Showing posts with label En Garde. Show all posts
Showing posts with label En Garde. Show all posts
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Interview with Donald Saxman
Recently, I have been in correspondence with Don Saxman, whose claim to fame – at least for purposes of this blog – is the creation of Superhero 2044, the first commercially available superhero role-playing game. Given the 1977 copyright date, it is undeniably old school. For anyone claiming enthusiasm for “old school” RPGs, Saxman's experiences should prove insightful. As such, I asked Saxman for an interview and he kindly consented.
If you have your own questions for Mr. Saxman, please ask them in the comments section and he may reply.
Thoul's Paradise: Not only was Superhero 2044 an early role-playing game, it was – as you say on thesestrangeworlds.com – “the very first comic book superhero RPG.” In the 21st century, we have certain concepts as to what a “tabletop” RPG should entail; in the mid-70s, when you created Superhero 2044, those concepts had not yet crystallized. At the time, RPGs were very much associated with wargames. In fact, I don't think you use the phrase “role-playing” anywhere in Superhero 2044, instead you reference “wargames” (as well as “improvisational theater”) in the introduction. When you wrote Superhero 2044, did you make a distinction between RPGs and wargames? In your opinion, were RPGs merely a 'special case' of wargames? What were your perceptions and what were the differences?
Donald Saxman: I wrote and playtested Superhero 2044 between early 1975 and 1977. Actually, there were two editions with significant differences. The first (Superhero 44) was printed by myself at the Indiana University media center in early 1977 and the more common color edition (Superhero 2044) was printed by Lou Zocchi's Gamescience about a year later.
At the time, I don't think the term “role playing game” was in common usage, especially in the context of a table top game. Those were “touchy feely” days and “role playing” was typically used more in the context of psychology and interpersonal dispute resolution.
I think the first time I heard the term “role playing game” was in high school, maybe 1970 to describe the Model Congress and Model UN (collectively known as the “World Freedom Club.”) These were live action, I guess, so they would qualify as LARPS now, but the goal was political awareness and not competition. I tended to “play” them to win, much to the chagrin of peace and consensus-loving fellow students and faculty advisors. In one scenario I was the UN ambassador of the Malagasy Republic (Madagascar) during an attempt to wind down a growing war in the Middle East. I looked at the scenario, my country's “goals” and my “assets” and quickly came to the conclusion that the best thing for Madagascar would be prolonged war and the interdiction (or ideally destruction) of the Suez Canal. The result wasn't pretty, especially to anyone downwind of the eventual fallout, but I “won” and thereafter ships moving between the Atlantic and Pacific often stopped at the new Madagascar Free Trade Terminal. Great role playing there.
In 1972 when I went to Indiana University, I quickly joined the Society for Creative Anachronism and the Science Fiction Club. In both cases, I was soon immersed in live action role playing. So by the time I joined the “Conflict Simulation Club” my idea of a role playing game was very different from todays.
Basically when we played miniatures, or cardboard and map board games, and then eventually Chainmail and then D&D, we weren't thinking “RPGs.” We were thinking “campaigns,” i.e. something that lasted more than just one session and we were thinking “fantasy wargame” i.e. something with explicit combat and something not rooted in reality. So we made a distinction between D&D and, say, Tractics and Boot Hill and En Garde: Those were all wargame campaigns but not “fantasy wargame campaigns.” And we made the distinction between one day miniatures reenactments or Avalon Hill's Gettysburg: Those weren't campaigns and arguably they weren't very realistic role playing either.
To (finally) answer your first question, when I wrote Superhero 2044 I thought I was writing a “campaign” and I thought I was writing a “fantasy wargame.” That was even my tagline: “The Campaign of Superpowered Crimefighters in the Year 2044.”
At the time, the term we used was “persona.” You would adopt the persona of a wizard or Klingon or even a Malagasy ambassador. Your persona would have different powers and abilities and equipment. But they would also have different motivation and goals or victory conditions. This is how a bunch of spindly college students could spend the evening pretending they were “breaking into a monster's home, killing them, and looting their bodies.” Not a motivation or goal any of us had in “real life” but an easily enough achieved persona.
This idea of “persona” loomed large when I was designing Superhero 2044. One of the main motivations for my doing the game was the release of Tactical Studies Rules' Warriors of Mars game book. I thought they had messed it up big time and that I could do better. I wasn't just upset that they consistently misspelled “Martian” or that they had failed to get permission from the Burroughs estate (some of whom I knew). It was that John Carter and other Barsoomians just were not heroic enough.
So I set out to make a platform for the heroic persona. There would still be combat – lots of it – so it would be a wargame, but the role playing would emphasize fighting evil. And it would be science fiction-type fantasy. And it would be a campaign. (BTW, the second edition rules for playing villains were written by one of Mr. Zocchi's staff writers, not by me.)
TP: If Warriors of Mars was one of your “main motivations” for Superhero 2044, what were your other motivations?
DS: A big part of it was the desire to create. One of my best friends was Mike Ford, an increasingly popular science fiction writer who published as John M. Ford. During playtesting he decided to begin wiring full time and he was a tremendous inspiration. In the mean time, he was a great D&D Dungeon Master who would occasionally toss in the stray displaced superhero into his fantasy campaigns.
Although Mike's growing creative successes were a motivation, it wasn't D&D, or even Mike's superhero/D&D house rules that greatly influenced Superhero 2044. Rather it was an entirely different RPG: En Garde by Game Designers' Workshop. En Garde was one of the first true role playing games that didn't rely heavily on miniatures combat. En Garde was a simulation of 17th Century nobles, gentleman, and soldiers. Amazingly, the game remains popular with very few changes to the core rules.
