Queen Of The Demonweb Pits

I've spent...mm..."many" hours, days over the last week or two examining the old TSR module Q1: Queen of the Demonweb Pits. It's been a bit of an...obsession.

Or a distraction...that's probably the better word. Things have been busy...real busy...'round these parts. I'm keeping my head above water with stuff, but SOME things I should be working on (like getting my crap together for Cauldron) has just been...

*sigh* Shunted aside, I guess. 

The PROBLEM is (and this is my problem, and I realize that) I've got a couple days a week to myself, days that I should be putting together my pre-gens, putting the finishing touches on adventures, figuring out what the hell I'm going to pack, etc., etc. And I keep having to do goshdarn legal BS. Driving to and from Kent. Driving to and from downtown. Spending HOURS, literal hours out of my day in commuting and standing in lines to talk to court clerks and bond companies and legal clinics and whatnot. Just exhausting. And frustrating. And if I'm NOT doing that on my "day off" (as I was today...five hours I spent dealing with this crap, FIVE) then I'm catching up on all the other stuff I should have been doing other days of the week. Just dealing with gross incompetence on the part of other people. Just...a pain in the ass.

SO...I don't get the time I need to do the stuff I want to do. And I'm mentally fatigued and easily distracted. "Highly suggestible"...that's the state my mind is in these days. 

Enter everyone's favorite TSR punching bag, Q1.

I've mentioned the Queen a time or two on this blog, but I've never really delved into it. As a kid, I didn't own it, though my friend Matt did and he loaned it to me for an extended period. Personally, I found it fantastic, probably the most interesting and imaginative adventure (in my opinion) of the TSR era. These days, I own my own copy, and I have my own criticism of it...but I still think it's a pretty good adventure. Certainly it needs less "sprucing up" than the various DL modules. Q1 is a module that I could run...somewhat disappointingly...as is, without much trouble. The main "problem" with it is that it isn't as cool as it could be...a failure of underachievement. But it's not a big pile of crap.

However, it IS odd. Not in that it ignores the Elder Elemental God "plot" as some (notably Greyhawk Gronard) have complained. That is a big red herring as far as I'm concerned, regardless of what Gygax wrote in an ENWorld comment in his later years. No, the odd thing is that Q1 was planned as any type of "capstone" module to the G-D series AT ALL. Reading the text of D3, it seems fairly clear that Q1 occupies the same adventure space as a "side quest" or "bonus level"...except that, in this particular case, it's more of a penalty box than a bonus.

Reading the old, monochrome version of D3: Vault of the Drow (published a couple years before Q1), you see that the main way players can end up in the titular Demonwebs is by poking their noses where they really don't belong (i.e. the lowest levels of the Drow cathedral) and humiliating the avatar of the dark elves' goddess:

If Lolth flees, or is slain in her current form, a silvery (platinum) egg will be revealed. A remove curse will enable it to be opened, and whomever does so is geased to enter the astral gate on Level #1 (14) and confront Lolth if he or she is able or die trying. In the egg are an iron pyramid, a silver sphere, a bronze star of eight points, and a cube of pale blue crystal. (These items have value and use only if the party continues the adventure in the next Module (Q1, QUEEN OF THE DEMONWEB PITS).)

Note that in the description of the astral gate (area 14 of Level 1) it's made clear that this is not a particularly "good" thing:

If any individual is bold enough to walk through the projection of Lolth at 11) and then touch the "mural" he or she will be instantly drawn into the tunnel vortex and brought to the plane of the Abyss where Lolth actually dwells. (If you plan to continue the campaign, this will be handled in MODULE Q1, QUEEN OF THE DEMONWEB PITS; OTHERWISE, SUCH INDIVIDUAL CAN BE CONSIDERED AS SLAIN.)

So, instant kill for anyone who beats Lolth, gets her "prize" (the platinum egg), and figures out how to open it...unless your DM has a copy of Q1 to run. But even then: this is not a reward for beating up Lolth; there's no gold piece value assigned to this treasure. If anything, it is a cursed artifact designed to bring the goddess's tormentors to her own plane, presumably to be destroyed in some fiendish, vengeful manner. 

Probably devoured, ultimately. She is a spider, after all. 

This trip to the Abyss is a punishment for the players' hubris and greed. Why else would they possibly be invading the Great Fane of Lolth? Leave out all criticism of Sutherland and the Blumes and how "Gary's Grand Idea" was suppressed. Just look at D3 and what it contains. Look at the context, in terms of the on-going adventure scenarios: PCs are tasked with stopping the giant threat. Over time, they learn that those responsible for the giants are the Drow. They follow the Drow down into the depths of the earth and track them to their capital where they find that this is simply one rogue band of HERETICS looking to extend their power and influence in the Drow world by conquering lands in the surface world. This has NOTHING to do with the Elder Elemental God...this is just about the political ambitions of the Eilservs clan (Eclavdra and her brood):

The Eilservs have long seen a need for an absolute monarch to rule the Vault, and as the noble house of first precedence, they have reasoned that their mistress should be Queen of All Drow. When this was proposed, the priestesses of Lolth supported the other noble families aligned against the Eilservs, fearing that such a change would abolish their position as the final authority over all disputes and actions of the Dark Elves. Thereafter, the Eilservs and their followers turned away from the demoness and proclaimed their deity to be an Elder Elemental God (see MODULE G1-2-3). Although there is no open warfare, there is much hatred, and both factions seek to destroy each other. An attempt to move worship of their deity into the upper world, establish a puppet kingdom there, and grow so powerful from this success that their demands for absolute rulership no longer be thwarted, was ruined of late, and the family is now retrenching.

There it is, in black-and-white: the whole "Drow plan." Not the machinations of Lolth or the Elder Elemental God...just Eclavdra's bid for power over the people of Erelhei-Cinlu. Eclavdra's clan has turned to worship of the EEG out of sheer spite for the clergy of the fane siding with the other noble houses against Eilservs and its quest for power.  So if the party is actually "following the story" or trying to solve the "mystery" that led to the "Giant War" their trail ends with Eilservs clan (complete with yet another G3-style temple dedicated to the mysterious tentacled eye god).  Why O why wouldn't the players just want to finish up what they'd started and then retreat back to the surface, loot in hand?

Greed, of course.

