C is for Campaign

[over the course of the month of April, I shall be posting a topic for each letter of the alphabet, sequentially, every day of the week except Sunday. Our topic for the month is Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: how to approach it, how to run it, how to enjoy a system that deserves to be played NOW, nearly 50 years after its inception. Consider this a 'crash course' in the subject]

C is for Campaign...the "world" of every Dungeon Master. Now that we have both our approach to the game in mind, and an array of instructional texts, we can dig into campaign creation and maintenance...the main work of any DM running a game.

Of course, first we'll have to unpack the word "campaign" so that we understand what is meant by the term.  Most people involved in the hobby these days (those that play 5E) consider a campaign to be a single story arc played out by a specific group of characters with a specific end goal/result in mind. Something like a television series in which each game session stands for one episode, leading to a culminating "finale."

That's not how we use the term in AD&D.

The glossary of the DMG states the following:

Campaign -- General term referring to one DM's adventures as a whole rather than individually. An ongoing series of games based upon a created milieu.

["milieu" being defined (later) in the DMG as 'an unique game setting embodying numerous possible variables in its creation, i.e. the "world" in which adventures take place']

Thus a "campaign" encompasses ALL the adventures taking place on a specific world created and run by a particular Dungeon Master. An AD&D player does not say "Yeah, we're playing Storm King's Thunder" or "Yeah, we just finished Curse of Strahd." Instead, an AD&D player might say, "I'm a regular player in JB's campaign," or "I play in Julie's campaign on Wednesdays, but we also do a once a month game in Tom's campaign."

It is important to understand this distinction. The Temple of Elemental Evil (for AD&D) was not a "campaign," neither was Gygax's GDQ series (Against the Spider Queen). the Slaver series, nor Saltmarsh. All these were modular adventures that a DM could include in their game world...they did not represent the beginning of a campaign, nor its end. A Dungeon Master's campaign is a persistent world that players will enter (via their characters) in order to participate in adventures.

The actual (non-D&D) definition of the term campaign is:

an organized course of action to achieve a goal

With examples provided such as military campaigns, political campaigns, and advertising campaigns. Viewing these examples, it is understandable (especially given WotC's commercial strategy w.r.t. selling product) that modern D&D players believe a packaged story, like Hoard of the Dragon Queen, provides a discreet "campaign" experience. After all, it has an organized series of game sessions with an achievable goal (the story ending of the adventure). Meanwhile AD&D's open-ended "eternal play" appears to have no goal whatsoever.

And yet it does. The AD&D campaign "goal" is the achievement of power and prestige by the players, such that they have a dramatic impact (or leave a mark) on the world created by the DM. The "organized course of action" is the series of adventures that lead to that goal: wealth and power (in the form of experience points). The Dungeon Master's role is in providing that organized structure...the challenges the players face, the rewards the players reap...in pursuit of their goal.

This is not Legends & Lattes that we are playing.

So it is that the campaign building advice in the DMG (really "world building" advice) comes into focus for the prospective Dungeon Master. DMs are advised to start small (with friendly village and a local dungeon to explore) because the task of building a world takes time and effort, and there is no need to overwhelm either the players or the DM right from the beginning.  Deciding to be an AD&D Dungeon Master means committing to the long haul. Yes, you can play one-offs and Saturday Night Specials and convention games with pre-generated characters, but this is hardly the means to achieve true satisfaction.  It does not play to the STRENGTH of the AD&D game, which is designed specifically with long-term campaign play in mind.

The world should be persistent. The players and dungeons...those things are transitory and mercurial.

Thus, the beginning: once you've decided that you want to be an Advanced Dungeons & Dragons DM, you start your vocation with the creation of your world. It need not be created from whole cloth...you can use local geography or the setting of your favorite fantasy franchise or a historic place and time from the real world as your inspiration. The broad strokes are largely unimportant at the beginning...instead your players will be focused on what their 1st level character can do, and how they can best work with their teammates towards their common goal of survival and profit in adventurous (i.e. dangerous yet rewarding) undertakings.  When a player sits down to play, they are not interested in the political landscape or historical timeline of your imaginary world...what they WANT to know is "where can I find some treasure?"

Because that's the game. 

Everything else comes after. You, O DM, have a triple responsibility on your plate, which should be understood from the moment you pick up your DMG and say, "I'm starting a campaign." Those three duties are as follow:

#1 Running the game at the table

#2 Preparing adventures for the players

#3 Building the world in which the adventures take place

All three of which (together) constitute your campaign. If you are shirking any of these three things, your campaign will flounder and die. Your reputation as a Dungeon Master (whether or not such a thing concerns you) is based on these three elements...be assured that players will judge you on each of these, although that judgment will not necessarily be harsh. After all, it is difficult to harshly judge something you yourself are unwilling to do.

