Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Chris Garner
Brewer, aikidoka, game master, cat whisperer, and all-around swell guy.
Brewer, aikidoka, game master, cat whisperer, and all-around swell guy.

Chris's posts

Post has attachment
Just noticed that Alan is back on G+, though he hasn't rejoined this community. Instead, he's trying to get playtesters for a Dresden Files RPG (FATE) one-shot:

And still hawking "SimpleDnD":

I guess he decided two months away and we'd all forget...

For judges and players in the Portland Oregon area, I've started a private G+ community, so that we can meet, organize, chat, and play. If you're interested in joining, drop me a line!

Post has attachment
Ladies and gentlesquids, +Alan B has left the building. But don't worry, you can find him hawking his new project here: And it's allegedly for sale (at least, the "starter book," which I'm guessing is about as useful and complete as anything he ever showed us for AL&C) here:

Well, this doesn't bode well, it appears that Alan B's Google account is gone. All his postings and comments have been deleted from the community, and clicking on links for him takes you to a 404 page. I guess that's the end of that!


If I'm reading the RAW correctly, a character can defend against multiple attacks in a turn with no penalty. This seems to give a big advantage to the defender. I realize that a pack of nameless goons will probably use teamwork to get their skill up to a level where they can challenge a PC, meaning that the PC must make only one defense roll. But what about a situation where two or more named NPCs are attacking? Do we just rely on the defender's increase fate point burn rate to (yes, I'm going to use the word) simulate the difficulty in defending against multiple opponents?

Post has attachment
Would anyone who's participated in one of the playtests for this like to comment? Or, has anyone received the password for the Combat post on the blog ( I'm curious to find out if there's more to this than the 20 or so pages that have been released on the blog or in backer updates, and I don't think I'm the only one.

I've run Sailors on the Starless Sea a couple of times now, but just noticed this in the description of Felan's axe:

"This terrible weapon... inflicts critical his on a threat range expanded by 1 (i.e., a natural roll of 19-20 for most characters, or 18-20 for a warrior or dwarf [emphasis added] who is already at a 19-20 crit range)."

Is this a goof? I checked my book, and didn't see anything about expanded crit ranges for dwarves.

Two questions:

1. What die do monsters roll on a fumble? I have searched the book in vain for this.

2. Has anyone done a conversion of G1-3? I'm having problems scaling it correctly. We have 5th level characters, but DCC giants are WAY more deadly than AD&D ones (2x d24 THAC20 of -1 attacks with av. dam. 26 vs. 1x d20 THAC20 10 attacks with av. dam. 14, for starters).


Does anyone know of a system in a FATE game where setting higher or lower stakes on a challenge or contest yields greater or lesser results - that is, to balance risk for reward? For my ancient Rome game, a character trying to curry favor with the people might throw gladiatorial games. The more he spends (Resource roll), the greater his chance of going into debt (wealth consequence), but also the greater chance that the crowds will love him (social advantage).

Has there ever been any notion of spending the free invocations on advantages or consequences as compels, rather than as a +2 or re-roll? For example, as a consequence in a fight you take "Twisted ankle," and rather than invoking it for a bonus, your foe runs off, compelling you, "You have a twisted ankle, so it makes sense that, unfortunately, you're unable to pursue me. Damn your luck." If you accept, the free invocation is used, and you get a fate point (not from your opponent, but out of thin air). Or, does that unbalance compelling too much?
Wait while more posts are being loaded