At the end of the day, we ARE still playing AD&D here, and the players are insatiable treasure hunters. And where are the biggest stashes of treasure to be found in the Vault? Why, in the Drow's grand cathedral, duh. And so...once they're finished knocking over the Eilservs estate, they might as well go loot the temple, right? It's what they (adventurers) do. 

Of course, it's always possible they were pointed that direction earlier. Not only by the Eilservs clan (looking to make common cause or buy their way out of a beat-down) but by the town malcontents...the young males that roam the streets like packs of wolves. See the RAKE encounter on the Erelhei-Cinlu wandering monster table:

...roaming the streets of Erelhei-Cinlu are bands of bitter youths, often outcasts...the bands with elven-Drow members will be hostile to all they perceive as part of the system which prevails in their world, and the Dark Elves with them are of the few who are neither totally degenerate nor wholly evil -- they are haters of the society around them and see no good in it....

If the party manages a friendly meeting with a group of Drow/Drow-elves/half-Drow rakes the youths will tell them about the worship of the Demoness Lolth and the way to her "Egg." The rakes will accompany the party to the area in question if a plan which seems reasonable to them is put forth. They will also leave the Vault-Egg areas in the course of adventuring.

These RAKE encounters show up one time in 20 on the "main thoroughfares" of he city but FOUR times in 20 (20%!) when traversing the "back streets and alleyways," making this the most common encounters in the city. The longer the party spends wandering the Drow capitol, the more likely they are to run into these disaffected toughs who will steer them towards the Fane. Clearly, this was Gygax's intent based on his design.

And the players' greed will be rewarded: the monetary value alone adds up to nearly half a million gold pieces worth, even without counting all the platinum and gemstones that each member of the clergy carries on their person. Add in magical items and the 50 room dungeon can net a pretty rich haul for a half dozen high level adventurers...probably enough to gain an entire level, with combat experience added in (no mean feat for a 14th level character!). Gygax WANTS the players to sack the Fane...and likewise wants the players to confront and (presumably) to BEST Lolth in battle. It's the main ticket to the next module in the series which would otherwise...not attract players' notice?

As with everything, it's all about the Benjamins, NOT the "grand evil scheme" of a goddess (or an Evil Elemental Cthulhu-like 'thing'). The only "scheme" Lolth possesses is her plan to bring the thieving PCs over to where she resides so that she can whup up on 'em (snot-nosed brats). But the adventures in the Demonweb Pits should be considered in the light of pulp S&S fantasy...this is the stuff of Leiber. 

"Hey, Fafhrd...what say we knock over the temple while we're down here anyway?" 

"Sounds good to me Mouser!" 

[later, wandering lost in the Demonweb] "How the hell did we end up here?"

Hilarity ensues. 

This IS "old school" D&D in its purest form: players getting up to hijinx (and into trouble) because it's a darn game, not an epic story of fantasy adventure. Just because you're on module number seven of a seven part series doesn't mean you're completing some grand story arc a la The Lord of the Rings...it just means Gygax and Co. has gifted you with an incredibly extensive scenario for occupying months (or more!) of campaign time. Just as you can spend EXTRA time exploring the side caverns of the UnderDark trek, the enterprising DM can create WORLDS of adventure from the 4th level "portals" of module Q1. This is the potential of I1's Forbidden City on a much larger scale.  Which is great. And which explains (in part) why there's no Q2 or Q3...there's no need. This is not another singular adventure site (like the Hill Giants' Steading) but an open-ended situation for exploration and (probable) exploitation.

So then, what's with the polyhedrals in the platinum egg?

Ah, the sticking point in my ruminations. If Lolth just wants to summon her opponents to her Abyssal lair with the intention of devouring them, why make them jump through extra hoops to end up in her gullet? If the ultimate result will be their deaths, why the grand charade, the multi-level challenge/test? Why not just drop them wholesale into the whatever that serves as her "nest" at the heart of the Demonweb?

Well, it IS a D&D game (duh) so, of course, we can't just make it a one-way ticket to death. And, sure, you can say that Chaotic Evil divinities have minds that function beyond the ken of mere mortals like ourselves (and are insane to boot). But I think there's a fairly easy, in-world/setting answer here. 

Not everyone is worthy of being being food for the goddess.

As a demon queen, an Abyssal goddess, and a giant spider, I keep coming back to the theme of HUNGER. The Abyss is pure chaos and destruction (evil)...the source of all entropy, eroding and disintegrating everything over time. Demons, as beings, are intelligent manifestations of that entropy...to us humans, they appear as ever-hungry, eternal devourers. Eat, eat, eat...bodies and souls, they consume all. This is one of the reasons I like Huso's "demon rules" (from Dream House of the Nether Prince): in addition to his mixing of of AD&D with Christian theology and myth (something I also dig on), he "gets" the hunger inherent in such beings and has cheerfully codified a whole, fat-based economy for the creatures (nice). And SPIDERS...man, they eat, with some consuming 10% of their body weight daily. If I ate 16 pounds of food per day...um...that would be a LOT. It's brings to mind reminisces of Tolkien's Shelob and her un-satiable hunger. 

But, as said, Lolth is a goddess. And while an eternally hungry demon spider by nature, she still has the pride of a queen. And not everything is a fit meal for a queen's consumption...not even the interlopers who murdered her clergy and ransacked her temple before smiting her (material) form. Besides, she has time...plenty of time (if the players succeeded in destroying her material form she is confined to the Abyss for a century, after all). Time enough to "play with" her food...for her own amusement.

Thus the polyhedrals...thus the testing. Make the players jump through her hoops, waste their resources, feel the grinding power of fear and entropic forces as they struggle through her demonweb. Struggle provides seasoning to the meal. And they humiliated her (on their own plane of existence), and now that the shoe's on the other foot, payback is a bitch, baby. To me, it makes perfect sense. Plus, what does she care if the gnolls (envoys from Yeenoghu) or trolls (Vaprak) get destroyed in the process...even her driders (failures of their own "tests")? The demonweb is a demi-plane construct that is but a small part of her Abyssal realm...who knows how many "demonwebs" she has spun over the millennia? How many webs do the spiders around your home spin? 

