Holmes Rules: The Monk

[this is part...I don't remember...in an on-going series revamping OD&D subclasses for use with Holmes Basic. You can find the paladin and ranger here, the witch here, the illusionist (part 1 and part 2), and the druid (part 1 and part 2) all available for use. I've had some time to stew on my monk musings and analysis from yesterday, and decided that the most important thing I can do is make it a class that I'D like to play (yet still remaining focused and thematically consistent). It may look a little different from what you expected...]

Monks -- instead of dedicating themselves to a particular deity, some clerics devote themselves to understanding the gods' greatest creation: the human mind-body temple. Though their first priority is their own self-development, many belong to monastic orders, providing each other with mutual teaching and support on the path to enlightenment. Sometimes, these orders attach themselves to a clerical group or institution, acting as muscle for the church.

The Scarlet Brotherhood
might require its own post.

A cleric must have a minimum strength of 10 and dexterity of 11 to become a monk. Monks do not wear armor or use shields, but they are trained in the use of all weapons (monks of good alignment will still refrain from using edged weapons). They do not cast spells, nor can they turn undead, but they do enjoy a +2 bonus to saving throws to resist mind-affecting magic (charms, etc.). A monk is only ever surprised on a roll of a 1, they may move silently as a thief of equal level, and they use the rate of speed given for an unarmored man.

Because of their training, monks excel at unarmed combat. They move with such preternatural grace and quickness that they subtract one-half their level (round up) from opponents' attack rolls, and non-magical missiles may be dodged/deflected by monks who make a successful saving throw. Their unarmed attacks do D6 damage on a successful attack roll, and if maximum damage (6) is rolled, they may choose one of the following maneuvers in place of damage:

• Disarm (opponent's weapon now in monk's possession)
• Disable (opponent suffers -2 to attack rolls for D6 rounds)
• Hold (opponent may take no action as long as monk maintains lock; monk may not act either)
• Knockout (opponent must save of be knocked senseless for D12 rounds)
• Takedown (opponent loses next action standing up)

Maneuvers always work against opponents of human size (or smaller); however, monks may also use these maneuvers on monsters whose hit dice do not exceed one-half their level of experience (for example, an 8th level monk could takedown a 4 hit dice ogre). Monks who have reached 5th level may execute a maneuver on a damage roll of 5 or 6; monks of 9th level make execute a maneuver on a 4, 5, or 6.

Monks are adept at meditation, and may use it to a number of effects. The monk may slow their body functions (heart rate, breathing, etc.) to the point that they can resist the effect of poisons and toxins, or appear dead to observers (maximum of 1 turn per level). They may heal themselves (curing D4 hit points +1 hit point per level), and monks of at least 5th level can use this effect to cure disease as well. A monk of 9th level can focus their inner power into their hands in order to make a fatal strike: the next opponent hit in unarmed combat must save or die immediately. Each of these meditation effects (slowed body, healing, or fatal strike) can be performed but once per day.

Monks practice non-attachment: they give all treasure to their order, and may retain a maximum of four magic items, plus up to two magic weapons. They may use any magic item (save armor) not restricted to a particular class. Monks may never have hirelings or followers. A monk's level determines her place in the hierarchy of her order; upon reaching maximum level (12th) she must challenge the master of the order for leadership. If she fails (and survives), she loses the level (goes back to the minimum experience needed for 11th level). Any time after reaching 9th level, a monk may leave the order to found her own; it will gradually attract new novices (1st level monks) over several months.

[all right, that's a little longer than I expected it to be, but I really liked how it turned out. Even though Holmes doesn't go into the "name level" type stuff, I thought it important to write a bit about the monastic order and how it functions. If this were in some kind of "Holmes Companion" book, this information would be important to the setting material; if I ever run a Holmes campaign, it will be important material]

[by the way, this IS a monk I'd be interested in playing]

[oh, yeah...and it's my birthday today]

The Dungeon Master Art

Not as easy as it looks.

Randy was our DM tonight (or rather, our "Labyrinth Lord" as we were playing LL tonight). We used the Advanced Edition Companion, so the game had a lot of similarities to the ol' hodge-podge mash-up of B/X and AD&D of my youth.

Wellll...kind of, not really. In my youth, the LAST book we acquired was the Players Handbook, the tome which features rather prominently in the AEC. My friends and I played pretty much straight B/X with the addition of the Monster Manual and DMG for a year or two prior to adding "race-not-as-class" and new-fangled classes and fancy armor and spells above 5th and 6th level.

And, yeah, having done it that way really does give me a slightly different perspective. I know a lot of folks who got into D&D about the same time as myself did the "mash-up" thing and I've read several reviews praising the AEC for the way it reminds them of their past, albeit in a more coherent form. For me, it just feels like "AD&D Lite." That's not a terrible thing, by the way...it's just not "how I used to play as a kid."

Anyway, we played tonight and Randy ran the game; his first time running a game. Wow. It has been a loooong time since I've seen a completely virgin DM run a game. God...you forget how damn tricky it can be (especially with eight players sitting around the table!).

I mean, I've been doing it for 30 years (shit, that's a long time) and even when I have "rust" from a couple year plus hiatus, it's not that hard to get back into it. I mean it really breaks down to:

a) knowing the rules,

b) managing the game/adventure, and

c) managing the players

Now, I'm a pretty hard grader, but my gut reaction is Randy still deserves a B+ for the outing. He gets a ton of props for managing a game with a group that size in that kind of environment. My knowledge of the rules was probably about the same (or less) than his my first time out, and I only had two players. And, no, just because we're adults and mature and friendly doesn't make it a walk in the park. Not at all.

A couple years back I introduced D&D to a couple teenage friends (my "nephews") and they positively loved it. Quit their World of Warcraft accounts even. Their family moved to Virginia (Arlington) and I gave 'em a copy of Labyrinth Lord for the road. A few months or a year later, my wife and I were back east visiting their family and I asked if they were still playing and they said, no. Appears S. (the younger) just could not grasp the rules and Z. (the older) just "didn't do it right" (according to his younger brother)...and Z. admitted it was a lot harder than I made it look.

I guess. But Z was twice as old as I was when I started playing.

Randy called the game a "clusterf***" and, sure, it was if one wanted to play "by the book." He haphazardly made up rules ("roll a D6 for that") or bluffed or just made spot rulings. But that didn't matter because there were really only two players at the table (myself and Luke) who had any DM experience or a clear grasp of the rules. And for the most part we just kept our mouths shut.

And so Randy did what good DMs do: he played with a shit-ton of panache. He kept the players in line. He made rulings on what they could and couldn't do. He didn't dismiss things out of hand, but he didn't let "bossy" players (like *ahem* me) push him around or dictate how the game was to be played. He included everyone. He listened. He narrated and described. He ran combat pretty f'ing fast-and-loose (a guy after my own heart there). And his adventure was nice and succinct being wrapped up in a single evening.

It was also pretty damn creative/interesting from a background perspective. Oh, he ripped off (at least partially) the plot of some fantasy book I've never heard of...and he included zombies of a more cinematic (as in movie) type (Randy digs on the walking dead), so it wasn't crazy original spun from his own brain. But it was pretty different from most anything I'VE ever played in a D&D game...at least for 1st level characters. It takes a lot of balls to tell players that they've been locked in an asylum because they've been infected with a mystic disease that will eventually turn them into psychotic zombies...and, oh yeah, you have no equipment or gear. At least my character had his spells tattooed on his arm, since he had no spell book. F'ing brilliant stuff that!

A couple of us died, but were brought back to life during the course of the adventure...another nice touch (instead of making the 1st level scenario super easy and survivable he just included ways to "get back in the game"). Oh, yeah, and we fought a giant demon and killed it...with "lightning powder" we spread on the small cache of weapons we managed to acquire scrounging through the ruins of the asylum.

I've said I would love to run or play the old TSR module A4: Dungeon of the Slave Lords. Randy's scenario was better (or at least on par).

But, man, it is hard. Having all those eyes on you, wanting you to entertain them and wanting to do a good job...or at least not look terrible doing it. As a fellow Scorpio, I'm well aware how fragile the ego can be in these kind of situations (not that we'd ever show it...or any kind of breakdown!...in public). But he did a great job and everyone had fun and now that we're out of the asylum, we all want to come back and see what he's got for us next week!

