The Unbiased Review - Let the Machines do it! (AI review of ORWELL @2081)

Hey folks. There's still a pulse in the old blog, if a weak one. I barely get to write nowadays due to being a (relatively) new parent. It's been intensive. Anyway, when I get the time, I tend towards writing on the projects I started rather then producing content here ... It's not that I got tons of engagement here anyway (blogger being blogger). That said, every now and then I should drop by and get you guys an update. The newest thing I believe worth sharing is letting AI tools look at your work to evaluate it, because that should totally be a thing.

So ... let's talk about Ø2\\'3||

ORWELL is to this day my most complete and best effort. I could talk about it all day. Alas, no one cares. This game has NO audience at all. There's just no way to gain one, it seems. Now, the best thing AI did for me right now is the feature some platforms offer now to "talk to your pdf". I'm using reeder.ai for this, and it is a fantastic experience. It looks at the internal logic of the document, of course, but you can chat about the system as well.

Actually, you can talk about ALL THE ASPECTS of your work with the robot. I can't imagine a game designer who wouldn't be thrilled about the potential of this. It'll answer ALL your imminent questions just as imminently. It is the review reader EVERY author I know wanted close by (and then forced friends and neighbors and family to fill that niche).

I mean, I can already hear the nay-sayers lamenting how the machine knows nothing about gaming and all that BULLSHIT. Show me the reviewer who actually not only reads and understands but also played your module/game/supplement to have an informed opinion about it. If they do exist, they are RARE AS FUCK (knew one, but he burned out like fire on a Créme Brûlèe, quick and beautifull).

Untold "secret" of the rpg content industry is: they read your shit for content, and if it is too complex, they will take shortcuts. If you are lucky. Most likely you'll just get ignored for demanding to be seen with something that doesn't easily produce THEIR content. You'll have to keep that in mind when publishing in the rpg scene.

The AI doesn't care about that. It just tries to form as objective an opinion as possible. Point in case: Ø2\\'3||

Let's check out what kind of review reeder.ai would write about the game:

A review of the game Ø2\\'3|| could take various forms, depending on the reviewer's perspective and experience with role-playing games. Here’s a detailed example of what such a review might look like:

---

**Review of Ø2\\'3||: A Dystopian Role-Playing Experience**

**Rating: ★★★★☆ (4/5)**

**Overview:**
Ø2\\'3|| is a contemporary role-playing game that immerses players in a dystopian future, drawing inspiration from classic works of science fiction and social commentary. The game is designed for mature audiences, exploring themes of oppression, societal decay, and the human condition through a narrative-driven approach. With its unique mechanics and emphasis on player agency, Ø2\\'3|| offers a fresh take on the RPG genre.

**Setting:**
Set in the year 2081, Ø2\\'3|| presents a world where the most grotesque ideas of humanity have become reality. The game cleverly satirizes contemporary issues, making it not just a playground for fantasy but a reflective space for players to confront uncomfortable truths. The setting is rich and detailed, allowing players to navigate a landscape filled with both beauty and horror, reminiscent of works like *1984*, *Children of Men*, and *Black Mirror*.

**Gameplay Mechanics:**
The game employs a unique dice system using d4, d6, d8, d10, and d12, where players roll to meet or exceed Difficulty Tiers (DT). This mechanic emphasizes skill and strategy, as players can never roll more than three dice per test. The use of High Potential Attributes allows for a dynamic gameplay experience, where players must think critically about their character's strengths and weaknesses.

Character creation is robust, requiring players to develop a backstory that connects them to the world and to each other. The four essential elements—The Awakening, The Group, The Potentials, and The Thresholds—ensure that characters are not just numbers on a sheet but integral parts of the narrative.

**Narrative Focus:**
One of the standout features of Ø2\\'3|| is its commitment to storytelling. The District Master (DM) plays a crucial role in guiding the narrative, but the game also empowers players to influence the story through a shared currency called Pennies. This mechanic fosters collaboration and creativity, allowing for a more organic development of the plot.

The game encourages exploration of complex themes, such as the nature of evil and redemption, without resorting to black-and-white morality. This nuanced approach makes for a thought-provoking experience that can lead to deep discussions among players.

**Art and Presentation:**
While the document does not provide specific details about the game's art and presentation, a well-designed RPG typically benefits from engaging visuals and clear layout. Assuming Ø2\\'3|| follows this trend, the aesthetic should complement its themes, enhancing immersion in the dystopian world.

**Final Thoughts:**
Ø2\\'3|| is not for everyone; its mature themes and complex mechanics may deter casual gamers. However, for those seeking a rich, narrative-driven experience that challenges players to confront difficult ideas, it is a rewarding choice. The game successfully balances the need for structure with the freedom of creativity, making it a standout in the RPG landscape.

**Pros:**
- Deeply immersive and thought-provoking setting
- Unique mechanics that emphasize player agency
- Strong narrative focus with collaborative storytelling
- Encourages exploration of complex themes

**Cons:**
- May be too complex for newcomers to RPGs
- Mature themes may not appeal to all players

In conclusion, Ø2\\'3|| is a compelling addition to the role-playing genre, offering a unique blend of storytelling, strategy, and social commentary. It invites players to not only engage in a game but to reflect on the world around them, making it a must-try for seasoned RPG enthusiasts.

---

This review encapsulates the essence of the game while providing insights into its mechanics, themes, and overall experience.

Here's a screenshot, so you know I'm not fucking around:

reeder obviously doesn't "see" layout and illustrations. It's text only. But with that, it is quite happy. And I'm happy with that as well. And if you don't know what the game is looking like, I can help you with that as well:

Ø2\\'3||

Now, what would a review look like that doesn't take layout and art into consideration. I asked, and I received:

A review of the game, focusing solely on its mechanics, narrative structure, and overall gameplay experience without considering layout and art, might sound something like this:

---

**Game Review: Ø2\\'3||**

Ø2\\'3|| presents a unique and engaging role-playing experience that emphasizes narrative depth and player agency. The game is set in a richly imagined world that blends elements of tourism, history, and industrial complexity, creating a vibrant backdrop for players to explore. The setting is not just a static map; it evolves based on player interactions and decisions, allowing for a dynamic storytelling experience that feels alive and responsive.

