[DF] What's worked? What hasn't?

[Edges]

Salutations All,

I'm considering starting up a Dungeon Fantasy campaign using most of the supplements in that line. I have read most of the books and some related Pyramid articles. I'm looking for advice from those who have played it. I am particularly interested in any pitfalls that may have been encountered and in house rules that have been used either successfully or unsuccessfully.

Some areas that I am curious about:

• Were there any particular supplements that you felt were indispensable? Were there any that you found problematic or unnecessary for your game?
• How rigidly have you stuck to the templates? Have you encountered players who felt restricted by them and if so, how did you handle it?
• I have heard claims that some templates tend to dominate combat and make things less fun for the others (specifically the Scout and Swashbuckler but there may be others). Have you found there to be any truth to these claims? If so, how would you suggest addressing them?
• What templates have you allowed/disallowed and why?
• Have you developed any custom templates?
• Have you used The Last Gasp with DF? How does it interact with magic?
• Do you have any custom Magic Styles to share?
• I have heard that some spells in GURPS Magic can be problematic. Do you have any warnings for me when it comes to DF?
• Have you used alternate magic systems in DF? How did it go?
• Have you used the Extra Effort rules as written? Were you happy with the results?
• Do you use the armor from Basic or Low-Tech? Or do you house rule armor?
• What, if anything, have you done to address the issue of ST-based weapons penetrating armor too easily? Is it worth it to do in DF?
• What system(s) have you adopted for point awards? What would you recommend for someone who was raised on the "slow" advancement of AD&D?
• How have you treated the purchase of enchanted items?
• Have you used any harsh realism rule options (bleeding, etc.)? How did it go? Did it bog things down too much for DF?
• How has healing gone? Have you used any optional/house rules for it? In actual play, are HP and healing spells the object of resource management that they seem to be intended to be? How do you treat healing potions?

Please don't be limited by the above list. I am interested in discussing any ideas you have on the subject.

Also, is there an index somewhere of published DF material? Which Pyramid issues contain which DF articles? (A sentence or two on what each article contains at a glance would be awesome.)

Thanks in advance y'all. I really appreciate the thoughtful input this forum has to offer.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Edges

I am particularly interested in any pitfalls that may have been encountered and in house rules that have been used either successfully or unsuccessfully.

Some areas that I am curious about:

• Have you used The Last Gasp with DF? How does it interact with magic?
• Have you used the Extra Effort rules as written? Were you happy with the results?
• Do you use the armor from Basic or Low-Tech? Or do you house rule armor?
• What, if anything, have you done to address the issue of ST-based weapons penetrating armor too easily? Is it worth it to do in DF?

The Last Gasp and the "weapons penetrating armor" rules are both in place to add realism, pacing, or more-low-key aspects to melee fights.

This hasn't been what the DF games I've played in have been about. Being able to do gonzo damage or strike many times in a round are part of the expected set of character abilities (again: in the games I've played). Tamping those down may not be well received.

The issue of "too much damage through armor" is most frequently stated in terms of "versus firearms." If you're not comparing a 3d+8 axe blow to an M16, then you probably will have less "that's unrealistic!" and more "that's totally freakin' awesome!" moments.

If what you're looking for is to have a more gritty flavored dungeon exploration game, then TLG and the damage/armor stuff may well be a better fit.

[mlangsdorf]

I've run two long-running (40+ sessions each) online games with DF, and another F2F game that ran through all of Mirror of the Fire Demon and another dozen sessions of homebrew after that. I've played in two long-running DF games online, and another short one face to face. So I have some experience relevant to your questions.

For the supplements, Dungeons is the GM's basic reference, and Monsters (1 and 2) Henchmen, Psi, Summoners, and Allies are each useful for mining for monsters. Treasure Tables often tended to be more trouble than it was worth, and I never used anything from Artifacts. Adventurers, Ninjas, and Sages are excellent articles from the player side, but I never got much out of Clerics, Sages, or Taverns, and I think the templates in Summoners are often a bit odd.

