More 'Painting!'

I decided to try something that I have never done before; painting on the computer. I have been familiar with GIMP for some time, working on maps and such, but never tried to do something artsy with it. I think what I have done so far isn't too bad. Just will have to keep at it and see how it turns out...

By the way, I am reserving the rights to these images and all subsequent images (to include the finished image) to ChicagoWiz.

Background w/out sketch overlay:

 

Background with sketch overlay:

So, what do you think thus far?

Best,

TB

 

**Rough** Conceptual Sketch

Over at Chicago Wiz's Blog he was kind enough to elaborate on a rule that he uses. In the examples he provided an example that he later requested art for. Now, I am NOT an artist. I doodle at best, but thought the idea of the image captured my imagination so I went with it.

Below is a VERY ROUGH sketch of what I envisioned. Once Chicago Wiz gives a thumbs up, I will do a finished product... perhaps in water color?

Best,

TB

Question Referencing "Dodging"...

Over at The Nine and Thirty Kingdoms Talysman ask which of three ways for Dodging seemed simpler / easier. I replied back and suppose that I chose "E: None of the Above." I regret it now, because in reality I wasn't any help. I did offer an option as a knee-jerk reaction, but that really isn't what he was looking for. So, rather than pollute his comments with ideas that he did not request, I figured I would put up the idea that I had on the subject and elaborate a bit.

Talysman's first option for Dodging utilized ideas from Trollsmyth's thoughts on "Shields Shall be Splintered". Talysman suggested, "...give players to skip their attack to avoid damage from one successful hit."

My thought was rather than removing the option for the player to attack, I would propose that the player can still act but is penalized for his damage mitigating action. It would require some additional book keeping and I am not entirely sure that I would want the option in my games. I do realize that many do, so suggest the following:

Perhaps rather than taking the player's following attack, they receive an immediate penalty to their AC, until their next action, and a penalty to their follow-on attack. Both penalties would be equal to the amount of damage that they circumvent.

AC penalties would have varying effect based on whether the character had had their action for the round or not yet. Dodging prior to your action doesn't seem nearly as bad as dodging after your action, but play tests would be required to confirm. This in my mind, if true, is explainable in that the character has time during the round to regroup for his attack. Either way, the penalty to the follow on attack and how many Dodges they perform in a round, should be sufficient to keep this action in the 'life saving' realm.

Example:

Round 3
DM - The first Goblin, needing a 17 to hit, connects for... 4hp...
PC - I Dodge!
DM - Fine, your current AC and next To hit are penalized by 4. The second Goblin goes for your legs as you dodge, needing a 13... hit... 3hp of...
PC - Dodge!
DM - Fine, but now you have a penalty of 7 to your current AC and Attack next round...

Round 4
PC - I want to crush the little bugger that went for my legs... I rolled a 15...
DM - 8... Modified for your penalty... Your hammer blow goes wide, missing it's mark...

Some additional book-keeping, but it might work ok. Especially if you are looking for a little more granularity and combat options. I tend to go the route that a 'miss' within a round of frantically flailing combatants isn't a miss per-say. A miss means the defender was sufficiently successful in reducing their opponent's actions to not caused them any lasting effects to their own effectiveness. Dodging, in this context, is that the character sees no acceptable way to stop their opponent's attack from doing damage except to put themselves in further danger later in the exchange.

Ok, I realize I have been somewhat long winded in presenting what one would think is a straight forward house rule, but as always, I need to work on conveying my thoughts better.

What do you think on the matter?

v/r
TB

Pelinore

Over at Absolutely Mental Tim posted about Pelinore and provided a link to an interesting pdf of some of the information to the long lost setting. Giving it a quick once over, though not what I personally want in a setting, I discovered that I really liked the way it was presented! Clear, concise, and inspirational.

I am considering doing something similar now with Ukarea...

Would love to know what people thought of the setting and its presentation. Is it worth going down this road?

Best,
TB

Been A While...

Yes, it has been a while since I have posted anything here. Do to some unfortunate personal issues I haven't had time for much past reading other's blogs, that I am subscribed to. But, for the few that follow along, I have every intention of continuing on with my Ukarea setting: Humanity's Reign and Ruin.

While I intended to go with Sword & Wizardry: White Box, I am beginning to lean more towards the Dark Dungeons rules set now. Mainly do to my familiarity and love for it's inspiration (Rules Cyclopedia) and the recent shake up of White Box, that I am not prepared to comment on at the moment.

I still have to delve into the legal-ese of Dark Dungeons, but "Dark Dungeons published 2010, no Copyright is asserted on the original text found in this work." does sound promising assuming a OGL page at the end of my publication will suffice.

With the re-discovery of Building the Perfect Class at Breeyark, I feel motivated to rebuild the classes from the ground up to better fit the setting that I have in mind. Especially the dark fantasy side, Humanity's Ruin, which will be demi-human centric. I think this all (Dark Dungeons and Building the Perfect Class) ties well into what I am gunning for.

More to come soon, promise.

Best,
TB