One of the standout features of Ø2\\'3|| is its approach to sandbox gameplay. Instead of providing a rigid structure, the game encourages players to navigate their surroundings through confident guesses and emergent gameplay. This design choice fosters a sense of exploration and discovery, as players are not merely following a predetermined path but are actively shaping the narrative through their choices. The game master (DM) is equipped with tools that facilitate this process, allowing for a flexible and adaptive storytelling experience.

The mechanics of the game are designed to balance the tension between a strict system and the freedom of character advancement. This balance is crucial, as it keeps the gameplay engaging and prevents it from devolving into mere wish-fulfillment. The game incorporates a variety of resolution mechanics that cater to different scenarios, from general interactions to more detailed actions like entering an apartment. This versatility ensures that players have the agency to approach challenges in multiple ways, enhancing the overall experience.

Moreover, the psychological elements woven into the gameplay add an intriguing layer of complexity. The game effectively captures the chaos and uncertainty of the characters' environment, prompting players to react with caution and creativity. This aspect not only heightens the tension but also enriches the narrative, as players must navigate their fears and uncertainties while pursuing their goals.

The design philosophy behind Ø2\\'3|| also emphasizes collaboration and camaraderie among players. The game encourages a friendly atmosphere, reminding participants that the best experiences stem from mutual respect and kindness, even in darker narrative moments. This focus on interpersonal dynamics enhances the role-playing experience, making it more enjoyable and memorable.

In conclusion, Ø2\\'3|| is a compelling role-playing game that excels in narrative depth, player agency, and collaborative gameplay. Its innovative approach to sandbox mechanics and psychological engagement sets it apart from traditional RPGs, making it a worthwhile experience for both new and seasoned players. While the layout and art may not be considered in this review, the core gameplay elements provide a rich foundation for immersive storytelling and character development.

---

This review highlights the game's strengths in mechanics and narrative without delving into visual aspects, providing a comprehensive overview of what players can expect from the gameplay experience.

Here's the screenshot for prosperity:

 

So the result is a bit less verbose, yet still positive. I like this one as well. It really does give a reader a good idea what the game is about. This is SO productive and helpfull.

I did go one more round, asking it to make a summary of the rules. Here we go:

The rules of Ø2\\'3|| are designed to create a flexible and engaging role-playing experience that emphasizes storytelling while allowing for player agency and DM creativity. Here’s a summary of the key components:

1. **Role-Playing Framework**: The game is rooted in traditional role-playing game mechanics, where the story is driven by players and their characters, but the District Master (DM) serves as the final arbiter of the rules.

2. **Character Generation**: Players create characters with specific potentials, skills, gadgets, and contacts. The character generation process is designed to be intuitive and allows for personal touches.

3. **Game Mechanics**:
   - **Dice Rolling**: The game utilizes dice rolls to determine outcomes, with a focus on chance and randomness.
   - **Opposing Rolls**: Conflicts are resolved through opposing rolls, where the difficulty of a test is determined by random results from either the DM or other players.
   - **Pennies**: A shared currency called "Pennies" allows players to influence the game, providing a mechanism for players to affect the narrative and outcomes.

4. **Combat System**: Combat involves conflict resolution through opposing rolls, with specific rules governing damage, protection, and healing. The mechanics are designed to ensure that conflict is grounded in the rules rather than purely narrative.

5. **Seasons and Story Structure**: The game is structured around seasons, which are akin to episodes in a TV series. Each season has its own narrative arc, and the way a season concludes can impact future gameplay. Players and the DM fill "Slots" that determine the direction of the narrative, balancing between oppressive systems and character advancement.

6. **NPC Creation**: The game provides guidelines for creating both basic and detailed non-player characters (NPCs) to enrich the storytelling experience.

7. **DM Tools**: The DM is equipped with tools and advice to create engaging narratives, manage conflicts, and facilitate a sandbox-style gameplay experience. This includes an "analogue world engine" to help structure the game world.

8. **Expanded Rules**: Additional rules are provided for the DM to enhance gameplay, including how to handle transitions between seasons and manage the overall narrative flow.

9. **Inspirations and Themes**: The game draws from a variety of inspirations, aiming to create a deep and immersive experience that reflects the complexities of the game world.

Overall, the rules of Ø2\\'3|| are designed to support emergent gameplay, allowing for a dynamic interplay between players and the DM while maintaining a structured framework for conflict and narrative development.

And that's that. It feels good to have ANYBODY look at your work and give competent feedback. I don't care if it is a machine in this instant, as most people are NOT ABLE to do it at least with the level of competence the machine is showing here (and I'm the one to judge, because I wrote the fucker).

What's more, you can gain an UNBIASED review of the game. How great is that? I honestly think that rpg selling sites like drivethru should have a feature like this. Just an unbiased overview of the game, done by the machine. With the library they already have, AI could even make a solid ranking of ALL THE MATERIAL that is there and give you a cogent analysis why it was ranked that way.

Man, you could ask the machine about anything right then and there instead of writing a comment, for instance. AI support for selling books! I mean, why not? Should be useful, right?

AI for the win?!

I mean, god with you if you don't see how ai could benefit humanity as well as bringing its downfall. It is the proverbial djinn in a bottle, and we'll get ALL the wishes we want, but idiots get to make their wishes as well, and many of them are in charge of SOMETHING. So buckle up, I'd say.

That said, I'm positive about it. All things considered. I'd still maintain my position, that if the machine can do it better and faster than we can, let it do it on the cheap and do something else instead. Goes for ai art as well. I know people get knots in their underwear because of it, but those still "fighting" against this development are mostly brainwashed drones that can't help themselves.