Of course, another inspiration and motivation was the comic book. For the record, I was (and still am) an avid comic book reader – specifically DC (or National back then). The comic book series that most influenced Superhero 2044 was Legion of Superheroes. The idea of a team of variously powered heroes working together in a future setting was especially appealing. I went so far as to incorporate LSH staple “the Science Police” in the rules (I even won a science fiction convention costume party in a Science Police costume). So the whole concept of the “unique” super-powered superhero was based on the Legion of Superheroes (especially the Jim Shooter and Win Mortimer and then Cary Bates and Dave Cockrum eras).
BTW, in subsequent treatments of 2044 I replaced the Science Police with a (not owned by DC) organization called CURBIT (Confederacy of Urban Regions, Bureau of Illegal Technology) or “Tech Cops.”
TP: With regard to the three character types: Ubermensch have a net Prime Requisite modifier of +60, Uniques have a net modifier of +20, and Toolmasters have a net modifier of -10. Other than modification of Prime Requisites, what are the differences among the character types in terms of game mechanics? Why would I want to play anything other than an Ubermensch?
DS: One of the weakest parts of Superhero 2044 is the character creation system. My original plan was to do three more or less equally sized game books: the existing one, one entirely devoted to character creation (including a couple dozen pre-gen characters), and one with more background and some sample scenarios. When I sold the right to Gamescience, I also pitched this and included some material that would have gone in the second and third book. Lou Zocchi went ahead and added some of the pregens in the first (and ultimately only) book and the other ones never got completed. However, a couple years ago I resurrected and expanded on some additional character generation material and it went into the “halfway to 2044” edition that Mr. Zocchi sold at game conventions. I have been in the process of expanding even more for a new game, Strange World.
As for your question, the basic prime requisites describe the physical and mental situation for each player, but are largely silent on their “powers and abilities” and “extraordinary tools.” So you're right, an Uber looks powerful compared to an Unique or Toolmaster if you just go by prime reqs. This is sort of like saying “Hawkeye or Black Widow could easily take out Tony Stark or Bruce Banner... But they would have a much harder time against Iron Man or Hulk (let's face it... they wouldn't last a minute).”
Personally, I always liked playing Ubers, with a few relatively weak Uniques and Toolmasters and a lot of powerful NPC Uniques as background. Conceptually this is a lot like playing a “fighter class” in a world of magical “wizards” and “clerics.”
Of course, the whole division into three classes is pretty unrealistic, even in a world of superpowers. In comics, Batman (an Uber?) has access to very powerful cars, a utility belt, and the whole Batcave...so should he really be a Toolmaster? And how to handle heroes like Green Lantern? Unique or Toolmaster? There are lots of hybrid superheroes in the comics...Spider-Man, Thor, etc. At the time, I was certainly influenced by the three character classes in D&D.
TP: Perhaps the most interesting thing about Superhero 2044 is the setting. You carefully designed circumstances which made the existence of super-powered crime-fighters plausible (or at least more plausible than otherwise). Is there any fiction based on this setting? Do you maintain rights to the setting? For that matter, do you maintain rights to the game itself?
DS: When I first wrote Superhero 2044 the setting was original and as unique as I could make it. I wanted a situation where there was very advanced technology, so I picked a setting in the future. I wanted a setting where there human mutations had resulted in super powers. Unlike many comic book writers, I understood how mutation worked...exposure to radiation might result in profound changes...but not to the individual exposed. Rather it would be the offspring of the irradiated. This narrowed down the specific date. It had to be about two or three generations after a nuclear war that took place in 1990. Why 1990? I was also writing a post-nuclear war RPG called “Ruinwar 90.” So if we'd have adult super-powered humans I figured it would be about 50 years after the end of the 1990 war, i.e. 1994 plus 50 years.
Next I picked some key technologies that would allow advanced weapons, vehicles, and other gear. I assumed the key invention would be a “super battery.”
Finally I wanted a self-contained environment so I created an isolated island where civilization had largely survived the war. I wanted the environment to be in transition so I created the Freedom League...and then destroyed them so that there was an immediate and pressing need for brand new heroes. This is where the players come in.
Then I began to populate the environment with non player characters, organizations, and supervillains. As I previously discussed my plan (never realized) was to provide a lot more background in a follow-up game supplement.
The main reason this never happened was that after a relatively small run of “Superhero 44” I sold the rights to the franchise to Lou Zocchi and Gamescience. This was the right decision for me at the time, and the right thing for the game, which got much, much more exposure than it would have if I'd continued to self publish. But for better or worse the game turned out to be a one shot.
A lot of this background sat around twenty years. It then got recycled into my “Strange World” online game and ultimately into the five-part “Strange World” series of short novels. These are currently available for the Amazon Kindle (just search for Donald Saxman on Amazon and ignore all the boring-looking non-fiction). You can also get them from my website www.thesestrangeworlds.com.
The scope and setting of the online game and the novels is not the same as Superhero 2044. Like I said, I sold the franchise. But much of the flavor and a few of the characters remain. For instance, the year 2044 remains, the post-war superhero setting remains and even a version of the “Inguria” setting remains in the form of New Miami.
On the other hand, the superhero portion of the setting is just a small part of the overall environment. Anyway, feel free to decide for yourself. Pay particular attention to the super-powered teenager “Cobra.”
