The Alexandrian

Archive for the ‘Roleplaying Games’ category

This week’s Advanced Gamemastery takes a first look (and then a much closer look!) at what it’s like to run a sandbox campaign. I use a D&D-esque campaign as the example, but the lessons can be applied to almost any RPG.

This is the third installment in the series. I’ve been very humbled by everyone’s excitement to see more of these videos! While I know it’s a cliche, it remains true that subscriptions, likes, and comments make a big difference in helping the channel grow! You can help bring these videos to a wider audience by training the algorithm!

If you’d like to keep helping the channel, though, can you do one more thing for me? Share the video! Whether that’s just texting it to someone you think would love it or posting it to social media, that would be huge!

I’d also love to chat about sandbox campaigns.

What have been your best/worst sandbox experiences?

What sandbox campaign have you always wanted to run/play?

Good gaming! And I’ll see you at the table!

Subscribe Now!

 

5E Hexcrawl

February 28th, 2021

Sample Hexmap

The hexcrawl is a game structure for running wilderness exploration scenarios. Although it was initially a core component of the D&D experience, the hexcrawl slowly faded away. By 1989 there were only a few vestigial hex maps cropping up in products and none of them were actually designed for hexcrawl play. That’s when the 2nd Edition of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons removed hexcrawling procedures from the rulebooks entirely.

It wasn’t until Necromancer Games brought the Wilderlands back into print and Ben Robbins’ West Marches campaign went viral that people started to rediscover the lost art of the hexcrawl. The format has returned to prominence in recent years through releases like the Kingmaker campaign for Pathfinder and Tomb of Annihilation for D&D 5th Edition.

BASIC HEXCRAWL STRUCTURE

Hexcrawls are only one way of running wilderness travel (see Thinking About Wilderness Travel for some other options) and there are actually many different varieties of hexcrawls and schools of thought on how they should be designed or run. “True” hexcrawls, however, share four common features.

  1. They use a hexmap. In general, the terrain of the hex is given as a visual reference and the hex is numbered (either directly or by a gridded cross-reference). Additional features like settlements, dungeons, rivers, roads, and polities are also often shown on the map.
  2. Content is keyed to the hexmap. Using the numbered references, some or all of the hexes are keyed with locations and/or encounters.
  3. Travel mechanics determine how far the PCs can move and where they move while traveling overland. After determining which hex the PCs are starting in, the GM will use these mechanics (and the decisions the players make) to track their movement.
  4. When the PCs enter a hex, the GM will tell them the terrain type and determine whether or not the keyed content of the hexmap is triggered: If so, the PCs experience the event, encounter the monsters, or see the location. (There is often a 100% chance that the keyed content will be triggered.)

Around this basic structure you can build up a lot of additional features and alternative gameplay. For example, mechanics for random encounters and navigating (or, more importantly, getting lost in) trackless wastes are quite common. Hex-clearing procedures were once quite common, too, as an antecedent for stronghold-based play.

THE ALEXANDRIAN HEXCRAWL

In 2012, before 5th Edition was released, I wrote Hexcrawls: This series discussed hexcrawl procedures and laid out a robust structure for prepping and running hexcrawls in both 3rd Edition and the original 1974 edition of the game.

The Alexandrian Hexcrawl had several key design goals.

First, I wanted a structure that would hide the hexes from the players. In my personal playtesting, I found that the abstraction of the hex was extremely convenient on the GM’s side of the screen (for tracking navigation, keying encounters, and so forth), but had a negative impact on the other side of the screen: I wanted the players interacting with the game world, not with the abstraction. Therefore, the hexes in the Alexandrian Hexcrawl were a player-unknown structure.

Second, the structure was explicitly built for exploration. The structure, therefore, included a lot of rules for navigation, getting lost, and finding your way again. It was built around having the players constantly making new discoveries (even in places they’d been to before).

Third, the hex key features locations, not encounters. It’s not unusual to see hexcrawls in which encounters are keyed to a hex, like this one from the Wilderlands of the Magic Realm:

A charismatic musician sits on a rock entertaining a group of Halfling children. He sings songs of high adventure and fighting Orcs.