["Oh, yeah, Lucy's campaign is a really intense with all cool stuff going on in the background, but she doesn't have a great grasp of the rules." "Well, Bill, is GREAT at running the game and does all these cool voices for the NPCs and stuff, but his dungeons are all these five-room affairs with almost no treasure...what's up with that?"]

As an AD&D Dungeon Master, you own your campaign...the good and the bad. This ownership gives you tremendous power: the amount of care and work you put into it is directly on YOU and, thus, completely under your control.  You can put in as much time and effort as you can when it comes to learning the rules, designing your adventures, building up the world. Yes, you start small (just as Gygax suggests), but over time, little by little, the world of your campaign grows and expands, with more things for players to explore, more things with which players can interact. Just as the experience of running the game makes you more proficient at running the game, just as writing adventures gives you more practice for future adventures, time and effort lumped on top of itself creates something that you can...eventually...look at and say, wow.

Your campaign is not about the players or their characters. It exists INDEPENDENT of players and characters. Players join and leave campaigns...for all sorts of reasons. Characters die or retire or disappear when their players leave. What remains is the campaign that YOU, O Great and Powerful Dungeon Master, have created.

And unlike the approach of 5E Dungeon Masters, there is no reason to "start" and "stop" a campaign. The campaign need not have an end point at all...why throw out all the work you've done? Want a new city or country or dungeon? Insert it. Want a new race to be available to the players? Have them discover it (look at Gygax's introduction of the Drow and Svirfneblin). Don't like a race or monster that's already in the campaign? Have a mysterious plague wipe them all out. Throw fiery mountains at parts of the world you dislike (just like Dragonlance's "Cataclysm," or Alphaks's meteor in the Mystara setting). Have other locations mysteriously appear out of interdimensional gates like Rifts's Atlantis or out of magical mists like Shangri-La and Brigadoon. 

The campaign is YOUR world. Do with it as you want. Erase parts of the map and re-draw them. O you want to throw down the Tomb of Horrors now that your players' characters are high level? Do so. Why haven't they heard rumors of Acerack before now? Because his tomb is off in the wilderness and news travels slowly in a horse-riding culture, unless you happen to live in the vicinity of the area in question. Have a wandering traveller appear with rumors and legends from far off lands and faraway places.  Have the PCs take a ship to get there. Jeez, pal, put those naval rules to the test!

Once you start seeing the campaign as yours...as a part and extension of yourself, utterly un-beholden to players and their PCs...it gives you an amazing amount of freedom. Your campaign becomes perpetual...it exists so long as YOU exist...whether you are running it Saturday night or not. 

It took me a long time to figure this out. These days, every game of AD&D I run are set in my campaign. Doesn't matter whether I am running an adventure for strangers at a convention, or for my "regulars" (my kids and their friends). Every adventure I create, every game-able situation I imagine, gets placed in my campaign world, making for a richer and richer tapestry with time. You can share your campaign with another DM...I've done this before and, in fact, have an agreement with my son that he can share my world when he is DMing. You can even publish your campaign notes and adventures like Gygax did with his World of Greyhawk. But doing so doesn't make it any less yours.  Even if you set it down for a few months (or years!), you can always pick it up again, right where you left off.

You are your campaign. Give it the same respect you give yourself.

One Game, One Campaign

The wife (inadvertently) woke me up around 3am with her nightmare/thrashing. While I comforted her and she quickly returned to sleep, I was once again left lying awake in bed. Just too many thoughts in Ye Old Noggin.

*sigh*

One thought was this recent post over at Grognardia. Yes, I still read the old man, on occasion. I already expressed my specific thoughts on his post in the comments, but I figured I'd go into more depth over here.

I've loved RPGs for a long, long time, and over the years I've collected an absolutely huge number...of which I've played more than a few. Dozens, probably...Boot Hill, Top Secret, Gamma World, Star Frontiers, Marvel (and Advanced Marvel) Superheroes, Stormbringer, ElfQuest, James Bond 007, BattleTech (MechWarrior is the RPG), ShadowRun, Teenagers From Outer Space, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Heroes Unlimited, Ninjas & Superspies, Beyond the Supernatural, Rifts, Vampire the Masquerade, Werewolf the Apocalypse, Mage (the Awakening?), The Hunters Hunted, Ars Magica, Over The Edge, Fantasy Wargaming, DragonQuest, DragonRaid, Traveller, Guardians, Star Wars, CyberPunk 2020, Risus, InSpectres, Spirit of the Century, The Dresden Files, Cadillacs & Dinosaurs, Maelstrom (and Story Engine), Fiasco, Warhammer Fantasy Role-Playing...probably (definitely) a few more that I'm forgetting at the moment. 