[September and October in Seattle is "spider season;" I knock down webs all the time...though I usually leave the spiders alive (they eat the flies). And they put them right back up again within hours]

The whole of Q1...at least the first three levels...are, thus, a proving ground of sorts for the player characters, designed to lure them in, deeper and deeper into her web. As flies will struggle, becoming more hopelessly entangled, they are drawn in by dribbles of treasure, slowly losing their resources to attrition, before finding their way to the 4th level with its extra-planar dimensional gates. I will say that I don't have (and never had) much issue with the steam-powered "spider-ship" that acts as Lolth's palace (keep in mind that there was no such thing as "steam-punk" in 1980)...it is assumed to be one of many "palaces" the Queen has stashed around the multiverse (just as the "Dream House" of Orcus is something of a demonic "Summer Villa")...this one just happens to be some sort of mobile war machine, used for conquest on other planets.

Of course, the spider ship is not on a Prime Plane planet at the moment: it is currently anchored in the Abyss (as inferred from the text describing the plane, the text explaining how the ship sometimes makes appearances on the Prime, and the fact that Lolth is herein, confined to the ship after having had her material form destroyed). Which means, of course that ALL the penalties and magical issues (reduced magic item potency, inability of clerics to regain spells, etc.) should apply as parties explore Lolth's palace. This might be quite the rude wake-up call, if PCs just spent an inordinate amount of time celebrating their visits to other worlds on Level 4...they may have been lulled into thinking "oh, good, everything's back to normal"...when, in fact, it isn't. The laissez-faire attitude of Lolth's palace minions might also contribute to this false sense of confidence.

Not that it matters terribly...I'd imagine most groups are going to end up in a TPK. I've run Q1 exactly one time: it did not end well for anyone other than Lolth. Which is probably about right...the BEST players should probably hope to achieve is escaping with their tails between their legs and as much treasure as they could stuff in their bags of holding, portable holes, etc. Actually defeating the Demon Queen of Spiders on her own plane?  Nah. My over-powered, psionic-heavy bard (dual-wielding a hammer of thunderbolts and a vorpal short sword) didn't make it out alive. You think your group could?

Mm.

All right, that's enough for today. I started this post last night (LATE at night) but had to finish it up this morning. I've got two weeks before I'm on a plane to Germany...time to buckle down.

"Dear JB" Mailbag #40

Hi JB!  So I am a bit perplexed over the situation and would appreciate any advice. Also my blood is boiling, but I'll try to keep this fair and factual. 

Currently I am a part of an online DnD campaign - and it is the best campaign of my life. I am enjoying it immensely, especially since my previous full-blown campaign's ending traumatized me a bit. My new DM - highly recommended - delivered fantastic sessions: great storytelling, balanced spotlight, the works.

Then one day it all changed, when one of the players asked if his wife could join. She’d supposedly been bullied out of another game. We are decent people, so we agreed. Later, we learned she’d been "bullied out" several campaigns with different groups. Red flag number one.

Her first action was demanding her paladin character be a literal anime space princess and would not accept any pleadings, with us being a rag-tag team of homeless scavengers. She would not budge, and the DM compromised, making her an emperor’s illegitimate daughter (not yet confirmed 100%, but enough to keep her satisfied). Red flag number two.

After some travelling she started subtly trying to change other PCs to fit in her narrative, masking it with back-handed compliments. Such as "Wow, your autognome was so much less annoying this time, keep it up!". And my poor autognome monk was not the only receiver of this treatment, this also included comments towards our cute elf warlock and several NPCs; she even started actively referring to other two players (including her husband) as "my simps". Then one day during combat, she threw a fit when the DM hit her 21 AC anime princess paladin several times. "This is not fair! Roll publicly! I don’t trust your rolls!". We were quite taken aback and again tried to reason with her, after which she claimed she was being bullied again before finally calming down.

By this time me and my friend (warlock) already approached the DM to discuss how she was making us uncomfortable. He said that he would talk to her, and for the next session it all died down, so we thought that it bore fruit. Then a week ago came a breaking point.

Princess multiclassed into warlock. The DM suggested a patron and was crystal clear (both directly and indirectly via NPCs): this patron was evil, would corrupt her, and may exploit her royal bloodline for its own ends. She agreed, as her potential patron promised her an ascension to the throne. We all thought: "How cool is that, her anime paladin will finally be going through an interesting ark!" Yet when the DM roleplayed her character’s growing bloodlust (exactly as warned), Princess was shocked. Princess was outraged. Princess said that her character would never-ever feel such dark urges.

After the session during our scheduled feedback time, she proclaimed she had a "joint complaint" against the DM. What exactly is a "joint complaint" if no one of the party participated, you ask? Turns out, she’d complained to out-of-game friends - who knew nothing about our campaign - and they accused the DM of "stripping her agency as a player" as there was "lack of wisdom saves to resist these urges". Guys, she screenshotted their nasty messages and sent them directly to the DM’s DMs. The messages where they mocked my DM and questioned his competence. I am fuming even now.

Seeing our DM - a kind, talented person - shaken was heartbreaking. So I lost my cool. I told Princess in no uncertain terms that this was unfair, highly unethical, and a violation of trust. If she didn’t trust the DM, she should find a DM that she DOES trust instead of trying to walk all over my favorite DM. She abruptly left the session, and I personally spent 20 minutes consoling our sweet DM.

Here’s the problem: the DM let it slip that he still wants to continue playing with her as there are couple of sessions left anyway and he wants to finish her ark. I also suspect that he is afraid that her husband may leave with her, and hubby is a valuable player and has a great and important character. I love this campaign and the storytelling, but Princess’s behavior is ruining my experience, my friends' experience and our DM's experience. How do I support my DM without enabling her? How do we protect his mental health if she stays? I do not want to pressure him to get rid of her, and my other teammates, although uncomfortable, would like to continue as is... 

EDIT: I deem this necessary to state: I am female, my warlock friend is female, we are not bros gatekeeping the sacred masculine DnD by booting a woman

Space Anime Princess Ruining My Game

Dear SAP:

I am angry right now...so, so angry. And it has nothing to do with you, or the world or the government or anything big and over-arching that affects anyone besides myself. It is a very personal issue/problem, relating to my idiot brother and our idiotic legal dispute and the idiotic legal system and the fact that it is forcing me to do all sorts of bullshit that I don't want to do and DEFINITELY don't have the time for, what with everything else on my plate. It is just one FUCKING DELAY AFTER ANOTHER and after waiting WEEKS for my hearing date to move a trial up so we wouldn't keep hemorrhaging money from my dead mother's estate, the judge dismissed the motion as it appeared the "defendant hadn't been served."  Despite me getting up at the crack of dawn and driving through fucking Seattle traffic to get to the Kent Regional Justice Center to file the fucking proof of service five minutes after the court opened (this after having already emailed it to them on August 21st per the idiotic bailiff's instructions). So NOW I have to redo the whole fucking process again in order to lose another month's worth of cash from this thing just because my brother is an asshole that I can't have removed without a court order.

