On Winning

 For one, brief moment...in this moment...I feel like I'm on top of things.

This is not a very common feeling for me; so much of the time I feel like I'm running behind...like I'm constantly trying to do the bare minimum to tread water or stay afloat or get just enough done so that things don't completely fall apart. It's like the pressure (I imagine) of going into the 9th inning of a ball game with a one run lead...you're winning, but it's a struggle to make sure you don't give up the tying (or go ahead!) run, knowing that you'll be batting the bottom of your order against a really good closer if you somehow screw things up.

Or something like that.

At this moment, I'm feeling comfortable. To continue the baseball analogy, this morning feels like we're in the 4th inning and have a five run lead. Yes, there's still ball to be played...several innings worth...but for the moment, we're taking a breather, cruising a little bit. It's not so imperative to press at the moment...it's not so necessary to hold on for dear life. 

I savor these moments: they're few and far between, and they don't last. Tomorrow, for example, is Saturday and we have a soccer game at 9am (Sofia), a playoff volleyball game at 2pm in Bellevue (Diego), and 5pm Mass in Shoreline for the anniversary of my mother's death. On Sunday we'll be hosting Sofia's birthday party (I'll be picking up cupcakes at 10am), Diego's golf at 11ish (unless he skips it for Sofia's party) possibly another playoff volleyball game at 1pm (if we win Saturday), plus a flag football game at 5pm, and (hopefully) dinner reservations in the evening. And sometime between now and tomorrow, I have to pick up supplies and such for the party, and it would probably help to get her a gift of some sort...tricky since the kids get out of school at noon today.

This moment is simply the calm before the storm.

Sometimes, I wonder at how games like Dungeons & Dragons...complex games that take time and effort to master...were ever invented, let alone became popular. Because they WERE popular when I was a kid; popular enough, anyway, that most kids had at least heard of D&D (and, thus, their parents), even if they hadn't played the game. We had sports and school and church and stuff, too, back in the 1980s but we seemed to have far more time for playing D&D then we do now. Hell, we had more time for a LOT of stuff that my kids don't seem to have: bike riding and camping trips and books...man, I read so many books in my youth. So many.

But I know what's different now: we live in the Age of the Screen. The television, the game console, the laptop, the smart phone, the streaming services...all things the eat up the time. 

Yes, of course they offer plenty of convenience and time-saving: my wife only needs to go into an office twice per week, I can write books while parked on my couch, birthday parties can be stocked via Amazon orders and bills can be paid without needing to write checks and place them in the mail. No need to take cooking classes or higher handy-people when How-To videos abound for free on the internet.

And, yet, the screen is mesmerizing, hypnotic, consuming. I can waste hours over the course of the day reading wikipedia entries or streaming useless videos on worthless subject matter. My family can (and does) spend hours of our "free" time watching television shows in the evenings and filling "empty" moments on the weekends. My kids will (when allowed) blow hours of their childhood lives playing nonsensical video games, rather than exercising their own creativity and imagination...and they fail, so often (so, so often) at any sort of self-direction outside of using a game console or screen device for game play. 

At least the weather is getting nicer and I know they will (of their own volition) spend more time in the yard, playing football and baseball and badminton. But indoors, when the sun goes down or the rain comes out? It's back on the screens, more often than not, rather than choosing something NON-screen related. Unless I am there and available for them.

This was not the case in my youth: we had only one screen (the television) and it had less than a half-dozen channels. When my parents were unavailable (which was MOST of the time), my brother and I were forced to entertain ourselves: reading, playing, gaming, or just making shit up. I feel like we even talked more...with each other, with our friends...but perhaps that's a false memory. My kids certainly talk with us (parents) a LOT, if not each other, and there were plenty of times I was absorbed in some book or other rather than engaging with my brother. 

Yeah, that one's probably inaccurate. 

*sigh*

I sat down to write an article "On Winning" and its turned into the usual Old Man Yelling At Clouds post. I am getting to be a geezer, darn it...just in case there wasn't already enough evidence of that. Mm. Let's try to salvage something:

With regard to volleyball, I wrote back in February that youth sports are a wonderfully safe way for kids to learn how to fail, building character calluses that will give them some durability against the future blows life deals out. I also wrote that I expected a lot of failure this season and hoped that it would still be both fun and useful.

Well, it turns out we've had much less failure then I anticipated. The players have been eminently coachable, and the amount of effort and athleticism they've squeezed from their bodies is simply remarkable. We have, for the most part, been under-sized and under-manned in every single game we've played (the sole exception was against a team comprised entirely of 7th graders playing up a year) and still managed to roll out enough victories to be playoff eligible. Every single player on our squad of nine is lacking in one or more key areas: size, speed, skill, confidence, discipline, jumping, serving. And yet they compensate for each others' weak ares and they are scrappy as hell; even the games we've lost (with one exception) have been "tough outs" for our opponents. 

I am immensely proud of them (in case you hadn't guessed). They are playing their best volleyball right now, at the end of the season, and they are excited and eager to play more, to win, in the playoffs. 

And this is the other wonderful thing about youth sports: when it's working, it should be building kids' confidence and sense of self. Team sports, especially, are useful as players find ways to contribute to the team's overall success: yes, some players are stronger than others, but everyone gets their moment to shine. Everyone can celebrate their teammates' individual victories; everyone can be there to support each other in hard moments (and know they have that support). It is so easy to get kids...young, impressionable humans...to gel as a cohesive unit, when you give them an opportunity to play and have an objective for their focus. School pride, for example, or a championship run.

Again, old edition D&D is much like this. Players are a team of disparate individuals, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, and yet each necessary and valuable contributors to the team's success. And when they are successful...working with and for each other, picking each other up, doing their own part...that success breeds enthusiasm and energy, eagerness and engagement. All rallied around - and directed towards - a common, shared goal or objective.

Coaching and DMing aren't all that different. In both cases, my work mainly consists of opening my players' eyes so that they SEE what it is they're doing and why. To help them understand the value of both themselves AND their teammates. To FOCUS them so that they can be successful, together, despite their differences.

There is, sadly, not enough of this in our world today (yes, yes, the curmudgeonly opinion of one old geezer). For my own kids, it's important (to me) that I wring out every last drop...for their sake.

Happy Friday, folks.

: )

My Experience Is Not Yours

Happy 5th of July to everyone; hope no one was seriously injured in yesterday's festivities. Currently, I am writing from a darkened hotel room in Spokane, Washington (the very heart of the Red Empire in my campaign setting). We've been on the road since the 30th; yesterday, I was at Muse Comics in Missoula, Montana getting information about MisCon. By tonight, I should be in everyone's favorite German theme park, Leavenworth...presumably eating shnitzel and quaffing great quantities of beer (bier?).

[I should note that we passed through Coeur D'Alene, Idaho and my kids were super excited to see the lake and recount their adventures...including their ship being herded through a warp gate by purple lightning. No such atmospheric phenomena was observed from the windows of our car, however...only weekenders in their powered pleasure vessels]

Hanging out / chatting with my 93 year old grandmother the last few days...as well as touring towns that have changed significantly since my youth...I've been reminded again how little of my life, especially with regard to gaming, bears any resemblance to others' lives. Including the folks who read this blog or to whom I'd like to "evangelize" about this D&D game. The other day, I posted a (fairly abbreviated) timeline of my gaming history, with specific focus on Dungeons & Dragons and the various editions I played, ran, and experienced; there's certainly more I could have added to the timeline (if I'd had a few more hours...or days...to spare). But while it might be of interest to various folks hoping to glean some idea of poor old JB's muddled mind, it's probably not terribly helpful to people. Because they can't live my life, or experience my experiences, and thus can't develop in the same way as Yours Truly.

We live in a different world from the one that existed five years ago, let alone fifteen, twenty-five, or thirty-five years prior. In the United States, huge societal changes have taken place. A lot of those changes are "for the better," but many of them have been of more dubious value...and even some of the positive shifts have had unfortunately negative side effects.

[by the way...the whole Roe V. Wade overturning? What a fucking disaster! What a fucking sham of "justice." Short political rant moment: my family (including my older relatives) are Roman Catholic and WE didn't want to see RvW over-turned...what the hell is up with midwest Catholics wanting to get all up in other peoples' business? Remember that bit about God giving people free will to choose stuff? Allowing states to make laws taking away choice (or, rather, forcing people into making worse choices because of fewer options) is bad, bad news. But, fine, you got your Pro-Life bullshit agenda passed...does that mean you're going to start voting Democrat now, instead of the hateful, pro-Gun, pro-War, pro-Capital Punishment, pro-Business, pro-fucking-Trump-esque-hate mongering Republican party? That is, are you now going to start voting blue instead of siding with basically EVERYTHING CHRIST STOOD AGAINST? Huh? Let's see you put your Christian values where your mouths are]

[by the way: I shouldn't bark at midwest Catholics when I've personally known plenty of Seattle-born Catholics (male and female) who voted Republican specifically because of their "pro-Life" values. Fine. Agenda passed. Now switch sides and show you aren't just hypocritical assholes]

*sigh* I know. I'm not winning any fans. Back to D&D:

I gave my son a long (like hour long), off-the-cuff lecture on D&D the other day. I wish I'd recorded it...it was pretty good (my measure of a "good lecture" is when my 11 year old will voluntarily hang out with Pops, folding laundry, while listening with rapt attention, rather than wandering off or whining about wanting to do something "fun"). Anyway, I didn't record it and I wish I had because I was rolling, and the gist of it went something like this:

Kid: you, at age 11, have only begun to scratch the surface of this hobby. You have started to experience the "obsession" of it...you can't get enough, you want to play all the time, you get frustrated when you can't. I know...I understand. I've been there...LOTS of people have been there. 