Of course, Matt and Josh may well be back, so then the group will be back up to ten. Eleven if Dan's wife shows up.

All right, that's enough of a "puff piece" for ol' Randy. I'll be harder on him next week if he doesn't get the surprise system right. But I still want to play...I like my character quite well: a gnome assassin-illusionist.

; )

G'night folks.

I Am A Jerk

There really is no graceful way out of this for me. Except perhaps by keeping my damn mouth shut...but that's not really my style.

As I wrote earlier today, I got axed from Alexis's on-line AD&D campaign. Cashiered. Shit-canned. Later, Alexis wrote a post about what a jerk I am. A bunch of folks wrote me nice words. Someone posted an off-topic remark on Alexis's game blog (please don't do that). I thought I might just let it go, but I feel there's been enough back-and-forth wasted that I probably ought to elaborate a bit on my own feelings/thoughts on the matter.

I was being an asshole. Alexis was totally within bounds to kick me to the curb.

I am an arrogant, stubborn, opinionated guy who has the insufferable quality of thinking he's right most of the time. You may have noticed my blog is littered with evidence of this.

I also have what my friend Michael once called a "tendency" to be "inflammatory." Honestly, I really have tried to blunt my Scorpio sting over the years and I'm much more mellow than I once was. I used to be downright mean, and fairly unrepentant of things I said and wrote. These days, I try to be kinder (and curse less), but I can still be terribly obnoxious. Especially when I get my ire up. You may have noticed more than a few rants posted to this blog on a variety of subjects.

And today I was angry...about a number of things, most unrelated to gaming (it's been a rough couple days), and it certainly carried over. That's not meant as an excuse or justification: I'm nearly 40 years old and know how to be polite and mature, regardless. I was pretty short on both those qualities this morning. That's inexcusable for a man my age.

Alexis, in my opinion, was acting to protect his players and his game...its quality, its integrity, its longevity. No matter how else he couches it...that he won't tolerate assholes, or PVP or whatever...it boils down to that. I certainly can't fault the man for that.

I appreciate his passion for the game. I admire his dedication, energy, and effort. What's more, he supports and promotes role-playing, a subject very near and dear to my heart. It doesn't matter that our style of play differs or not, I want the same thing he does: for the game to continue. Period.

Now, as I said, I was being an asshole. Never mind what anyone else was doing, I can only control my own actions. And I didn't like what was occurring and I handled it poorly. And my actions drew scathing remarks from Alexis and I handled that poorly, too. And he still gave me a chance to get back in the game and I blew that...because just as Alexis is too old to put up with assholes at his table, I'm too old to kiss ass just to stay in a game where clearly there is a clash between playing styles or semantics or game expectations.

And perhaps a simple apology for not playing by the rules (his rules, those rules that I had agreed to abide by when I first signed on) would have been enough. Perhaps...but I don't know. I'd already acted like a pretty big asshole...I was surprised to even have a chance at redemption once the shit hit the fan.

So there. Alexis runs a tight ship with very specific expectations of play. I tried to interpose my own expectations (like an asshole), rather than play nice...and I got exactly what I deserved. As I said, I don't bear Alexis any hard feelings (and he can say whatever he wants on his blog...Lord knows I talk enough smack about people on this blog, myself!).

For me, the worst part of all this is my embarrassment at my own actions. I realize I can be over-the-top, obnoxious, and a pain in the ass...but I really thought I'd reign it in for this game. I didn't, and it's too bad, but life goes on.

And that's about all the self-flagellation I'm going to do on the subject; I really hope others will let it drop as well. I've got a ton of other things to prep this week...including a Super Bowl party...so I don't have a whole hell of a lot o time to wallow in self-pity.

[original title of post: All Too Human]

New Astrological Signs

My brother, my wife, and now some of my blog readers have asked me about the news of the zodiac being out of tilt and there now being a new 13th zodiac sign. For the sake of non-astrologer readers, here's the skinny:

The 13-sign zodiac idea isn't anything particularly new...it was first "popularized" (among some astrologers) back in the mid-90s. I'm not particularly certain why it's grabbing headlines right now. It is one of many schools of thought/study on astrology (astrologers differ on a lot of things...the study of the stars and their meanings has been around for thousands of years and a lot of those meanings are open to differing opinions on interpretation).

The facts of the matter are these:

1) Because of the tilt of the Earth's axis, the progression of the stars through the sky change over time. Right now, even without a "13th sign" the position of the stars over the Earth's sky have changed enough from the times of the ancient Greeks that the true CONSTELLATION over your head at the time of your birth is probably about one sign off from the SIGN that your astrologer tells you is "yours." For example, my birthday was November 13th...while traditionally this means I'm a Scorpio, the actual constellation the Sun was in when I was born was the sign of Libra.

2) The signs of the zodiac (the 12 "constellations" used in astrology) have long been associated with particular dates on the Gregorian calendar based on a fixed zodiac. I should say, "long been associated with WESTERN astrology," the kind normally used in Europe and the Americas and descended from Greek and Middle Eastern tradition.

3) Most professional astrologers are aware that the true constellations are off from the "traditional fixed zodiac." In general they don't care (kind of like that whole "Pluto's not a planet" thing didn't really take with a lot of astrologers). Part of this is due to inertia...we learn to do astrology in a particular way and adaptation is not the strong suit of folks who practice a discipline requiring years of study and practice.

But part of it is due to the nature of the beast. Astrology is a way of understanding, analyzing, and deciphering human psychology using a symbolic language. At least, that's the way I was taught to think of it. People have theories on why it works, but in the end few care why, only that it does work. The theories can't really be proven (at least not in such a way that it will satisfy skeptics anyway), and so we work with the tools we have, hopefully in aid of helping humans better understand themselves and their lives.

And for that, the important thing is to find a symbolic language that works for your own (i.e. the astrologer's) mind. For me, I use a Porphyry house system in astrology, though the more popular house systems are Placidus and (probably) Koch. Walter Berg, who's the real mind behind the 13-sign astrology system, uses his true sidereal zodiac. Whatever we choose, it works for us, helping with our understanding of ourselves and others.

It's like the tarot cards...in the end, the pictures on the cards are not nearly as important as what they mean symbolically to the reader's subconscious. Astrology is just more of an exact science (with its rulers, dispositors, houses, and aspects) allowing for more fine-tuned symbolic interpretation.

So yeah, I guess I'm technically a Libra. But part of the Libran personality is Libra's need to interact with others in order to learn about itself (using others as a mirror for self-understanding). And generally, I don't give a shit about that kind of thing...which makes me much more of a Scorpionic personality. I have my Libra days (when I'm feeling creative and artsy, blogging or writing) but as far as my symbolic personality, Scorpio seems to be a better fit...emotionally needy, introverted, mean-spirited at times, kind of a drama queen, etc....

; )

The Compleat [sic] Spell Caster (#2)

That last bit was getting a little long so I decided to break it up. Here’s Part 2:

SO…as I was writing earlier…IDEAS are the thing that The Compleat Spell Caster (or TCSC) is chock full of. NEW ideas. Like that familiars are not “little bonded animals” but rather DEMONIC SLAVES (just like we thought of ‘em back during the Inquisition!).

Demons are a mix of the historical and the weird. No there are no “cambions” in the game, but the description of the Incubus/Succubus (dammit! I thought I would be the first one to publish the incubus with my B/X Companion!) clearly states that they are the product of a union between “a spell caster and an arch demon.” Oh, I love it!

MAJOR ARCANA: the concept that there are some spells that are “mythical” in nature…that may exist or may not and if so may be unknown to the normal practitioners of a particular spell caster class…is downright awesome. I’m tempted to lump all or most max level spells into this category and require spell research or adventuring to discover them.

Such a neat idea: it gives the DM the ability to actually limit the spell selection in his or her campaign (“oh, the Spell of Forlorn Encystment? That one really IS just a fairy tale made to scare children…”) or dangles a nice plump carrot/treasure for the characters to quest after (“the arch-mystic Waluu is the only caster known to have perfected the Negative Illusions spell”). The spells themselves are nothing way spectacular in my opinion…it’s the CONCEPT that I will completely rip off!

