Through Ultan's Door

[squeen]

Issue number #2 of Ben L's (of Mazarins Garden) zine of the awesome Dreamlands city of Zyan is now on sale.

For a probably very limited time you should be able to order a print copy of it and issue #1 (which sold out quickly).

Through Ultan's Door

Purveyor of dreams and illusory hopes, merchant of nightmares, speculator in fancies.

throughultansdoor.bigcartel.com

His work inspires me like few others. A very high standard.

Here's Bryce's review of issue #1.

Through Ultan’s Door #1 | tenfootpole.org

tenfootpole.org

 

[squeen]

98 views and not one reply.

Just 'bots?

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Maybe. All forums get view bots (mostly search engine crawlers/index builders).

What's there to be saying though? "Yes, this is indeed a product that exists"

 

[squeen]

Hmm. Perhaps my own excitement at its release is atypical. I was bummed out when I missed the original opportunity for a print-copy of issue #1.
Receiving a hard copy in the mail transported me back to when I was a wee lad and would rush to the comic shop on Thursdays to get the latest issue of a beloved series. Physically, it feels and looks just as collectible. The presentation and artwork is pure eye-candy and the content top-notch.

Joy in an envelope (wait, that sounds a bit weird).

Anyway. I gush.

I'll stop prodding the forum-corpse now with my ten-foot pole.

 

[Ice]

It's really fucking great and I am stoked about it too. The content is so imaginative and wonderful. It's got so many great little things about it. The weird vein-demon who is looking for the heart-stone is so interesting and memorable. The Carniverous Moths look so great, I am for sure going to drop them on one of my groups in the near future. The optional random table rule called "I have dreamed of a place" will also definitely get incorporated into my games.

Also the physical zine version is really execellent. I would show this zine to people who have no interest in DnD because it is so nice to look at.

Joy in an envelope, dog I feel you

 

[TerribleSorcery]

I was lucky enough be a player for Ben's playtest of issue #2, and I'll say that as scary as Zahdu is on paper... he's WAY scarier when Ben does his voice, and your hirelings are being exsangunated one per round!...

 

[squeen]

I was lucky enough be a player for Ben's playtest of issue #2, and I'll say that as scary as Zahdu is on paper... he's WAY scarier when Ben does his voice, and your hirelings are being exsangunated one per round!...

I get the impression from a number of reports that Ben's table is top notch.

Here's Anthony Huso's comments on Ben's game at Blue Bard

The place we went was Zyan. And it was spectacular. Gorgeous vistas, baroque chambers and creatures without name drooled from Ben's mouth.

This was a keeper.

I did not return to most games that I crashed in those initial days of exploration, but Ben's games contained such depth and wonder that I found myself coming back (as often as I could).

What makes my returns to his table even more surprising (even to myself) is that I found the mechanics and combat to be shallow and uninspiring. Let me explain. My personal preference is for fairly regular combat sessions filled with meaningful choices deeply rooted in tactics and resource management without relying on the brainless crutches of feats and skills.

Everyone has a system preference. Therefore, if you feel differently than I do about such things, the above is a non-issue. I call it out because:

1. Despite my deep convictions about fun (combat and tactics being a primary component) I returned again and again to this adventure because of things system-agnostic.
2. Saying such underscores the magnetism of the adventure. I didn't know Ben at the time and would have walked from any other table using that system.

The mood, atmosphere, creatures, vistas, treasures, NPCs, lore, puzzles, mysteries and so on were just so good that they overpowered my bias against the system and I played anyway.

Incidentally, we can also see what Ben thought of Anthony's A Night in the Wolf Inn here.

With respect to voicing characters, I once had this awkward conversation with my family (as players):

ME: "...and then Frak says "Blah blah blah"
R: "Dad, do his voice."
ME: "What voice?"
R: "The one you usually do for him."
ME: "I'm not doing any voices."
ALL: "Yeah. You do."
ME: "Umm...OK. 'and then Frak says "blah blah blah?"'"
R: "That's not his voice. You know...do the normal one."
ME: (totally confused)

Its nice to hear at least I'm in good company.

 

[TerribleSorcery]

Pro tip: part of Zahdu's cool voice came from Ben YELLING close enough to his computer that his webcam mic started to clip out. Sounded evil and awesome.