But YOU have a great advantage. YOU have a parent that understands. When I was a kid, parents did NOT understand. My parents certainly didn't. For good reason: there had never been a game like D&D. Games like chess, card games, classic board games like Monopoly...those games had been around for decades or centuries. For multiple generations of people in our society. When I was a kid, D&D was first published in my lifetime...I was born in 1973, the game was first available in 1976, and not available in an easily accessible (i.e. learnable) form till 1981. And when it first became available, in that easy-to-learn, easy-to-access form [B/X]...where was it sold?

In toy stores. To parents of children. For their children. Children like me. 

If a game marketed to children is sold in a toy store, what are parents to think? Should they not assume that this is a child's game, something to provide momentary diversion and entertainment but, eventually, to be set aside as all toys and games are once a child grows beyond it? Why would they think otherwise? What would lead parents to believe that here was something that could be utilized by a person for their entire life, providing decades of entertainment and endless mental stimulation...through youth, adulthood, and (presumably) even into old age?

How could they POSSIBLY understand that...when no such game existed for them as a child. When they had no such experience with any game that came in a box (with dice). It's not like D&D was marketed as a game to last you your entire life. 

But it can...it does. It can be played in fair weather and in foul, in sickness or in health. It exercises both the imagination and the mind, encourages cooperation and communication, provides powerful experiences in physical safety, and develops learning, knowledge, creativity, and problem solving. 

Your whole life.

Kid: your mom doesn't get it...not all of it, anyway. And that's mainly because she's in the same boat that MY parents were. There was no D&D in Mexico when she was growing up. She sees it as an interesting game (and a weird obsession of your father) but only that. And games serve their purpose (entertainment), but D&D is too long and too complicated to learn for it to be worth her time when she has little time for games. Games are more for kids than for adults; adults have better things to do than play games.

Video games are not the same thing as D&D...and yet many of today's video games (particularly those of the "adventure" variety) have their roots in D&D. Many were developed from ideas of how to shortcut the "inefficiencies" of the game: how to play an escapist fantasy without players; how to play when you had no DM; how to calculate numbers without rolling dice and doing he math; how to experience worlds without using your own efforts. Video games have superficial similarities to D&D...but they are not D&D, they remain limited by their very medium, and they provide little lasting value. They are, indeed, momentary diversions, entertaining time wasters, and (in the end) just games. By their very nature, they are isolating, requiring us to interact with a machine (even when gaming with others). The intention of video games...like the intention of most technology...is to increase convenience. The unfortunate side effect (as with a lot of other technological wonders) is to instill alienation and detachment...further separating humans from each other, rather than bringing them closer together.

D&D is a powerful tool for stimulating and expanding the human mind. And the human mind is the most powerful, knowable thing in our present reality. Everywhere we go, most everything we see and experience started as an idea in the mind of a human: the clothes we wear, the food we eat, the films we watch, the music we hear, the buildings that shelter us, the pets we care for,  the vehicles we drive, the institutions and communities and religions...ALL of these things began as ideas in the mind of one or more humans. And then those ideas became concrete reality for us to interact with. The sports and games we play are not found in nature...they were invented. By people, for people. First imagined, then willed into creation.

Little Gods are we, cast in the image of our Creator.

D&D is not just "a game for smart children." It is a device that develops the human mind, the most versatile and powerful possession every human owns. And because of that, D&D has value beyond entertainment, and is worthy of respect...despite being a game even children have the capacity to learn. Just because it is grasped by the average 10 year old doesn't mean it is a game exclusively for 10 year olds. There is a difference between Little League and the Majors, after all.

All right, there was quite a bit more to the conversation than this...a lot of it had to do with the differences between players of different ages (Diego was frustrated that his 8 year old sister doesn't have the same development as his 11 year old self) and reasons for encouraging inclusion and cooperation and the pitfalls of "solo" play (i.e. play between one DM and one player, NOT literal one player solo play, which can be used for teaching, though it has many of the same issuesI associate with video games). But it's 10am right now, and the family's up, and if I don't start wrangling them they're just going to start watching Pawn Stars or something on the hotel TV. Time to get some breakfast!

Have a good week, folks.

5E Assumptions

As I wrote Tuesday, the weekend was fairly busy for Yours Truly. Rest assured that D&D continues in one form or another 'round my house, but this weekend we'll be traveling to Skagit County for a three day soccer tournament, so who knows when I'll have the chance to write again...figured I should get something up on Ye Old Blog NOW, while I can.

Last Wednesday (before school let out) we had Diego's buddy Kieran over to the house. Kieran is a kid that Diego introduced to D&D the previous school year (I believe at the time it was still just B/X) but who then went out and got the 5E books and started playing in a 5E game, much to my son's chagrin. Back in February, Kieran expressed interest in starting up his own 5E campaign, but it ended up falling through as these things tend to do. Kieran, all things considered, isn't really cut out for the role of "DM" at this point in his life. He'd much rather just sit down and play.

So we offered him the chance to play in our campaign. Here's how it went:

At the time, the players were still in Coeur d'Alene ("Orlane"), tidying up some last bits before starting their new "boat adventure." As this was Kieran's first time playing 1E...and because I was making lunch for the kids...Diego led him through the character creation process (standard Option I procedure from the DMG). He was trying for a paladin, but couldn't quite make the scores and ended up settling for a human ranger. And UN-like our usual practice, I gave the character 4,600 x.p. (50% of the party average) for a number of expedient reasons:

• While this was Kieran's first time playing AD&D, he wasn't an unexperienced gamer...he's been playing 5E for about a year and has had characters in the teens.
• It brought the character up to 3rd level, comparable to the other party members, adding survivability while not grossly affecting overall effectiveness.
• I expected Kieran would NOT end up being a regular member of our campaign (as he was already involved in a weekly 5E game). If he does in the future, we will - of course! - have him create a new 1st level character.

Finally, I thought that the party would be adventuring in MY "Ravenloft" (rewritten for levels 3rd to 5th) and I didn't want him getting one-shot by a half-vampire.

However, we never made it there. 

Our "warm-up" for the session came courtesy of the Inn of the Golden Grain (still in N1: Against the Cult of the Reptile God). A secret room in the inn cellars had a barred door that the party had not taken the time to investigate prior to their abduction by (and subsequent conquest of) the titular cult of the adventure. While the party discussed mounting an excursion (while swilling wine and victuals procured from the inn's larder), who should enter the inn but a wandering ranger looking for adventure! "Revlin" was quickly enlisted for the task at hand.

Down into the cellar went our brave adventurers, searching after an ivory idol that one-time cult member (now loyal henchman) Misha had memories of. The network of tunnels beneath the inn were crude, narrow, and only recently dug out, only (occasionally) widening into large caves. For the most part, the cramped conditions required single-file lines and stooping to avoid low ceilings. "Hey, Revlin: what kind of weapons are you proficient with?"

Well, my main weapon is the two-handed sword. That's a 'greatsword,' right? 

"Um, yes, but you're not going to be able to swing it very well (or at all) in these conditions. Two-handed swords are a lot more useful in the open than in underground environments. What else do you have?"

I've got a (horseman's) flail, too.

*sigh*

The ranger ended up walking point, light crossbow in hand. However, it wasn't long before found their way into a large(r) cavern, able to spread out a bit.

At which point a giant constrictor dropped from the ceiling, achieving complete surprise. Random roll determined that it landed on the ranger.

[the adventure location has the constrictor wrapped around a rafter and achieving surprise with a whopping 5-in-6 (!) chance. Rangers, of course, reduce the normal chance of surprise from 2 to 1. After adjustments, it still ended up being 2 full segments of surprise]

Fortunately, the other party members have excellent response times (high DEX). While the ranger literally "flailed away" (he got out his flail and tried to whack the thing...to no avail) his companions stabbed the snake repeatedly with short swords and daggers. The serpent snapped at the harriers repeatedly even as it continued to constrict its coils around the hapless ranger....