While the Alexandrian Hexcrawl system could be used with such keys, my intention was to focus the key on content that could be used more than once as PCs visit and re-visit the same areas. (This is particularly useful if you’re running an open game table.) In other words, the key is geography, not ephemera, with encounters being handled separately from the key.

Fourth, the system is built around the assumption that every hex is keyed. There may be rare exceptions — the occasional “empty” hex, for example — but if this is happening a lot it’s generally an indication that your hexcrawl is at the wrong scale. This tends to create two problems in actual play: First, it results in very poor pacing (with long spans of time in which navigational decisions are not resulting in interesting feedback in the form of content). Second, the lack of content equates to a lack of structure. One obvious example of this is that hexcrawls with vast spans of empty space lack sufficient landmarks in order to guide navigation.

(You run into similar problems if you have lots of densely packed hexes featuring multiple locations keyed to each hex: The abstraction of the hex stops working and your hexcrawl procedures collapse as the PCs engage in lots of sub-hex navigation.)

THE (MANY) RULES OF 5th EDITION WILDERNESS TRAVEL

Since the release of 5th Edition, I have been frequently asked to update the Alexandrian Hexcrawl to the new system. Unfortunately, there have been a couple impediments making this more difficult than it might first appear.

First, 5th Edition is not designed for hexcrawls. 3rd Edition didn’t feature hexcrawl play, either, but its rules were fundamentally grounded in a mechanical tradition that had originally been designed to support hexcrawl play, and it was therefore fairly straightforward to graft those procedures back onto those mechanics.

5th Edition, ironically, reintroduced hex-mapping to the core rulebooks, but mechanically trivializes or strips out essential mechanical elements that make hexcrawls (or, more generally, the challenges of wilderness exploration) work in actual play.

Second, the rules for overland travel and wilderness exploration in 5th Edition are a little… fraught.

  • The rules are scattered haphazardly throughout the rulebooks and difficult to pull together into any sort of cohesive procedure.
  • The rules actually change from one book to the next: The exploration procedures and travel distances in Tomb of Annihilation, for example, are just slightly different from those in the core rulebooks for no apparent reason. And the ones in the Wilderness Kit are different once again.
  • The rules are vague in bafflingly inconsistent ways. For example, there is a specific rule about how many pounds of food you need each day. And there’s a specific rule about how many pounds of food you get while doing the Forage activity while traveling. It seems like those would link up, but the rule for how often you make a Forage check is “when [the DM] decides it’s appropriate.” Which could be every hour, every day, every week, or literally anything else.
  • Most of the wilderness rules are not actually found in the SRD, making them inaccessible for projects outside of the Dungeon Master’s Guild.

Although these factors have largely stymied my efforts in the past, I’ve decided to more or less embrace the vague chaos of it all: If there is no coherent set of rules in the first place, then no one will probably care if I change them.

So my final design goal is to maintain the large, macro structures of 5th Edition wilderness travel that tie into other elements of the game – like how various classes modify your travel pace, for example – but otherwise tweak and change whatever needs to be altered to make things work.

Go to Part 2: Wilderness Travel

5E HEXCRAWLS
Part 2: Wilderness Travel
Part 3: Watch Actions
Part 4: Navigation
Part 5: Encounters
Part 6: Watch Checklists
Part 7: Hex Exploration
Part 8: Cheat Sheet

Hexcrawl Running Sheets

Hexcrawl Tool: Rumor Tables
Hexcrawl Tool: Spot Distances
Hexcrawl Tool: Tracks

HEXCRAWL ADDENDUMS
Sketchy Hexcrawls
Designing the Hexcrawl
Running the Hexcrawl
Connecting Your Hexes
Special Encounter Tables
Describing Travel
The Layered Hexcrawl

Over the Edge - Characters on the Edge

Character creation in Over the Edge is hyper-fast. It’s so fast, in fact, that you can trivially do it with brand new players as part of a four-hour one-shot.

Character Concept: Virtually any character concept is possible in Over the Edge, but there are a few core principles that your concept should honor.

