|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 22, 2008 20:44:23 GMT -6
Dad! Mom! Play that dragon with ME!" How many gamers have heard this from their children? Your kids see all your gaming material and are fascinated. They want to play too! But what if they aren't old enough to read? What if they can only count to 10 or 20? And they do always seem to ask when you are the least prepared. Kids, Castles & Caves is a very simple rpg that allows children to take the role of a Hero – a Knight, Wizard, Elf, Dwarf, Fairy or Halfling. The entire game is based upon a d6 and includes easy suggestions for using miniatures as well! A good selection of traditional monsters is included as well as tables and descriptions of magic items. Kids, Castles & Caves is designed to provide gamers with an easy and quick way to role play with their children. In only a few minutes of preparation or even on the fly, you and the kids are having fun! Included are the Rules for playing, the Heroes you can play, the Monsters you can fight and the Magical Treasure you can find! Also included are three sample adventuring maps: A set of Caves, a Tower and a Dungeon. Pdf is available at: Yourgamesnow.com: www.yourgamesnow.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=2456&zenid=8ac6b722dac8a5c4e9ea20f2163ad596RPGNOW.com www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=58575FULL-COLOR Print version is available at Lulu.com: www.lulu.com/content/4596275Be sure to pick up Arion Games' bonus pack with 21 hero paper miniatures, 20 monster paper miniatures, 15 battlemats and 10 pages of illustrations for use as handouts! Bonus Set pdf at Yourgamesnow.com: www.yourgamesnow.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=2455&zenid=8ac6b722dac8a5c4e9ea20f2163ad596Bonus Set at RPGNOW.com: www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=58574&src=FrontPage
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Oct 23, 2008 7:22:16 GMT -6
John, is this your creation??
I have to run, but I'll be back to check out all those links; this looks like exactly what my 4.5 yr-old needs! I have more thoughts on this, but the whole paper miniatures thing is key for this age!
Woot!
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 23, 2008 8:05:11 GMT -6
John, is this your creation?? I have to run, but I'll be back to check out all those links; this looks like exactly what my 4.5 yr-old needs! I have more thoughts on this, but the whole paper miniatures thing is key for this age! Woot! Yes, this in my baby. I have three boys, ages 8, 6, and 4 that have been playing this for over a year now. I really hope you like it.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Oct 23, 2008 11:58:08 GMT -6
I picked up a copy already.
If you're expecting something radical and revolutionary, you won't find it in Coleston's Castles & Caves. However, if you're looking for a simplified rules set that is built with the youngster in mind then it's a good read.
Coleston's PDF contains basic info for classes, spells, monsters, treasures, and so on. It's a very streamlined version of the rules.
I've only read through about half but have skimmed though the whole thing. I like it.
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 23, 2008 12:29:10 GMT -6
Thanks Finarvyn.
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Oct 23, 2008 15:25:43 GMT -6
If you're expecting something radical and revolutionary, you won't find it in Coleston's Castles & Caves. However, if you're looking for a simplified rules set that is built with the youngster in mind then it's a good read. Coleston's PDF contains basic info for classes, spells, monsters, treasures, and so on. It's a very streamlined version of the rules. There are a couple of websites devoted purely to rpg's for kids. Looking through them (and looking through the dusty cobwebs of my memory), I don't think anyone before has formally published what amounts to a highly simplified D&D for children. There have been plenty that are aimed at older children and most seem much more complex and less "D&D" than John's creation. I think this product will fill a gap that has been sadly missing for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by apeloverage on Oct 23, 2008 18:37:11 GMT -6
There are a couple of websites devoted purely to rpg's for kids. Can you post the addresses?
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Oct 23, 2008 19:58:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Oct 23, 2008 20:46:49 GMT -6
I just downloaded it on the strength of the comments here and the preview itself, though I must admit that the character section illo of the halfling creeped me out a bit... I'll read it this weekend and post my thoughts sometime next week! Aaron
|
|
|
Post by apeloverage on Oct 24, 2008 1:09:46 GMT -6
Thanks! I liked the title "Meddling Kids".
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Oct 24, 2008 9:30:00 GMT -6
I've printed out Kids, Castles & Caves and plan to give it a read this weekend.
First impressions:
* Yeah, some of the artwork is a bit creepy. I found myself wondering if a background would help at all.
* Some of the tables are awkwardly formatted. They've been narrowed to the point that the word "Attack" (for example) doesn't fit on one line, so it wraps. That just bothers the proofreader in me.