So my future plans? I'm about a third of the way through a massive 400 page RPG based on the Strange World multi-dimensional setting. I tried the Kickstarter route and failed miserably to create the necessary buzz, but the game will eventually be completed.
Or will it? It's been suggested I should refocus the Strange World RPG and turn it into a new version of Superhero 2044. That's a possibility. I'd have to reacquire the right to the franchise from Mr. Zocchi. He's never particularly been enthusiastic about this but who knows?
TP: The aliens from Formalhaut (which I assumed to be Fomalhaut) are an important part of the background and (in my opinion) deserve more detail. How did you 'design' this species and has anyone made a depiction of one?
DS: There's actually a story behind that. When I arrived at Indiana University in 1972, I went to the student union for “orientation” and met a couple of upper classmen who were starting a science fiction club. One was Leif Andersen, and he was a graduate student in planetary geology. Mind you, humankind knew very little about this science at the time. We'd landed on the moon, and had what we thought was a reasonable understanding of what was happening on Mars and Venus. The Jupiter and Saturn moons were still a mystery. The whole idea of extra-solar planets was, well, science fiction. Leif knew if it became known he was a big SF fan it would impact his career, so I think he wanted to found the club so he could benefit from it while keeping a low profile. Alas, he passed away before the Saturn and Jupiter flybys, which was a tragedy on so many levels.
Anyway, I wanted an alien race for Superhero 2044 and I wanted it to be someplace new, and I initially picked Fomalhaut. I had a pretty complex back story for them. Back then, there was no Wikipedia and no easy way to research this kind of thing. Anyway, well into playtesting Leif noticed what I was doing and let me know that Fomalhaut was a singularly unlikely place for life of any kind to inhabit. For one thing, it was a triple star. Who knew? So the Triple star system of Fomalhaut became the imaginary Formalhaut. The Fomals became the Formians. Funny thing though. The Hubble telescope found one of the first extra-solar planets orbiting one of the Fomalhaut suns. And there are now planetary evolution models that allow for a life zone in such a system. It's still a singularly unlikely place for intelligent life to evolve, but not an impossible place. I wish Leif was around to discuss. I spent a lot more time designing the culture than I did the Formians themselves. Most of this didn't end up in the game. I did provide more detail in the previously-discussed Strange World novels and they will be featured prominently in the eventual Strange World game.
Here's a backgrounder from the novels: The Formians are a relatively low tech level race native to Formalhaut 2. In 2032, human radio astronomers detected a plea for help from this dying race. Formia was a heavy (1.4 Earth normal gravity), hot world with a high oxygen content. Industrialization increased global particulate levels and resulted in a planetary ice age (ironically designated “global cooling” by humans). Worse than the cold, climate change turned much of the planet's free water to ice. As population increased, and farmland decreased, more and more coal was burned to produce fertilizer and operate greenhouses. Planetary ecology was on the brink of collapse. The most advanced Formian technology was approximately that of AD 1900 Earth. The age of steel was well established and electrification was beginning. Nuclear power (and weapons) were being conceptualized. Formians dreamed of space travel, but the best they could do was helium-powered blimps.
Formians are quadrapods with two legs and two arms, each with five prehensile fingers. They are about the same size as humans, with shorter legs and longer backs and arms. Formians are mammals but lay eggs and are completely covered by grey hair that closely resembles penguin feathers. Male Formians each resemble one another. Female Formians are somewhat smaller and with somewhat more variation in body shape. Formians live several hundred years. They are approximately as strong and fast as humans and are very durable and difficult to injure. They are very heat tolerant and not very cold tolerant. Formians must use oxygen masks if they venture above about a mile over sea level. Formian intelligence is variable. Formians have photographic memory so “intelligence” often equates to experience and access to education. Formians have the ability to mimic most sounds they hear, including human speech. Formians are carnivorous but can't eat Terran food and generally rely on “artificial” food grown in tissue vats. Formians must take allergy pills while on Earth. These expensive allergy pills are illegal for humans to possess because they are addictive and hallucinogenic.
The evacuated Formians prospered on Earth, either forming enclaves or integrating with human culture. I have some sketches of Formians but hope to eventually have a professional tweak them into something more attractive. In a case of independent evolution, the closest I've ever seen them come to realization in mainstream art is the intelligent platypus in much lamented My Cage comic.
TP: Although you did not publish a supplement, Judges Guild published Hazard, an “official game aid approved for use with Superhero 2044.” I assume it was “approved” by Gamescience. Did you have any contact with the author, Robert Bingham? What are your thoughts about that supplement?
DS: As you say, Judges Guild did Hazard and this was approved by Gamescience, but I was not involved. Their depiction of the world outside of Inguria was fine, but not at all what I had envisioned. It was very popular and no doubt served to make the game popular too, so who can complain? I understand a lot of people used it in non-superhero role playing. As an example of an interesting “parallel universe,” my version of “the world outside of Inguria” was actually the subject of an entire game. I wrote it as “Ruin War 90” and sold it to Gamescience, and it was published in a very short run as “Nuclear Survivors.” It was to be a prequel to SH 2044 set in 1990. There was even a sequel game planned...a space opera set in the 2100s called “Hundred Suns.” By the time Nuclear Survivors was published Gamma World was popular (as it is to this day) and I think that many would-be buyers thought NS was a rip-off of that game. Actually, it was written before Gamma World, but even I admit GW was better. It did however center on the 1990 nuclear war that sparked (literally) the mutations that eventually resulted in Uniques. As you might imagine, I've recycled many of the concepts from this post-apocalypse game into the Strange World novels too.
