d4 d4

Roleplaying Game System

with one to three pages of each chapter More examples and other stuff in the full version! 89 pages and 35 illustrations of gaming goodness! And only one table for players to worry about!

Demo Version

By Kyle Schuant, 2004 Jim Bob Productions

Credits & Acknowledgements

Comments and development discussion are acknowledged from:

Russell mmm, Doritos Andrews, for his term, "Thespmaster" Clash hola! Bowley of Flying Mice Games for his comments on the Game Play Styles chapter Steve there's a girl... Darlington of rpg.net, for his term, "Pixelbitching" Bill it's free and legal, I swear! Edmunds for his advice on layout, and artwork acquisition Mark "We haven't had a combat since you left the group" Moncrieff John Well, there's a story about that Nowak for his many and various discussion of the manuscript, and game theory, for which in truth he should be named as second authour, though he denies it. Scott Yes, you do deserve this suffering Rhombus of rpg.net, for the cover illustration. Belinda Engrishu prease Sag as layout consultant. The many stimulating and mad people at rpg.net over the past couple of years who have impressed me by the immense variety of games played, and styles of game play. The Forge, for showing me how important it is to write so that people can understand you. Byron Hall, for showing the evil that an excess of concern with realism can lead to, especially when you haven't done your research.

Disclaimer
Trademarked names and copyrighted works mentioned in the text are mentioned for discursive purposes only, and no infringement is intended or should be inferred, and anyone who thinks the opposite is a knucklehead. The roleplaying game Kill Things and Take Their Stuff does not exist. It's a joke. No, we won't write it. Only comic strip writers and cynical old game designers produce games from jokes.

Caution
The following game mentions issues of race, racism and so on. It assumes that the players are decent, unprejudiced people, or at least try to be; it does not assume their characters are the same. Either of these ideas, or the implied concept of what is decent and unprejudiced could be offensive to some people. The following text refers to individuals by their individual gender, and to people in general as they. Persons who consider this to be grammatically incorrect are directed to the Oxford English Dictionary. The only exception is in the chapter discussing annoying gamers, who are usually male; they're referred to as he. Cat Piss Man is legendary. Has there ever been a Cat Piss Woman?

A Note on Printing & Copying

Its assumed that the GM will be the one purchasing this book, in pdf electronic form, and that theyll make a printed copy for themselves, and one electronic or printed copy for each of the players in their group, for their convenience. This copying will be interpreted by Jim Bob Productions as fair use under copyright laws. When a person leaves the gaming group, they ought to destroy or pass to the group their printed or electronic copy of the text. If the original buyer wants to sell on their electronic copy of the text, they ought to make a copy, pass it on, receive payment, and then delete their original electronic copy. Where possible, they ought to destroy, or to pass on to the new electronic copys owner their printed copies of the text.

Contents
Introductory Chapter page 3 The Basic Game Mechanics Chapter page 4 The Character Chapter page 9 The Traits Chapter page 15 The Combat Chapter page 52 The Game Play Styles Chapter page 70 The GMing Chapter page 80 Index ... page 84 Trait Index ... page 85 Character Sheet ... page 87 GM Combat Sheet & GM Session Sheet... pp 88-89

Introductory Chapter
Design
All rules are optional. That goes without saying, you'd think, but a Game Master (GM) once said to the authour, "those are the rules, and they are not bendable, however logical your argument." This system is not designed for that kind of GM. d4-d4 is a roleplaying system best suited to campaigns set in modern (post-1600) or future worlds. Certainly it can be used for other settings, but these are what its been specifically designed for; its not quite universal. A die roll of two four-sided dice, the one subtracted from the other and added to a Trait, and compared to a Difficulty level, resolves most actions. Traits are rated with a description, so that you can say, "Djim is an Outstanding Cook," or "Jane is a Middling Swimmer." The system works best for one-off games and for campaigns of a dozen adventures or so. If playing the same character for a longer campaign, for many years, they will become too powerful, and the system will break down, becoming less realistic and gritty than it began. Many games aim to present systems for characters that will last many real years of game play. But the reality of roleplaying game groups is that often the group breaks up after a few months, or the players and GM get tired of the setting or the characters and want something new. The system aims for a descriptive feel. This is the reason for its "granularity." Suppose two fencers are practising. Will they really know that one has 67% skill while the other has 64% skill? Probably not. Both will be regarded as "good," while the new guy with his 22% skill will be seen as "ordinary." It's quite difficult to measure abilities very precisely and accurately in a single test on one day. Thus, the Performance Ladder, as at the middle of the page. The idea is that with these Trait descriptions, plus the Personality Aspects, the player will have a good idea of their character's behaviour and abilities. Few of us could rate our own Fitness or Confidence to an exact percentage, but we ought to be able to guess that we've Ordinary Fitness and Good Confidence, with a Philosophy of Empirical Science, and a Demeanour of Friendly or whatever. The settings which will initially be available for d4-d4 will be: Guomindang, set in China 1911-49, from the Revolution to the Warlord period to the Japanese War to the Revolution, focusing on the middle two. Commonwealth 2271, a space exploration Royal Navy campaign. Heirs to Empire, set in the Ottoman Empire of the 17th-19th centuries. Osere, an espionage campaign in Europe, from the 1970s to the present. Humidity, a swampy chaotic post-apocalyptic Australia

Structure of Book
This book has several chapters. Each chapter begins with a Summary section. Once you've read and played out the stuff a few times, this should be all you need to look at to remind you. The rest is just discussion and explanation. Important rules are in bold. Examples are in italics, and the text will be indented from the rest of the page.

Optional
rules will often appear as sidebars from the rest of the text. Of course, the entire set of rules is optional, but this part is where it's suggested that if the GM and players want a different style of game, they should use this option. It should make it easier for a game to be chosen with more or less "realism" and so on. Sometimes this will also be an explanation, a different way of looking at what's just been discussed.

Basic Game Mechanics Chapter

Summary of Game Mechanics
Every character has a set of Traits describing them, with a word, such as "Good", or "Ordinary", describing their capability in that Trait. These are arranged in the Performance Ladder, from Famous to Crap. When characters act, the players roll d4-d4 (one four sided die subtracted from another), and adjust the performance of the character up or down rungs on the Performance Ladder. They compare this performance with a GM-set difficulty, or with the performance of another character. Famous Olympic Outstanding Excellent Good Middling Fair --- Ordinary --Poor Terrible Crap

Performance Ladder
Every character has some Traits, and these are rated on this Performance Ladder. The Performance Ladder will appear on every character sheet. These descriptors are known as the Trait Ratings Every person's performance on a task can be placed somewhere on the ladder to the left, from a Crap to a Famous performance. Almost everyone will spend their whole lives within the boldface letters region, from Poor to Outstanding. If these terms don't seem right, simply put in others. If the group doesn't like words and prefers numbers, then call "crap" 0, terrible 1, poor 2, etc. But this text will assume that the group's sticking with the words already here.

Trait Level Descriptions

Crap: the person's ability is simply atrocious. Watching them even try is embarrassing, and you're Terrible: this is a really bad performance, which you'd rather not watch, but they probably won't

certain they'll hurt themselves or someone else in the process. "For pity's sake, stop!" injure anyone. An 8th grade ability. A 10th grade ability.