I never stuck too rigidly to templates, and dealt with player dissatisfaction by modifying them or creating new lenses to add options. I don't think templates should be straitjackets, and I'm only minimally interested in "reproducing an old school feel" or whatever.

I think I'm one of the chief proponents of the theory that the Swashbuckler and Scout tend to overshadow the other templates in a game that involves fighting primitive humanoids in dank dungeons. My solution is make my games about more than that: exploration and physical challenges and varied opponents (homogeneous for the Scout, mind-controllers for the Swashbuckler) force those templates to spend their earned CP on things other than "more destruction!" Of course, then the wizard starts to intrude into everyone else's niche, but I have house rules for that, too.

GURPS Magic is generally problematic. Every group has its own big offenders, but Missile Shield, Reverse Missiles, Great Haste, Grease, Shape Earth, and Air-Walk all tend to come up a lot. Peter Dell'Orto has a reasonable set of advisories on his blog.

I've also used Divine Favor (which is great and think is highly recommended) and RPM (which I personally hate but your mileage may vary). I like Threshold magic with generous thresholds over FP magic (and have house rules about that...) I haven't played a game with the Sorcery rules yet but I'm looking forward to them.

I do use Extra Effort, pretty much as written, except I disallowed Heroic Charge. I used Heroic Charge for a while, but I feel it turns every fight into a dogfight as Swashbucklers move 7+ hexes to run behind their foes and murder them, and I didn't like that. Everything else was fine: Heroic Charge is the problem.

I house rule armor. I think everyone should use my house rules. They go some of the way to limiting armor overpenetration, but honestly, half-ogre weapon masters are available out of the gate and will penetrate any armor you can imagine, so I don't know how useful of a goal that even is.

I've used a couple of different systems for buying magic items. The best is random availability of useful items and the option to inexpensively transfer enchantments from one item to another (so a Puissant Battle Axe +3 can become a Puissant Longsword +3 if that's the weapon someone prefers to use). I generally make potions and one use items cheaper, and don't allow Quick and Dirty enchantments. I have some tentative houserules for repricing magic items in general, but nothing I'm ready to share. Even so, cheap Cornucopia Quivers take an element away from the game, and the divide between "cheap armor with Q&D enchantments" and "nice armor with S&S enchantments" is so vast that the nice armor almost always ends up getting sold, which is stupid.

I don't use the Last Gasp or any harsh realism rules. I'd have a player revolt on my hands, and I suspect they'd slow the game down too much.

Feel free to browse http://westmarchsaga.wikia.com/wiki/...Westmarch_Wiki and http://westmarchsaga.wikia.com/wiki/...est_March_Game for more house rules that may or may not be useful to you, as well as session reports and the like.

[Kromm]

I have a few comments stemming from the (very) long-running fantasy campaign that inspired GURPS Dungeon Fantasy and served as a testbed for the supplements I wrote alone or with Peter (DF 1-4, 6, 11, 14-16, and DFM 1-2).

Originally Posted by Edges

Were there any particular supplements that you felt were indispensable? Were there any that you found problematic or unnecessary for your game?

I'd call DF 1-2 "essential" if you plan to use any of the other supplements in the series.

As my campaign's power level rose, I felt a strong need to invent the content that now appears in DF 6 and 11, and the scariest critters in DFM 1-2. I'm glad I did! If you plan to keep the power level low, though, those selfsame supplements might prove less useful or even useless to you.

Personally, I'm not a fan of "pets" for adventurers and so never had any use for the stuff in DF 5 or 9. I also don't mix psi with my fantasy, despite having written DF 14.

Oh, and I think DF 16 is absolutely essential if your campaign is more about roaming the world than raiding dungeons, which mine was.

And DF 15 is a good idea, too, if in eschewing supernatural and summoned "pets" – as I did – you create a need for PCs to retain NPCs.

