Delving 4E: An Interlude

AKA "Delving 4E Part 3.5"

In my last post, I gave my thoughts about the classes and builds of 4th Edition, specifically some of the stuff I liked with regard to conceptualizations (is that a word? spellcheck says yes). The post only addressed classes in 4E PHB, and long-time players of D&D will notice the conspicuous absent of a couple-three loooooong time classes of the D&D game: the druid and the bard.

The druid is the real glaring absence...available as a player character class since the days of OD&D (it first appeared in Supplement 3: Eldritch Wizardry), the druid is a standard class in both AD&D 1 and 2, D&D 3 (and 3.5), and even makes it into BECMI as a "proto-prestige class" of cleric (see the Mentzer Companion set). It provides a natural (as in "nature") counterpoint to the cleric's more organized worship and is a bit of a bridge between the magic-user and cleric archetypes, gaining some of the spells and benefits of each, as well as hybrid selection of weapons and armor.

It is also the favorite class of my buddy +Heron.

The bard's history is a little shorter, only first appearing in an appendix of the original AD&D PHB, and never in any of the "basic" games (the one in my B/X Companion doesn't count). Unlike the druid, the bard has undergone several significant revisions over the years, beginning first with its jump from 1E to 2E (where it went from a more martial class to more "trickster" as rogue subclass) and from there to 3E where it became a hybrid support class with an emphasized arcane (wizardry) flavor, and a favored class of gnomes (by 3.5).

The bard was my favorite class back in my 1E days. But that's a post for another time.

I should probably also mention the assassin, which first appeared in OD&D's Supplement 2 (Blackmoor) before the 1E PHB. While 2nd edition initially axed the class, it later appeared in the Al-Qadim setting book as a religious-zealot reimagining, as well as a "monster class" (the Headsman/Thug) in the BECMI Master set. As of 3E, it still wasn't a core class, though it makes and appearance in the 3E DMG as a prestige class. As it's been MIA for so many years, its absence from 4E isn't nearly as surprising as the lack of druid and bard options.

Welp, the fourth edition's PHB2 does contain both the bard and the druid, along with updated versions of 3E's barbarian and sorcerer class, and something called an avenger...an assassin rewrite of serious religious overtones (something reminiscent of video games like that bald Hitman guy with the numbers on his scalp or the white-hooded Guild dudes).

[for the record, I draw a very severe distinction between the raging berserker of 3E and the flavor/skill-heavy barbarian that appeared in the 1E Unearthed Arcana]

The PHB2 also adds three completely new (to D&D) classes in the invoker, shaman, and warden, as well as additional race options in the deva, gnome, half-orc, and shifter. As I said in my earlier post, I'm not a fan of 4E's races (especially the new ones), though I have to admit the gnome tickles me a bit with its "fade away" power (would have been a useful ability for my old gnome assassin, Shoon Grinblade).

Even the cover art is bad.

Here's the thing: with one possible exception, all these classes leave me ice-cold. Or worse, they just plain irritate me...both in conception and execution, most of the stuff in the PHB2 is a big bucket of crap. In my opinion, of course...perhaps other people have found these options to be fun, interesting, and exciting. For me? No, sorry.

I mean the druid...the druid, what the f---! The druid is some sort of lycanthrope from the get go (though only a fight-worthy one...the PHB2 suffers A LOT from the basic premise of fourth edition...). The warden appears to simply be "the other druid" for people who don't want some sort of were-priest. Maybe they had too many options for druids and split it up over two or three classes? But then, you've already got this shifter race, and... I don't get it. What's with cranking the animalism up to 11 in this book?

When Heron told me druids were his favorite class and was waxing eloquent on their virtues, never once did he mention the way their dire wolverine attributes matured with level progression.

