Basic Adventure Gaming

Some years back, I decided that I would stop referring to what I do as 'role-playing' and instead refer to these things (what I once called "RPGs") as "fantasy adventure games" (or "FAGs," for short). I know I was doing this as early as 2013, because I was very deliberate in my omission of any phrases of "role-playing" in my self-published Five Ancient Kingdoms game. You see, I wanted to end any confusion over how I (as a designer) intended my games to be played.

Of course, the term "fantasy adventure game" is not original to my noggin...I'm fairly sure I stole the term directly from my copy of Moldvay. "Fantasy Adventure Game Basic Booklet" it says, right there on the cover (the Cook/Marsh expert set says "Fantasy Adventure Game Expert Booklet"). The first paragraph of Moldvay's introduction begins:

DUNGEONS & DRAGONS Fantasy Adventure Game ("The D&D Game" for short) is a role-playing adventure game for persons 10 years and older...

It's a good term for what the game is about..."fantasy adventure," duh...and, I believe, helps put one in the mindset of what we're supposed to be doing when we sit down at the gaming table. Let there be no confusion! We are here to play a game of fantasy adventure; we are not here to play-act, explore alternate personalities, or craft delightful narratives...all things the "role-playing" term has come to represent.

For the most part, I've approached my entire role-playing hobby in this way...and why not, when my introduction to the hobby was the D&D game?...even with game systems that are clearly not conducive to this style of play. Or rather, I did...up until the early 2000s when I started reading RPG theory over at the Forge and recognizing how different systems facilitate different types of play.

So, yeah...I've been a fantasy adventure gamer (a "FAG") for a long time. 40+ years. And yet I understand that my view of how to use these games is different from the majority opinion these days. Which is why I decided to start distinguishing myself (and, yes, distancing myself) from the "role-playing" terminology. Not because I don't see what I do as "playing a role-playing games" (a genre of entertainment distinct from board games or computer games), but because my approach to how one plays an RPG is so foreign to the majority of the community...even that part of the community purporting to play Dungeons & Dragons, the FIRST fantasy adventure game.

I'm not the only one. I've previously mentioned the growing CAG community ("CAG" is an acronym for classic adventure gaming...I suppose the term "FAG" was found to be problematic...), a splinter group of the "old school" scene that exist mainly to 'keep the flame' of adventure gaming alive, in the same way that the early OSR tried to keep alive "old edition" gaming: by discussion, encouragement, and sharing of 'best practice' wisdom from old timers, not to mention just playing. In terms of the overall hobby, CAG style play can be seen as a niche of a niche: "old variety D&D" is enjoying the same proliferation and popularity one sees in the current (5th+) edition of D&D, but even among the folks who play old edition D&D (or its clones, like OSE) there is a lot of misunderstanding, misinformation, and inaccurate assumptions of what game-play is supposed to look like. The CAG folks aren't (especially) trying to rectify that, but they are trying to be a repository for knowledge, and a resource for folks looking for a way of playing these games in this particular style.

"This particular style." Yeah, I know how I sound. I'm trying to avoid writing "teaching people how to play D&D the correct way," because I know that ruffles feathers. Ruffling feathers isn't my objective today. Definitely not my objective.

*ahem* For more information on CAG, I'd suggest checking out the semi-regular CAG podcast, especially the first couple/three episodes. For shorter summaries, you can read Zherbus or EOTB's blog postings which are fair summations of CAG gaming philosophy. Both of these folks are strong proponents of 1E AD&D (and OSRIC, 1E's retroclone), for the simple reason that it is the system that best facilitates this type of play (a perspective I happen to agree with). 

But the question has come up: Can Basic systems (like B/X, BECMI, Holmes, Labyrinth Lord, Old School Essentials, etc.) be used for CAG play? And, if so, how?

The answer to the first question is decidedly "yes." The answer to the second is...longer.

The basic games (Holmes, Moldvay, and Mentzer) were all initially intended to act as introductions to the D&D game. It is only with the additional Mentzer volumes (the Companion, Master, and Immortal rule sets) that the "D&D" game (distinct from Advanced D&D, i.e. AD&D, the main product line of TSR for the majority of its existence) became something that could be considered a "complete" game system...a system of its own, standing in its own right.

This latter edition (called BECMI, later consolidated in Aaron Alston's Rules Cyclopedia, sometimes referred to as the "RC") is something I didn't play when it was first published (i.e 'in the days of my youth'). My friends and I played AD&D, although we did pick up some of the BECMI offerings (for 'reasons'). But there was a LOT of stuff for this line that hit the shelves...I've always assumed it was a popular game line at the time, which is why they created so much content for it (setting material in the form of Gazetteers, game accessories, adventure modules for all levels of play). Decades later (in the early 2000s) I acquired a lot of it and messed around with it a bit, thinking there might be something there. 

Meh.

Only recently, I've been hipped to the fact that it might not have been a very popular game line at all...at least in the USA. However, this Mentzer-penned version of "basic" was the version first translated (officially) into other languages and sold overseas. The 1E PHB and DMG were translated into both French and German, but Mentzer's Basic set (and the BECMI line) was translated to French, German, Danish, Finnish, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Norwegian, Portuguese, Korean, Spanish, and Swedish. For many countries outside the United States, Basic D&D was the seminal, defining version of the game.

I'm digressing. As said, the original Basic sets were meant to be a "gateway" to the AD&D game (as it was for me)...but that wasn't necessarily the case in other parts of the world.  Then TSR crashed and we didn't see, hear, or care about these "basic" games until the rise of the OSR circa 2007-9.

Mm.

This next part is tricky. The OSR didn't treat these Basic editions as "introductory" systems; quite the contrary, they looked at them as editions of D&D worth being played in and for themselves. There were a lot of reasons for this. Ease/accessibility was a major reason: they are short systems to read with less nuance. Their rules were so uncomplicated and simple that creating additional, compatible material (a thrilling pastime for creatives) was a cinch. And...probably...there was a lot of familiarity and nostalgia with these systems, especially in light of A) the OSR being an international community, plus B) Mentzer's Basic being the "standard" D&D most widely translated across countries/cultures.

They were also some of the earliest retroclones on the market. Labyrinth Lord wasn't written as an 'introduction' to anything, and its Advanced Edition Companion gave people additional (1st Edition) content, adapted to the Basic chassis. Lamentations of the Flame Princess used basic D&D as a vehicle for exploring all sorts of grimness. OSE simply re-organized the B/X books in a way to make them even more user friendly than they already were.  None of them were designed, nor seemed interested, in being a gateway or bridge to a more Advanced game. These clones were created by different, independent publishers (with different, independent motivations), NOT by a single, gigantic corporation hoping to funnel newbs to its flagship product. 

So...back to that second question.

When one understands the objectives of "adventure gaming," one can begin to see the limitations inherent in a game designed first and foremost as an introduction to the "real game" (the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons game written and published concurrently with the first 'Basic' set). Most of the stated attributes of adventure gaming (again, looking at the two cited blog posts above) are easily satisfied even with a basic system of procedures. However, the overall objective/goal of fantasy adventure gaming is long term campaign play...sustained play in an enduring fantasy environment, created by the DM and impacted by the players. Despite the ease and accessibility of the various basic rule sets, their systems have several insufficiencies that hinder long term play. These are:

1. Severe lack of distinction between character type. The basic character falls into one of seven categoric class, is defined by one of three alignments, and has an extremely limited selection of equipment and magic spells with which to choose. Variation between ability scores is compressed (seven possible options for each ability) contributing to a marked "sameness" between PCs. For an introduction to the game, this limited selection is more than adequate; it cuts down on the amount of "analysis paralysis" inherent in a new player approaching a complex game. For long-term engagement, however, more distinction and variety is desirable. AD&D offers 36 class variations (interlocking with race), another score of multi-class options, several times the number of armor and weapon selections, and four distinct spell lists, each of which contains more 1st level spells than any spell list in the basic systems. The variety in the advanced game is sufficient without being overwhelming, providing much "replay" value (in terms of exploring different character types for interacting with the D&D environment).

2. Lack of survivability. This has been discussed before: basic characters are fairly fragile at low levels, easily slain by misadventure. Lack of staying power is a barrier to long-term play, requiring more work on the part of both DM and players to ensure surviving to higher levels of play (a desirable outcome as it opens more content for players and DMs to experience). AD&D increases survivability by providing higher hit dice for most character classes, a negative hit point "buffer," and plentiful healing magic from clerical types even beginning at 1st level.