Poor: If the person tries to do anything, it'll be immediately obvious they have almost no talent in it. Ordinary: This is pretty much what everyone is in most abilities. They're not going to fool anyone

that they have talent here, except perhaps themselves. This'll be spotted very quickly. An 11th grade ability. Fair: People who know the person well will have guessed this is their ability level. They do okay sometimes, but really they should leave it to the professionals. A decent 12th grade ability. Middling: This person gives no particular impression. They do okay most of the time, and could perhaps make a living using this ability, but won't get promoted without sleeping their way up (at least good appearance). A top 1st year university student's ability. Good: Now we're starting to get somewhere. They're not great, but their friends will know they've got some ability, and maybe admire them for it. A top 2nd year, or low 3rd year university student's ability. Excellent: It's immediately apparent they know what they're doing here. They're a professional in this field, or if they're not, they should be. A Master's degree ability. Outstanding: This person impresses with their ability. They'll be known among their friends and colleagues for their ability, and if they use it professionally, will do well in their career and win promotions and top wages regularly, or run their club if it's some hobby. A remarkably competent PhD. Olympic: Okay, maybe Macrame isn't an Olympic sport, but if it were, and the character had Macrame: Olympic, they could get into the competition. This is top-level stuff. Famous: the stuff of record books, documentaries, biographies, and so on. Keep it up and the character will be a household name, at least among people who know of that particular ability and admire it. Note that the normal human range is from Poor to Outstanding. Most people spend their entire lives in that range without descending to Crap or ascending to Famous.

Trait Tests
In the d4-d4 system, performance is determined by taking a character's Trait level with a d4-d4 roll added, and comparing with the difficulty level. The result is called their Performance. So, for example, the player may tell the GM, "I want Djim to bend the iron bars." The GM tells Djim's player, "That's an Olympic level performance." Example: Djim has Excellent Strength. The player gets two four-sided dice (d4), preferably of different colours, and designates one as an "add", the other as a "subtract." They're rolled together, and one is subtracted from the other to get a result from 3 to +3. Suppose Djim rolls 4-2. 4 2 = +2. Djim's Excellent Strength, for this one action, moves up two rungs on the ladder, to Olympic level; he bends the iron bars. Suppose Djim's player had rolled 1-2. 1 2 = -1. Djim's Excellent Strength wouldn't be very well applied in this action, he'd move down one rung on the ladder, it'd be just a Good performance. Bob's tendons on his arms and hands stand out, his face grimaces and turns red, but the bars remain firm. Can he try again? See "Continuing Trait Tests," below.

Optional View
Some people get a little flustered when they get negative numbers and so on. If so, think of it this way. Put your finger on the Trait Level being tested. Roll one die, move your finger UP that many rungs on the ladder. Now roll another die, moving your finger DOWN that many rungs on the ladder. Where you are now is your performance on that particular task.

Notice the percentages next to the numbers. They're the chance of rolling that particular result on d4-d4. See that about twothirds of the time (okay, 62.5%, if you want to be picky) the person's performance will hover around their Trait Level. Many systems have it Optional Rule that a character with higher The die mechanic here means that if two people are competing on a task, there's a chance of them matching each-other, even if they're at different ability can have successes, and ends of the Perfomance Ladder, so long as they're both within the Poor failures; it's simply that the more to Oustanding range. able character will fail less The Poor character will achieve a Middling performance 6.25% of the often. They have it that you time, as will the Outstanding character. They'll be equal in (both get can't tell the difference between Middling) performance 0.39% of the time. If you want a greater chance of performance overlap, then you can the "success" of someone with allow the dice to be open-ended. On a +3 or -3, roll again both dice and 99% skill, and the "success" of add the result, so that possible results go from -6 to +6. someone with 23% skill. The probability of each result, after the two rolls have been added But this isn't the way together, is as follows: things really work. A more +6 0.39% +5 0.78% skilled person consistently +4 1.17% performs better than a less +3 1.56% skilled person; they don't merely +2 13.67% fail less often, they do better +1 19.53% most of the time, and they do 0 25.78% -1 19.53% better when they do succeed. -2 13.67% So, someone of -3 1.56% Ordinary Strength will perform -4 1.17% Ordinarily, Fairly, or Poorly -5 0.78% about two-thirds of the time, that -6 0.39% is, be within one level of their Notice what this means. With open-ended dice, the results gather more towards the middle. Where before there was a 6.25% chance of +3, basic ability. A consistent now there's a 3.91% chance of +3 or better. So, you're more likely to get performance. Similarly, an a result closer to your Trait level, but there's a chance it'll be Outstanding Artist will usually extraordinarily good or bad. paint Outstandingly, though This will make Famous and Crap results more common in play.It does not actually give a greater chance of performance overlap, but it means sometimes only Excellently well, that characters of widely separate Trait Levels have a chance of and sometimes of an Olympic matching one another. It means, too, that someone of Ordinary ability standard. There's even a has a chance of a better than Good performance; normally, they have chance she'll produce none. They also have a chance of a worse than Crap performance. something which may become Famous.

+3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3

6.25% 12.75% 18.75% 25.00% 18.75% 12.75% 6.25%

The Character Chapter

Summary of Character Creation
Each character has a Character Sheet. This lists their Personality & History, and their Traits. Each character should have defined their personality, background and appearance. This will include, Backstory Some words, a paragraph or two about the character. Background & Appearance Name Race & Sex Height/Weight Hair/eyes/skin Date & Place of Birth Personality Philosophy (religion or worldview) Demeanour (how the character presents themselves to the world, their attitude) Habits & Mannerisms Likes Dislikes Hobbies Ambitions Traits Each character will have Traits, which are their abilities, skills, talents, etc. Most of these Traits will be rated on the Performance Ladder, from Poor to Outstanding; they begin at Ordinary. Each player will have levels they can spend on their Traits. How many they have depends on the type of campaign being played: Realistic, 20 levels of Good Stuff, with up to 5 levels of Bad Stuff (and thus up to 5 levels more of Good Stuff) TV action-drama, 30 levels Good Stuff, up to 7 of Bad Stuff. Cinematic, 40 levels; the GM should consider allowing Olympic level Traits; plus up to 10 of Bad Stuff. Super-heroic, 50 levels; the GM ought to insist on some Olympic or Famous level Traits (the super-heroic dont merely have many Traits, they have some incredible Traits!); plus up to 15 levels of Bad Stuff.

Backstory
Some players and GMs dont like to bother with this, some do. This could be just a couple of paragraphs about the history of the character before the start of the adventure. What their family background is, what events shaped them, etc. The player can write this, and then get inspiration for the Personality Aspects and the Good and Bad Stuff Traits out of that; or they can put all the Aspects and Traits together first, and afterwards come up with a Backstory explaining them. In the character creation examples that follow, the player has no idea about the setting the GMs throwing him into, and so hell use the second method Aspects and Traits first, story later.

Background & Appearance

The character's Background and Appearance encompasses their race, culture, origin and so on. These shape their Personality. Example: the GM tells the player, the game will be set in 1930s Africa, beginning in Ethiopia. Id prefer you start off as native to that country, but of course youll be able to travel. You can be Educated, but remember this is the 1930s, so you wont have things like computers and so on. The player, a chunky Australian male IT nerd, scratches his head a bit and says, hmmm, okay, interesting. I guess Ill read up a bit, eh?