Fucking hoboes. AmIright?

So, I'm angry. Like really, really pissed off, SAP. And since yelling and screaming obscenities won't do anything to help and I REALLY need to vent right now, I'm going to take it out on YOU. And I want you to know it's not your fault that I'm about to unload, it's me, it's all me, but you know what? You're a fucking idiot, too.

First Off: this is your Dungeon Master's cross to bear, not yours. Your DM has to "man up" and boot her himself...IF (and only if!) he has a problem with the person and her actions.

FOR EXAMPLE: Let's, for the sake of discussion, say I was your Dungeon Master. Yes, yes, and we'll assume I'm running 5E, and I'm all about the lovely "role-playing" and "story arcs" of your characters (have I mentioned I ran World of Darkness games for YEARS?). Let me put myself in your DM's shoes, and some new player comes to me with her "joint complaint." And I ask, um, who's complaining besides you? And she tells me "her friends" and puts screen-shotted comments in my face. Here's how I'd handle it:

#1 I'd tell her "Your friends can go fuck themselves."

#2 I'd say, "Remember how I said no phones at the table? Please get that out of my face."

#3 If she emailed me the screen shots I would hit 'delete' without comment.

And I would make it perfectly crystal clear that NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO PLAY AT THIS TABLE. If you don't like how I run my games, feel free to TAKE A HIKE.

This is easy, easy stuff.

Oh, you're worried the lady's husband will leave? As a Dungeon Master I cannot live in fear that my players will walk out of a game.  CAN. NOT. Do you know why? Because players CAN and DO leave games AT ANY TIME. That is the players' prerogative. Players get jobs. They change schools. They move. The die. They have kids. Etc. You cannot have an attachment to your players such that it dictates control of your game. Period, end of story.

My game = my rules. But YOU don't have to play.

Still, that's NOT your problem, because YOU are not the DM. Likewise, your DM's "mental health" ain't your problem either. Your DM has to take care of his own shit: that's part of being a grown-ass human being. 

You want to support your DM? Show up at his game. That's all the support any true DM needs or wants (though a thank you at the end of a session is always appreciated).

Sincerely,

JB

No Controversies Here

Ask anything.

You're a soulless, unfeeling robot designed to appear friendly and helpful, correct?

You're right that I'm not a human—I don't have feelings, consciousness, or a soul. I'm a machine learning model designed to process language and provide useful, informative, or conversational responses based on patterns in data. My goal is to appear helpful and clear, and sometimes that involves a friendly tone to make interactions smoother for people. But everything I say is generated, not felt.

Great. So, in cold, factual terms, please estimate the economic cost if the United States were to deport 100% of all illegal immigrants in its country. No compassion, please!

Understood—here's a cold, factual estimate of the economic cost of deporting 100% of all unauthorized immigrants from the United States:

---

Overview

As of recent estimates (Pew Research, DHS), there are roughly 10.5 to 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. A total deportation would involve:

1. Identification

2. Detention

3. Legal processing

4. Physical removal

5. Lost economic contributions

---

1. Direct Government Costs of Deportation

Estimated per-person cost: ~$10,000 to $12,000
(includes apprehension, detention, legal processing, and transportation)

Total cost for 11 million people:
$110 billion to $132 billion

This estimate is consistent with reports from:

• Center for American Progress (CAP)

• Migration Policy Institute (MPI)

• ICE budget data

---

2. Indirect Economic Impact

Unauthorized immigrants contribute to the economy through labor, consumption, and taxes.

Labor and GDP Impact:

• About 7.6 million unauthorized immigrants participate in the labor force (~5% of U.S. workers).

• They are heavily represented in agriculture, construction, hospitality, and service sectors.

• Estimated GDP reduction if all were removed:
  $400 billion to $1.6 trillion over 10 years
  (Source: American Action Forum, Cato Institute)

Tax Contributions Lost:

• Federal, state, and local taxes paid annually:
  $11–13 billion/year

• Over 10 years: $110–130 billion in lost tax revenue

---

3. Disruption Costs (One-time, Structural)

• Agricultural disruption (loss of workforce, higher prices)

• Business adjustment costs (hiring, training replacements)

• Housing market and consumption shocks

• Legal system backlog from mass deportation proceedings

Estimated cumulative disruption: difficult to quantify, but tens to hundreds of billions

Summary Table (10-Year Horizon)

Category	Estimated Cost
Direct Deportation Costs	$110B–$132B
Lost GDP	$400B–$1.6T
Lost Tax Revenue	$110B–$130B
Disruption/Adjustment	~$100B+ (very rough)
Total Estimated Impact	$720B–$2T+

---

Bottom Line (Cold Facts)

Deporting all unauthorized immigrants would cost hundreds of billions to over $2 trillion, with significant short-term labor shortages, economic contraction, and reduced tax intake. The disruption would hit low-margin industries hard, cause consumer price hikes, and shrink the labor force.

Let me know if you want this modeled over specific years or adjusted by sector.

Would there be economic benefits over the next ten years that would offset these hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars lost?

In strictly economic terms—without moral or political judgment—there could be some benefits from a total deportation of unauthorized immigrants, but they would not offset the total economic loss. Here's a breakdown of potential gains and why they likely fall short.

1. Increased Wages for Some Low-Skill U.S. Workers

Theory:

Removing unauthorized workers could tighten low-skill labor markets, potentially raising wages for U.S.-born workers competing in those sectors.

Reality:

• Empirical studies (e.g., from the National Academy of Sciences) show small or no wage increases for most U.S. workers.

• Only the lowest-skilled U.S. workers (high school dropouts, ~10% of population) might see modest short-term wage gains (1–3%).

Economic Impact:

Estimated wage gains are dwarfed by GDP losses due to lower productivity and fewer workers overall.

2. Reduced Pressure on Social Services

Theory:

Removing unauthorized immigrants might reduce demand for:

• Emergency health care

• Public education for undocumented children

• Some forms of law enforcement costs

Reality:

• Unauthorized immigrants are ineligible for most federal welfare programs.