He was saved, healing was provided via the party cleric (no "short rests" I'm afraid) and play continued. More exploration, the elf now walking point. Cursory inspections of "empty" caves and wariness (ceiling checks!) became watchwords of the party. They avoided spending time in partially collapsed chambers (avoiding the concealed mudvipers that lay in wait) and eventually stumbled upon a huge ivory carving of the naga "god." Realizing it was too large to carry, they broke it into several large chunks, filling their bag of holding with as much ivory as it could hold and vowing to return for the rest. They then proceeded to search for the exit.

And instead wandered into a huge chamber filled with several cadaverous humanoids, hissing at them with drooling, hungry eyes and brandishing filthy claws.

"I've got this!" declared the courageous ranger, dropping his crossbow and pulling his two-hander from its back scabbard. The party dropped back, hurling daggers, as the ranger advanced upon the foes, sword in hand. I think the ghouls hit him 7 or 8 times? I know he was paralyzed by the end of the 1st round (even though I only require one save per creature, rather than one save per successful attack).

The cleric attempted to turn the monsters but failed, and the party was forced to do battle with mace and blade. Fortunately, elvish blood and well-worn iron carried the day: the ghouls were destroyed and the party set a watch till the ranger revived and they could exit the catacombs. 

All told, it was a good haul of treasure, and the party was most satisfied with having secured the cellars of their newly acquired tavern. Revlin agreed to accompany them on their upcoming voyage via ship, and even contributed to the cost of the ballista ("We have a ship in our 5E game, too! It has three magic canons and an aboleth chained to the bottom!"), though some party members had doubts about the young ranger's overall effectiveness. In total, he'd inflicted two points of damage over two encounters while sustaining 28 points of damage himself. 

Kieran DID have fun, however.

; )

Dishonesty

An anecdote:

On Friday, my children had a couple friends over after school. This is ostensibly called a "playdate" (still, though my son is an 11 year old. Not sure when this will just transition to "hanging out;" maybe age 12?). Diego and his buddy, Maceo, spent the majority of their time together playing D&D with Yours Truly...this was, in fact, the reason Diego wanted his friend to come over: to play Dungeons & Dragons. Much fun was had, as usual, and Maceo went home before dinner time. This was, perhaps, the third time Mace had been a guest in our home.

Cut to yesterday (Sunday). Maceo and Diego, besides being classmates, have been on several sports teams together...they both played Little League (which just ended last week) and they're currently on the same flag football team, coached by Mace's dad, Connor. Maceo's parents are "good people," friendly, progressive, kind, intelligent, etc. They are  planning on leaving our school next year (Diego says it's something about them having a problem with God or something...I don't know, though I know they aren't Catholic or particularly religious) but we (my wife and I) have tried to build a relationship with them, as the kids really get along, they live close to us, and we'd like to keep in touch.

[mm...I have some things to say about God and belief and stuff, but I'll save it for another post. Tomorrow night we're having the parish priest over to our house for dinner (I'm cooking my version of Paraguayan asado) so I'm sure I'll have some reflections after an evening of theological discourse]

ANYway...Shaina (Mace's mom) and I were chatting on the sideline, and she was telling me her kid had a fun time and expressing her appreciation that we'd hosted him again when it was clearly their turn to have our kid over to their house. And I said that was totally fine and next time they could host and whatever. And then she added that, funny thing, when we'd invited Mace to hang out last Friday, they had planned on turning it around and asking Diego over, but that Maceo had pleaded with his folks to let him go over to our house instead because they wanted to play D&D and Diego's dad was the Dungeon Master and his own father (who would have been watching the kids since Shaina was out-of-town that day) couldn't do the job. 

To which I replied, "Oh, I'm sure Connor could have done just as good a job being 'Dungeon Master' if they'd been at your house."

Which is, of course, a blatant boldfaced lie...something I realized roughly 30 seconds after I said it. But what was I supposed to say? Yeah, the father of your kid's friend has spent 40 years playing this D&D game, and it probably would be tough for your husband to just pick it up and run the thing? Or maybe just "hey, your kid's friend has this creepy man-child for a dad and probably it would be good for everyone if our children spent time away from all that D&D nonsense?"

*sigh*

Lately, I've been encountering parents who are...perhaps, maybe...running into the same kind of thing the parents of my generation ran into: their kids are obsessed with this weird, strange game of Dungeons & Dragons. The other night (a week or two ago), we went out to eat with another family who we know through soccer (their two sons play for the same premier club as our kids). They're very cool, international types (dad from the UK, mom from Spain) only slightly younger than my wife and I. Their boys are DEEP into the 5E D&D...to the point that the older boy brought his books and dice to the restaurant and was running a game for the kids while we adults chatted and ate and drank.

And the kids had a great time. Though it was clear that they didn't really know the rules and were "winging" most of it and generally just f'ing around, even my son came away saying "I like 5E now!" (though, he stipulated later, "only the way Manjeet runs it." He also says "1E is still the best."). And the parents, while they were happy about their children's joy were just kind of befuddled by the whole thing. "I tried playing with them but I didn't really get it," confessed their father (Manjeet Sr.) to me. "I don't really think they know the rules even, but they sure have fun." 

"Yeah, D&D is a lot of fun," was about all I could offer.

But my wife, who is always quick to promote me, explained how D&D was totally my thing, and how I wrote books for it, blogged about it, had been playing it for decades, etc. "I don't really understand it myself," says the wife, "But Jonathan knows all about it and can tell you anything you want." 

We ended the night over a gelato in Ballard, promising we'd have to get together again, soon. This time at our house, so the kids could play D&D while the adults hung out and drank wine. "Or maybe three of the adults can hang out," someone (I don't remember who) quipped, "while Jonathan acts as Dungeon Master!" 

Truth be told, that sounded pretty good to me (though I'm sure I'd still partake of the wine).

I am...and have been...in a weird space lately. Once upon a time, I was just a guy masquerading as a normal adult who had this gaming hobby on the side. The same way other dudes play pickup basketball at the rec center, or jam with their old musician buddies, or run a fantasy baseball league. And THAT was fine...normal, understandable. People were cool with it...that's just JB's thing, like someone else might really dig sailing or gardening.

But now my kids are old enough to play D&D. And the kids of my (adult) friends are old enough to play D&D. And the kids are learning the goodness of the game and the obsessive-compulsive nature of it and its potential for absolute immersive fantasy joy and their parents are...um, glad that they're wanting to do something that doesn't just involve a video game console but weirded out a bit by this thing, this "role-playing game" that they don't understand...

And then there's this adult that their kids gravitate towards, who they (the kids) want to "play with" and who is cool playing this game with kids a quarter his age... I mean, it was cool when JB was their soccer coach, but this "dungeon master" thing is a little strange, ain't it? A little cult-ish, maybe?

I wonder if these parents
watch Stranger Things.
Probably...

Yeah, it's weird. When I was a kid, I wasn't playing in games run by old geezers...or even by old teenagers. I was running the game for my friends (or playing in games run by them). Because there weren't any adults who were interested in, or who understood, or who'd ever played these games we loved and enjoyed and obsessed over. Until I was an adult myself, I only ever met ONE ADULT PERSON (I've related that story before) who was an active gamer. One. As far as any of us knew, these were games for children...they were purchased in toy departments, after all.

Neither my kids, nor their friends, live in the 1980s that I grew up with...but there are still some parallel things going on. Russians are bad again. Music is crassly commercial again. Economy is sucking again. And D&D is sold in toy stores again. And kids are getting it, and playing it, without much understanding from their parental figures.

Well, most of them. But my kids have a weird old man. That's not their fault. 

My wife's colleague has a couple kids who LOVE D&D. During the early days of the pandemic, when everyone was under house arrest and kids were being homeschooled, she found out about my little "hobby" and asked if her kids could play in our home game via Zoom. While I was happy to oblige, the medium sucked and we shut down the game after a couple sessions. Melissa (the mom) did gift me with a six-pack of (disinfected) tasty craft beer for my trouble, however. For her son's birthday, a year later (he was 13 or 14) I know they hired a 'professional DM' to run a game for him and his friends. These parents still don't "get" this D&D thing...and this is a woman who used to compete in Magic the Gathering tournaments (at a high level) in England when she was a teen! 

D&D, though...nope, don't get it.

As I said, it's a weird head space I find myself in these days...and it's only getting more weird. I have a long-running narrative in my head about who and what I am that seems to be butting heads a bit with reality. Like, I long ago made peace with the fact of my "gamer identity" but the more I make that identity public knowledge, the more I have to navigate new waters and ramifications surrounding that identity. 

*sigh* (again) I guess I'm surprised that I keep surprising people. Look, I get it. Humans are self-involved. We see other people as cardboard cut-outs until we start having meaningful interaction with them. But even then, we confine our discussions to general, relatable topics: How's the weather? How are we coping with the challenges of child-raising? Why is the local sports team terrible? Man, that pandemic sucked. Etc. 

I assume I probably come off as a smarter-than-average Average Joe Seattlite. Ball cap over thinning hair, Seahawks hoody, jeans. Pleasant-enough white dude. Wife, kids, house, dog. 

