Building a New Dungeons & Dragons (Redux)

Look, folks…

A couple/few days ago I got incensed by something I read and I got a bee in my bonnet and I said, hey, I can come up with Three Pillars that are a lot better things to consider “across areas of design” than the WotC design team’s Combat-Exploration-Roleplay model. But as I said (initially) I’m just a lone voice ranting from the darkest backwater depths of the internet.

WotC doesn’t care who I am or what I have to say: they’re already getting paid.

Folks who’ve canned everything post-1987 or post-1983 or post-whenever your personal favorite edition was issued probably don’t care (much) about what I have to say: they’re already playing their edition of choice (with or without) house rules.

Folks who are Shills for the Man, or Completists, or Fair Shakers, or Eternal Optimists, and who already plan on buying WHATEVER WotC puts out (they bought 4th edition, anyway), almost certainly don’t care what I say: they’ve already voted with their wallets.

SO…who does that leave? Anyone?

Well to those who ARE listening and don’t think I’m patently ridiculous…to you, Slim Few, I say unto thee:

I can build a “new” edition of D&D…and hell, you can, too.

You can. You really, really, REALLY can.

The more I look at it, the simpler it gets. In fact, the more I roll the idea over in my head, the more I like it.

Allow me to indulge myself for the nonce: a while back I wrote this-and-that about “fantasy heartbreakers,” and even came to the conclusion that I wanted to try my hand at writing one…a game that was a total knock-off of D&D, destined for no more than the trashcan ‘cause, you know, fantasy heartbreakers aren’t viable in any sort of commercial or economic way. It was purely a project of vanity.

Then I started getting some delusions of grandeur: “Wow,” thought I, “maybe I could sell this for some scratch! Maybe Barnes & Noble would carry it!”

Then I woke up from my folly. I considered not only that such thinking was the height of silliness, but also that I really didn’t want to “rewrite D&D.” The things that D&D had “missed on” the first time around were things I found, frankly, quite charming…like the lovable quirks and idiosyncrasies of your friends and family. Anything I really couldn’t live with I could f’ing well “house rule” if needed. That what I do already.

In other words I found I wanted to play D&D.

THEN I really started to fall in love with the idea of campaign settings (and something set me off, though I can’t remember what it was), so I decided to write a very specific one for B/X in the form of Land of Ice. I was thinking of snow and Vikings at the time. ANYway…it was while doing Land of Ice that several things happened at once:

• All the hubbub about 5E started
• The AD&D reprints were announced
• I started playing in Alexis’s AD&D game (and was subsequently canned)
• I started playing in Randy’s Labyrinth Lord game
• I re-read the OD&D Supplements I-III

And then there was this Three Pillars thing (in which I take a closer look at “what makes D&D tick”).

And ALL of that roiled and boiled together and spilled over into an idea...a minor epiphany...that, hey, you know what? Not only do I like Dungeons & Dragons…the kernel that is its core, the core material of most every edition…not only do I like D&D and have ZERO interest in writing my own “fantasy RPG” to replace it…not ONLY that, BUT this:

I, too, can write a “new” edition of D&D. It’s not all that hard. After all:

Gygax did it.
Holmes did it.
Moldvay did it.
Mentzer did it.
“Zeb” did it.
WotC did it (several times).

And I would say all these “retrocloners” (Proctor and Raggi and the S&W and OSRIC folks, etc.) have done it, too.

NONE of these games that we call “D&D” (or facsimiles thereof) are “exactly like” any other. I doubt that anyone playing D&D anywhere is playing strictly Rules As Written…I certainly don’t and I’ve long been a big (and loud) proponent of RAW.

The fact of the matter is this:

There is no one, true, complete, baseline edition of Dungeons & Dragons. There are the pillars that form the foundation of game play (Challenge, Reward, and Escape is how I label ‘em). There are the stylistic tropes we’ve come to recognize (XP, class, D20 combat, hit points, saves, etc.). And then there are the players at the table who have a loose agreement on “how to play” based on a common understanding and a (hopefully strong) social contract.

The players say:
“You will be our DM…you will interpret the rules. It is your responsibility to challenge us, to reward us, and to provide us with escape.”

The Dungeon Master says:
“I will accept this mantle of responsibility. I understand that my challenge is to challenge the players, my reward is in seeing my vision come to fruition, and my escape is in the creation of that vision. I will endeavor to share this vision as an impartial channel and arbiter.”

And play begins.

It’s too bad we don’t begin the game with some sort of ritual like this: ritual is a powerful thing, and a real bonding process. You can see it in the rites of a Mass or church service, the pledging of allegiance in classrooms, the swearing on a Bible or holy book…even the singing of the National Anthem, coin toss, and post-game handshake at a pro-football game. RITUAL to open and close a game session would be a cool thing in my opinion…but then again, I’m Catholic and dig on ritual.

But that's a post for another time.

Perhaps what every table needs is its own Game Bible, filled with one’s own interpretation of “the original adult fantasy role-playing game.” That is what I’m actually talking about when I say I can build my own “new” edition of D&D. I really don’t think it’s all that hard to do: pick an edition that you like as a BASE and then write out the differences for your game. How tough is that?

Do you really need to keep sucking at the corporate tit to get nutrition for your imagination?

It’s just as Alexis said (or implies anyway): you really don’t. Waiting for a 5th Edition or a 6th or a 7th or a reprint of earlier books is simply staying dependent on someone else…in this case, a soulless corporate entity whose main concern is baseline profitability due to the reality of being a publicly traded company with shareholders.

I mean, that’s the fact of the matter folks. The ugly truth. Unless you’re brand-spanking-new to the game, just pick an edition you like and rewrite it to taste. Anything less is…well, it’s kind of intellectual laziness, and possibly a bit childish.

And don’t think I’m not calling myself out here as well…I’m as lazy as they come when it comes to organization and getting my shit together. It’s a lot easier to criticize than to actually f’ing DO something. Just because I'm a hypocrite doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to tell it like it is and hold it up as an ideal.