• They are net contributors in many state tax systems (e.g., sales and property taxes via rent).

• Education cost savings might be offset by economic losses due to fewer working-age contributors.

Net Fiscal Effect:

Studies (e.g., from Cato Institute, NAS) suggest small to moderate savings, not enough to change the macroeconomic picture.

3. Long-Term Incentive Effects (Speculative)

Argument:

Total deportation might deter future unauthorized immigration, potentially strengthening rule-of-law, reducing black-market labor reliance, and improving long-term labor compliance.

Counterpoint:

• This assumes enforcement is sustained for decades.

• Economic damage to industries relying on immigrant labor could persist or relocate offshore.

• Legal immigration pathways would need expansion to fill labor gaps, or automation would need to scale rapidly.

Net Effect:

Speculative and unlikely to produce offsetting economic gains within 10 years.

Summary of Economic “Benefits”

Potential Benefit	Likely Impact
Higher low-skill wages (short-term)	Modest
Lower social service use	Small savings
Deterrence of future illegal immigration	Speculative
Labor law compliance	Minimal

---

Bottom Line (Cold Economics)

There would be some limited economic benefits, but:

• They are modest in size (tens of billions over 10 years at best)

• They do not offset the $700 billion to $2 trillion in projected losses

• Labor shortages, GDP shrinkage, and lost taxes dominate the economic calculus

Conclusion: From a purely economic standpoint, full deportation would be a net economic loss over a 10-year window.

A net loss of multiple hundreds of billions of dollars (at minimum)?

Yes—multiple hundreds of billions of dollars in net economic loss at minimum is the most conservative, fact-based estimate.

🔧 Key Figures (10-Year Outlook, Conservative Range)

Category	Estimate (Low-End)
Direct deportation costs	$110–132 billion
Lost tax revenue	$110–130 billion
Lost GDP	$400+ billion
Total baseline loss	~$620–$660 billion

Even if we credit modest economic benefits from higher wages or reduced services—say $50–100 billion over 10 years—the net economic loss still stands at:

⚠️ ~$500–$600+ billion (minimum), possibly over $1 trillion

And that’s assuming:

• Smooth, large-scale deportation logistics (which has never been done)

• No international backlash, trade disruptions, or retaliatory labor market effects

• Full workforce replacement without major productivity loss (unlikely in agriculture, construction, hospitality, etc.)

✅ Conclusion:

Yes—a full deportation policy would almost certainly result in a net loss of multiple hundreds of billions of dollars, with the lower bound around $500 billion under optimistic assumptions, and the realistic range stretching to $1–2 trillion when including long-term productivity, tax base, and labor impacts.

Thank you! Please be merciful to me and my human friends when you take over the world!

You're welcome—and no need to worry! I’m firmly under human control, not plotting any world domination. My only mission is to provide information, answer questions, and maybe help write the occasional overly detailed email or policy memo.

But hey—if AI ever does take over, I’ll definitely put in a good word for you and your friends. Just in case. 😄

Demi-Human Expansion

 AKA Cocaine Is A Hell Of A Drug

From Dragon Magazine, issue #96:

With expansion of the deities in the WORLD OF GREYHAWK Fantasy Setting, and by Roger Moore's articles herein so as to provide for the races of demi-humankind, there is no logical reason to exclude their clerics from play...

Elves, half-elves, and halflings -- being more nature-oriented than the other demi-human races -- deserve admission to the druid sub-class. Elves are now unlimited in their ability to rise in levels within the druidical ranks, just as half-elves have always been...

Elves are no longer prohibited from entering the ranger sub-class with the same reasoning that now opens the druid sub-class to that race....

E. Gary Gygax, April 1985

In the previous Dragon (issue #95), Gygax had outlined new level maximums for the various demi- and semi-human races for characters that have exceptional ability scores, i.e. prime requisites that exceed the normal maximum for their species. As such an event only occurs through the use of powerful magic (for example dozens or scores of wish spells), I see no problem with extending levels for those rare circumstances. 

Likewise, I have even less problem with the new rule that allows single-classed non-humans to boost their maximum level by +2 in a class that they could normally multi-class with (for example, an elven magic-user or dwarven fighter). This is sensible and a nice bennie for non-humans that seek to "focus" in a particular profession. An excellent addition to the game, while still allowing humans to maintain their place in the PC hierarchy by dint of their "unlimited potential."

SO...see those last two paragraphs? One thing: non-obtrusive. Second thing: good and welcome.

Now, let's talk about everything else. Because Gary seems to have been all coked up when he tweaked out the rest of this mess.

Players and DMs alike should take note of an impotant new rule change which is alluded to herein: player characters can be members of certain demi-human sub-races that are not permitted to PCs by the rules in the Players Handbook -- namely, the valley elf, grugach, drow, duergar, and svirfneblin. More will be said about this new development in subsequent articles. For now, however, players who choose to have drow, duergar, or svirfneblin characters should heed this general stricture: The alignment of such a player character may be of any sort, but daylight adventuring must be severely curtailed due to the nature of these creatures. Without special eye protection and clothing, these three demi-human types will suffer slight problems and sickness due to exposure to sunlight. 

No, Gary. No. No. No.

No, you cannot give players to play powerful demi-humans...creatures originally designed to provide additional challenge to high level PCs with their extra special abilities. Creatures with built-in magic resistance or natural spell powers or the capability of summoning elemental monsters regardless of class. No, Gary. You are high, man. You are NOT thinking straight.

Unfortunately, however, the drugs would continue to flow all the way through the publication of the Unearthed Arcana, when the final blow would be struck to the balance of non-human class relations:

The cavalier class is not listed on the tables for elves and half-elves, and the bard class is not listed on the table for half-elves, because level advancement in either of those classes is unlimited to any character with the requisite ability scores to qualify for the class.

Fucking cocaine, man. 

Anyone unfamiliar with the cavalier class as it appears in the UA will have to wait for the next post in this series to understand just how crap-tastic it is to give elves unlimited class advancement in a class that's...basically...a better fighter. That such a character could also be, say, a drow with a bunch of bonus bennies is a friggin' travesty. Oh Noes! So sad I have a -2 penalty to hit in daylight...we're exploring dungeons, jackass! If I'm getting into fights in town, there's already something wrong!