Less impressive are the “runes” and symbols section. The magic of writing just doesn’t feel very occult in a game world where any character with a 9 intelligence or greater can read. Runes (and magical writing in general) had much more power in a world where literacy was uncommon. Not so much in D&D…really.

I mean, can’t anyone scratch a copy of a symbol on a door? And if not why not? And if it’s necessary to focus one’s magical power (as opposed to just blasting someone with a spell effect), well that’s kind of a weak spell caster.

Regarding the specific, new classes (the mystic, witch/warlock, necromancer, sorcerer, and sage): I like the basic direction taken with each, and all would be worthy of some sort of conversion. Sorcerers are much more “old timey” (think Ron Edwards and his demon summoners, NOT Wizards of the Coast's Charisma-based weenies), which I approve, of course. Sages are akin to hedge wizards (being eclectic wise-man types ) while Mystics seem like the basis for the Rifts O.C.C. of the same name.

Witch and Warlock are listed as two included classes on the back cover, but they’re actually only one class (warlocks being male witches). Regardless, they are portrayed much more like the witches of the Wiccan religion, though still magical in nature. Much like druids, they derive their powers from the natural world…yet they have plenty of Wizard of Oz (good and evil sides both) in the class description. I really like this write-up actually and see them as an excellent foil to any campaign that includes Witch Hunters.

Finally, of course, we have the Necromancer. What can I say? Disappointing as almost always every version of this maligned mage has been (from WFRP, to Rifts, to various video games, to Necromantic specialists in 2nd edition AD&D) I have always been drawn to the concept of the necromancer. Even my long run NPC magic-user (Alejandro’s companion “Arioch”) was based on a “necromancer” design. And my best Ars Magica characters were always “death mage” types.

Now this, of course, can be chalked up to my Scorpio sun. Yes, yes I make fun of everyone else’s sign…might as well spill some dirt on the Scorpio drama queens. Everything’s “O So Life & Death” for us; every Scorpio can stand to “loosen up” no matter how loose you may already be (assuming, that is, that you’re not the self-destructive, self-stinging scorp type…they need to grow a pair and clean up their act).

Anyways, yes, Sex and Death are the two great stereotypical fascinations for the Scorpio person…and being a triple Scorp (Sun, Mercury, and Ascendant) as well as having the ruler of both my MidHeaven and South Node (though these are lesser influences) makes me no exception.

‘Course, every person has all 12 signs of the Zodiac in their natal chart, so we all have SOME degree of Scorp in us.
; )

So back to our deadly fascination with the necromutant…er, necromancer. How is it?

Pretty badass in some regards. These guys also make a good foil for the witch hunter (or paladins or lawful clerics). They have some interesting abilities one might expect (controlling undead, seeing in the dark, immunity to fear) and some you might not (attracting undead to their stronghold like a cleric attracts “faithful” followers, automatically rising from the grave as an undead when their mortal body is slain, fashioning golems from flesh, bone, and “graveyard clay”).

The necromancer’s spells are a mixed bag: Undead Shapechange (like the 9th level magic-user spell but only applicable to undead) seems a bit of a waste to me as a 7th (max) level spell. On the other hand, necromancers can Summon Arch-Demon (TCSC’s equivalent of a Demon Prince or Lord of Hell!) at only 6th level! Of course, such summoning generally cost the conjurer one-third of his soul or ten years servitude (in life)…unless the necromancer wants to attempt to coerce the demon (!!) into submission.

Anyway, adjustments are certainly necessary for any B/X conversions. Not in terms of “game balance” (who cares about that?) so much as consistency and cohesion. In other words, I’ll need to edit these guys down a bit if they’re going to fit into a B/X paradigm. As AD&D character classes they’re probably pretty close to “good as is.” Take that as you wish.

[Um, by the way…the Necromancer is probably not suitable for young children or 2nd edition AD&D player characters. But he/she sure makes a good villain in ANY game system. Dig it!]

TOTAL WAR

[no, this post has nothing to do with the Middle East]

And while I’m thinking about it…Happy Earth Day!

So just in case anyone was wondering, I get easily distracted. No I do not have ADD or ADHD, but I do have something I like to call “Wandering-Obsessive-Compulsive-Disorder” or WOCD. Something sparks my interest or curiosity and then I dive the hell into it and plumb the depths for awhile, only occasionally coming up for air…at which time, sometimes something new will catch my wandering eye.

From an astrological point of view, this can be linked to a Mercury in Scorpio in the 12th House…not only do I need to plumb the depths of things I study, but I do this about EVERYTHING not just particular arenas (though escapist fantasy stuff and the occult holds the biggest “draw”). The Mars in Aries ruled by Mars in Aries accounts for the “wandering attention span” and the fact that it is in direct opposition to Uranus (pronounced Urine-Us, not Your-Anus) means that the more prohibited I am from doing something, the more likely I am to fight like hell to do it.

All of which is to say that I COULD have fixed my computer and internet connection (or at least made some attempt to do something practical that I should have been doing), when in fact I was really just distracted by BattleTech.

I have said before that, pacifist though I am, I dig on military fiction, especially of the speculative (sci-fi) variety. BattleTech is a guilty pleasure in which I’ve occasionally indulged for…well, shit, nearly a quarter-century. That is a long-ass time for something that started life as a board game with a single not-quite-64-page rulebook (I think it’s more in the 30-40 page range).

Of course, look how much time Dungeons & Dragons has sucked from my lifespan…talk about obsessions! : )

So my buddy, the Doc, picked up an old Xbox game called MechAssault which is completely and utterly based on BattleTech, and then I picked it up (I owned it before, but had sold it awhile back), and then decided it just wasn’t “BattleTech” enough, and went down to Gary’s for “board game night” where I thought I might be able to entice a few folks to break out the old hexagonal battle map. Problem is, I don’t own anything BUT the map (and the rule books, of course…the OLD rules that is), and I was also looking for any BT miniatures I might borrow for the evening.

Instead, Tim produced a used copy of the original BattleTech boxed set, complete with cardboard stand-ups, the same game my buddy Scott had owned “back in the day.” The same set I had originally learned to play on (and Scott had shamelessly targeted my Rifleman’s head with a Marauder PPC…why in God’s name would you design a ‘mech with only 6 points of armor on the head? Even a 20 ton Lotus has more!).

Ahhh…BattleTech.

So I bought it, of course. And I skipped Board Game Night at Gary’s and spent the weekend indulging in BattleTech…including looking for freeware java apps on-line that would allow me to run huge as BattleTech scenarios like I used to with MechForce on my old Amiga 500 (I told you I’ve been doing this for awhile). Well, I couldn’t find MechForce for the Mac but I DID find an app called MegaMek that is a near perfect duplicate of the current version of BattleTech (sans MechWarrior rule stuff). Unfortunately the campaign builder only works with Java6 and Mac hasn’t bothered making that, so I have to edit everything line-by-line by hand and…

…well, you can see how my obsession with this stuff led to me being “off-line” for a few days. One thing leading to another to another, etc.

So, I’ve come up for air and decided that it’s time to take a big ‘ol break from BT (editing code and programming languages is NOT my forte, and my frustrations have been piling up). Plus I’ve got other stuff to do. AND BattleTech “Total War” is NOT the same BattleTech of my youth anyway.

Though it seems more like a miniatures/war-game, I always considered BattleTech an RPG. If your character sheet has a place for your character’s name (not to mention skills: piloting and gunnery), then as far as I am concerned, you are playing a role. If I am imagining myself to be some dude named Bob in a 60 ton, 15 meter tall, be-weaponed construction, by God this is an RPG…and if I’m commanding a lance or company of these mechwarriors, you better believe I’ve got names and call signs (and possibly personalities) for each of ‘em…usually based on friends and relatives (just easier that way).

Of course, that makes it tough to watch ‘em get shot all to pieces…but doesn’t it make you fight harder, too?

Of course, BattleTech DID have a role-playing game attached to it called MechWarrior. I don’t know if MW has been incorporated into the current three-volume-set of BattleTech Total War or not. I re-read MechWarrior over the weekend and man oh man, this is a vastly under-rated game, in my opinion.