3. Less opportunity for advancement. Basic systems award x.p. for both combat and treasure found (just as in AD&D) but does so at a lesser rater: fewer x.p. are awarded for monsters and treasure x.p. is only awarded for monetary treasure (magical items being deemed as 'their own reward'). True, x.p. totals for advancement are slightly lower than in the Advanced game, but in practice, far more x.p. is awarded in the Advanced game, especially with the potential to sell magic items for exorbitant amounts of gold and x.p. This procedure in first edition AD&D allows characters to continue to rise at a regular pace, even as the x.p. totals needed for advancement rise to six- and seven-digit figures. Treasure pools for monsters also have a tendency to award more treasure than what is given for the hoards of basic monsters; type H treasure (the best available in B/X) awards an average haul valued at 50,000 g.p. Considering that H treasure only occurs in dragon lairs...and that 50K split seven or eight ways is quite a small amount for name level characters requiring 100K-150K each for advancement...that is a lot of risk for comparatively small reward. As basic game PCs rise in level, advancement has the potential to stifle which, coupled with low survivability, is a bad recipe for "long term" play.

4. Lack of options for mid- to high-level play. Even when a basic campaign awards sufficient treasure for regular advancement, there is precious little to spend all that money on. Basic games require no training costs, no upkeep costs, have a shorter list of "buy" options available, and prices of items are quite depreciated (consider that plate armor costs a measly 60 g.p. in basic play and is available to all but the poorest of 1st level characters). Basic rules provide no rules for item depreciation/destruction, and thus there is never a need to replace or repair equipment for hirelings and retainers. While the Expert sets of both B/X and BECMI provide some guidelines for the building of castes and strongholds, only Mentzer's Companion and Master books make any real attempt at providing "domain" (rulership) rules...and these are poorly done, providing heaps of unearned x.p. on the heads of domain rulers for doing little more than raising taxes on their populations. True, there is some impetus for conquest provided in the Companion book (if only to gain higher titles of nobility), but the "War Machine" system is extremely limited in scope (meanwhile, neither Holmes nor B/X offer any such systems, referring DMs to the out-of-print Sword & Spells for handling mass combat). 

I admit that Mentzer's BECMI system strives mightily to provide options for high level characters: proto-prestige classes, combat maneuvers, higher level spells, demihuman "crafts," powerful monster antagonists, and codified quests for immortality. But, for all practical purposes, these options remain far out of reach due to the lack of advancement opportunity (#3 above) which makes the achievement of Companion (15th-25th) level characters next to impossible to achieve. Such characters require well in excess of 1 million g.p. worth of treasure...the equivalent of 20 average sized dragon hoards...each, in order to reach such lofty heights. Personally, I've found 12th level to be just about the maximum effective in (standard) B/X play, and even that requires impractically large treasure hoards (a four ox wagon can only pull 25,000 coins weight; a bag of holding in basic can only hold 10,000 coins). Any character with half a million in gold coins has the cash to purchase multiple castle complexes given the procedures in the basic rules.

And I imagine that was deemed just fine by the original designers. Buy your castle, retire your character...and then graduate to the Advanced D&D game for your next go around. Buying a castle and settling down in your gold stuffed halls should be considered a "win."

But fantasy adventure gaming is not played with a particular endpoint in mind. Some characters will, of course, "retire"...especially demi-humans who've reached the level limits and are unable to progress further. For the majority of human characters, however, AD&D has no hard cap, no limitation to advancement; like the campaign itself, adventurers' careers have the potential to be perpetual, ongoing without end. In theory, basic characters (both B/X and BECMI) have a 36 level cap which should probably be all but unreachable, even after years of play...but the game does not scale nearly as well as it does in the AD&D game. Demons in BECMI are equivalent to (lesser) gods, not beasts to be fought in the deepest dungeon levels or (more usually) on the outer planes. And while Mentzer included his own version of artifacts in the Master set, they do not function nor serve the same purpose of reward as the artifacts and relics found in the 1E DMG (hint: there's a reason Gygax gives these items a sale value in gold).

So for those folks wishing to play a simpler, streamlined "basic" system with long-term CAG objectives, what can be done to remove these inherent impediments?

1. Increase character variability. The interlocking combination of race and class has generally been found to be sufficient for providing diversity in character choice. Labyrinth Lord's Advanced Edition Companion (and, presumably, OSE Advanced) takes pains to adapt 1E's system to the basic style and can be adopted wholesale...these games also tend to recreate the extended spell lists and equipment charts of 1E, but in a "basic" style. Solid world building with attention paid to markets and economy, and one's own setting-specific character options can also provide variety for players. The Complete B/X Adventurer provides a plethora of character options and new character classes, although the latter are meant to be used sparingly in better tailoring one's setting, not dropped in their entirety into a campaign.

2. Increase character survivability. Basic characters start to hit their stride around 3rd level, and one can simply start PCs at that level; likewise, DMs might add negative HP buffers, higher hit dice, and bonus spells (based on WIS or INT scores for clerics and magic-users, respectively). However, the main consideration for basic groups is to ensure they have enough bodies in their adventuring parties: 7+ is generally the fewest you want to see, and hired mercenaries (like the kind found in adventure module B2) should be readily available to low-level parties needing to 'fill out the ranks.' Special attention should be paid to both the Reaction and Morale procedures in the basic system, and both the DM and players should understand how these work, as 'breaking' foes (especially humanoids) is generally going to pay higher dividends than fighting them to the death. Fierce as a single ogre is, it is less likely to kill half a party than five to seven bandits/humanoids (all those attack rolls!)...especially ones armed with missile weapons. DMs need to take a look at what makes a "survivable" encounter for low level characters: the Tower of Zenopus example dungeon in Holmes basic, and adventure module B1 are both good resources in this regard. Also, it is incredibly important that DMs stock enough treasure that players are leveling up to more sturdy levels of experience as quickly as possible.

3. Provide sufficient treasure. Unless one adopts the AD&D system of awarding x.p. for magic items, and higher award totals for defeating monsters, DMs will need to find ways to stock immense amounts of coin and valuables for the players to advance. It should not be unusual for PCs to be 3rd level after 4-6 sessions of play (depending on character type and diligence in sniffing out loot), given a bit of luck and survival. Unfortunately it is difficult to sustain such progress even into the mid-levels, as I first noted waaay back in 2010...it is simply a flaw of design. However, one idea I had back then was to slash all x.p. requirements (i.e. the amount of x.p. needed to advance in level) by a factor of five or ten, while retaining the normal treasure hoard amounts and monster x.p. values. So, for example, a fighter's progression might look like this:

1st level: 0 x.p.

2nd level: 400 x.p.

3rd level: 800 x.p.

4th level: 1,600 x.p.

5th level: 3,200 x.p.

6th level: 6,400 x.p.

7th level: 12,800 x.p.

8th level: 24,000 x.p.

9th level: 48,000 x.p.

10th level: 72,000 x.p.

With an advancement table like this, a 50K dragon hoard split amongst eight survivors is a nice chunk of change: enough to raise a 6th level fighter to 7th or make a good size dent in a higher level character's x.p. needs.

4. Provide options for PCs of higher levels. Reducing the x.p. needed to advance alleviates some of the pressure to provide overflowing piles of gold and gemstones, but players must still have monetary needs to drain their coffers and perpetuate the cycle of treasure seeking. Here, solid world building will help, providing all manner of costs and expenses as well as delightful ostentations for purchase. DMs can, of course, adopt upkeep costs, item saving throws, and training fees from the 1E DMG...but then, why not just play AD&D?

More than that, game play needs to be scaled so that it remains interesting  even as play progresses...players should not be taking the same approach to monster fighting at 8th or 13th level as at 1st and 2nd. Here, a DM might well want to look at the later BECMI books (Companion and Master) for rules and procedures that are adaptable even down to 9th level (I would NOT however adopt the weapon specialization rules for low-level characters as it can disrupt game balance in the same way the UA's weapon specialization rules do). Likewise, DMs might wish to take a look at my own B/X Companion which provides a great deal of material specifically geared for high (15th+) level B/X play. Both "companion" books provide a number of new procedures (including unarmed and mass combat rules) in addition to a ton of new "content" (spells, monsters, magic items). For that matter, DMs looking for content might want to look at my last book Comes Chaos for a host of demonic entities and corrupted magic items, great for tarting up one's mid- to high level B/X campaign.  