  • They Are Human. They might be mutants, metahumans, prodigies, freaks, or ghosts. But they are fundamentally human.
  • They Follow “Hollywood” Reality. Hollywood lies about how the world really works for all the right reasons, and you should, too.
  • They Are Not Played Straight. If your character is a common archetype, give it one weird twist: Not just a vampire, but a recovering vampire. Or a vampire who drinks human tears. Or is addicted to sunlight.
  • They Don’t Wreck Plots. Your character does not grant wishes, read minds, mind-control people, see the future, stop time, or otherwise trivially wreck plots.

Main Trait & Side Trait: Your character has a main trait and a side trait. You’ve probably already unwittingly picked them with your character concept.

  • Traits are not mechanically predefined things. They’re not picked from a skill list. They’re not feats. They’re not classes or archetypes. You make them up.
  • The difference between main traits and side traits is that main traits are broadly interpreted and side traits are narrowly interpreted. For example, if your side trait is MMA Fighter then you’re really good at fighting. But if it’s your main trait, then you’re also good at working the crowd, dealing with publicity, knowing other fight performers, sizing people up, etc.

Level: Generally speaking, beginning characters will be Level 2.

Trouble: Your character’s Trouble is what lures or provokes them into doing unwise things from the perspective of the game world that are constructive or exciting for the players. It’s your excuse to do things that are fun instead of pragmatic. For example, you might listen to an imaginary friend. Or brag and say too much. Or take risks to help an innocent in danger.

Question Mark: This is the best part. An adjective or short phrase that describes a major truth about your character’s reputation or personal identity.

  • They should not be capabilities (like Persuasive-? or Intimidating-?). Your traits describe your capabilities.
  • Generally speaking, the question mark does NOT imply that this is something your character is uncertain or wishy-washy about. It is usually fundamentally true. The function of the Question Mark is to telegraph on the meta level that this fundamentally true thing might STOP being fundamentally true during play. For example, a Priest who is Faithful-? isn’t necessarily fully of doubt at the beginning of the game; but her player is saying that something might cause them to question their faith during the game.
  • It’s usually best not to name in advance what will trigger the Question Mark: We want to discover that during play.

A good example of this is Indiana Jones: He’s Brave-? Totally brave. All the time. Until we discover, in play, that he’s terrified of snakes.

Tells: Tells are observable details the correlate to your characteristics. For example, a character with the Linebacker trait is… built like a linebacker. The Semi-Feral Brawler sniffs new people they meet. The Hacker is always wearing AR glasses.

  • You assign tells for your Main Trait, Side Trait, Trouble, and Question Mark.

Group Questions: You wrap up character creation with a round of group questions. Every player should ask one question of another player & every player should also be asked a question about their character.

  • Open Questions are the gentlest. (e.g., What hobbies, arts, activities, or interests does your character pursue?)
  • Leading Questions put the character’s identity under another player’s influence. (e.g., What caused you to suddenly stop painting?)
  • Really Leading Questions push hard. (e.g., How do you keep your superiors at the Church from finding out about your sex tourism habits?)

A player is always free to refuse a leading question or to reject the premise and answer it however they like.

And that’s it! Because it involves more open-ended creativity, it doesn’t quite work like Character Creation in 5 Sentences for D&D or Character Creation in 7 Sentences for Magical Kitties Save the Day, but it’s very similar in practice. I can usually get a whole table up and running with new characters in just 15-20 minutes, which usually also includes introducing them to the rules.

REAL CHARACTERS

Because character creation is so quick, I’ve done it A LOT over the past couple of years. I thought it might be fun to share some of these characters from actual play as an example of the sort of crazed creativity the setting and system of Over the Edge inspires. Because of the nature of the game, these are also fully functional pregenerated characters: Just add a starting Level and a round of Group Questions and you’re good to go!

JOJO

  • Main Trait: Asasssin
  • Side Trait: Ex-Circus Clown
  • Trouble: Imagines his own personal soundtrack (and is heavily influenced by it).
  • Bloodthirsty-?