[ha...my child just saw the PDF images of the gnomes on my computer and asked, "Are those gelflings?" We just watched The Dark Crystal the other night]

[it's funny because they don't really look like gnomes]

Anyway...aside from the gnome and the concept of a shapeshifter race (I'm a fan of Roberson's Cheysuli books, and I think the archetype is pretty good "fantasy;" I've used it to good effect with, for example, DragonQuest in the past), the only thing I really liked in the PHB2 was the bard, and its optional martial build, which reminds me very much of my "glory days" playing 1E AD&D. It would be tempting (for me) to play such a character...but then, I suspect, that even the most martially oriented bard would look pretty tame next to other class-builds (and not just the fighter). Maybe.

So, yeah; that's it for the PHB2. There's nothing else here that I really want to comment on. Not in a positive, constructive fashion anyway.

Film Hate

Can I just talk about hate for a brief moment? I'm not talking about the absence or antithesis of love...I'm just talking about the standard dictionary definition of "intense or passionate dislike." There are some things that just make me really cranky...and while I could just keep 'em to myself, I have a feeling that might be bad for some of my internal organs.

So here comes a short (I hope) rant regarding films.

I don't work in Hollywood, so I have no "insider perspective" on the filmmaking process. I know that films cost a lot of money. I know that they take huge numbers of people working in collaboration to make them. I know that many of the decisions made by film companies revolve around the ability to recoup the money spent and make some profit so that the rich can get richer and produce more films, continuing the business of filmmaking (which helps employ all those people that work on making films). I know that no matter how much "vision" one, single person possesses (whether that's a writer, director, producer, etc.) that vision is going to be worked over a bit by all the other people involved in the filmmaking process...especially co-writers, co-producers, directors, film execs, etc.

And nothing I write on this blog is going to change that. Still, I'm talking about saving my spleen, here.

I HATE that there is so little originality coming out of Hollywood...that so many of the Big Budget Blockbusters are remakes (or "updates") of existing movies. Whether you're talking Straw Dogs or Clash of the Titans, I just feel like slapping people and saying this doesn't need a remake...if you want to introduce an old film to a new crowd, then digitally remaster it and re-release it. Otherwise make your own Goddamn movie, dudes. Aren't people being paid millions of dollars to do these things? And you can't think of an original idea? You suck.

I HATE it when films based on novels written in different time periods, decide to spruce up ("update" again) the material in order to make it more in line with out 21st century wants and perspectives. "Modernizing" it. Look, if you're going to make a live-action version of The Hobbit, then make The Hobbit. Don't make it into something else, restructuring the characters and plot to make it "cooler." If you don't feel like being faithful in your adaptation, then come up with your own original fucking idea for a movie. How many cars do you own?

[and just to add onto that...]

I HATE it when filmmakers choose to make films that use an existing piece of intellectual property (like The Hobbit) and then inject a bunch of random token characters into it because the original IP wasn't diverse enough in terms of gender and race. THERE IS IP OUT THERE THAT FEATURES DIVERSITY, WHY DON'T YOU ADAPT THAT?! There are lots of fairy tale books that feature female protagonists (Shirley Murphy's Soonie and the Dragon comes to mind). Oh, wait...that doesn't have enough blood and guts and combat for you?

Nice little tale. Dragon eats people.

[because bloody violence is what has made The Hobbit a beloved classic of children's literature for decades, right? That and all the songs/poems Tolkien threw in there]

Fine, how about adapting one of Robin McKinley's (award winning) books? How about adapting Jennifer Roberson's Cheysuli saga (when an author gets an eight book series published, maybe there's an audience)? How about adapting the saga of Brynhildr to the screen in a Norse mash-up the same way Ray Harryhausen adapted Perseus and Greek myth in the original Clash of the Titans? Are you just too fucking stupid to do this?

I HATE that so often Hollywood (when it comes to action/fantasy films) seems like the epitome of a "good ol' boys" network where the white, male (straight) hero front-and-center. I'm white AND male AND straight and I get tired of seeing the same old shtick.

You know what I really, REALLY don't want to see? I don't want to go into a screening of Star Wars VII and see three white buddies (two male, one female) going on a fantastic galactic adventure. That was fine in the 1970s, but it was certainly a tired concept by the time Harry Potter rolled into theaters. Give Lupita Nyong'o a kick-ass role as Lando's daughter-turned-space-pirate and let her be the "Han Solo" of the movie.