A lot of games...many in multiple editions (learning a new edition is often akin to learning a new game). And, of course, a few of my own games (Cry Dark Future, Five Ancient Kingdoms, War of the Mecha, DMI and its variations, etc.). Yeah. I've played a LOT of games.

But the vast bulk of these games...with the exception of my own stuff...were played before the age of 30. Which is to say: more than 20 years ago. Since entering my 30s, I'm either playing some one-off (usually a demo or con game), or I'm playing something of my own ("play testing"), or I'm playing D&D. And mostly, it's just D&D. 

And since 2020 it's solely AD&D 1E. 

It's not that I'm not (still, continuously) enchanted by RPGs and amazed at the creativity, artistry, and design I see on display every time I walk into a local game shop. I LOVE games...I do!...and I'll buy the occasional RPG these days just to marvel at its beauty and throw some financial support at the industry. But most everything I've purchased in recent years...unless it's D&D related...simply goes on the shelf. If I bother to buy a print copy at all. I have a lot of digital RPGs stored on the ol' laptop, and those never get played (I only play games out of a printed book)...those are, generally, purchases for 'research purposes' only. 

But I don't have any need or use for most of the hundreds of game books I own. I can't, for example, see myself EVER playing 3E again, and yet I must have a literal dozen volumes of that game sitting on my shelf. I keep it for reference, for occasional inspiration, and as a constant warning against nostalgia and the danger of impulse buying (i.e. if I got rid of it, there's always the chance I'd run out and re-purchase the damn thing on a whim...that's happened to me multiple times over the years). 

No. The only books I need...and the only books I use with any regularity...are the PHB, DMG, and the three Monster Manuals. Pretty much the same books I used to carry around in my backpack when I was 12 years old (minus the UA and the DDG). 

I now play ONE game and, since 2020, I've run only ONE campaign. That's all I need: just a single world. Truth be told, due to my other priorities, I only have time for a single world (and barely time for that!). But even if I were to re-order and re-organize my life to prioritize gaming, I still wouldn't need more than that...I'd just spend MORE time in my world. 

Whereas in years past, I'd break my head, starting up new games from scratch with new systems and/or new genres (hell, even in the early days of this blog, when I was only running B/X, I was constantly "starting over" and tweaking my game...)...NOW, I simply work on building the world I have. I can add layer upon layer. I can pile depth upon depth. I can detail it down to the Nth degree, if it suits my fancy. Any and all work I decide to do...whether a little or a lot...is an investment into my campaign, making it richer and richer over time.

It is the great, not-so-secret Secret that all the great world builders have discovered: spreading your imagination thin, defusing your energies over multiple works and worlds, does not lead to satisfying fantasy. In fact, satisfaction is a false carrot to chase at all...we receive satisfaction ONLY when we pause and look back over what we have wrought...what our investment of time and effort has yielded. Like a master gardener checking out the fruits of their labor. And after that pause, we simply go back to work...again...adding more depth, adding more investment to our project.

And when we pause again, we look back at what we've wrought and we feel MORE "satisfied."

And the process repeats. Those of us who scatter our energies (as I did myself...for years) seldom look back at our "works" for they are naught but a wasteland...wasted time, wasted effort. Looking at all that waste...campaigns started and abolished, games played and discarded...can be disheartening. Few of us want to take the time to sit and reflect given just how sad  the could have beens can be; few of us have the courage for self-assessment of a wasted life.

Which sounds harsh, but only if one chooses to dwell on the superficial "first pass" of squandered potential. The FACT is that every moment you've spent in your life...gaming or otherwise...has led you to the exact present moment in which you currently stand. And even if you can't find it within your heart to feel a profound sense of gratitude for your gift of life (I assume none of my readers are undead) and the blessings you have in that life (whether few or many)...well, at least you've acquired wisdom. And with wisdom, you can change what you're doing so that the next time you pause and reflect at what you've wrought (whether with your life or your gaming or both) you can feel some degree of satisfaction.

If you're reading my blog, chances are that gaming is an important and valued aspect of your life. Assuming that is the case, then how you approach your gaming should hold some importance to you. If you, like me, are a habitual Dungeon Master, the world you build should be the single most vital part of your gaming life. 

Why wouldn't you want to focus your attention and energy on a single world? Why wouldn't you want to make the world in which your fantasy adventures take place as wonderfully detailed as possible?

And lest you think I'm being rhetorical, I think there are only two possible answers to that last question:

1. You are fearful of committing to the art and process of being a Dungeon Master, OR
2. You dislike the world/setting that you would otherwise be creating.

And IF the answer is the second one (as opposed to the first, which is perhaps more common among those not having accepted their vocation...as was me for many years), then the next question is: why are you bothering to game in that world at all? If you are not whole-heartedly on-board with the genre or IP of the setting (whether it is your own homebrew or the pre-published 'grand design' of someone else), then why are you wasting your time with it? Take the parts you like, build them into a world you can commit to for the long haul, and rock that as the foundation for your game.