Hazard wasn't alone. There were other supplements, including one in Different Worlds by Brian Wagner (Issue 5, Dec/Jan 1980, “Super Rules for Superhero 2044”). Then the 1982 (issue 23) of Different Worlds has a supplement by me called “Part Time Superhero.” I was planning on doing additional articles for Different Worlds but for one reason or another they never happened. I also did a tabletop encounter that was demoed and sold out (all 50 copies) at the DeepSouth Con/River Con science fiction convention in the early 1980s. It had rules for a group of five superheroes fighting five supervillains. It's so rare even I don't have a copy anymore! Lots of good stuff in all these if you can find them on eBay.
TP: What really happened to Dr. Ruby? Dr. Ruby is a geologist; your educational background includes geology. How much character identification is going on?
DS: Dr. Ruby was named after and somewhat based on Indiana University professor of Geomorphology Dr. Robert Ruhe (he passed away in 1993). He was a real character and a pleasure to learn from and joke with. At the time the Geology department offered a “Screwball Award” to a professor each Christmas. This award was based on student voting and the main criteria was overall zany behavior. Campaigning was always fierce. I think he won it the year I was writing SH2044 largely because of his threat to flunk anyone who used the word “dirt” in his soils chemistry class. “In this class, we don't use 'dirt.' We don't even use 'dirty.'” He continued, “We say soiled.” This got into the school paper and even in the Indianapolis mainstream paper.
Anyway, Mike Ford (who did the part for the “what really happened to Dr. Ruby” series based his drawings on life and pretty well nailed him I think.
What happened to him? I have two versions. During the 1990s when I was running the first Strange World online game, Ruby managed to get into the tunnels that led to different parallel universes and found there was a universe where each of the illustrated outcomes had occurred – except the “really dead” option. He learned that if he ever returned to his home universe he probably wouldn't survive. He ended up a kind of traveling supervillain.
However, that outcome came later.
It was my original intent that the “lava suit” outcome was the real one. In fact, I started a “choose your own adventure” type game that explored this. I never finished it and the original (handwritten) manuscript is either lost or at the bottom of some 40 year old box in Public Storage.
It's doubtful it will ever be revived but just in case I should put the obligatory spoiler warning about now.
The adventure starts when a hideously burned man in a space suit is discovered dead in Battery Park. The authorities decide it was one of the asteroid miners testing out an experimental spacesuit designed to survive re-entry. (This is somewhat based on an old “Superman” TV show where a drowned man in a deep sea diver suit is discovered in an alley in Metropolis.) The player/superhero thinks otherwise and eventually tracks down Ruby to his subterranean lair (protected by lava moats). If they survive they just might manage to prevent Ruby from destroying the island's geothermal power station.
The adventure also reveals a good deal of background about Dr. Ruby. In his younger says he had experimented with protection against lava but his partner died in an accident. Ruby blamed the Science Police for the accident (with a certain degree of justification as it turns out). He went on to perfect the lava suits and realized that they would also protect against high intensity radiation. He eventually ended up in London, where he hoped to loot the radioactive, half melted remains of the British Museum. While doing this, he discovered the notes and journals of Professor Moriarty including “Dynamics of an Asteroid.” This started him on his path of revenge.
Using instructions from “Dynamics” he deflected the orbit of a large asteroid to impact on earth. The Science Police formed a rare and tenuous alliance with the asteroid miners to place a nuclear device on the asteroid and break it apart and deflect its path. Recall that one of the reasons the Science Police was created was to keep all forms of nuclear power and nuclear weapons off Earth. Ruby then stole the bomb and returned the asteroid to its original orbit.
He then devised a plan to nuke Science Police headquarters (and a good deal of the surrounding city). Instead, the superheroic Freedom League attacked and were nearly all killed when the bomb detonated in an uninhabited area. Ruby was widely thought to have died too, but he had escaped to his lair to sulk and plan.
And who was the original man in the space suit? A kidnapped biologist forced to clone a frozen Tyrannosaurus Rex (Ruby had also looted a map for the monster's Arctic resting place from London). How much identification is going on? Well, if I was a supervillain, I wouldn't have left the heroes in the dinosaur cage where they might conceivably escape. I'd have just dumped them into the lava moat.
TP: That doesn't seem very sporting. Regardless, thank you for taking the time to answer these questions.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
The Vagaries of War and Fortune
Siege of Stralsund – 1628
Public domain via Wikimedia Commons
|
In the immediately previous En Garde post,
your humble host started to provide
information about military campaigns. The outcome of any such
campaign is predicated by military ability – “the
numerical quantification of a character's ability to lead men in
battle.” Although not mentioned until page 19, military ability
is determined as a part of character generation. Unlike the other
ability scores, only one die is used to establish military
ability. It is also necessary
to determine military ability
for many non-player characters. For instance, when a player
character belongs to a regiment on campaign, military
ability must be established for
each commanding officer (and their adjutants) of every unit level
under which the player character serves. Page 21 tells us, “Campaign
battle results determination begins at the highest level and proceeds
to the lowest.” The roll of a die is compared to military
ability on the Battle Result
chart, first for the highest ranking officer and then down the chain
of command with a sort of 'trickle down' effect. In the example on
page 22, each of eight non-player characters is provided a military
ability so that the outcome of
a campaign can be found for a single player character. These
military ability
scores are recorded so that they will remain consistent when needed
for future campaigns. This would seem to be a great deal of
bookkeeping. Your humble host understands there are computer
programs that calculate and store these values but it is the
principle that is distressing.
