Dolmenwood PbP - New Rules suckas!

I did read through the players part of the preview. I'm thinking I'll be the Cleric, human naturally. As for the Orders, my initial thought was St Signis, but gotta get there first!
Yeah, no hurry. I only mentioned it because the different orders lend themselves to different kinds of characters, which you may or may not want to lean into from the start.
 
Re-reading the thread I saw I can switch one stat for another. So that means Tunnock Stourkettle's ability scores are now:

Str 12
Int 10
Wis 11
Dex 11
Con 13
Cha 11
 
Re-reading the thread I saw I can switch one stat for another. So that means Tunnock Stourkettle's ability scores are now:

Str 12
Int 10
Wis 11
Dex 11
Con 13
Cha 11
Where's the bell curve at bro?
 
Are there any benefits to having a 14 vs. a 13 in an attribute? If so, I might swap out the Wisdom for something else if there's any advantage for Oberon, the wily grimalkin thief.
IMG_1409 (1).jpg
Str 13
Int 13
Wis 14
Dex 17
Con 13
Cha 13
 
Are there any benefits to having a 14 vs. a 13 in an attribute? If so, I might swap out the Wisdom for something else if there's any advantage for Oberon, the wily grimalkin thief.
Str 13
Int 13
Wis 14
Dex 17
Con 13
Cha 13
I will be using the optional B/X rule for ability checks but at that point you should probably keep WIS for perception type stuff anyway.
 
I will be using the optional B/X rule for ability checks but at that point you should probably keep WIS for perception type stuff anyway.
Will do. That will reflect his wiliness as a defalcator, beguiler, cheat, trickster, larcenist, deceiver, and peculator extraordinaire.
front (1).png
 
I plan on playing Tunnock like the billy goat my aunt used to keep in her back garden. Which means I will charge anyone unless a) I am told 'No!' or b) my target scritches me behind my horns, in which case how could you be enemy?
0x0ss-85.jpg
 
So first off, the Breggle and the Grimalkin get a buddy comedy spin off....
Even after you'd been introduced and he'd been told "No!" by my aunt and you'd scritched his horns, he would follow you around pressing his forehead into you. This was his way of saying "I could butt you but I'm not going to but I could". Man, I loved that fuckin goat. He was GOAT.
 
Even after you'd been introduced and he'd been told "No!" by my aunt and you'd scritched his horns, he would follow you around pressing his forehead into you. This was his way of saying "I could butt you but I'm not going to but I could". Man, I loved that fuckin goat. He was GOAT.
This people. Three sentences of backstory, not three pages.
 
Maybe Jar Jar is a bridge too far. Perhaps a himbo Chewy would do...
 
Just a caveat, Dolmenwood is very much B/X in terms of the presence of things man was not meant to poke his short sword into just to see what happens.
 
Just a caveat, Dolmenwood is very much B/X in terms of the presence of things man was not meant to poke his short sword into just to see what happens.
Dude, I heard Nathan Lane is packing a long sword. Voros Voros swears to it.
 
Sorry bud, I won't be playing the game. Hope the game goes well!
Well, I hope you reconsider staying as it will be a shame to see you go but do what you think is necessary, There will always be room for you in the game.
 
I may try a little something in this game to do with some specific PbP related, um, formats? Habits? Something like that, specifically to try and streamline social interaction. SI can be a messy pain in the butt at the best of times but can suffer even more in a PbP environment when all the nonverbal communication elements are absent. So this idea stems from my reading of this article about social encounters. So in terms of the declare-determine-describe cycle SI can really run up post count and I'm thinking about using the five approaches outlined in the article to help mitigate that. In short, the article suggests that most social actions in TTRPGs fall into one of five categories in terms of the intent of the player declaration, which I'll list here in short (read the article, its good):

  1. Connect - this is any action that is supposed build rapport with an NPC
  2. Assert - about stating needs/wants/desires and generally answerable in a yes/no sort of way
  3. Understand - figuring out what's going on in an NPCs head - what they want/value/fear etc
  4. Convince - changing the NPC’s goals, drives, desires, perspectives, priorities, or understanding
  5. Negotiate - similar Convince but with the addition of giving them something they want in order to overcome objection
So these aren't about what skill might be rolled (not that B/X has skills) but more about what the character is trying to do. Actions declaration properly contains both intent (desired outcomes) and approach (the above). I thought it might be useful to use these five as a shorthand in posts, as an addition, to help streamline the adjudication cycle. Essentially you'd just add the approach you're aiming for in italics or whatever as an additional bit of information for me when we move to adjudication.