I cannot expound enough on how liberating it is to operate in this way. By settling on ONE system...one that requires no expansion rules like B/X, no curating like OD&D or 5E, and one that had been vigorously play-tested long before I got into the hobby...I cut out so much worry and stress from my gaming and can just run the thing. By settling on ONE campaign setting, fit for the system, I can spend any free time and energy I have in drilling down different bits and crafting adventures based on that setting. Scenarios, not plots, not "capers." Simply opportunities that players can choose to explore...or not.

And if they don't, those opportunities continue to exist in my world (until they don't) adding to its depth (until they vanish, to be replaced with different opportunities). 

I was considering addressing another "Dear JB" letter before writing this post, one about liar DMs and cheating dice rolls (i.e. "fudging"). However two things stayed my keyboard. One was that most of the responses were adamantly anti-fudge/cheating (from 5E aficionados!) which is, frankly, a welcome change from older Reddit posts. The other, though, was one particular response, which said (in part):

I think the problem here is in the "players losing = death" forced narrative.

In the older editions of TTRPG, like the original D&Ds, the game was a wargame with a unique premise. The expectation was that your characters would die and you'd have to reroll and that was part of the game. You could pick between a martial character like a fighter and level faster, getting up to speed more quickly, or you could pick a wizard and be intentionally weaker and level slower, but with huge pay off if you reached higher levels. Retrieving equipment to pass it down was expected, and dungeons sometimes had mechanics to specifically prevent this. The focus wasn't really on a wider campaign narrative or character story arc.

As TTRPGs matured, however, the role-playing elements started to see the spotlight, and gradually the expectation shifted towards one of collaborative story telling with a wargame aspect that meant random chance still played a role in narration.

Overtime, however, we start to run head-long into the central problem with this set up: your character becomes tied to the story and character death removes you, rather jarringly, from the plot. There's no longer an expectation that players will be at disparate levels, and trying to introduce a level 1 character into a campaign already 5 levels deep will result in you being useless. So your new character is shot up in levels without ever earning them, has a backstory forcibly integrated without ever really experiencing it, and is shoehorned into a plot that never expected to handle them. It creates a terrible dissonance that's difficult to work around and will never be as satisfactory as your first character that was there every step of the way.

This isn't always the case, of course. Sometimes there are really great moments where a character death feels right and adds a lot to the gravity of the story. Sometimes there are new characters that can naturally integrate themselves into the plot to replace the old.

However, those tend to be exceptions, not the rule, when death is left to random chance.

So, it should come as no surprise to regular readers that I have some serious quibbles with this person's analysis; however, I want to focus on specific elements with regard to what they mean to my post this morning.

First off, I'll go ahead and AGREE that there has been a shift in D&D gaming to "campaign narratives" and "character story arcs" and "collaborative story telling." I'll also go ahead and AGREE this makes the issue of character death a "problem" from the perspective of derailing the "narrative" being told (and, yes, that's a significant part of what leads to cheating/fudging at the modern day table). 

Here's the thing, though: ALL THAT IS A FUCKED UP WAY TO PLAY D&D.

Leave aside, for the nonce, that this idiot seems to have forgotten that dead PCs can be brought back to life...fairly easily!...in the D&D game. We had plenty of "main (player) characters" that were raised from the dead MULTIPLE TIMES back in our long-running campaigns; my own PC must have been raised or wished back to life at least a half dozen times. 

But (as said) leave that aside. Tell me: why O why do you play Dungeons & Dragons at all? Is it because you want to tell stories of the 'fantasy' genre in collaboration with other people? Because, you can do THAT a lot easier without restricting yourself to big books of rules and the random whims of dice rolls.

Personally, I think most PLAYERS (i.e. non-DMs) play D&D to experience the spills and thrills of being another person participating in adventures in a fantastical land of might and magic. Full stop. And the BEST WAY for you, as the Dungeon Master, to provide that experience is to craft a deep, rich world chock-full of opportunities (scenarios) that the players have leeway and agency to explore. Sometimes dying, sure (danger is part of adventure) but always with the option to make a new character or raise the dead one (i.e. always with the option to "get back in the game"). 

Your best path, then, is to pick ONE system you can live with and master (possibly tweaking to taste), and then spend ALL your world building efforts on ONE setting that you love and are committed to. Thusly, you will be able to provide the best experience to your players, such that they will want to keep returning to your campaign...regardless of whether or not it has a "narrative story arc" in it. Players want to LIVE their D&D; they can't live it if there's no world in which to live. Focusing just makes it so much better.