Name This ought to be something appropriate to the character's background, culture, era and so on. Choose a name you can stand being called for a while. Example: the player decides to call his character, "Djima Makele," known as "Djim" to his friends. This fits in, more or less, with the games setting in 1930s Africa. He does a sketch of an Ethiopian guy, Race & Sex Consider these carefully. In some cultures and eras, this choice could affect your character's life considerably. They will also affect their background, history, philosophy and so on. Consider also that "race" is a fluid concept. It's not merely the colour of your skin or the shape of your eyes. In most cases, some sort of culture, history, goes with it. What are minor or not even noticed differences to an outsider can be a great importance to one within that culture. In the modern United States, for example, almost everyone with at least one grandparent who is of sub-Saharan African origin, and is dark-skinned, will be called, "African American." However, if that person goes to Nigeria, they won't say, "welcome, brother African!" but will try to discover if he's of Hutu, Tutsi, Ibo, Oromo, etc, origin. Similarly, while in Australia someone may identify themselves as "Chinese", in China itself it will be significant that they're from Guangzhong rather than Beijing. There's as much or more cultural and linguistic difference between someone from Guangzhong and someone from Beijing as there is between a Frenchman and a Belgian. There's also the issue of the mixed-race individuals. In the West, traditionally the native peoples of the Americas and Australia, and the imported African slave stock, were looked down upon. At the same time there's been a general loss of depth of Western culture in the past two centuries, as it's become broad and included aspects of other cultures. For this reason, it's very common that if someone has any African, Amerindian, or Aboriginal blood at all, others will see them as that race, and they will identify themselves as that race. A one-quarter English and three-quarters Aboriginal calls herself, "Aboriginal," while a three-quarters English and one-quarter Aboriginal also calls herself, "Aboriginal." The thinking of both the full-blooded pale and dark-skinned peoples is that the darker blood determines the race; this thinking comes from the racist laws of the past, where the "dark blood" was held to "pollute the white blood". So for example in the United States during the era of slavery, if a master had a child with his slave, the child would be half white, half black and would be called, "Negro", and be born a slave. Anyone at least one-eighth Negro could be owned as a slave. Later on, this view of race applied to the segregation laws. On the other hand, in 19th century Brasil, anyone who was any part European by blood was called, "white." So, just as in the USA some light-skinned people were called, "coloured", in Brasil, some dark-skinned people were being called, "white."

Personality
Each person's personality is made up of a number of Aspects. These are: Philosophy, Demeanour, Habits & Mannerisms, Likes, Dislikes, Hobbies and Ambitions. Each character should have at least one of each, and possibly two. The one listed first will be the Primary one; the second, the Secondary. The Primary one is the one the character is more passionate about. These personality aspects are simply there, or not there. They don't have levels as Traits do. The various aspects may be important in play. They define the character's personality, and make them more than just a set of numbers. It helps inspire the GM for plots and adventures. In certain circumstances, the character aspect may give bonuses to actions, since people make more effort and tend to be better at things which interest or are important to them. Note on Personality The GM and players ought to be careful in listing the personality aspects of the characters. It's always tempting to create characters with extreme personality traits, to create fanatics and madmen. This always seems funny at first, but can get annoying after a while. The player risks creating not a character, but a caricature. For example, a common method of caricature is the one-dimensional character. The Warrior who has: "Likes swords, dislikes blunt swords, hobbies sharpening swords, ambition to have a bigger sword." This is funny at first, but quickly becomes dull; better not to bother with Personality Aspects at all, since the natural and spontaneous improvisation of the player will almost always create a more interesting character that the Sword Warrior.

Optional Rule
GMs and players of the Thespmaster variety may like to treat Personality Aspects just like any other Trait. In that case, the GM ought to give out an extra 10 levels for players to use on their characters Personality Traits. Personality Traits could be tested when players are asking themselves, what would my character do? and theyre not sure, because the character has conflicting desires. They could indicate the level of passion the character has in that area. They could also be useful in determining the course of discussions characters have with others, which the player doesnt want to roleplay in detail. They could be used as Complimentary Traits, much as has already been described here. Of course, all this is extra work for the player and GM both, work which may not achieve what they want to achieve from the game, which is why its an optional rule.

Use of Personality Aspects in game The Personality Aspects may come into play in game terms. Specifically, the GM may rule there's a bonus or penalty of one or two rungs to the Performance Ladder, to any action relating to that Aspect. In effect, a Personality Aspect may act as a Complimentary Trait. See Complimentary Traits, page 7.

Examples: Philosophy: Racist, a character of Vietnamese race, comes across an ethnic Meo from the mountain regions of Vietnam robbing a Vietnamese civilian. Since this action by the Meo corresponds with the Vietnamese racist conception of the Meo as "bandits", the GM rules that any action by the racist in resisting the Meo will have a +1 to his die rolls. Philosophy: Empirical Scientist is sitting in his laboratory one day when a gigantic redarsed demon with horns and the stench of sulphur appears through a grate in the floor. The scientist at first assumes it's his PhD student playing a prank. He reaches out to poke the pudgy flesh of the corpulent demon's body, and burns his hand on the acidic blubber. Horrified, he suddenly realises that "demons are real." As this goes rather against Empirical Science as commonly conceived, the GM rules that the scientist will have a 1 to all his die rolls while the demon is about. Once it's gone, he can rationalise the experience and the penalty will disappear. Demeanour: Obnoxious fellow is at a job interview. The interviewer asks him that dreaded interviewers question, "what is your major weakness?" The player will get a 1 penalty on his die roll to give a Fast Talk charming answer, or a +1 bonus on their die roll to Intimidate the interviewer, such as by pounding their fist on the table and saying, "my major weakness is that I hate stupid questions."

Philosophy This represents for most people not a whole system of thought carefully considered and logically presented with footnotes, like a Kantian book of epistemology; instead, it's simply the filter through which they view the world, the way they interpret events. They interpret events so as to support their Philosophy. Also, they seek out events that support their philosophy: a Capitalist starts a business; a Catholic goes to Lourdes to see a miracle; an Empirical Scientist, if they don't actually have a career in science, joins the Sceptic's Society or watches science documentaries. Example: A person has a long illness, and is told they've six months to live; they pray to Jesus, and live on, recovering fully. The Empirical Scientist will call this a "spontaneous remission," and perhaps think it'd be good to study the hormonal effects of prayer, and whether those hormones promote natural antibodies, and Whereas the Charismatic Christian will say, "it's a miracle." The same event is thus interpreted differently by different Philosophies. In all philosophies, people tend to look for evidence to support their point of view: the Empirical Scientist sees "facts" everywhere, while the Charismatic Christian sees "miracles" everywhere. Of course, there are different degrees of philosophy. Its up the player how strongly theyll play the various Aspects. Common philosophies include (mentioning only those with at least ten million believers worldwide): Atheist, Catholic, Protestant, Charismatic Christian, Secular Christian, Sunni Moslem, Shi'ia Moslem, Secular Moslem, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Shinto, Animist, Jewish, Secular Jewish, Empirical Scientist, Conspiracy Theorist, Racist, Apocalyptic, Messianic, Environmentalist, Survivalist, Capitalist, Socialist, Nihilistic, Liberal Humanist, Therapist, Hedonist, Altered States. There are many others, these are just a sampling for inspiration. Note that two or more philosophies may be combined. Catholic Apocalyptic is one who believes the end is nigh, when the Lord shall come "with woundes redde to damne the quick and the dead." Scientific Messianic is one who believes science will solve all our troubles, and lead us to paradise on earth. A Capitalist Survivalist probably makes a living from sales of survivalist gear; he thinks the world will probably fall apart, and is prepared for it but he's also prepared in case it doesn't fall apart, and he just needs wads of cash. Example: Djim has chosen for him the Philosophies Hedonist and Coptic Christian. So Djim's a person who's pretty much into having fun. He won't turn down a drink or a toke or a shag if it looks halfway alright. This'll be pretty apparent fairly soon after meeting him. But he does have some religious beliefs, and goes to church and tithes some of his meagre income. Demeanours This represents the way the person presents themselves to the world, how they behave. It's not necessarily related to their Philosophy. Not all Charismatic Christians are Chirpy, and not all Empirical Scientists are Geeky. Common Demeanours include: Aggressive or Obnoxious, Bitchy or Catty, Bookish, Butch or Macho, Chirpy, Courteous, Elegant, Extraverted, Feminine or Camp, Foul-mouthed, Friendly, Geeky, Happy, Humble, Introverted, Loud, Nervous or Jumpy, Oblivious or Obtuse, Partier or Clubber, Passive or Accommodating, Poetic or Eloquent, Quiet, Sarcastic, Sceptical or Cynical, Serene, Serious, Slovenly, Smug, Sour, Sporty, Stylish, Talkative, Thoughtful. Note that two or more Demeanours may be combined, as with the Philosophies. All of us know people who are Slovenly yet Friendly, or Camp and Foul-Mouthed, etc. Again, the primary demeanour will be the dominant one. Example: Djim has chosen for him, Demeanour: Talkative / Happy