* Another thought I had was that the monster descriptions could be done either next to or on the back of the illustration. That way, you could hold up the picture and the kids could see what they're fighting, but not necessarily read the text. (I was thinking flash cards, but I don't want to trigger any school-related trauma...)
* Also with the classes. Especially in PDF, I'd like to see each class get its own page to itself; that way, you can print out that page and hand it to the kid playing (for instance) the Cleric. And they have all the info right there.
Again, these are just my impressions. I'll read it this weekend and see what else I have to say.
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 24, 2008 9:52:11 GMT -6
* Yeah, some of the artwork is a bit creepy. I found myself wondering if a background would help at all. Arion Games wanted to make paper minis for the game and they let me use their art for the game. I choose the "good" halfling. * Some of the tables are awkwardly formatted. They've been narrowed to the point that the word "Attack" (for example) doesn't fit on one line, so it wraps. That just bothers the proofreader in me. Well I'll be! Must have been an evil spell cast on the pdf. I'll get that fixed. * Another thought I had was that the monster descriptions could be done either next to or on the back of the illustration. That way, you could hold up the picture and the kids could see what they're fighting, but not necessarily read the text. (I was thinking flash cards, but I don't want to trigger any school-related trauma...) Again, Arion Games has released a paper mini bonus set that includes "flash-card-like" monster illustrations that the monster descriptions can be printed on the back. * Also with the classes. Especially in PDF, I'd like to see each class get its own page to itself; that way, you can print out that page and hand it to the kid playing (for instance) the Cleric. And they have all the info right there. Another good suggestion. Most of the kids I been playing with don't really want to read the Hero descriptions (some of them are too young to read) but I could see how useful that could be. Thanks! The other issues I've had pointed out are the misspelling of "Halfling" on page 7 and the tower map is more oval than circle. For some folks the girl on the front gives them the creeps - others are creeped out by by the halfling on the front and the one in the Hero description! I just hope folks find it easy to use when gaming with their young children. I have amended the pdf.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Oct 24, 2008 10:57:45 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 24, 2008 11:07:58 GMT -6
The mini's should be customizable. A beleive that plain image files (though they might be in ppt format) are also included with the minis.
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 24, 2008 14:01:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Oct 27, 2008 20:06:44 GMT -6
...I don't think anyone before has formally published what amounts to a highly simplified D&D for children. There have been plenty that are aimed at older children and most seem much more complex and less "D&D" than John's creation. I think this product will fill a gap that has been sadly missing for a long time. This is exactly right. For instance, Faery's Tale by Firefly Games is an excellent product. It even has a nifty mechanic for using colored glass beads instead of dice, which could be useful for playing with lots of different kinds of kids. However, the rest of it's complicated enough that I wouldn't really be inclined to play it with kids younger than 9 or 10. Plus, it ain't D&D. John's game, otoh, I can easily see playing with my 4.5 yr-old and his 5.5 yr-old friend (whose dad is a gaming friend of mine.) And, as greyharp mentions, it IS D&D, in more than just flavor. What I Liked:The hard focus on level. I think it's hard to argue that anything but level is the engine that drives all editions of D&D. KC&C ditches ability scores and saving throws, for the better I think, given the audience. They add color, but their effects can easily be replicated through the lens of level. Plus, they're going to confuse any kid younger than, say, 12. Heck, I've seen them confuse adults... Race=Class. I know it's heresy to some, but this is how I was introduced to the game back in 1982 with Moldvay Basic. I found it intuitive when I was a kid, and I imagine that's still the case for a lot of kids. The Fairy. When I get the chance to run this for my 8 yr-old niece, I can guarantee you it's what she'll choose. Innate magical abilities for the Wizard and the Cleric. I'm currently a big fan of the Chainmail Wizard. I think natural "magical" abilities make them more, well, magical! No little kid I know of would find any pleasure in playing a standard MU or Cleric, for obvious reasons. No equipment tables. Much better just to tell them what they have, and work out any desired personalization. Advice on magical items. Solid advice, especially with kids in mind. They LOVE magic items, and with such stripped-down rules, they're needed to help add some individuality. The tone. It reads like it was written with a 9 or 10 yr-old reader in mind. I love the idea that a bright 4th grader could pick this up, read it, and start playing with her friends. Questions:Why cap levels at 3? I mean, I absolutely agree there should be a level cap, but my inclination would be to set it at 6, and reduce the number of Play Points needed to actually advance. It'd give more room to see a real character difference between from the beginning of the character's