I might write a series of posts about my own campaign world, something that...to date...I've hesitated to do (though don't mind mentioning it in passing). For one thing, much of my world is amorphous, the subject of wild rumor and speculation (at least, in areas the players haven't visited) and therefore subject to change. For another thing, I think a DM describing their campaign world is about as boring as a player talking about how kewl their character is, i.e. pretty darn boring.

But maybe it would be helpful to some people. And "helpful" is something I'm really interested in being these days (far more than being "interesting," which was my M.O. for most of my life). Maybe this can be the subject of the personal A-Z challenge I was thinking of doing in June? I'll have to see if I can come up with 26 subjects for discussion...shouldn't be too hard.

ANYway.

I'm running out of steam. I think I'll go lie down for a bit; I've said pretty much all I want to say at the moment.

[published after dragging my sorry ass out of bed and getting the kids up and off to school]

The Rundown

I am writing this Thursday morning, though I don't intend it to post up till Sunday. The holidays have caught up to me and my time over the next week or so will be fairly occupied.  Yes, I'll be checking emails, responding to comments, etc. but I doubt I'm going to get much posted before the New Year, unless it's a "happy Christmas" missive or something.

In deep diving the Unearthed Arcana these last several weeks (has it only been since Thanksgiving? My how time flies...) I've found that it isn't all bad. True, it is mostly bad, but that's still better than I expected to find. It's interesting to wonder if my pained memories of UA's indulgences (so awful in implementation 'back in the day') may have been part of what prevented me from taking up the torch of 1E far sooner than I have...that those indiscretions of my youth may have left a bad taste in my mouth putting me off the AD&D game and leading me down the road of B/X play, obstinately turning up my nose at the better game for years. If so...how sad. It's certainly true that my enthusiasm and fire for 1st edition was stoked immensely with the realization that I could simply play the game with the original (three) core books, that I need not adapt the entirety of the line.

Well, whatever...water under the bridge. I am immensely enjoying my game as is, and...

[pause, as I take my first sips of coffee in some nine days. Apologies: I got back from Mexico on the 8th, fully addicted to caffeine and had to (once again) go through the rigamarole of breaking my dependency. This involved quite a bit of excruciating withdrawal symptoms as well as a seven day juice fast...I just started eating again yesterday, but this my first morning with a freshly brewed pot of decaf. Mmmm...]

*ahem* As I was saying, my game is immensely satisfying the way it is now, but with my new broad-minded attitude, I think it no great crime to add the good from the UA to my campaign.  Keeping in mind that I have yet to examine...let alone curate...the spell lists and magic items; here is the current list of items from the Unearthed Arcana that I will henceforth be including (presented in the order in which they appear):

• (page 8) Non-human characters who choose to single-class in a class that they could normally be multi-classed have their maximum level limits raised by +2.
• (page 13) Armor permitted updated as per the table. New weapons, where added, as per the table. Old weapons (thieves using short bows?): NO. New weapons that are not a part of the campaign (staff slings and hand crossbows, for example) are ignored. Yes, assassins can use a shield and still perform an assassination attempt. Likewise, if a character wishes to pick up and keep a weapon they can't use, I'm generally okay with it.
• (page 14) No cavaliers. However, see my new Bogatyr class which WILL be part of the campaign. They are generally only found east of the Cascades.
• (page 17) I don't mind there being a 15th level Grand Druid (good luck getting to three million experience points!). My own campaign setting has a 14th level Great Druid, but I'm sure he/she is beholden to a higher power...there's always someone bigger. No hierophants as of yet (and maybe never).
• (page 18) Barbarians are being added, as much a "sub-race" of humans as a "sub class" of fighters. The class is largely unchanged from how it appears, save that there are no attribute requirements for entry. In my campaign, there aren't many "barbarian tribes;" you'll find them in the frozen lands to the north (British Columbia), in some of the deeper jungles to the south (Oregon), and in the mountains of the Idaho Deathlands (to the east)...basically, the farther away you get from "civilization" (Washington State) the more barbaric the humans you'll find. 0-level human types the barbarian replaces in the MM (cavemen, dervishes, nomads, and tribesman, etc.) remain 0-level, d6 hit point type creatures. NOTE: a barbarian may only receive x.p. from a "sold" magic item if it is an item they could normally use (as per the table on page 20). Otherwise, the barbarian receives NO SHARE in the x.p. gained by the party (though they may give the barbarian a cut of the money received).
• (page 22) Ranger's "giant class" opponents updated as listed. No other changes to the ranger from its appearance in the PHB.
• (page 22) Thief ability armor adjustments for wearing armor other than leather now added.
• (page 23) Thief-Acrobats now added, as written.
• (page 26) Field plate (as per the DMG) remains a part of the game, but is not available for purchase in every one-horse town. All new weapons added, with the EXCEPT for the hand crossbow and staff sling (both are Drow weapons, first appearing in the D-series of modules; perhaps they are available for purchase/learning in the Underdark). I see no reason to include the buckler...isn't that just a "small wood shield?"...but the spiked buckler is okay.
• (page 27) New weapons get their bonuses. As there is no "full plate" armor, only AC adjustments to 1 are considered. Full plate may be added in the future as "jousting plate" or "tournament plate" but it will be bulky armor and have a movement rate of 6". "Field plate" is the fitted plate armor that is worn on the battlefield for real combat.
• (pages 28-31) All spells will need to be reviewed before being implemented. When choosing spells to cast, players are restricted to spells found in the PHB. All UA spells will require spell research to acquire, though they may be found on spell scrolls or in certain grimoires (see S4: The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth). No cantrips.
• (page 72) "Appendix VI" of the WotC re-print. As stated, armor penalties are implemented as listed. Thieves and their subclasses may NOT perform "thief skills" when wearing armor heavier than studded or elfin chain. Bards wearing magical chainmail are penalized as if wearing elfin chain. All multi-class options are ignored in favor of the (standard) PHB lists.
• (page 75) Armor and encumbrance for new armors as per table. Field plate provides no bonus other than a high armor class (if "jousting plate" is permitted, the same will hold true)...no "damage absorption."
• (page 77-78) New weapons as described with the exceptions already listed.
• (page 79) I am still deciding how to use/implement spell books in my campaign.
• (page 80) Illusionists acquire spells as per the DMG; there is no read illusionist magic in my game and no such spell is required to read illusionist spells/scrolls. There are no cantrips.
• (page 80) Cost of magic-user/illusionist spell casting: these rates are a little low (in my opinion), but they form a good starting basis for negotiation.
• (page 82) Combat penalties in darkness are adopted. Ignore all references to faerie fire (spell is used as per the PHB). 
• (page 84-106) New magic items will be reviewed as needed, although magical field plate, full plate, and elfin chain should all be cut from the lists...sorry!