It just means I’m not a very good role model.

So by all means, why don’t we just do it? Build our own “D&D Next?” What are we waiting for? What are we afraid of? Don’t we have word processors and printers at our homes, schools, work?

Have you folks not seen Planet Eris (just as an example)?

I’m doing it…I’m f’ing going to do it. There’s really no excuse not to. I’m going to do a small supplement book (like Greyhawk or Blackmoor or, yes, Planet Eris) and it’s going to collect all the rules I use that describe how the game is played at MY table. No thief skills, for example. No weapon restrictions. D6 damage. Allowable classes. All that good stuff. Heck, maybe I’ll do my own illustrations (I can draw a little bit, and I do have a scanner at home). I’ll save it as a .pdf and make it available for my players as a download for their tablets and smartphones. If rules need to be changed (due to breakage discovered at the game table), I’ll update the book. A small “House Rules Bible.”

Call it, “D&D Mine.”

When will I get to this? Who knows…soon, I hope. I really don’t think it will take that long, as I don’t need it to be a masterpiece of prose, just cut-n-dry rules (maybe a random table or two). I know how to play, I just need a reference document.

And I’ll tell you this: building my own D&D will be a damn sight better, more fun, and hella’ cheaper than waiting for WotC’s new version, and then figuring out which modular supplements I need to run a game. I mean, when you think about it, isn’t it kind of ridiculous?

Ballsy of ‘em? Sure. Done with super-good intentions? More than likely (at least on the part of the designers). Done with love and care for the game? Probably…as best they can given the constraints of their corporate overlords.

But I can project into the future and see myself being disappointed by the whole thing. Wanting to like it, saying O What Neat Artwork and Presentation…and still being frustrated by the whole experience of it. Eventually falling back on My Own Way of playing or an older edition or house-ruling the shit out of whatever-it-is, modular or not.

‘Cause that’s what happens with EVERY edition one plays.

So, yeah, I’m going to head ‘em off at the pass. Maybe I’ll work up a generic template for others to use (maybe…that might be a little too ambitious) so that I’m not the only one on this Quixotic journey.

Anyway…that’s just where my head’s at right now. I know some folks would say, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." I've decided to go for the third option instead.
; )

The Third Pillar – Escape

You know, I have a pretty good life. I have a beautiful family that I love very much. I have caring parents and in-laws. I have two (beagle) dogs who, while obnoxious at times, are a lot of fun and no more than what I deserve. I own a nice house. I have a car that runs. My wife and I both have decent jobs, and there’s food on our table every night. I have a large TV to watch large TV shows. I live in a city with professional sports teams that provide hours of entertainment. I have several bookshelves over-flowing with books and games. And if that wasn’t enough, I live in a pretty nice city with a lot of recreational activity, both indoors and out.

My life is fantastic, and I feel truly blessed to live it. And yet sometimes reality just isn’t good enough.

Welcome to Escapism 101.

There’s no getting around it (at least not to my mind): one of the major draws of the Dungeons & Dragons game is the fantasy of playing an imaginary character in an imaginary world where magic and monsters abound. The challenge and reward that are the first two pillars might keep folks coming back for more, but it’s the temptation to play a wizard or sword-wielding elf (or whatever) that sucks people in in the first place.

Now I (personally) use the term “fantasy role-playing” to discuss most RPGs. After all, the word fantasy simply means “the realm of imagination” or “make believe,” and pretending to be a secret agent or rugged cowboy is just as fantasy (for me) as pretending to be Bilbo Baggins.

But for purpose of the Third Pillar, when I use the term fantasy (and to be fair, it would probably be more clear to call the pillar “Fantasy Escape” instead of just “Escape”)…*ahem* When I use the term “fantasy” in reference to the Third Pillar, I’m talking about the literary term “fantasy,” which involves aspects of the supernatural and magic in addition to the imaginary or make-believe.

When it comes to fantasy literature, there are several sub-genres that are espoused, both in terms of theme and setting. Dungeons & Dragons, being originally inspired by fantasy literature, makes a clumsy swipe at the bunch and draws subgenres from both of those:

From the theme subgenre: Sword & Sorcery (example: Robert E. Howard)
From the setting subgenre: High Fantasy (example: J.R.R. Tolkien)

The reason why people have such a hard time deciding which it is, is because it is in fact BOTH…and comparing S&S to HF is comparing apples to oranges, not Braeburns to Granny Smiths.

[we’ll get back to the pillar in a moment; this needs a little set-up]

The high fantasy SETTING subgenre of literary fantasy fiction is defined by being set in an alternative world, one in which magic and the supernatural exists. Themes of high fantasy can include conflicts of epic scope, and generally have a “good vs. evil” thing going on. Protagonists are lone heroes that start young (or immature anyway) and grow into their abilities/confidence over time, sometimes walking the road of the Heroic Saga, and sometimes not.

The sword & sorcery THEME subgenre of literary fantasy fiction is characterized by fast paced action and danger that threatens its heroes on a personal level. The scope of conflict is immediate and immanent to the hero, not some looming Dark Lord. Sword & sorcery heroes tend to be competent wanderers, disinclined to settle down, instead going “where the action is.” Their adventures often include elements of magic and the supernatural (thus distinguishing them from historic adventure fiction and the like).

Got it? So what we have in D&D is a mash-up of THEME and SETTING…you get an alternate world filled with magic and the supernatural (elves and dragons and wizards, etc.). You have good versus evil. And you have heroes growing into their own, becoming important parts of the setting (at least if you choose to play the game into high levels, becoming kings and queens and whatnot). At the same time the scale of conflict is, more often than not, IMMEDIATE to what’s right in front of you. Do you defeat the antagonist? Do you set-off the trap? Do your party members find the gemstone you’ve hidden up your left nostril?

The fact that your characters are “competent wanderers” (at least in the mid-levels) and scurrilous rogues (default characterization for pre-1983 editions) makes characterization of PCs even more S&S-esque. You're Fafhrd, not Elrond, more often than not.