Oscar winners shouldn't have to play aliens.

Please don't make her a token "new apprentice" of Jedi Master Skywalker with the sole purpose of being killed off by the Big Bad Guy of the film. Please, please, please don't do that. And don't make her an "alien" (non-human), either.

[EDIT from 2016: They made her an alien. Dammit]

Anyway, these are some of the things I'm thinking/fuming about today. Earlier I watched a trailer for the new Hobbit film (I'm not even going to bother with a link...you folks can find it, I'm sure). And it just made me irritated. And then it got me thinking about Hollywood and all these things I "passionately dislike." Things I really can't change or impact or control. Which, BTW, just makes me more irritated.

One of the wonderful things about this RPG thing...the OSR movement, the Indie movement, the DIY-self-publishing thing is how nice it is to have some control and to be able to make shit without being beholden to "money men." I know that what drives the film industry to do things I hate is (for the most part) money. It's the same reason why people choose to live in Paraguay (for those who HAVE a choice): here you can start a business and expect (on average) 10-30% return on your investment annually.

[which is crazy-huge compared to the 5-8% (or 5-10%) you'd expect in the USA. Here, you can recoup your costs after three years and then just profits, baby, ever after. The money doesn't, of course, get reinvested in the country...but who cares when you can afford to send your kids to school in the United States? Just sad, in so many ways...]

People in the self-publishing RPG biz aren't getting rich, clearly, but at least folks are getting a chance to make games (and play games) that they want. If game design is an "artistic" enterprise (and I'd say it is), then at least its not the compromised art of the (establishment) film industry. And that makes it cooler than Hollywood and (for me) mostly "hate-proof."

Mostly.
; )

Fantasy Females

I just started re-reading Jennifer Roberson’s Cheysuli books, a series I started years ago but stopped collecting due to a lack of funds (a frequent occurrence in my high school and college years). They’re pretty darn good…I had originally thought they’d make a decent B/X campaign setting (and still think that), but now I’m enjoying them just for themselves. Back in high school (my non-D&D years) I attempted to emulate the setting with SSI’s DragonQuest RPG (DQ has a lot of “ups” on D&D for a Cheysuli setting, including shapechanger characters, more accessible magic-use, and knife wielders that don’t totally suck), but in the end no one really wanted to play DQ, not even me.

[side note: If anyone would like to see the equivalent of a literary justification of “all weapons do D6 damage,” check out the Cheysuli books…these guys are like Apache knife-fighters extraordinaire!]

Anyhoo, I was thinking to myself this morning: what the hell is it with all the chick fantasy authors?

That is to say: why do I seem to be drawn to the fantasy writings of women authors? And how has that colored my ideas of fantasy and story and the application of both to my gaming?

Because (after all), the baseline foundation of the DM craft is emulating the stuff that you enjoy or read or watch in the various media available to us: books, comics, film, TV. You can say “well, I base MY D&D campaign on actual history” but I would say you are STILL getting that version of “history” from something: books, comics, film, TV (or possibly university lecture hall).

I think it’s nigh impossible to create something out of a vacuum…and SINCE I’m drawing on my own “memory banks” of fantasy to run my campaigns, and SINCE I’m reading so much fantasy written by female authors, HOW is that influencing me?

Because I do think there are differences in story-telling technique and priorities between genders. That may just be me (I was never an English major, as you may be able to tell from my blog-writing style, so I don’t know if there’s any study/analysis of this kind of thing)…but I certainly tend to gravitate to the woman story authors. Allow me to list some of my authorial inspirations (in no particular order):

Jennifer Roberson (despite only having read 2-3 of her books, she turned me into a knife fan many years ago…also prefer her version of “high fantasy” to others).

Elizabeth Boyer (duh…Vikings. I’ve blogged about this many times; she had major influences on the B/X Companion).