I have not yet reviewed the appendices. My base impulse is to ignore Appendix Q: Weaponless Combat (I'm happy with the DMG, thank you very much), but Appendix R: Non-Lethal Combat looks interesting. I do not allow demi-human clerics as PCs, nor do I care much about their gods, so Roger Moore's Appendix S: Non-Human Deities is absolutely worthless to me...it's just crap filler. Appendix T: Pole Arm Nomenclature (from Dragon Magazine #22!) is helpful but provides no actual game mechanics.

Aaaaand...that's all she wrote. Happy holidays, folks!

You Don't Have To Run 5E

People just don't believe me (I guess). 

Over and over again I hear the same complaint; it generally goes something like this:

Man, I'd love to run an [old edition] D&D game, but I've had to bite the bullet and run 5E. That's the only game players seem to want (or know how) to play. 

Let me be perfectly crystal clear here: no, you NEVER have to run 5E (nor any other version of the world's greatest RPG) for anyone. 

Nope. Zero. 

These folks that are complaining are missing an important dynamic here: the Dungeon Master holds all the power.

"But-but-but...without players to DM, what IS a Dungeon Master? I must please my players or they will leave and there will be no game! I'll be left all aloooooone...!"

It is this kind of thinking that keeps you in chains.

Look: forget (for a second) that there is this internet thing that allows us to connect with (and find) players all over the world. Ignore that...forget about it.  Okay? Got it? Moving on:

Is anyone forcing you to be a Dungeon Master?

Seriously...blink twice if you are being forced to run D&D against your will; we'll send the cops to free you from your kidnappers. 

For the vast majority (if not 100%) of cases, we are choosing to be the Dungeon Master. For any number of reasons!  But "Dungeon Master" is not a profession (yes, yes...I know there are some people who earn money DMing...just keep wit my thread). You are not dependent on running D&D to earn your daily bread...something else is putting food in your mouth and a roof over your head. Being a DM ain't that thing...it's not like you will starve to death and become homeless if you stop being the DM.

We CHOOSE to be DMs to run a D&D game. No one is putting a gun to our heads. And just as we have the free will to choose to run D&D, we have the free will to choose which version of D&D we want to run. In fact, if you plan on taking up the mantle of a DM it is your responsibility to choose a version of D&D that you want to run, that is most comfortable for you to run.

Because if you don't, your game will suck.

That's the truth of the matter: a DM cannot be fully invested in their own game if it isn't a game they want to run. Instead, you'll end up frustrated, regretful, and resentful. You will grow fatigued when it comes to the act of creation, rather than inspired and energized. Your games will suffer, you will lose enthusiasm, you will draw out a long, slow, death and constantly looking forward to the time when the campaign finally, mercifully ends.  You may be a competent DM for the duration, but you will definitely NOT be the best DM you could be.  How could you be? When you hate coming to work every day, you either drag your feet (perhaps subconsciously hoping you'll get fired) or build up a smoldering ball of anger inside that kills all the joy you should feel at this pastime you've CHOSEN to do.