The third pillar upon which D&D is built…and without which, you don’t really have a D&D game…is its ability to allow you to escape into this fantasy mash-up. This escape...escape from our mundane lives, nice (or terrible) as they are…allows us to experience (vicariously, with our imagination) two very distinct things simultaneously:

1) What it means to live and breathe in a high fantasy world.
2) What it means to live the life of a rough-and-tumble, S&S hero.

Now THAT’s a powerful combination.

With only one of those things, you run the risk of losing part of the draw of the game.

For example, take out the high fantasy and leave only the S&S and you run the risk of players becoming incredibly cynical and callous to the game. Take the Stormbringer game for example. The original game was a great piece of sword & sorcery RPG…including the idea that life is short or transitory at best and often ends in messy spillage of organs. Having no “end game,” and very little character growth over time, players were expected to survive as long as possible while “adventuring” until meeting their inevitable gruesome demise (as occurs to all characters in Moorcock’s Elric books). I’ve played Stormbringer many times and enjoyed it, but it never turns into anything “long term.”

Ron Edwards’s supplement Sorcerer & Sword (for use with his Sorcerer game) is explicit in its attempt to emulate the S&S literary genre. It also is a “short-term” (3 or 5 session) game. This has quite a bit to do with Sorcerer’s game play aspects, but the rules eminently emulate the inspirational literature.

Contrast that with a game that leaves out the S&S and focuses only on the High Fantasy. Actually, that’s kind of a trick question as few RPGs will really spurn the individual character in order to pay honor the overarching setting. Perhaps MERPS, Star Wars (I consider it fantasy, even though set in space), or ElfQuest, might be examples. When I’ve played or run these games in the past, players (including moi) were often lost as to “well, what do we do now?” And especially with the licensed games, there’s a feeling of “none of my adventures matter, because it’s really Frodo/Luke/Cutter who’s going out and accomplishing the world changing/saving, breast-beating fantasy that I only wish I could.”

Sure, you can call this silly on my part; chalk it up to me not having enough imagination to revisit, say, Middle Earth and rework The Lord of the Rings' plot for the player characters to take the place of Frodo and company. But why should I bother? I mean, I have Dungeons & Dragons…here’s a system that does what I want it to do with very minimal tweaking. With its Tolkien species and its Vancian magic, not to mention Howardian shrines and tombs begging to be robbed of gold and jewels, D&D caries just about the right mix of heroic and epic for my fantasy escape.

And it’s easily customizable! Look at the archetypes (classes) that are available! Look at all the fantasy worlds available for exploration!

That last is the bit that appeals even to the guy tasked with the responsibility of DM. The participants taking the role of “player characters” get to live their daydream life in the fantasy world, swinging swords, slinging spells, talking smack to ogres, etc. You can fall off the edge of a cliff or get bitten by a giant spider or snake and still miraculously survive (with a lucky die roll or two)…unlike, say, real life. But while PCs get to run their characters, it’s the DM that gets to run the world.

And there are so many to choose from! When I was a kid we used Greyhawk, and as a teen we were exploring the Known World of Mystarra. But besides published ones (personally, I like the ideas behind Dark Sun and, to a lesser extent, Krynn and Shadow Dell) you have the whole range of fantasy literature to draw upon: CA Smith’s Averiogne, Howard’s Hyboria, the fantasy Scandanavia of Elizabeth Boyer, Tolkien, Lewis, Lahnkmer, Xanth, Darkover, Sanctuary. I’ve been reading Dave Chandler’s Ancient Blades trilogy lately (more on that later) and the deeper I get into it, the more I want to build a campaign setting based on HIS world.

But it’s just as easy and entertaining an escape to design and develop your OWN world. Personally, I dig on both my Goblin Wars and Land of Ice settings, but Raggi’s horrific New World and Wetmore's Anomalous Subsurface Dungeon and Jimm Johnson's Planet Eris are weird-cool-fun…and I’d love to do something with just a baseline version of Arneson’s Blackmoor (meaning just “OD&D + Supplement II”).

Escapism and “fantasy” are part of MOST RPGs, it’s true. But D&D’s particular brand of fantasy escapism…giant, high fantasy setting coupled with individual badass heroes…is one of the integral parts of the game. One of the *ahem* foundational pillars of the game. And something that needs to be accounted for when building any “new” edition of D&D. And part of accounting for that is in terms of actual game play.

Now this next bit may evoke some disagreement: I’m willing to live with that. I have said in the past that, despite its name, I don’t feel 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons really is “D&D.” Yes, it has the name. Yes, it has some of the tropes. But compared to the previous 5 to 8 editions (however, you choose to count ‘em), I don’t think the game AS WRITTEN provides the same game play experience. And the controversial part of that opinion is that I haven’t played it, and I haven’t skimmed more than a few pages of the text. But I have seen it played, and I’ve read reviews, and I’ve talked with people who have played it. And from that “hearsay” it would seem that both the challenge and reward pillars of earlier editions are dialed WAY DOWN in the 4th edition.

However, it’s when we come to the literary fantasy roots that make up the third pillar of D&D, that 4E REALLY seems to take a nosedive into something else. Gone is the exploration of a high fantasy setting…instead, we have set piece encounter followed by set piece encounter with little other “action.” Gone is the individual hero to be replaced by superheroes that mechanically are little different in effectiveness from each other, instead having individual color rather than true distinction. Even D20, for all its flaws, felt MORE like the fantasy escape I’ve grown to know over the years than 4th Edition, the latter of which seems (from appearance) to have all the heart-and-soul of a board game or war game (i.e. “not much”).

What I want…what a lot of folks who enjoy D&D, in any edition, want…is to get lost, temporarily, in a fantasy world. One separate and outside the one we live in. One filled with magic and wonder and the supernatural. One in which the individual counts for something, when one individual can make a serious difference…because in this story, your character is the protagonist and your choices and behavior are at the forefront of the saga.