The main thing, however, is to understand that there's going to be a lot of work involved in adapting a Basic rule system to the needs of long-term campaign play. While AD&D has requires a bit more work up front (learning to use its system) in comparison to the basic games, once learned it provides depth of game play from 1st up through the highest levels, needing only world building and adventure writing on the part of the DM to maintain solid, satisfying play. The basic system is incredibly easy to learn and run, but to make it an enduring form of play (i.e. the kind of play worth spending time out of our busy schedules) requires far more effort, not just in tweaking and experimenting with modifications to rules, but in designing adventures and developing content. Sure, there are sources for this content to be found: bestiaries, tomes of magic items, or various retroclones (and their supplements) with setting specific particulars...but searching out that content and curating it requires work. By contrast, I've yet to use every monster presented in original 1E Monster Manual, let alone the Fiend Folio and MM2, and there are spells and magic items from the original PHB and DMG that haven't yet been seen at my table...after decades of play.

Just saying.

That work, that effort that goes into making a basic game system a sustainable form of play can be fun at first...look at my blog as evidence of that! All the tinkering I did with B/X over the first 10-12 years of its life...but over time can lead to frustration and (in my case) ennui. The mature, adventure focused Dungeon Master wants to spend his or her time on world building and scenario creation, not hand holding and system modification, but the shallowness of basic game play requires BOTH those things in order to make it last and function ("hand holding" being a shorthand for customizing the game in a way that it doesn't kill the PCs nor bore the players out of engagement). YES, it CAN be done...but do you want to? Is that a price you're willing to pay just because you don't want to spend some time parsing the AD&D rule books?

There's a reason I'm not playing B/X these days...and it's not because I don't still think it's a great simple system that can be readily taught and is easily customizable in a multitude of ways. B/X IS a "fantasy adventure game;" it's just not a great one when it comes to sustained, long-term play. And at this point in my life, that's pretty much the only type of game play I'm interested in. 

Sorcery I Like

Well, what do you know: a quiet moment around the old home front, for a change.

I'll be honest: I've (perhaps) had the opportunity to blog recently, just not the spirit. Just lots of things over-occupying my brain/attention. It gave me some peace to simply withdraw from the whole blog-o-sphere for a few days, rather than tread water with throwaway posts and comments. Not that this isn't (perhaps) a throwaway post, but there's enough quiet right now that I can sit and type-type-typity-type.

Mmm. With cup of hot coffee at hand.

Yesterday (or maybe the day before) I had the chance to read Clark Ashton Smith's second Xiccarph story, The Flower-Women (to give credit where credit's due, I only learned about Xiccarph after Maliszewski wrote about it a week or so ago). I like Smith's stuff, though I've read precious little of it (perhaps a dozen of his short stories). His work is reminiscent of other writers, though I recognize he was probably the influence on them, rather than the reverse. But his stuff is (usually) punchy and short, perhaps only slowed down by an expansive vocabulary that requires me to look up two-three words with every reading. 

[quick: who can tell me the definition of odalisque off the top of your head?]

I also like this bit about Smith's writing, aptly summed up by James in his (previously mentioned) post:

Smith is almost unique in the history of pulp fantasy for sympathizing with his evil sorcerers, or at least presenting their thoughts and perspectives sympathetically. It's what sets him apart from both Lovecraft, whose antagonists' motives are largely inscrutable, and Howard, whose dark magicians are never portrayed as anything but villains to be cut down.

I think it's fair to say that, for much of my life, I was one of those who tended to "root for the bad guy" both in story and film. Not always, but often enough. Many times over the years I found myself wishing the villain would triumph, the hero would be cut down (or disgraced), the evil plot would unfold according to its nefarious plan. However, this was certainly more the case when I was a kid...having (in later life) viewed films and such where evil did triumph, I confess that the result is generally unsatisfying.

[perhaps my initial rooting for bad was fueled by too much sympathy for Wile E. Coyote and Sylvester the Cat. My wife, to this day, HATES Tweety Bird, and I can't say it's difficult to understand why]

*ahem*

Anyway, black-hearted sorcerers have long been "my cup o tea;" I think it's fair to say that's part of my fandom of Moorcock's Elric stories, despite the general whininess of their protagonist (for me, his constant bitching-moaning is balanced out by his dark sense of humor and occasional bursts of action). But I like necromancers and black magicians of all sorts; when it comes to sorcerous characters, I become a BIG champion of the flawed, antihero type...a cardboard stereotype that I usually loathe in other genres (action films and supers comics, to name two).

I guess I just like my magic a little transgressive? I mean, sorcery transgresses the laws of reality, so shouldn't a sorcerer transgress cultural/societal norms (the laws of man)?

Eh. Not trying to get too deep here. The heart wants what the heart wants. The funny thing is this: with regard to Dungeons & Dragons, I have long said that my personal play style lines up far better with the fighter type than any other archetype. Even when playing another class (bards, clerics...even thieves) I tend to run my character like a fighter. Bold. Brazen. Hacky-slashy. My old DM famously precluded me from playing anything but a fighter in the last campaign she ran, because I 'always acted like a fighter anyway.' 

I've played a lot of too-loud "war priests" over the years.

Magic-user was the last class I was interested in playing...so much so that, with regard to D&D, I'd never run one as a PC until a Con game in 2019.

[okay, okay...I did play ONE wizard back in a SINGLE session of 3E/D20 years ago, but I gave him feats like "martial weapon proficiency" so that I could use swords, etc. Natch, I was doing Gandalf...and the DM quit the game in disgust when he saw I hadn't taken an "optimal build" for the character. One of the events that led to my disillusionment with that particular edition...]

HOWEVER, while I've generally stayed away from the magic-user class over the years, upon reflection (after reading The Flower-Women) I realized I actually had a hankering to play just such a character...a proper D&D (or, rather, AD&D) -style sorcerer. An old school magic-user. 

That character I played back in the 2019 convention? Probably the best time / most fun I've had as a player in a loooong time. And just to re-tell an old saw (for folks who don't want to read the old post):

• We were using Holmes Basic rules, MINUS the wonky combat (no double attack daggers!).
• PCs were rolled randomly at the table (3d6) in order; I took magic-user only because I didn't have the stats for anything else.
• My one spell was protection from evil and it was expended in the first room of the dungeon.
• I spent the majority of the three hour time slot with 1 hit point (due to being wounded) and no spells.
• I was only slain by another party member at the end of the session for (reasons).

And it was still a great time. Despite my character's fragility and lack of "usefulness" (sleep spells, charm spells, combat ability, etc.) I was able to contribute and...many times...take the lead on our eight-man band of misfit adventurers. I used the character's multiple languages and negotiating ability, I used poles and oil and torches, I preceded others into trap doors and tight spaces (okay...probably a little foolhardiness there, but not much to lose in a con game), and I was able to help direct attacks...and throw the occasional dagger...such that we didn't lose a single party member over the course of the session. And that's with 1st level characters and zero healing magic.

I was the only magic-user in the party.

The challenge of playing such a character is/was fairly exhilarating. Trying to find ways to be useful (without getting killed) was far more challenging than other (D&D) games I'd played: games where I had lots of hit points and/or good armor and a feeling of invincibility (at least for the first hit or so). I can only imagine the fun that could be had with the increased effectiveness (more spells) and survivability of playing such a character in the Advanced version of the game...it's not difficult to visualize the manifestation of an "imperious sorcerer" the likes of Maal Dweb. Gradually, of course.

The main difficulty, as always, is finding the right Dungeon Master. *sigh*

I've messed around over the years with a lot of different design tweaks for the D&D magic-user. Most of these have ended up being nothing but junk. What follows are my current "house rules" for the magic-user class in my home game (if not otherwise stated, rules are as per 1E PHB/DMG):

• Magic-users begin the game with three 1st level spells, randomly determined (per the DMG). 
• There is no read magic spell; magic-users can read magic-user spell scrolls automatically.
• All spells known may be cast once per day; a particular spell may not be cast more than once per day (no multiple memorizations of a single spell).
• New spells are added after training upon reaching a new level of experience; new spells are presumed in the cost for training. Preferred spells are chosen by player and then diced for based on Intelligence (per PHB). Spells from spell scrolls and spell books may not be added to the magic-user's repertoire of spells...a magic-user knows what he/she knows.
• Spell books are part talisman, part grimoire, part journal/scientific notes. Study of the spell book is needed to regain spells. Spell books can be prohibitively expensive to replace; losing (stealing) one's spell book is akin to losing (stealing) one's power. Magic-users will endeavor to recover lost (stolen) spell books (and will punish thieves with great vengeance, if possible).