The Traits Chapter

Summary of Traits
Every character may be described in terms of several Traits. These are their abilities, what they can do and what they know. Some of these are Anyone Traits anyone can try them and some are Specialist Traits only specially trained people can try them. Everyone begins with all Anyone Traits at Ordinary. When creating a character, the player can assign 20 levels to their Traits to improve them. Also, there's Bad Stuff. These are Traits that hinder you. The player may assign up to 5 levels of these, and these add to the levels of Good Stuff which the player can assign. In some campaigns, there's a limit to the different Traits you can have as better than ordinary. It takes brains and effort to keep them all in practice. However, that's not so bad, because some Traits are similar. If you have one, then it may give you some knowledge of another one.

Types of Traits
Here in d4-d4 there are three kinds of Traits: Anyone Traits: Good Stuff Anyone Can Try. These depend on the game world. In the modern west, anyone can jump a fence, drive a car, swim, etc. But they begin with an Ordinary level in it. Everyone begins with a Ordinary level in all Anyone Traits. To improve them beyond that level requires effort. The first level you buy for your character is Fair. Specialist Traits: Good Stuff Only Specialists Can Try. This is stuff like brain surgery or flying a plane, "don't try this at home." People begin with absolutely no ability in Specialist Traits.. They can't even try. The first level you buy for your character is Ordinary. Bad Stuff: this is stuff that hinders you, like being impoverished, having one leg, or being illiterate. It might also be an Anyone or Specialist Trait that you have at worse than Ordinary level. When you develop a character, you normally begin with 20 levels (this may vary, see the Character Chapter, page 15) . With these, you can get Traits. So you could take twenty Traits up to fair level (20 lots of +1, Ordinary + 1 becomes Fair), or ten Traits up to Good level (10 lots of +2, Ordinary +2 becomes Middling), or five up to Excellent level (5 lots of +4, Ordinary +4 becomes Excellent), or some combination in between. Characters may not begin with better than Outstanding in any Trait. No-one can begin as Olympic or Famous in anything. You have to earn your famous status, mate. When you purchase Specialist Traits, the first level you buy takes you from Ordinary to Fair, just as with Anyone Traits. But remember that if you don't buy any levels in it, you cannot even try it. Bad Stuff is purchased differently to Anyone and Specialist Traits. When you "buy" levels of Bad Stuff, the first level you buy is Poor and then goes down the ladder to Terrible, then Crap, and no further. As with Specialist Traits, if it's not listed, it usually means that you don't have it at all. But if you buy levels in it, they add to your total remaining. So if you took one level of Enemy, that's a Poor Enemy (everyone has some Ordinary Enemies!), and you'd have a total of 24 + 1 = 25 levels to spend on Anyone and Specialist Traits. Just to keep it sane, it's recommended that the GM restrict character to not more than five levels of Bad Stuff. Someone with that maximum is bound to end up on Oprah someday. Anyone with more than five levels of Bad Stuff will end up on Springer. Note that a person may, if they really want to, choose to take one of the Anyone or Specialist Traits as a Bad Stuff. Examples
Tom may choose to be a Crap Driver, giving him three extra levels to spend - since Crap is

three rungs lower than Ordinary - instead of just an Ordinary Driver, or level to spend, or

Mark may choose to have Poor rather than Ordinary Confidence giving him one extra Kyle may end up with Terrible Agility, giving two extra levels to spend.

The GM should be alert to abuse of this, for example, a person who already has Crap Strength and Agility is probably a wheel-chair bound cripple, so if they take Terrible Sprinting, well, that's pushing it a bit. Characters should not be able to take as Bad Stuff Traits which they don't ever expect to use, such as a medieval knight being Terrible with Biochemistry. Players should consult with the GM before taking worse than Poor in any Trait, since it's a very serious hindrance, beyond the human norm of incompetence.

Optional Rule
There's a limit to he number of Traits which a character may have at better than Ordinary. This limit is 3+ Perception steps better than Ordinary + Education steps better than Ordinary + Confidence steps better than Ordinary There's only so much any character can notice, remember, or be bothered keeping in practice. This rule would mean that there are some people who have very few, or no abilities at all. There really are people like this, people who are simply too stupid, ignorant or lazy to learn anything. The limit would not apply to the three Traits above, nor would it apply to the character's native language.

Similar Traits
Sometimes a person may not have a Trait, but may have something similar. A Similar Trait defaults to the other at 3. These are skills which are somewhat related, have some overlap in learning, for example Chemistry vs Biochemistry, Big Guns vs Smallarms, Computer Operations vs Computer Programming, etc. So if for example someone has Outstanding Chemistry, they will have Middling Biochemistry as their default, since Middling is three rungs lower on the Performance Ladder than is Outstanding. Without any particular effort towards Biochemistry, they use their education, their knowledge of general Chemistry to figure some things out. Of course if they just had Middling Chemistry, then their Biochemistry wouldn't be up to much, being Poor. Since it is probably a Specialist Trait, they'd be grateful at least to be able to roll, try to scratch up the relevant knowledge from somewhere

Characters get the higher of the Similar Trait level, and the Anyone Trait default of Ordinary. So, Similar Traits only help if the primary Trait is better than Good, or if the secondary Trait is a Specialist one, which they wouldn't normally get any ability in without effort. Don't bother writing your Similar Traits in; they will be determined as relevant during play. Example: Djim finds himself in need of Area Knowledge (Addis Ababa), to know his way around town, as hes looking for a particular street. He doesnt have any extra ability in Area Knowledge of any kind, so the GM tells his player that he just has Area Knowledge (Melbourne) Ordinary. Ah! says Djims player. But I am Streetwise in Addis Ababa. Ive got Good Streetwise, good knowledge of the lowlives of Addis Ababa. Doesnt that help? The GM explains that yes, Streetwise is a Similar Trait for Area Knowledge. Streetwise gives you Area Knowledge three levels lower. So, Streetwise Good becomes Area Knowledge Ordinary. The GM tells the player, if your Streetwise were Excellent, then thatd make your Area Knowledge Fair. If you had Streetwise Outstanding, itd become Area Knowledge of Addis Ababa, Middling.