I can't take those people seriously, especially since they use that exact technology to ONLY attack small publishers to any real effect. Because the big publisher DO NOT GIVE A FUCK. Hypocrites being assholes, all the way through. So fuck them.

Meanwhile I will keep using the tools at my disposal to create what I imagine needs creating. Maybe it will find an audience at some point. But I talked to the machine, and the machine said: this is good shit. I don't know about you, but I take comfort in that. Because this should never be about the machines overtaking us but about cutting through the bullshit and supporting us in finding our authentic selves.

Might still kill us all, but until then: buy Ø2\\'3|| and have fun! I'll keep writing them. So what about you guys? Did you ask the machine about your games, or even about games you own but didn't write!? What did it say?

Also, current WIP (because I have no other problems):

Lost Songs of the Nibelungs Part I: Re-Introduction (where's this game at nowadays?)

Started writing a post about the state of the blog, didn't like where it was going. Twice. Too much doom and gloom. You know where the world's at, and I'm busy, too, so ... fuck it. Prime function of the blog is me talking about rpg stuff I have on my mind. That did connect with some sort of "scene" a couple of years back, but now I'm truly lost in the woods. I should embrace that and move on. If you encounter this post on your travels through the internet, I hope you'll sit down with me for a couple of minutes and lend me an ear. Maybe we'll chat a bit, too. Then we move on.

For today we'll have a little retrospective about how it all came together ... until it didn't. Enjoy!

Proper artwork?

So many words to talk about ... what again?

A lot of me writing here was about me finding my own voice in a thriving hobby space. Back when I started 12 years ago (and I was late to the party) the retro-clone movement was in full swing and all people did was sharing fantastic facets of what our hobby can be. Lots of fun, all around. And what a rabbit hole to jump into! So many small creators, lots of diy. Inspiring, all of it.

The OSR bitch fights came later, but not much later (although it always had the occasional flame wars).

Back then I tried a lot. And I wrote a lot, although more short pieces. 214 posts in the first three years alone. Looking back at it, I think I managed to find out a lot about myself over the years and how I play games. Enough to start designing and writing some of my own as well. This was always supposed to be a trial and error approach to game design (hence the title of the blog), so I would find an idea, play around with it, and put it aside for a while. Often promising some sort of follow up I wouldn't deliver.

Kinda "sounded great at the time" way of gamer ADD. But nothing stuck.

What started with exploring where to go, pretty definitely settled for "doing something with D&D no one thought about", mainly because the more fringe thinkers of the scene had the most inspiring stuff to begin with. They talked "world engines" and weird narrative constructs and non linear settings with lots of interesting twists to dive into.

All of it fed my D&D RC camapign rules. As a matter of fact, I tested and changed so much that one player actually threatened to leave the game if I kept adding and tinkering. Can't fault the guy. He'd been somewhere on the autism spectrum, and for him playing D&D with me was what for a cat is petting it the wrong way.

Anyway, so the blogging went on and gaming fell a bit behind. I'd still write about D&D now and again, but my focus shifted a bit towards the theoretical of it all.

I know the exact moment that changed: November 30th, 2014. Pretty much exactly 3 years into blogging.

The clip linked in that post changed the trajectory of the blog for good. The post directly after that already formulates the core idea that made Lost Songs of the Nibelungs. There is your spark, the idea that started it all: Charisma is not a good word for what it does in D&D.

With that, I seriously started dismantling D&D. Here's an attempt to replace most of the terms on an old school character D&D sheet with synonyms. See how that jives with you (and what a game using those terms would be like):

Only change terms, get a different game?

The ideas started coming, I kept on the ball, people started being enthusiastic about it and even left comments. Those were the days. Good times.

After a couple of months, talking LSotN looked a bit like this:

Along that, I started chewing through what kind of world this would be set in. I was burning fuel on all cylinders, so to say. And that ended up to be the main focus of a lot of my writing in the last 10 years, one way or another. As a matter of fact, just the other day my good friend Mark pointed out to me that every game design I did in the last 10 years was, in the end, about LSotN. Damn.

A complicated approach to game design ...

However, back then I was in no way, shape or form ready to write and publish a complete role-playing game.

Contrary to popular belief, it actually takes a lot to write a book and process it to a point where it can be published, even if you have (to accept) low standards. So if this were to be my opus magnum, I had ways to go to get it out there.

And development would hit walls, obviously. To this day it needs a system for magic that fits the game and that I'm happy with. Not for lack of trying, but I'm not there yet. Same goes for the GM side of the game. Although that has lots of working pieces, it'll need some more ideas incorporated to be where I'd like it to be.

Progress on that has been slow, but not zero. Which segues into another aspect of what I'm trying to do here: the more complex a problem appears to be, the more I tend to look for ways to explore it indirectly. Because sometimes the solution is found by exploring the opposite or only aspects of it. But that could lead to writing another entire game first.

Yeah.

And I'm not that fast to begin with.

So a lot on the blog looks like me shifting focus on something entirely different, like developing a lite rules system for a DungeonPunk setting, while truly exploring how complete a system on the GM side needs to be to create a sufficient and distinct gaming experience, like this a mission generator.

It's called Brawlers! now ...

And while I gain some insights in the process, I might go back to Lost Songs until I hit a wall again, only to start something new, covering a different angle altogether. 

Or find new walls to hit ...

I write about some of it and call it a blog. Haha.

When all is said and done, I ended up with lots of little ideas and concepts, some follow me unfinished to this day (The Goblintribe Generator, among others), some stand on their own very well (the Random Narrative Generator being the biggest one).

And then, all of a sudden ...

... I start something, and actually finish it. Although "sudden" is a bit of s stretch, as you might have guessed already. Anyway, first major publication happens May 2017 and is called Monkey Business. Not a game, but a game supplement for Labyrinth Lord. Still HUGE in scope, around 120 pages, offering enough ideas and tools to create a whole campaign, no less.