In
any event, the personal outcome for a player character is eventually
resolved. The player makes a number of 2d rolls, trying to achieve a
certain number or greater in order to (a.) survive, (b.) be
'mentioned in dispatches,' (c.) be promoted, and (d.) acquire
plunder. (This method is the direct forebear of the process used for
each 'term of service' during Traveller character generation.)
Before making a roll for survival, a player can choose to apply a
positive modifier to the roll in order to have a greater chance of
survival. This is called poltroonery and, if discovered, can cause
the character to be disgraced. On the other hand, a player can opt
for reckless bravery; this increases the chance of death but also
increases the chances of being 'mentioned in dispatches,' being
promoted, and acquiring plunder. Being 'mentioned in dispatches'
entitles the character to one-to-six points of status for three
months and one point of status per month thereafter (cumulative with
other 'mentioned in dispatches' awards).
Being
promoted is conditional; there must be a vacancy (more bookkeeping)
and the character must be of sufficient social level. Of course,
with higher rank comes greater privilege in the form of status and
pay. Success in military endeavors can lead to a title of nobility
with an increase in social level, an award of status points, and a
possible pension. Higher ranks and titles are eligible for
appointments, such as Quartermaster General or Minister of State.
Some appointments can be quite lucrative, either by adopting policies
that enhance one's investments or by embezzlement. One interesting
appointment is the Commissioner of Public Safety. Not only can the
Commissioner “trump up charges against five players per year...he
must trump up charges against one player character” within the
first two seasons of his appointment.
Characters can use 'influence' to
affect rolls that represent the decision of a non-player character.
For instance, when attempting to secure an appointment, influence can
be expended to increase one's chances. Characters can also use
influence to the detriment of their enemies and rivals. Influence is
measured in units of favors and each favor is defined by its class.
Decision makers of greater prominence can only be influenced with
favors of higher class. As an example, a colonel can be influenced
with a class 3 favor, but the king can only be influenced with a
class 9 favor. Separate favors can be combined to increase their
effectiveness. Influence is obtained from one's mistress, from one's
position or appointment, and from one's own social level. There is
no allowance for it in the rules, but I think that characters should
be allowed to 'improve' the class of any given favor by contributing
a certain amount of funds, similar to how a courtship roll may be
modified – only more money would be required, such as 100 crowns
times the next higher class value. Perhaps there could be a way to 'convert' status to a favor.
In closing, your humble host perceives
En Garde as an interconnected set of ‘sub-games.’ First, there
is the ‘fencing’ game being, of course, the foundation upon which
the other games are situated. Next, we have the ‘social standing’
game characterized by the constant need to acquire status. Closely
aligned to the ‘social standing’ game is the ‘money management’ game with the risk-taking elements of gambling and investments. There is also the
‘military’ game, by which I refer to the resolution of campaigns
and their attendant effects upon characters. Also, there is the
'influence' game where influence is cultivated and strategically
spent. Finally, once the characters has progressed sufficiently, there is the 'appointment' game. Each 'sub-game' is indispensable but the rules for such need
not be ingrained. For example, players could employ a different
method to resolve duels without altering the rules for the other
'sub-games.' Also, I would like to think that military campaigns
could be handled in a more straightforward manner, yet not disrupt
other aspects of the game as a whole.
For those of you who may have missed
certain comments on prior posts, Les Petites Bêtes Soyeuses is an active game of En Garde! that currently seems to have
about fifty players. Please use the link for additional information.
Monday, March 26, 2012
No Friends for the Cardinal's Guard
| Image believed to be in the public domain |
According to page 16 of En Garde, “Gentlemen will find that a career in the military offers the best opportunities for advancement.” There are seventeen regiments from which to choose (not counting frontier regiments). The ease with which a character is accepted into a given regiment is based upon social level; higher social levels indicate a higher likelihood of acceptance. More desirable regiments require higher social levels. For instance, acceptance into the Royal Foot Guards (the most exclusive regiment) requires a minimum social level of seven; even then there is only a 1-in-3 chance of acceptance (i.e., a roll of at least 5 on a d6). The same social level gives a character a 5-in-6 chance of acceptance to a regiment of lesser renown, such as the 13th Fusiliers. If a character applies to a regiment commanded by another player's character, there is no die roll; the commander's player simply decides. To be accepted, the character must still meet any requirements. For instance, in order join a cavalry regiment, a character must own a horse (which requires a monthly expenditure of crowns for supplies and a groom).
Applying to a regiment requires a week of game time. If the regiment declines to accept the character, he may apply to other regiments in the same week, provided the regiment is of lesser social standing. For every two rejections, a -1 modifier is imposed on future rolls for acceptance.
Once accepted into a regiment, a character may purchase a commission; otherwise, the character will hold the rank of private. This entails spending two weeks of every month performing duties for the regiment. Characters of the next rank, subalterns, “must spend one week of every month on duty...” Characters of higher ranks are not obligated to spend any time on duty. A position in a regiment provides a monthly salary and (in most cases) a monthly amount of status. The amount of salary and status is dependent upon rank and regiment. For instance, a private in the Royal Foot Guards earns 12 crowns and 6 status per month; a private in the 13th Fusiliers earns 4 crowns and no status.
Each regiment has a friendly relationship with another regiment, as well as a regiment with which it has a hostile relationship. Exceptions are the Cardinal's Guard, who have no friends, and the Royal Foot Guards, who have no enemies. Relations among the regiments affect characters for purposes of dueling. A character gains more status when he wins a duel against an opponent from an enemy regiment; however, a character actually loses a status point if he wins a duel against an opponent from a friendly regiment.