The sessions in the Catacombs of the Fleischguild were so intense, and my conviction of our imminent demise so certain, that I started praying for a TPK just so the terror would cease. We hung on EVERY roll... But in the end we won through. I think Gary said - the players should have a 70% chance of surviving, and feel like it's 30%. That was me in Ben's game.

 

[Slick]

Sounds like a wild ride, it's rare to play in tabletop games that are genuinely tense. It's not the first praise I've heard of Ben's sessions, either.

I'd like to see a breakdown of his "style" of running/presenting and why it's so effective-- if it's even something that could be codified. It might validate my belief that 90% of good DMing is down to charisma and personality; things that you can't learn by reading a DM tips & tricks guide.

Was it a lot of vivid descriptions and convincing acting on behalf of NPCs, or something more?

 

[squeen]

You should watch the video interview of Ben that Patrick Stewart has on the False Machine web site. I think it might disavow you of the notion that Ben's some sort of extroverted method-actor. I doubt it's that. I think he probably just has such a vividly conceived mental reality that he can't help but communicate it well. (Disclaimer: I have never played with him...just postulating.)

That was the case with my boyhood DM as well---a brilliantly agile mind and strong-willed, but by no means dripping with charisma. Yet the worlds he created lived, breathed (and reacted!) marvelously.

 

[Slick]

You should watch the video interview of Ben that Patrick Stewart has on the False Machine web site. I think it might disavow you of the notion that Ben's some sort of extroverted method-actor. I doubt it's that.

I just watched the video, and while it's hard to gauge how somebody is when they're "in the zone" based on how they come across in an interview, I thought he at least came across as articulate and thoughtful. By charisma I don't mean you have to be a Matt Mercer-esque thespian cool guy, you just have to be able to put some kind of descriptive flair into descriptions without stammering and grasping for words. Your "personality" doesn't have to be flamboyant or even assertive, just amicable.

That was the case with my boyhood DM as well---a brilliantly agile mind and strong-willed

Again, things that you can't teach, at least not through a book or Youtube video.

You could probably develop some of these skills, but it would involve training with a scope beyond tabletop games. Public speaking classes, leadership workshops, etc. As for having a vivid imagination, I don't think there's a substitute for that.


The only reason I even ask about this is because I wonder how much of the success of those sessions is due to Ben's presentation and oration, and how much is the material. Could I run a game of Ultan's Door that's similarly evocative and memorable? Is the material that good, or was it something magical and elusive that an outsider can't replicate? This is kind of a question about adventures and published material in general and not necessarily TUD specifically.

 

[TerribleSorcery]

I have been thinking about this today, and IMHO it comes down to several things:

1 - Ben has a quality of speaking that isn't loud or commanding, but draws your attention. He's a university professor in his day job, so this should perhaps come as no surprise. And he's good with NPC voices, which is great - although it helps that we haven't dealt with any goblins. (the goblin voice is a cardinal sin - you know the one I'm talking about. I wish I could erase those fuckers from my setting, but it's too late)

2 - I had read his whole blog through before ever playing with the guy, and this contributed big-time. I was bought in from the very start, I knew about the setting and was excited to participate.

3 - Ben has command of the OSR dungeoncrawling 'best practises' that have been developed over a long time in the scene. He's assimilated them and made them work for him. He's run his main online group in this setting for a couple years. I assume they explored this dungeon too, so it's been refined over time - something a lot of DMs don't ever get to do.

4 - The descriptions!!! Gross, enticing, tempting, bizarre, lurid. You just want to check out every goddamned thing in the dungeon, everywhere you look. And that's part of the danger - when everything is so strange, who knows what kind of monsters we'll meet? All you can be sure of is that they'll be totally unfamiliar - I don't think Ben has a single stock creature in the whole setting. This leads to...

5 - The classic risk vs. reward dynamic. We wanted to see everything, take all the incredibly tempting treasure (I wanted the treasure because it was so cool, not just for the GP&XP reward. DMs take note), go everywhere. But as HPs and spells dwindle, the tension ratchets up and I start white-knuckling.

6 - Just a cool group of other players, we don't always agree on the best strategy but everybody is there to play. God bless FLAILSNAILS.