Marion Zimmer Bradley (the Big MZB…one of the All Time Greats. Her books are wonderful and pretty much un-translatable to a visual medium making them real “book books”).

Margaret Weiss (I know she only co-authored Dragon Lance, but her name does get first billing, and not out of alphabetical order…the DL books renewed D&D for me in middle school).

Wendy Pini (artist and writer of ElfQuest comics…probably the most engaging and gripping fantasy graphics of all time).

[Colleen Doran, artist and author of the weird sci-fi comic A Distant Soil has also had some small, if strong influence]

Anne McCaffery (mixing SciFi and fantasy is a good thing!).

J.K. Rowling (not an influence in my formative years, and certainly fairly cheesy compared to my usual literary fare, but I admit I have read all seven Hairy Bottom novels…probably the most books I’ve read from a single author in the last ten years).

[regarding my formative years, I will say that before I started reading fantasy, I read quite a few (10 or more) of the old Nancy Drew books at my school library. Although “Carolyn Keene” is a pseudonym, the authors of most of these books were women, with Mildred Benson and her daughter Harriet Adams being the ones primarily credited]

Susan Cooper (this one WAS during my formative years…read the entire Dark is Rising series. Wouldn’t mind revisiting that one, one of these days).

Robin McKinley (another one from my youth; author of The Hero and the Crown and The Blue Sword. The plots of these books impacted much of my early D&D gaming).


Now this isn’t to say that I haven’t read and enjoyed the works and writings of male authors over the years…however, most of these guys (like woman author Anne Rice) are folks that I’ve read once and not returned to…or authors I’ve grown beyond. For example, I read quite a bit of Piers Anthony back in my youth, but I can’t stand his stuff anymore, and none of it has impacted my gaming (I don’t do puns of the Xanth variety, and his Apprentice Adept series is the kind of simplistic fantasy/scifi that makes me wretch)…despite the sex and violence of his books, they seem squarely aimed at the age 12-15 demographic.

Sometimes, it seems like male fantasy authors only fall into two camps: the humorous/whimsical and the ugly. Humorous/whimsical would include Robert Aspirin’s books (which, like Anthony, can get tired after awhile), while “ugly” is the term I use to describe, say, Stephen King’s Gunslinger series. The latter is a series I read compulsively/raptly as it was published, but as with all of King’s books, it doesn’t shirk from the coarse, the gross, the gritty side of life, instead delighting in showing off just how bad things can be. Reading his books isn’t always “fun.”

However, there ARE male authors that fall into the “inspiring, impactful fantasy” category for me: Howard, Moorcock, Lovecraft, Tolkien, George Lucas, Lloyd Alexander, and C.S. Lewis (especially The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, which I have read half a dozen times at least). Interesting that of these authors, Howard, Lovecraft, and Tolkien had very strong female influences on them from a young age (Tolkien’s father died when he was 3 years old and he was raised by his mother)…but then, who’s to say that the female authors I cited didn’t have strong masculine influences?

The point is: it is the female fantasy authors that have had the larger impact on my concepts of fantasy (and directly translated to my fantasy gaming). ESPECIALLY with regard to gaming, only the Big 3 (Howard, Moorcock, and Tolkien) have had as much impact; the first two with regard to tone, the third with regard to mythology (and I would cite the Silmarillion and Children of Hurin as the main influence, not LotR). “Character,” “setting,” and “plot” (for what that last is worth; call it “scenario”), as well as “theme” (if any) comes from my female authors with the occasional random dude (Beagle’s Last Unicorn, Ellison’s Run for the Stars, Steakley’s Armor, and Boyett’s Ariel) sometimes throwing up an especially noteworthy piece of fiction.

[this, of course, is only in reference to my fantasy fiction influences; history and folklore also has a major impact/influence on my gaming and “fantasy life”]

Well, anyway, I thought it was interesting. I'll think about the subject a bit more and see if there are specific things about woman-penned fantasy that I really admire or if the whole discussion is ridiculous...more (hopefully) later...

: )