Mmm. Sometimes I feel my persona is only that...a "persona," a dishonest facade. And yet, it IS honest. I look and dress and talk like I do. I am a "pleasant-enough white dude." I do have a wife and kids and house and dog. There's just a lot more underneath all that...the deeper me that I don't advertise. These days, I'm being...well, more honest about it. More open about it. And it's maybe a little more different than, say, revealing I like rock music and used to have long hair. A lot of dudes my age could certainly say the same.

A lot fewer of them would admit to being a practicing Dungeon Master. 

Other Games

Watched the first episode of the new Stranger Things last night (well, this morning...around 1am) and now I am annoyed. Like, really annoyed. Not because of the new characters or plot developments or story arc changes...no, all that stuff is neat, interesting and welcome. Well done, intriguing, makes me want to watch more.

No, what has annoyed me to no end is the new D&D player boasting about her 14th level rogue character...in 1986. Three years before 2nd edition would introduce "rogue" as general class specification of thieves and bards, and 14 years before 3rd edition would introduce "rogue" as a specific, playable class in lieu of the thief. 

Color me the brightest color of nerd on the planet...fine. For a series that prides itself in grounding its setting in a particular time period, this is an annoying, gross misstep that I simply cannot unsee. It has tainted my enjoyment of the show; it's broken my suspension of disbelief. It's lowered my opinion of the Duffer Brothers' "D&D cred;" born in 1984 did they ever actually play the brand of Dungeons & Dragons their protagonists do?

*sigh* The things that annoy us. Everyone has their pet peeves...this is just one of those things that really chaps my hide.

[the idea that ketamine...i.e. "Special K"...would have been available to a casual drug dealer in '86 in as small a town as Hawkins also seems a bit dicey, though that may simply be my naivete regarding 80s drug culture (it wasn't on my radar till the 90s). But THAT particular anachronism bothers me a lot less...go figure]

Moving on to other, non-"nerd rage" topics: I wrote...mm...last weekend (maybe?) that I wanted to introduce my kids to some new RPGs, particularly Gamma World and Top Secret. Top Secret it was (or, as my kids call it, "super spies"). My son's British MI6 agent, "Chad" caused me no small amount of amusement (mainly due to his name which, to him, sounded "very English") though his antics were a bit more Johnny English than James Bond. In the end, he was KIA while trying to rescue the U.S. president (Operation: Executive One, from the TS Administrator's screen)...having his foot shot off by a shotgun-tripwire trap.  

Fun, but not as much fun as D&D (that cleric magic can really mitigate missteps, you know?). And I'm afraid Gamma World wasn't even tried, and probably won't be any time soon. There's a LOT that I dig about the GW game...just reading the 1E rules or early adventures like Famine in Fargo and The Albuquerque Spaceport are a JOY. But I'm not a huge fan of the GW system...it's just so...

Mm. I don't know the word I'm looking for. It's kind of immune to planning or manipulation. It's too "swingy;" there's no mastery of design, really. Um...hm. Okay, how 'bout this:

Gamma World, unlike other RPGs, is poorly done when it comes to character generation. Not because it's poorly themed (I rather like the PSH, Humanoid, Animal selection), but because...outside the first choice of "character type"...you are a slave to the random die roll. It is possible to create an Uber-mutant...or a complete genetic dead end. And it's all based on a random throw of the bones. Vast discrepancies in effectiveness are possible between different players' characters...and the success of the PCs adventures largely comes down to how heavy a hand the GM is willing to take.

Such is not the case with D&D, for example: 1st level characters have their different skill sets, but they are largely comparable in power...and experience/leveling gives a good indication of what types of challenge/obstacle are appropriate for a party of a particular size. That's ain't GW, where a beginning mutant may (by dint of fortunate rolls) come out as a powerhouse while her amigos are all primitive weenies. I saw a lot of this, Back In The Day (when I used to run 2E)...more than GW setting nonsense, this is what eventually turned me off on the game. Somehow, I always seem to forget this aspect of Gamma World, right up till it's time for chargen.

[and I'll probably forget about it in the future as well. Dennis Laffey's GamMarvel World idea remains an intriguing one...something I'd love to run with pre-gens sometime...]

Other games:  I picked up the latest version of Twilight 2000 a few (three to five) weeks back. It continues to sit, unopened and shrink-wrapped, on my living room coffee table. I don't know why. I don't know what I'm waiting for. I'm going to open it. Soon. One of these days. 

Ugh. I'm scattered all over the place this morning. Truth be told, there's nothing burning terribly brightly on my mind this morning, other than the sunshine streaming through the window. I'd like to go for a bike ride today, I think...a little exercise, a little fresh air. That's what I need...not more games. 

I already have/own/run the BEST game. The session with the new kid went well yesterday. I won't bother to bore folks (more than I already have) with tales of the party's exploits, but great fun was had, and much success as well.  I don't know why I need to collect and hoard other RPGs.

All right, this post is going nowhere...maybe I'm just tired (still). Going back to sleep for a bit.

The Stupid Of 5E

So in an attempt to "lighten the mood" (blogger just deleted a rather long comment I was scribbling re the conflict in Ukraine...I'll take that as "a sign"), I'm going to go ahead and denigrate the current edition of D&D for a bit. 

[how is that lightening the mood? Because my readers appear to enjoy my rantings like a crazed lunatic and, in the end, it doesn't matter terribly whether one finds an edition of Dungeons & Dragons to be "cool" or "crap." It's just a game...play it if you like, or don't. Besides, venting appears to be good for the spleen or something]

*ahem*

SO...here's the deal: a couple posts back, I wrote about how my child purchased the 5E PHB (with my approval and blessing, though with HIS money, not mine) in order to learn the new system for a game his friend intended to run (said game never having materialized...they're 11 years old, you know?). Well, he read the book and pretty much hated a lot of it...so much so that even when I offered to buy a copy of the DMG and MM and actually run the game he vehemently rejected to offer out of hand. 

[I have little doubt the boy would slap Satan in the chops if Ol' Scratch appeared on the road with a bag of temptations]

Anyway: I'll admit I was slightly disappointed, just because I was curious to see what would happen if I actually ran the game in the manner to which I've become accustomed...

[just by the way, I've done so little writing the last couple-three months, I'm finding my typing skills to be woefully rusty...I keep misspelling words and hitting the wrong keys and generally annoying myself. Sorry, but that needed to be vented, too...]

...a playstyle that is most assuredly NOT the type currently in fashion with the New D&D crowd. 

However, I only felt comfortable making my offer because I'd been reading the books (the DMG on-line) co-currently with the boy, doing my own studying. And I decided, early on, that I would keep a running list of all the stupid found in the 5E game. Seriously, I just started a running list on my phone's Notes app called "5E Stupid." It was last updated 3/20/2022 at 9:04 am. For posterity (and so that I can delete the thing off my phone) and for my own amusement, I present it here.

In no particular order:

• Eldritch bolts (cantrips in general)
• Cost of normal plate armor = cost of gauntlets of ogre power PLUS immovable rod PLUS helm of telepathy (economy)
• Wights > Specters (and no energy drain in the game)
• 300 days to craft plate armor (economy)

[if there's a common thread, it's the host of issues with the fantasy economy of the game. The game design seems more of arbitrary, video game economy than anything based or grounded in reality. For example, it's an easy Google search to find information on the historical forging of plate armor and, NO, it did not take ten months to manufacture. When designing a living, breathing campaign world, these details become important and their missteps become glaring]

• Less XP needed to get from 11th level to 12th level than from 10th level to 11th level (total arbitrariness)

[again, this is just sloppy, nonsensical design]

• Hellish rebuke (3d10 damage, 60' cantrips available to all tieflings of 3rd+ level)
• Humans demonstrably weaker than every other race in the book (no skill proficiencies, spells, abilities, etc. for a cumulative bonus of +1.5), promoting a non-human-centric game.

[i.e. not D&D as originally conceived]

• Staff of Withering (non-magical magic)

[again, this note...these are all just notes...requires some explanation. I'd invite unfamiliar folks to read the original description of this magic item as presented in Book 2 of the LBBs, or even the description from the DMG: so much potential for one's game, so many plots and ideas that can stem from the consequences of its use, whether against the players or prominent NPCs, so much FLAVOR in a single item of enchantment...powerful, fairy tale stuff. Contrast that with the 5E version:

The staff can be wielded as a normal quarterstaff. On a hit, it deals damage as a normal quarterstaff. and you can expend 1 charge to do an extra 2d10 necrotic damage to the target. In addition, the target must succeed on a DC 15 Constitution saving throw or have disadvantage for one hour on any ability check or saving throw that uses Strength or Constitution.

