Spring has sprung, and with the turning of the seasons comes a new edition of Kobold Quarterly! KQ Spring #21 is their “Divine Magic” issue, and as usual, I’m going to give you a quick rundown of what is inside the issue, whether it is Pathfinder/Third Edition, Dungeons and Dragons Fourth Edition, Dragon Age, or general purpose, and whether it’s good, bad, or ugly. As an added bonus, I’m going to be talking about Open Design “Party of One” adventures by Matthew Hanson. These are Choose Your Own Adventure-style adventures in the vein of the Lone Wolf paperbacks that haunted my childhood bus rides. Adventures for a single player; all you need are a couple of dice, a pencil and the adventure, and you are all set. Great fun; I was having flashbacks to balancing a book on my knees while rolling dice on the seat of the schoolbus while I was balancing the pages on my knees, hitting a random number generator on the subway ride to work. You’ve come a long way, kid!
The issue opens up talking about portrayals of women in fantasy, something related to Emmet Asher-Perrin’s article on the subject. “The Shaman” is a Pathfinder base class, and is essentially a spontaneous casting druid. A little too druid-y if you ask me, since they have an animal companion and wild shape too, but the addition of “Totem Secrets” adds a nice bit of flair, sort of like the Third Edition wu jen’s “Spell Secrets.” Something I did really like about this article was the use of fluid naming conventions for the sample “spirit guides.” Buffalo or bison, condor or vulture, cougar or jaguar, that kind of thing. Just by word choice you can tweak the flavor of the thing; ain’t language grand? “The Ecology of the Succubus” was less interesting to me; not that it is bad, but there isn’t anything here that you wouldn’t expect, except perhaps “womb-mothers,” the special succubi that can bear young. There is a neat 4e “Channel Divinity” feat that lets you “reveal” that a newly met NPC is part of your infernal conspiracy, though.
Zeb Cook’s “It’s a Mystery!” is a primer on mystery cults and how to add them to your game, and it’s a nice chunk of inspirational history no matter what rule system you use. It falters at the end by not giving you any ideas for the core mysteries of initiation. I wanted to see some ideas, perhaps even some mechanics—maybe there is a mystery cult at the heart of the mechanics of a druid’s shapeshifting or cleric’s turn undead, maybe there are some 4e themes or Pathfinder feats that could he been added? “Clerical Conflicts” follows, and it is just a crackerjack piece of writing. Were-angels, messiahs, priests abandoned by their gods, all held up by elegant rules for Pathfinder and the examples used all weave together into a subtle meta-narrative. “Why No Monotheism?” addresses the multiple gods assumption in fantasy roleplaying, but frankly I’m more interested in the author’s note contrasting the “patron god” henotheism of the game and the absence of the more “we worship the whole pantheon” approach. Kathenotheism is what you called that; hey, I learned a new word! Ain’t language grand?
“Divine Archetypes” goes into tricky ground, but does it with panache. I’m on the record as saying The Book of Exalted Deeds was my least favorite Third Edition Dungeons and Dragons book, but this Pathfinder article avoids those pitfalls. Plus, a “holy gunslinger” archetype called a “peacemaker” is just spot on, as are the mechanics for being a fighter with an angelic buddy and a Shinto-esque ranger option called the “spirit hunter.” We’ve got a big interview with Bill Slavicsek next, which—honestly, interviews aren’t really my thing, so I skimmed it, though I was happy to see Planescape get its due props. “A Background in Magic” is the only AGE specific article in here, and if there is one thing I know about AGE, it is that people are clamoring for content—Backgrounds and Specializations, in particular. “From the Mines” and “Ask the Kobold” are the staff answering letters, both about the magazine and about game mechanics. “The Scriveners of Allain” is a Fourth Edition article about evil scribes with ink magic? Reminiscent of China Miéville’s Kraken, but not particularly sinister.
The last few articles in this issue are pure gold. The last issues of KQ had derro ooze magic, dire naked mole rats and the kami “Lurker in the Cave,” and this issue doesn’t stint on The Weird, either. “Nine Treasures of Midgard” doesn’t feature handcuff cheese, like the art seems to portray, but it does have more derro madness with a box of saws and gear teeth, drow brandy and canned heads. “Saints of Mavros” is a Pathfinder article—I’ve always found their pantheon bland, but these saints spice up the church of the god of war, especially Saint Whiteskull, beatified warlord of the Ghoul Imperium. Oh, and you know those horrifying ocean bugs that eat a fish’s tongue and then live in their mouths? Well “White Tongue, Black Heart” gives your terrible wizard Pathfinder rules for having one as your familiar. So that is pretty much the worst, in the best possible way.