We've been using these rules for a while now (a couple years) and they work for us; i.e. there haven't been any complaints. I'm sure long-time AD&D players will recoil at the thought of NOT having the option of adding "extra" spells to their spell book; in practice, it's been a non-issue (and it's a lot more convenient to simply HAVE the spells available then to need to search them out). The bonus spells at 1st level provide additional effectiveness to the new character, and the randomness and single memorization clause ensures creative use of even the most "worthless" spell (all spells are precious commodities to be treasured by the first level magic-user). 

We have yet to see a thief reach 10th level (or any high level illusionists/rangers) so it's hard to say how their abilities to "read (magic-user) magic" will interact with these rules. As it's a bridge we've yet to cross, I'm content to leave the issue alone and continue with what works...for now.

As an aside: spell-casting dragons in my world know spells as a magic-user equal to their hit dice (a red with 10 HD, for example, would know spells as a 10th level magic-user). This makes dragons considerably more magical...at least the ones that can use magic (I've toyed with the idea of making ALL dragons speaking and magic-using, but I like the idea of there being more "vermin-esque" dragons who are ignorant...and mundane...threats to civilized folk). For me, in addition to dragons being more sorcerous, this helps justify the dragons' hoards, as magic-users pay them in coin and treasure to be trained in higher level spells (what "magic schools" there are being few and, often, strictly regulated).

All right, the coffee pot is empty and the brew in my mug is considerably cooler than when it was first poured (and the house is not nearly as quiet...the wife is wanting me to make lunch), so I'll sign off for now. Hope y'all are having a good January.

: )

Young Grognards

Maybe that should say, Young Groglings?

Yesterday, my son ran his first AD&D game for his friends (also aged 10) via a Zoom meeting. He had exactly two players (Evan and Caroline) who played a human ranger and a half-elf assassin, respectively.

[I later asked him about the potential alignment conflicts from such a pair to which he replied that he wasn't using alignment in his game...]

Per my suggestion, he is running the Tower of Zenopus from the back of the Holmes Basic book. For a first time adventure, Zenopus makes an excellent introduction to the game, offers multiple types of interaction with the game mechanics, and is easily converted to the AD&D system. 

[it is also an adventure my son has experienced first-hand (as a player) and is fairly short to read and prep]

Besides the suggestion (and providing the books), I did nothing but set-up the Zoom meeting for the kids...that is to say, I did not interfere with the experience. Diego has already been running his Star Wars game at school for the last few weeks (he's up to 7 or 8 players), so there's no reason for me to butt in and undermine his authority. It's his game, not mine. 

And they all had fun (of course), and want to meet on Thursday (tomorrow) rather than waiting till next Tuesday (of course)...because it's D&D and it's awesome (duh).

[some notes about their game: they encountered the ghouls and were able to survive. Only the ranger was hit, but he managed to make his save versus paralysis. Treasure was discovered, tunnels explored, and I believe they just finished (or are in the middle of combatting) a skeleton. They spent the first part of the session rolling characters; all the children have their own dice (provided by my son). He's using all the AD&D rules he can remember...yes, including weapon length and speed factor, etc...and is keeping careful track of time and light sources and wandering monsters and all that jazz. The main difference...besides dropping alignment...is that he is using Alexis Smolensk's experience system, which has been standard in our house since May 2019. It necessitates tracking damage inflicted and received, but that's still a lot easier than it sounds (as even a ten year old Dungeon Master can manage it)]

My kid's rulebook.

Prior to the appointed game time I did take the time to reach out to the kids' parents (via email) to explain a bit about what was going on and assuage any concerns they might have...there is still, to this day, left over impressions of negativity surrounding Dungeons & Dragons among folks who grew up in the 1980s. never played, and yet heard rumors the game was "Satanic." And, of course, our kids go to a Catholic school (though, of course, so did I and all my friends and our teachers/parents never had an issue). There were, it turned out, no worries at all, though both child's parents thanked me for taking the time to reach out to them.

Evan's mom wrote this to me as well (after the kids' game):

Thanks for giving Evan dice and letting him borrow your books too! He actually received a D&D starter kit for Xmas but Chris was overwhelmed and I didn't even try to learn, so it's great that Diego is teaching him how to play.

This...this is so much of what is wrong with the hobby as it is being marketed by its current Keepers of the Flame. Hey, does anyone remember that old red book, penned by Tom Moldvay that said "Ages 10 and Up" right on the cover? I was able to teach myself AND my ten year old friends how to play D&D just using that book. Hell, the thing even came in a box with dice and an adventure to boot!

But now, even the "Starter" set is too much for adults (let alone kids) to be bothered to learn. And the damned thing doesn't even come with dice.

And I've written about this before...multiple times...at least since 2015. These are not stupid people; they are actually very smart, educated professionals. Creative professionals even. Ones with fairly open minds...

*sigh* I will stop beating this dead horse.

ANYway...my son ran a game of AD&D for his friends, without supervision. They enjoyed it, they want to do it again. The culmination of a decade of waiting for my child to take his first step into his father's world.

I am proud.

Not as proud, perhaps, of the kids' athletic accomplishments - scoring goals, hitting fastballs, recording strikeouts - as these are things I was never able to do in my youth (still not sure where he gets it from). And, also, it is pride tempered with knowledge that the journey is long and he has only just begun. But still...I feel proud. 

And content in a way also. Even should he turn away from D&D or transition to a different form of the game (6th edition? 7th?) or even a different game altogether...at least, at least he has the knowledge now. The acquired experience of knowing "Hey, I can do this. It's fun, people enjoy it, and I can even teach it if necessary." I have passed on what I know...he, in turn, can develop it further (delving deep into the game even as I have), or even pass it on to his friends or his own children some day. I have assured that my love of gaming will not die with me.

Legacy. I think I've written about that before, too. 

Happy Wednesday, y'all. I have some dishes to clean up from last night and then I'm going to start combing through these Dragonlance modules to make my notes. Busy-busy!

: )

Zenopus Part 2

Last night we had our third D&D session, still exploring the tunnels beneath the ruined tower of Zenopus; tonight, we had session four. It is "midwinter break" for my kids (a five day weekend, including the Presidents Day holiday tomorrow), so bedtime has been extended deep(er) into the night than usual...last night's game lasted until midnight, and tonight's would have as well if I hadn't made the children go to bed by 11pm.

But the details of these sessions will have to wait till a later post...I still haven't written about our second sojourn into the bowels of Portown's ancient catacombs. And I want to make sure I am chronicling these in sequential order.

While our first excursion presented the basic tropes of dungeon exploration (starting with character generation and equipment purchases) and featured several combats and treasure gathering, our second  (played out last Saturday, if I remember right) introduced concepts of role-playing to the children...that is, interacting in character with non-player characters.

[the first session only saw encounters with ghouls, skeletons, and giant rats, none of whom are great conversationalists]

First up was Brubo the Bearded (...er, Hooded) and his giant mastiff of a dog. The kids were quite surprised to find him guarding the ruins when they returned for more looting; apparently, they'd just missed him on their previous excursion. He informed them that ruins were off-limits by order of the Town Master, and that trespassing was expressly forbidden and punishable by law. Unable to bribe the old man, they decided to try to talk their way into acquiring some sort of permit from the local administration.

Unfortunately, none of their arguments found any traction with the Town Master (a rather busy man and annoyed by the antics of these would-be treasure hunters). Despite giving it a good shot (and possessing excellent charisma scores), the Master of Portown remained unmoved from his stance that the ruins were best left undisturbed.

[thinking about it today, I started to get the feeling he may have some knowledge about the pirate activity in the sea cliff caves; i.e. he may be in on the deal]

The adventurers were likewise undeterred from their quest (for more gold) and determined to find a sneaky way into the dungeon. Dissuading them from outright murder of a town constable, I reminded them of the elf's charm person spell and the beginnings of a plan were hatched. First, though, they went about hiring some more muscle...another daunting task after the resident mercenaries at the Green Dragon Inn were informed of the deaths of Flint and Match, the party's last two hires. However, a stout young lad (and Ot-nay Oo-tay Ight-bra) was willing to accompany the party for a share of the treasure and a kiss from the elf (her offer!); ecstatic, they garbed young Bryan in a chain hauberk and returned, re-provisioned, to the site of the old wizard demesnes.

"Sic Elf!"

Where they encountered Brubo (again) and his large, grumpy dog (whose name escapes me...Rupert? Maybe). Almost as soon as the bearded constable could issue a "Who goes there?" the elf began chanting her incantation...at which point the wily old man immediately let loose his hound. Initiative was won by the beast who charged and savaged the elf, wrecking her spell; fortunately, Bryan and Daniel were able to dispatch it with efficiently murderous strokes. The old man turned and ran, bawling for help, and though Daniel attempted to shoot him down from behind, his arrow went wide the mark. Deciding it best not to wait around for the town guard to show up, the trio descended into darkness.