That's it. That's all it does. Fail a save and you have disadvantage for an hour. The damage inflicted by the thing doesn't even do as much damage as the hellish rebuke that can be cast at will by any tiefling of 3rd level or higher. Were the designers actually trying to strip all the magic and wonder out of the D&D game? Their staff of withering is but one example]

• Adamantine plate armor is cheaper than normal plate armor (as an "uncommon" magic item, its value is only 500 gold pieces, compared to plate armor's 1,500 g.p, value).
• Limits of "attunement" (attuning magic items in general).
• Evil high priest cantrips (spare the dying or chill touch are the only available options...which is appropriate)

[can't remember what I meant by "appropriate;" I think I meant it sarcastically with regard to spare the dying]

• Average shopkeeper earns 36.5 g.p. per month (after expenses and paying salary of employee); cost for "aristocratic lifestyle" is 10 g.p. per month (making every baker and shoemaker an aristocrat).
• Medieval bakers would be expected to bake/sell 80 (4 pound) loaves per day. To earn the AVERAGE shopkeeper income (not profit), a 5E baker would need to sell an AVERAGE of 3,475 loaves per day (2 c.p. isn't  a bad price given that 2-3 english pennies...1/240th of a LB...is fairly similar). Considering that a medieval village of 2,500 people could expect to host four bakers (and each medieval person ate roughly 1# of bread per day), that's a surplus of 11,400 pounds (more than 5.5 TONS of bread per day)...even assuming NO ONE is baking their own!
• True polymorph allows for substantial creation of wealth (by bards, warlocks, wizards) unlike the limitations of the wish spell.
• Wraiths > specters; wraiths only CR 5, specters CR 3.

[ha! I repeated myself. But to be fair, I was rather flabbergasted by this change, not to mention the nerfing of such (previously) feared undead phantoms]

• All damage is attrition (HP) based; purple worm poison, or being swallowed (for example) simply do "damage" of various types. 5E appears to have a phobia of "save or die" effects.
• AT THE SAME TIME "revivify" becomes available as a 3rd level spell (for clerics of 5th+ level) with raising carrying NO penalties, so long as the spell is used within 1 minute (10 combat rounds in 5E) of death, for a minimal (300 g.p.) cost.

[two notes: the 5E version of the vorpal sword DOES retain (somewhat) its auto-kill effect so kudos (I guess); also 300 g.p. may NOT be all that minimal...it's difficult to tell with the general wonkiness of the 5E economy. However, the point remains that for a game that appears to fear PCs inadvertently dying, it sure is easy to bring folks back from the dead]

• If you can attack me, I can attack you (re: "reach" from larger creatures).

[this was with regard to combat maneuvering. If a troll...or whatever...is going to swipe at me with a long arm, it doesn't matter that I'm armed with a dagger instead of a spear. If he can "touch" me, my weapon can touch him. His effective range is zero because he's unarmed..."reach" should only come into play when using weapons (like a pike versus a knife)]

Aaaaand...that's where my notes end. They could have continued, but I think 3/20 was around the time I decided there was no use examining it further when no one in our home had any desire to play the thing.

Folks should note that ALL of these things are complaints I had with regard to actual DESIGN...there's plenty of "stupid" (IMO) regarding the way the game is written, choices of aesthetic, of focus, etc. But these decisions of design...things like the way the crafting or finances or spells or magic items are handles...are things that I see undermining any type of meaningful (or satisfying) long-term play using the 5E system. They were things I found so striking that I felt compelled to jot them down.

Of course, people DO play 5E, and have been playing it for years, so it's not really appropriate to stamp it with any type of "failure" judgment. The game has been successful...clearly...at its general aims (reclaim market share, generate returning consumers, make lots of money). It's also, clearly, not my cup of tea. 

All right, that's enough for now (deleting page of notes...and...done!). The next couple days are going to be pretty busy for me, so for folks looking for content, take a listen to Settembrini's podcast interview of Trent Foster Smith. It's about three hours long and has some fascinating insights, as well as some things I wouldn't mind addressing in my next (hopefully soon) blog post.

Later, Gators!

Different Strokes

The other day, I was looking for video reviews of old adventure modules (something to listen to while doing housework) and stumbled across an old Goodman Games video in which four of their prominent designers, listed their Top 10 D&D modules (TSR era) of all time. 

As such videos go it was...eh. Par for the usual (as in, no mind-blowing opinions/info got dropped). And, yet, I was fascinated enough to go back and re-watch the thing and make up a spread sheet charting everyone's individual list. Because what was interesting was just how surprisingly crappy their favorite picks were and their justifications for including specific adventures.

That's "crappy" in my opinion...but my opinion is one of an adventure designer. And these guys are adventure designers...like long-time ones with more book credits under their belts than I will ever have. That is what caused me to sit up and take notice. You know, if three out of four designers list Sinister Secret of Salt Marsh as one of their Top Ten faves, then, hey, maybe there's something to take a look at there. On the other hand, when they blather on about Ravenloft being one of the greatest of all time with regard to design, it makes me question their abilities at all.

So I rewatched the thing and dived deeper. Some of the dudes had picks I agreed with. Some (clearly) did not. But what I came to realize, as I watched this video was that their lists were largely based on something more than "design." They were influenced by nostalgia, reputation, size/scope and...more than anything else...fond memories they've had of times actually running/playing these particular adventures. The guy who picked Ravenloft as his number one claims to have run it 5 or 6 times (even taking the same players through it more than once). The guy who listed the Desert of Desolation series as his favorite has run the entire thing more than once and had a blast doing so. 

The fact that they have fond memories of playing/running Ghost Tower of Inverness or Palace of the Silver Princess or whatever...because that's what they had the opportunity to play/run as a youth...should not be a knock against their opinions, any more than it should be a knock against MY lofty opinions of Forbidden City or Tomb of Horrors or whatever. The fact is, it's tough for MOST of us to be critical against the things we hold in esteem due to rose-colored glasses of the past.

And as my son likes to point out: different folks have different tastes. 

[of course he only points that out when it excuses his enjoyment of a song like Pitbull's "Fireball," which I am absolutely convinced is THE WORST SONG I'VE EVER HEARD. I don't know that it's the worst song ever written (that "honor" may go to some other Pitbull song), but it is hands down the absolute most awful piece of trash masquerading as "song-writing" that has ever tortured my ears. Worse than "Party in the USA." Worse than "I'm Too Sexy For My Shirt." Worse than "You Remind Me Of My Jeep." Worse than Crazy Town's "Butterfly." I would almost...almost...be willing to put it second to that stupid "Good Is The New Bad" song I had the misfortune to hear on Disney radio the other day (that one even makes Diego cringe), but then I hear Pitbull's opening "lyrics" and want to punch my face through a wall of glass. 

Yet everyone else in my family dig that stupid-stupid song. Even my wife (who claims to not like Pitbull). There's no accounting for tastes. I consider "The Hotel California" one of the best songs of all time, and some people hate the Eagles. But I would rather listed to Ice-T singing "Evil Dick" (from his Body Count days) than Fireball. F**k that garbage. I won't say I hope Pitbull dies a gruesome death...but if he were to spontaneously combust some day and all his gazillions of dollars be donated to some worthy charity, well, I can't deny I'd be more than content]

*ahem*

Now, as I wrote in my last post, all RPGs provide rules for participants to explore an imaginary environment, but they are distinguished from each other by HOW they execute this exploration. And it is in the execution of these "HOWs" that we can best judge them.

And, yes, because of the limitlessness of the (RPG) medium, it is possible to contort mechanics into doing all sorts of things that the design doesn't support. Back in the day, we transported a couple of our high level AD&D characters to the Marvel Superhero version of earth, converting all their stats and abilities to standard FASERIP scores. That was some bunch crazy (and I don't recommend it)...but for us, it worked and we had half-elf weather goddesses and psionic-slinging bards brushing up against mutants, cyborgs, and aliens...for a while anyway.

BUT, as I wrote about recently, different RPG groups have different priorities of play, similar to what Ron Edwards once termed "creative agendas," a term from the (now more-or-less obsolete) GNS theory postulated on the Forge. Dungeons & Dragons (the old pre-1983 version about which I'm concerned) pushed a particular priority of play and conceptually executed it rather well:

• the premise contained a joint objective (everyone wants treasure)
• deadly challenges force engagement (pay attention or die)
• asymmetry forced players to cooperate (different classes bring different skills to the table)
• simple mechanics increase accessibility (roll dice, look at chart)
• kitchen sink setting provides many possibilities for exploration (the length and breadth of pulp fantasy fiction)

For those who wonder why it is that D&D has remained "king" of the market for so long, one really only has to look at the excellent way in which the game executes its objectives. It's not that people LOVE "pseudo-medieval fantasy" ...some people want to retch at the idea of "high fantasy." It's the fashion in which the system functions and interacts that makes it the master of the RPG realm. 

The ONLY game that really comes close is Shadowrun. It has a joint purpose (players need to complete missions...for money). It has high pressure (i.e. deadly) stakes. It has SOME asymmetry...magic and cybertechnology don't mix well, and both are (generally) useful for completing missions. Plus the priority system of chargen ensures PC types have different strengths. But its setting...being both near future and far more defined...is far less mysterious (less avenues of exploration). And EVERYone has the ability to use firearms (the great equalizer) making many teams feel a bit "same-y." Also, the premise (PCs being beholden to missions given by Mr. Johnson) makes the game the equivalent of "quest-giver-at-the-tavern" Every Single Time...a rinse-n-repeat that gets old with no endgame in sight.