“Silus and the Red Dogs” was an article Kobold Quarterly #18, but the subsequent “Party of One” adventures that have been extended and are now available separately, are totally worth it. Being made for adults allows these “Party of One” adventures to be more complex than your standard Choose Your Own Adventure fare. Branching pathways in the flowchart that the player has to return to, but that allow new options based on what you discover from the choices you’ve pursued, items that alter the flow of the story or the abilities of your character in a fight, secrets that open up different dialogue trees; it is pretty neat, actually.
I decided to try out Kalgor Bloodhammer and the Ghouls Through the Breach first. I concluded the adventure without dying, but I think I played the “good little soldier” a bit too well; as a player and a character I have suspicions about the things I missed, but I’ll have to go back and replay it a little more slyly to see those outcomes. Hey! Look at that! I already want to replay the thing; I’d say that makes for a pretty good value. Twist and turns, secrets and fights—the random element really adds a degree of just organic drift that wouldn’t happen otherwise. I made decisions based on my hit point total twice in the adventure that I might have done differently had I been in better or worse shape.
Actually, when I played Elgar Fletch and the Dark Army the same thing happened; I stayed on task, didn’t get distracted, and ended up finishing the story with a generic happy ending, knowing terrible secrets went uncovered. I did get a sweet elven cloak out of the deal; the story opens with a choice between buying an elven cloak, a dwarven charm or saving your gold, which is a really great cold open. I will say I’m a bit distressed at the overwhelming “boy’s club” feel so far; I’d like a female protagonist!
I tried to play Alosar Emanli and the Creatures From the Fallen Star a little more curiously, but luck wasn’t with me. A friend of mine had played this adventure and had been excited to get a bear cub as a sidekick, but I failed at the bear cave, and failed again later on when evil spaceworms attacked the bears, so I was solo on this one. I used up all my spells—spells! Another of those fun complications—and couldn’t confront the aliens myself, so I ended up having to crawl away for help and almost killed myself climbing a tree for a nixie. The dice hated me which just proves that these stories really are different depending on your choices and your luck, since my non-gamer friend found this one to be “too easy.”
Next issue: Dwarves, dwarves, dwarves! and rogue archetypes from the author of “White Tongue, Black Heart”!
Mordicai Knode is pretty sure some necromancer is summoning those ghouls to prop up a decaying dwarven military-industrial complex; if you find out the secret, will you tell it to him on Twitter?
This is awesome. Further confirms the ingenuity and creativeness of the people making games today. Can characters transfer between adventures? Can they advance or “level up?” Seems like that would be too complicated tho..
“Why No Monotheism?” seems like an interesting read, if just for the author’s note you mention. Religion has always been one of the more interesting facets of RPG settings to me, and it has often struck me as odd that games like D&D tend to adopt the “patron god” approach rather than the kathenotheism (nice word!) like you see in many real-world polytheistic civilizations. The general absence of monotheism has also been strange to me (though I think it was handled really well in Eberron with the Church of the Silver Flame), but I guess if you have a handfull of literal, undeniable gods throwing their weight around the multiverse it’s a bit hard to say “there’s only one!”
1. Kirk Keen
No carry over on adventures yet, but I wouldn’t rule it out for an “Advanced Party of One” concept of forthcoming products? I can only say…vote with your pocketbook? If KQ sees the “Party of One” series succeed, I can only imagine that they would pursue it further.
2. jondowner
I have to admit that I usually ignore DnD’s “patron” system & pick a range of deities to worship. I mean, seriously, sometimes you have a deep, dark, black, horrible secret…so you whisper it in prayer to Vecna so he’ll help you keep it hidden, right? I mean, you might not want Bane at your wedding, but if you are trying to fight off an invading army, you might call out his name in the heat of battle. I think gods work best when you focus on their portfolios & ignore their alignments.
I really like Kieran Yanner’s style of artwork.
5. TWGrace
In general I think the quality of the artwork in KQ is really outstanding; I don’t know what their pay scale is like, but I’m assuming it is pretty decent, because they get some solid illustrations. It is worth noting; it means they don’t cut corners.