In fact, I’ve often heard it remarked (or seen written) that MW is considered a spin-off game to BT…an RPG “based on BattleTech.” Frankly, I find this pretty insulting. Without MW…including it’s wonderful background material, BattleTech as a game loses a lot of my interest.

I’ll say this here and now: as far as original science fiction backgrounds/alternative histories/game settings go, I find the MechWarrior/BattleTech universe to be the most interesting, imaginative, and compelling story published in RPGs. Really.

Star Frontiers, Traveller, Aeon Trinity...even Warhammer 40,000 (I know there’s a lot of Rogue Trader fans out there!)…in my opinion, none of them holds a candle to the BattleTech universe, at least the original material up to the 3rd Succession Wars (I don’t have the later rules, so I can’t really judge the whole Clan Invasion thing, though on a superficial level I think the alternate-evolution-based-on-eugenics-and-warrior-lodge thing is cool…and better done in many ways than the Legion Astartes background of WH40K).

Even without the giant robots, I find the whole BattleTech story extremely interesting and compelling. As I said, I find it by far the most interesting ORIGINAL background material written for any game (I’m not going to judge it against games where the background/setting comes from fiction established in other mediums…for example, Star Wars…but it sure beats the hell out of plenty of those). Which is all the more surprising considering how many of the original mech designs were ripped off from other sources, including Robotech (the anime TV series) and Robotech (the 2-Issue comic book series that had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Japanimation). The former provided the mech designs for the Wasp, Stinger, Phoenix Hawk, Crusader, Warhammer, Rifleman, and Marauder. The latter provided the designs for the Wolverine, Griffon, Shadow Hawk, Battlemaster, Thunderbolt, and Goliath. In fact the only mech from the original game NOT appearing in one of these two sources is (as far as I can tell) the 20 ton Locust. No idea where the game authors got the Gooney-Bird.

Despite not originating a single mech design (apart from the Locust) the background/history of the BattleTech universe (at least its skeleton) was already incorporated into the game, appearing in the side bars of the original rule book. MechWarrior fully fleshed the thing out and provided a great galaxy to scheme and intrigue in “outside of the mech.”

However, it appears that the game, because of its nature, tended to attract wargamers that weren’t interested in role-playing and repelled role-players that weren’t interested in the basic premise of mech combat.

Excuse me…I know there are plenty of folks out there that enjoy both aspects of gaming, but I’m talking about people interested in more “hard core” role-playing, not just “how much XP do I get for the mission and how do I level up my character’s piloting skill?” There’s plenty of room in the MechWarrior RPG for exploring other aspects of the BT universe without needing a Mech…or an Aerospace vehicle…or whatever.

It’s a shame because it’s a pretty nifty little system. Oh, it’s simple enough to use (base skill roll based on ability score plus skill level, hit points by location determined by overall “Body” score, simple point-buy character gen taking up about four or five pages total in the rule book), and immediately adaptable to the BattleTech game (if you DO want to keep exploring the “war campaign” aspect of the game). But the story ideas ingrained in the game: from court intrigues and diplomacies, to pirate kingdoms, to missing/recovery Lost Technology, to ComStar and the Word of Blake, to the alliances of the periphery, to assassination attempts and spying, to infiltration and sabotage, to jumpships and gladiator games, to political positions and acquisition of titles and land (planet!) grants…all of this is the stuff to make a great sci-fi RPG, even withOUT the “giant robots.”

Anyway, now the game is about “Total War,” a phrase reminiscent of WH40K’s tag line about there being only war in the 40th millennia. Which is fine I suppose, but I’m kind of “war-gamed-out” these days. As I said, I’ve come up for air from my BattleTech obsession, and I see that it doesn’t have what I want…mainly the role-playing aspect that I desire as much as the mech-on-mech combat. So fun as it is to re-tool and re-design the existing mechs for optimal efficiency (Step One: give the Rifleman more armor…on the head!...and make sure it’s using DOUBLE heat sinks), BT is going on the shelf for awhile. At least till the next time my wife is out of town and I’m thinking about Board Game Night at Gary’s.

: )

O Shame! - D20 Star Wars (Part 1)

So last night, my wife and I are at this pseudo-French place in Greenwood and she tells me I such a “double-standard man.” What do you mean double-standard – I don’t have double standards!

M: Oh yes you do, you are always saying how much you hate cheesecake and here you are ordering cheesecake!

JB: No I don’t! I say I’m not a big fan of cheesecake, but I like cheesecake sometimes.

M: No, how many times have you said “ew, cheesecake, I can’t stand cheesecake, let’s get something else?”

JB (remembering): Well, okay, maybe I have said something like that in the past, but c’mon! Fresh, hand-picked huckleberries from Montana?

M: Double-standard. How fresh do you really think those huckleberries are? You’re going to eat it and say “ugh, don’t let me order THAT again,” just like always!

JB: Well…I’m sure it’ll be delicious.

M: Double-standard!

The cheesecake WAS quite tasty, even though the huckleberries didn’t taste all that fresh; I did not regret my dessert choice. However, my wife got me thinking about my actions lately…specifically my vehemence of opinions on certain issues being reversed 180 degrees at the drop of a hat.

Take my recent Star Frontiers post, not-quite-retracting my earlier diatribe (and to be fair, most people seem to have missed the whole point of the original post: that some games won’t be worth re-visiting, specifically 4^th edition D&D). In the former, I did a more in depth re-read and consideration of the Star Frontiers rules and found it “just fine” in the context of its own setting. Despite my often noted dislike of Skill Systems, SF skills are simple enough that they really don’t get in the way of fast character creation, or quick task resolution (and it’s not much of a “stat block” to write “Beam 2, Demolitions 1” or whatever). My main gripes have always been (and continue to be): rate of advancement, combat, and lack of starship rules in the main game. But within its basic setting, starship rules aren’t really necessary and everything else can be chalked up to the particular idiosyncrasies of its particular system. The subject of “modeling realistic combat in an RPG” deserves its own loooong post.

So…180 degree turnabouts. Hmm, where to start? Here’s the thing: I tend to be fairly passionate (do put it mildly) about the things I’m passionate about. Which probably sounds like a big “duh” except that I tend to be passionate about EVERYTHING. There’s very little “moderation” in my life, though I’ve gotten better at the attempts (I think). I have a tendency to LOVE LOVE LOVE things or HATE HATE HATE them…or more specifically to “not give a shit” about the things that don’t matter to me.

Take Sarah Palin, for example. I have decided that what she does or doesn’t do makes no real difference to me. I would not vote her into any elected office and would actively vote for most any opposition candidate to prevent her from achieving any sort of power in this country. But I understand that some people find her an attractive candidate for our next president (at last poll it was 20% and falling, thank God!). That 20% (or less) of the U.S. that would vote for her…well, they are so far outside MY particular perspective of what is “good leadership” that it doesn’t make sense for me to expend the energy trying to sway them…I mean we aren’t even on the same page! Something about Palin simply attracts a portion of the population, and it’s probably the same stuff that repulses me. You can’t fight that, you can only accept that different people have different tastes and hope that more people share your view than the other (oh…and work to be a good person with your own life and actions).

Okay, so…I TRY not to spend time and energy spewing the negative, but still it sometimes comes out. Especially when I sit around talking politics with friends. Or when I’ve been drinking. Or both. ‘Cause I’m a naturally passionate individual (triple Scorpio did I mention?) and when I get relaxed, sometimes the restraints come off.

So, too, with this blog. I assume there are folks that dig on 4^th edition D&D. I KNOW there are huge fans of D20 and Pathfinder. I’m not. Sometimes, I get irritated about one-thing-or-another and I type a big, long post about how much I HATE this-that-and-the-other. That’s me. However, sometimes I find something I like about a game system I’ve previously denigrated, and I expound on the subject. That’s me, too.

But sometimes, the week feels like I’m living in Backwards Land and I start eating cheesecake just because it has huckleberries, or I start thinking about starting a Star Frontiers Campaign just because I’ve been watching that Caprica TV show and I can draw comparisons. And sometimes I do something truly retarded like run out and buy a brand-spanking-new D20 game, purposefully lining the coffers of Wizards of the Coast and supporting something I loathe.

It feels like I made a campaign contribution to Sarah Palin.