I0

  • Main Trait: Zen Coder
  • Side Trait: Martial Artist
  • Trouble: Locks are a challenge, not a statement.
  • Structured-?

KEN

  • Main Trait: Ex-SWAT
  • Side Trait: Youtube Conspiracy Master
  • Trouble: The Truth Is Out There
  • Self-Confident-?

LODGE

  • Main Trait: Spiritual Lodge (channels entities)
  • Side Trait: Intermittently Institutionalized
  • Trouble: Follows old souls.
  • Mercurial-?

LADY

  • Main Trait: Anger
  • Side Trait: Zombie
  • Trouble: Impulsive
  • Trusting-?

ED SIMS

  • Main Trait: Drifter
  • Side Trait: Bad Luck
  • Trouble: Enjoys upsetting bigger men.
  • Honest-?

DR. ED SEXY

  • Main Trait: Sexual Healing
  • Side Trait: Kinkomancy
  • Trouble: I listen to my dick.
  • Likable-?

THE BIG DUDE

  • Main Trait: Meta-Tourist
  • Side Trait: Elementary School Teacher
  • Trouble: Talks down to people.
  • Innocent-?

JONATHAN TWEET

  • Main Trait: Immortality
  • Side Trait: Telling Aloofness
  • Trouble: Turns the page.
  • All-Knowing-?

(Yes, someone decided to play the designer of the RPG that they were playing. That’s the kind of crazy awesomeness that Over the Edge inspires.)

REE REYES

  • Main Trait: Geekomancer
  • Side Trait: Barista
  • Trouble: Protective of their friends.
  • Confident-?

SISTER PROMISE

  • Main Trait: Inspirational Nun
  • Side Trait: Sees what others cannot
  • Trouble: Compelled to help the faithless.
  • Selfless-?

RICK LEE

  • Main Trait: Accidental Boddhisatva
  • Side Trait: Successful Business Consultant
  • Trouble: Existentially inquisitive.
  • Determined-?

“SLOW HAND” LUKE

  • Main Trait: Slow Gunslinger
  • Side Trait: Animal Lover
  • Trouble: 100% White Hat
  • Confident-?

JERRY

  • Main Trait: Assembled Man
  • Side Trait: Well Read
  • Trouble: Can’t Die
  • Holding It Together-?

BOOKER

  • Main Trait: Noir Detective
  • Side Trait: Optimistic
  • Trouble: Can’t say no to someone’s face.
  • Straight-Edged-?

NEVAEH

  • Main Trait: Socialite
  • Side Trait: Insect Talking (But Not Wasps)
  • Trouble: Can’t Resist Dirt
  • Ruthless-?

LITA

  • Main Trait: Con Artist
  • Side Trait: Ghost
  • Trouble: Vengeance
  • Greedy-?

GARAMOND

  • Main Trait: Crime Boss
  • Side Trait: Exotic Artifact Collector
  • Trouble: Collection Builder
  • Former Criminal-?

EMERIC RAI

  • Main Trait: Erotic Chef
  • Side Trait: Knife Skills
  • Trouble: Seeking ingredients
  • Overconfident-?

MINOR TOM

  • Main Trait: Astronaut
  • Side Trait: Cosmic Abilities
  • Trouble: No short term memory
  • Expert-?

MORE OVER THE EDGE @ THE ALEXANDRIAN
Over the Edge: System Cheat Sheet
Over the Edge: One Weird Twist
Design Notes: Scenario Hooks for Over the Edge
Design Notes: Scenario Tools
Behind the Scenes: Welcome to the Island

The second Advanced Gamemastery video has been released! The Goblin Ampersand is a simple technique that you can use to supercharge the concept for any RPG scenario!

I talked about this a bit last week, but while our first video dived into the venerable concept of the Three Clue Rule, I wanted the second video in the series to present something completely new that hasn’t been seen on the Alexandrian before. In the long-term, the series will be a balance of these elements: Presenting the fundamentals of game mastering in new ways and to a new audience, but also diving into entirely new tips and tricks! And many videos will be a blend of both. Next week, for example, I’m hoping to combine a new introduction to sandbox campaigns with a few insights that will be very familiar to long-time readers of the Alexandrian!