Now, if we accept that “fantasy escape” is the third pillar, how do we incorporate that into the modular design of a new edition? Some possible examples might include:

- Specific setting add-ons that change the play of the game (changing game play, keeping it fresh, giving participants new “dimensions” to explore).
- Rules (or add-on systems) that allow individual behavior to have an impact on the world...things that encourage role-playing (i.e. escape into character), ideally non-class-specific but setting driven: luck points, sworn oaths and vows, one-on-one dueling, rules of attraction (for romance), aging and deterioration (character mortality)…all things that make the game more complicated, but richer in character
- Setting specific magic and supernatural effects
- Different ideas for challenges and rewards (the first two pillars) based on fantasy escape. How many of us in real life get to lead troops on a battlefield? How many of us get to jockey for status within the faerie courts? How many of us have ever had the opportunity to raise a dragon from the time it’s hatched to be a companion, mount, and/or supernatural familiar?

[here endeth the Third Pillar post...I have one more post in this series for tomorrow]

1000+ Words

On the advice of Steven King, I decided I better write 1000 words this morning to fulfill my daily requirement as a would-be writer (hack or not). I put together a 1400 word post this morning regarding a lot of crappy feelings I have right now, but I didn't bother to post it...who needs that kind of attitude on a Friday morning?

I think I'm just tired...didn't get much more than four hours of sleep last night.

The next "Three Pillar" post will go up around noon today, just BTW.

The Second Pillar – Reward

The second pillar that is fundamental to the integrity of the D&D game is reward. Participants who participate in game play (whether as a player character or Dungeon Master) can expect to be rewarded for their actions.

Some might say the act of play itself is its own reward, and to a certain degree that is true (we’ll address that in the 3rd Pillar). However, actual compensation for the merits of one’s in-game (imaginary) action has been true through almost every edition of the game and is an identifiable part of the D&D game’s foundation. If characters are not being rewarded for their action, I’m not sure what you’re playing can be called “D&D.”

Similar to what was discussed in the prior post, the rewards to be had are different depending on the role one takes when participating in the game; I’ll discuss each in turn.

For player characters, we can see that one’s reward is one of improved effectiveness, decisively tied (in most editions) to the player’s response and success to challenges issued. A player character that meets and overcomes all challenges will progress quickly in game effectiveness, gaining experience and thus level, increasing attack ability, saving throws, hit points, number of spells, etc. A player character that chooses to face fewer challenges will find his (or her) effectiveness increased at a slower rate, as will player characters that seek many challenges but fails at overcoming those challenges.

This has been the case since the earliest editions of the game, when PCs were considered scurrilous rogues seeking fortunes within dark dungeons. The measure of a character’s “score” was, in the main, directly attributable to the value of treasure brought out of the ground. Recover a great deal of treasure and your character received more points, increasing in level (game effectiveness) and allowing the character to recover MORE treasure…though with a gradually diminishing rate of return.

By the 3rd (D20) Edition of the game, the experience points awarded were solely due to overcoming challenges commensurate with ability; whether or not treasure was recovered was of secondary concern (at best), except with regard to magic items (we’ll get back to those in a moment).

In addition to in-game effectiveness, the reward of game play also includes MORE game play and DIFFERENT game play, as the rewards reaped open up greater avenues of exploration for the player characters. A character that increases in level (and thus effectiveness) is able to delve deeper, darker dungeons and face greater challenges, presumably reaping greater reward. A character that acquires a spell or magic item allowing planar travel can journey to other dimensions, even across game and genre boundaries (see the notes on Gamma World and Boot Hill crossover in the original Dungeon Masters Guide). A character that acquires Name (9th) level and enough gold to build a stronghold fortress can begin exploring the adventures only open to a ruler of men: opening territories for expansion, drafting armies for conquest, making treatise and alliances, and seeing about putting an heir on the throne.

“Reward” is a fundamental pillar of the D&D game. Reward informs play; it explains why it is that player characters take action, why they behave as they do. Reward provides the motivation for character activity; some players may be uninterested in facing a challenge simply for the sake of a challenge (not all of us are “adrenaline junkies,” even in our imaginary worlds!), but for the sake of REWARD they will participate.

The promise of power can be a strong lure for even the most recalcitrant adventurer. Spell-users, especially the unarmored, lightly armed magic-user, will find that the best way to increase his (or her) survivability is take on challenges, to act heroic rather than stay home studying their tomes for it is only through adventuring that the wizard’s spell-casting ability improves.

To some, this doesn’t make a whole lot of sense; the RPG Ars Magica, for example, makes the acquisition of magical power a product of staying shut-in for seasons at a time, poring over dusty scrolls and pursuing alchemical study and experimentation. Perfectly sensible and realistic, and Ars Magica is a very cool game (I’ve owned a couple editions). On the other hand, except as a mental exercise, this type of game play (tracking seasons and study points) is DEAD BORING to play. The Dungeons & Dragons game rewards active participation; it rewards PLAYING the game. As an activity of group participation, I prefer my RPG game play to have more player activity and less mental masturbation.

Since we’re on the subject of magic, I will mention that magic items in the D&D game are a stylistic trope that provides an additional “piece” of the reward system. After all, magic items are not simply gifted or sold to PCs (well, not in most editions of the game). Instead they must be found or earned/awarded through game play. They provide a similar bonus as experience points (i.e. they increase character effectiveness and open up other avenues of game play, depending on the effect of the item) and provide “crowing rights” to players: “Hey, I got a portable hole!” “Yeah, well I have a sword of sharpness, so there.”

Crowing (i.e. bragging) is part of the out-of-game reward that players receive; again referring back to the Forge article on the gamist creative agenda, players play the game in part to test their mettle and feel a sense of accomplishment at overcoming challenge. Whether that turns your crank or not, the game of D&D (at least in its pre-2007 editions) rewards players commensurate with the challenges tackled and the results achieved; whether or not you feel like bragging about it is entirely up to you.