Pathfinder follows the classic single god, single cleric style of play. Most of that is due to James Jacobs’s play style, and a leftover from 30+ years of gameplay. Pathfinder prefers to use oracles as a mouthpiece for a variety of deities representing a theme, but monotheism seems to be a sensitive topic due to perceived slights against Christianity (unfounded, but understandable).
I’ve played a huge amount of priests/religious characters in my time, and I like monotheism, gods of duality, full worship of regional or worldwide pantheons (IE everybody worships the same gods), and the pantheon, one god/one cleric idea. I think gamers and designers like to put a name to a concept, hence why you see less worship of metaphysical forces or ideas (such as priests of Law, or Chaos, etc). I have ran the arrival of new deities into established worlds, which is a great plot motivator for conflict and upheaval. I think the one game factor that is missed by designers is making a priest classs unique, since their only true ability is the power to wield divine spells (even turn/rebuke/channel is shared by various divine classes).
If you want to separate clerics by their god, then make their spells focus on their portfolios. For example, an evil cleric of a death/murder god heals peoples wounds by channeling the life energy of the people he murders. Fire priests can’t cast cold magic, and so on. Gods should evolve over time as beliefs fracture and change. All of these things add to the roleplaying aesthetic of being a priest. Otherwise, you might as well just say I’m a healbot…
7. stormcrow27
The fire/cold dichotomy you mention…isn’t that how shugenja work? Or I don’t know if they are forbidden– I’ve never actually played a shugenja– but there is a greater focus on subtypes. In general I think that putting forethought into “types” lets you do neat things; like you say, tossing “alignment restrictions” & focusing on like, elemental or school, or…something else.
I think something that really informs campaigns is…well, the DMs willingness to go planar. Like– a lot of major religious questions (starting with “does god exist?”) are really thrown into disarray when you can pop on over to Heaven & say hi to Pelor.
8. mordicai.
Shugenja have that, and so do more traditonal settings with 3.5 derived good/evil spells for casters, but they are the only divine class I can remember that even approaches some form of specializationthematic spell denial (without a prestige class or spellcasting as a secondary focus, such as paladins or rangers). Spheres of access was a better system for that sort of differentiation, but most 3.0. 3.5 and 4.0 players I know shudder when you mention that phrase. One 3rd party company made a stab at it, but the separation was pretty lax.
Portfolio separation of spells is probably the best method for engendering a difference amongst priests for game purposes. It adds to to the roleplaying aspect. Part of that also comes with eliminating the substitution for healing/causing wounds setup for alignment and instead allowing spontaneous conversion for either domain spells or a sphere of the player’s choice (drawn from the deity’s portfolio). Of course, this can cause some issues with the core design for the Fab Four class route, but it also forces players to think more and bash less.
DMs should almost always go planar, unless they are inexperienced, or are specifically focused on a world design. Theological questions such as “does God exist?”, can magic exist, etc are swapped out with competing ideas “can my god beat your god, does he, she, it, them answer to your god, do the various aspects of your god agree, and so on”.. The main point with deities is to use them as needed, so the servant of the god doesn’t feel like a theolgoical sock puppet mouthing the decress of the DM’s whims. Unless of course, your deity IS a theological sock puppet
Also, does belief create deities, or have they always existed? Can gods truly die?
9. stormcrow27
I have to admit, I’ve always hated the whole “belief creates gods” or “gods gather their power from belief” angle. I mean, it just seems so…so…I don’t know, it seems like an overcooked comicbook trope, I guess? I’ve seen it done well & I’ve seen it done poorly, but over-all I prefer my gods to not actually care if people believe in them…unless those people are supplicating them with sacrafices & stuff. Persona; preference, I know.
I really like the Planescape game, but I don’t think I agree that you should assume it will go planar. I mean– I think any high level game needs a “weird” outlet, so either the Planes or Spelljammer is the solution, but I think that “well, lets go fight Tiamat!” inherently downgrades the gods from “mysterious & potent, worthy of worship” to “weird monsters that are super high level.” You know?
As for spell design– I really hate classes that are balanced by tweaking the spell list. Things like bard, ranger, paladin…& most prestige classes. I think that the smart design would be to make the spell lists generic– okay, you can divide it into “divine” & “arcane” if you want– & then have each spell come with a variety of types, subtypes & descriptors. Then you can have classes balance by having them have access to certain types, certain levels…or to be forbidden from certain types. So yeah I totally agree. I agree & I think it should fundamentally a part of the game design.