The game I purchased is the latest version of D20 Star Wars (the Saga Edition). I’m not going to attempt to justify my purchase, but I’ll tell you the events that led to me putting down money for it:

1. I love Star Wars. I have since I saw the first movie at the age of FIVE. I own five of the six films on DVD (and have owned them in other mediums) and have watched them all many, many times. I especially like episodes II and III for their subject matter (Jedi – Sith conflict).

2. West End Games went out of the Star Wars business long before the prequel movies were released.

3. I saw the Star Wars RPG in the “used” section of my local game store, and over a couple-few days decided I could pony up the dough just to have it “as a reference.”

4. I went back to the game store and found the used copy had been sold. Denied of my instant gratification after a day of planting 65 pound stepping stones in the back yard (using only my own brute force, a shovel, and my wife’s pinpoint directions), I bit the bullet and blew $40 on a new copy of the game.

As I said, there’s no justification for my actions, and I would not encourage anyone to do what I did. I don’t know if I’ve related this story before, but shortly after Knight of the Old Republic had been released on the Xbox, I purchased their first edition of the D20 Star Wars RPG from a WotC retail store (remember when they used to have those? At least, they used to have ‘em in Seattle). After perusing the game for less than a day, I returned it to the same store and got my money back. Star Wars or not, cool setting or not, the game sucked and I decided I would never play it.

Now…well, I’m going to withhold posting what I think about it till, I’ve had a chance to read more. On first pass, the thing seems to be worse than I even remember D20 being. Pretty much every character is multi-classed (save Padme and the droids), with stat blocks that look like a ton of gibberish. Not only are their feats and skills, there are “talent trees,” “force powers,” “secret force powers,” and a host of strange minutia.

Hmm…talents are like class-specific feats…severing limb is a talent? And only available to a prestige classes? So a 20^th level Jedi is too inelegant to do anything but bash an opponent to death with his or her lightsaber? Storm troopers are a 4th level “Un-heroic” class?

Ugh. Ugh-ugh-ugh. It’s like pounding nails into my brain.

As I said, I’ll be writing more about this game as I continue to read it (perhaps this will be the “theme of the week”). We’ll see if I can do another 180 with this thing.

Post-Apocalyptic Fantasies

The sun was shining today…I mean REALLY shining after weeks of grey, wet misery (that January-February kind of Seattle weather that will eventually beat down even diehard rain lovers like myself…too much mud and sickness) and even though we haven’t even got to Groundhog’s Day it feels a tiny bit like the beginning of Spring…I mean you can feel we are on the upside of days getting longer and such.

And so I find myself thinking of the Apocalypse.

I don’t know why…the last couple-four plus years that’s just what Spring and Summer start doing to me. Thinking about The End of the World is hard to do when in the midst of the happy holiday season…or is perhaps too depressing to take out and look at period during the grey, wet winter days. But Spring time…the Easter season, a time of renewal, etc…makes me think about the death of our world and the rebirth of the next.

Not to be morbid or anything…I don’t clean out the bomb shelter or re-stock the canned goods and ammo or anything. Me…I start getting in the mood for post-apocalyptic fiction and role-playing.

Post-apocalyptic fiction/lore (I’ll just call it PA for short from now on, or this post will get waaay too long) is something that’s held great interest for me for a looong time…so long I’m not sure when it started. It’s like my interest in astrology or fencing…from the moment I discovered such a concept existed it has held a great and terrible fascination for me (not that astrology or fencing are “terrible,” but they would draw my interest to the point of distraction even years..decades!...before I started practicing either).

Using Wikipedia to see the release dates of the earliest pieces of PA fiction I remember might give me a clue to when I first started dwelling on the subject. The Day After (1983) was a horrific made-for-TV movie that I remember watching as a 9 or 10 year old…though I also recall falling asleep before the end and having to ask my folks what happened (spoiler: everybody dies). Thundarr the Barbarian I watched religiously on Saturday Mornings and it aired from 1980-81 (age 7 to 8). Sometime around the same period I recall watching George Peppard in Damnation Alley on television and wow, did that one haunt my nightmares as a kid…but it was released in the theaters in 1977 so it was probably not broadcast on television for at least 5 years (’82 or so). Definitely I saw Planet of the Apes early-early in life, and found that pretty horrific…though I’m sure I didn’t see that until the 5-7 year old range (again on TV). My aunt and her friend almost took me to see the Road Warrior in the theater (US Release circa 1982), but at the last minute ended up taking my brother and I to see The Secret of NIMH instead…and I can recall vividly having a long conversation about the Apes movies on that summer day in Montana, so I must have already seen a couple of the films (possibly more than once).

But the earliest PA fiction I can recall is watching the Logan’s Run television series on TV (broadcast 9/77-1/78…’round about the age of 3-4!!). While not dealing with the horror of nuclear holocaust (or did it? Was that the one where there were these crazy scarred mutants wearing gold masks and black cowls to hide their disfigurement?), it certainly involved dystopian societies and bubble cities.

Hmm…I wonder if I can get that one on Netflix. I might need to re-watch it.

Anyway, I’m sure growing up in the Reagan "2^nd Cold War" 1980s helped fuel the paranoia/fascination with the coming apocalypse and “what happens thereafter.”

[Hmmm…just remembered that I also saw the 1978 version of the Time Machine on television when I was 5 years old, and the whole Morlocks/Eloi-cannibalism depiction of THAT film had more impact on my young psyche than any other version of the Time Machine I’ve seen since…this might even have something to do with my whole squeamishness regarding cannibalism]

Yes, long before I ever picked up a copy of Gamma World (2^nd edition, found used in the usual Montana bookstore) I was watching and reading tales that would depict (either in plot or background) the End of Civilization as We Know It. Hell, what 13 year old spends his own money to pick up a paperback of After the Bomb? Probably the same kind of kid that grows up watching Buck Rogers (with the nuked Earth surrounding “New Los Angeles”) and videotaping Chuck Heston in The Omega Man to watch multiple times. Yes…I am weird.

So it might strike some as odd that I’m kind of indifferent about most PA RPGs on the market.

But allow me to clarify: I love-love-LOVE the IDEA of the PA RPG. When I first started designing RPGs myself (as a hobby…my B/X Companion is going to be the first thing I actually publish, folks), I had a half-dozen fairly different RPGs all of the PA variety. I even figured I would call my “company” (whoa! Delusions of grandeur!) something like “Post-Apocalyptic Games.” I just felt there was such a dearth of material out there…and I wanted MORE.

Here’s the short-list of published PA RPGswith which I’m familiar:

Gamma World (1^st through 3^rd editions)

Rifts (and After the Bomb, etc.)

Twilight 2000 (and Cadillacs & Dinosaurs)

Deadlands: Hell on Earth

Car Wars (post-peak oil)

Mutant Chronicles (more Cyberpunk than PA)

Shadow Run (more Cyberpunk than PA)

Cyberpunk (see above)

Paranoia

And of course other assorted weirdness that can be categorized as PA: Obsidian, HOL, World of Synnibarr, some versions of Terra Primate (of course) and AFMBE (zombie apocalypse!), etc. And of course there’s Mutant Future, the OSR’s current darling of whimsical PA mutation & exploration.

The problem for me is: none of these games really satisfy my itch for PA role-playing.

I suppose I should look for a copy of Aftermath! (which I’ve never owned, nor read). But the reputation for being especially fiddly is off-putting to me, even as I like the idea of a grim survival based game.

'Cause that’s 50% of the problem…”grim survival” is the thing that is really missing from all the RPGs I listed above. Gamma World has the potential to be an excellent metaphor for man and his relationship with technology (especially the 1^st edition with some minor 2^nd edition tweaks), but usually gets bogged down in silliness like fish that turn people to stone and rabbits that turn guns to rubber (not to mention all the rest of the well-known gonzo mutants). Rifts and DL:HOE are waaaay too over-the-top to ever be considered grim in a semi-realistic way...and most of the other games don’t even come close.

