(ed: in my original post, I said that Swords & Wizardry WhiteBox was shared under a Creative Commons License, but this was incorrect. It is, in fact, shared under the Open Game License. I've edited the text below to reflect this)
So, I've been reading through the ever-excellent Kevin Crawford's An Echo, Resounding, as well as Sage LaTorra's totally sweet Dungeon World, switching back and forth between the two of them, and I think there's something really powerful to be made between them.
For starters, don't get me wrong: both are awesome and great on their own. The sandbox GMing advice in Red Tide and An Echo, Resounding is useful, flexible, and imminently playable. Where it touches on the specific campaign setting it is evocative enough to get me to want to read more about it despite my firm intention not to play in it. On the other hand, it is light enough and tied enough into standard D&D tropes that any setting-specific content can be easily excised or repurposed. Just about the only thing I'm finding a little bit difficult is that some of the assumptions in the Domain Play rules in An Echo, Resounding assume a technology level and social organization consistent with Imperial China/Shogun era Japan. In a more European flavored milieu, some of the social structures described imply a higher technology level/later historical analog. Since I am going for a Iron Age/Dark Age Scandinavian feel (predominantly) with scattered and primitive bits of "civilization", assuming that domains can dispatch "magistrates" or that there are organized mercantile forces pushes in some different directions than I have in mind. Fortunately, I've done some thinking about bronze/iron age social and economic structure rules, as that is the entire point of my Book of Threes game.
Which segues me nicely into Dungeon World, given Book of Threes' current status as an AW hack. Ever since Tony Dowler threw together some playbooks and GM advice for "Apocalypse D&D", I've been enamored of the implementation of Apocalypse World's rules to Dungeons and Dragons. Imagine my chagrin when I discovered the Dungeon World kickstarter a week after it was successfully funded. Poop. Fortunately, if you're willing to do some work with InDesign, the rules are available as open source (I had to import XML, since my CS4 InDesign won't open the included InDesign files, and my student discount isn't *that* good on CS6). At any rate, they'll be getting my money just as soon as the make the book/pdf available for purchase. It really is a fantastic way to get a lot of what is great about D&D and a lot of what is great about these new-fangled story games/story now games/indie games/whatever in the same package. Reading through the rules makes me want to play it/run it like whoah.
But I've taken to heart Mr. Maliszewski's advice on gamer ADD to heart, and I'm already having a great time with my S&WWB Old School campaign, so I'm mostly resisting the urge. Mostly. But as I opened the post with, I think there is a lot of use to be found in Dungeon World that can be ported to D&D without too much pain, especially since I loves me some kit-bashing, whether with models or with rules systems. So, following are my thoughts on what I plan to do with Dungeon World while still running a game I can call S&WWB with a straight face.
First off, I won't be importing any player moves. I thought long and hard about importing some for areas that aren't "skills" - stuff like "Last Breath" and "When you Make a Perilous Journey". If I ever do import any player moves, it'll be ones like those - stuff that is not a substitute for or supplement to player observation or description of action, but rather a system for covering something that would otherwise purely be me making decisions out of the blue. Because that's where I think Dungeon World has the most to bring to Old School D&D, at least in my case. I don't have nearly 40 years of good Old School Refing practice to fall back on. I do have buy-in to the underlying principles, and I have read through a lot of OSR posts, and I can look back on a fair number of play experiences as emblematic of Old School play, but it's just not automatic to me. So, AW style agendas, principles, and moves are a great way to give myself reminders of how to Old School ref. Fortunately most of what's in the Dungeon World GMing sections is congruent with if not representative of Old School refing. What doesn't match up, I'm going to tweak.
Where these tweaks will take shape is in the reference file I'm creating for myself. I'm taking the Creative Commons Licensed Dungeon World material and chopping it up in InDesign to export into a PDF of just the stuff I want for my current D&D game. With a little more effort I may actually combine it with some of the stuff from Red Tide and An Echo, Resounding, but that stuff is *not* CCL, so if I do, that would not be quite as releasable as a fan supplement. If I get really ambitious, I just might even take the White Box rules (Open Game License, which is similar to CCL) and combine them with the various Ref aids I end up using, and make a one volume Fellhold Edition ruleset for my own use (or to be shared if anybody cares and if I can wrangle a legal version).