Unlike Dungeons & Dragons.

And that's the BEST of other RPGs...most fall down in even more ways. Asymmetry is the usual one; while most of the challenging RPGs do well forcing cooperation between PCs (safety in numbers!) none have quite the distinction...nor emphasis...between different PC types, even in games that have "classes" (including Marvel's "power types," Rifts' "O.C.C.s," Vampire's "clans," etc.). It's not like the VtM group is saying, "man, we really need a nosferatu to round out our coterie!" 

Here's the thing, though: that ain't a priority of play for MANY players of RPGs. Being challenged is a priority of play supported (and enhanced) by the design of Dungeons & Dragons, but some people aren't looking for that. Some people just want to explore a particular genre/setting. 

Westerns, outer space, superheroes, Lovecraftian exploration, Cold War spies, post-apocalypse, secret vampire society, zombie survival, steampunk time travelers, whatever...there are RPGs written to provide rules for just about any "imaginary environment" one might want to experience. You read it in a fiction novel, you saw it in a movie, you had a weird dream...wherever the strange inspiration came from you think it would be "cool" to live in that particular setting for a while. And that kind of play appeals to some folks: a shared daydream, if you will. 

Most RPGs fall into the category of facilitating this style of play. Most. 

D&D isn't about genre/setting satisfaction: there are better games that explore "pseudo-medieval" (Chivalry & Sorcery, Pendragon, Ars Magica, etc.)...better games, even, that explore struggles between law and chaos (Stormbringer, Warhammer) in a "realistic" fashion. D&D, as originally written, is wholly unconcerned with realism and almost unconcerned with genre emulation...save for the tropes of adventure fiction. 

The idea of genre emulation or setting exploration has a vast appeal. It's super cool! I get drawn into it myself! My shelves are filled with RPGs for settings/genres that are wicked-awesome. Zombie cowboys (Deadlands), pulp adventure (Hollow Earth Expedition), time traveling zeppelins (Airship Pirates), etc. In my experience all these games tend to be extremely short-lived, no matter how heavy-handed the GM (and it generally takes a heavy-handed GM to get the game even beyond the chargen stage). None have any long-term duration. And yet some people desire nothing more from their RPG than the type of exploration afforded by these genre-specific RPGs, happily jumping from one to another. One day ElfQuest; the next day Star Trek.

Different strokes for different folks.

There are other priorities of play found in those who regularly play RPGs...two more really. I don't really want to discuss either one of them, however, as I have nothing positive to say about them (different tastes, fine); likewise, of the two "unmentionables," one is only designed for incidentally. But neither is conducive to long-term play except in the most toxic and/or insular fashion. And these days, I am all about the long-term play. 

What I am now wondering...and what I have sometimes wondered in the past: is it possible to design an RPG that functions conceptually as well or better than D&D. AND...a "flip-side" thought...is it possible to write a genre/setting-specific RPG that generates the same type of "perpetual game experience" that D&D does. 

Considering it right now, I actually think the latter has already been done, at least in one genre. Heavily developed Traveller or games like Ashen Stars or Bulldogs...RPGs in which the PCs represent the crew of a single ship provide a reason for players to cooperate and "adventure" together, unfettered from the needs of being challenged in a D&D-type fashion...so long as the table is cool with that type of play. Lots of "imaginary environment" to explore in space; shared/joint concern (maintaining the ship); need for cooperation among the PCs...although the asymmetry isn't quite there. And with good reason: if each PC is responsible for one aspect of "ship survival" (engineer, pilot, etc.) and any PC gets killed, the entire ship goes down. The perils of operating in a hostile environment (same would hold true in submarine-type RPG).

Genre exploration is most usually executed with scripted stories...and while that's functional for that priority of play, it cuts out the beating heart of D&D, destroying what makes D&D great. And, yet, that is what many MANY individuals equate with fun, authentic D&D play...so much so that some DMs simply cannot run a game of Dungeons & Dragons without some sort of storyline/plot. Sad (to me), because the game as written takes care of player motivation, leaving nothing for the DM but to construct a world that is sound...an imaginary environment worthy of exploration. 

Why must you force story down the players' throats? What are you trying to prove? What has destroyed your trust in your players?

Different tastes. 

All right, that's enough for today. I want to take the dog for a walk before I pick up the kids from school. Next week they have the week off, so posting will (probably) be light. Have a happy one, folks!

The Vids

[man, I've been writing some longwinded posts lately]

Waaaaay back in the comments on my "Drift" post, John Higgins wrote:

When I started playing in the 90s, we had two texts to draw from when learning how to play D&D: we had the Classic D&D Game boxed set (which has pretty much all of the same rules as Mentzer Basic and Moldvay Basic, any differences are minor to the point of trivial), and we had whatever AD&D 2nd Edition hardcovers and splatbooks we could get our hands on with what little money I and my fellow teenagers could scrape together (and the text of 2nd Edition is *terribly* prescriptive, always harping on the reader to practice "good roleplaying" over desiring high stats or powerful magic items or a powerful character, really driving home the dissonance between the venerable AD&D rules and the then-ascendant "trad" culture that said RPGs were all about story and character). 

And what did my friends and I learn from these texts? Very little, actually, because before we had ever rolled our first d20, we had already been thoroughly corrupted by JRPGs - Final Fantasy VII in particular - and assumed without even paying a jot of attention to the texts or the rules of (A)D&D that a role-playing game was a story simulator with some combat rules bolted on, just like the console and PC RPGs we were already familiar with. And so that was how we (mis-?)(ab-?)used (A)D&D.

This was a comment I meant to come back to, but never did (in my defense, I did have a lot of other stuff I wanted to jot down on Ye Old Blog before forgetting about it). However, John's comment in Friday's post about Second Edition Story Awards gave my brain a poke:

While I would never defend 2nd Edition's XP system, I'll say that it at least gets a perfectly functional implementation in the Infinity Engine video games (Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment, Icewind Dale). Monsters are worth exactly as much XP as in the tabletop 2e core rules, but every time the party completes a task or mission or quest (or slays the "final boss" of a dungeon), some fixed XP award is granted which appears to bear no formulaic relation to anything else (beyond, likely, the built-in assumption that the party will be of a certain level when they complete the task, and so the reward is vaguely commensurate with the difficulty and XP needed for a party of that level). I would even go so far as to say that Baldur's Gate is an example of the 2e XP system "working as intended" - insofar as it deviates from the text of the rulebooks but lines up quite well with how I remember every single 2e-playing group I've ever encountered actually running things.

So let's talk about the video game thing. Specifically computer RPGs that emulate fantasy adventure gaming in a style similar to Dungeons & Dragons.

I have, of course, played a couple/three of these over the years, but probably not as many as one might expect of a geeky D&D blogger. Fact is, my family didn't even have a personal computer in the house till sometime around 1988 (an Amiga 500 for the curious), which was purchased around the same time I was entering high school. This probably seems crazy to folks now, but my parents even debated whether or not we NEEDED a computer (this is before the ubiquitous internet, young 'uns) and while, sure, it was easy enough in those days to say "computers are the FUTURE," there wasn't much imagination for what one would USE a computer for in the home. I mean, we had a typewriter for goodness sake (which I used to type term papers and such in middle school). Would a word processor alone be enough reason to justify the expense? 

Because the MAIN thing most kids were doing with PCs in those days was playing video games, and my parents weren't big fans of such things...for any number of reasons (most valid). They certainly weren't getting the 'puter for that. We may have had some idea that I would have learned how to code or write BASIC with the thing...but once we got it home we found the thing's proprietary "user friendly" OS was absolute shit for this purpose (you couldn't even ACCESS code with it), so those dreams died on the vine. In the end, it did turn out to be a pretty shitty investment. I wrote a few papers using Word Perfect in high school (that I could just have easily done by hand), and I played a handful of video games before the system became obsolete (sometime around 1992). But my parents were divorced by then, and I was in university (or, later, work) where I had access to computers when I needed them.

I didn't buy a computer for myself (my first laptop) till after I was married and had purchased my first house (circa 2005). And that was with the idea that I might start doing some writing stuff (like games or books or something). 

I give this brief history as a way to explain: I have never played games like Baldur's Gate or Pool of Radiance...computer games published in collaboration with TSR and aimed at emulating the AD&D game. For gamers of a certain age, these video games were their introduction to tabletop gaming...their development as D&D gamers were largely informed by these games, and their assumptions and expectations of play exhibit the sentiments instilled by these products.