 

[squeen]

The only reason I even ask about this is because I wonder how much of the success of those sessions is due to Ben's presentation and oration, and how much is the material. Could I run a game of Ultan's Door that's similarly evocative and memorable? Is the material that good, or was it something magical and elusive that an outsider can't replicate?

I total think you should try and then report back!

 

[squeen]

Have a peek at Ben's post on Non Magical Research over at Mazirian's Garden.

This dude is freaking doing it!
He's bring a whole world alive through extended and subtle play.

It's awesome (and I'm taking notes).

 

[Beoric]

Have a peek at Ben's post on Non Magical Research over at Mazirian's Garden.

This dude is freaking doing it!
He's bring a whole world alive through extended and subtle play.

It's awesome (and I'm taking notes).

Okay, but ultimately that is just a more complicated roll-to-know system. The system does not include any baked-in choices that carry any consequences, the only real choices are keep going or stop, and there are no obvious consequences to keeping going. There are hints that there could be a branching structure (which line of research do I follow), but even those choices carry no consequences if you can just go back and follow the other branch later.

It would be much simpler to just roll the amount of time it takes to gain knowledge randomly, like the 1e mechanic for sages. That still doesn’t make for interesting choices, but at least it is faster.

If you want to make interesting choices out of it, you need to impose a consequence to choosing to research rather than adventuring or whatever else the PC might do. You could make the passage of time a consequence, using something like Necropraxis’ hazard die for “haven turns”. Or you could make the cost financial, like the 1e sage who costs more the longer it takes to find an answer. If the text is magical, you could have some sort of risk associated with pressing on – chances of insanity or a horde of demons coming to claim the grimoire, for example.

In a really good system for domain play (which I have yet to see) the consequence would be the stuff that you are not doing while you are researching – not keeping your peasants happy, not guarding your borders, not keeping rumors from spreading in court. I note that in my head any system that did this would likely rely on a haven turn hazard die.

The other thing is that the content the library generates has to be gameable if it is going to have value. Asking a DM to manufacture background for a player’s amusement, without actually playing using that background, seems like a lot of work for no actual play.

I would be much more inclined to tell the player they have a certain level of knowledge about the academic subject in question, and then allow them to research specific questions or use it as a device to plant information when convenient for the DM – most of which will be hooks.

 

[squeen]

There's another post on his site that explains what a Down-time action is. From what I gather, this is something that takes place with his players (via email for something) between games. The reason I got excited was because I've had this same problem to contend with. My players in the campaign world discovered a tome that was suppose to give them useful info, but it required a sage ($$$) and time to extract. I didn't know how to handle it in an interesting way.

What Ben has done is bought time for himself to fill in interesting game-able content with a slow-reveal. It builds excitement with the players just like anything "won" and not given away on the cheap (i.e. just a quick die role).

It's savory!

When you have an open-ended campaign world with twists and turns, you as DM are always just barely one step ahead of the player's choosen direction. Being forced to "write a book" on the spot is impossible---so you often abstract it, simplify, and gloss over detail. In my mind, this is much more fun because it gives the DM time to make it interesting and relevant---connect plot-threads, drop hints, distract, etc. The Book becomes a real artifact! Because of the possibility of branching---it effectively now has "charges" that have or have not been expended. (Cool.)

However, I agree with you---it could be tweaked, expanded upon, codified, etc. with house rules. But that's fine! I love doing that too. I even think there's a "sub-table" roll implied by the "7-9 Shaky progress" result---maybe "braches" live there. While you could codify that via an strict mechanism---wouldn't it make each Tome more unique if it had it's own sub-table?

What gets me so excited is catching these glimpses of what a visceral experience his players must be having. A book as a hard-fought treasure---players getting excited to extract arcane world-info---way better than just read-aloud = eyes-glazed-over. IMO much more fun than just rolling a die.

I know. I'm gushing again.

 

[squeen]

A thoughtful review of TUD#2 is over at Melan's blog.

Also Issue #6 of his Echoes From Fomalhaut is out now too. I'm going to grab a copy of that as well since I've been recently enjoying his Nocturnal Table for city encounters (even though I was never much of a random tables guy in the past)....I also like getting mail from Hungary, feels exotic---although I doubt Melan walks around everyday thinking, "Wow! This place is exotic!"

I also can't figure out how he gets such top-notch artists to contribute!

Man, wish I could take a month off. Two weeks to just write content and two weeks to play---alternating every other day.