Last week I also talked about how important it is for a new Youtube channel to have engagement with its videos: Subscriptions, likes, comments. I was overwhelmed by the outpouring of support! Thank you all so much for supporting me and the Alexandrian! And I’d really appreciate it if you’d do it again for our second video. Train the Youtube algorithm so that it knows how much you care about the Alexandrian and the algorithm will help introduce these ideas to an even wider audience!

Good gaming! And I’ll see you at the table!

Subscribe Now!

DISCUSSING
In the Shadow of the Spire – Session 25B: Blood on the Orrery

The scene they found was gruesome: Bodies were scattered throughout the first two chambers of the bloodwight complex, many in various states of dismemberment. Faeliel’s body was spread-eagled across the orrery itself, dripping blood down upon the silver spheres.

Ranthir, coming upon the scene, eased Faeliel’s body to the ground. With tears welling in his eyes, he turned back to the others with a crack in his voice. “He wouldn’t have wanted the mechanisms damaged… is there anything we can do?”

The bloody fate of House Erthuo’s research team in this session is a good opportunity to spotlight an important part of how I run an RPG campaign, because it’s a fairly unadulterated example of the technique.

Let’s back up a dozen or so sessions: The PCs have discovered and are exploring the Laboratory of the Beast, a dungeon which is part of Ghul’s Labyrinth beneath Ptolus. At this point, neither House Erthuo nor the Surgeon in the Shadows are involved in this scenario. In fact, not even I — as the Dungeon Master — have the slightest inkling that these factions are going to become involved in this scenario. (Let alone that it’s going to end up in this horrific massacre.)

While exploring the dungeon, the PCs discover both a huge, antique orrery (too large for them to move) and a number of chaositech artifacts. Later, after leaving the dungeon, they’re intent on liquidating their loot.

First, they make some inquiries around town and sell some chaositech items. Looking at my campaign notes, I know that there’s an organization of chaositech dealers led by the Surgeon in the Shadows who is going to be part of an upcoming scenario in the campaign. If the PCs are selling chaositech, it’s likely the Surgeon in the Shadows will become aware of it and send an agent to negotiate with the PCs for it.

Second, during a party at Castle Shard in Session 12, Tee tells some of their contacts about the orrery, hoping for a recommendation on someone who might (a) be interested and (b) have the resources to remove the orrery from the dungeon. Looking at my notes for the party, I see that Lady Peliope Erthuo is attending the party. In her background notes, I’ve copied some descriptive text from the Ptolus sourcebook about House Erthuo: “House Erthuo is said to possess one of the finest collections of rare books, antiquities, and artifacts of historical significance in this part of the world.”

At this point I don’t have any particular plans for House Erthuo in the campaign: I’ve included Lady Peliope at the party as one of the incidental guests. (Not every single person the PCs meet in the campaign needs to be an Important Character™.) But she’s obviously a perfect fit for what Tee is looking for and it’s a great vector for prompting the PCs to continue circulating through the event. So Tee’s contact points here in that direction and she makes arrangements with Lady Peliope to meet with Cordelia Erthuo in order to arrange the sale of the orrery.

THE VECTORS ESTABLISHED

At this point, the actions of the PCs have created two vectors in the campaign that did not previously exist.

Now, if you’ve stopped prepping plots and are running situation-based scenarios, you’ll know that this sort of thing happens all the time. But this particular example, as I mentioned, is particularly clear-cut because it’s not only the vectors which didn’t previously exist in either the campaign or the specific scenario of the Laboratory of the Beast, but also the elements of the campaign world which have been pushed into motion.

Moving forward, in Session 14 the PCs met with Cordelia Erthuo and sold her the location of the orrery. This vector is now obviously pointed back into the dungeon, with House Erthuo planning to send a research team to study the orrery. (I make a note in my campaign status document to this effect.)