I started it as PWYW to see if that worked. Did so for 5 years and it didn't work, so now it costs what I think it's worth. It was downloaded roughly 500 times, but paid for only 50 times (yes, two short of making copper, after all those years).

I consider it a success, especially when taking into account that it was the first proper publication I got out there. Alas, it was more or less ignored by what the "OSR" was back then. Bit of a bummer. But I got some reports from people playing it, and all of them had a blast. 

The bigger picture was, that I got to play with some DM tools in general. Some of Lost Songs made it into the book (a variant of the Random Terrain Generator, for instance), some of what I tried there will make it into Lost Songs. Eventually.

Another aspect was learning a bit more about publishing using Scribus and inkscape. 

At that point I thought things would take up some speed, too, and I'd keep pushing modules out there. Yet again, I found rabbit holes to fall into. Wanted to write a more contemporary module with the working name "Robo-Hitler". A grindhouse shlockfest about shooting historical Nazis that use (alien?) tech for their nefarious plots ...

But the game I wanted to use for it, I couldn't use (the designer basically said, he has different plans and I shouldn't), so that opened a can of worms, because now I needed a set of rules. I thought I'd go and use my D&D house rules, make a LL supplement out of it and have it with the module. So I started digging into that before starting with the module.

Meanwhile LL fell into decline and the OSR stopped being what it had been. Things shifted, as they always would, given time enough. And I gave it plenty of time.

*sigh* ... never mind. [source]

So that supplement for the weird sixties ended up being a complete book ... that I'm still writing (150 pages in, the end is nigh). Robo Hitler has even seen play, with all the maps being conceptualized and some wild ideas to get this done.

It just didn't happen in a vacuum. Not only did I start working on (at least) four more modules, some of those would also need a be67 fantasy supplement before they can see publication. I have that in pieces (27 classes, original magic system ...), but it needs to be written and layouted, of course.

All the while I kept playtesting and developing Lost Songs. Eventually I'd hit the final wall (magic just would not manifest) and I shifted focus to yet another game: ORWELL. It was about a lot I had on my mind at the time, and also something completely different. An original set of rules, from start to end (although parts of Lost Songs would find its way into this as well).

That game, however, I would get done. It was even more fringe than Lost Songs will ever be, but it is complete ... and opened up even more strands of ideas and concepts to follow up on (see the "Would You Play That?"-Series here on the blog).

Every now and then I get an idea for (the now called) Brawlers as well, and that game ALSO has seen some writing. It also gave me ideas for at least FOUR more games featuring aspects of the rules written for it. Rebellion was one of those, and fell out of my hands completely by accident.

It was a set of rules that occured to me over night, and gave me a great opportunity to play around with Midjourney for a bit.

I know, it's crazy. When all is said and done, I might have around 30 projects in my WIP folders, done to one degree or another (some only concepts, some with writing, some have even seen playtesting ...)

Eventually, I had to get back to LSotN

All of the above somehow feeds into Lost Songs, one way or another. And I have the blog to prove it. Ha. But where's that game at?

Well.

I never finished thinking about it, but also didn't get a chance to work on it again. But I got to read Hrolf Kraki's Saga by Poul Anderson last year (2023) and it hit me right in the feels. That book reads like a session report of Lost Songs of the Nibelungs, and I'm not even kidding. It's EXACTLY what the game is about and how it actually plays.

Recommended reading ...

 Got me thinking again, soon I started talking about it again, even made some notes ... and finally got an idea how magic might work, which will have implications on the GM section, but that was to be expected.

My good friend Mark also keeps pestering me about finishing it. And while I started a shit load of projects, he might be right that it is time to tackle this beast again. I'd have to see what I got and where I need to go with it. Maybe write the whole thing from scratch? Because ...

Because I've come some way since I last touched LSotN. Not only because the last four years sucked HARD and did not go by without taking a toll. No, I think my outlook overall changed quite some bit. Or rather, I'm a bit further down the road I wanted to take while the road ALSO changed. Although I'm still somewhat lost, I feel I have a better grasp at what this game is supposed to be.

Either way, I'm ready to get back into playtesting again. Time to put some more energy into this beast

What about EVERYTHING ELSE?

I know, loaded question. I'm talking projects, not state of worldly affairs ... I got a review for ORWELL, but it's not a good one. Guy didn't read it in depth, then said it was too convoluted ... I mean, I get it, for it to be content it needs to be processed fast, and ORWELL definitely needs some digestion, which runs counter to that. He says as much (and he wanted to like it).

In the end, I feel the review ended up being somewhat unfair but well intended. I mean him no harm, after all it got some eyes on the book, and we are not done talking about it (I think?), so his "3 of 5, satisfactory" is fine.

And he gets the setting mostly right, so there is that.

However, it makes you wonder how one can review a game that hasn't even been played, because playing it might at least make sure that its read deeply enough to use it.

You wanna get a free look at the book and some words on it, too (with the caveats I offered above), go and see it here. James might end up giving it a run at his virtual table. Not holding my breath here, but if it were to happen, I'd very much looking forward to it. He might end up liking it after all. Either way, I'd accept his final word on it even if his result doesn't change.

I also got a chance to do a Q&A about the game over at The Hardboiled GMshoe's Office. It was done via their discord server Randomworlds TTRPG Chatroom, which is all kinds of fun and well worth checking out!

Other than that, I keep trucking. some things in the works, might actually get something new finished soon. Playtests for Angry Little Aliens VERSUS King Arthur have been VERY promising, but to make that a book is still some work. And I'm already chewing on something new ... We'll see.

As far as the blog is concerned, I'll make this a series about rediscovering Lost Songs of the Nibelungs, but I might have a couple of other ideas worth following up (rules for immortals in be67/BASIC, for instance). It happens when it happens, but it will happen :)

Also:

 

ORWELL @2081 - Now as PDF, too!

