Stop Blanket-Blaming the Game Master by Seth Skorkowsky

TL;DW(atch): It's up to both players and the GM (not just the GM) to ensure a great roleplaying experience! I encourage you to watch, Seth does some great videos about the roles and behaviors of players and GMs (warts and all).

MR Welch Recaps D&D's Entire History Off the Top of His Head

 

End-of-Year Ode to Dragonlance

I love you, Dragonlance. And like I've said before, I don't care who knows. Every year at this time, when I wax nostalgic about my relationship with heroic fantasy literature and roleplaying, I return to my love for Dragonlance.

Yes, were the old modules the epitome of railroading? Sure, I'll capitulate on that point. Were the original novels somewhat corny, and many of the subsequent novels of dubious quality? Perhaps.

Is my opinion colored by the fact that I encountered Dragonlance novels in a grade school bookshelf before I ever read a word written by Howard, Leiber, Moorcock, Vance, or any of the other Appendix N luminaries? Yes, I'm sure that accident of my personal history features prominently in my stance as a Dragonlance fanatic.

I still don't care what you say. I love Dragonlance. And I want to convince you to love it a little bit too. 

When it comes to the novels and stories, I believe they were more subtle than they seem on the surface. If you look deeper, you'll find some grey among all that black and white. Sure, there's lots of archetypal good and evil material in the Dragonlance canon. But what about the "grey areas" like the love Tanis had for the evil Kitiara? Or the inner turmoil of the flawed and broken Raistlin as he struggled with the shadows and light in his soul?

From a roleplaying perspective, when have gamers ever been truly restricted by published modules? Sure, beginning players might be duped into railroading when using ANY module. But once you have some sessions under your belt, you realize that you can, and should, stray away from the published material. It should not be taken as ironclad plot.

Gaming in any published world doesn't mean you have to follow the storylines. Call it alternate history or whatever, but in the end you are free to take that world in any direction, as you and your fellow gamers go on your own adventures with your own characters. This concept, however, for some strange reason, seems to elude far too many gamers. The mind boggles...

And like I said before, kender don't have to be quirky and kooky kleptomaniacs.

I'm not sure I've convinced you to explore the world of Krynn, but perhaps you won't mindlessly accept the next batch of Dragonlance hate you encounter. If so, my work here is done!

The "Anywhere but Where the GM believes" Player

In thinking back over my gaming career, I came to think about the types of players that annoyed me over the years. Of course there's the Rules Lawyer. We've all encountered that particular beast, haven't we? Then there's the player type I call the "Anywhere but Where the GM Believes" player.

Have you ever had a player who, when you checked in with them, they would tell you they weren't actually in that location? This is more than splitting the party. It's the situation where a player keeps correcting you as to their character's location. The player never seems to be specific enough about their character's movements, no matter how many times you ask them to be more specific. 

Example #1:

GM: "Okay, the party enters the cavern-"

Bruno the Dwarf's Player: "No, I'm not in the cavern."

GM: "But I asked the whole party if you were all going into the cavern and you didn't say you weren't going in with everyone else, so..."

Bruno the Dwarf's Player: "No, I'm not in there. I stayed in the tunnel."

GM: "Ooookay..." [followed by annoying situation where you have to jump between the rest of the party and whatever Bruno's player wants to do]

Example #2:

GM: "Your group has been in the tavern for about a half hour, when-"

Bruno's Player: "I never entered the tavern."

GM: "You never told me you didn't enter the tavern with the rest of the party..."

Bruno's Player: "Well, I'm outside..."

You get the idea.

Have you ever had a player like this? If so, do you think they were purposely trying to mess with you, or just not paying attention, or some other reason they did this sort of thing?

The Campaign is your backstory, and your future...

While perusing my old unpublished posts, I came across some musings that arose from reading a post over at the venerable Beyond the Black Gate. This particular post was entitled "What is a Character?"

One key line in that post reads: "Their backgrounds aren't something I wrote down on a piece of looseleaf paper before rolling up the character - their backgrounds are what happened from 1st level to 10th level, or even higher."

I couldn't agree more.

I think this is part of what old OSR grognards are getting at when they rail against the "storyteller" type of RPGs. Yes, we don't like being railroaded in slavery to a GMs story for their campaign. And yes, we as players don't want to play the part of "frustrated novelist" by writing up a huge backstory for our characters.

There was a time back in my youth that my friends and I did slave away on deep, complicated backstories before/while rolling up characters. But after a time, this became onerous indeed. And restrictive. In RPGs, characters really don't become three-dimensional beings until they're LIVED, so to speak. Or should I say, PLAYED? Really, it's both. For a character to come to life, it MUST be played. 

A cursory character background outline can, and often will, inform what a GM throws at a character, and a good GM will weave some of that cursory player-created background into a campaign. But also, as one play's a character, ideas will occur to the player that can be incorporated into the background, i.e. the character's past.

Simultaneously, as suggested in the Beyond the Black Gate post, the player is creating the story, the LEGEND as it were, of their character as they progress through levels.

Backstory doesn't have to be dreamed up whole-cloth before playing a character. Yes, you can come up with an outline for what your character was up to before a campaign starts. But the real meat of a character comes from the exploits that evolve through play. Those experiences are always going to be more tangible, more meaningful, than the story you make up for a character's background. Because you LIVED it!

What do you think? Agree, disagree? How do you use background/backstory in your roleplaying?

End-of-Year Elmore (12/2617): Dragon Lady and Child-Like Wonder!

Ah, here we are, folks. Wrapped in the holidays, basking in the afterglow of all the gift giving and receiving. If you're like me, at this time of year, it seems one can briefly revisit the wonder and magic of being a kid. This is made easier if you have kids of your own. 

My kids are getting older but they're still of an age where I can see the spark in their eyes of genuine youthful wonder. They help me tap into the deep part of me that is still a kid in some respects. This is especially true when it comes to roleplaying. I've introduced my kids to roleplaying of course. No self-respecting grognard would do otherwise, no? My daughter has a touch of my interest in fantasy and sci fi but roleplaying might not be her cup of team. My son however has expressed interest in playing and even running his own campaigns. Ah, my breast swelleth with pride! 