Optional Rule
Some GMs may feel that the Similar Traits rule is too generous, or may lead to minimaxing, or may be too complicated to keep track of. In that case, it shouldnt be used. Its recommended that a GM not using the Similar Traits rule should give the players 5 to 10 extra levels to build their characters with, since theyll have just the Traits they buy directly.

Similar Traits don't count during Character Creation. So you can't, for example, take Agility to Excellent level, using 4 levels, then claim that you can take all Traits which are Similar to Agility (Brawling, Climbing, etc) to Middling with just one level each, instead of two. All traits are bought up from Ordinary, regardless of any Similar traits the character may have.

Selecting Traits
It is strongly suggested that every player consider granting to their character some levels above Ordinary in three or more of Agility, Confidence, Education, Fitness, Perception, Strength. The reason to develop levels in these Traits is that they are Similar Traits for so many others. Speed and Toughness are already listed on the character sheet, but you cannot get levels in these, since they are derived from the other Traits listed. Example: Djim's player wishes him to be a sneaky, smart, canny sort of guy. His GM advises him that the game will be "realistic", and he'll have 20 Trait levels to spend on Good Stuff, and up to 5 levels of Bad Stuff, for each of which he'll get an extra level of Good Stuff. Djims player says, Bad Stuff is bad! Ill only take one level of it. Im sure my sadistic GM will give me more Bad Stuff later on. Djim chooses as follows: "I don't want to be a klutz." Agility Fair... uses 1 level of Good Stuff "It's a tough world out there." Brawling Middling... uses 2 levels of Good Stuff "I can take care of myself!" Confidence Good... uses 3 levels of Good Stuff "Hey, it wasn't me." Fast Talk Good... uses 3 levels of Good Stuff "I played with the kids in the Embassy Quarter." *Language (English) Ordinary... uses 1 levels of Good Stuff - as this is a Specialist Trait, the first level he buys takes it to just Ordinary. "I can seeee you..." Perception Middling.... uses 2 levels of Good Stuff "It's good to pump iron." Strength Excellent... uses 4 levels of Good Stuff "They won't see me coming." Stealth Middling... uses 2 levels of Good Stuff "I know who's who and what's what." Streetwise Good... uses 3 levels of Good Stuff Then, Let's go! Now!" Impulsive Poor... uses 1 level of Bad Stuff. In all, Djim has 21 levels of Good Stuff, and 1 level of Bad Stuff. A balanced character. Djim also gets without any effort, Native Language (Amharic), and Native Language Script (Amharic), equal to his Education, which as he hasn't specified it, is Ordinary. Djim's Speed is the average of his Agility - Fair and Strength - Excellent, rounded down: Speed - Middling. His Toughness is the average of his Strength (Excellent), Confidence (Good), and Fitness (Ordinary), rounded down: Toughness Middling.

Djim

Background Name: Djima Makele Race & Sex: Oromo Height/Weight: 1.70m / 70kg Hair/eyes/skin: dark frizzy hair, brown eyes, dark skin Date & Place of Birth: April 1st, 1908, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Personality Philosophy Hedonist, Coptic Demeanour Talkative, Happy Habits & Mannerisms Moves quickly, Never combs hair Likes: Tall women, short drinks Dislikes: Government, Rules Hobbies: Dancing, Planning in copious detail Ambitions: to be rich as Croesus, to never pay tax Traits Speed Middling Toughness Middling Agility Fair Brawling Middling Confidence Good Fast Talk Good *Foreign Language (English) Ordinary Impulsive Poor Language, Native (Amharic) Ordinary Native Language Script (Amharic) - Ordinary Perception Middling Strength Excellent Stealth Middling Streetwise Good

Notice all the things that arent on Djims character sheet. His Wealth? Income? Attractiveness? Education? Fitness? Computer Operations? All these things are Anyone Traits, at Ordinary level, and so Djims player doesnt bother writing them down. Only the things which are better or worse than Ordinary does he write down. Of course, the Specialist Traits like Vacc Suit and Surgery he doesnt have at all, not even at Crap. But all the Anyone Traits not mentioned as being better or worse than Ordinary, he has them at Ordinary.

Fast-Talk (Similar Traits: Confidence, Acting): keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em manure. Middling get an extension on a bill. Good talk your way out of a parking ticket (Attractive Trait helps) Excellent explain the lipstick on your collar, or the extra pair of men's boots beside the bed. Outstanding convince a witness that they saw the opposite of that which they did (eg, "he started the fight!") Olympic make the Repo Man go away empty-handed. Famous persuade the teacher the dog really did eat your homework. Favours due: some people owe you favours, which you may collect. Each favour you collect must be approved by the GM. A stronger trait here could indicate more small favours from several people, or a bigger favour from one person. Firearms licence: This is a licensed right to possess and use firearms of a certain type. In Australia, this would be: Poor prohibited from possessing firearms. Ordinary no weapons Fair - Bolt- or lever-action rifles and shotgun with magazines of less than 10 rounds; Middling - Semi-automatic rifles and shotguns with magazines of less than 10 rounds; Good - Handguns of any kind; Excellent - military-style weapons of non-explosive type, or licence to carry on your person and use in an urban area loaded firearms. All Such licences also require absence of criminal record, a large locker or safe, with a separate compartment or locker for ammunition. Licence levels and requirements are about equal to that of Australia in western Europe and Britain. They are two levels lower in the United States; that is, licence and check only required for handguns and military-style weapons in most states, and some states permit possession of explosive weaponry. Eastern Europe and much of Asia have similar laws to Britain, but are rather poorly policed in most cases, with notable exceptions such as Singapore. Firearms rules in much of sub-Saharan Africa are simply, "shoot first." The cost of firearms licences in Japan is three levels higher for each type of weapon, and in no case excepting only the US President's Secret Service guard detail - would a non-Japanese be granted such a licence. In Australia, this is an Anyone Trait; improving it is relatively quick. In more restrictive countries such as Japan it might be a Specialist Trait, taking some time to improve. There's an alternate version of this Trait, simply, Firearms Possession. Note: the issue of firearms licences is, in fact, much more complicated than this across the world. Firearms laws are like other laws, full of exceptions and variation from place to place. However, this isnt meant to be a treatise on gun law, just to give an idea of the issue: most games simply treat the problem of acquiring firearms as a matter of money. Prerequisite: No Traits granting a criminal record, obnoxious personality aspects, psychological problems for which medication is required, etc. Firearms Possession (Illegal): In this case, the firearms are possessed illegally, but the character has some other Trait going with it, such as Duty to Crime Family, etc. The Trait is otherwise the same as Firearms Licence, excepting that the ease of each type of firearms possession is one level lower in each case, for example only a Middling Firearms Possession Trait is required to have handguns, compared to a Good Firearms Licence Trait.