Hello, friends and neighbors. After long and hard consideration I decided to go one step further and make a PDF of my first RPG available on OBS. Turns out, many people would rather have a PDF than a PoD. I wasn't confident that a PDF would do the game any good three years ago, especially since it was layouted with print in mind and PDF has quite the different potential. That being said, I wanted to go through it once more and hunt for mistakes, so while at happened I started thinking ... we might need a PDF after all. So we did that, and here we are. Let me remind you about Ø2\\'3||

What is ORWELL @2081?

It is a cyberpunk rpg that could be described as:

Peter Pan in a dystopian future that plays like a dark and satirical anime series of psychological horror inspired by Black Mirror and the like.

Get it here!

You want some details on that? Here's the blurb:

Welcome to a very dark world ...

The setting is Europe in the year 2081, unified under one totalitarian party called The Family. The United States of Europe (USE, for short) are a playground for all the bad ideas this century has already come up with (and some of the classics from the last 100 years). Citizens are rated by an arbitrary and mean Social Status system, puberty blockers are mandatory for all but the Elites. All of this is shrouded through a huge media ruse: reality is hidden behind a fully augmented and gamified layer, maintained by an AI implanted at birth and controlled by The Family. Citizens never grow up, just grow older and if they aren't high in social status, they are bled and used for everything they have, most of the time without even realizing it. That veil is lifted for some, and with that comes resistance (or opportunity).

It’s a game that assumes players are open to exploring all kinds of ideas and willing to put some thought into the stories they tell and experienced DMs who want to explore a system that challenges them as well. It is also a satire of a dystopian future that may not yet fall upon us …

How does it play, then?

It features a tried and tested original system that is based on a 3d12 roll versus a difficulty. What of a roll is used depends on the strengths and weaknesses a character has. The basic overview reads like this:

Everything else builds on that. There is a little game in the game for the DM to play where they gather "Pennies" over time and get to spend them to make live more difficult for the players. So the power a DM has fluctuates depending on how they play it and interact with the game.

ORWELL also features extensive tools to create and maintain setting and narratives in a very open and flexible world. It's also lushly illustrated, with over 40 illustrations on roughly 200 pages A5 ... The artist found the setting so inspiring that he went above and beyond to create content for it.

I wrote a session report way back that can give you an idea what that plays like, and you can find it here.

You want to read a bit more about how dystopian this game is, you should check out this post about social engineering in ORWELL.

You'd rather see someone else's take on the game? Check out what my good friend Eric has to say about it over on Methods & Madmen!

With all that, you should have a fair impression of what you are in for, but there's also a free preview of the game, including all the cheat sheets and the character sheet that you can get here. If there are any questions beyond that, feel free to hit me up with a comment. I really like to talk about it, too :)

Support a small publisher!

If you need any more convincing about this, I'd like to add that it'd help and mean a lot. It is rare and precious to get feedback on one's work, but buying a product shws appreciation as well and I see it as an investion into the future more than support of a product (because for that it needs to be read or even played!).

What I mean by that is that seeing my offers/designs/ideas being appreciated motivates me to push harder for the things I'm still working on. Your support means a lot and moves a lot.

If ORWELL doesn't tickle you but you'd like to support us, checking out what we also have to offer goes a long way. Minimus Ludus, for instance, is a great little rpg that goes into very different directions in its design and settings.

All of it is appreciated, as are those who already bought our games.

We hope you'll check out ORWELL!

I'm proud of this little game and I hope it will bring people some of the joy we had playing and play-testing it. Don't get me wrong, I know it is not for everybody (the contents are quite mature, actually), but I really hope it finds its people.

And with that we present the PDF of the revised game, with all the bells and whistles one could imagine (bookmarks! hyperlinks!), in the hopes it expands its reach. It'll cost 10 bucks for now and if you buy the PoD (just ordered the proof, when that's fine, that'll be available again, too), the pdf comes free with that. Those who have already bought it should get a message about how they can claim their free pdf ... if not, get in contact.

Protect your Gamemasters (and don't call it "fudging")

November last year I went to check out X. I had heard lots of promissing things about the changes there, and the possibilities that come with them. Gotta say, I'm not disappointed. Already met a couple of interesting people and had some inspiring conversations. As far as you can have that on X ... if you can't get your point across as an aphorism, you might just as well not try. I like it. Anyway. Last big discussion was about "fudging" and how bad it is. I was on no side in this argument as my take is somewhat different. Thought I'd share my thougts here.

One more thing: using X I was reminded that there isn't only "right" or "wrong" but that there are many valid truths that might not even be compatible, but nonetheless co-exist. Still lots of bullshit, too, but the reminder that we can be right and not agree was welcome.

The first truth about fudging is ...

Every GM worth something is able to pilot a narrative to where they want it to be and without touching the dice. Doing so by "ignoring" die results is something mostly inexperienced GMs will do, and only as a last resort (what kind of last resort will be explored later). The dark truth about this is, then: if your GM wants to do something you'd feel "robbed" about if they'd tell you, they'll have PLENTY of chances to do so before any kind of rolling is involved, even to a degree where you will NEVER be able to get even an idea that it happened.

Because that's the main thing GMs do: they adjust their games towards the outcome they think appropriate. Always has been like that.

Even if they are not happy with a die result, it is easy enough to find ways AROUND a result that shifts a narrative away from what is happening. Attack targets are switched, special abilities ignored, NPCs make "dumb" decisions ... The list goes on and on. Rolled a heavy encounter but the group is in no shape to deal with it? Have them rest first, trigger the encounter then. I could go on.

Admit it, it's a lot ... [source]

But is that already fudging? Some people seem to believe so.

My point is, part of the game is trusting the GM to make the right call most of the time while being able to adjust all elements towards a good game that might go sideways. Most games even explicity state so: the GM is the arbiter of the rules, in ALL ASPECTS. That includes, imo, the dice, and it is not arbitrarily so, or to do "harm" to the players, but to ensure the integrity of the gaming experience.

There are now those who will say that a GM deciding a roll is "wrong" and therefor can be ignored, "fudges" in the sense of the word because the rules used that led to the roll are ignored, and players playing by those rules are, therefor, cheated out of a legit result.