I'm spending some time going through my collection of games with my son, and generally reminiscing about campaigns past. I'm also, as usual, ruminating on the possibility of resurrecting a regular game sometime in the new year. One can hope and dream, eh? 

Over the next few days leading up to the new year, I'm going to be posting some nostalgia-inducing Elmore images along with some musings about the hobby and my personal experience with it, and hoping that you wonderful people will also share some tales of your own adventures. 

May the blessings of the holidays be with you all! Happy gaming!

Game Session Report 10/21/16 (Part 2 - Fragmentary): Descent into the Depths of the Earth

I know, I know...I said in my first post of 2017 that I didn't want to finish blogging about my two sessions of RPG action with the neighborhood newbs...but I started a post and dammit, I want to publish it! 

Specifically, I want to post it because of my inane...observations. And because I have no time to blog here usually, so wasting my precious words is a crime to my sensibilities. 

See below for the fragment I wrote up before despair overtook me and my will to write on...

Let's return to the recap of my newbie players and their first RPG session, shall we?

So, a gang of goblins (probably the same that attacked the priests of Libra) came running out of the excavated barrow and attacked the party. The group made decently short work of the creatures, but player Laura (aka Noo the cleric of Leo) had the presence of mind to consider capturing one of the goblins in order to interrogate it.

Now, this brings me to an interesting observation: these folks, being newbs, have actually displayed a lot of aspects of more experienced players. Specifically, from the very first battle, they decided it would be a good idea to have a captive to interrogate.

And, if it came down to it, they wouldn't balk at a bit of torture to get information.

Now, does this say something about human nature? Granted, we're talking about an imaginary torture situation of a non-human creature, so there's really no need to be disturbed by the players decision. But I find it really interesting that no matter who I've gamed with, no matter the experience level of the players, they usually see the need to get captives and glean information, and consider torture a necessary evil.

Again, human nature? Or is there too much torture on the TV and Internet to learn from? Too much waterboarding and Gitmo Bay news footage to teach them what to do?

Oh my god, I'm Tipper Gore!

Anyway, they did indeed capture a goblin and started to interrogate, and of course threatened it with torture. The goblin told them it was a part of a tribe that moved into tunnels below the barrowlands. When the archaeology team ventured into their tunnels, the goblins reacted, attacking the humans and capturing them. 

The goblin offered to take them to the captives in exchange for its freedom. They decided to take a chance and believe that the goblin was sufficiently cowed to guide them truthfully and accurately.

That's all folks! Little did I know at the time of the writings above that the newbs would also resort to the good old lamp oil Molotov cocktail tactic in the dungeons they entered! It was instinctual, I tell you! They just came up with it out of nowhere! No prompting from me at all!

Am I way too excited about this? Let me know, please!

Of Gaming, Raging, and the Dying Light

Did you ever watch professional wrestling, especially the old WWF?

Do you remember those matches were the "good" wrestler (aka the Face) would be nearly defeated, on his knees, being beaten down by the "bad guy" (aka the Heel)?

Do you remember how the Face would suddenly get a burst of defiance that made him seemingly invulnerable, shrugging off the blows of an unbelieving Heel? How the good guy would rise to his feet again, eyes wide with righteous fury as he shook his head at the now-ineffectual attacks of his enemy?

I want to be the Face. Only instead of wrestling, my arena is roleplaying.

I'm being eaten alive, folks. From the inside out. Sound dramatic? Perhaps. I AM indeed a dramatic person, and I'm not ashamed of it. What is life if not spiced with a dramatic flair, I ask you?

The Curse of the Collector

Over the last few months, I've become increasingly worried about myself. I've taken to staring at my RPG and board game collection longingly. I never wanted to become one of those sad ex-gamers who just collects games but never plays them...but I fear I AM becoming one after all.

You see, I'm still collecting RPGs. I just invested in two more games in the last week or so. One of them is the latest incarnation of the Lone Wolf Adventure Game box set (just the words "box set" make me incredibly happy and tingly with excitement...no sweeter words exist for an old-school gamer than box set, IMHO...) The other game is the new edition of Warriors of the Red Planet.

What made me buy these latest games? When it comes to Lone Wolf (which I just featured in my first-ever unboxing video), the justifications leaped through my mind: "It's very rules light, you could get a game up and running in no time! Come on, man, let's play SOMETHING already! Let's play with your kids, with your old friends, with SOMEBODY! Call that FLGS a few towns over and tell them you want to use their space and get some new players! Gimme a fix, man!"

Yes, a fix. I'm in withdrawal. The simpler the game, the more likely I could fit some sessions into my schedule! I love everything I've seen of Warriors of the Red Planet, but seriously I don't think I could handle even the relative simplicity of those rules (which I would say are no more complicated than Basic/Expert D&D).  Lone Wolf seems my most likely path!

Farewell to All Things Fun in West Berlin

I've also been depressed by the fact that my beloved All Things Fun game store in West Berlin, New Jersey has closed its doors. There are so few of those incredible FLGS havens in my neck of the woods, the closing of one is a huge blow to the gaming community here. 

During the several years I was gaming there with friends on Wednesday nights, a grand time was had by all! I hadn't played an RPG for years, and ATF was the perfect place to return to the hobby and meet new gamers. It's also the place where I got to game with some of my favorite game creators, the Troll Lords!

Fare thee well, All Things Fun! I salute you!

The Gamer Shall Rise Again!

But forget all the hand-wringing, the gnashing of teeth, and the lamentations you just read! I'm determined to rage against the dying of the gaming light! As the roleplaying gods are my witness, I'll never go gameless again! 

It's time to rally like the Ultimate Warrior! 

It's time to kick ass like Ragnar Lothbrok (did I mention a new season of Vikings starts tonight)! 

It's time to fight on! To roll on! TO GAME ON!

Thanks for indulging me. If you're feeling something similar to what I'm experiencing, I'd love to hear from you!