Originally Posted by Edges

I have heard claims that some templates tend to dominate combat and make things less fun for the others (specifically the Scout and Swashbuckler but there may be others). Have you found there to be any truth to these claims? If so, how would you suggest addressing them?

That sounds like a problem in campaigns where your enemies are all basically mundane mortals (humans, elves, orcs, ogres, etc., as well as big animals) who die easily from having holes poked in them. That wasn't my campaign.

Yes, I had lots of fights with human bad guys – and yes, those favored PCs with high weapon skill and impaling weapons. But most of the fights that mattered were with horrors who had many and varied forms of Injury Tolerance, or who were ghostly, shadowy, or otherwise not material. I used a lot of undead – corporeal and incorporeal – as well as demons and magical automatons.

Just as important, I threw in a lot of social and leadership situations that would be dominated by what DF calls the bard, or at least a holy warrior or knight with lots of Born War Leader and Tactics. I also presented puzzles and research challenges worthy of very capable artificers and scholars. In fact, I'm pathologically incapable of not doing that. :P

Originally Posted by Edges

I have heard that some spells in GURPS Magic can be problematic. Do you have any warnings for me when it comes to DF?

I'd strongly advise that you get Pyramid #3/60: Dungeon Fantasy III and use "Wizardry Refined."

Originally Posted by Edges

Have you used the Extra Effort rules as written? Were you happy with the results?

Quite a few of those were tested in my campaign, too. I was happy with all of them. I think the dislike some have for Heroic Charge is tied to the overuse of easily impaled humanoid foes. Against greater demons that take dozens of telling hits to take down, and spirits that can just fade into the floor or teleport away, that option didn't really change the face of battle in my game. Its main effect was to let those who invested in extra Basic Speed and Basic Move instead of extra ST (everybody had lots of DX!) have fun in fights vs. mooks.

Originally Posted by Edges

Do you use the armor from Basic or Low-Tech? Or do you house rule armor?

My campaign used armor from the Basic Set, and DF was written and balanced assuming that armor. Use other armor rules at your own risk.

Originally Posted by Edges

What, if anything, have you done to address the issue of ST-based weapons penetrating armor too easily? Is it worth it to do in DF?

Hack 'n' slash is more fun if you leave this alone. Armor isn't the DR you care about anyway. If you use a proper mix of foes, it's natural DR that matters . . . and you can tweak that to be whatever you want on an Elder Thing with a cosmic force field.

Originally Posted by Edges

What system(s) have you adopted for point awards? What would you recommend for someone who was raised on the "slow" advancement of AD&D?

I gave out about 2 points/session plus 10 points whenever a major plot arc was closed.

Originally Posted by Edges

How have you treated the purchase of enchanted items?

My setting had no magical economy at all. All magic items were found and not easily sold.

Originally Posted by Edges

How has healing gone? Have you used any optional/house rules for it? In actual play, are HP and healing spells the object of resource management that they seem to be intended to be? How do you treat healing potions?

Healing was the main limit on PC combat might in my campaign. Once "per person per day" penalties got scary on Healing spells and the Healing advantage, everybody got very, very cautious.

Originally Posted by Edges

Also, is there an index somewhere of published DF material? Which Pyramid issues contain which DF articles?

Start with the GURPS Dungeon Fantasy page and be sure to scroll through the whole thing.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Quite a few of those were tested in my campaign, too. I was happy with all of them. I think the dislike some have for Heroic Charge is tied to the overuse of easily impaled humanoid foes. Against greater demons that take dozens of telling hits to take down, and spirits that can just fade into the floor or teleport away, that option didn't really change the face of battle in my game. Its main effect was to let those who invested in extra Basic Speed and Basic Move instead of extra ST (everybody had lots of DX!) have fun in fights vs. mooks.

To me, it sounds as if the problem is with GURPS' implementation of facing rules.

It makes no logical sense that you can pay FP to use a non-supernatural ability to run around a combat-aware being (IQ 3+ and not suffering from Stun, Combat Paralysis or the like) and shiv it in the back.