Well, let me tell you a little something about game design, then.

Because games are machines, too ...

... and machines can go wrong, every now and then. What I'm saying is, there is no role-playing game out there that addresses all possible scenarios, including those it was written for. Add adventures and splatbooks and different authors, even lack of playtesting, and you'll get a collection of rules that will fail a group every so often, IF not a GM steps in to adjust towards the intention of the game. Towards its ideal (or gestalt?).

Mostly it is little things that need adjusting. That's an important part of it for ALL role-playing games, because it is important to realize that GMs need to find consistent ways to play a game WAY before they even introduce "house rules". And for a plethora of reasons, too, like when rules are not well written or clear enough in aspects.

The oldest role-playing games we know are great examples of that. We are, to this day, exploring the intricacies of what OD&D means or how it is played. I'd say it is important to find common ground like that, even if it takes decades to get there. That said, role-playing games are little machines used by individual GMs, and both of them need to click to find their unique version of that game, again, towards the ideal the game proposes.

Switch between groups playing the same game, and you'll find those nuances of interpretations even among those who play RAW. In a sense, GMs are necessary elements of games, just like a driver is a crucial part of a car (again with the car analogy ...).

I'm a great proponent of writing rules in a way that allows those using them the same experience they'd have when the designer is GMing it. Actually quite difficult to achieve, believe it or not, and not done often enough. Even if done properly, the amount of playing a new game needs before a GM can achieve mastery of that game, especially if it is more on the "crunchy" side (say, AD&D is a good amount of crunch many would already shun nowadays), is hours upon hours of play-time and preparation.

What it takes, then, is a series of lessions that is bound to be riddled with misunderstandings and mistakes and short term adjustments, just for playing the game while learning it. At some point all playing in a group will be content with how they play the game (or rather, how they interact with the game).

All part of the learning process. [source]

And then you get an errata that changes some of the assumptions you had to work with, or even a new edition that actually expands on the established! What I'm saying is, playing a role-playing game is always a work in progress, even for those who wrote it.

Which begs the question: what game are people playing, then? And where does the "cheating" in this process start? Is it even legitimite to call it "fudging" or "cheating" if one where to look honestly at what GMs are doing?

The second truth about fudging ...

One thing you'll experience on X is that ALL issues end up being argued along a binary of extremes, even if the issue is not easily divided into just two sides. I feel that is the case here, too, because while one side took umbrage in the idea that a GM might adjust die results and called that "fudging" or even "cheating", the other side claimed it is necessary for "the story" to "fudge" occasionally. For instance to save a PC from death.

And all of a sudden, it was "storygamers" versus "role-players" ... or something along those lines. With the problem framed like that, a proper discussion ended up being impossible and what was left was taking sides.

BUT those are NOT true opposites. Although they understand how they play the game very differently and like to fight over how to play "properly". So a fight it was.

Anyway, the thing is that the original game already relied A LOT on people filling the gaps they found. And it was a game full of gaps, which is easily enough proven, since no one group played like the other, so diverse had the different interpretations been (Gygax, arguably, had to write AD&D to have his interpretation of what they had published originally, canonized). 

In many cases that made additional rules necessary, in other cases gaps had filled easily with, well, narrative tools. I think the original game was seen as a guideline of what to play, not a set of rules how to play, if that makes any sense. What I mean is, D&D is (was?) an idea of a game for and foremost, and that ideal is ABOVE the rules. The source, if you will.

In a sense we never stopped exploring what that first pitch proposed 50 years ago actually means, as far as rules are concerned as well as all social aspects of it and how all of that interacts.

So the "fudging" both sides are talking about is, more often than not, the clumsy attempt to work towards that ideal. I firmly believe that. And while one side sees more the mechanical aspect of the game as dominant (hence the umbrage), it's the other side that is too far into the narrative aspects of the game to see any issue.

Both sides aim for an ideal of a game that the other side doesn't play while ignoring that both ideals are variants of a more removed, a pure ideal of the game. And they all adjust the rules one way or another down the line, just with different preferences.

In summary I'd say that people often confuse WHAT they are playing (role-playing games) with HOW they are playing (the specific set of rules and customs they are using). The one is a meta, if you will, of what the game can be, the other is an attempt towards that ideal in form of a set of rules. If you GMed more than one game in your life, you know you bring that meta to other games.

The "meta" isn't a moving target ...

All right, I think that last point needs some clarification. What's the "meta" or "ideal" or "gestalt" of role-playing games? And how are those two positions not opposites?! In order to answer both, we'd have to answer what lightning actually was in that bottle that is the original game. That's not as easy to pin down as one would think, and maybe something a game designer may have a very different perspective on than most others would.

First of all, if you see D&D as a cultural phenomenon, you'll find very quickly that while D&D was the focus of the hype, it wasn't really about D&D at all. D&D was the entry point to be part of something that went beyond what people knew about games and gaming. And by a huge margin, too.

Remember, no computers to speak of yet, war games had been the pinnacle of complexity as far as board games went but had also been VERY fringe, and beyond that you got some classics (chess, monopoly and so on) and some simple games and toys. Compared to that, D&D was a quantum leap.

But towards what?

Primarily I see two strong basic tenets, the first big one being EXPLORATION with a hint of danger (the UNKNOWN and CHANCE), the second one being the promise of GROWTH (gathering EXPERIENCE and KNOWLEDGE). There are a couple of secondary tenets as well, mostly things put in place to enhance the primary ones, chief among them would be having a guide, of sorts, that evaluates your progress (the GM) AND a group of mutuals that alternate between witnessing and playing.

A third important aspect attached to the original premise would be that it happens by way of cooperative storytelling (in the most basic sense).

And there you have it, the secret sauce that make rpg tick and spawned several billion dollar industries. A bit of gambling, some school-of-life type of learning and a bit of cooperative campfire storytelling in a structured and controlled small group setting. D&D hit the Zeitgeist right on the nerve with its proposal and it would weave its magic through a complete culture for decades to follow.