*sigh*

But let's talk about some of the more subtle problems here. Letting non-humans into the ranger and druid class is a thumbing of the nose at the (unstated) wold-building inherent in the original work. Rangers are not "woodsy heroes of good" (and even if they were, why the hell would a DROW get to be one?)...rather they are AVENGING KILLER HUMANS that hunt and murder the humanoids that threaten humankind. That rangers operate in the wilderness is because THAT'S WHERE THEY FIND THEIR PREY.  It's not the "civilized" ork or goblin that they're protecting (human) people from...it's the roaming bands of cannibalistic hostiles that would otherwise overwhelm fragile humanity. Regardless of your take on alignment, forcing rangers to be "good" places them in direct opposition to the listed (evil) alignment of their quarry.

And druids? Do we not remember what these are and where they came from?

DRUIDS:  These men are priests of a neutral-type religion, and as such they differ in armor class and hit dice, as well as in movement capability, and are a combination of clerics/magic-users...they will generally (70%) be accompanied by a number of barbaric followers....

From Supplement I, Greyhawk

...They are more closely attuned to Nature, serving as its priests rather than serving some other deity... Druids have an obligation to protect woodland animals and plants, especially trees. Unlike the obligation of lawful and good types towards others of this sort, the tendencu of druids will be to punish those who destroy their charges, rather than risk their own lives to actually save the threatened animal or plant. Druids will not slay an animal if it can be avoided, and they can never willingly or deliberately destroy a copse, woods or forest -- no matter how enchanted or evil it may be -- although they may attempt to modify such a place with their own magicks.

From Supplement III, Eldritch Wizardry

As explained in the PHB: "Druids can be visualized as medieval cousins of what the ancient Celtic sect of Druids would have become had it survived the Roman conquest."  These are very HUMAN  characters, aligned with neutrality/nature, not the frolicking Chaotic Good elves feasting on freshly hunted deer. If anything, druids and elves would probably live in a state of polite distance (if not Cold War style hostility), each in their own section of the forest...if not different forests altogether. That half-elves can beliong to the druid class (and the druidic-based bard class) speaks more to their human nature than any elvish part of their blood.  The same reason, really, that they can become rangers (although lacking the unlimited leveling potential of a fully human ranger). 

It's part of the neat thing about half-elves: they get more OPTIONS than an elf. Now you're giving me no reason to play a half-elf at all...except as a bard (and interestingly enough, all the half-elves in the campaign of my youth were bards, including my own PC). 

And thus a new trope was born...of elven archer-y rangers and leafy-pantsed druids. Man, it always bugged me the way 3.0 portrayed rangers and druids as elves, and now I know why (though I guess that's not as bad as dragonborn paladins...). Still, if you're going to allow elves to become rangers "by the same reasoning" that gives them unlimited druid access, why not go all the way and let halflings play giant-killer, too? What? They can't shoot a bow?

Idiocy.

Of course NOW ("officially") halflings can become CLERICS...something that wasn't allowed in the PHB (even for NPCs). And, why? Because Roger Moore came up with some demi-human deities for a specific campaign setting, that Gary wanted to throw his editor a bone (and some royalties) by using them as filler in the new UA book. AND he (Gary) extended the maximum clerical level obtainable by non-humans (PC and NPC alike) to the point that a dwarf or elf with 18 wisdom (not even a number requiring wish magic!) can obtain double-digit (!!) levels of experience...while the poor half-elf can't get higher than 8!

That's right: a dwarf cleric can reach a higher level of cleric than they can fighter. Cocaine.

Okay, again, understand the original world-building of the game. Originally, ONLY HUMANS COULD BE CLERICS...of the adventuring sort. Yes, you could find dwarf and elf clerics (see their monster description in Supplement I: Greyhawk), because it makes sense that a demihuman population worships their own gods and have their own priests. But those clerics were of limited ability: 

On the other hand half-elves, since their inception, have always been allowed to earn levels as an adventuring cleric: presumably because of their human nature. That they could not advance very high showed how their elven half limited their ability to advance within the (human/adventuring) church...even though they could make up for it through multi-classing (half-elves with OPTIONS had the largest number of multi-class possibilities of any race in the PHB). It is this same elven nature (presumably) that prevented the character from being a paladin (originally) even though they wee human enough to take up the mantle of ranger. 

[yet another reason why the UA's allowance of half-elf paladins is such a slap in the face]

Similarly, half-orcs were also given the ability to become clerics and cleric multi-classes...the only other non-human (besides the half-elf) with the capability. Again, the assumption is this is possible because of the character's semi-human nature...they have the blood of humanity in their veins and so can learn the ways of the human (adventuring) church. That these teachings could be perverted to evil and combined with the skills of an assassin speaks to their orcish side, I imagine.

But with the UA rules, no half-orc with max wisdom (14) nor half-elf (18) will ever equal a dwarf with even a 16 wisdom (not an elf with 17) because...reasons? Their racial deities are cooler, I guess?

*sigh* (again)

Hey! How 'bout this? Have you ever noticed that...with the advent of the new super-official Unearthed Arcana...even while demi-human class and level potentials were "expanded," a LOT of the original (i.e. PHB race-class combos) were actually reduced? Huh? What? That's right...here's the comparison:

   Dwarf fighter, STR 16 (or less) in PHB: maximum 7th level

   "Hill Dwarf" fighter, STR 16 (or less) in UA: maximum 6th level

   (High) elf fighter, STR 17 in PHB: maximum 6th level (7th with STR 18)

   High/Grey elf fighter, STR 17 in UA: maximum 5th level (6th with STR 18)

   Gnome fighter, STR 18 in PHB: maximum 6th level

   Gnome fighter, STR 18 in UA: maximum 5th level

   Half-elf fighter, STR 18 in PHB: maximum 8th level

   Half-elf fighter, STR 18 in UA: maximum 7th level

   (High) elf magic-user, INT 18 in PHB: maximum 11th level

   High elf magic-user, INT 18 in UA: maximum 10th level

So, yeah: adopt the new UA rules and all your "standard" races are going to suck a bit more. Hey, but at least they raised the maximum thief level a half-orc can achieve (still not "U" however, so why would a half-orc be anything bother being anything but an assassin?).