career to the end. Why no other spells for the magic-using characters? Did you envision the gap being filled by magic items? I fear the Wizard especially might become tiresome after awhile with nothing to do but magically blast his foes! Why only d6? I'm guessing for the sake of simplicity, and I would've agreed, but my 4.5 yr-old has recently become fascinated with the whole range of polyhedral madness. Surprisingly, he has no problem reading any of them, except maybe the d20. I immediately thought, when I saw the increased damage tied to levels, "it'd be cool if this increased through die-type." Maybe not straight "d6-d8-d10", etc., but something like that. Why not add a short essay on making up adventures? Right now the text simply assumes that you know what the characters should be doing, where they should be doing it, and how to create that environment. It wouldn't need to be groundbreaking, just some guidelines and maybe an actual, short adventure. Observations:There are a fair number of typos. This didn't bother me so much buying the $5 pdf, but if I'd bought the $12 printed version, I'd have been annoyed. There's no actual separate explanation of how combat is resolved. Right now it needs to be pieced together from the definitions in the "What the Words Mean" section and the example of play. Especially if you are writing this with a kid reader in mind, I think a clear algorithm for both a round of combat and the mechanics of attk/def/dmg is absolutely necessary. The wizard description doesn't include how much damage is done by a Magic Blast. The play example implies that it's a 1d6, but it isn't stated explicitly. It's not clear how big a fairy is. I'm assuming you meant for them to be small, but the description doesn't mention size. The intro states that a Lvl 2 monster is more powerful than a Lvl 1 character, etc., and the bit at the beginning of the monster section tells you to give your monster a level, but then none of the actual monsters has level as a part of its description, and it's not mentioned anywhere else. In the "What the Words Mean" section, it says that Play Points are earned for fighting monsters, finding treasure and solving problems. However, the only appearance of PPts elsewhere is on the character level tables and in the monster descriptions. Again, as with combat, I think a clear explanation of the gaining and use of experience is critical for the young reader. Whew! In summary, I think there are a few vague points in the text that need to be addressed, but overall I'm eager to give it a try. I would almost certainly houserule in the polyhedral crowd, some extra spells (probably constructed as abilities), and a higher level cap. I might also add a "barbarian" or a "warrior" to contrast with the knight. But, you know, that's just my oldskool-tinkerer genes kicking in... John, you've done all the work and then some for me to get my kid (and maybe some others) playing early. This is obviously a labor of love. You deserve an Exalt! for your work. Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 27, 2008 21:10:24 GMT -6
Hey thanks Aaron! I sure appreciate all the comments and suggestions. I originally had levels go up to five and used all the dice. I brought it down to three because most little one's only play for about an hour. I chose to use only d6 because nearly every household has at least one. Did you use the amended pdf? You were supposed to get an email stating that a new version is available (I'm asking because RPGNOW is supposed to automatically send out an email to folks who have have purhased the pdf when a new version is up-loaded. Either way, if you wanted to share with me the type-o's, I'd make it worth your while.
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 28, 2008 1:45:57 GMT -6
There are a fair number of typos. This didn't bother me so much buying the $5 pdf, but if I'd bought the $12 printed version, I'd have been annoyed. I have been told by my chief proof-reader that I released this before he got his full crack at proofing it and that you are being quite kind here, Aaron. Thank you. I'll get an amended file up for the game soon. It's not clear how big a fairy is. I'm assuming you meant for them to be small, but the description doesn't mention size. There's a question I hadn't though to address (but a good one)! I'll have to ask my fairy expert, Greyharp about that one! He put the fairy together after there was a small out-cry from play-testers with girls that we must have fairies! (I have three, young boys who have never asked to play a fairy.) Again, thanks for your review. It sounds like if I can address some vague areas in the text as well as some type-o's, I can get this game perfected.
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Oct 28, 2008 2:54:44 GMT -6
I'll have to ask my fairy expert, Greyharp about that one! The Fairy was my only contribution and initially I was going to suggest that they were the same size as Halflings. But by leaving it vague, I figured it gave freedom to both parents and their daughters to decide for themselves the exact nature of a Fairy (kinda 0e style ). I also figured some young girls would like to imagine themselves to be "grown up" tall Fairies, while others would like to be tiny like Tinkerbell, and a bit of vagueness here would be apt.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Oct 28, 2008 8:31:25 GMT -6
To most people though, vagueness is like incompleteness. Unless you have a statement about old school philosophy in there, actually saying they come in various sizes would probably reduce a lot of confusion and frustration people might have.