Calling Dibs on Those Damn Dirty Apes

I'm an idiot.

Okay, that's harsh. I shouldn't say that about myself. How about this: I'm an inveterate dreamer and RPG lover, and said love makes me commit victimless crimes of roleplaying passion.

 

What sort of crimes, you ask? Well, how about this: despite my busy life and a self-imposed, indefinite hiatus from roleplaying in order to pursue other efforts, I've once again been daydreaming about doing my own variant of an OSR rule set.

 

Perhaps this urge has surfaced again because of the recent White Star release. Before that it was Warriors of the Red Planet and Jonathan Becker's excellent Five Ancient Kingdoms (this last offering, mind you, is more divergent from its D&D roots when it comes to mechanics, but it's still an offshoot). And let's not forget offerings such as Crypts & Things, Scarlet Heroes, and Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea, to name a few.

 

What do all of these have in common? They've tied the old rules to specific settings/genres (more or less). And that's something I've been wanting to do, in connection with a specific setting: the Planet of the Apes franchise.

 

So, I hearby officially and publicly call dibs on this effort! So there! No one can steal this idea now! Or else I will have sour grapes (a reference to a recent, particularly dopey non-kerfuffle...feel free to read up on it if you have some time to waste).

 

Seriously, I've been thinking about this "ape OSR adaptation" for at least a year-and-a-half. I really want to do it, as I love the Planet of the Apes (PotA) series and I think it would be great as an OSR-based RPG. I love the original movies, as well as the recent reimaginings from the last few years. Heck, I even liked the Marky Mark remake (that's REALLY proof of my adoration for the franchise). I've also been collecting the numerous PotA comics produced by Boom! Studios.

 

I have to ask: am I alone in the RPG blogosphere when it comes to PotA love? Just want to get a roll call of other ape-ophiles out there! If you're out there, declare your ape loyalty! If I ever do this, I'll be doing this for you and me!

 

In my little corner of the world, my ape love has made me an outcast. Okay, once again I exaggerate. More like, no one else I know seems to like the PotA franchise. I get funny looks and bemused questions like "why do you like it so much?" Hell, I've been outright ridiculed for my ape-fection!

 

Has anyone else experienced such anti-PotA reactions? Is this a franchise that you either love or hate? At any rate, in order to break my loneliness and isolation, I'll be seeking out ape communities online. Seriously, gimme a shout if you love some apes!

 

I expect I'll do some blog musings on this whole effort, but again, it will be a slooooooow development process. I see no near-term creation efforts happening. Ultimately, if someone else decides to run with the idea, I say Godspeed to them and best of luck. Let me know when you're done and I'll check it out! But I'm going to do SOMETHING with this ape-game desire.

 

If I don't, they'll have to put me in the madhouse.

D&D's 40th Birthday: What are we REALLY celebrating?

Okay, maybe this post is just all self-referential musing. But I wonder how many of you out there feel the same way. There's something I want to put out there for your consideration. This might not be a ground-breaking post in terms of its sentiment or subject matter, but bear with me.

I don't care what edition of the game you play. Hell, I don't care if the Medieval fantasy RPG you're playing is even called D&D or not. We're all still playing D&D, folks.

So, I posit this: what we're really celebrating this year is not the 40th anniversary of the brand name of D&D. We're celebrating the spirit of the game, and all of its uncountable varieties and offspring!

Thanks, Azeem!

Morgan Freeman said it best, I think, in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves: "Allah loves wondrous variety!"

Just a note: this sentiment also includes 4th Edition. Speaking of which: congrats on the cancellation of your edition, 4E fans, because you are now a part of the "my favored edition is out of print" clan! Welcome, hail, and well met!

I'm bringing all this up because, well, I bought the new D&D starter set, and downloaded the free Basic rules. And while I think all that 5E stuff is nifty, I have to say that I'm so much more excited about games that don't carry the D&D name, but rather carry the D&D DNA.

Here's the versions of the game that I'm currently drooling over:

• Dungeonteller
• Warriors of the Red Planet
• Dungeon World
• 13th Age

 

I already own Dungeonteller and the Warriors of the Red Planet beta. My copies of Dungeon World and 13th Age are on their way from the great Noble Knight Games.

Of course, I also already own Labyrinth Lord, Swords & Wizardry, Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG, Adventurer Conquerer King, Beyond the Wall, Dragon Age RPG, Crypts & Things, Five Ancient Kingdoms, and other permutations of the "world's oldest RPG" of which you no doubt have heard! And all these "clones" sit cheek-by-jowl on my bookshelves with D&D books from all eras of the game. And it's like looking at a glorious family reunion, with many generations gathered into one place.

I'm so happy that D&D has gone forth and multiplied, incubated in the fertile minds of so many fellow enthusiasts!

So, talk back to me, fellow roleplayers! Tell me how you are celebrating D&D's 40th this year, what version(s) of the game you're celebrating with, and any other reflections you care to share!

Long live Dungeons & Dragons, no matter what skin it wears! 

D&D 5E Starter Set: First Impressions & Thoughts

Please don't take the following post as a full review. Just want to put that caveat out there. I'm just giving my opinions here, and trying to clear up my confusion here and there.

 

I'm only going to be talking in this post about the Starter Set contents. I haven't yet read through the Basic Rules PDF that is free online, mainly because I wanted to have an unadulterated read-through of the box contents. I've read through most of the starter rulebook at this point, and wanted to start writing out what I'm experiencing, thinking, etc.

 

Here's just some impressions and thoughts:

 

To me, this "basic" game is a bit more "advanced" than what I'm used to, when it comes to a basic version of the game. But right there, that's a rub, isn't it? As a long-time gamer, try as I might I can't really escape my D&D history (personal and otherwise) or the context/influence of said history.

 

So, when I'm thinking Basic D&D, my old gamer brain shoots back in time to Moldvay and Mentzer, you know? I'm sure some of you experienced that as well. BUT, there was nothing that WotC said to indicate that this box would be as basic as Basic, if you know what I mean. 