Thoughtless of mapping (again) the party wandered the dungeon in a roughly circular manner, at one point being trapped in a strange room with a metallic statue (an appeal to mama for help proved to be useful here in figuring out the means of egress), before finally stumbling into a barracks of goblins. The rowdy creatures were none-to-happy about trespassers in their home and attacked, only to be murdered quickly by our intrepid adventurers. The last goblin surrendered, but when proffered an offer of servitude to the slayers, decided death was preferable (a very poor reaction roll here) and attacked, actually managing to wound the burly fighter before being handed his head.

Battered, bloodied, and now loaded down with goblin treasure (a backpack of silver and a chest of copper), the party quickly (and luckily) located the stairs up and out of the ruins where they happily found neither Brubo, nor the town watch. Still several hours before dawn, they made their way through twisted and empty city streets only to be stopped by a patrol of three guardsmen (wandering monster roll). The dice were on the party's side (again) and these particular guards were NOT out hunting for the adventurers who had slain old Brubo's dog. Even so, the inevitable shake-down occurred when the party made the mistake of displaying the treasure they were carrying (lying that they had just come from a ship moored at the Portown docks). Negotiations with the watchmen proved successful, and the guards agreed to porter the crates to the Green Dragon Inn in exchange for a rather large "silence tax" that cut substantially into the group's profits.

Okay...now we're caught up (at least, till yesterday). The kids are really starting to get sucked into the game (as, you know, new D&D players tend to), so we'll probably end up playing tomorrow too. But I just can't keep my eyes open right now...I'll try to post the further adventures of Daniel the Brave and Maddee the Elf tomorrow.

[writing all this up, I can't help but be reminded of John Eric Holmes's stories of Boinger the Halfling and Zereth the Elf no doubt based, in part, on his own runnings of the game for his children. What a racket this D&D thing is...]

Zenopus

The last few days have been markedly bad for my mood...although, I imagine regular readers must be wondering how much grumpier I can actually get.

Lots. And for multiple reasons...NONE of which are "D&D related."

But I am going to cut myself off right now from talking about those things. In fact, the original post I'd planned (and started writing a couple days ago) has been indefinitely shelved in the "draft" files rather than burden folks with...well, with all that. There's enough stuff to be depressed about in the world without me piling on.

Instead, I'll simply announce that I ran my two children through their first, real B/X adventure Tuesday afternoon (February 4th...happy birthday, Alice Cooper!). Well, kind of. While I used the B/X system, I decided to use the tower of Zenopus dungeon found in the back of the Holmes Basic rulebook (though converted for B/X). It's incredibly lightweight, and yet mostly sensible in design (at least as far as D&D's basic premise goes). Also, Holmes doesn't have the same "save or die" mentality that Moldvay does with regard to low-level traps and such.

Characters were rolled up via 4D6 in order (best three of six) and the kids rolled incredibly high...so much so that I was checking their dice to make sure they were actual D6s. My son didn't get a single score under 14, while my daughter rolled 15+ in every ability but CON and DEX. Unfortunately, both were light on gold (70gp and 80gp, respectively, to start) and had to settle for less than optimal gear: Daniel the Brave entered the dungeon wearing chainmail and carrying a battleaxe, while Maddee the Elf was likewise armored but sporting a sword, shield, and hand axe (she also had the torches).

Maddee wanted to hire some "helpers" (at my suggestion and despite her brother's protest that they reduce the shares of any treasure found). With an excellent hiring roll (helped by her 16 charisma), they picked up two grizzled mercenaries named Flint and Match, both of whom were enthusiastically loyal...to the elf anyway.

[Maddee chose charm person as her starting spell, by the way; however, she did not perform any magic in the dungeon, for reasons that will become readily apparent]

SPOILERS FOLLOW

The party entered the ruins and descended the cracked staircase into the depths of the tower's cellar/excavation, almost immediately encountering a crossroads. This being the players' first foray into any type of fantasy trope (and, thus, having absolutely zero experience with dungeoneering) they decided to take the right hand path rather than following the standard "alway go left" advice. Neither were they interested in taking notes or making maps.

Eventually encountering an old and swollen crypt door, they decided to break it down and look for plunder. What they found was an ancient crypt of broken sarcophagi and two flesh-starved ghouls (#5 on my top ten list of most dangerous B/X monsters) pawing through the remains. Neither group was surprised and the PCs won initiative...unfortunately, two-handed weapons always strike last in combat and the claw-claw-bite of the smaller ghoul managed to hit and paralyze Daniel the Brave before he could make a single attack roll. The larger ghoul, while wounded, still managed to rip the throat out of Flint and immediately began feasting on his flesh.

The smaller ghoul turned its attention to last two warm-blooded creatures yelling at it, and launched a devastating attack at the eyepatch-wearing Match, paralyzing him as he had poor Daniel. However, Maddee's great strength served her well as she struck a terrific blow that killed the creature. Rather than take the easy way out and attempt to escape, she turned to the remaining monster and slew it with a strong blow from behind.

She then sat there for an hour waiting for her companions to regain their mobility. Fortunately, no wandering monsters appeared.

After ransacking the tomb for loot (and finding some ancient platinum pieces and several small gems), the remaining three adventurers continued their exploration, deleting torches and taking no note of their circuitous direction. They encountered a room piled high with garbage, rubbish, and broken furniture, and thought there might be some treasure worth the search. Instead they were assailed by four giant rats, one of which immediately killed poor Match. The beasts proved no match for Maddee and Daniel, however, and despite their ferocity (they made their morale roll) all died beneath the blows of the adventurers. Many old electrum coins were discovered in the refuse, as well as a silver dagger.

Continuing on the pair entered a dark and foreboding chamber, filled with dust and ancient cobwebs. Daniel immediately considered the ceiling, but found no lurking giant spiders, and the pair decided to pass through, weapons in hand. It was only after taking such bold action that a clattering was heard from the hidden side alcoves as four animated skeletons lurched into the torchlight. As luck would have it, the children's dice were hot, and they dispatched all four in a clatter of bones with only Maddee taking a wound...though the blow reduced her to one hit point remaining.

[for the record, this was not a "fudging" on my part; all dice rolls were made in the open]

No treasure was discovered in the chamber and the wounded and weary pair continued on, coming to yet another intersection. Feeling a breeze from the righthand passage, they chose that route and were rewarded by discovering they had somehow managed to find their way back to the entrance stair...still with a torch and a half remaining!

So deciding that discretion was the better part of valor, Daniel and Maddee removed themselves from the ruined tower of Zenopus and made their way back to the Green Dragon Inn (whence they started), paying a piece of platinum for a private room in which to recover their health. The dice revealed that they would be fully rested and healed after three days, and they are already making plans to return to the ruins.

[if I had let them, they would have happily played more that night...and every night since; however, I put my foot down due to our rather busy family schedule; still they continue to talk about the game and want to play it again, and soon]

I am using straight B/X rules at this point, as they are the easiest entry point for the game (my son just turned nine; my daughter turns six in April). I have adapted Alexis's system for combat XP, as I like the way it models the experience gained from battle, even battles that end in defeat or stalemate. I intend that the players encounter Brubo the Hooded the next time they venture into the ruins, and I am already beginning to adapt the another adventure for the PCs, should they survive Zenopus and wish to explore a new site.

The kids are very excited about their newfound wealth. I'm curious to see what new equipment they'll procure.
: )

My DragonFlight Adventures

I know I said I'd post about my DragonFlight sessions, but it's been a busy couple weeks (kids starting school, managing three different soccer teams, last minute road trips, etc.). So before the memory fades too much, I'll jot down some things that stand out, minus any ennui. For the first time ever, I went to the convention with no expectation of running a game, and I played zero indie/story games, instead focusing squarely on Dungeons & Dragons:


Session #1: Captain Zhudo & The Last Crown of Atlantis (B/X)

DM: Scott

My Character: a chaotic fighter with 18 strength and a big axe.

Quick Take: One thing that I noticed right from the sign ups was that there were a lot of common players scheduled for all four games I would be attending. It wouldn't be until my final session that I'd find out that many of these players attend a regular old school game up at Around the Table Games. So a lot of these guys were buddies since long before DragonCon.

I know I wrote that I was going to take a less blood-thirsty approach to the con games, but the beefy axe-guy (a pre-gen) was too hard to pass up.