I’ve never owned Twilight 2000. My friend Jocelyn DID, but we never played it…and her descriptions of the game to me did nothing to entice me to play (she made it appear to be a WWIII simulation fought with conventional weapons only, rather than a broken military in a PA world which might have been intriguing). I DO own Cadillacs and Dinosaurs, a true PA meets Lost World type pulp game that uses the same system as Twilight 2000. Unfortunately, I find the system to be incredibly BORING. I’m not sure exactly why (I’d have to pull it out and read it again), but after picking it up (recently…within the last 12-18 months), I was left feeling like I REALLY wanted to read the Xenozoic Tales comics instead of playing the RPG.

Grim survival ain’t present in these games, system-wise…and that’s something I’d want to see (yes, yes, a GM or referee can certainly tailor events to be “grim” but I want it INHERENT, dammit!) for a real PA game no matter WHAT the nature of the apocalypse. I mean, look at Reign of Fire (the film). Here’s a world that’s been burned to a near-cinder by DRAGONS but (as with all the best PA stories) still there is the over-reaching story of the GRIM STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL. Not, oh dragons exist maybe we should study magic. Not whimsical stories of captured maidens or bad guys allying themselves with the beasts. This is HIDE OR BE EATEN. Which is a common theme in many types of PA fiction (even without dragons).

But as I said “grim survival” (or lack thereof) is only 50% of my dissatisfaction with PA RPGs. The other 50% of my dissatisfaction comes from the other missing integral part of the genre: COMMUNITY BUILDING. The PA story is NOT simply concerned with 'O woe is us we don’t have electricity/plumbing anymore.' Most PA stories involve some sort of rebuilding/rebirth…a rise from the ashes and possibly a redefining of what community and “civilization” means to those left behind.

Now maybe this is just the Plutonic/Scorpio part of me (Pluto, ruler of Scorpio, is greatly concerned with volcanic upheaval that leads to karmic transformation within our lives) but that shit fascinates me. Surviving the apocalypse? That’s tough enough. But re-building the world from the rubble up? Now THAT’s a heroic task.

And again, while this can be simply “injected” by the GM of the game, I’d prefer it to be a real and integral part of the rules, hopefully directly linked to the “reward/advancement” system in the RPG. Reward systems based on behavior encourage that behavior that engenders rewards. Call that Axiom #3 of RPG design. If characters are only rewarded for killing monsters and getting treasure, guess what: that’s what they’re going to do (unless they wander off on a tangential Creative Agenda like, say, Story Now…hello Trollsmyth and Oddysey!). If characters are rewarded for “good role-playing” (whatever the F THAT means) then you’re going to get some hammy play-acting from your players (or you’re going to get players leaving the group disgruntled ‘cause they’re not into being judged on their improv abilities).

Now again, Gamma World (2^nd edition) comes O So Close to establishing this in its Status/Rank reward system…after all, what is being measured in GW appears to be characters value TO their particular community (or Cryptic Alliance, should they join one). Defeating mutants raises their “standing” in the eyes of their people, as does turning in valuable (and working) artifacts with the instruction book attached.

However, while community is INVOLVED in the advancement process, it is not being directly BUILT (perhaps INdirectly, depending on how many mutant monsters get killed and how many tribesmen the PCs arm with Tech III weapons). And community building is the main component of the PA genre…after the grim struggle for survival of course.

[as for the non-Gamma World games, they don’t even come frigging close to addressing this]

Community building or defining: you see it in the Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. You see it in A Canticle for Leibowitz and The Postman. You see it in The Stand, The White Plague, and even Battlefield Earth and the Matrix films. In all these stories, the grim survivors of the Apocalypse (no matter what form the Apocalypse takes) must come together and redefine what their community is, what it stands for, what they’re all about and how they are going to relate to each other in this changed world. Heck…even those little rag dolls in 9 do this!

Yep, there is the ever-so-faint smell of Spring in the air and I’m itching for some Post-Apocalyptic action. I’ve yet to see The Road or The Book of Eli but I fully intend to see both if possible at my earliest opportunity (watched It’s Complicated on Friday which was very good but certainly not “apocalyptic” in subject matter). I’ve also been meaning to check out S.M. Stirling’s Dies the Fire, which seems to be a rip-off of Steven Boyett’s 1983 book Ariel (though without the unicorns). I just discovered Stirling in the last year with his throwback planetary romances (Mars and Venus) and Marching Through Georgia, but his PA series has gotten some of his ravest reviews and I’ve yet to peruse any of ‘em. As I finish up work on the B/X Companion and its companion adventure module, I find myself more and more enticed with doing a new 64 page RPG…and I wonder if I have enough junk material (and new ideas) to distill some sort of Post Apocalyptic goulash that will meet MY particular needs of gaming in a world gone mad.

; )

The Right to Dream

No I am not talking about simulationism…B/X play is all about the “step on up,” anyway.

No, I want to relay an anecdote from my past that has naught to do with role-playing but a bit to do with where my mind has been wandering.

They say it takes a thick skin to be an actor. I consider this to be a half-truth. It takes f’ing BULLET-PROOF skin to be an actor…at least if you plan on making a living at it. Sure luck helps: being in the right place at the right time or being born with the right look or right connections. But mainly, it’s about being bullet-proof.

Now there are other, extenuating reasons why I didn’t pursue my acting after college (I won’t go into ‘em all right now), and I am far from bullet-proof, but I am incredibly thick-skinned. Astrologically, I am a Scorpio, and while I am as sensitive to criticism under my crusty shell as any of the water signs (Cancer and Pisces), I also have a Scorpio’s ego which goes a long way towards reinforcing my psychic defenses. But I’ve known others who weren’t so stubborn, nor care-free.

One guy, call him "Phil," was in my graduating class, and the only other male to graduate that year with a degree in dramatic arts (‘course, there was only four of us total that year). And oh man did he want to be an actor. And oh man was he terrible. Just terrible.

He was so bad, and he was so damn sincere that other folks in the drama department felt well and truly hurt on his behalf. And when he was drunk (as actor-students often are…at the ends of show runs, for example) and he would ask us, “tell me honestly, do you think I can make it?” and we knew, we KNEW he wasn’t bullet-proof, wasn’t even CLOSE…ugh, what the hell were we supposed to say?

Now some of us (like me) were in the department because we truly wanted to be in the theater and performing arts and were serious about our craft. But I don’t think ANY of us besides Phil (including me!) had any delusions that we were bound for fame and fortune. None of us were talking about moving to Los Angeles or New York, and at the time Seattle was the #3 city for theater anyway (and by now, may have passed up Chicago for #2).

But Phil wanted to shoot the moon. In our last show before graduation, he somehow managed to find Tom Skerritt’s phone number. Remember Tom Skerritt? From Top Gun and Growing Pains (or whatever that sitcom was that he was in)? Well, he lives (or did live) in Seattle at the time. And Phil got hold of him and begged and pleaded for him to come to our show and see us perform.

We were actually running TWO shows that quarter…I was starring in A Sleep of Prisoners by Chris Fry, and Phil had a fairly substantial role in a Phoenix Too Frequent. I actually got fairly rave reviews myself, but as my show ran 2nd (right after intermission) and most of the time we’d only be playing to a small handful of people in the audience (the students that were forced to attend for their art classes)…most of the crowd hit the door after Phoenix.

I remember the night Tom Skerritt was supposed to come. Phil was SOOO excited…he talked incessantly about it before hand, and was totally pumped up (I, on the other hand, was listening to Green Day on the headphones to get jazzed). At intermission and after the second show ended, Phil prowled the lobby looking for Skerritt, to no avail. Either he, too, had snuck out at the break, or (more likely) he simply failed to show to a production of college students in a venue that wasn’t even a theater (this was long before Seattle University opened its multi-million dollar dedicated theater in conjunction with Intiman).

Phil was crushed. And at the after-party he got very drunk. And you could see...I could see…that deep in his heart he knew, he KNEW it was all a pipe dream. For him anyway. And it was a crushing, crushing defeat.

And was that even the truth? Who’s to say that if he had simply continued to act…in anything and everything…and continued taking training and lessons that he wouldn’t get somewhere? I certainly don’t know…but the last I hear Phil had long given up the acting dream and was pushing papers around a desk, just like me. The guy wasn’t bullet-proof; hell, he wasn’t even thick-skinned.