You MUST have joy in the act of being a Dungeon Master: not only of running the game, but of crafting the world and writing adventure scenarios. If you do not, your game will suck and your players will sense it no matter how good a job you do at hiding it (unless, I suppose, they're really obtuse players). Running a campaign is WORK. You must enjoy that work or you will not give it your best effort. True...you MAY be able to "steel yourself" and still put up a heck of a game. But it will NOT have the excitement and joyfulness it could have. And will, thus, suffer for it. 

"But-but-but...all my players are my FRIENDS!  It's not just about wanting to play D&D, it's about wanting to play D&D with THESE PARTICULAR PEOPLE. And they ONLY want to play 5E!  If I refuse to run 5E, my long time gaming group will disappear!"

Just what kind of slave are you?  Or, perhaps a better question, what kind of friends are these? 

I have friends. Most of them I've never gamed with. NONE of them are folks I currently game with. That doesn't stop us from being friends. And if they invited me to join their table and play a session of 5E with them, I might give it a whirl...if I didn't have any other pressing engagements that particular evening. 

But I wouldn't run 5E for them. I would not run a 5E campaign for them. 

And if they wanted me to run a D&D campaign for them...or ANY kind of campaign for them (that is an incredibly imposition, just by the way: hey, will you our Dungeon Master?)...and IF I had the time and the bandwidth to do so, it would be under MY TERMS.

Because I am the Dungeon Master.

I used to run a weekly game at a local bar every Thursday night. For the most part, the game I was running was B/X. For the most part, most of the players that would show up to the game were people I had never met before they sat down at my gaming table. Over time, the number of players grew to double-digit numbers. Then I stopped running a B/X game and instead started play-testing other things. The number of players shrunk. But new players comtinued to show up...people who had read about my game on my blog or who had heard about the game from a friend or someone who was bringing their significant other to the table. 

The game ended because I moved to Paraguay for three years. The game only ended because I ended it.

In my youth, I stopped running games because I stopped running games. It's not because "all my players left me." So what? You can always find players. People like to play games and people are (usually) pretty lazy...as long as all they have to do is show up and roll dice, well gee, that's pretty easy.  Hell, most players these days can't even be bothered to read the rule books! 

[damn illiterate culture we're sliding into]

The only person doing REAL WORK here, is the guy or gal sitting in the Dungeon Master's chair. So guess what? THAT's the person who's calling the shots on what game gets run at the table. There's not even the excuse (only semi-valid 10 years ago) that the old books are out-of-print. You can get all the 1E stuff now, print-on-demand! Or PDF if you want to go cheap and digital!

[sure, buddy...like you're really going to read the book]

Don't let would-be players manipulate you. "But 1E isn't supported with on-line tools like 5E," they whine. Yeah, because it doesn't need "support;" there aren't any 'character builds' in 1E. "But 1E was written by racist old white dudes." So what? Lots of games were. Does it stop other people from enjoying them? Have you ever looked at the guys who built the NBA, the NFL, the MLB, etc.?  "But 1E is all about killing people and robbing them!"  Look, I thought you wanted to play Dungeons & Dragons. The game is about finding treasure in a violent, action packed world. If you don't want to play that kind of game...that's OKAY. But that's the game I run.

[and please tell me, just by the way, is it somehow better to play a game that still involves murder but without the robbery? Because you're murdering for "altruistic" reasons? Just WTF does THAT say about our cultural norms these days?]

There are some people who disagree with, or dislike, the premise of the D&D game. And that is fine...D&D is probably not the game for them. But if you (like me) are okay with that premise and want to run a game of Dungeons & Dragons, then do so. And do so in the manner...and with the system...that YOU find most comfortable and that best suits your needs.  Maybe that IS 5th edition. Or 2nd. Or B/X or one of its many clones. That's fine...YOU are the Dungeon Master. You call the shots.

But don't bitch and moan about it. Don't say you have to run 5th edition. That's a damned lie. No one HAS TO run 5E (save, perhaps, for WotC employees who have it stipulated as pat of their contract). One of the perks of being the Dungeon Master is that you're the honcho in charge...stop giving away your power!

Dungeon Masters, sorry to say, are a premium commodity: there aren't enough of them to go around. And if you don't have a DM and want one...that can be tough. Like it or not, you might very well end up in a 5E game if that's the only thing available in your area. And that's sad because 5E (especially its latest incarnation) ain't great. 