 

And, am I even off base, because is the Starter Set supposed to be a basic version of the game, and used in tandem with the online free Basic PDF? I'm trying to get clarity on this, and perhaps it's not WotC's fault for my lack of clarity. That very well could be true. This whole thing could be clear as day to some folks, but with my limited time and brain capacity these days, I could be missing the message here, and the interrelation of the products.

 

So, the question is: is the Starter Set supposed to be a beginning point for entry into use of the Basic Rules PDF AS WELL AS the upcoming PHB, DMG, and MM?

 

I mean, the game has proficiencies included, but not feats. Proficiencies in Basic D&D? Perish the thought, at least when it comes to the old sets from the 80's. But this Set is not supposed to be THAT basic, I suppose. It ain't your daddy's Basic D&D, and I guess that's alright.

 

So, overall the game seems to be stripped down version of 3.5, with some new innovations to the rules, such as getting rid of reflex/will/fortitude saves (the saves are now attached to the attributes, similar to how Castles & Crusades does it). Also, there's the advantage/disadvantage thing that everyone's been talking about, and it seems rather neat, although the thought of more dice rolling is usually not appealing to me on a visceral level. I prefer less dice rolling when possible.

 

I have nearly zero familiarity with D&D 4E, so I'm not sure what may be in the Starter Set that came from 4E. I know that 4E had at-will, encounter, and daily powers, and I'm honestly looking forward to seeing if those things are offered as optional rules for, say, spellcasters in the PHB. Any way to lighten up the "limitations" of Vancian magic is good in my book. I notice that the cantrips in the Starter Set are at-will casting, so there's that.

 

The fact that they mention that adventurer's ability scores can reach 20 was disturbing to my old-school sensibilities, but I'm not sure how that works when they're using the 4d6-drop-the-lowest method. Maybe they mean through the use of magical items...oh wait, I think I remembered that in the advancement rules in the Starter Set, your character increases in a class primary ability score at a certain level...okay so I guess the max attribute level is now 20? Sounds kinda icky.

 

Also a bit icky to me is the bonus inflation for the attributes. Example: an 18 gives you +4 now. Ouch. That's something of a gut-reaction turn-off as well.

 

The set encourages players to see replay value in the included module...and I suppose that's what one would have to do while waiting for monsters in the Basic PDF and/or the eventual Monster Manual?

 

I know that JB is currently discussing the actual "completeness" of the Basic PDF at the moment, and getting flak for it, unfortunately. I know that JB can come off as being confrontational about RPGs, but I think he's just passionate. He can sometimes be inflammatory, but I don't think that comes from a desire to simply start arguments. He just wants to get people energized and fired up about the subject.

 

Some people have stepped forward to remind JB that the current version of the Basic PDF is not the final version, which will be out in August I believe, to coincide with the PHB release. I guess they're trying to keep some of the PHB stuff under wraps until the release of the book, because honestly the Basic PDF just seems to be pages ripped out of the PHB.

 

I can understand a company not wanting to give away the cow for free, you know. So they want to be cautious with what's given away for free. Again, is the free stuff for use with the Starter Set, but if you want to have a fuller experience, you leave behind the Starter Set and Basic PDF and move on to the PHB/DMG/MM? Maybe the RPGPundit can clear things up for me!

 

Anyway, this has been an interesting experience. I'm not sure that this version of D&D is for me, because of the "complexity" of it, despite the thing being called basic...but then again the Starter Set doesn't say it's Basic, as far as I know.

 

BUT THIS DESIRE FOR "SIMPLE," BASIC RULES COMES FROM MY OWN PREJUDICE AT THE MOMENT, and not from any fault in the 5E Starter Set itself. Because personally, due to my own specific life circumstances, I'm looking for simpler rules these days, even simpler than old 80's Basic and even my beloved Castles & Crusades. To that end, there's a certain little game coming out soon that might scratch my simplicity itch...more on that in another post!

 

In the meantime, please give me your thoughts, impressions, etc. on 5E so far!

D&D 5E Revelations & Coverage Beyond the Covers

 

Okay, by now everybody knows about the revelations WotC released regarding the D&D 5E books, right? So, no need to rehash it here. Instead, I want to get all "meta" about the discussion burning across the roleplaying blogosphere. I want to weigh in on what D&D still means to the roleplaying world, if I can, and what the new edition might mean for both the veterans and new gamers alike.

Alright, the current buzz is primarily focused on the cover art, right?

Some people - specifically older gamers who were young when the earlier editions of the game were in print - are complaining that the new D&D covers "don't do it for them." In other words, they personally are not inspired by them, like they were inspired by the covers from their OOP edition of choice.

Oh well. Too bad for you.

Do I, personally, like the new covers all that much? Nah, not really. Why? Because, like the other uninspired veterans, they won't replace within me the feelings I get when I see the covers and other illustrations from 1st Edition and especially 2nd Edition. Those were the editions I played the most as a kid.

The art of 2E from the likes of Elmore, Parkinson, and Caldwell are what I experienced as a youth. The work of those artists became the lens through which I viewed the game, and since I encountered their work at an early and impressionable age, they were burned into my mind and heart and soul. Their association within me is nigh irrevocable. In short, those 2E images MEAN D&D TO ME.

But does that mean the art used to illustrate subsequent editions is pure junk? No. Could the 5E covers be a bit more subtle and evocative? Sure they could. But that doesn't mean they have no artistic or inspirational value at all.

The new covers are not D&D to me, but nor are they terrible abominations. I think this sentiment is most pervasive amongst the bloggers I've read. But for those who are veritably dry-heaving over the art...get over it.

Why should they get over it? To paraphrase JFK (probably in poor taste on my part): "Ask not what the covers do for you. Ask what the covers do for the next generation."

Clearly, WotC has had a tall order for themselves with this latest edition. They're trying to include disparate demographics in their bid for "one edition to rule them all." They're trying to appeal to the youth of today, who have been exposed to a much different graphic aesthetic (thus the style chosen for the cover art) and conception of what it means to play a game. At the same time, WotC is also trying to appeal to older gamers and their love for the earlier versions of the game.