Now, I think that the traits system (like the tags system in Stars Without Number, Kevin Crawford's excellent and free sci-fi game) in Red Tide and An Echo, Resounding along with the Location rules and Campaign Region rules more generally could have some really awesome interactions with Fronts, Dangers, and Tags from Dungeon World. I'm not sure what those interactions are just yet, but they both are modular and evocative in a way that supports individual referee decisions while still making the work easier, and I like that a lot. They also both tie directly into how to make those decisions matter in play and to help in moment-to-moment running of the game, which I definitely appreciate. Again, I'll probably post here when I think of something more concrete about how to merge these systems that are both getting my engine going.
In the meantime, check out some of those links I included above if you're not already familiar, they are well worth your time if you're at all interested in RPGs of any stripe.
A Point of Similarity
So, all of my recent posts have been about the Old School Renaissance, and my old school D&D game. If you look to the posts that started this blog, you'll see that I was quite enamored of indie RPGs and forge theory and the like. At first glance this seems like something of a flip-flop, but it was actually from the indie "scene" that I discovered the OSR and became fired up to run a D&D game. And one game design specific thing I think can be found in both camps is a distrust of "skill systems". Now, plenty of old school games use and love skill systems, and some indie games use them to great effect, but it's one of the things taken for granted in late 80's - mid 90's game design that is significantly absent from the earliest D&D or the indiest of indie games.
Here's the thing: skill systems make a *whole lot* of sense. Once you've accepted the premise of deciding things about a fictional world by rolling dice, it's a very short jump to decide such things should be made regular and to hang together. Especially if any of your justification for your rules is in "modeling" the real world (even if it's as simple as stats like strength, intelligence, et cetera). So, it's no surprise that skill systems were introduced to the hobby in its very first few years.
There's a few potential problems with them, though. The worst is probably the fact that the implicit assumption of a skill system is that if you don't have the skill you can't do it, and that if you do have the skill, you must use the skill system to resolve something. This puts you in a position where your master driver character both has to roll to do routine driving and face the chance of failing and is prohibited from cooking, because there's a cooking skill in the big list of skills and you didn't take it. Now, of course, I've picked some especially heinous examples, and plenty of GMs and rules systems have work arounds to prevent such annoying instances, but the that is one of the logical directions for skill system-based play to go in.
So, if you look at pre-supplement OD&D or at lots of cutting-edge modern indie games, you do not see any sort of regularized universal skill mechanic, and I've come to believe that this is a beautiful thing. Don't get me wrong, my anal-retentive, simulation-loving side gets giddy discussing intricately nested area of expertise-skill-focus-specialty type systems that are elegantly executed. But I've come to appreciate the complete opposite as well: replacing any attempt at yoking every possible situation to a rule system with faith in the judgement of one or more players at the table. That's the whole reason the GM/referee role was invented in the first place: a disinterested 3rd party's judgement is one of the most flexible tools you can have for providing open-ended excitement.
Have advances in game design reduced the necessity for relying on unaided referee judgement? Certainly. Is properly guided referee judgement obsolete and useless? Not on your life. I'd argue that Original D&D, at its best, stumbled upon some of the best stuff that is designed into modern systems through its default fallback position of "let the ref decide".
As such, I have made the conscious decision to *not* include any skill systems, proficiencies, or what have you into my D&D game, but I've taken ideas from Apocalypse World and others to heart when it comes to constraining and directing what my actual role as ref is, and I hope the result is a fun game.
Here's the thing: skill systems make a *whole lot* of sense. Once you've accepted the premise of deciding things about a fictional world by rolling dice, it's a very short jump to decide such things should be made regular and to hang together. Especially if any of your justification for your rules is in "modeling" the real world (even if it's as simple as stats like strength, intelligence, et cetera). So, it's no surprise that skill systems were introduced to the hobby in its very first few years.
There's a few potential problems with them, though. The worst is probably the fact that the implicit assumption of a skill system is that if you don't have the skill you can't do it, and that if you do have the skill, you must use the skill system to resolve something. This puts you in a position where your master driver character both has to roll to do routine driving and face the chance of failing and is prohibited from cooking, because there's a cooking skill in the big list of skills and you didn't take it. Now, of course, I've picked some especially heinous examples, and plenty of GMs and rules systems have work arounds to prevent such annoying instances, but the that is one of the logical directions for skill system-based play to go in.