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 28, 2008 9:36:31 GMT -6
Hey guys, your honest comments on this game have led me to start a new blog on my trials and tribulations (nearly all self-inflicted) are now on display in my new blog, "Confessions of an Amateur RPG Publisher." The first two entries are entitled, "You Can't Do It All by Yourself" and "How I Became an Amateur RPG Publisher." My hope is that it will help others keep from making the same mistakes I have. carpgp.blogspot.com/But keep the comments and suggestions coming!
|
|
|
Post by verhaden on Oct 28, 2008 11:36:46 GMT -6
For those wishing to reduce such mistakes, I suggest looking into a style guide. There are many available in a wide amount of formats (MLA, APA, etc.) I would recommend the following book to anybody who wants to write or publish: www.amazon.com/Short-Guide-Writing-Biology-Guides/dp/0321385926There's a lot of information in that book that would definitely help those who want to self-publish. Some literature writers might balk at using a scientific guide, but it really does wonders across the board. Flowing prose is great, but there's also something to be said for pointed conciseness and an economy of words. Besides, this book contains a lot of information that's geared towards getting your papers peer reviewed and published in journals. And, to be honest, the typical RPG rule-book has more in common with a scientific paper than it does with Moby Dick.
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Oct 28, 2008 14:24:05 GMT -6
To most people though, vagueness is like incompleteness. Sorry blackbarn, I found this statement hilarious on an OD&D forum. But of course we're not talking about OD&D, so fair point. Does anyone else feel that a lack of physical description of fairies (other than to say they have wings) in a kiddies game, is a bad thing? Certainly any statement about old school philosophy would be very much out of place in such a basic and concise game, considering its target audience.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Oct 29, 2008 8:14:18 GMT -6
To most people though, vagueness is like incompleteness. Sorry blackbarn, I found this statement hilarious on an OD&D forum. But of course we're not talking about OD&D, so fair point. Does anyone else feel that a lack of physical description of fairies (other than to say they have wings) in a kiddies game, is a bad thing? Certainly any statement about old school philosophy would be very much out of place in such a basic and concise game, considering its target audience. I agree, and wouldn't have said it if this was OD&D, but it's not. Now, I'm sure kids wouldn't worry about whether or not there was a statement about fairy sizes, they will just make it up. I was thinking more of consideration for any non-RPG-playing adults who may be helping them. And I didn't really mean to suggest an old school philosophy bit be included.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Oct 29, 2008 14:24:53 GMT -6
I think my reaction to the "what do fairies look like?" question (or dwarves, or elves, or whatever) might be to ask the kids. My daughter told me they were a few inches tall and fly around like Tinkerbell from Peter Pan. My son said that fairies were fae folk from Irish mythology.
I can imagine playing fairies either way, so why not leave it open-ended and let the campaign evolve as it may on its own. So, the lack of size information doesn't bother me at all. If my kids don't have a good answer, I'll just make it up on the spot.
I encouraged John to post this thread becasue I see his game as being quite similar to OD&D, even if it's based on somewhat different mechanics. I think there are enough vague spots in the rules to be "house ruled" and don't think this provides problems at all.
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by Haldo Bramwise on Oct 31, 2008 6:44:24 GMT -6
I think my reaction to the "what do fairies look like?" question (or dwarves, or elves, or whatever) might be to ask the kids. My daughter told me they were a few inches tall and fly around like Tinkerbell from Peter Pan. My son said that fairies were fae folk from Irish mythology. I can imagine playing fairies either way, so why not leave it open-ended and let the campaign evolve as it may on its own. So, the lack of size information doesn't bother me at all. If my kids don't have a good answer, I'll just make it up on the spot. I encouraged John to post this thread becasue I see his game as being quite similar to OD&D, even if it's based on somewhat different mechanics. I think there are enough vague spots in the rules to be "house ruled" and don't think this provides problems at all. Just my two cents. Yes, I do not intend to spell out every aspect and detail of the game. It's more of a toolbox for playing with young children and much less a rules system. Young children usually want to just play. This game is set up so a gamer can play an hour or so with their kids. Basically, the really young one's can tell you what they want to do (search the room, attack the critter, etc) and the gamemaster (usually the parent or older sibling) can very easily rule on what they do (role d6 to search or attack or howfar they can runaway). We can always add more monsters, magic items and spells - maybe even a few new rules that follow the same general pattern as the rest. But it has never been intended to be a full-blown system with every detail spelled out. But anyone else can take the game farther, if they want to!