Each regiment has a favored weapon (i.e., sabre, rapier, or cutlass). A character can practice with his regiment's favored weapon at no cost. Practice constitutes a week's action and after so many weeks, the character's expertise ability increases by one. A character who chooses to practice with another weapon (or a character who is not in the military) must pay his expertise in crowns for every week of practice. If expertise improvements via practice apply only to one weapon, then it would seem that a character could have as many as three expertise scores – one for each weapon. The rules for practice (p. 15) say that characters can irreversibly convert five points of expertise to one point of strength. Does this apply only to 'comprehensive' expertise or will simple 'cutlass' expertise be sufficient?
According to page 19, “One of the aspects of joining the military is that it is sometimes necessary to go on campaign.” Regular regiments only campaign during the summer season while the frontier regiments campaign every season. While on campaign, a character is exempt from status requirements and need not pay for his usual monthly upkeep. Also, characters can take a leave from their club so as to avoid paying club fees for the duration. A roll on the Force Commitment table indicates which regiments are deployed in a given season. The type of campaign (i.e., siege, assault, defense, or field operations) is determined by a roll on the Force Deployment table. To determine the organization of the campaign army, create a two-digit number using the Force Commitment die result as the first digit and the Force Deployment die result as the second. With this two-digit number, consult the aptly named Force Organization table. The nature of the 'force organization' helps to determine the eventual outcome of the campaign, a topic about which your humble host shall digress in a post next week.
Note: Republished due to Blogger errors.
Note: Republished due to Blogger errors.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Clubs and Bawdyhouses
| Dirck Hals [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons |
Clubs are a good way for En Garde characters to cultivate a certain number of status points per month. Clubs have membership requirements, usually a minimum social level. They also have monthly dues; the more exclusive a clubs is, the higher the dues are. If a character leaves a club, he may rejoin it only after three months. The rules make it sound as though such departures are voluntary, but what about a character who fails to pay dues? Does he have to wait three months or can he rejoin as soon as he has the money? What about a character who no longer meets the membership criteria? Does he still get to be in the club as long as he pays his dues? Is he expelled?
So, assuming one is a member in good standing, clubs provide some automatic status points; there is no need to visit the club during any given month. Of course, a character may visit his club; this counts as an action (therefore a week in game time). While doing so, a character may engage in carousing; in other words, spend crowns on 'liquid refreshment' to gain a status point. Characters may also gamble (against the house, not among themselves). Characters get status points for winning and lose status points for losing; however, characters get status points based upon the amount that they bet regardless if they win or lose. Finally, a character may gain status points from toadying – being the guest of another character at a club where the toadying character does not meet the membership requirements.
As discussed in a previous post, each En Garde character has certain monetary costs he must pay monthly in order to maintain a lifestyle appropriate for his social level (e.g.: servants, residence, clothes, et al.). Failure to do so causes a loss of one social level. En Garde characters have another monthly need which, if not met, imposes a loss of two cumulative status points; so, two for the first month, four for the second, six for the third, etc. Obviously, this is a very important need. This need is female companionship.
There are two means by which “characters may fulfill the female companionship requirements.” One way is to use an action to visit a bawdyhouse. Similar to clubs, a character may gamble and purchase liquid refreshment at a bawdyhouse; in fact, the purchase of liquid refreshment is mandatory. Unlike clubs, characters gain or lose status points at gambling only by winning or losing, not based upon the amount of crowns bet. Female companionship costs a number of crowns equal to a character's social level. After visiting a bawdyhouse, there is a chance that a character will be “set upon by footpads and relieved of his money.”
The other way for a character to obtain female companionship is to use an action to visit his mistress. Of course, characters do not begin the game with mistresses; a mistress “belongs” to a character only after the character has successfully courted her. At the commencement of the game, a number of mistresses are created equal to the number of player characters. Thus, mistresses are a finite resource; there may be competition to win the hand of a given mistress and with competition comes the possibility of dueling. Each mistress has a social level of anywhere from three to eighteen. Each attempt to court a mistress takes a week and has a cost in crowns equal to three times the social level of the courted mistress. Courting is never certain; a die roll is made to see if the courting is successful. The difference in social level between the mistress and the character determines the difficulty of the roll. It is more difficult to win the hand of a mistress whose social level exceeds that of the character just as it is less difficult to successfully court a mistress of lesser social level. A character may spend additional funds in order to increase his chances, but there is always a chance of failure. Once a character succeeds at courting a mistress, he can keep her only by spending a number of crowns equal to three times the mistress' social level per month. It is possible to court another character's mistress and 'steal her away' but, as one might expect, such behavior invites a duel.
There are benefits to having a mistress beyond female companionship. Every month a character keeps a mistress, he gets a status point (more if the mistress' social level exceeds his own). Each mistress may have one or more special attributes (there is a one-in-three chance of having any given attribute). Any mistress with a high enough social level has some amount of influence, but a mistress with a special attribute of influence has influence regardless of her social level (or has influence in addition to what she already has). A character gains an additional point of status per month if his mistress has the special attribute of beauty. Characters need not spend crowns to support a mistress with a special attribute of wealth; in fact, if the character's social level is less than hers, she will give him crowns on a monthly basis. When courting a mistress with wealth, a character must spend the usual amount (in order to get her attention) but cannot modify the roll for success by spending additional funds.