So, if you look at pre-supplement OD&D or at lots of cutting-edge modern indie games, you do not see any sort of regularized universal skill mechanic, and I've come to believe that this is a beautiful thing. Don't get me wrong, my anal-retentive, simulation-loving side gets giddy discussing intricately nested area of expertise-skill-focus-specialty type systems that are elegantly executed. But I've come to appreciate the complete opposite as well: replacing any attempt at yoking every possible situation to a rule system with faith in the judgement of one or more players at the table. That's the whole reason the GM/referee role was invented in the first place: a disinterested 3rd party's judgement is one of the most flexible tools you can have for providing open-ended excitement.
Have advances in game design reduced the necessity for relying on unaided referee judgement? Certainly. Is properly guided referee judgement obsolete and useless? Not on your life. I'd argue that Original D&D, at its best, stumbled upon some of the best stuff that is designed into modern systems through its default fallback position of "let the ref decide".
As such, I have made the conscious decision to *not* include any skill systems, proficiencies, or what have you into my D&D game, but I've taken ideas from Apocalypse World and others to heart when it comes to constraining and directing what my actual role as ref is, and I hope the result is a fun game.
How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Random
One of the many things I've learned to embrace in preparing my Old School campaign has been what Mr. Maliszewski over at Grognardia refers to as "The Oracular Power of Dice". I also got the name for my blog from a post by Ben Robbins at Ars Ludi on a similar topic. Basically, the idea is to accept what the dice give you and then craft your plans around them, rather than to have a master plan and only accept results that fit with that plan.
Now, this is a little bit hard for me because I tend to have some pretty definite ideas about the "flavor" I"m going for, and I tend to want to make decisions about everything. But I've discovered a few interesting things while prepping Fellhold. First, it is strangely liberating to just go through rooms and roll to see if anything is in there and what it is. It removes a lot of the burden of trying to think up logical monster and treasure placement and hold the entire dungeon ecology in your brain. It also removes worries of being either too easy or too harsh on the players, as much of it is out of my hands.
So, ease of use and making the ref's job easier are widely known and pretty obvious benefits of random monster and treasure stocking. What is perhaps less obvious is the way that taking this unexpected input and linking it to what is already established results in unexpected depth. Sometimes asking yourself "okay, so why are these hobgoblins in this room?" with them being there as a given inspires more creativity than thinking "what is this room and should it have hobgoblins in it?". Also, sometimes strings of monsters will just seem to fit so perfectly that you can't believe you didn't think of it on your own.
Finally, the non-random aspects of this process are interesting as well. I'm learning to love stocking tables and wandering monster tables, and figuring out cool things I can do with them because of it. So, originally I was just using my wandering monster table to stock a particular sublevel, but for further levels I'm thinking that I will have separate room stocking tables and wandering monster tables, since different sorts of monsters are more likely to be wandering around than others. Also, it helps me to establish the sort of ecology that exists in a particular place without actually having to establish every little detail. I'm planning on playing around with multiple dice tables, so that I can have more nuance in frequency (for example, use 2d6 so that things in the 6-9 range are more common, whereas the 2 and 12 results are quite rare). Hopefully if I can develop sophisticated enough tables and charts, I'll get to the point where all I have to do is draw a floorplan, plop down a few points of interest, and then roll up a totally fleshed out dungeon level. Such techniques will also help when we get to wilderness adventures.
Now, this is a little bit hard for me because I tend to have some pretty definite ideas about the "flavor" I"m going for, and I tend to want to make decisions about everything. But I've discovered a few interesting things while prepping Fellhold. First, it is strangely liberating to just go through rooms and roll to see if anything is in there and what it is. It removes a lot of the burden of trying to think up logical monster and treasure placement and hold the entire dungeon ecology in your brain. It also removes worries of being either too easy or too harsh on the players, as much of it is out of my hands.
So, ease of use and making the ref's job easier are widely known and pretty obvious benefits of random monster and treasure stocking. What is perhaps less obvious is the way that taking this unexpected input and linking it to what is already established results in unexpected depth. Sometimes asking yourself "okay, so why are these hobgoblins in this room?" with them being there as a given inspires more creativity than thinking "what is this room and should it have hobgoblins in it?". Also, sometimes strings of monsters will just seem to fit so perfectly that you can't believe you didn't think of it on your own.