Why am I relating all this? ‘Cause working on the B/X Companion, trying to stand on the shoulders of giants (and I don’t just mean the Founding Fathers…I’m talking about ALL the game designers and publishers that have actually created amazing material), sometimes I wonder if I am completely self-delusional myself...just like Phil. Am I fooling myself that anyone is going to like what I’ve written or want to play (let alone purchase) my product? Even if I throw money into this production, am I going to sell five copies that get universally panned and spit on around the internet?

Shit…is MY skin getting thin…like my hair line?!

F That Noise. I ain’t bullet-proof, but I’m familiar with this particular mind game. I AM going to put out the best damn product I can, period. I am in unfamiliar territory, but I’m going to try to be humble and ask others for help, as I can. Hell, I BELIEVE in this product…I AM willing to put some money where my mouth is. These scary shadows flitting around the back of my mind…well, hell, I don’t think ANYone is truly immune to worry and second-guessing. But it’s part of the cross of being an intellectual that I over-think and go down roads of self-doubt.

Folks, I’m going to do the best I can…that’s all I can do. I, too, have a right to dream. Sure it may be big, ambitious, and Lord Knows unrealistic, but it’s my dream and it’s a pretty one. I’m going to enjoy it as much as possible and I really, really hope some of you want to come along for the ride.

Prost.

Oh, AB...

Forgot to mention earlier:

My brother (he, the one-time wielder of Blackrazor by the mailed fist of his avatar Alejandro) emailed me an "early birthday present" last week: a link to D&D On-Line. For interested parties, feel free to check it out.

Now folks who've been reading me for a couple months will recall that not only am I an avid opponent of on-line MMORPGs, but my Ables often gives me shit about my love of table-top RPGs. Asked if he's actually been playing DDO, he replied "yeah, the last couple days...I'm already Level 2!"

Ugh.

I did not even bother to register or create a character. Just seeing such a thing confirmed all my assumptions about 4E (that it was geared towards video gamers; that it was meant to be seague into an IP-driven on-line game). Barf!

I especially like how the female voice on the web site attempted to both cajole and goad me into joining, before finally berating me for not pressing the "Play Now" button. Pretty f'd up, all the way around, if you ask me...though it made me chuckle at the desperation in her voice. As if Hasbro realized it was on a goddamn sinking ship and wanted me to throw it a life raft.

Sorry, pal.

; )

Ooops...one minute to midnight. Almost time to wish myself a happt birthday!

And there it is...yay!

Looking Back

Welp, tomorrow’s my birthday and as of right now I have zero plans planned. It’s my day off so I don’t even have to work, and my wife generally gives me a lot of “birthday leeway” so I probably won’t have much in the way of chores around the house either. Pretty much my schedule is wide open…so I may very well end up doing nothing.

THAT thought is a bit more depressing than the prospect of being another year older. I don’t take extremely good care of myself by any means, but I still feel about five years younger than I am…chalk it up to periodic fasting and a lot of walking. Oh…and red wine taken in liberal, medicinal amounts.

Still, it’s only human to feel a little envious of others. Oh, I don’t envy other people their high-paying gigs or high profile positions. For the most part I am totally satisfied with the decisions I’ve made in my life and the point that it’s brought to me. But I DO feel a bit envious of others who have regular gaming groups that have stuck together “through thick and thin” over the years.

Sorry to wax melancholy and all, but it IS my blog and my birthday, so I’m feeling entitled. Also, part of this blog is a review of my personal history in/through gaming, and I’ve gotten away from that a bit with recent posts (instead devolving into Scorpionic venting). So there!
Anyway, there are a few different ways people find gaming groups: one is going to Cons, which I don’t do. One is taking out ads at the local game-shop/on-line forum which to date I have procrastinated on except for Pat’s On-Line B/X game. And the other (I’m guessing usual) way is to gather together a group of friends and play…unfortunately, this is the one thing I haven’t seemed to be able to keep together over the years.

It’s the same with bands (i.e. musical groups). Talk to anyone who’s been in a long-running band for a number of years and they’ll tell you the thing that keeps ‘em together is as much friendship as the urge to make music. It’s one of the reasons one might find musicians of disparate talent working together for decades…if they enjoy each other’s company and can “gel” well THAT’s the important thing. I myself have played with a number of bands over the years but with one exception they were all people I hooked up with through “friends of a friend” or through an advertisement of “musicians wanted.” None of ‘em lasted beyond one or two gigs (and some not even that long) before falling apart.

It’s been much the same with the few gaming sessions I’ve had over the last decade or so…one-time sessions that are sometimes fun and sometimes not, but that just don’t go anywhere. There’s no glue that holds the group together…the people, even if they’re passing acquaintances, are not “friends” in the strict sense of the term. And they simply drift away.

I HAVE had strong gaming groups in the past and we WERE in fact good friends…but we’ve just drifted apart over the years. I mean they’re STILL friends, but we’ve just lost touch or (more often) they’ve moved out of the area. I’m the only “non-rolling stone;” at least it seems like that sometimes: Boston, Oregon, California…even Eastern Washington and Snohomish County. Outside the city may as well be the moon for the inconvenience of casual gaming.

Is it really so hard to hang onto friends?

Well, perhaps it takes a special type of miscreant to continue to play games into adulthood while still maintaining a job, home, spouse, etc. Some people “grow up” and move onto “adult” things. Some folks “never grow up” and are still working out the un-resolved issues of adolescence. I’m just kind of a weird duck, I guess.

Or perhaps I’m just lazy. Just got a call from my wife wanting to know what I want to do for my birthday tomorrow and I really have no idea. She wants to know if I want to hang out with any of my “old friends” but it has been so long since I’ve been in contact with most (and hell, for many I have no way to contact them anyway!) that it would seem weird (to me) to call ‘em up and say, hey, hang out with me for my birthday. This is what I get from putting off networking 365 days a year. Why can’t we all just live in the same damn town/neighborhood? Ugh!

Anyway, if I’m envious of anything it’s the folks out there playing regular games around the table. If I had MY druthers, that’s what I’d be doing Friday night. But even if I were to somehow, miraculously “get the band back together,” who’s to say we could even come to a consensus on what game we were going to play. Plus I’d probably have to prep it all myself…and then we’d have to make characters and such…and what I’d rather do first is actually CATCH UP a little with people before sitting down to a game…and shit, why haven’t I done all this before?
As I said: ugh and double-ugh. Not to beat myself up or anything, but I accept that this is simply a silly dilemma of my own making. Ah, well. I’ll muse on it a bit more tonight I’m sure.

Playing to Your Strengths

Having my own little blog from which to proselytize has been very liberating for me…not in the sense that I now speak my mind where before I did not…but in allowing me to cut down on time pent surfing various net forums and moderating/following discussion threads. Sure, my “message” (if I have one! Still refining that) may not be reaching as many folks as it could be, but dammit I can’t be responsible for everyone anyway! If it’s meant to be, people will find their way here and if anything I write interests them, they’ll stick around.

Doesn’t mean I don’t sometimes miss or get nostalgic for the old web forums.

One set of forums I frequented regularly circa 2006-2008 was those over at deathguard.org. Unfortunately closed up now, deathguard.org was THE premier site for discussion specific to the Death Guard chaos space marines of the Warhammer 40,000 universe. In addition to fun tips on painting, modeling, and army building there was plenty of discussion on strategy, tactics, and theoryhammer regarding the use of the Death Guard against other army types. The place was quite the think tank, and there were a lot of victories forged in the fires of those discussions.

Which often surprised other 40K players. Fielding an “all Death Guard” army (or any chaos specific-dedicated force) is kind of the equivalent of showing up to a Con with your Little Brown Books and running an OD&D game. In the original edition of 40K, if one wanted to field a chaos legion army, one would choose a single patron demon (for Death Guard this would be Grandfather Nurgle, Lord of Decay) and build the army using those troops specific for the patron. However, beginning with the 2nd edition (WH40K is now in its 5th or 6th edition) the designers moved to a more “Chaos United” kind of format, where you could sample a little of this and a little of that from the Chaos buffet line.

Of course, to older (or more stubborn) “traditionalist” players like myself this was frigging blasphemy! I ran a “Khorne only” army for a looong time, up till I discovered deathguard.org a whole community of dedicated curmudgeons drawn to the plaguey ones for the modeling opportunities a diseased horde affords the a budding sculptor. Seeing them as kindred spirits, I quickly switched allegiances and built a very nice collection of plague marines; a veritable “pox hammer,” if you will.