I'm not sure how successful WotC will be in their ambitions, but I give them props for making the attempt. And I wish them good luck, because I for one like seeing a game called D&D in print.

The young gamers today have experienced the legacy of D&D mostly through video games. They don't know that the terms hit points and armor class and such came from D&D.

So let's teach them about that legacy, and so much more.

To once again paraphrase JFK: "Ask not what the covers can do for the hobby. Ask what YOU can do for the hobby!"

This comes back, once again, to my impatience for the doomsayers who cyclically come out of the rotted woodwork to declare that the end is nigh for D&D, if not roleplaying in general. Funnily enough, it is the rare doomsayer who actually states the following sentiment: "It seems that roleplaying as a hobby is dying. Therefore, I'm going to go out and do something about it!"

That's my biggest frustration with my fellow veteran gamers: they'll sit around and bemoan the fate of the hobby, BUT THEY WON'T GET OFF THEIR ASSES AND BE PART OF THE SOLUTION. Even if roleplaying is fated for extinction, didn't you guys learn anything from all the heroic fantasy you've read? Didn't all that reading teach you that HEROES FIGHT NO MATTER THE FACT THAT DOOM IS CERTAIN. One must still fight, even in the face of "assured defeat."

Because you know what? Quite often, what we thought was assured defeat is not really the case at all.

Rather than sit back and see whether or not freaking roleplaying book cover illustrations can  entice a new generation to play, perhaps we as veteran gamers should go out and actively help young, potential gamers discover the game. Let's be more active and not passive. Let's help the kids discover what makes these books really cool: the contents, and the history behind the contents. Let's teach them there's more to these books than cool covers. Let's teach them the value of stepping away from the console and to the table-top.

And once the young players of today are at the table, we have the chance to say, "yeah, this new D&D edition is pretty cool, but let me tell you about this other version..."

To wrap this rant up, here's a final thought: the release of 5th Edition is a chance to open up the dialogue about the hobby to a more mainstream audience. In conjunction with the 40th birthday of D&D, we have an opportunity to maybe, just maybe, do something to keep the hobby alive once us old-heads are gone.

I'm doing my part to spread the good word of the previous versions of D&D, with my own children as well as with kids at the FLGS when I can.

What are YOU doing?

Early-Morning Clarity, Personal Growth, and Roleplaying - Part 1

Have you ever experienced the phenomenon where, in the moments after you wake up in the morning, the first thoughts that come to your mind seem so pure and clear? In addition, do you suspect that those thoughts are manifestations of your truest, deepest desires? In other words, these thoughts may be what you truly want with regard to some aspect of your life, but most of the time they are buried under all of the other thoughts, feelings, and various mental distractions of your daily life.

I believe I woke up on a recent morning with one of those moments of clarity. At least, I think that's what happened. I want to farm this whole thought process out to you, my fellow RPG bloggers in the great virtual hive-mind that is the Internet. I want your thoughts, advice, feedback, ridicule, whatever. This is going to be a bit long, so I'm breaking it up into two posts. Here goes:

For some reason, I just haven't been feeling fully satisfied of late when it comes to the rule systems I've been considering or actually using. OF COURSE, I am entertaining the possibility that this lack of satisfaction with any of the rule systems that I've been reading/using of late is due to some lack of vision on my part, some lack of thought-clarity.

Anyway, I've been feeling that there needs to be an RPG, and specifically a fantasy RPG similar to D&D, for busy adults. Perhaps this theoretical RPG would somehow facilitate play for those who can meet only infrequently, and who can't spend copious amounts of time on session prep.

Now, I do in fact believe that the continuity and cohesion of a particular campaign depends a lot on the GM's attention to detail, and not on the system being used. Does the GM take the right amount of notes during sessions so that he/she creates a firm bridge between sessions? For me, if I can't maintain this session cohesion, I don't feel like I'm doing right by my campaign and, most importantly, my players.
 

Back to this RPG for busy adults concept. Here's what I'm thinking currently, stream-of-consciousness style:

Perhaps the biggest concern I've had of late is the "damage" long breaks between game sessions can inflict upon a campaign. As a busy adult, I've come to believe that the sometimes long absenses from the table-top result in an increase in time needed for players to level up. Is there an RPG with an advancement system that doesn't suffer from long absenses from the campaign? Is there an RPG that will have just the right advancement system that will give satisfying goals for players and allow them to steadily advance despite the potential for long breaks between game sessions?

I don't want to keep track of arrows, torches, sling bullets, rations, etc. And as a matter of fact, I don't want my players to keep track of the usual "consumables." Yes, this is my heretical disdain for resource management. Heck, I want lack of resources to crop up unexpectedly.

I also don't want to keep track of time, miles traveled, etc.

I DO want to deal with plot hooks, player decisions, and subsequent consequences.

I'm a busy adult who believes (perhaps wrongly or rightly) that he doesn't have time to keep track of the resource management, but believes that the tension that stems from said management can still be created using the right system...or perhaps using a system right!

I want to focus on the complex results of the interplay between GM and players. I prefer to focus on fostering the cooperative story that the players and I are creating.

When I talk about a story game, my definition is one that doesn't involve me creating the RPG equivalent of a "novel" through which I will railroad my players. I am not a frustrated novelist. I'm a GM running roleplaying games. Story comes from me presenting a world and events in that world, and giving players knowledge of the events in that world (or at least some of those events). This knowledge will come in a variety of ways: rumors in the tavern, intelligence from thieves, braggadocio of mercenaries, whispers of courtiers, declarations from enemies, scribblings on scrolls and in tomes, and on and on and on. Then, the players will decide which of these sounds appealing to them, and they will head off in search of adventure. And part of the joy of this is that I will have to adapt, as best I can, to their whims. I will do my best to react and give them consequences, both "good" and "bad," that will interest, intrigue, engage, titillate, horrify, bedevil, ensnare, and reward them.