Obviously, with a greater number of players, there is a greater selection of mistresses; regardless, the pool is static. One supposes that when a character dies in En Garde (and some characters will certainly perish), the player generates a new character and thus stays in the game. I suggest that, when a character dies, a random mistress is removed from the game and a new mistress is created to take her place. (The removed mistress doesn't necessarily die, we can say that she joins a convent or whatever.) I think it would help to keep things interesting.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
The Importance of Status
| Image believed to be in public domain |
...breathes life into the character, providing him with a background and an environment through which he may claw his way to success.
Ultimately, 'success' is measured by 'social level.' The typical way for a character to attain (and maintain) social levels is to accumulate status points.* If, at the end of any given month, a character has accumulated a sufficient number of status points, his social level increases by one; however, if he does not have the minimum amount of status points to maintain his current social level, it decreases by one. Status points are exhausted at the end of every month, they do not carry over. Thus, every month every character must obtain status points to avoid the loss of a social level. (A social level can also be lost if a character fails to pay sufficient 'crowns' in a month to support his lifestyle; higher social levels require that more crowns be spent.)
The tables suggest that a social level of 24 is quite elevated and that few – if any – characters will achieve such a station. Regardless, there is no stated limit and En Garde has no proscribed end point. This is another reason that tends to qualify En Garde as a 'genuine' role-playing game. A characters has a starting social level based upon his father's (randomly determined) class and position; anywhere from 1 (a peasant's bastard son) to 12 (a count's first son). Technically, a character could begin with a higher social level if he starts with a title; however, the chance of starting with a title is slightly less than 1%. A standing of a character's father also determines the character's initial funds and the potential for a monthly allowance. It is possible that a character will begin the game as an orphan, thereby receiving an inheritance instead of an allowance or initial funds. Apparently, if a character is not an orphan at the beginning of the game he will not become one during the game.
In En Garde, each game week is considered an 'action.' For the sake of convenience: a month consists of four weeks, there are three months in a season, and four seasons make a year. Before deciding their characters' actions for any given game week, players engage in a brief “negotiation period.” Some activities require coordination among the players (such as when one character will be the guest of another character at a club). Much like Diplomacy, each player secretly writes down the character's action for the week; a player need not keep promises made to other players, but must follow through with what he or she wrote on the character's calendar.
For actions, there are several options available for characters, such as visiting a club. Part of the purpose of the negotiation period is “to arrange for duels.” Although not stated in the rules, I suppose that particular duels must be specified as part of a week's action. It does not seem to me that a duel would constitute an entire week's action. Do characters duel before their actions for the week or after? Regardless, characters may only duel if there is sufficient cause. The rules supply examples of “sufficient cause” for a duel, but I don't think that the examples are necessarily exhaustive. One of the examples is, “If a noble meets a non-noble who is four or more social levels above him.” If there is uncertainty whether cause exists in a particular situation, a vote is taken among all players whose characters “do not belong to the same regiments as the two estranged parties.” The decision that there is no cause must result from a unanimous vote. Therefore, if even one non-involved player deems that there is cause, then cause exists.
Characters lose status if they do not fight when they have cause and opportunity. Characters also lose status if they challenge without cause. Although not expressly stated in the rules, it seems that a challenge must predicate a duel. Let's take the example referenced above of the noble encountering the socially elevated non-noble. Does the non-noble have cause to challenge the noble or does only the noble have cause in this situation? If the two players are not disposed to having their characters duel and neither character challenges, do both characters lose status? I am of the opinion that the noble would lose status, but I am not certain about the non-noble.
A character whose endurance is less than half of its normal value may decline a duel without losing status. However, such a character gains status by accepting a duel whether or not he wins said duel. This brings up an interesting point. Duels are not necessarily fatal; surrender is one of the optional (dueling) actions and it must be respected by an opponent. From what I can tell by the rules, a character who loses a duel (and survives) only loses status if the duel was against a member of an 'enemy' regiment. There's nothing to stop a character from 'accepting' a duel only to surrender as his first action in the sequence. Of course, no gentleman would engage in such a craven tactic, but at what point is surrender an 'honorable' option? After so many sequences? After suffering a wound, no matter how slight? After one's weapon breaks? Is it ever acceptable for the challenger to surrender? I think that surrender would be acceptable for a character who loses more than half of the endurance with which he started the duel. After all, it would be proper to decline the duel initially in such a condition.
* Receiving a title (which is an infrequent occurrence) is the only other method by which social level is improved.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
The Fine Art of Pretending to Fence
As recurrent readers may recall, last week, I indicated that En Garde player characters are gentlemen adventurers of a 'semi-fictional' France in the era of the musketeers. Well, this statement is somewhat equivocal. Black Vulmea politely demonstrated this at the Really Bad Eggs blog. A less equivocal statement would be that En Garde player characters are gentlemen adventurers in a fictitious setting having some correlations with France of the musketeer era. Black Vulmea also points out that En Garde is still in print. Please note that the current publisher wholeheartedly endorses the premise that “En Garde! is a game of swashbuckling in a fictional 17th century Paris.” While the creators of the game intentionally instilled subtleties inconsistent with “17th century Paris,” players may easily suspend disbelief. In any event, the publisher freely provides tables that may be of value to readers as I continue my discourse.