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Nov 2, 2008 14:15:01 GMT -6
John, not to quibble with your self-definition of KC&C, but if my years participating in the indie-game design world, as well as subsequent years trying to grok ODD, taught me anything, it's that a rules system, no matter how "lite" it might be viewed, is still, contextually, a complete system---"toolbox" is just another name for rules with a particular purpose.
I bring this up only because it seems you really do intend for this to be picked up, read and used by an older sibling, etc. For them to get the most out of what you've written, you'll need to be explicit on what tools your box contains, and how they should go about using them. Or so it seems to me, anyway.
As for the Fairy thing, I'd have to agree with blackbarn that, in this case, it struck me as an oversight. I certainly have no problem with open-ended descriptions, e.g., "Fairies come in many sizes, from no bigger than a human's thumb to only slightly smaller than a halfling. There are also rumors that the Fairy Queen Herself is taller than the tallest Man..." That sort of thing gives guidelines, but leaves much open to the imagination.
Typos: John, if you'd still like, I can comb through my document tomorrow and email you with the results, though it sounds like you have an in-house copy editor. Oh, and no, RPGNow never emailed me about an updated pdf; I'll have to log in and see what it says. As far as I know, the copy I bought is the very first one you uploaded.
|
|
|
Post by greyharp on Nov 2, 2008 15:57:13 GMT -6
John, not to quibble with your self-definition of KC&C, but if my years participating in the indie-game design world, as well as subsequent years trying to grok ODD, taught me anything, it's that a rules system, no matter how "lite" it might be viewed, is still, contextually, a complete system---"toolbox" is just another name for rules with a particular purpose. I bring this up only because it seems you really do intend for this to be picked up, read and used by an older sibling, etc. For them to get the most out of what you've written, you'll need to be explicit on what tools your box contains, and how they should go about using them. Or so it seems to me, anyway. It should be remembered that this game is first and foremost aimed at experienced rpg-playing parents, who want to play an rpg with their young children. It's target audience isn't older children, who can pick the game up and teach themselves. The kids don't need explicit instructions because they will come from their parents. And the parents (who are the true target audience), will in most cases be old farts like us, with a couple of decades of experience playing rpg's and making houserules up on the fly. I think the sort of game you're talking about kesher is already out there - Basic D&D. It'll do the job nicely for the older, more independent child, who will want a more "complete" game. It would be a mistake, I think, to try and put KC&C in the same category as most other rpg's. While perhaps aimed at children 3 to 8 years old, the beauty of it is that it gives the parent the ability to involve their young children, while throwing off the shackles of years of rules-heavy, complex rpg systems. When children play "let's pretend", it's done with an absolute minimum of rules. I believe John has tried to recreate that with KC&C, marrying up an rpg with the age old children's game of make believe.
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Nov 9, 2008 21:50:56 GMT -6
It should be remembered that this game is first and foremost aimed at experienced rpg-playing parents, who want to play an rpg with their young children. It's target audience isn't older children, who can pick the game up and teach themselves. The kids don't need explicit instructions because they will come from their parents. And the parents (who are the true target audience), will in most cases be old farts like us, with a couple of decades of experience playing rpg's and making houserules up on the fly. I think the sort of game you're talking about kesher is already out there - Basic D&D. It'll do the job nicely for the older, more independent child, who will want a more "complete" game. First off, I absolutely agree with your second paragraph. BD&D is what I learned to play with, and it's hard to beat, perhaps never has been beat, for clarity. For a 6th or 7th grader, it'll work just fine. Now, having just gone back through the KC&C rules with a fine-toothed eyeball, I see the source of my own confusion regarding for whom the game text is intended. The two intro pages do make it pretty clear that the rules are meant to be read and utilized by the parent. Fine and good. However, I still have a twofold concern: 1. The text reads to me like it's being written for an eight-year old. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's written poorly; it's just that I can almost hear John's undoubtedly patient parental voice explaining how we're going to do cool stuff in this game. 2. Given an adult intention, I'd almost beg John for a section of advice on running games with young children. I know you can find actual play accounts out there online, but here's a guy who's actually written the first real dnd rpg for kids, and who undoubtedly has more experience playing with them than me and quite likely many of his intended audience. Even just a few paragraphs on what he's found most useful for making the session as fun as possible would be really useful. * edited for grammar
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Nov 10, 2008 21:05:56 GMT -6
One lesson I'm taking away is that "blind" testers (folks who try your game without your hand-holding) can make a big difference in quality! Apparently, that's how the Faeries were introduced, right? And if you'd given your "finished" product to enough people seeing the game for the first time through your target audience's eyes ... maybe they'd have noticed some of those rough spots.
|
|