Finally, the non-random aspects of this process are interesting as well. I'm learning to love stocking tables and wandering monster tables, and figuring out cool things I can do with them because of it. So, originally I was just using my wandering monster table to stock a particular sublevel, but for further levels I'm thinking that I will have separate room stocking tables and wandering monster tables, since different sorts of monsters are more likely to be wandering around than others. Also, it helps me to establish the sort of ecology that exists in a particular place without actually having to establish every little detail. I'm planning on playing around with multiple dice tables, so that I can have more nuance in frequency (for example, use 2d6 so that things in the 6-9 range are more common, whereas the 2 and 12 results are quite rare). Hopefully if I can develop sophisticated enough tables and charts, I'll get to the point where all I have to do is draw a floorplan, plop down a few points of interest, and then roll up a totally fleshed out dungeon level. Such techniques will also help when we get to wilderness adventures.
A Note about Rules
So, one of the things I took to heart while reading through James Malieszewski's Dwimmermount campaign over at Grognardia was the notion that it is easier to start with sparse rules and then add more subsystems than it is to cut back an existing bigger system. I originally intended to go real-hard core old school and use the original three Little Brown Books as the rules, and add from there. Alas, during character generation I found myself not comfortable enough with them to quickly and efficiently use them as in-game reference material.
Instead I found myself going to my extremely handy little hardcover of Swords & Wizardry Whitebox. I find its minimalism and digest size to be delightful, not to mention the awesome cover art, and so I have made it the "official" rules for the campaign. In other words, my players can expect the rules to work as written in there unless otherwise notified.
Most of the shared material for the campaign is being posted in a Google Docs folder, since we're playing via Google+ Hangouts (2 players in California, 4 in Texas, and 1 in Virginia), and included there is a compendium of house rules to date. I highlight any changes or additions made since the last session, and I'm planning on eventually editing any changes that become established into the Whitebox .rtf file and making a little "Fellhold Edition" for my own personal use, but we'll see.
With that foreword out of the way, here's a summary of the major house rulings so far:
Equipment Quick Start Packages
Shortly after one of my players asked for this option, I discovered that Brendan at Untimately had already made an excellent table for quickly generating starting equipment for OD&D. The only slight discrepancy here is that 1 wk of iron rations from the LBB's costs 15 GP, whereas 7 days worth of dried rations in S&WWB costs 21 GP. So, for now, I've skated around the issue by modifying the table to only provide 5 days of dried rations. Also, as you'll see below, the starting weapon assumptions of Brendan's chart have been modified, so there may be more trading out than would otherwise be suggested.
Weapon Damage by Class
Another excellent house rule I have swiped wholesale is Akrasia's Weapon Damage Chart from his blog Akratic Wizardry. For me, these rules are a great compromise between all characters doing d6 damage and having some mechanical differentiation between characters and weapons. I read somewhere an argument in favor of all characters with all weapons doing d6 damage that basically pointed out that by removing the mechanical import of weapons, you can have your Gandalfs with swords and Fafhrds with great swords and what not and not worry about whether they're the right class. Then there's the added benefit that the differences between weapons become much more flavor and player inventiveness based. Your giant greatsword may do the same damage as a dagger, but you can't swing it around in a 10 x 10 room. On the other hand, the idea that the magic user might be more useful just butchering people with a dagger than, you know, using magic, struck me as a bit off. So, this chart allows for flexibility while still providing mechanical benefit to fighting men actually fighting, without creating "objectively better weapons".
Bleeding to Death
I've adopted the suggested alternate treatment of 0 HP in S&WWB, where players are bleeding to death until they reach their level in negative hit points. I mostly did this as a concession to the fact that my players are not used to the lethality of Old School games, and because it has a long and hoary tradition in the game.
Class and Level Limits
Dwarves are the only non-human PC race in my campaign world, so I've done away with level limits, but to insure that it remains a human-dominated Swords and Sorcery feel, they are still limited to being fighting men.
Debt
New characters can take out up to 3 loans for 3d6x10 GP each if they desire. These loans will have 25% interest, compounded monthly, and are of course not from reputable lenders. When I saw this idea mentioned on Grognardia, it was too good a source of future trouble to pass up.