What we now recognize as the ‘traditional’ role-playing paradigm consists of a small group of players, acting in concert, under the guidance and regulation of a gamemaster. En Garde does not follow this paradigm. It can accommodate a large number of players, they do not necessarily act in concert, and the rules make no mention of a referee. I suspect that with a sizable group of players a moderator would be quite useful and one would be necessary for a play-by-mail campaign; however, in most circumstances, a referee is unnecessary. All of the (reasonable) choices a (gentleman) character can make are addressed in the charts, tables, and rules. Some people may exclude En Garde as an RPG on this account but I do not. Had En Garde remained focused on dueling, it would not be a RPG; however, the game was expanded to supply motivations and rationale for a character's actions. Players wanted their characters to have a reason to duel. This is the very essence of adopting a role and hence my insistence that En Garde is a role-playing game (as opposed to – for instance – Yaquinto's Swashbuckler). I grant that the range of play is limited, but it is well tailored for the genre.
For purposes of dueling, there are abstract divisions of time called turns. In a turn, each character performs one simultaneous action. The passage of twelve turns is a sequence.* A set group of actions, performed in order, constitutes a routine. You can think of a routine as a 'move' in fencing, like a parry or a lunge. Before each sequence, each player writes down a series of actions that his (or her) character will perform – in order – during the course of that sequence. It is possible for a character to begin a routine at the end of one sequence and complete it at the beginning of the next.
There is an action called a 'rest.' Nearly every attack routine incorporates one or more rest actions. Therefore, rests are the most frequent action. For instance, a lunge routine consists of three actions: a rest followed by a lunge followed by another rest. A character with a lower expertise than his opponent may have to include as many as three additional rests into each sequence to reflect the lack of comparative skill. A character who has lost more than half of his endurance must include an additional rest per sequence.
When a character performs an attack action, his opponent will likely suffer damage that turn. The amount of damage is a multiple of the attacker's strength; that multiple is determined by consulting 'Duelling Table B' and comparing the attacker's attack action against the action performed by the defender. The attacker's weapon also modifies the amount of damage.
On any given turn, players simultaneously reveal their characters' actions for that turn and resolve any consequences (such as damage) before progressing to the next turn. Although players decide (and write down) what actions their characters will take for several turns in advance, each turn is revealed one at a time. In certain circumstances, a player may forgo a routine in order to perform an optional routine (parry, block, or surrender). This would entail changing what the player has written: removing the remainder of the current routine and substituting the optional routine (possibly 'pushing back' the next recorded routine).
As is evident, there is a great deal of writing (and potentially rewriting) going on. I have an idea that may make things easier. My idea is that both participants have a selection of cards; each card represents an action. Before each sequence, each player fashions a stack of twelve cards, face down. The topmost card indicates the action taken for the first turn of the sequence. Each turn, the next card is revealed. Of course, when a player elects to have his (or her) character perform an optional routine, the player will put cards on the stack and – once the routine is complete – adjust the remaining cards as and if necessary.
* I cannot help but think that the En Garde concept of turn and sequence influenced the creation of the Hero System Speed Chart. (Imagine an En Garde sequence as equivalent to a Hero turn and an En Garde turn equivalent to a Hero segment.)
Sunday, February 26, 2012
The Other Little Brown Book
En Garde! Being in the Main a Game of the Life and Times
of a Gentleman Adventurer and his Several Companions
En Garde!* was published in 1975 by Game Designers' Workshop, two years prior to the more successful Traveller. (For the record, my copy is the revised edition from 1977.) The game was created by the inestimable Frank Chadwick and the somewhat less prodigious Darryl Hany. To be fair, Hany's name is listed before Chadwick's in the game design credits, so it's reasonable to assume that Hany's contributions outweigh Chadwick's. GDW stalwarts John Harshman and Loren Wiseman are given credit as game developers.
The status of En Garde as a 'genuine' role-playing game is open to interpretation. The introduction states that “En Garde is a semi-historical game/simulation” and no claim is made in the book that it is a role-playing game per se. Of course, in those very early days, the actual term “role-playing game” was not necessarily used in RPG products. (For instance, the term does not appear in the original three D&D 'little brown books.')
In the game, each player controls a character. Characters are defined, in large part, by abilities that have a randomly determined, numerical value. Players make choices as to how their characters interact with (1) the setting environment and (2) one another. The ramifications of said choices are often determined via rolling dice and consulting charts. There is a focus on combat. En Garde shares the preceding features with 'genuine' RPGs but, for other matters, En Garde differs from the usual concept.
En Garde represents a peculiar development from the dawn of role-playing that I (due to the absence of other authority) categorize as 'scheduling games.' (Superhero 2044 is another example of a scheduling game.) These games combine qualities of 'proper' RPGs with play-by-mail games in that players interact with one another face-to-face but the actions of characters are plotted out in advance. In effect, a player composes a schedule of activity for his (or her) character. For En Garde, such a schedule can cover a month of game time or, in the case of fighting a duel, scant moments.
Speaking of fighting duels, in En Garde, each player controls a 'gentleman adventurer' of France in the time of the musketeers. As mentioned above, the game is “semi-historical.” The goal is not realism so much as a representation of the swashbuckling genre. (The game is dedicated to Alexandre Dumas, Danny Kaye, and Sir Harry Flashman.) Evidently, the game was intended originally to be a way to simulate fencing and background 'color' was included to provide rationale for duels. Eventually, the background 'color' became more prominent than the actual duels. The essential objective of the characters is to acquire status; dueling is merely a means to that end.
Each character has four abilities. Strength (ability to inflict damage), Expertise (skill and experience with fencing), and Constitution (general health) are determined by rolling 3d6 for each. Endurance (ability to absorb damage) is determined by multiplying Strength by Constitution.
Next week we shall examine the fencing rules.
* The cover appellation includes the exclamation point, a convention that is not observed in the body of the work. For the sake of convenience, your humble host will forgo said punctuation when referencing the game henceforth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)