Samantha Patri's Blog

 I'm not a fan of the third act. It feels ... overused in Western storytelling. The first act:   The set up, we learn about the main character, see the social dynamics. The second act: The main character makes friends, is a rising star, that sort of thing. The third act:   The main character fucks things up , everyone turns against them, and they're alone / abandoned until... The fourth act: they make it right. Usually, this doesn't involve the idiot ball ... which is almost a shame, because if it was a case of idiot balls, we could chalk it up to bad writing. But usually... it isn't. This is very much a Western mindset though ... this idea that the main character has to fuck up, has to make additional drama, has to atone or have everyone realise they were right all along. Part of it, I think, is the West's fixation on being the underdog. That the hero has to be abandoned so that they can rise up and say 'see? I was right all along!' or even as some sort o...

Renegade Studios  is releasing the Cobra supplement to their GI Joe setting, and the Cobra pitch is ... pretty spot on. It points out society is corrupt, the lazy and greedy hoard all the wealth, while the working class effectively slaves under them. And Cobra wants to change things! The thing I enjoy doing when I run games is have the villains be perfectly honest about things - it makes them sound reasonable, and makes the hero's job harder. But this means GI Joe isn't 'fighting for what's right', they're fighting to keep the status quo - they aren't effecting positive change. At the end of the day, the world is as it was, with little changed. And this is a problem with most super heroes - they're pushing to keep the status quo against anyone who would change it. There's this fascinating little story I saw on Tumblr, showing what happens when you have a superhero who tries to enact positive change. That story doesn't miss the mark, either. Imagi...

Alright. If you've been paying attention, you know who Mr. Beast is. If you're in the loop, you know that recently, he helped  restore the eyesight  of one thousand people, then dropped a whack of cash more to cover the lost income of some of these people, then a whack load more to cover even more surgeries to help restore more people's eyesight. He's known for doing huge, charitable events, and making YouTube videos of it. He has an entire channel dedicated to philanthropy . He's also known for doing games and contests to give out money, too. And there's people who aren't happy with any of this. They complain he's using the disabled and poor as a commodity. They're saying that if he's going to help people, he should shut up and not make videos of his work. And we're saying these people are missing the point, or don't understand the reality of the situation.  If he didn't do video, he'd not get money.  No money, no means to help...

   Do you give your players a 'warning shot' when they're being ambushed or sniped? "An arrow strikes the tree inches from your head" kind of thing - the thing you see in movies and TV shows, alerting the hero they're in imminent danger so they can dive for cover. We're not fans, really. It's plot armour that the PCs don't need. If they've made an enemy that's going to use ambush tactics, or the creatures they're going to face are known for ambush tactics - then the ambush tactics should have a chance to actually succeed. The PCs get their Perception Checks (if it makes sense).  The enemy get their Stealth rolls. The attack roll is made to hit the PCs.  All of this is fair . If it drops the PC, so be it - the PC drops. And there's nothing wrong with the PCs doing the same.  PC rolls stealth, enemy rolls perception, attack roll is made.  If the PC one-shots the BBEG because of this? So be it, the BBEG drops. Is it 'anticlimactic...

Our playing group likes to open most encounters with parlay. It just happens to be their thing. If it is at all possible, the party tries to prevent combat - they'll talk things out, try to negotiate, look for common ground, and even win over enemies if there's an opportunity. The excuse that D&D is mostly a 'combat' game doesn't hold water. Yes, most of the rulebook is on how to hurt your opponents - but that doesn't mean that's the best path (or first option) people should take. There's social skills for a reason - so why not use them? "Well, I don't want the BBEG to be defeated with a single roll." Then think of a way to draw it out. How many successes are needed? Each success prevents combat for a few rounds, as the PCs try to work on the opponent's resolve. But it goes beyond this. In 1st edition Mummy (World of Darkness), they discussed what a character with higher-than-human social charms could do (in D&D, we'd go wit...

There's a lot of talk going on right now about WotC's, new "OGL 1.1". First and foremost, something to consider. WotC isn't going to be able to enforce 1.1. They can't. 1.0a already says it can't be revoked if someone's following the rules that are laid out for it. That, right there, protects people using the original OGL. Second, if 1.1 is enforceable, this gives WotC the rights to Lord of the Rings , Diablo , World of Warcraft , Wheel of Time , Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser , Mutants and Masterminds , Star Wars , DC Comics, and Wild Cards . That's a whole lot of companies that would be righteously pissed off with Hasbro. It would most likely lead to a class-action lawsuit. And the courts, when it comes to the kind of contracts you see here, lean in favour of the people signing the contract, and not the people who wrote it up, when there's a grey zone. Not that there's a grey zone. With all that being said, WotC needs a smack upside the head....

This is from an essay we wrote back in 2012, when Shadowrun 5e was first announced. A lot of this still holds true to this day. We're going to tweak it slightly, but for the most part it holds up well. Shadowrun 5e  is slated to come out this summer.  I decided to make a wish list about what I would like to see in it, and I was (not entirely) surprised to see people wanting a reversion back to the first edition "feel" of mirrorshades, cyberdecks, and the removal of the wireless world from the setting. Having just finished writing an essay on science fiction, this debate was already fresh in my mind. Good science fiction uses the setting as a framework to reflect aspects of the modern world and raise questions, while near science fiction will usually extrapolate from where we are to where people think we will go. Shadowrun , I feel, does this very well, which is why it is one of my favourite roleplaying games. When dealing with many science fiction games, I tend to think ...