On second thought...make that two months.

 

[Melan]

I am very happy I could get the artists I did. Granted, some of them were too dead to complain, or ask for money, which helps. But working with the living ones is the real deal. I hope that one day, I can look back on this project and tell future interviewers "I used to be able to afford them before they made it big, you know."

Partly back on topic, Echoes #06 has a lot of interesting parallels with the excellent TUD. BenL and I were working from rather similar sources of inspiration (Kahré and EPT are major points of reference for both of us), and the City of Vultures / Zyan have a lot of thematic and structural similarities between them (and a fair number of differences, too). You could probably mix and match them without too much effort.

 

[squeen]

Ben L's got a few wonderful (recent) posts on his blog, Mazirian's Garden

First and foremost -- the next issue of Through Ultan's Door is coming out as a three-part-er! Sounds very cool.

The next is a nice article about the OSR play-style. It's a favorite topic of mine "Challenges". I guess I am totally set in my ways---I like hearing the echo chamber of what makes the style of D&D I came to love great. In particular, theory about the various moving parts of that machine.

In the article I liked:

• he delineates between things that are challenging to the player-at-the-table, as opposed to the character-on-the-sheet
• the retro-gaming mantra: "the answer you are looking for is not to be found on your character sheet"
• the challenges that players overcome are often ones the players pose for themselves and so want to overcome purely for fictional reasons
• you jump in with a PC who is more or less a blank slate whom you will flesh out through play
• failure can and should be fun if approached in the right spirit, just like losing a match of basketball can and should be fun
• The frustration of failing to get treasure is a condition of the possibility of the pleasure of success.
• challenges in retro-gaming play style are also open-ended, admitting of no pre-given solution, and often not even an obvious path of least resistance--at least not one promising a reasonable chance of success. In fact, one good way to design a retro-gaming dungeon or location is to place challenges in it that you have no particular idea how the players will overcome.

That last bit really resonated with me---don't imagine a "right way to win" during your design. Just set up a tricky, seemingly balanced-to-the-point-of-stasis scenario, and let your players surprise you in how they pick its locks (i.e. no mental "Adventure Path").

This design principal generally works out well for me---except in one case, in my megadungeon---the risks looked too high, and the status-quo too unbreakable...so the player's turned around and headed elsewhere. That was well over a year ago...will they actually return at higher level? TBD.

One final tasty quote:

"...the idea of balancing combat encounters with challenge ratings is incompatible with retro-gaming play-style. If you are playing well you will avoid combat when the balance goes against you, and if you do fight, you will usually be trying to tip things your way first. A fair fight is certainly not something to be celebrated (even chances of death, yay)! The other reason that balanced combats do not work in retro-games is that they are incompatible with a sandbox and open world, without some serious contrivance."​

​

Anyway. Go read it, and get excited for the next zine issue(s).

(Speaking of magazines and this thread, Melan also just published a new issue of Echoes From Fomalhaut (#7): From Beneath the Glacier to rave reviews over at K&KA.)

 

[DangerousPuhson]

One final tasty quote:

"...the idea of balancing combat encounters with challenge ratings is incompatible with retro-gaming play-style. If you are playing well you will avoid combat when the balance goes against you, and if you do fight, you will usually be trying to tip things your way first. A fair fight is certainly not something to be celebrated (even chances of death, yay)! The other reason that balanced combats do not work in retro-games is that they are incompatible with a sandbox and open world, without some serious contrivance."

Ah, yet another OSR blogger who still doesn't understand the value of Challenge Ratings. Ignore the newbie advice in the DMG about number of encounters per day; CRs are best used to give a general idea of the combat prowess of an enemy - a metric to assess power, that's it. There's absolutely nothing stopping a DM from sticking a CR 20 Pit Fiend in front of a level 3 party in a game of 5e - can we please stop acting like the OSR has a monopoly on that style of game world?

Actually now that I look at it, that entire list of "things that give off the OSR-style vibe" are not unique to retro-clones, and perhaps that's why I get so frustrated by the defenders here. I have all that same feeling in my 5e games. I mean, do people really think that new D&D is incapable of creating open-ended problems, player-created goals, and disposable characters? Do you really believe you can't recreate the feeling of "fun failure" and creative problem solving with anything but retro-clones?