For the Dungeon Master, there are rewards to game play as well:

• The reward of creatively expressing oneself through a rich fantasy environment, not to mention interesting settings and scenarios.
• The reward of cackling uproariously at your players’ expense when your fiendish challenge completely burns them.

The first item is something many GMs of other role-playing games can attest to as a “reward of play” (not all GMs…in some indie-style “story-games” the setting is too collaborative or too “set in stone” to allow much “world building”). But we’ll discuss some specific differences (with regard to D&D) when we get to the last pillar.

The second item, though, is something a lot fewer RPGs offer.

Because of the natural antagonist role placed on the DM by the Dungeons & Dragons game (i.e. the role of challenging the players), the DM has a chance to exercise his (or her) own personal brand of destruction in acting as an obstacle to the players. This can be in the form of a fiendish monster encounter or diabolical trap; it can be a cleverly mapped labyrinth or a moral quandary of epic consequence.

For an example of that last one, I advise checking out the fairly excellent Return to White Plume Mountain, the only 2nd edition book of any kind that still sits on my shelf. It forces players to make all sorts of ethical choices due to the nature of the adventure (wherein power is promised with a price, and mental possession is on the board for player characters)…and the climax (should the PCs reach it) is the real kicker: kill the baby or don’t kill the baby!

I mean, who would hurt a little baby?
; )

Anyway, as I said in the last post, the challenge of being a DM is in setting up challenges for the players that are neither overwhelming nor “softball.” The PAY-OFF (i.e. the “reward”) for the DM is in seeing those plans come to fruition and (if done correctly) feeling totally at ease with the self-indulgent hosing of the player characters.

Hey, I’m just being honest. A DM needs SOME kicks, after all…it’s not like we exist purely for the players’ entertainment, puffing them up with set pieces that are easy to knock down. We are required to “play fair” with the players (that’s explicit in every edition I've read), but providing we’re not throwing the might of the universe at ‘em, we’re obliged to try to knock the PCs down a peg. That’s OUR fun, and D&D is one of the few games that allow the referee to indulge in that kind of mayhem.

[in other RPGs, game moderators are working to build a world or story…sometimes in collaboration with players, other times “for the benefit of players” (and when the latter is done with respect to “story,” then you’ve got a railroad going on)]

Admittedly, not every DM “cackles” with glee (I was being superfluous there, though in my case it HAS been a literal truth at times), but DMs can take pride is their challenges and “stumping” the players, enjoying the push-and-pull of competition.

In building a new Dungeons & Dragons, care must be taken to build upon the pillar of reward, just as it is with the pillar of challenge…existing editions point to the way in which challenge is integrated with reward to provide a game that is both stimulating and motivating. If building the game in a modular fashion (as is the stated intention of current designers), modules can be developed that address this integral part of the D&D foundation. Some possible examples:

• Rewards for increased effectiveness at different levels of play (low, mid, high)
• Rewards coupled with new avenues of exploration (an example of such from the past might be the SpellJammer setting…by finding/building a space-worthy magic item or spell, it opens up “fantasy space” for exploration/exploitation by the party).
• Additional rewards in terms of level-based minor abilities (similar to D20’s feats)
• New methods of “keeping score,” new incentives to motivate players, “tournament style” add-ons for real crowing rights, etc.
• Instruction and information for DMs to better gauge challenges so that they can “crow” on their own; modules that offer different ideas of how to “stick it” to players, giving DMs alternatives to the standard method of counting “wins” (I can think of a few, but listing them will sound more self-indulgent and sadistic than I already do!)

All right, that's enough to chew over for today.

Next pillar up: ESCAPE.

The First Pillar - Challenge

Dungeons & Dragons is a game that challenges its participants…and I don’t just mean by forcing them to read hundreds of pages of text to grasp the rules. I‘m talking about game play itself. Playing the game of D&D requires participants (players and dungeon masters) to accept and meet challenges. If no one is being challenged in the game, then you’re most likely NOT playing Dungeons & Dragons.

By “challenge” I mean:

“to summon to action, effort, or use; to stimulate”

As well as

“a call to engage in a contest”

[both definitions coming from the American Heritage Dictionary]

Now as I said, when I talk about challenge as a fundamental concept (pillar) of D&D, I’m talking about it within play of the game itself. I am not talking about the challenge of getting through the rule book (which in recent years can be a fairly daunting task), nor the challenge of learning a system from others (for those not interested in purchasing/reading the book), nor the challenge of character creation (another daunting task at times, especially given the incredible array of options presented in recent editions), nor even the challenge of cooperating and working in conjunction with fellow players (sometimes the toughest non-game challenge of all!).

I’m talking about challenges faced within the course of the game

For participants acting as player characters, there is a near limitless number of challenges that might be encountered in a fantasy world, though they can be broken down into a number of general categories:

• Monsters and NPC antagonists
• Traps and threats of a “dungeon” (i.e. an adventure site)
• Environmental hazards (arctic conditions, desert, swamp, etc.)
• Resource management (food, arrows, spells, hit points, etc.)
• Puzzles, riddles, and choices of mental quandary
• Intrigue, political maneuvering, choices of social quandary
• Spiritual temptations, ethical dilemmas, alignment and moral quandary
• Magical or divine curses, quests, geas, etc.

I’m sure there are other categories I’m forgetting at the moment.

All of these examples are challenges: in-game events designed to summon players to action as they consider the best method of overcoming the challenge. The majority of these challenges can be confronted in a number of ways, and part of what makes a D&D game an engaging experience is figuring out different, interesting ways to overcome difficult challenges.

For example, in a recent game, my player (and the rest of the party) started the game at 1st level, locked in a prison asylum with almost nothing in the way of equipment. My own character’s “gear” (assigned by the DM) consisted of some rags and a thick wrap of cloth around one hand that gave me the equivalent of a boxing glove-like punch (1D3 damage). We soon found a large, brass key out of our communal cell and upon leaving I unwrapped my fist and re-wrapped it, key inside, to make a nice heavy cosh. Finding the hall lit by torches, I took one down to act as both a light and a secondary weapon…later on, I got hold of a rusty old dagger, which I incorporated into my wrapped hand to make a workable punch-knife, a fine weapon for my assassin. Other players in the party took similar steps to acquire armament, the (mental) challenge being: given your predicament, how can you arm yourself against the wandering zombies in your prison?