Contrarily, I was tabletop gamer looong before I ever fired up "Bard's Tale" on my old Amiga, and as such I come to the CRPG genre with a different perspective: here is a way to play (in abbreviated fashion) D&D when D&D isn't otherwise available to you. At times when I didn't have a solid gaming group, and yet still had a deep desire to play, it was something that could scratch an itch. These games SUCK compared to the thing they were supposed to emulate, but they were OKAY.  Plus, no need to juggle schedules with all the players: fire the thing up and the entire party is present. Sure, they lack the personality of real players (I hope!) and probably the creativity when it comes to challenges....but they are, at least, absolutely reliable.

Not D&D

But I'm not relying on these games to teach me how D&D works or plays. I am not looking at these games to show me how (as a DM) to design a campaign. I see them as the limited entities that they are: SSI's game Phantasie III is cool enough to have PC's travel to other planes of existence (the Plane of Light, the Plane of Darkness, and the Netherworld)...and, at the end, also gives you the choice whether to join the bad guys or good guys by the end (saving the world or damning it)...but compared to an ACTUAL game of D&D, even such choices and options are incredibly limited.

At least, if you're used to running a game that isn't a railroad / adventure "path" travesty.

Hey, I played one or two of those old "Fighting Fantasy" books (Choose Your Own Adventure with dice); they were a little better than a CYOA (or TSR's "Endless Quest" series), but you're still only playing someone else's story. A computer RPG is a bigger, sweeter version of the same thing, using the computer's computing ability to juggle and care for all the fiddly bits and dice rolls. But it's still just playing out someone else's story. And it is constrained by the limitations of the medium, in a way that the human mind and imagination just is not. And fun as it is, as awesome as it may be to play, NONE of these CRPG's provide adequate teaching or preparation for running your own campaign as a Dungeon Master; at best, they can give you some ideas on how to be a storyteller, which...apologies...is just not the same thing.

Because it's not just about drawing dungeons or wilderness maps, and it's not just about coming up with good "scenarios." To paraphrase an old war aphorism: all campaign ideas seem good until they make contact with the players. Managing that, is really what being a Dungeon "Master" is all about. 

[though being a "master" of the system is also an important bit]

Now, I joke fairly regularly about being an Old Man...I do that on the blog, I do it with my family, I do it with 20- and 30-somethings I come in contact with. But I'm not really that old at all...I certainly don't feel "old" (middle aged, yes...and I've got some creaky past injuries that bother me from time-to-time). Despite my slow start with getting into the "computer thang" I'm not completely hopeless/lost/uncomfortable when it comes to technology...if I'm resistant to it, it's mainly due to my annoyance with having to learn new ways of doing things, not an incapacity/fear of doing so. But while I'm not really an "old man," I am old enough that (especially with regard to gaming) I straddle two worlds: life before ubiquitous (user friendly) computers/tech, and life after. And because my formative years were from "the time before" so, too, are my sensibilities about a LOT of things. I watch too much TV and read too little compared to what I once did, for example, but my opinion of what is "too much" and "too little" is directly informed by the fact that once there was less TV to watch and more books worth reading on the shelves.

[ooo...someone's probably going to get mad about that last statement]

My particular perspective is a shrinking one: the more years pass, the more folks are born on the other side of the Great Divide. Plenty of people born before the advent of the "smart phone" have grown up never really knowing the "inconvenience" of a phone tethered to your wall. Plenty of folks in their 30s have never known a television that didn't have at least "basic" cable...or even the days of changing a channel without a remote control (can you imagine!). I was just explaining to my kids how, when I was their age, MOST of the home baseball team's 162 games could only be heard on the radio...and how that allowed folks to do other things (while still listening to the call) instead of sitting on their ass in front of their video altar.

The Dungeons & Dragons game was published by a middle aged man, but it was written for folks of a younger (and more imaginative) persuasion. And it is still being published for those types of individuals. But the number of "young people" of the '70s and '80s, are far outnumbered by the "young people" of the '90s, '00s, '10s, and (now) '20s...and that outnumbered sensibility is only going to get greater the more time passes. My own kids, now D&D players, have never yet played a computer RPG...but even their sensibilities are colored by the time in which they live. They have so much more need of attention...so much more need of being entertained instead of finding ways to entertain themselves. Video games and tablets and cell phones and laptops are just such an easy drug to hook up to...let alone a television set with a gazillion channels and streaming services.

Damn frigging insidious.

To all my "young" readers that are trying to unlearn D&D lessons taught to them by computer games...or the lessons of editions of D&D that were written to emulate video games that were created to emulate D&D: I feel for you. And I don't judge you or your particular notions of what D&D "is." And I will try to help (if I can) or point you to better bloggers/writers than myself (when I can't) to try to offer you different options, a different perspective. I'll try. 

But right now, I have to wash some dishes. They haven't yet invented the app to do that.

Classic Priming

It's been nearly a week since my last three posts, and I've been using my (little) free time since then to think about my "theme" and just exactly what I want to write. It's tough, because there's a lot going on in there "world" of D&D gaming.

Hold that thought.

First, let's start with someone else's blog. If you haven't read The Retired Adventurer's essay Six Cultures of Play, you really should. I've read it multiple times over the last couple months, trying to absorb it; yesterday, I listened to a podcast reading of the essay (while doing household chores), and feel like I've got an even better grasp of these concepts...trying to see how they fit with my own experiences AND those reports from others that I've read about. With regard to Dungeons & Dragons, two thoughts keep drumming in my brain when I consider the development/evolution of role-playing:

1. Is it too late to close the barn door?
2. Should I even be worried about the escaped horse?

I know several, very respectable minds who would say the answer to #2 is a definitive NO, and thus #1 isn't even worth bothering about. This is the mindset of, "hey, I have my game, I'll run it how I want, and everyone else can go to hell." Other, less respectable, minds feel the same way...or at least reach the same conclusion: "it is what it is," they say.

And, yes, there are folks who just want to find a way to make money off whichever way the wind happens to be blowing. A war profiteer can sell guns to both sides of a conflict, after all.

But I am a jackass. And I have made a bit of a rep for myself railing against (and failing to accept) just "what is." Shouting in the darkness is pretty much what I do...so let's fucking go!

In recent days, I have come to the conclusion that there is only ONE TRUE edition of Dungeons & Dragons. This is, of course, patently and provably false, as any gamer with half a brain can tell you: people of all stripes continue to play every edition (and variant) ever published (by my count: about 13) IN ADDITION TO two dozen or more various hacks, heartbreakers, retro-clones, and homages. Yes, I agree...I am an f'ing idiot to make such a statement.

There is only ONE TRUE (published) edition of Dungeons & Dragons. Yes, I suck and I'm wrong, and I can feel the rotten fruit and garbage folks are pelting me with, even as I write this. And the HATE...the venomous hatred that folks will have for hearing me say such a dastardly thing. Because I'm guessing a lot of folks (well, my readers anyway) know in their heart of hearts the truth (or suspect the truth) of my statement, and it won't necessarily sit well with them for a VARIETY of reasons. And the harder that sits with you, the more pushback and resentment and hatred I expect to receive. 

[maybe some puzzlement, too...but those folks have been puzzled throughout this series. I have an inkling of WHY that is, but I don't want to address it...not in this post, anyway]

So, go ahead, say it with me. You all know what the "one true edition" of D&D is, don't you? I don't even need to write it (though I will), because for anyone who's reading this blog post, there's probably a particular image of a particular edition that comes to mind when one hears the term "Dungeons & Dragons," a color illustration that (for whatever reason) is thoroughly branded in your brain in association with the game. Probably. I'd guess at least 90%. Even if the image has NOTHING to do with the edition (or game) that you currently play/run.

AD&D. The "first" edition. Gygax's opus. That's the one: the one true game. 

Not OD&D (all respect to Arneson's legacy and Rob Kuntz's opinion...yes, I've read your book). The original books were a proto-game, something in it's formative stages, an add-on to Chainmail, a rules-ifying of Braunstein. Not B/X (although that's still the best introduction to learning/teaching the game) nor any of the other "basic" versions. And definitely not Cook's cleaned-up 2E or any of the later, innovated versions. Certainly not the currently published 5E which (in my opinion) makes a mockery of earlier systems with its attempt to compromise on all fronts. 

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, that hoary, draconian, curmudgeonly trilogy of tomes (DMG, PHB, MM) crystalized the "system" first begun with three Little Brown Books...three books that were so woefully incomplete that they led to half a dozen supplementary volumes and countless variations of The Game across college campuses in the U.S. and military bases throughout the world. AD&D by itself...with no additional volumes necessary...was whole and complete. Everything else added later...the Fiend Folio, Deities & Demigods, Unearthed Arcana, Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, etc....were at best ICING and, at worse, blatant ca$h grabs. Whether you like them or not (I like several), ALL are superfluous to the game. Many do more to BREAK the game's function than actually aiding it.

*exhale*

It is not a perfect game...there are few (if any) games that ARE perfect. It has inconsistencies and missteps. Polymorphing undead. Alignment language. Sex-based limitations on ability scores. Color spray. Many examples abound...nearly all are eminently correctable without destroying functionality (i.e. without breaking the game). And while not perfect...and definitely a tad on the "complex" side...it is a wonderful game. Extremely playable. Incredibly enjoyable. My favorite game of all time, and one of the greatest games ever created.