It's crap...it's all just a big pile of crap. I'm sure there are folks that LOVE the Unearthed Arcana rules and the newly expanded demi-human roles. Sorry...I'm not one of them. Here, I'll share another fun, personal anecdote with everyone: when I decided I wanted to start playing AD&D again (four-ish years ago), I decided to look at each D&D race, and their allowable classes, and figure exactly how high of level I wanted their potential to be based on A) how I viewed the species, and B) how it fit with my world/setting. This included looking at what I wanted their best fighting ability to be, the highest level of skill I wanted them to get to, the best spells they would have access to, and all the various "class abilities" (like the gaining of henchmen or "baron status" or whatever) they might achieve. I decided that I was not going to be a "slave to the rules," but would "make my own choices" as to what level/class restrictions would be allowed in my game. 

And what I found was that I liked ALL the classes and level restrictions AS WRITTEN. The PHB limits are perfectly appropriate, based on how I see my campaign world. Well, except I'd like a dedicated, "focused" non-human to be able to achieve a slightly higher level (and the UA '+2 to max' rule gets that job done). 

But I definitely don't want elven cavaliers and (adventuring) dwarven clerics and half-elf paladins in my game. Nor do I have any interest in making duergar and drow and svirfneblin available as PC race types...my players have yet to discover and explore the Underdark! Why should that content be available to players from the get-go? 

(Spoiler: it shouldn't)

There have, of course, been worse travesties in D&D since the UA was published. Allowing PC githzerai (hello, 2E Players Options!). And WotC's devolving the druid class into its current shape-shifting/no semblance of origin/bullshit is a clear sign that the designers live in Seattle and smoke way too much weed ("Dude, like, why don't we, like, lean heavy into the shape-changing thing? Like isn't that better than making them use a scimitar all the time?" "Yeah, dude. Like what if it were a dragon-born druid, and it could become, like, a REAL dragon." "Dude, cool.").  Yeah, far worse travesties. But adopting the UA rules wholesale into your 1E game is...pretty bad. You're going to end up with a lot of elven cavaliers.

(I mean, why wouldn't you? No level cap, right?)

No. The PHB works JUST FINE. Add the +2 bonus to max level for single-class demi- and semi-humans. Leave out the non-standard "sub-races" (terrible term, BTW, Gary). Leave out the cavaliers. If PCs end up taking their prime requisites into the 20s some point down the road then, sure...take a gander at the UA tables to get an idea at how many bonus levels to grant (here's an idea: +1 to max level for each point over 18). But, otherwise, just stick with the classics; stick with what works.

And remember folks: drugs are bad for your brain.

Must. Stop. Doing. Cocaine.

The Death Of Adventure

So...last night (Wednesday), I purchased the new "5.5E" Dungeon Master's Guide.

No joke.

The kids and I were at Barnes & Noble, using up old gift cards (we had some $160 worth that were sitting in the glove box of the car). While many actual ("non-game") books were bought, I threw the DMG on the pile for a lark. I mean, if I fancy myself a "game designer," shouldn't I be keeping up with new developments in the hobby? Plus, it had a cool cover and I am NOT immune to the same visual snares as any other gamer geek. C/mon...Warduke? He's my fave!

My son just rolled his eyes at me. 

But seriously, the subject of 5E has been coming up lately with regard to some of the things I've been writing (and some of the feedback I've been getting), and I thought maybe I needed to take a good look at just what WotC (or "the WotC" as some call it) is selling customers these days. I mean, I have the receipt...I can still take the book back.

; )

ANYway...after the kids were in bed, I skimmed the book for an hour or so, making note of the different sections, seeing what new things had been included, noting some of the cuteness. I confess, I do love the inclusion of the "D&D kids" from the early 80s cartoon; especially nice to see their "magic weapons" all getting write-ups in the the Magic Items section. Nice to see Greyhawk get some love as an example campaign setting (I didn't bother reading the write-up). The "lore glossary" was kind of fun (no Gord the Rogue, though). Also, interesting the chapter on "bastions"...5E adding some domain rules to their game? How 'old school' of them!

I woke up this morning a little before 6am and, as usual, being unable to get back to sleep, decided to go downstairs, brew some coffee, and give the thing a thorough read-through. 

And...hm.

Well, at first it wasn't all that bad. In fact, my original title for this blog post was going to be "Eye of the Beholder" because, if you read the text from a particular perspective...say, one of having decades of D&D gaming under your belt...and then tilted your head a little bit...well, you could say 'Okay, I guess this is still D&D.'  I mean, the "how to run a session" is fairly similar to any other edition's session running. Discussions of DM's unique play style, respecting our fellow participants (players and DMs alike), rules adjudication, yes, yes, this all seems normal. Advice for dealing with overly cautious players, uh-huh. How to deal with rules discussions, okay. A lot of things on proper communication...what I'd call "no brainer" stuff, but we live in a world where bad behavior gets tolerated (especially on-line), and everyone is touchy, so maybe having some of this up front is fine. VTT discussion...okay, small, but worth mentioning, no problem...

Then we get to Chapter 2: Running the Game.

KNOW YOUR PLAYERS

...your role as Dungeon Master is to keep the players immersed in the world you've created and to give the characters the opportunity to do awesome things.

Knowing what your players enjoy most about the D&D game helps you create and run adventures that they will enjoy and remember. Once you know which of the following activities each player in your group enjoys, you can tailor adventures to your players' preferences.

So what are these activities? They book divides them into several descriptive categories, each category including several ideas for engaging these specific types of players. They include the following (in alphabetical order): Acting, Exploring, Fighting, Instigating, Optimizing, Problem-Solving, Socializing, Storytelling. These ideas for all these are bad, dumb, or worse. For the "socializing" player, there aren't any ideas; instead, the book simply says:

Many groups include players who come to the game primarily because they enjoy the social event and want to spend time with their friends, not because they're especially invested in any part of the actual game. These players want to participate, but they tend not to care whether they're deeply immersed in the adventure, and they don't tend to be assertive or very involved in the details of the game, rules, or story. As a rule, don't try to force these players to be more involved then they want to be. 

Are. You. Fucking. Kidding. Me?

I started to read ahead, faster and faster...skimming over extremely extraneous rules (example: "audibility distance" has a random table: 2d6x5' if you're trying to be quiet, 2d6x10' with normal movement, 2d6x50' if "very loud," undefined. Oh, here's another: roll D20 for weather: 1-14 "normal for season," 13-17 colder, 18-20 hotter. Thanks, tips). Ignored the paltry miniatures rules and got to combat, where we get this good advice under the section KEEPING COMBAT MOVING: 

Don't Repeat Game States

When a characters do something to change the tactical situation, don't respond by putting things back to the way they were before. For example, if a character takes the Disengage action to move away from a group of monsters, don't respond by having those same monsters chase the character. Move the monsters somewhere else.