I'm not 100% convinced this is a brilliant idea, but I'd like to try something like if you guys are willing.
 
I may try a little something in this game to do with some specific PbP related, um, formats? Habits? Something like that, specifically to try and streamline social interaction. SI can be a messy pain in the butt at the best of times but can suffer even more in a PbP environment when all the nonverbal communication elements are absent. So this idea stems from my reading of this article about social encounters. So in terms of the declare-determine-describe cycle SI can really run up post count and I'm thinking about using the five approaches outlined in the article to help mitigate that. In short, the article suggests that most social actions in TTRPGs fall into one of five categories in terms of the intent of the player declaration, which I'll list here in short (read the article, its good):

  1. Connect - this is any action that is supposed build rapport with an NPC
  2. Assert - about stating needs/wants/desires and generally answerable in a yes/no sort of way
  3. Understand - figuring out what's going on in an NPCs head - what they want/value/fear etc
  4. Convince - changing the NPC’s goals, drives, desires, perspectives, priorities, or understanding
  5. Negotiate - similar Convince but with the addition of giving them something they want in order to overcome objection
So these aren't about what skill might be rolled (not that B/X has skills) but more about what the character is trying to do. Actions declaration properly contains both intent (desired outcomes) and approach (the above). I thought it might be useful to use these five as a shorthand in posts, as an addition, to help streamline the adjudication cycle. Essentially you'd just add the approach you're aiming for in italics or whatever as an additional bit of information for me when we move to adjudication.

I'm not 100% convinced this is a brilliant idea, but I'd like to try something like if you guys are willing.
Sometimes though you have more than one goal because social interactions are like that.
 
Sometimes though you have more than one goal because social interactions are like that.
Yup, and that's fine too. It's more about providing a little bit of direction that might in person come from table chatter, tone, delivery, and other things. If you put two of those in it would work just as well. That said, I do think that most discrete social actions, as opposed to whole social encounters, do mostly fit into one of those five.
 
Sure thing, gaming has always been about taking rules and adapting it to make it work.

So, to try and use an example (not a great one, off the top of my head), you're thinking something like this?:

[Negotiate] Ral gives the shopkeeper his best smile, then asks kindly, "I'm sure you could lower the price just a bit for a brave adventurer such as myself?"
 
Sure thing, gaming has always been about taking rules and adapting it to make it work.

So, to try and use an example (not a great one, off the top of my head), you're thinking something like this?:

[Negotiate] Ral gives the shopkeeper his best smile, then asks kindly, "I'm sure you could lower the price just a bit for a brave adventurer such as myself?"
Yeah, but I think to keep the emphasis on the declaration I'd put the tag at the end rather than at the beginning. It's the gravy, not the potatoes. Mostly I hope it will help prevent tangents and miscommunication.
 
Something else I'm thinking about is ways to use the various posts reactions to help reduce unnecessary post bloat. Don't get me wrong, I'm not hung up on post count or anything, but less scrolling and paging back is a good thing. I'm mostly thinking about when someone suggests a course of action for the party that a thumbs up count specifically to index assent, which would make it easier for me to move things along.
 
Last edited:
The pre-release digital players book for Dolmenwood just dropped, so hopefully the other two books will follow soon-ish and we can push the big red button on this campaign.
 
So the book I just got is the Player Book, which means at the very least we can move ahead with char gen as soon as I'm done reading it. I'll do a little precis for those of you who don't have the book once I've read it though.
 
If anyone wants to get cracking on character creation hit me up with a PM listing Kin and Profession and I'll supply some of the relevant rules. I don't want to post too many screen shots of the rules in a public thread.
 
There's no form fillable character sheets for Dolmenwood yet, but I'll attach the rough draft one I got with my PDF preview should anyone want a copy.
 

Attachments

  • Dolmenwood_Character_Sheet_-_Rough_v0-3.pdf
    45.6 KB · Views: 4
Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top