Experience
Experience is only earned by treasure *spent*. I'm not picky about what it's spent on (carousing, tithes, room and board, new equipment, whatever). This is to provide an incentive for players to have trouble acquiring large hoards and to keep diving back into the megadungeon for the increasing riches.
Late Game Stuff
I'm going to be setting up the campaign region using the rules from "An Echo, Resounding" so that I can bake in higher level concerns right from the get-go. Once again, I have to agree with Mr. Maliszewski that the appropriate "end game" for D&D characters is to become lords and lead armies and manage domains, not to become demi-gods who can warp the fabric of reality with their super powers. That stuff is way less interesting to me, and I feel like is the sort of thing that computer RPGs do better, whereas complex domain building and politics is something that tabletop games with a human referee still do better.
Instead I found myself going to my extremely handy little hardcover of Swords & Wizardry Whitebox. I find its minimalism and digest size to be delightful, not to mention the awesome cover art, and so I have made it the "official" rules for the campaign. In other words, my players can expect the rules to work as written in there unless otherwise notified.
Most of the shared material for the campaign is being posted in a Google Docs folder, since we're playing via Google+ Hangouts (2 players in California, 4 in Texas, and 1 in Virginia), and included there is a compendium of house rules to date. I highlight any changes or additions made since the last session, and I'm planning on eventually editing any changes that become established into the Whitebox .rtf file and making a little "Fellhold Edition" for my own personal use, but we'll see.
With that foreword out of the way, here's a summary of the major house rulings so far:
Equipment Quick Start Packages
Shortly after one of my players asked for this option, I discovered that Brendan at Untimately had already made an excellent table for quickly generating starting equipment for OD&D. The only slight discrepancy here is that 1 wk of iron rations from the LBB's costs 15 GP, whereas 7 days worth of dried rations in S&WWB costs 21 GP. So, for now, I've skated around the issue by modifying the table to only provide 5 days of dried rations. Also, as you'll see below, the starting weapon assumptions of Brendan's chart have been modified, so there may be more trading out than would otherwise be suggested.
Weapon Damage by Class
Another excellent house rule I have swiped wholesale is Akrasia's Weapon Damage Chart from his blog Akratic Wizardry. For me, these rules are a great compromise between all characters doing d6 damage and having some mechanical differentiation between characters and weapons. I read somewhere an argument in favor of all characters with all weapons doing d6 damage that basically pointed out that by removing the mechanical import of weapons, you can have your Gandalfs with swords and Fafhrds with great swords and what not and not worry about whether they're the right class. Then there's the added benefit that the differences between weapons become much more flavor and player inventiveness based. Your giant greatsword may do the same damage as a dagger, but you can't swing it around in a 10 x 10 room. On the other hand, the idea that the magic user might be more useful just butchering people with a dagger than, you know, using magic, struck me as a bit off. So, this chart allows for flexibility while still providing mechanical benefit to fighting men actually fighting, without creating "objectively better weapons".
Bleeding to Death
I've adopted the suggested alternate treatment of 0 HP in S&WWB, where players are bleeding to death until they reach their level in negative hit points. I mostly did this as a concession to the fact that my players are not used to the lethality of Old School games, and because it has a long and hoary tradition in the game.
Class and Level Limits
Dwarves are the only non-human PC race in my campaign world, so I've done away with level limits, but to insure that it remains a human-dominated Swords and Sorcery feel, they are still limited to being fighting men.
Debt
New characters can take out up to 3 loans for 3d6x10 GP each if they desire. These loans will have 25% interest, compounded monthly, and are of course not from reputable lenders. When I saw this idea mentioned on Grognardia, it was too good a source of future trouble to pass up.
Experience
Experience is only earned by treasure *spent*. I'm not picky about what it's spent on (carousing, tithes, room and board, new equipment, whatever). This is to provide an incentive for players to have trouble acquiring large hoards and to keep diving back into the megadungeon for the increasing riches.
Late Game Stuff
I'm going to be setting up the campaign region using the rules from "An Echo, Resounding" so that I can bake in higher level concerns right from the get-go. Once again, I have to agree with Mr. Maliszewski that the appropriate "end game" for D&D characters is to become lords and lead armies and manage domains, not to become demi-gods who can warp the fabric of reality with their super powers. That stuff is way less interesting to me, and I feel like is the sort of thing that computer RPGs do better, whereas complex domain building and politics is something that tabletop games with a human referee still do better.