In a different game, played a year or two ago, my party stumbled into a nest of troglodytes…which in B/X play is pretty much a killer for even 2nd level, plate-armored characters (due to the creatures claw-claw-bite plus stink attack). This was a bad blunder on our part, and two of us (including my cleric) decided to sell ourselves dearly that the other characters could escape the encounter (and, yes, our two PCs did indeed die). The challenge here was not “can we overcome the encounter” (we couldn’t) but rather, can we acquit ourselves admirably and save our buddies (which we did)?

In a third game played MANY years ago, my character was in love with a particular NPC who was, unfortunately, being wooed by an even bigger, more powerful NPC (a lord baron with a lot of land and armies and such). The challenge for my character was to find a way to win her heart away from the guy, and somehow do so in a way that didn’t antagonize him into exacting a terrible retribution (he was not known as a ‘live-and-let live’ type of guy). Funnily enough, two other player characters were also enamored of the same NPC (she had a few desirable qualities) and were working towards the same end themselves, though in different fashion. As I recall, it was not my character that spirited the love interest away from the lord (that was the cleric PC who actually launched a whole invasion with his army of the Faithful in true Trojan War style. I believe the lord baron ended up crucified on the road…) but the girl did eventually end up marrying my character…if only briefly (that’s another story).

Challenges can come in a lot of forms for the imaginary character avatar: physical, mental, emotional, etc. But the challenges do come…at least in a game of D&D. The game itself is set up to encourage proactive ACTION by awarding points (i.e. experience points) for overcoming challenges. Experience points are a measure for “keeping score” in the game, and while it’s usually unfair to compare characters from different campaigns against each other (my 15th level character versus your 3rd level character may not be reflective of the players’ actual ability, but rather the circumstances of the campaign), WITHIN a campaign it is possible to compare players to each other, as they have the same DM and same imaginary environment. And even though a new PC has fewer "points" and levels than the PC that’s survived the longest, you can still compare the “rate of gain” between the two to see how well one is “scoring” compared to the other.

In the Forge articles on “creative agenda,” D&D is held as one of the baseline examples of an RPG that facilitates a “gamist” agenda. And with good reason: it is a game where challenge is integral to game play. Some editions have de-emphasized the challenge and its connection to reward (for example, Mentzer’s Companion rules provides heaps of XP for doing nothing but tracking the tax rate of your dominion), but most retain SOME degree of challenge (in Mentzer, character’s must adventure the “normal” way just to reach Name level and dominion status, and once there they face outside interference or…horrors!...an unwelcome visit from local nobility requiring a holiday/tournament to be paid out in their honor).

There are other role-playing games where challenge is NOT integral to the identity of the game. But those aren’t D&D.

For the Dungeon Master, too, there is challenge within the play of the game: the challenge of NOT just managing the system and players (as GMs in other RPGs generally have to do to some extent). The challenges that face D&D refs in-play include creating challenges for players that ARE challenging (and neither over-whelming nor “softball”), adjudicating and arbitrating rules on the fly, and keeping the pacing quick and the imaginary action (physical or not) lively and engaging. In addition, DMs are challenged by the need to keep things “fresh” for players, by changing up encounters, tweaking monsters and traps and enchantments, so as not to simply be putting out the “same-old-same-old.”

But mainly it is the antagonist role of the Dungeon Master that sets the D&D game apart from many other RPGs. If the DM does not provide challenges to the PCs, there is no advancement. Without advancement there is little reward. The constant challenge, the infliction of dramatic or traumatic or batshit crazy events on PCs is inherent in the structure of the game. And that role of being a “challenger” of players IS a challenge: being a mean, dastardly, no-good DM while at the same time being an impartial referee and arbiter and neutral with regard to the outcome of dice rolls.

If you DON’T include this aspect of the DM in your game, if the DM is told to simply fudge the rules in the players’ favor for example, than there is no real challenge being presented. A large part of what makes the game “D&D” is the challenge, and finding that proper balance for DMs is their specific challenge.

It’s part of the fun of being a DM.
; )

While some challenges can be overcome by combat, combat never needs to be integral to a game of D&D, despite what WotC would have you believe. Characters can always use brains to overcome challenges, or glib social skills, or magic, or fleet feet (i.e. turning tail and running). The example is right there in Tolkien, one of the major inspirations for the Dungeons & Dragons game: does Bilbo and the dwarves fight the dragon, Smaug? No. Does the Fellowship confront Sauron in his lair and chop him to pieces? No. Stealth, wit, trickery, courage, fortitude, discretion…these are on heroic display in Tolkien’s books. They can be a larger part of your D&D game, too, provided players are given the tools to use them.

In building a new D&D game THAT should be kept in mind: the need to challenge players. It’s not simply about making each class useful in combat or whatever. In D&D a player character can be looked at like this:

Ability Scores: describe the character’s basic capability in six distinct arenas.
Class: provides a small suite of skills to be used.
Race (if separate from class): provides a small variation on class skills and capabilities.
Hit Points: provides a measure of health/vitality
Armor Class: provides a measure of defensive value

Experience Points: provides a character’s current “score” in the game.
Level: provides a measure of a character’s survivability and increased effectiveness/power as a result of achieving a good “score.”
Alignment: a moral compass for your character’s in-game behavior.

With this “stat block” in perspective, one can see that the most important thing in game play is the character’s BEHAVIOR in the game. Because it is the behavior that is going to determine WHICH challenges are confronted as well as HOW they are met. Can you find your way out of the maze? Do you give half your treasure to the starving villagers? What are you going to do to defeat the 100’ tall undead colossus? Whether in the dungeon, in the wilderness, or in the king’s court, CHALLENGE is an integral, fundamental part of the D&D game.