Bad Stuff
Concerning this "Bad Stuff," it's called that because it's something that restricts the behaviour of the character. You can't do any damn fool thing you want, you're restricted by this stuff. From the point of view of the player that makes this stuff bad. Things such as a Code of Honour are from many people's point of view a good thing. But from the point of view of freedom of action of the character, they're bad. That's why they're here. When you "buy" levels of Bad Stuff, you go down the ladder to Poor (first level), then Terrible (second level), then Crap (third level), and no further. The "worse" the Bad Stuff Trait, the more it restricts your character's freedom of action. Bad Stuff Traits do not have Similar Traits, or Prerequisites. Note on Codes of Honour etc. Most game systems have your character's strong will opposing their "weakness" - like their Code of Honour, or their Gluttony. So that a strong-willed character more easily overcomes their honourable nature to do dishonourable things, or their hunger. But in fact, a stronger-willed person is one who tends to hold to their character aspects more strongly than a weaker-willed person. The will does not act against the aspect, it supports it. A weak-willed person is more likely to give up on what they believe in (Code of Honour) or what they desire (Gluttony). A strong-willed person sticks to their guns, or pursues what they want with more determination. If a roll is called for on a Bad Stuff Trait, then this will usually be an Unopposed Roll against Confidence, to resist the effects of that Trait. If the Bad Stuff Trait performance is lower than Confidence, the Bad Stuff Trait gets expressed for that scene. If the Bad Stuff Trait performance is equal to or higher than Confidence, then the character hesitates, and doesn't express their Bad Stuff Trait for this scene. Consider: a Terrible Code of Honour the "Terrible" represents how restrictive the code is. Your characters Good or Poor or Middling Confidence represents their strength of will how strongly they hold to that code, as well as how strongly they hold to other things. Don't think of it as "am I strong enough to resist my faults?" but as "am I strong enough to behave in the way I feel is natural and proper for me?" So a person with a Crap Code of Honour and Poor Confidence level, they've got a very restrictive code, but they keep breaking it and feeling bad about it; a person with a Poor Code of Honour and Outstanding Confidence, they only have some light restrictions, but they almost never break them. That is, the level of the Bad Stuff Trait represents how restrictive it is, while the Confidence represents how dedicated you are to it and any other such traits or personality aspects. This does not apply to all Bad Stuff Traits. It's irrelevant to One Arm Trait, for example. And many others will be rolled against a difficulty set by the GM according to the situation, rather than according to the character's willpower and the like. Each Trait describes this. Many of these Bad Stuff Traits will seem like Personality Aspects. Feel free to treat them as such, if it seems appropriate. The distinction thats been made here is between Personality Aspects, which the player may choose to ignore in their character from time to time, and Bad Stuff Traits, which they cant ignore. Most people can set aside their Catholic Philosophy or Friendly Demeanour for a moment or two; they cant set aside their Code of Honour or Sexuality. Example: Djim is Impulsive Poor. His character is a bit down on his luck, and decides to visit a casino, hoping his luck will turn. The GM describes the scene, and that theres a large wad of cash on the table while the croupier is setting up. Djim's player giggles, "I should just grab it!" The GM says, "okay, since you're Impulsive Poor, roll that against your Confidence. If you Impulsiveness comes out as lower than your Confidence, then your Confidence in yourself wins out, and you grab the cash. " "Don't I use my Confidence to resist my impulses?" "No. Being Impulsive means you think it's good to just jump on in there. Djim doesn't think of being impulsive as Bad Stuff. He thinks it's good to do things without thinking about them. If he had weak Confidence, he might be a bit nervous about grabbing the cash. But his high Confidence means he's not nervous, usually he feels confident about life, that he'll be alright no matter what. Now, roll your Impulsive Poor against your Confidence Good." "Ack! The highest Impulsive performance I can have is three levels higher, on the best die roll. That's Poor, plus three levels, Middling. So even if I roll +3, I still have Middling Impulsive, which is less than Good Confidence. My Confidence makes me so arrogant, I think I can do any damn thing. I guess no matter what, I'll grab the cash...

Trait Improvement
There are three approaches to Trait Improvement. It's recommended that the GM pick one of them, depending on the style of the campaign. These are: Study Steady Rate Learn from Mistakes, Slack Off with Success Study: New Anyone Traits: will be learned from Ordinary. One month's training brings it to Fair. New Specialist Traits: Six month's training, which brings it to Ordinary. Anyone Traits: a month's training; Skill will improve one level. Specialist Traits: six months' training; Skill will improve one level. For this purpose of improvement only, innate Traits such as Strength, Agility, Fitness, Perception, Education and Confidence are Specialist Traits. Bad Stuff Trait: these can be improved, and when they reach Ordinary level, disappear in terms of game mechanics effects. However, the GM must be consulted before changing the level of these. Usually, some in-game story or action will be required. A Dependent might grow up or get better; but how do you get rid of the Enemy without defeating them? Or grow back that Missing Arm? Note that the time taken is not a full month or six. It's at most a couple of hours daily over that time. A couple of hours daily is the most time that may be usefully spent trying to improve something. If, for example, you were to lift weights eight hours a day, you'd get no extra benefit compared to two hours a day. Similarly, with most other Traits. It takes time for the body to recover from the last workout, or from the mind to "digest" the information. A character doing a normal full-time job may attempt to improve Trait at a time; they have a couple of hours spare each day. A character doing nothing but study may attempt to improve up to four Traits at once. But each one attempted beyond the first requires a successful Confidence roll, firstly at Good difficulty, then Excellent difficulty, then Outstanding difficulty. That is, can they really be bothered? Or do they just watch TV, surf the Net, and order pizza This is why you do not find that the idle rich or unemployed are all extremely well-skilled. Steady Rate: With this method, the GM and/or players nominate the session's "Most Valuable player," the one who contributed the most to the enjoyment of the game not to the success of the mission, but to the enjoyment of the game. This player gets two levels to add to their character; two Traits improve by one level each, or one improves by two levels. Everyone else gets one level with which to improve their character. A Specialist or Bad Stuff Trait takes two levels to improve, an Anyone Trait, one level to improve. The GM, of course, may award more or less levels to the players, should it seem desirable to speed or slow the pace of character improvement. Learn from Mistakes, Slack Off with Success The reasoning of this is that people learn from their bad, bad mistakes, and if they achieve success, they become smug and make a mistake next time. The player will note if, during the game session, the character achieved a result of Crap on a Trait test. If so, at the end of the session the player should roll the dice, on any result of 0 or better, the Trait improves a level. (Of course, a character with better than Middling in a Trait will have to really stress it to get a Crap result.) If the character achieves a result of Famous on a Trait test, the player should at the end of the session roll the dice, on any result of -1 or worse, the Trait drops a level. Naturally, the GM may choose to combine two of these methods. All three would be difficult to rationalise as compatible.