Much hilarity and blood-letting ensued as we looted our way into the ruined Atlantean settlement...mostly our own blood owing to some invisible stalker mischief. In the end, we went through a teleporter that beamed us to the lair of "the big bad" and while I was discussing strategy with our party cleric, a pair of fireballs from our wizards/elves wiped out all the monsters in a single round. Yay, initiative FTW. It seemed very easy...no party deaths occurred.

After the con, I would discover that the adventure was, in fact, an existing OSR adventure written by our DM (though I believe it may have been written specifically for Labyrinth Lord).

Funny Anecdote: Early on in the session I got the "uh-oh-serial-killer" eyeball from my fellow players for "going too dark" (I believe it was the dismembering of one recalcitrant captive in order to compel the other to act as our guide to the lost city) but, well, these were bushwhacking goat men we were dealing with and things needed expediting.


Session #2: The Masks of Lankhmar (B/X)

DM: Travis

My Character: a female "acrobat" (thief)

Quick Take: Another adventure that I learned (after the con) was pre-published, this one for DCC, converted to B/X. Because it took place in Leiber's Lankhmar, the pre-gens were setting appropriate (no clerics, more than half the party consisted of thieves, magic-users had pretty light magic). The DM used a twist on AD&D2 thief rules when setting thief skill percentages (so my character was really good at climbing, while another was our trap expert, etc.). He also included a "heroic luck" mechanic that I found to be less-than-stellar in practice, but was still kind of neat in that it encouraged us to try more risky maneuvers.

For the life of me, I can't remember how the session ended...oh, wait, now I do (floating masks in an abandoned temple). I liked this adventure quite a bit, as it had a real "sword & sorcery" feel...reminded me of the stuff I used to run with first edition Stormbringer, but more supernatural and less alien/extra-dimensional. Having a party consisting mostly of thieves (with a sprinkle of lightly armored sell-swords) helped immensely. That being said, I found the adventure again to be way too easy (no one died despite the absence of healing magic; damage was d3s and d4s), and there was a lot of "roll under ability score" mechanics that made accomplishing tasks waaaay too simple (when you have a character with a 17 dexterity and know something's a DEX check). I'll stand by my earlier assertions that these need to be cut out of the game.

Funny Anecdote: Jokingly asked if I was going to play my character "suicidal" again (based on my actions in the earlier session of prompting folks to follow me through an unknown teleportation device), by the end of the session I had been nominated by at least one player as the "MVP" for braving a fire trap to recover the loot we were after. I later had to escape through said-wall of fire with a bag over my head. Again, my character survived the entire session (as a 1st level thief!). Chalk it up to the double gin-and-tonics.


Session #3: Beneath the Ruined Tower of Zenopus (Holmes Basic)

[if you check out the photos in the link, I was to the left of the guy with the green thermos. You can't see it, but my beer glass was emptied rather early on]

DM: Andy

My Character: a first level magic-user

Quick Take: This was my first time playing the Holmes edition of basic, something I really wanted to do (and a nice way to fend off any leftover ennui from the night before). This was an expansion of the adventure found in the Holmes rulebook, but it wasn't anything I was familiar with. Andy played mostly BTB (except for trading out some of the wonky combat stuff...my character did not strike twice/round with a dagger, for example). The DEX-based combat went very well, and added an extra level of tension as each monsters' DEX was diced for at the start of an encounter (when the 16 DEX orcs showed up, we knew we were in trouble!).

Since this was a con game, the acquisition of treasure was actually a secondary consideration for us despite, ostensibly, that being our characters' goals (in the earlier sessions we had some specific objectives of play). The "for reals" goal was exploration and survival...could we navigate the labyrinth beneath the town, pick up some bling, and make it back alive? And in this, I think I chose a very challenging character.

We created our characters at the table (3d6 rolls in order), and it just so happened that I rolled up the stats to play a magic-user. Poor rolling for "spells known" precluded me from taking the usual spells of sleep, charm person, or magic-missile (or even read magic!), but I was satisfied with protection from evil, which I used to ward myself against possible undead in the first crypt we had the chance to desecrate.

While I would not go so far as to say Zenopus was exceptionally easy, it's a fact that only one PC died during the session (see below). However, I'd say that death for our fragile characters was mostly mitigated by good game play (we were very much on our toes during the game), and partly through sheer strength of numbers: it's harder to kill PCs when you have a large party (we had eight plus two NPCs) and can rotate bodies in and out of the marching order. We actually found a respectable amount of treasure; definitely enough to encourage further exploration.

Funny Anecdote: The one character death that occurred was my PC, at the very end of the game. The crypt room (where I used my one and only spell) occurred near the very beginning of the adventure, so for most of the four-hour session my character had neither spell, nor armor. What's more, I was injured early on in the game as well (hit by an arrow? maybe) and spent nearly the entire time adventuring with 1 hit point.

Did that mean I was huddled up in the middle of the party doing nothing? Of course not! When we were ambushed by orcs, I spoke to them in their same language and tried to bluff them into letting us pass. When there were trap doors in ceilings, I was the first up the ladder. When we found some sort of venomous gorilla straining at the bars of its cage, I'm the one who splashed oil on the damned thing and set it on fire.

My character survived the entire scope of the adventure. I was killed by another player at the table, in a fit of PVP violence, as we were leaving the flaming tower, loot in hand. He attacked my AC 9 character from behind, apparently piqued by my setting the place alight as we were making our escape (I assumed we should leave no evidence of having despoiled the place). It was more of an epilogue to the session than an actual part of the adventure.


Session #4: The Castle That Fell From The Sky (B/X)

DM: Scott (again)

My Character: a cleric of Odin

Quick Take: Yes, I ended up playing four different character types over the weekend, none of whom were demihumans. This was yet another pre-published adventure that I'm not familiar with...it had kind of Krull-crossed-with-White Plume Mountain vibe to it. It was also exceptionally loooong...we did not reach the game's objective goal (getting through only about one-third the thing). Of all the adventures I played, it had (probably) the most challenging encounters...we even saw an actual PC death!...but it probably evoked the most listless performance from myself of any of the sessions. Maybe it was fatigue (on my part), but I just couldn't get up for it like I had with earlier games.

One thing The Castle That Fell lacked was any connection to an implied setting. Here's this thing: go explore it. Oh, you're trapped, find your way out. So what? Boring. Even though the earlier adventures were still "con games" (i.e. one-offs and not a part of any on-going campaign) there were cities/towns involved...a sense of place. When our caravan was ambushed by goat men on the road to whatever-whatever, there was still this place (whatever-whatever) that we had been attempting to get to...we almost continued on anyway (after dispatching/dismembering goat men) to stock up on supplies and whatnot before we realized (meta- like) that O Wait, this is a con game, and we're just supposed to follow the goat men's back trail into the jungle. Lankhmar is a place...with themes and concepts and history and its own weird culture. Portown is likewise a place...it was our following of rumors that led us to the secret entrance of the place in some woman's root cellar; when we were making our escape, it was with the knowledge that we would be fencing our loot somewhere in the town...some place we probably lived and resided.

Just working with set-piece challenges (giant hypnotic albino snakes, huge lurking spiders in mirror-crystal caverns) isn't enough to get my blood churning. It isn't enough to evoke a sense of wonder...at least not when it occurs in a vacuum. It's not that I've "outgrown" dungeons or that I need my dungeons to "make sense." It's just that there has to be some sort of larger consequence or reward for my actions; that my actions need to matter (even in the most paltry fictional way) to the setting. That I'm not just playing a board game or some app I've downloaded on my phone. There are already apps for that.

Funny Anecdote: I've got two for this session. First one goes like this: we thought we had too many people at the table (I'd actually been on a waiting list) so when the last two folks arrived, the DM thought we were waiting for two others and (gently) turned them away. Upon discovering that those guys were the ones we were waiting for (the couple we thought we were waiting for hadn't signed up for the session), one player commented that "they sure were quick to leave" (rather than staying and explaining they were signed up for the game). And the DM said, "Yeah, and the funny thing is, one of those guys was that dude who writes the B/X Blackrazor blog!" Of course, I then had to explain no that's me...the same guy they'd been gaming with for two days.

The other funny thing: the same guy who backstabbed my character in session #3? At one point his character was in danger of dying (the reason is a too-long story about hypnotic toads, armored dwarves, and boggy swamps), and the only PC in any position to save him was my own. And I did, solo and unprompted (possibly to the surprise of some people at the table...). Sometimes, you just have to break that karmic wheel.
; )

Certifying Dungeon Masters

Man, my brain has really been addled by all things D&D lately ("The Sleeper has awakened!")...if I wasn't so busy with a gazillion other things, I could/would be posting multiple blog entries on a daily basis (and probably still find the time/energy for drafting some campaign notes/house rules). *sigh* Such is life...when I have LOTS of time on my hands, my inertia always seems to be the other direction.

