left hanging again later due to poor attendances (this from the people who requested me to GM!?) I was hesitant because every time I get to GM, I usually do an extensive preparation and research before I consult the players of what characters they want; of course the type of game has already been agreed upon. My friend Marc posed the challenge to keep everything simple and be able to throw it away at a moments notice, just in case people don't attend regularly or not attend at all.

So how do you do it? The concept was simple really, get concepts or ideas that you are already very familiar with - enough for you to generate the adventure - and run from there. Prep time is shorter to almost none compared to starting one from scratch. Anyway that's it for now, I've hit empty. I hope to be able to post more after I'm done with work.

Why The Left Turn??!!!!

For those who stumbled onto this blog, let me explain the story and genesis of this blog.

It is a collaborative project borne from the piqued interest of my high school friend after I showed him a blog which happens to be like a RPG campaign developer's diary. That item was set the wheels in motion for me to create a similiar endeavor and for this one since my friend wants to take a shot at this.

As to the left turn, it was actually a reference from the metaphor discussed in a gaming article I read from rpg.net. The left turn that was discussed refers to a radical element or diversion to a pre-existing campaign structure or flow to keep the interest in the campaign going. It can either be inspired genius or just downright coincidental.

I recall a radical left turn in my campaign which was set in a post-apocalyptic radiation filled wasteland and that left turn catapulted the campaign into creative overdrive into a science fantastic space opera setting. It was one of the left turns I have looked back upon from time to time. There were other left turns I encountered as a GM and a player.

My gaming career has its share of left turns in the roles of GM and player. Some of these left turns can be so moving in terms of the result of the experience itself or the result created from it.

I intend to go through another set of left turns as I endeavor to the campaign I'm going to helm after being away from the GM and player's chair.

The status of that particular campaign would discussed in another upcoming blog, coming to a browser near you soon. ;)