Later, in Session 21, an agent of the Surgeon in the Shadows called Ribok comes to the Ghostly Minstrel to negotiate with the PCs. By this point, however, the PCs have learned that chaositech is far more dangerous than they had suspected and they have no interest in selling. They turn Ribok away.

Okay, so what’s the vector from this? Well, the Surgeon isn’t going to take “no” for an answer. They’re going to try to figure out where the PCs are getting the chaositech from. How would they do that? Well, the PCs filed a claim for the labyrinth access under Greyson House… the one which leads directly to the Laboratory of the Beast. It’s possible that the Surgeon will be able to discover that… and a skill check indicates that he does.

So I note this down on my campaign status document, too: On the 12th of Kadal, the Surgeon in the Shadows sends a chaositech strike team to Greyson House.

THE VECTORS INTERSECT

These two vectors are now pointing at each other.

Here’s the key thing: I still don’t know exactly how these events will play out, but if nothing disturbs these vectors it’s clear that they’re going to intersect and I have a pretty good idea what will happen when they do. So I now have the following entries in my campaign status document:

09/12/790: Surgeon in the Shadows sends a chaositech strike team to Greyson House, they end up killing House Erthuo’s team that’s examining the orrery.

09/13/790: House Erthuo investigates the disappearance of their research team and finds their workers dead. Cordelia contacts the PCs.

09/14/790: The Surgeon’s team leaves the Ghul’s Labyrinth complex with the chaositech artifacts from the temple; they also have discovered the mind-transference device.

What would happen next? Well, I have an inkling. (Ribok’s team couldn’t remove the mind-transference device, but they’re definitely interested in it. So they’ll be coming back – possibly in greater numbers? – to investigate it. Perhaps they’ll even dismantle it and take it back to the Surgeon in Shadows’ laboratory.) But I didn’t spend any time prepping this material or writing it down, because it existed beyond the event horizon: It was overwhelmingly likely that the PCs will have interacted with these elements of the campaign world before that happened (which, in fact, they did), with no way of anticipating how they would affect the vectors in play.

THE VECTORS IN PLAY

And, of course, we’ve now seen how this worked out in actual play: By pure happenstance, the PCs were actually in the dungeon when the Surgeon’s team showed up, creating the fantastic drama of seeing the House Erthuo team only a few short minutes before they were killed.

Could I have forced that outcome? Possibly. (Although I hadn’t actually thought of it until it occurred during play.)

Could I have instead forced the outcome from the undisturbed vectors described above? Certainly. (I could have just delayed Ribok’s arrival until after the PCs left the dungeon again.)

But the point, of course, is that we’re not predetermining the outcome. We’re discovering the outcome through play. And there are any number of other outcomes that could have happened that didn’t. (For just one example, Ranthir could have become fascinated by the discoveries of the House Erthuo team and decided to stay with them while everyone else explored the dungeon. What would have happened if he’d been present when Ribok arrived? I have no idea!)

Looking at just these two vectors in isolation is deceptive anyway: The campaign is actually filled with lots of these vectors (and, as we’ve just seen, the PCs can create new vectors at any time). There’s no way to know how these vectors will actually develop until it happens at the table.

Here’s another way of looking at this: If I had been predetermining events, I would never have set up these vectors in the first place – they were not, after all, part of my prep for the Laboratory of the Beast – and none of this would have happened.

This is what I mean by active play. When the PCs take an action, I think about how the elements of the campaign world are going to react to those actions. Some of those reactions will be direct and immediate (their vectors will immediately intersect the PCs). Others form vectors that I sort of let loose in the campaign world until they intersect with either another vector or the PCs themselves.

(Some of these vectors will end up never intersecting with anything. Or, at least, nothing that is part of the campaign. That’s okay. Sometimes you’re done playing with a toy and you don’t need to pick it up again.)

Of course, not all vectors originate from the PCs. When I create an NPC or faction in the campaign world, they’ll also have proactive vectors determined by their agendas.

NEXT:
Campaign Journal: Session 26A – Running the Campaign: Urban Splits
In the Shadow of the Spire: Index

Archives

Recent Posts


Recent Comments

Copyright © The Alexandrian. All rights reserved.