ANYway, I was combing through a bunch of old Dragon magazines the other day (specifically the first 50 or so), looking for a particular article, and kept coming across little buried "gems," pertinent to my own thoughts and musings. As I've often found over the last ten years of blogging/researching there really isn't all that much new under the sun...people have been obsessing and coming up with ideas and putting 2 and 2 together for a long, long time. The execution wasn't always quite right, but the early days of the hobby were still "early days;" lots of stuff hadn't been worked out yet. And yet some of our adaptations of these ideas (or decisions to go 180 degrees directions, in certain instances) are/were even more flawed than the original stab at the kernel of a concept.

[I'll give you one quick example: I've recently come to the conclusion that Alexis Smolensk's system of awarding experience points based on damage inflicted and received (in addition to XP for treasure found), is really the only sensible way of handling combat/encounter XP, and have decided that I'll probably adapt it wholesale in my next campaign. Welp, Dragon #36 (April 1980) already proposed this variant system ("Experience Points to Ponder: A New System" by William Fawcett). Alexis has the advantage of a bit more thoughtful design and about a decade of play testing...but someone had a similar idea (and for the same reasons) almost thirty years prior]

But I don't want to get sidetracked...the reason I decided to open up Ye Old Laptop and post something (instead of doing what I should be doing) is because I just have to mention this idea from Dragon #28 (August 1979). In an article entitled "Level Progression for Players and Dungeon Masters," writer Jon Mattson proposes a method of awarding experience points to players and DMs (not characters) based on their actual gaming experience, in order to provide an objective measure of ability.

This is something I've been thinking about for years, and only more so since considering the discussions I've had (both on the internet and in-person with other designers) about the possibility of training or certification for game masters. My opinion is that some sort of training for individuals who want to run games is not only desirable but necessary, and that the lack of good, codified training is detrimental to the hobby (some of my blog posts have mentioned this in passing). But I've often wondered how one would go about certifying a person as a credible, proficient GM.

Because here's the thing: it really doesn't matter all that much to me how experienced a player is at a table (neither as a DM or a fellow player), but it matters a LOT to me how competent a Dungeon Master is running the game. Because my enjoyment of a game session hinges on whether or not the DM can do his or her job at the table. And it is, frankly, very difficult for me to come back to the table of a DM whose game I neither appreciate nor respect (I don't think I've ever walked away mid-game from such a DM...I'm a little too polite for that...but I have come away from game sessions feeling frustrated, angry, and vowing to never waste another chunk of my time with that same dungeon master)...even if the person running the game is a friend that I like and respect.

Mattson's article provides the following experience point awards for DMs (he also provides some awards for playing/running other games that might have a certain "carryover" effect, but I'm just going to stick to the ones that are Dungeons & Dragons specific):

Per campaign* of basic D&D you play:  60
Per campaign* of basic D&D you DM:  900**
Per campaign* of Original D&D you play:  80
Per campaign* of Original D&D you DM:  1200**
Per campaign* of Advanced D&D you play:  100
Per campaign* of Advanced D&D you DM:  1500**

* Mattson considers a campaign to be "one full adventure, i.e. if a group of characters set out to explore a five level dungeon, the whole five levels (and only those five levels) would count as one campaign." While I take this to mean that XP is not awarded every session for a multi-session, site-based adventure, the article does not indicate what counts as finishing a "campaign;" should a DM be awarded full XP if a party abandons an adventure site, or if the delve ends in a Total Party Kill? I'm inclined to say "Yes" since that's the outcome of the "campaign," but I'm not sure that's the author's intent.
** Per Mattson, only two-thirds of this amount is awarded if the DM did not design the adventure (for example, if a published module was used). This seems reasonable to me, awarding one-third XP each for writing/designing, game prep, and actual running. 

Being written in 1979, the only "basic D&D" the author could be referring to is the Holmes-written basic set. B/X (published in 1981) is much more similar in complexity and rule scope to OD&D and I'm inclined to put both it and the later BECMI in that category. 2nd edition AD&D would go into AD&D, and you could probably put all "later editions" (3rd, 4th, 5th) there as well...but then some might argue that the objectives of play are so different for later systems (especially 4E) that they really need to be put into the "other games" category for simple "carryover" XP.

[maybe you'd need to have "multi-class DMs" these days with XP split between Old and New school. Ha!]

The advancement table for Dungeon Masters in the article looks like this:

Level 1: Initiate     0-1499 experience points
2: Apprentice     1500-2999
3: Expert     3000-4499
4: Overseer     4500-5999
5: Supervisor     6000-8999
6: Moderator     9000-11,999
7: Mediator     12,000-17,999
8: Arbitrator     18,000-24,999
9: Referee     25,000-34,999
10: Referee, 1st Class     35,000-49,999
11: Judge     50,000-74,999
12: Dungeonmaster     75,000-99,999
13: Dungeonmaster, 13th level     100,000-124,999
14: Dungeonmaster, 14th level, etc.     125,0000 plus 25,000 per level after 14th

[ha! There's also a note that Dungeonmasters of 18th level or higher may also be called "Overlord." I dig on that!]

I'm sure that some folks reading this are going to just shake their heads and call it all ridiculous. After all, the mark of a good DM should include something about how they're evaluated by their players, right? How they interact, how they arbitrate, how they smooth over difficulties and deal with troublesome issues? Not to mention how they improvise and adapt, how they role-play monsters and how much fun is had by all? Certainly, if a DM is giving the impression to everyone who joins the game that he/she is an asshole, it shouldn't matter whether they've run five adventures or five hundred, right?

Maybe. But maybe we need to have some concrete "measurables" to measure. Maybe there is something about a person who writes, preps, and runs a game getting better at writing, prepping, and running games. And maybe that's kind of important when you're emphasizing the game aspect of the hobby and not the "oh, it's just another way to socialize and interact with buddies in a casual, geeky fashion." Sure, yes, that's a thing...but some folks want a higher standard of gaming. I know I do.

Mattson's article isn't a bad starting place for such a discussion. Going over my own DMing history (as best I can remember it), and sticking with only these XP awards (and counting B/X play as "basic" rather than OD&D, and not counting any post-2E experience), I'll say I conservatively calculate my own experience as 65,420, giving me a rank of "Judge," but being about 10,000 shy of "name level." If I upped the awards for B/X campaigns and included awards for other games I've run (there have been many...including 3E D&D), it's possible I might crack 12th or even 13th level, but I'm inclined to leave it as is...a good indication of my "rank" in terms of Old School D&D.

Which...frankly...is about all I care about these days.

And which ALSO means, I've got room to grow. I'd certainly like to be worthy of the "Dungeon Master" title ("Overlord" seems like a pipe dream any time in this lifetime). But, being honest here, I've still got plenty to learn and discover. "Judge" actually sounds about right (I'm pretty judgmental). "Mastery" is something I'm working on.

Anyhoo, I welcome thoughts and ideas on the subject, and ways one might use this (or a similar) objective system to analyze quality, skill, and competence...or any differing opinions from folks who feel this line of thought is unnecessary or impossible. Also, I invite anyone who feels so inclined to post how they level themselves (using this system) in terms of "old school DM experience." To be perfectly honest, I'd like to see how I rank in comparison to the other DMs out there.

Just please: no taking XP for 5E games. I don't care if they're run in an "old school" way or not.

Q is for Quasqueton

[over the course of the month of April, I shall be posting a topic for each letter of the alphabet, sequentially, for every day of the week except Sunday. Our topic for this year's #AtoZchallenge? Revamping the Grand Duchy of Karameikos in a way that doesn't disregard its B/X roots]

Q is for Quasqueton, the mysterious fortress featured in Mike Carr's adventure module B1: In Search of the Unknown.

Many folks have cherished memories of B1; a lot of first-time D&D players cut their teeth on the module. Personally, I've only run it once: with my brother back in 2010 after modifying the content substantially for mid-level play. I'll probably get around to running it again some day, and properly (maybe for my kids), but it's tough when the adventure needs so much prep from the DM to work (as a teaching module, B1 leaves many encounter areas to be stocked by the new DM).