The Combat Chapter

On Killing
These are "realistic" rules, and therefore not suitable for all campaigns. They're here to reflect the fact that most people are not brutal killers, who giggle as they run people over, or whose only hesitation in shooting unarmed people in the heads is a moment's wait to think up a witty line. Most people will not kill, even if their own lives are in danger. It should be emphasised that these rules should be considered according to the genre. They're not for dungeon-crawls, but they do fit in well for modern technothrillers, for example. Characters who wish to shoot or swing or jab to kill must make a Confidence roll, with a result required as follows:
Victim a point on a map (eg for artillerymen), Poor Victim a distant blur through sights, Ordinary Victim another fighter some distance away, but recognisable; or a melee fighter in Victim coming for you with obvious intent to kill, Middling Victim begging for life, showing you pictures of his family, etc, Outstanding. Victim is an obvious innocent (child, cripple, etc), Olympic

combat with you, Fair

Yes, its more difficult to kill someone directly threatening you than someone a few dozen yards away. This is because the difficulty of killing has nothing to do with the threat they pose to you, but has to do with how close and identifiably human they are. Once a killing has be aen deliberately done, a character will find it a level lower in difficulty the next time in a very similar situation. Once you've bayoneted someone in combat, it's not so difficult the next time. This will be cumulative, and will apply to easier situations also; for example, once you've shot a crippled blind begging child, it's not such a big deal to bayonet someone in trench combat. If the roll is only just failed by one level, the attacker uses some less fatal means to attack. For example the bayonet thrust (Stab damage) becomes a whack with the butt of the rifle (Bash damage). If the roll is failed by two or more levels, the attacker doesn't directly attack the enemy, but uses their weapon to intimidate. For example they fire in the air above their heads, or brandish their sword with a battle cry (Intimidation skill, with a bonus for weapon use) If the roll achieves a "Crap" result, or a result three or more levels lower than required, the attacker doesn't use their weapon at all, but finds something else to do. For example they run away, load magazines for another fighter, surrender, cowers and cries and dribbles all over themselves, etc. This of course should be player choice, according to their character's personality. In this case, the character will find killing in a similar situation a level harder next time. The difficulty may be modified by such things as, crowd chanting with their thumbs down, officer standing next to you abusing and threatening you, "Stop aiming high, damnit!" and so on. Of course, it may also be modified by appropriate Traits and Personality Aspects, such as Humanitarian, Pacifist, Intolerant, Racist, etc. This is the reason that d4-d4 does not give copious tables of statistics for guns and other weapons. For the vast majority of people, even combat soldiers, the problem of weapons is not whether the .44 Magnum has greater stopping power than the 9mm parabellum, or 38 hollow-nose; it's pulling the trigger while pointing it at a human being. It doesn't matter what the calibre or range or fire rate of the thing is if you never fire it directly at anyone. And if you are willing to fire, then you will eventually kill the guy, regardless of how useless your weapon is.

Summary: Combat Sequence

Each combat round consists of: 1. Initiative rolls 2. Statements of Intent 3. Resolution of actions, in Initiative Order. a. If attacking, roll to hit, vs opponent's Dodge or Parry. b. If you hit, roll for hit location. c. Assess Damage, and then Wound. d. If you have been hit, roll to check for Knockdown e. If Knocked Down, roll to check for Knockout. 4. After the combat, if injured, check for Shock. a. Now, wound penalties will kick in. 5. If anyone is still standing against another, return to 1.

1. Initiative
All combatants roll against their Speed. The highest goes first. The GM may impose modifiers, such as attacking by surprise, a combatant being drunk, and so on. A Poor or worse result means that the character does nothing this round except D&D: Dithering and Ducking. A character may choose to act later in the round. The GM will simply skip over the character, going through every other character's turn, and the character pipes up when they want to act. Naturally, if you are knocked down before your turn, one of your two actions will be getting up. Even if you choose to stay lying down, you must still take a moment to collect yourself and get your bearings. If knocked out, you simply miss your turn. Hey, it's a tough and nasty world out there. Example: Djim finds himself in a barfight with Golly Grover, famed pugilist. His relevant combat Traits are Speed Middling, Toughness Middling, Brawling Middling, Strength Excellent. Golly Grovers combat Traits are Speed Fair, Toughness Excellent, Brawling Good, Strength Outstanding. In the first combat round, Djims player rolls 4,3 = +1 for his Initiative, so that his Speed is increased by one level this round, and he has Speed Good. Golly Grovers player (the GM!) rolls 1,3 = -2 for his Initiative, so that his Speed is reduced by two levels for this round, and he has Speed Ordinary. Djim will act first.

2. Statements of Intent
Players decide what two actions their character shall take this round. It's a good idea to have the players state their actions in reverse order of Initiative. That is, the ones going last decide their actions first; the ones going first have a little longer to think about what they're doing. Generally, characters in combat get two actions, two of: Move: 3 metres plus the Speed level above or below Ordinary (eg 2 metres for Poor Speed, 6 metres for Good, etc) Draw a weapon Do a melee attack note that some weapons require two actions (basically very large/heavy weapons) Do an unarmed attack, including fancy stuff in combat (see below). Do a parry Dodge (Speed roll). If you do not use a full action to dodge, your Speed/Dodge will be Crap. Fire a snap shot. This is where they simply raise their weapon and fire. They point it at the target; they dont actually focus and aim. Aim Change position (prone to crouch, one action; then from crouch to stand, one action; or from stand to crouch, or stand to prone in one action). Turning to run away also counts as changing position. Reload, fix weapon stoppage etc note that some weapons require two actions. Orient yourself (check who else is firing, who's been knocked down, is there a way out of here? Etc). Useful for avoiding inflicting "friendly fire." Intimidate (see Trait description)

Game Play Styles Chapter

Reasons game groups fall apart, and how to counter them
"I don't have the time" Often this is true. More often, not. People make time for things that interest them. People in the modern Western world are forever complaining of how pressed for time they are. Yet they watch fifty or more hours of television a week, and when studies are done about how people feel when watching TV, the most common feeling is mild depression. When people say, "time," what they really mean is "energy" or "effort." I received a message from a player while writing this, he said, "I could be quite interested but as I said it comes down to time and availability." That means, "if it's a good game I'll make the time. If it's boring I'll say I'm too busy and slink away." People will find energy, and make efforts, for things that interest them. They'll stay up late to watch a good TV show, they'll go out in the rain to meet a good-looking guy or girl, and they'll find time for a game they enjoy. So, you counter the lack of "time" by ensuring they enjoy the game. Game styles clash Consider the various elements in this chapter. It's easy to imagine, for example, that someone who wants lots of shtick will be bored by a lot of drama, and vice versa. So, smart GMs and players will sit down with each-other, and try to make sure everybody gets what they want to out of the game. Of course, it's not possible to please everyone all of the time, and it may well be that your game styles are simply too different to fit together. In that case, find another group. But often you'll find that if you make the effort, you can put a little bit in for everyone. Players aren't friends Here I make a distinction between "friends" and "acquaintances." An acquaintance is someone that you do just one thing with. You work with them, or play indoor soccer with them, or go to school with them, or roleplay with them. If that activity stops or you do the activity somewhere else, you'll probably never talk to that person again. You might miss them from time to time and wonder how they're doing, but you certainly won't shed tears over their absence. A friend is a person who you do more than one thing with. The relationship goes beyond the activity. It doesn't matter a lot what you're doing, because you're doing it with them. That's a friend. Quite obviously, a game group is more likely to last if the players are friends, not just acquaintances. You build a friendship by doing different things. When you ring them up about the game, chat about the rest of your lives, too. Get to know them as a person, not just a gamer. The bond of friendship means that if there's other troubles in the group, people are more likely to make the effort to fix them. If they're just acquaintances, who cares? And even if you do leave the game group which has your friends in it, at least you've still got them as friends. The bond of friendship will generally make players and GMs more reliable. You can sneak away from acquaintances, ignore their phone messages and emails, and just disappear. It's a bit harder to do that with a friend, they're more persistent. Also, you'll miss them. Time and Place of Game Sessions My practice in running games has been to have the game sessions at the same time and the same place, regularly. Many groups fall apart because the GM's ringing around at the last minute, "the game's on at Bob's place this week," and getting the reply, "oh, I never heard from you, so I didn't think the game was on this week," and that kind of thing. Just set a regular time and place and stick to it. As to time, when first forming the group, try to find the least worst time for everyone. Not the best, the least worst. Of course, some people you'll never please. There's the guy who says, "Monday is no good for me, let's change it to Tuesday this week." That's the guy who, after you've called everyone up, and they've changed their whole week around him, he doesn't show anyway because there was something good on TV.