As I said above, I don't want my players to have to do bookkeeping. I know there can be joy in the bookkeeping, but that's a different style of play than I am currently interested in. I was interested in the past, but right now I am not. Why? Well, again, I feel sometimes overwhelmed when dealing in-session with I feel like a nanny when I ask players to "mark off that arrow you just fired" or "reduce your mana for that spell." I don't want to be bothered.

I suppose I can get this from any RPG system if necessary, I just need to change my perception. Or is there a system out there that facilitates the plot focus that I'm seeking, but somehow brings the tension of resource management to the table? Is this system called Torchbearer or Dungeon World?

Ok, I'm not all that happy about how coherent this post is...but I think I got the gist across. I feel like I've had a cronic lack of clarity in my writings of late...but that's for the next post. In the meantime, your comments are welcome.

End-of-Week Elmore Musings/Navel Gazing (10/4/13)

Tika wields her +1 frying pan with skill!

 

Well, after a month of potentially inane and definitely self-serving meme posts, I'm back to End-of-Week Elmore! This time around, I'd like to inject a bit of what I've been thinking about of late, when it comes to me and roleplaying. I'm definitely going to elaborate next week on these subjects, but I wanted to at least give a taste of what's to come.

 

First of all, I love Dragonlance, and I don't care who knows! I love it so much that I'm thinking it's time I took the next logical step, and make my blog into something of an online bastion of Dragonlance support, positivity, etc.

 

I know the arguments put forth by the Dragonlance "haters," and I understand where they're coming from: Sure, the Dragonlance modules back in the day were railroady, some of the races (*cough*kender*cough*) are annoying (I believe my long-time hatred of gnomes stems from my exasperation with Krynn's tinker gnomes), etc. The novel series has been very soap-opera at times, and is a large and looming spectre that hangs over would-be Dragonlance DMs. On and on.

 

Sure, I understand all that. But those things mentioned above can be overcome. Like any other published campaign world, you can take Dragonlance and you can tweak it to your own version of the setting. Just do it, stop crying.

 

Don't like the whole "test" concept for wizards of High Sorcery? The mages in your version of Krynn abolished it. Boom, done. Don't like the proliferation of dragons in the setting? Uh, have dragons retreat back to the fringes of the world. Simple. So, ultimately, when you start that Dragonlance campaign, you let any players that are huge fans of the setting/novels know what changes you have made so as to temper expectations. 'Nuff said.

 

The other thing on my mind of late has to do with my desire to find a game system suitable for the needs of the busy adult roleplayer. I need to elaborate on this, but suffice to say that I know that, technically, any RPG can be tweaked/adjusted/house rules/otherwise utilized to suit the needs of a group that can't meet all that often, or sometimes goes through long spells of inability to meet.

 

However, what about a system actually created to facilitate play by a group that meets infrequently and/or also has a mix of players that can change from week to week? What about a system that allows some sort of progression by players so that they have milestones/goals for which to strive, but that doesn't have to be as "long" of a slog as wading through thousands upon thousands of XP points to advance? What about a system that gives characters access to abilities that they might have from their early adventuring careers right on through to when they become veterans, but just have degrees of danger at lower "levels" (if that even makes sense to you).

 

All of this makes me think of JB's urging that roleplayers create their own "D&D Mine." And it's also the reason I've been bugging him about the next game he's going to create ;-)

 

ANYway, I'll elaborate on all of this next week. Until then, happy gaming folks!

The lure of the alien...

I'm having a yearning for running something not based in traditional fantasy tropes. No elves, dwarves, halflings. No strictly medieval European society. That sort of thing.

So strange of me, to have Gamer ADD, eh?

 

Hmmm, speaking of "no elves," that reminds me of Talislanta. A game I first encountered in the old days of the old Dragon Magazine, a game that I own and would dearly love to play. Ah, if you are like me, you remember those Talislanta ads as being exotic and mysterious! I mean, the ads in Dragon for ANY game that wasn't D&D were always intriguing to me when I was new to the hobby. But there was something alluringly alien about Talislanta. I had similar feelings for Skyrealms of Jorune...

 

These days, I'm also interested in Barbarians of Lemuria. Then there's Magnamund (the setting of the Lone Wolf gamebooks) and the Fabled Lands...though I suppose part of their appeal for me is that they originated "across the pond."

 

Then there's of course The Dying Earth (so far in the future that the earth itself becomes alien). And let's not forget Leiber's Nehwon. And I suppose Howard's Hyborea (so far in the past that the earth is alien) ...although these last three worlds are perhaps less alien when it comes to racial variety.

 

The upcoming Lords of Gossamer & Shadow RPG and the Amber RPG from which it draws inspiration also have something of the alien to them, of course. That reminds me, ugh...I need to really get on a retrospection of Amber and its monolothic place in my RPG career...

I even find myself thinking of Thundercats and Thundarr the Barbarian of late. Hmmm, cat people...

 

I suppose all this is connected to the sword & sorcery side of the genre. Ooh, and then there's sword & planet!

 

OK, I need to stop. Please, chime in and let me know your experiences, if any, with Talislanta or other RPGs that have a setting that could be considered more "alien" than the default medieval D&D world.

The Player's Responsibilities in the GM-Player Relationship

I know this may seem to be an already well-trod topic in the RPG blogosphere, but I feel compelled to add my own thoughts into the mixture. Prepare to be amazed! ;-)

 

So, the straw that broke the back of my silence on the subject of the GM-player relationship was a post over at Raven Crowking's Nest. It seems he recently had players object to some rulings he made during a game session. 

 

I got to thinking: you know, much is made of the many responsibilities of the GM. But what about the responsibilities of the player? For the most part, I mostly see bloggers simply stating that players "should not be dicks." That's it? I beg to differ.

 

Of course, when it comes GMing, there is much more besides "avoiding dickishness" that GMs must do. We all know that it is incumbent upon the GM to neither favor or disfavor the players. The GM needs to be, as much as possible, unbiased. He should not favor the players or favor his precious campaign. He should be the force in the fictional universe of the campaign that takes the player's actions and uses them to create effects/consequences that affect the game world.