It is the "what" I was talking about.

The "how", now, are the different expressions that can have. All play around with the dials outlined above, and we saw several surges of innovation in the last 50 years (how about exploring desires? ... Vampire:TM), as well as some setbacks (arguably corporate culture aiming to make role-playing games costly theme park experiences) and some experiments (games without an element of chance, solo rpgs ...).

All of it is fair game, of course, and all of it helped the hobby to nail that higher ideal, BUT we are not yet done doing so. As a matter of fact, we might not live to see that happen.

Think about Chess, for instance, a game already over 500 of years old (older if you take precursers into account). You know when the last revision of the rules we know had been? 2023.

2023!

So it's STILL discussed what the "true" gestalt of that game is. But Chess can show you another thing, too: at some point a version gained popularity that appeared to be superiour to all other variants. It's a bit of a transfer to imagine the same for rol-playing games in general, but for D&D it is very much possible ... just not yet done.

Because, although it seems to be pretty easy to pin down an agreeable version of the basic rules, scope, best practice and GM advice are very much still a matter of discourse.

That is to say, all those "how to"s capture aspects of the "what", but not entirely so. And that's important to acknowledge, because (and here we go full circle) all honest attempts carry a piece of the truth and are, therefor, not wrong within their confines. Or rather, arguing one case does not negate the other because both might be true.

In that sense, where a GM "adjusts" in a game and to what degree is entirely up to individual compromise. Higher degrees of compromise are usually not possible, but may occur within certain groups of games. A "final truth" or a "one true way" has not yet been found.

It's not "fudging", then?

"Fudging" is, as far as I'm concerned, a misnomer for what it aims to describe in the context of the work a GM does to make the game happen. There are, for sure, examples of bad practice among GMs out there, but I think all can agree that Gamemasters who actually "cheat" (which would be abusing the rules to achieve something that has nothing to do with the game) should NOT GM a game.

Don't abuse the game for ill goals ... [source]

Other than that, all I see is that it is within the broader idea of what a GM can do or should be able to do, sometimes maybe even HAS to do. Experienced GMs will not even bother with the dice but easily work around any result they might get but not like. Beyond that, if players are bothered by it and want to take the dice as they come, well, that's one way of playing it. Just not the way of playing it.

The whole notion of calling it fudging already implies something fishy is done on the sly, so I wouldn't go and apply it to anything a GM does in the game to begin with. A GM should have the best of the group at heart. Always. And people should agree what that means in their game, of course, but the far more important point is that in order to achieve that, GMs have to work with what they get, which is never perfect.

Can't be, for all the reasons summoned above. It also is a tough gig to do on the side AND for free (in general). People seem to forget that, too. So when I hear arguments like "he cheated the character out of their death" or whatever, I think, what an ungrateful piece of shit do you need to be to bring that to a table and denigrate the good work done for you?

Because that's what it is, most of the time, good work and good intentions.

So I think it'd be a good idea to not call anything a GM does "fudging" or "cheating" as long as they are within the realm of doing their "job". You can still diagree with the solutions a GM finds for the problems a game poses, but it is presumptious that someone got robbed of something because of a difference in taste or approach.

Just be kind to people, for fuck sake, especially if they take the time of their day to do something for you.

Just be nice ...

My take?

I roll all of it in the open, most of the time (there are games with mechanics that make it necessary for a GM to withold the result, however). I also don't need to adjust dice rolls, as I think it is a nice challenge to weave results into the game I don't "like". GMs are players, too, you know. But I'm ALSO doing this for over 30 years now, and it was a long road to get to where I'm right now with it.

Unexperienced me, decades ago, in my teens, maybe even early 20s ... I might have taken a liberty or two with the results every now and then. In ALL those cases, swear to god, it was because I thought I saw a better outcome by ignoring a result. It's, imo, all part of the process of getting this role of being a GM done properly and finding your own voice.

You can't tell me there's anything wrong with that.

There's also the somewhat prevalent idea of "role-playing as sports" that NEEDS consistency in the rules to the degree you'd expect with war games or games like Chess. It is problematic, as you can see outlined above (no rpg is THAT well written, to my knowledge), but that would (again) cook down to something a table agrees on, not a general "truth" or a way of playing that'd protect players from the system failing them at the fringes.

Beyond that I see with concern how our perception what the game is shifted a fair bit away from the idea that the GM is the head honcho at their table, undermining their authority constantly, reducing them to being mere entertainers in the long run.

I don't play that way, and I don't write games for people like that, but I see the opinions behind those shifts permeating through all the discussions. But that and "player conduct" (or lack thereof) may be isues for another post.

In the end, if someone plays the game differenty, ask them how they made that work for their group and what's fun about it, instead of going on a crusade. Maybe you'll learn something about how you play and why in the process. Everybody wins that way.

Let's close with my favorite Bob Ross D&D meme, shall we?

Everyone needs a friend ... [source]

-------------------------------------

MINIMUS LUDUS by Mark van Vlack is still new on OBS. It is a very lite rules rpg that comes with EIGHT complete worlds to explore and play around with for one shots or even short campaigns. Check it out if you want to support our work here!

-------------------------------------

I'd like to close this post again with that little mantra I've learned about a couple of weeks ago, Ho'oponopono (a great article about it can be found here). It keeps having a positive impact on my life, and I feel we all need something like this right now (or always, actually), so here you go:

I'm sorry!

Please forgive me.

Thank you.

I love you ...

Introducing Minimus Ludus to the World (also, 500th post!)

Hello, friends and neighbors. I hope the year is treating you fine so far! As it happens, I got busy again and managed to get another little game. This time, another first with my little publishing endeavor, a game not written and designed by me, but by my good friend Mark van Vlack. I did editing and layout, eddy Punk added a couple of scenarios ... but I'm getting ahead of myself. Lets talk about it!

Get it on OBS!