Pick a time, and stick to it. Suppose you've five players in the group. If you talk for hours and haggle over what time they should show, eventually they'll all agree on a time, and then only three of them will show up regularly. If you just lay down a time and stick to it, no matter what, they'll bitch and moan and then four of them will show up regularly. It's crazy but that's the way it is. A regular place is also good. This can be difficult if people are spread out across a large town, but it's still worth trying. Some people have trouble getting across town, especially if they're relying on public transport or a car they share with a spouse, but if it's at the same place each session, then they can plan for it and work around any troubles; whereas if it changes each week you never know if they'll be able to show. However, regular time and place means you need to be flexible in your gaming. Flexibility Many game groups revolve around one person, the GM, or some key character in the story. If that person can't make it, there's no game. If that person misses a session or two, the game group dies. Be flexible. If that key person can't make it, everyone meet up anyway and play something else. Be a group, not a bunch of followers of the Dear Leader. Your local sports team doesn't forfeit the game because a single player is missing, why should you? So, be like a sports team play even without the important players, because you're a team first. Think of all the music bands around, some of them have one member out of six leave and the band dies; others have half the members leave, but they go on. Just meet up every session, if the key person isn't there, scratch up another roleplaying game, or a board game, or a video, or a visit to the pub, whatever you like. This also makes that missing person feel envious at having missed all the fun, get worried that you don't need them any more, and so they make sure that they come to the next session. Variety is the Spice of Friendship and Gaming If you're not so comfortable with the personal chat way of getting to know each-other, that's okay. The main thing is to do different activities. What works well is the Moncrieff Method (named after the GM who introduced me to it), suppose you have a game session once a week. Every fourth session, do something different. Play a different roleplaying game, watch a movie, play a board game, go out for dinner, go bowling, play football, whatever. After each session like that, nominate a person to organise the different activity for the next session a month later. So if you have six people in your group, each person will have something to organise every six months. This helps everyone get to know each-other in a different setting, know what they like and dislike. It lets the people who are usually players be in control for a change. It encourages that quiet guy to do something active as it gives him responsibility. It gives you a break from running or playing that particular game. Arnold Schwarzenegger used to say about body-building that you should do a little bit less exercise than you felt like doing. "You've got to stay hungry," he'd say. Do more than you feel like, you might not do it again. Do a little bit less, and you look forward with enthusiasm to the next session, and are more likely to show up and do it. If the players become friends, the group will last longer. Variety also helps groups last, because often what happens in small social groups is that everyone becomes accustomed to their roles, and if any of those roles look like changing, the group falls apart. If the same guy has GMed the same game system in the same setting with the same players for a couple of years, if they try something different, it's a mess. If the GM's forced to change the system or setting, he steers the game to closer to his preferred style, or lets the players do something stupid, and then says, "well, the campaign is over now, you've screwed it up! I guess we'll have to go back to the old one." If the former GM becomes a player, he's not used to not being in control, so he becomes disruptive and has his character do stupid things does his best to derail the campaign, so you can go back to his one. Just as doctors make the worst patients, and chefs make the worst customers, so, too, do GMs make the worst players. The trick is to not let them become professional GMs. Mix it up a bit. A lot of this sabotage by the former GM isn't deliberate, but it gets the same result either the group goes back to the old way, or the group falls apart. So, a little variety every fourth session or so will mix things up a bit and keep it interesting. Of course, this also means that players will have to have a little tolerance. Maybe the nominated person will run a game, and never has before. Give them a chance. It's only one session. Incidentally, if a couple of the players are unhappy with the current GM, and want to topple him in a bloodless coup, this can be a good way to do it. After the variety session, get someone to say, "hey, that was cool. Maybe we could do that for a few sessions?" Just let the old unpopular campaign be quietly forgotten.

GMing Chapter
Elements of Gaming
In essence, players play for four reasons: 1) Friends: the social group of the players and GM 2) Wonder: to explore stories and worlds of imagination 3) Heroism: to have the experience of being more brave and capable than you are, and/or to be a deciding factor in important events. 4) Acting: to get into the mind and behaviour of another, imaginary person. The purpose of the GM is to make easier those four things, and to do a bit of it themselves. GMs run game for the same reasons as players play, but with the extra element that it's nice to see other people enjoy themselves, and know that you made it possible. In that respect, GMing is like giving someone a gift, cooking them a nice meal, knitting them a jumper. That's an extra reason to be nice to the GM even when they're not much good. Players certainly expect people to be nice to them, even when they're not much good. The issue of friends has been mentioned many times in the previous chapter. The issue of heroism is one which depends on player actions, and on the setting of the game. The many sidebars in the text of the game point to rules you can use to make heroism of the reckless kind easier or harder for characters to manage. Wonder and Acting will be dealt with below.

Wonder

This is something which is difficult to produce. Anyone who has visited some place like the Eiffel Tower, or the Sistine Chapel, or stood on a mountain on a clear day, or been stunned by the first chords of an orchestra or band, or explored a deep cave these are all feelings of "wonder." That moment of intense wonder is perhaps impossible to produce just with words from the GM. But you can produce less intense wonder in other ways. Music is one way. Often a GM will be inspired to run a game in a particular setting after seeing a movie or tv series in that setting. In that case, buying the soundtrack may be a good investment for the GM. Put that on in the background while you're playing. Also, if you enjoy that piece, or if there's some other piece you feel is appropriate, consult friends and roleplaying message boards, who'll be able to suggest similar music. Choose the music carefully, though. Music with words will often lead to players singing along, distracting from the game (unless the game requires them to sing!) So, instrumental music can be better. Unless, of course, the words have significance to the story. Illustrations can also be good. Most of us can't draw. But public libraries will have books with the right illustrations for your setting. Fansites of a movie or tv series or game may have the appropriate illustrations for you; but of course be careful about copyright, and when in doubt, contact the website administrator their not replying does not mean it's okay to take what you want. Many won't mind you taking their illustrations for your private use, so long as you check with them first. Maps are just another kind of illustration. A websearch for "historical maps" will bring up some interesting ones. There's entire sites dedicated to historical maps online. In the case of both illustrations and maps, bear in mind that these act as a hint to players. If the characters see twenty things, but the players only see one illustration of a thing, then the players will send their characters along that line. If the characters meet fifty people, but only two of them have illustrations, guess which ones the characters are going to talk to for a long time? Think again of "Push & Pull." A few illustrations can act as a very strong Pull for the adventuring group. Description is something which many GMs fall down on. Many aim for their game to be like their favourite movie or TV series. They focus on the visual medium of these shows. But every gamer, and most characters, have five senses: sight, hearing, touch (including temperature sense), smell, taste. A good description will use at least two of these senses. It doesn't have to be long, the description, but it should have two or more of the senses. Compare the two below:

More examples and other stuff in the full version! 90 pages and 35 illustrations of gaming goodness! And only one table for players to worry about!