Heavy is the head that runs the campaign, as the GM must put in prep work between sessions AND be all the senses for the players as they experience the game world AND portray every NPC and monster in the game AND be flexible in the face of player decisions AND not stifle "player agency" AND on and on and on.

 

With all the duties that a GM must attend to, the last thing he/she needs is players who think all they need to do is "show up."

 

Sorry. Nope. Wrong. I'm not one to tell people that they're "doing it wrong" when it comes to roleplaying. But if you come to a game session as a player and think all you need to do sit back and be entertained, you ARE doing it wrong.

 

Look, I'm not one to say that every gaming group needs to have a hardcopy "social contract" that they must adhere to before a campaign starts. But I think it's common sense for people to have enough awareness that, when you agree to roleplay together, you should cut everyone at the table some slack. If you're sitting at a GM's table, whether you know it or not you've made an unspoken statement: "I am trusting you, GM, to do your best to run a good game. That means I'm not going to sit here and assume that you're trying to 'screw me over' when it comes to events in the game."

Who is the GM not trying to "screw over"? The player. A GM might indeed screw over a player's CHARACTER by, you know, inflicting severe harm or even killing them. But a good GM will make it worth your while even while they're killing your character. So, if you don't trust your GM enough to believe that they have your best interest in mind when it comes to running a good game, then who's fault is that?

It's YOUR fault, as a player, if you distrust your GM even though he/she has not given you any concrete reason not to trust them. It's different if the GM is being a dick.

 

Let me put it another way: everyone at the table is responsible for the health of the campaign. Not just the GM.

 

A player should not be passive. A player should take an active role in being engaged with a game session. Of course, this includes responding to the GM's eternal question, "What do you do?" But it's more than just reacting to what the GM throws at you. Besides running your character, you as the player should also be an active force giving the GM some respect.

 

What are the traits of a good player? What are the responsibilities of a good player, beyond bringing their character to life?

 

A good player knows that it's not their job to exploit "weaknesses" displayed by a GM during any given session. To clarify, this includes giving them your patience and understanding when they, inevitably, stumble a bit now and then. For example, don't get on the GM's case if he/she forgot that your character no longer had that cursed dagger.

 

A good player knows that they shouldn't be questioning a GM's rulings, descriptions, or interpretations of the rules in a confrontational manner during a session.

 

A good player will try to be politely persuasive with the GM, gently probing for possible courses of action, testing to see what they can get the GM to agree to when it comes to the game world.

 

If a player trusts a GM enough to devote precious roleplaying time to said GM's campaign, then the player should fulfill the promise of that trust by helping to nurture the health of the campaign. Part of this is taking time to care about the welfare of your GM. The GM has a lot going on. Give them a break. 

 

If a player does not like how the GM operates, then that player should consider finding another campaign. It doesn't matter who is at fault. It's just time to move on.

OK, to recap: if players have a GM worth their trust, they should be willing to accept that the GM is the final arbiter of the rules. This means they should be able to trust their GM to interpret the rules in an unbiased way. Now, some GMs no doubt are guilty of breaking said trust and make all sorts of outlandish rulings that impinge on their players' ability to flex their agency. However, I'd wager there are a goodly number of players who don't truly understand that they need to give the GM the benefit of the doubt, or the unspoken social contract between GM and players becomes broken. Good players don't come to the table thinking they have no responsibility to keep the game flowing, to keep things civil between themselves and the GM, and to foster mutual trust and respect.

There's always talk of "killer GMs" but what about "killer players." What do killer players kill? Campaigns!

The Importance of Setting

What is the importance of setting for you, fellow gamer?

 

I'm not talking about whether you prefer a home-brewed setting, a published setting, or a hybrid of both that you create. I'm talking about the importance of setting to your immersion in a campaign.

 

For me, my connection/appreciation/enjoyment of a setting is vital to my connection/appreciation/enjoyment of a campaign.

 

I would be immensely happy to create my own home-brew world that incorporates what I love from my many sources of inspiration (novels, films, non-fiction/documentaries, etc). But alas, my current lifestyle does not afford me the time I need to create such a world to my own standards. If I can't do it "right" (i.e. in a way that lives up to my expectations of what a world should include, with the level of detail I want), I don't want to do it at all. Which is a shame, because I have ideas that I would like to flesh out into a campaign world. I am confident that such a self-crafted world would easily keep me inspired from week to week when game night comes around.

 

So, for some time now I've been exploring numerous campaign settings, seeking those that hit the right roleplaying buttons for me. I've run a goodly number of sessions in the Forgotten Realms, so I've gotten the most mileage out of that setting. I tried a few sessions in Greyhawk, but didn't find myself so taken with the setting after a relatively short amount of time. The Dragon Age setting has been of some interest to me of late. And I've found some things to like about the Dawnforge world, as well as the Midnight setting. Oh, and then there's the worlds of Golarion and, more recently, Midgard for the Pathfinder system (though I am confident I could easily use those settings while running Castles & Crusades).

 

All I know is, I'm feeling eager to stop the "setting merry-go-round" in my head and once again find a campaign world that makes me happy, keeps me coming back for more, and is ultimately worthy of my precious free time.

So, what settings, home-brew or otherwise, inspire you and keep your passion for the game alive?

A short OSR Second Wave "Manifesto"

I was cruising around the blogosphere, and came across this post again by the inestimable Matt Finch. I read this post a while back and meant to comment on it, but never got around to it. So, here goes:

I like what Matt is saying: we now have plenty of "tools" (gaming products, especially the retroclones and supporting materials). The next step is spreading the good word, or what we might call "edition thumping" (just because I want to come up with a "clever" term).

Yes, us "old schoolers" need to be out there playing. We need to be in the game stores, libraries, etc. with our old school-style gaming materials showing loud and proud. That's why I created a GM screen using three-ring binders with the cover of the Mentzer Red Box in all the front slip covers. I've gotten a lot of curious looks when I'm gaming in my FLGS, since every other game in the store is (for the most part) D&D 4E. And some people came up to ask what we were playing, and expressed interest in joining. Now, at the moment I'm running Labyrinth Lord and I'm using the "official" Goblinoid Games screen. That also attracts some curiosity.