I vaguely recall that D&D 3rd Edition may have had no facing rules. The tactical rule was about whether a combatant was flanked or not, and based on that I'm inferring that there was ny defined facing, rather everyone was always assumed to be facing in the most logical direction provided the being is aware that he, she or it is involved in combat. Thus if somoene were to pay FP to move real fast to run around the being, the being would naturally turn in response to that, and so it wouldn't be possible to backstab it.

RPG combat is always based around units taking turns to move, whereas in real life movement is simultaneous. But it's still important to make sure that the rules don't encourage actions or combinations of actions that would have absolutely no truck in real life, and I've been in favour of assumed facing, as opposed to explicit facing, for the last many, many years.

[Appletoe]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

To me, it sounds as if the problem is with GURPS' implementation of facing rules.

It makes no logical sense that you can pay FP to use a non-supernatural ability to run around a combat-aware being (IQ 3+ and not suffering from Stun, Combat Paralysis or the like) and shiv it in the back.

I vaguely recall that D&D 3rd Edition may have had no facing rules. The tactical rule was about whether a combatant was flanked or not, and based on that I'm inferring that there was ny defined facing, rather everyone was always assumed to be facing in the most logical direction provided the being is aware that he, she or it is involved in combat. Thus if somoene were to pay FP to move real fast to run around the being, the being would naturally turn in response to that, and so it wouldn't be possible to backstab it.

RPG combat is always based around units taking turns to move, whereas in real life movement is simultaneous. But it's still important to make sure that the rules don't encourage actions or combinations of actions that would have absolutely no truck in real life, and I've been in favour of assumed facing, as opposed to explicit facing, for the last many, many years.

Perhaps another way around this would be to grant certain enemies the 360 degree vision advantage with the justification that they're 'just that good'?

[Anders]

Blind Fighting should allow you to ignore facing penalties for locating enemies.

[Kuroshima]

On the facing rules, I defend GURPS implementation as superior to any other game I've played.

I really don't like the radially symmetric D&D 3.X characters, where in order to get position advantages, you need to have a friend to give you "flank". In fact, unless you're playing one of the few classes with access to sneak attack, you could turn invisible, go completely unnoticed, and behind your target, and you would still do zilch. That's not acceptable to me. Real scenario, my the SO was playing a sorcerer who became invisible, and sneaked behind a NPC guard. Since the guard had no DX bonus, it's AC was unchanged by the fact that it was being attacked by invisible opponents.

GURPS, however, would have resulted in the guard not being able to defend, and so even if the attack wasn't very strong, it could have been aimed to a vulnerable location for extra effect.

Speaking of sneak attacks, in my games, I've changed the surprise ST on the thief, unholy warrior and assassin templates to give it's bonus if the target is denied it's active defense roll, meaning that if the character gets to place itself at the target's back at the beginning of it's turn, it gets the extra damage. It's a small boost, but it helps making "roguish characters" more viable in melee.

Remember, if you run around your foe to strike at it's back, it's still a flank attack, not a rear attack. It's only if you start the turn at the target's back that you get the benefit of a rear attack.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Appletoe

Perhaps another way around this would be to grant certain enemies the 360 degree vision advantage with the justification that they're 'just that good'?

But that still maintains the blatant nonrealism that it's possible to run around an enemy, who is fully aware of your presence, and shiv him in the back.

The proposed solutions to Heroic Charge, in this thread, always revolve around exotic advantages of some sort (even if your case proposes the use of an exotic advantage to represent sheer non-supernatural skill), whereas my thinking is that it's boosting the realism of the facing rules that'll solve the problem. Because I like the concept of Extra Effort, and I like the idea of having Charge as one of several possible EE actions.

[DouglasCole]

Somewhere on my blog I discuss the possibility of a free facing change to allow mild repositioning against something like this. I'll look for it.

Found it.