And one of the most misunderstood.

And I'm not talking "misunderstood" because of inherent misogyny or colonialist attitudes or whatever. The misunderstanding I'm talking about is How To Play The Game and What The Game Is About...basic foundational pieces of game play, in other words. Part of this is due to ineptitude on the part of the author (Gygax). Part of this is due to a grandfathered community of OD&D gamers already playing with wide variation prior to AD&D's publication. Part of this is due to new entrants to the hobby, coming in with incoherent ideas of what D&D play IS and not being disabused of their notions by a publishing company (under ANY banner or ownership group) whose aim has been and continues to be turn a profit from this "thing" (Dungeons & Dragons) that we don't quite understand ourselves. 

John Bell's essay (cited at the beginning of this post) fails to address it within any single one of his "six cultures of play," but of the six it is the Classic model that comes closest, specifically with this line:

The point of playing the game in classic play is not to tell a story (tho' it's fine if you do), but rather the focus of play is coping with challenges and threats that smoothly escalate in scope and power as the PCs rise in level.

[emphasis added by me, as usual]

Bell may have been more accurate in stating that "classic" play is not meant to "tell a story" in the same way as a trad, neo-trad, or "story gamer" tells a story, but the point of play is NOT limited to wandering around (and blundering into) challenges of proportionately increasing progression. D&D, as played in the proper style, is not a video game, and does not operate under the assumptions of video game play. Or rather, it has SOME similarity to...generally older...computer RPGs (here I'll cite The Bard's Tale and SSI's Phantasie III: The Wrath of Nikademus) which took their cues from Dungeons & Dragons, but which were limited by their particular medium...namely, the requirement of being finite and requiring an endpoint to their "story."

Correct play of D&D (and, yes, again, throw your tomatoes at me and insert your own air quotes every time I write "correct") involves the telling of not one but THREE stories, only two of which matter much, and NONE of which require any sort of "emotional satisfaction" from an unfolding narrative structure. These are:

1. The Setting Background
2. The PCs Actions
3. The Campaign's Development

The setting background is all the DM-facing stuff that goes into preparation before the game is played. It is the creation and outlining of lands and power structures, determining the whys and wherefores of any dungeons, "histories" of the world, thoughts on why monsters exist, and conceptualizing how magic functions. It's all the various bits and pieces of "fluff" that the DM must add to make a setting suitable for running a D&D game; it can be amorphous or specific or gradually built-up over many sessions of gaming. It can be based on real world stuff, fiction novels or film, or anything else. This particular story matters far less to the players than the Dungeon Master, as "sensibility" of a setting is only a secondary concern compared to the action at the table, assuming the DM is competent at their craft (i.e. if the players are more thrilled discussing the setting's background than "what's going on" in play, then there's a major issue with the DM's ability to generate engagement).

The second story being told, and the one of most immediate concern for everyone at the table, is the story of the player characters' actions. This is game play itself and (as I've written before) it should have all the narrative structure and theming of a really crazy camping trip...which is to say: not much. It is simply the story of what the PCs did during any particular game session. It is not concerned with PC backstories or drama, it is concerned with ACTIONS. Was there a fight? Was a dungeon explored? Did anyone die? Was there a really noteworthy victory won? Was a PC transformed into something "unnatural?" Was the shopkeeper a surly cuss? Did the goblins become unexpected allies? Etc. D&D, correctly played, provides player engagement in the moment because of the circumstances of the game, not because of any "meaningful constructed narrative." And it is that player engagement that leads to emotional investment of a much deeper sort than one pre-constructed prior to play.

The final story being told over the course of a true and proper D&D game is that of the campaign's development. This is the story...the legacy really...of a DM's setting/world after having been met by the players. As in real life, no one knows when the game begins just who will end up being the hero, who will be the goat, who is destined to die in tragic (or humorous) fashion or how the history of the campaign world will be written. Depending on the length of the campaign being played, the setting may be RADICALLY changed over time, with kingdoms rising and falling, regions getting "nuked" with magic or monsters, old dungeons being cleaned out, and new dungeons being discovered...not to mention all the failures and successes along a path littered with the corpses of dead (and raised and re-killed) adventurers. By the end of such a campaign...IF it ends...a common theme may be discovered, but just as likely one may find an interesting "world history" featuring the antics of many important (player character) individuals of a minor or major impact.

The problem with "classic" play as defined by Bell...and ONE of the reasons behind the shift to "trad" play...is when imagination and/or effort on the part of the Dungeon Master fails the players at the table. When there is NO engagement, because the world is too simplistic, boring, undefined, unrealized...when the game is nothing but a scaled up version of the Dungeon! board game, then yes, players will try to find their OWN methods of having fun, creating dramatic backgrounds to spice up a bland setting, inventing funny voices and quirky personalities for bland avatars that represent nothing more than a collection of numbers scribbled on paper. Gygax himself recognized this and wrote about in his section The Ongoing Campaign (DMG, p. 112):

"...there must be some purpose to it all. There must be some backdrop against which adventures are carried out, and no matter how tenuous the strands, some web which connects the evil and the good, the opposing powers, the rival states and various peoples. This need not be evident at first, but as play continues, hints should be given to players, and their characters should become involved in the interaction and struggle between these vaster entities. Thus, characters begin as less than pawns, but as they progress in expertise, each eventually realizes that he or she is a meaningful, if lowly, piece in the cosmic game being conducted. When this occurs, players then have a dual purpose to their play...their actions having meaning above and beyond personal aggrandizement."

"Classic" play is thus NOT limited to "challenge-based play," solely for the sake of progressing to fighting bigger monsters with larger treasure hoards. Good play on the part of players does lead to advancement, earning them the right and (hopefully) ability to take on such challenges, but this isn't the endgame of play itself...not by a long shot!

Likewise, please note that Gygax's text is NOT relating to the establishment of domains and strongholds. As he writes in the paragraph just preceding: "...even your most dedicated players will occasionally find that dungeon levels and wilderness castles grow stale, regardless of subtle differences and unusual challenges." He is talking about sustaining campaigns through something more, in order to stave off "participant attrition" and "enthusiast ennui." The complete game...as envisioned by Gygax and codified in his AD&D tomes...was supposed to be more than that.

What is was never supposed to be, though, was what it would become after his ouster from the company in 1986. Every iteration has of the game since Gygax closed his formulation of the DMG (circa 1979), every variant...even Gygax's own!...have taken the game farther and farther away from the fashion in which it was meant to be played. This drift in the game's design parameters cannot entirely be laid at the feet of the publisher, of course (more on that in a second), but it is the publishers (TSR, WotC, Hasbro, etc.) who ultimately bear responsibility for how the game is played. Only the publisher, as owner and caretaker, have real authority and influence over the customer base.

And the current publishers have, largely, abdicated their responsibility, instead focusing on marketing and selling their brand. "Have fun! Make the game what you want!" they say [so long as you continue to put money in our pocket...that's the unspoken bit]. Consider this: if they ACTUALLY came down and said "this is the way you're supposed to play D&D" would there be the confusion and arguments and misinformation about the game being spread far and wide on Ye Old Internets? Would there be blogs and talking heads decrying one edition or another? Would there be youngsters turning to Matt Mercer when trying to figure out HOW one is supposed to play this D&D game?

So, instead, you have people buy the game...and then abandon it on a shelf. You have people that "dabble" a bit...and then move on to other hobbies. You have enthusiasts who lose their enthusiasm...and drift into RPGs that better facilitate their priorities of game play. 

And you have a plethora of people screaming bloody murder at each other over something that should be the most amazing, innovative game ever invented!

NOW...when I write that there is only ONE TRUE edition of D&D, I'm not being facetious. Nor am I being judgmental of your particular preferred edition of play. Heck, I'm about to publish another supplement for the B/X game myself (before the end of the year, fingers crossed), so it would be great for me personally if you were open to other versions of the rules!

I'm not trying to denigrate your tastes, your style, or anything else. And I'm not saying that AD&D is a perfect game, nor that E. Gary Gygax was a perfect designer. I'm just saying it's the greatest game I've ever encountered, and Mr. Gygax was largely responsible for its best iteration. And I'd like more people to play it...and play it in the manner it was intended, which is neither "classic" nor "trad." Nor is it (generally) in the fashion of the OSR, nor of the OC/Neo-Trad school.

Right at this very moment, I have a post-it stuck to my DMG with 7 elements of "true D&D" jotted down. In a way, these elements are the things I'd like to institute as a replacement for the mythic Old School ethos I rebutted in a prior post. They are not meant to function as a new "primer"...I suspect none of my readers need such elementary instruction in D&D game play...but they are meant to "prime" the reader, as in to make ready (e.g. "prime the pump") for game play, both as a player and as a Dungeon Master.

That will be tomorrow's post, since this one has already gone long. Please feel free to post your scathing denouncements in the comments section.