Building a new D&D game means making sure challenge is honored. If the game is modular in design (as is planned for the 5th edition), modules should be designed to change and vary challenge for the players, and address the challenges of the DM’s role.

One Last Note: while other RPGs make use of conflict, danger, and/or dramatic tension in their games, the challenges of D&D have a very strong (imaginary) risk factor involved. More often than not, with true D&D challenges the consequences of failure (which must be present for a challenge to be "worthy;" it's not enough to just ask, "how well do I succeed at an inevitable success") are more often than not DEATH to the failing character. Fortunately, the game of D&D offers rules to off-set this "tragedy" (resurrection magic and easy character creation in early editions), but death, even for an imaginary character, can have an emotional impact on a player at the table. It makes the challenge of the game all the more savory.

Oh, yeah...and just because you have heavy challenge in your RPG doesn't make it D&D. There are THREE pillars, folks.

: )

Next pillar up: REWARD.

Three Pillars – Introduction

A little preface before I begin this series. In my opinion, there are pillars on which rest the foundation of Dungeons & Dragons. These pillars are what support what can be called “D&D game play;” if you don’t have these things, you don’t have Dungeons & Dragons. It is these things that help identify the specific type of game play one calls "Dungeons & Dragons." Stylistic tropes (hit points, saving throws, D20s, etc.) help with that identification, but those BY THEMSELVES don’t make a game “D&D.” Other games can include these stylistic tropes and NOT be D&D, for example.

The three pillars will each be identified and discussed in turn. None of the pillars is any more or less important than any of the others. The rules (“system”) of the game are what unite and bind these pillars together. System can be adjusted and tweaked to taste, as discussed (briefly) in my earlier post…the strength of the game is that it and its game play are recognizable across systems. These pillars make that possible.

When creating a NEW edition of Dungeons & Dragons (as is currently being done by the WotC crew, and as will more than likely be done again in the future), it is of vital importance that these pillars are kept in the forefront of the design process…that the mechanics created support the pillars, interact with them, and stabilize them, even as they (the mechanics) are informed by the three pillars themselves. They are the things from which the game play of Dungeons & Dragons is derived.

As I explained in my prior post, WotC has named their three pillars as “Combat, Exploration, and Role-Playing.” They state these are the foundation of D&D game play and that they are the things to which WotC is paying the utmost attention with regard to balancing character archetypes against each other. Not only that, they’ve stated that their philosophy of these three identified areas:

“…is something we want to extend beyond just character design; it should affect adventure design, setting design, and every other aspect of the game.”

Despite their worthy intentions, I think they’re acting under a faulty premise: their three pillars are NOT the actual foundations of D&D game play. I think that even though their three pillars are often a part of the D&D game, they are not the areas that identify and inform game play…they are not what make the game "Dungeons & Dragons" (as opposed to a different RPG).

In my opinion, the REAL foundation of Dungeons & Dragons can be summarized as:

1. Challenge
2. Reward
3. Escape

As I said, all are of equal importance. All need to be present for a game to play like Dungeons & Dragons. All pertain to game play and the experience of game play. All are necessary for every participant at the table: players and Dungeon Master (DM). These three pillars are the “core” around which the design of the game should be woven.

As stated, I will explain each in turn, and try to give some constructive notes on each. The order listed is the order in which I want to discuss them; however, as I said, none are of greater or lesser importance for a game to be considered “Dungeons & Dragons.”

In my opinion.
; )

I’d also like to point out that nowhere in this trilogy will you find the term “fun.” FUN is assumed in the play of the game: people do not choose to play a game that isn’t fun for them (they may be dragged kicking and screaming to game table by a friend, family member, or significant other, but it’s not the game’s responsibility to help that particular issue). Not every game is fun for every person; that’s a fact. So “fun” is not a foundational pillar of D&D game play.

Likewise social stimulation and engagement is not fundamental to the game of D&D. One can play D&D in a recognizable form without the need to have a jovial camaraderie with the people at the table (see tournament/convention play), and playing games with two or more people are a requirement based on the system (i.e. rules) of the game…like having dice or using the tables within the text of the book. “Socializing” is thus not a foundational pillar of D&D game play, either.

Okay, having got all THAT out and posted, I'm ready to talk about our first pillar: CHALLENGE.

Building a New Dungeons & Dragons

AKA “Three Pillars My Ass”

This probably won’t seem like an incredibly constructive post. Hell, maybe it’s not. But I’m not in a bad mood or anything (yet, that is…sometimes when I start typing I get all worked up, ya’ know?). But to start with anyway, I’m feeling cool as a cucumber.

What the F, Wizards of the Coast? I mean, really.

You know, all those guys on the WotC design team…Monte Cook, Mike Mearls, whoever…you know, all of ‘em have a much better design “pedigree” than myself. I mean, measured simply by real hard numbers: they’ve sold a ton more product and been paid a ton more money for their game design work. And, yeah, perhaps if I had ownership of the intellectual property of our niche industry AND the marketing force of a Hasbro corporation I might be able to pull off a similar feat, but I don’t and I haven’t and I accept I'm just a little tiny voice yelling in the darkness of the internet.

Yep, I accept it. However, for my own amusement and my readers’ entertainment, I’ll try to yell just a tiny bit louder.

Okay, so this “three pillars” thang. I spent some of today (and off and on the last week or so) running searches on the internet to try to get it, you know, hammered down what exactly the WotC folks are talking about. I mean, what I’d heard was something like this transcript of “charting the course of the new edition.”

The first place I actually saw it mentioned was at Geek’s Dream Girl here., where e wrote the following:

3 Pillars of D&D

Mike mentioned that they see the three pillars of D&D as Roleplay/Interaction, Combat, and Exploration. That covers about 90% of what goes on in D&D, minus the rules lawyering (that last one was pointed out by someone during Q&A at the end). They think a lot about how they can incorporate all the things that people want to do at the table, without making a rule for everything.