The reason I don't have much experience with the module is because I never owned the thing until recently. B2 was my "introductory adventure;" B1 was written for (and included with) the ORIGINAL D&D Basic set, the edition we Bloggers refer to as "Holmes Basic." My copy of B1 was acquired back in 2009 when I came across a (used) box set of Holmes (no chits) that contained the adventure (my initial thoughts are here, for the curious). As a Holmesian relic, the module is not entirely suited for B/X play (though it's easy enough to convert), and some readers might be wondering why I even bring it up for this particular series, as it antedates the publication of Karameikos and the Known World by half a decade (a lifetime in terms of the hobby's primordial origins).

Once again, we can hold Mentzer responsible: his re-printed wilderness map of the Known World in BECMI's Expert set included the location of (what I assume are) all the then-published "B" and "X" adventure modules. B1 is located deep in the northern foothills of western Karameikos, near the mountain origin of the Achelos River, which flows to the coast (eventually emptying into the Bay of Halav by way of Blight Swamp).  Fortress Q is not shown on the GAZ1 map, nor is it mentioned in the text of the Gazetteer, but it's clear from the landmarks on the Expert map where the "hidden" stronghold is located.

"Hidden" is a pretty relative term, in this case. The text of the adventure states the hidden fortress of Roghan the Fearless and Zelligar the Unknown was located "far from the nearest settlement, away from traveled routes, and high upon a craggy cliff" specifically because they were not interested in unwanted visitors. However, it's clear from encounter areas strewn with recently deceased bodies and the relatively picked over nature of the site that there are at least a few adventuring souls that have found their way to the fortress. Heck, the adventure starts with the PCs acquisition of a map to the complex!

Not sinister enough for
Zelligar and Roghan?

Which is fine...it helps make some sense of the adventure (and gives plenty of justification for the "low level" nature of the site...the biggest treasures and monsters have already been taken out, both literally and figuratively). As usual, I advise folks to check out GusL's excellent review/analysis/ideas for this module. Despite his critique, he provides a great blueprint for how to run the adventure in a way that's both sensible and properly challenging/rewarding.

So let's talk about the adaptation of B1 to the Karameikos setting. The first thing one needs to grok is that In Search of the Unknown is NOT a "generic" site for exploration...it contains a lot of background material and setting information in its pages, some of which doesn't jibe with the history of the region as presented in GAZ1:

- Roghan and Zelligar only ceased 30 years prior to the start of the adventure. That means they disappeared to fight "northern barbarians" around the time Duke Stefan, Baron Ludwig and all the rest were moving in.
- Prior to this (and within living memory...certainly for elves and dwarves) they had been "heroes of the people" having fought off a large barbarian horde that attacked the region.
- The construction of their fortress, even before their fight with barbarians took over a decade "and the work of hundreds of slaves and laborers." After the defeat of the horde, they worked for several years more, adding to the fortress, and presumably continuing to use additional workers. Many of these would still be alive, or have drifted into communities.
- While the pair took "most of their henchmen and associates" with them into the wilderness (when they disappeared), many they did not, including Roghan's mistress, their advisor, the captain of the guard for the fortress, etc. It's clear from the text that these individuals and other servant types (I doubt they used their menial orc servants for cooking, but who knows?) eventually left when R and Z failed to return. There aren't a whole lot of places they could have gone, especially not without an armed escort.

One more thing to realize: this adventure was NOT originally written to fit with the Known World ("Mystara"). At least in MY copy (the monochrome cover) there is a note on page 6 stating:

"In the mythical WORLD OF GREYHAWK (available from TSR) the stronghold can be considered within any one of the following lands -- the Barony of Ratik, the Duchy of Tenh, or the Theocracy of the Pale."

This note is removed from the later, "brown cover copy." Reviewing mine, I can see it clearly appears written to work in the AD&D system, based on the NPCs of different race-class combinations (dwarf thieves, elven fighters, etc.) that were later edited out of the "straight Basic" version. Also, certain titles in the NPC names ("Servant of Saint Cuthbert," etc.) implies use in the Greyhawk setting. Concepts like "The Great Church," "The Secret Church," and "The City Afar," sound cool, but don't really work with Mystara as written, except perhaps as euphemisms.

So I'd probably change that, and let the "fluff" of the module fill out game world.

[here's a different question that really nags at my brain: Who are all these berserker guards that are in charge of the place? If they've been waiting 30 years (because they're fantastically loyal to their masters or something) doesn't that mean they're all well past their prime?]

There are plenty more unanswered setting questions that arise from this pair of adventurers who were "dedicated to perfecting their craft." From whence did they come? Where did Zelligar receive his magical training? Who is this demon idol that they casually worship (it's not an extravagant temple...more of a personal shrine)? Roghan has a brass dragon skin on the wall (brass dragons were a part of Holmes, not B/X or BECMI)...where did this come from and what does it imply? Magic mouths? Not a spell in ANY form of Basic.

In a BECMI setting, with its "everything is codified" sensibilities, this weirdness doesn't work great. In B/X, it works but just becomes "weirdness," which may not be what you want.

"Raaargh!"

And dammit, who are these "barbarians" supposed to be? The Republic of Darokin with its disciplined, Swiss Pikemen-like army is hardly what I call a "savage horde" (and neither does frothing halflings from the Five Shires). Another invasion of humanoids? That doesn't really work with the whole Song of Halav legend (it's not like King Halav returned as foretold). *sigh*

So here's the idea that comes to my head for revamping B1 for use in a B/X Karameikos:

Fifty-some odd years ago, the wizard Zelligar "the Unknown" arrived in the region of what would someday be called Karameikos. Perhaps he was encouraged to adventure in the land by his patron demon; perhaps he was expelled from his country of origin (Darokin? Glantri?) because of his necromantic practices. Perhaps it was simply a teleportation mishap.

Regardless, he found himself in foothills of western Karameikos. Turns out there was an indigenous population prior to the coming of Stefan and his Thyatia cronies...a hardened, iron age culture living in small agrarian communities...more tribal clans based extended families than anything that would be called villages. Here was a superstitious lot, easily cowed with displays of magic, easily manipulated...and Zelligar found it the ideal space to create a base of operations.

But one "barbarian" showed no apprehension of the strange wizard. Roghan (later called "the Fearless") was more intrigued by the stranger than worshipful. Desiring companionship and needing an interpreter (not to mention a strong right arm), Zelligar adopted the young Roghan as a protege, gifting him with enchanted armaments the likes of which had never been seen by the primitive hillmen. So equipped, the two began to explore the wilderness, especially the northern mountains, that were full of both fell beasts (like dragons) and treasure hoards built from mineral wealth of area. Successful in their undertakings, they eventually came to build Quasqueton as described in the module background.

Unfortunately, their relationship with the hillmen of the area were far from amiable. To the hillmen, the pair's worship of strange and foul gods was despicable, as was their taking of slaves from the hill tribes, forcing Roghan's own people to work alongside orcs taken in raids. What was worse, Roghan's and Zelligar's own henchmen and soldiers were drawn from the most vicious and violent of the mountain tribes, people who were known to practice human sacrifice and cannibalism. Eventually, the hillmen rose up, united, and marched on Quasqueton, only to be brought low by the martial might of Roghan and the sorcery of Zelligar. Much tribute was taken from the defeated tribesmen, not the least of which was the beautiful Melissa, eldest daughter of a great chieftain of the hillmen. Roghan was smitten at first sight and, bringing her to his stronghold used much of his wealth to construct suitable accommodations for his most cherished prize.

Fair Melissa, on the other hand, saw Roghan as a traitor to his own people and looked for a way to revenge herself on the adventurers. Knowing that murdering the warrior would do nothing to remove the pair's tyranny (would not Zelligar simply find another man of greed and ambition amongst the hill tribes?), she instead endeavored to seduce the wizard himself, with Roghan none the wiser. Thus manipulating both men, she arranged for the pair to embark on a dangerous venture from which they would never return, due in no small part to her sabotaging of their gear and poisoning of their supplies.

It was shortly thereafter that Stefan and his ilk arrived in the region. Searching out potential rivals for his control of the land, the archduke's henchmen made forays into the north, following rumors of a "secret fortress." However, none who found it actually lived to tell the tale, as the hillmen still secretly guard Quasqueton, regularly posting their strongest warriors (the berserkers) to prevent other adventurers from discovering and "setting up shop" in the fortress. The hillmen remember the past, and while they are content to let the "Archduke" and his pet barons rule in the south, they want no more foreign lords exercising their will over their lands.

Been watching too much GoT...

[by the way...Happy Triduum to folks that celebrate the Easter holiday! I shall be pretty busy the next couple days (aren't I always?) especially as it's my daughter's 5th birthday. I might not get around to my "R" post till Sunday night]