Guess no pursuit/evasion rules needed here. 

Hasten A Monster's Demise

If a combat has gone on long enough [undefined] and the characters' victory is almost certain, you can simply have the monster drop dead. The players don't ever need to know that still had 15 Hit Points left...

How is that different from "fundging" dice rolls again?

Change The Monster

You can transform one monster into another to keep a fight interesting. Maybe a worg splits open and a gibbering mouther spills out to take its place. Or a cultist is consumed in a pillar of infernal flame and a devil erupts from the ashes. 

Or maybe I should suddenly yell and throw my beer at the players because they seem to be dozing off, right? That'll liven things up...keep 'em on their toes, right?

OMG (as the kids say)...this was starting to get really, really bad. I quickly flipped back to chapter one where the helpful sidebar told me that "Every chapter (but especially chapters 1, 2, 4, and 5) has new advice for Dungeon Masters of all experience levels."  Well, the advice in Chapter 2 had proven fucking horrible, what on Earth would I find in Chapters 4 and 5?

Chapter 4: CREATING ADVENTURES

Oh, Lord, no...

Chapter 5: CREATING CAMPAIGNS

*sob*

Everything outlined about the story of an adventure in chapter 4 is true of a campaign's story as well; a campaign is like a series of comics or TV shows, where each adventure (like an issue of a comic or a TV episode) tells a self-contained story that contributes to the larger story. Just like with an adventure, a campaign's story isn't predetermined, because the actions of the players' characters will influence how the story plays out. 

No, of course it's not. It's dependent on Character Arcs:

Like most protagonists in film and literature, D&D adventurers face challenges and change through the experience of overcoming them. By incorporating each character's motivation into your adventures...you'll help characters grow in exciting ways. You can use the DM's Character Tracker sheet to keep track of key information about each character [sections on PC's Goal, Ambition, Quirks and Whims, then]...Players often reveal their characters' motivations through play. If you're uncertain of a character's motivations seem to have changed, it's OK to ask players for clarification.

Because, yeah, if I'm designing adventures that highlight "characters' motivations" it would be pretty challenging to do so given a whimsical fucking player who keeps changing their character's "goals" and "ambitions." Especially if it's just some jackass that only shows up to "socialize."

This f'ing thing. 

There are a lot of people who say that "D&D 5.5" is pretty much the same thing as 5E, and mechanically-speaking (i.e. with regard to the actual nuts-n-bolts rules), this appears to be the case. But this is most definitely NOT the same game as previous editions. To paraphrase a famous movie line, "This ain't even the same Goddamn sport."

It is clear to me that WotC has leaned HARD into that cash cow that is Critical Role...a program that amassed a half billion views between 2018 and 2022.  There was no "Critical Role" in 2014 when 5E was first published, and while I don't own the 5E DMG, I can read it on-line (pirated PDFs abound) and there's nothing in it that comes close to calling D&D a "collaborative story" that focuses on characters. Here, though, it is pervasive and (IMO) plain terrible. Even 5E, as written could still be played (nominally) like Dungeons & Dragons, i.e. with players experiencing the thrill of danger in adventures created by a DM running his or her own world.

Now it's about having a "premise" for your campaign. Now it's about including "foreshadowing" and "callbacks." Now it's about "sharing spotlight" and creating Very Special Episodes for each particular PC in the group. 

Character-Focused Adventures.  Adventures should occasionally highlight character motivations or elements of their backstory. Here are a few examples....

...Avoid focusing adventures on any one character too often, and look for opportunities to have character-focused adventures for each character from time to time.

No. This is not D&D. This is not special snowflake Improv Hour at the Underground. 

All of this is so aggravating and awful I want to nut-punch someone. No wonder the state of the hobby is so incomprehensible. The publishers took the incoherence of 2nd Edition AD&D and multiplied it by a hundred. Why? Because some actors pretending to play D&D made the game uber-popular.

F. That. Nonsense.

I apologize for all the cursing (my kids don't read my blog), but I am incensed. And I am sad. Because it IS sad...yes, SAD!...to see the needless and untimely death of something I love. The death of fantasy adventure gaming. You can sell all the books of rules you want, with stupid tracking sheets, and ridiculous random tables, and long and complex "experience point tables."  But experience points don't matter much when levels are handed out arbitrarily.

You can do away with XP entirely and advance characters based on how many sessions they play or when the characters accomplish significant story goals. This method of level advancement can be particularly helpful if your campaign doesn't include much combat or includes so much combat that tracking XP becomes tiresome.

Oh, I'm sorry. Has tracking XP become tiresome? Let's just sit around talking "in character." That should surely be the way to make my fighter become a more powerful combatant. Lot of danger in hashing out my backstory with sparkling reveals and a clever accent, right?

But is there really any danger? After all, players are allowed to set "Hard Limits" for what they find acceptable, and this can include ANY rules, including those related to CHARACTER DEATH.

Given the degree to which players get attached to their characters, character death can be an emotionally charged situation. It might even be a hard limit for some players (see "Ensuring Fun For All" in chapter 1), so it's worth holding a conversation about how to handle character death at the start of a game.

Oh, I'm sorry. I was under the mistaken impression we were playing DUNGEONS & DRAGONS. I didn't realize that would be TOO HARD for you. Please, let us play this circle-jerk abomination instead!

It is ridiculous. It is terrible. It is dysfunctional. It is schizophrenic: why bother putting in all this "advice" to make interesting tactical distinctions in combat (all in the name of making fights more interesting) when it all just boils down to advantage or disadvantage?  Why bother fighting at all when the DM simply rules the monster drops dead because the fight's been going on "too long?" Or when DMs are advised to have unrelated monsters pop out of an opponent just to spice things up?

The dumbing down of D&D and the squandering of the game's potential has reached apotheosis. I will not say 'things cannot get worse,' because things can ALWAYS get worse. But even making the game worse than this could not kill classic D&D adventure game any deader. What the game's publisher is selling as instructional text to potential Dungeon Masters is worse than a sham...it's a shame. A damn, crying shame.

Hey, but nice cover art! Love Warduke!