Other 40K players call this a “theme” Chaos army. But really, we’re just Old Schoolers of a 40K variety.

Anyway, on the Death Guard forums I developed my own pet theory of strategy called the Doctrines of Strength. I wish I’d saved my essays on the subject, as they were lost with the closing of the forums. They were a bit controversial (that is, heatedly debated at times), but they served ME well. The basic idea behind them (I’m not going to try to eloquently re-create them today) is that an army/force is good at SOMEthing, figure out what that something is, and do THAT. Hell, overload it! One gets more “bang for the buck” playing to one’s strength and can achieve crushing victories using the same.

The reason this was contested was of the existing idea of “shoring up one’s weaknesses.” This was the theory that if an army was weak in one area, one should add units to compensate for those weaknesses, thus becoming more “well-rounded.”

To me, this appeared to be a coward’s deception…hell, trying to compensate for weakness is simply denying your own strength! For example, the Death Guard were never going to be great at long range shooting, so why bother worrying about adding one or two (very high priced) long range weapons to the mix. Just focus your tactics around the areas your force is strong (short-mid range and close combat) and crush your opponent in the areas where YOU are strong.

Anyway, as I said, there was far more to it than that, and several good discussions on the subject that I wish I’d saved somewhere (maybe they are saved on my old PC hard drive, but that’s sitting in my garage still). Anyway, they weren’t entirely original (except perhaps in application)…I got the idea for the Doctrines of Strength from a seminar/training at work!

The training was based on a book (I don’t remember the title, as I’ve never read it, though it’s stuffed in some book shelf at home) and involved a video of people throwing fish around the Pike Place Market…or maybe I’m confusing that with a different training (maybe there was a jazz trumpet player? I don’t remember). ANYway, the basic gist of the training was this: different people have different strong personality traits, the older we get the more we become “more of the same” (stronger in our strong areas, weaker in our weak areas), and we gain more by exploiting our own strengths than we do by compensating for our weaknesses.

Interestingly enough, while I think the Strength theory works great for Warhammer 40,000, I probably come down on the opposite side of the argument with regard to human beings; it is much more important to be a well-rounded person in day-to-day life than it is to be “super strong” in one area. Also, I don’t believe everyone becomes “more of the same” as they get older…it really depends on the self-analysis and work you do on yourself over time. Otherwise, I’d suspect I still be a full-time jerk in stead of just a part-time one!

But with regard to GAMES including RPGs, the strength doctrines are interesting. I see two applications of them with regard to standard RPGs (like D&D) the first obvious, the 2nd less so.

The first, is in choosing character concepts that fit one’s randomly rolled profile. Now of course this only applies to games where random chance is a factor in character creation (for example: ALL old TSR games, Traveller, Chaosium BRP games, etc.). The recent post over on Grognardia about ability scores is what got me thinking about this at all. In OD&D, the three Prime Requisites (strength, intelligence, and wisdom) did nothing but increase the rate at which you gained experience points. This is the Doctrines of Strength in all its glory! You can certainly play a fighter with an 8 strength…and hit just as hard as a fighter with an 17 strength (same to hit roll at any given level, same 1D6 damage regardless of weapon type)…but the guy with the 17 is going to get more “bang for his buck” in earned XP than the lesser dude. The same applies to the un-intelligent wizard or the cleric that lacks wisdom.

I like this…hell, I like it A LOT. Most of the gamers I know do NOT like it (simply because they prefer more bonuses and more distinctions between characters), but I do. You can role-play the wimpy fighter or ignorant wizard with great fun and enjoyment (and you know what else? No one gets an advantage over someone else simply because they happened to roll a higher strength than the other! THAT’s game balance, folks!). And yet there is still a reward for the players who “play to their character’s strengths” in the form of more rapid advancement (though not “meteoric” advancement…just a bonus).

The second, less obvious application of the strength doctrines is regarding players’ choice of character type within an RPG. Certainly many folks gravitate to different types of characters depending on their temperament and personality. However, some of us (like me), want to try a whole slew of different personas seeing great “role-playing potential” (whatever THAT means!) in various character types; however, that doesn’t necessarily mean we are best suited to a particular class or archetype.

Let me give a personal example before I write something that offends someone. Now for me, I am a fan of the Western genre (duh!) and I am an aficionado of the spaghetti western (Clint Eastwood blazing away). I think the silent, stoic, lone gunman is totally badass and cool (who doesn’t?), and it really appeals to my Scorpio nature.

But folks who know me and role-play with me know that I am probably the least likely candidate to play the strong, silent type. Why? ‘Cause I’m loud and talky and perhaps (not too much I hope!) obnoxious at times. I can glare and sneer with the best of ‘em, but especially at the gaming table (a “fun” environment) I tend to be very sociable and un-Scorpionic. Something about role-playing brings me out of my shell.

Similar to my earlier posts about my Toad cleric…I had wanted the guy to be a sleezy, in-the-shadows kind of priest, but I couldn’t help bringing him to the foreground. Now this is NOT because I have any kind of tendency to be "heroic." It IS because I have a tendency to be impatient, aggressive, and (at times) ballsy. Being the support guy or the “thinker/schemer” is NOT my forte…unless I can be thinking up plans and tactics on the fly (I tend to be decisive in the “pressure cooker” situation).

This is probably one of the main reasons I have NEVER played a magic-user or magic-user sub-class in D&D…in ANY edition (oh, well, there was my abortive attempt at a Gandalf knock-off in 3rd edition…but that’s the exception that proves the rule in my opinion). I’m not good at walking in 2nd or 3rd rank…I like to be up front where the action is. I don’t like having to plan my spells in advance (unless I can just take a bunch of utility spells and rely on my SWORD, as I did with my Gandalf character!). Yet another reason why I hate the bard of the 2nd and later editions…they are designed to be a purely support role (they will be quickly up-staged by any “focused” class), and I can’t abide that.

But that’s ME. I have gamed with many folks who don’t share my particular berserker temperament. Clever, outside-the-box players, thoughtful-intuitive players, players who used their social skills to advantage IN GAME. And yes, those heroic players that always, ALWAYS play paladins (hi, Alex!).

Some players like to take a wait-and-see stance, only stepping forward when called upon (these are thieves of the non-swashbuckling variety) and they are perfectly content to play such a reactive role in the party. This is FUN for them. But would they make a good fighter? Not necessarily one of the “tank” variety; that’s quite possibly outside their comfort zone.


This post is getting long so I’ll just talk about one last RPG example (one that, along with Grognardia, blew this whole post into existence). Top Secret (1st edition; I haven’t played SI) is an excellent example of an Old School game that is “wide-open” as far as character possibility, but one where paying attention to one’s strengths is critical. There are only three character types (occupational Bureaus) in Top Secret: Confiscation, Investigation, and Assassination. Nothing chargen-wise distinguishes any of them from each other…you can roll any scores for your random attributes and choose any Bureau. Likewise, Bureaus themselves confer no special abilities or kewl powers…PC s are all trained spies; they simply happen to work in different departments.

The “only” thing Bureaus do is completely influence behavior and one’s role in an adventuring group (because the rewards system – money and experience – is tied directly to one’s actions and the expected actions of a Bureau member). So an Assassin gets more “points” for killing and kidnapping people, a Confiscator gets more “points” for stealing and hijacking vehicles, etc.

While ANY character generated in Top Secret can choose to be of any Bureau, certain (randomly determined) ability scores would be desirable for different departments (for example, an Investigator would like to have more Areas of Knowledge and an Assassin would probably like a higher Hand-to-Hand rating) and could (and should) prompt a person to take a particular “career path.” However, it is even MORE important in a game like Top Secret that players consider their own personal temperament, and how they feel comfortable “playing their character” as the character’s behavior within its Bureau’s specifications are going to be directly linked with game advancement. A person with no stomach for killing or (like myself) no patience for planning “clean” or “ultraclean” assassinations, should probably think twice before picking an assassin character…even though government hit-men seem cool and “glamorous,” the style of playing involved may not fit with our personality types, thus leading to slow advancement, discomfort in conformity, and less overall “fun.”

Just something to think about.