Monte recognized that some PCs will be good at exploration and not so good at combat, and vice versa. But it’s important to have a firm role for each class. If you have a player who just wants to kick ass, you can help that person create that PC.

Continuing on the classes discussion, Mike added that you can be a stabby rogue (more combat-heavy) or a sneaky rogue (more exploration heavy). Monte added that bards can still kick ass.

Hmmm…interaction (“roleplay”), combat, and exploration covers “about 90% of what goes on in D&D” and appears to be the focus of the designers as the presumed foundation of the game. Specifically with regard to characters being balanced against each other. Because if that accounts for 90% of game play, then the most important thing is to account for that in the design of the game, right? And we don’t want one character type to hog the spotlight all the time, yeah?

*sigh*

Anyway, before I jumped to any conclusions based on 2nd (or 3rd) hand hearsay, I figured I really wanted more info on this whole “Three Pillars” concept. I finally found something more in an article posted to WotC’s own site answering some dude’s question.

[it’s dated 2/7/12, though my calendar still says it’s 2/6…not quite sure what that’s all about]

Here’s the link; I’ll quote it in its entirety:

Q: I frequently have games when throughout the entire session we go without any combat whatsoever. What can I expect from the new edition in regards to this style of play?

A: Over the course of the last year, we've distilled the essential experiences of D&D down into three general categories: exploration, roleplaying, and combat. We believe these form the three main pillars of gameplay in D&D, and, while broad, they can help guide our design.

A part of the design philosophy going forward is that each of those three elements contains some very specific things that contribute to the game and culture that is Dungeons & Dragons. However, we also know that individual DMs, players, and gaming groups might favor one of those elements over another; of course, sometimes they might favor one element over the others in one session, and then completely reverse that preference in the next. The goal, then, is to support all three of those elements in the design of the game in such a way that the individual gaming group can choose its focus and have a satisfying game experience. This doesn't mean we necessarily need the same amount of game mechanics supporting each; obviously, combat has tended more toward detail and more rules support, and that may well be true going forward, but we also want to make sure we're paying a similar amount of attention to the other two experiences.

This philosophy is something we want to extend beyond just character design; it should affect adventure design, monster design, setting design, and every other aspect of the game. Our goal is to make it so that you make choices for your character that speak to your preferred play style, and that it's OK to do so even if other members of your party make choices pointing toward a different play style. Adventuring demands a certain amount of competence in all three areas of the game, but when you customize your character you might push yourself more in one direction or another.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. The emphasis added to that last sentence is mine, and it’s there ‘cause I want to draw attention to it.

How does one customize your character to push yourself more in the direction of “role-playing?” I can understand what is meant by combat and I can kind of figure what they mean by “exploration” (exploring the game world, setting, or adventure, right? Something like that?). But when I think of “role-playing” I can only think up a couple-three definitions to the term, and none of ‘em can be customized in the character creation process:

• role-playing as acting (i.e. “playing a role”), something like talking in an accent or hamming for one’s fellow tables
• role-playing as tactical role in the party (for example, “she’s the tank, he’s the fire support”)…but this would be covered under combat specifically and is generally not the "RP" one thinks of in an RPG.
• role-playing by JB’s definition:

When the objective of the player matches the objective of the character.

[there is a series of posts, starting HERE, that explains this more clearly as well as explaining it’s importance to the RPG hobby]

So what then, exactly, is it that the WotC folks define as "role-playing?" What is it you can do during the chargen process to increase the value of this third “pillar” of the Dungeons & Dragons game?

Actually, both those questions are rhetorical…I neither want nor need answers to them because the whole idea that the “essential experiences of D&D,” that the “three main pillars of gameplay [sic]” can be categorized as role-play, exploration, and combat is totally bogus.

As in bullshit.

Or let me put it in a slightly different way: with all due respect to the WotC brain trust, maybe those things are the three pillars of game play in YOUR campaign, but that is certainly not what drives mine, and if attending to them (and the importance of the thre in character design) is how you’re going about Building A Better D&D, then I think you’re starting off under a way faulty premise.

You really think that this is what keeps people coming back to D&D? “Role-play, exploration, combat?” That’s totally f’ing ridiculous. I mean, how do those “three pillars” motivate the DM? What makes him (or her) want to break brain and put together kick-ass sessions?

[not that the DM always succeeds in doing so…]

If the three things that form the essential D&D experience are “role-play, exploration, and combat” and this is your focus, then you are leaving the DM out of the loop. And you are (once again) probably going to end up doing a disservice to the game (and pissing people off).

I’m not saying the whole “modular approach” thing is a terrible idea (though I’m not sure it’s a terribly good one). I’m saying whatever it is you’re making is being built on a dumb-dumb foundation. You all are emphasizing the importance of the wrong things based on a faulty premise.

Sure. That's just one man's opinion (and one small, lone voice...yes, I get it). But I would be remiss if I didn't say something. Not because it will necessarily influence anyone, but because the on-going hobby of role-playing (and the on-going health of Dungeons & Dragons) is, at some level, important to me. And unlike other gamers, I'm not just content to let it go to hell in a hand basket while I play my own game off in the corner.

Well...maybe I am content to do so, but that would be irresponsible of me.

; )

Tell you what: how about if I give you the REAL three pillars on which D&D is based. Three things that ARE essential to the game play of D&D, three things that have kept players coming back over the years, without which the game suffers and stagnates. Heck, I’ll even bother to explain ‘em for you (though I’ll have to wait till tomorrow, ‘cause this post is already getting long). Want ‘em? Okay, here they are:

Challenge
Reward
Escape

These are the truly essential components of D&D game play, and ought to be the focus of the WotC design team. If you're not using those as your foundation, then...well to end this post on a constructive note, let's just say: make these the emphasis and foundation of your design process and you'll get your "unifying Dungeons & Dragons game."

More to follow on this subject.

[sorry, had to post it in the morning after all...]