 

The point is that we need to be recruiting. Plain and simple. We can't just be grognards and sit around complaining about "kids these days." We need to be nice people, open to new gamers and their many questions. We can't be stuck in our little niches grumbling anymore.

There are those who continually prognosticate the death of the hobby, but what are they doing to stave off that demise, besides being doomsayers? You want to find more players for the OSR? Create them. Nurture them. Show them the true TAO of D&D (Tao meaning "the way," right?)

 

If you want roleplaying to survive, do something to keep it alive! Don't just sit back as some silent, inscrutable "master" of an OOP game. Be a truly enlightened gamer and get out and recruit! Be the solution, be part of a movement that strives to save the hobby from extinction! Otherwise, shut up with the "RPG apocalypse" crap!

Yes, RPGs should be balanced...

I think Tom Baxa drew this...I hate Tom Baxa's artwork. Oh well...it serves my purposes.

 

...upon the GM and the players, that is. That's where true game balance exists.

 

It should not exist in the mechanics of an RPG. Indeed, there are many that believe (including me) balanced game mechanics are an unattainable goal, a mirage-like Holy Grail that will never feel the grasp of human hands.

 

Those who consider themselves part of the old-school roleplaying scene should not dismiss the concept of balance in roleplaying. We should espouse a balance among the participants in roleplaying games.

 

What do I mean by all this?

 

The balance to which I refer exists in the strengths of the participants, and how they work together as a unit in order to create the unique experience of playing RPGs. I don't need to tell you that one of the most vital aspects of roleplaying, which differentiates it from board games or the often-solitary pastime of video games, is communal storytelling.

 

Whether you think "story" means the "path" or plot (or railroad, if you prefer the negative term) that the GM has laid out before the players, or what results from a well-executed sandbox-style campaign, it doesn't matter. Roleplaying taps into our primal, innate need to be social, even for those of us whose social abilities may be less developed. Indeed, like any other creative outlet, roleplaying can serve as the means for awkward folks to come out of their shells and express themselves.

 

So, if GMs and players want their games to be examples of what good roleplaying is all about, they need to do some work getting to know each other. If this involves becoming good friends, or just taking time to learn each other's style of play, it doesn't matter. The point is to find a balance between the players and what they, literally, bring to the table. A good GM will facilitiate this process. Speaking of GMs, he or she should inform players as to what they can expect from campaigns, i.e. what sort of campaigns that GM likes to run.

 

Anyway, once all participants know each other's tabletop "talents," expectations, and assumptions, there is a much greater chance that they will strike that precious balance of camaraderie that fosters great roleplaying. If a game session is going well, roleplayers really can't help but get into the game, let down their barriers, cooperate and concentrate on the game, and enjoy themselves (and each other). It's really just a natural progression that flows from people that understand what each person wants from the experience.

 

The older RPG systems necessitated getting to know your fellow gamers, because there weren't rules for everything, and more often than not (especially in the case of D&D) the classes weren't designed to stand alone. You needed to depend on each other for creative play in order to survive. Modern RPGs seem to have attempted to remove this need for cooperation, ironically, from a pastime where cooperation and shared solution-making are just some of the good reasons to play in the first place! The later editions of D&D seem to favor some sort of gamer "rugged individualism" that seems to completely miss the point of roleplaying.

 

So OSR folks, don't dismiss the word "balance" outright. Rather, teach others where RPG balance truly exists.

The GMing Never Stops

As you probably know by now, I'm taking a hiatus from GMing for an indefinite amount of time this year. I discussed my reasons in detail in my 2013 reflection post, but it boils down to this: I needed to take a break because I was feeling a bit overwhelmed by my constant, all-or-nothing, full-speed-ahead approach to GMing. Basically, I'm GMing all the time. It never stops.

 

What do I mean? Well, when I'm not at the table actually running a session, I'm usually doing something pertaining to GMing in my head. All the time.

 

This can be great...a real joy to have my imagination churning...the creative spark aflame! Or, it can burn the hell out of your brain, and exhaust you utterly, because (at least for me) it's hard to shut off. And the line between awesome-ness and crispiness is razor-thin most of the time.

 

If I'm reading a novel or even non-fiction, I'm mining for plot hooks, ideas for NPCs, etc. I've been doing this for decades, even during the very long periods of time I wasn't roleplaying...as if my subconscious mind knew that someday I would return to the table-top, even if my conscious mind wasn't even considering a return to roleplaying.

 

If I'm watching a movie or a TV show, I'm doing the same thing as when I'm reading a book.

 

Then there's the reading of actual RPG materials, be it game systems, campaign settings, GMing advice, modules, etc. This often conflicts with novel/non-fiction reading time, which can be something of an internal dilemma. I've got a huge library of books that I own (some for years now) but I haven't yet read. But when I go to the library with my kids I can't seem to leave without a book or three, which distracts me from my own personal library. So, I'm way behind on reading, in general.

 

And don't even get me started about all the blogs I want to read...

 

But, it seems I'm not alone in my affliction. This here post was really inspired by a post at Gnome Stew the other day called "The Constant GM." I, of course, can relate in spades. Then there's the Rather Gamey post (from another GM on hiatus) about always having GMing on the brain. And then there's the great post on Not the Singularity that is basically an ode to GMing, and a pretty good read...an sort of pep talk for GMs. I needed that.

 

It's good to not be alone. This is one of the reasons I enjoy being part of the blogosphere: the reminders that there are like-minded souls out there with the same challenges.

 

So, I'm sure there are others of you out there who are constantly GMing, either at the actual table or in the table of the mind. Please, if you are also so afflicted, share with us!

 

In the meantime, I'm holding on to this hope: that this hiatus will culminate in a glorious return to the helm, and will result in one of my best campaigns yet!