Fellhold Session 1
So, our brave expedition's first venture up the mountain led to a ruined outpost guarding a gate into the underworld. Blum and Varian were unable to make it on this first expedition, but Yllgrad, Caleb, Bryni, and Earn set their sights on adventure and followed the path out of Silverdelf up the spur of the mountain. While exploring the ruined outpost, Earn and Caleb ventured into a ruined tower and were set upon by a giant spider! This loathsome beast failed to (literally) get the drop on them, and Earn bravely set to it with his morning star, inflicting grievous wounds. Caleb fled in terror at such a horrific challenge to his rationalist view of the world. In a few rounds, the rest of the party showed up, and Yllgrad and Bryni also wore down the beast's defenses. Yllgrad's hireling, Gar, lined up a shot with his crossbow, but in the heat of the moment missed the spider and wounded Bryni instead. After heroically leaping onto the spider's back, Earn was grievously wounded by the spider's stinger, and only survived due to the ministrations of Caleb. Bryni was able to thrust his spear up into the bowels of the spider and to finish it off. After a thorough search of the outpost, the party discovered a small sum of silver and copper coins, a few plain, but serviceable weapons, a potentially valuable Ivory box, and a fine idol of Dwyn, the Oak Mother. They returned to Silverdelf to assess their treasures and to allow Earn and Bryni to recuperate, but they learned the secret of opening the gate into the mountain before departing, and they intend to venture into the underground when their members once again are in fighting shape.
Prep is Fun!
So, we had to put off our first game session until next week due to a number of scheduling difficulties, but that's probably good, as I will be far more prepared this way. I'm having a grand old time swiping stuff from modules and supplements new and old, gleefully combing OD&D, S&W, AD&D 1E, LL, and whatever else comes in handy, while checking facts about ecology online. I haven't designed a dungeon in about 15 years, and back then I was completely focused on providing *just* the right challenge that players would have a tough time of it, but would win, and they were all "lair" type dungeons, very much of the "something bad is outside of our village, please go deal with it!' school of thought. This is my first megadungeon, and I'm finding the process of thinking out what the different levels are, and what their relationship to each other is to be fascinating and intoxicating. Let's hope it stays that way.
A Wild Campaign Appears!
Last night saw the character generation session for my new old school campaign, Fellhold. Fellhold is a dungeon built into the living rock of Ashfell made up of ancient dwarven ruins, later additions by a foul cabal of sorcerors and their minions, and who knows what else that has burrowed its way in. The general feel is Germanic swords and sorcery (think if Robert E. Howard wrote Beowulf. Or, you know, the Frost Giant's Daughter works too). For visuals, think Paul Bonner's stuff for Riotminds.
The Game is using Swords and Wizardry White Box as it's core rules, though with some house rules. I originally planned to use the original three Little Brown Books (LBB's) of the actual white box edition of D&D, but even just going through character creation I discovered the advantages of S&W's streamlined and reorganized layouts. I will still be using the LBB's and the supplements for further material (there's a lot more about creating and stocking dungeons in "The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures" for example).
We're playing the game over Google+ using hangouts, and soon to use Tabletop Forge program, which is already pretty cool, but looks like it will be really great as it gets developed after its successful Kickstarter campaign.
We're starting with a large group, six players and myself, and that brings us 4 fighting men, one of whom is a dwarf, a magic user, and a cleric. Dwarves are the only demi-humans in my campaign, and the number of evil humanoids will be extremely curtailed as well. We're sticking with the original three classes for now, but without a level cap on dwarves (they can still only be fighting men, however). Experience will be awarded for treasure spent and for killing monsters.
The most notable house rule so far is an adoption of Akratic Wizardry's Class Based Weapon Damage rather than either straight d6's across the board or Supplement I (and later D&D's) weapon based damage. This strikes me as a nice compromise that allows some differentiation between weapons, maintains fighting men's dominance in combat, but allows for some variety (such as allowing priests of Germanic gods the use of spears).
Hopefully regularly updates regarding this game will be a good spur to keeping up to date with this blog like I haven't for the last long while. I'll be posting summaries of sessions, notable house rules, and possibly some flavor stuff as it emerges through play.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)