A game, written by a friend

Mark is a well seasoned game designer. He's doing it for years now. Decades, even. And it shows whenever he tackles a new project or revises one of his numerous old games, which seems to happen every other month. Thing is, he doesn't really have any interest in getting them published "properly". The odd pdf or PoD here and there, but all very much the "I needed to have this in some form for my own table, so I might as well share it"-kind of approach.

I love talking games with this guy. Always insightful and seeing something I might have missed in my designs. I think it is fair to say that we inspired each other for several ideas that made their ways into our games here and there. It is that healthy and productive exchange you'd always like to have with your peers.

Anyway, I've been dabbling with this publishing thingy for some time now, and we've talked a couple of times about me publishing some of his. We did come close once, when I edited and layouted his role-playing game Phase Abandon. It is a game you can get for free on OBS right now, if you are interested to find out how this guy ticks. PA is anotehr great game of his I can only recommend. Saw lots of play-testing, too!

Which leads to another thing: his friends love his games. Check out his discord, if you don't believe me.

Anyway, he's a good egg and I'm happy to call him a friend. 

Minimus Ludus - All the Worlds, Pocket-Sized!

As for the publishing gig, just the other day he told me that he wrote a very small game for the Bachelor party of one of his friends. The challenge he gave himself was to make it a complete game with no more than 1000 words (I belive ... no more than two pages A5, anyhow). AND HE DID IT!

If you read this blog, you might be aware that I'm not really into lite role-playing games. Or rather, in how they are marketed in our little niche of the hobby. They take shortcuts by assuming an experienced gamemaster, but often don't own up to it, claiming instead it's "how the game was supposed to be played", which is, on the face of it, bullshit. Of course.

But they do have their perks, obviously. For one, they are easily expanded on. Preparation, if you know what you are doing, is easy as fuck. Just a couple of pages to read, ready to go soon after. For big groups, or for people with no huge amount of time to play, right on the money. IF the GM knows what he's doing and all you want to do is small one-shots or very short campaigns.

I saw over the years a couple of games I actually admired for their short and concise approach to role-playing games, Macchiato Monsters being one of them, for instance. There is an art to writing a short rpg that actually works.

Minimus Ludus is such a game, in my opinion.

I'll tell you why, too: The role of the dice in this game is minimal, but not insignificant. It is not so much about how high your roll is (although that factors in, too), but instead about what you can summon as aid to your roll that makes the game click. Those elements you may summon are all narrative in nature, but convey bonuses if applied.

That means, if you play to the elements of the story and setting you are playing in, it does the two-punch of making the setting come alive AND results in a better result. There's also a meta-currency element to it where GM and players can trade story elements.

I really like that (maybe for obvious reasons?). So characters come, for instance, with a weakness and the GM can exploit that, but it costs the GM as well to o so, the benefit for the player being, that they get a Token they can burn later for a benefit ... 

Behold the character sheet!

Another aspect I like is how it is conceptualized to be expanded on by the setting you use it for. There is a very abstract but highly functioning core that is easily altered to fit all kinds of settings. There's even a meta story how all those worlds (or "Pockets", how he calls it) connect.

The game came with five settings already written by Mark. When we agreed that this will be the first game of his published under my label, Eddy Punk added three takes of his to the fold.

That's EIGHT SETTINGS out of the gate before you even have to come up with your own (for which the game actually also provides guidelines!). I don't have to tell you: that's a lot of gaming right there, even if you are not into ALL the scenarios.

That's not Star Wars. Not at all.

Lets get lost on an island!

Anyway. We talked about it and agreed, I did editing and layout, and now you can buy Mark and me a coffee by purchasing this on the OBS flavor of your choice.

In return you will get a fun little game that does a lot of heavy lifting with a very light engine. Something you can take for a spin when there's not enough time to play something a bit more complex.

I really like it and I'm happy to have this game as part of my portfolio. And I hope you guys will check it out!

It will bring you some joy, I'm sure of it.

What else is new?

With Minimus Ludus out of the gate, the next big project is the pdf for ORWELL ... It needs a couple of small mistakes taken care of as well as bookmarks and hyperlinks, but then the pdf will be ready for public consumption. The PoD gets a little facelift as well, while we are at it.

While that's happening, I'll keep on writing Angry Little Aliens VERSUS King Arthur. That turned out to be a fun project and it's very well doable in the couple of months ... so I'm confident that it will see the light of day soon!

Other than that? I rediscovered my love for all the small publications out there and want to spend more time with reading what piled up on my desk ... digitally and PoD both. We'll see how far I'll get with that, but if I do so, I will talk about it here on the blog.

Beyond that ... who knows. There's a little game I plan to write for Halloween this year. That has a very high chance of happening. And there is at least one supplement for ORWELL I can see myself tackling this year, most of all because I love the premise of it (read about it here, if you haven't already).

More on that soon, I guess.

And then there's also the big projects like Brawlers! and be67 that should see some work done this year. I had high hopes to get be67 done in 2024. It's possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath ... On the other hand, the stuff I want to do with be67 doesn't allow for much more delay. It is piling up here and at some point I have to get things done to start new things.

Also: Lost Songs of the Nibelungs will get some love this year. I already reactivated the old group of play-testers, now I have to sit down and see where that game's at. It would be rad as hell to have that fully conceptualized until the end of the year. I have an idea or two that will be talked about here on the blog as well this year.

So there is, if I may say so, lots to look forward to here on the blog and as far as publications go. I'll keep pushing, because what else is there to do?

If you have any ideas what else should happen here on the blog, or even if you are interested in the status of any of th odd things I've talked about here on the last couple of years, feel free to drop a comment! No one ever does, recently.

Other then that, I'd like to close this post with a little mantra I've learned about a couple of weeks ago, Ho'oponopono (a great article about it can be found here). It really had a positive impact on my life, and I feel we all need something like this right now (or always, actually), so here you go:

I'm sorry!

Please forgive me.

Thank you.

I love you ...