But if you're a competent and willing Dungeon Master? You're good to go. Just run the game you want to run, regardless of any demands of the players. If the game/system you're running is one YOU are enthused about, the players who are interested in that type of gaming will be fully engaged and committed. If they're not, they'll walk...and that's okay. Because the alternative is going to be ending up with a game that sucks.

Grow a backbone. Stop whining. Run the game you want to run.

Starting Your (AD&D) Game

Over the last MANY years of writing this blog, I've read (or fielded) countless questions from people asking how to start their D&D campaign. Not all of them come right out and say this; they couch it in lots of ways: How can I get my 5E players to play B/X?  My OSE players are reluctant to play AD&D, what should I do? How do you build a 'world?' How do do you run a 'long-term' game like you describe? Etc., etc.

It's all pretty much the same question (i.e. how do you start a D&D campaign from scratch), and while most of the answers I give to people is...more or less...the same stuff (this is why I say it's "pretty much the same question"), it would probably behoove me to just write up a post of my thoughts on the matter, so that I have a single place to direct folks.  

In the past, I've put off this idea because, well, who am I to give advice? Plus...what do I know? But I'm at the point now of 'f**k it...they keep asking me and no one else seems to be giving 'em what they need so, yeah.'  ALSO...I feel like I've finally got a handle on the entire subject (which was NOT the case in the past).

Now, be warned: while this may be (yet another) long-ish post, the subject matter could probably fill a book...a book I hope to write one day; this is still just a quick-n-dirty version. Call it the "Cliff notes" version:

Step 1: Decide You Want To Run A Campaign

"Wait! Didn't I already do that?" Hold on, little cowpoke...it ain't that simple. Running a campaign takes some time and effort (what is commonly called "work"). Have you decided you are really up for it? Do you have the temperament for the job? Do you know the rules of the game such that you can dungeon master a table full of unruly kids/teens/adults? No matter what your level of ego or "personal God complex" is, you need to be able to act and speak with authority (authority which comes from being a knowledgable arbiter of the game rules). If you just want to tell stories and be creative and "wing it" then you are going to SUCK as a DM...and eventually this will lead to the dissolution of your table (and even if your players don't lose interest, you will). 

Even if you DO know the rules and you're willing to give it a go...do you have the time to commit to the game? Be honest! Are you expecting or currently raising a new baby? Do you have day job that requires 60+ hours a week? A demanding spouse? An invalid relative that you care for? A farm to run?  Olympics to train for? Yeah, you can juggle two or three of these things AND run a campaign (maybe)...if you give up the television, video games, and other hobbies (golf, skiing, whatever) that occupy your free time.  Of course, you can also just run an "irregular" game...which is what I do...but I wouldn't recommend that unless, like me, you're drawing players from your own household (i.e. my kids and their friends).  For busy adults and semi-adults, you're going to want to run a REGULAR game (i.e. one that meets with regularity: weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, etc.). Do you have the bandwidth to do that? Be honest! It's okay! Maybe right now is not the best time for you, but you can play D&D until your brain dies so it's okay to put off your "grand campaign" for the moment. And you can still world build in your spare time. 

Step 2: Build Your World

So you've decided to run a campaign. Great! Now the fun...and the work...begins. First, you need a world ("Wait, don't I need players?" Not yet), a setting for your campaign. 

I'll be honest: this was the part that stymied me for YEARS. Because it starts with a map...and maps aren't my strong suit (for what it's worth, my "strong suit" is running adventures). But maybe you are skilled with drawing up fantasy worlds. Or maybe you have a particular fantasy world you want to pull from. Back in the 1980s (when I was growing up) lots of fantasy books had maps printed inside the front cover...no doubt taking inspiration from Tolkien's Middle Earth. You can use one of those. Or you can use some pre-packaged game setting (Greyhawk, the Young Kingdoms, etc.). Or maybe, you want to go the easy route I finally settled on and just use a real world region from our real world globe (my world is the Pacific Northwest, a region with which I'm intimately familiar). 

In the end it doesn't matter too much where you get your world map from, just so long as you have a map. Because you can't run a campaign without a map. You want a setting like Martin's Game of Thrones book? Cool. Or you could just do what he did and blow up the UK to a huge size. Where you get the map doesn't matter; what MATTERS is that the map is small enough that you can manage it, but large enough that it has the proper range of diversity for the adventures you envision (some day) creating.  Do you want pirates adventures? Then it's going to need a sea. Mountain fortresses? Then you need mountains. Warring kingdoms? You need areas that could conceivably hold farmland supporting (civilized) populations. Etc.

[don't worry about the Underdark or the Astral plane...the nice thing about these areas is that they're not confined to the world map...you can always build down (into the bowels of the earth) or out into other planes/dimensions]

Once you have your map, make sure that you like it, because that's what you're going to be using for the foreseeable future...hopefully for the rest of your life. The dedicated DM doesn't just "change worlds" every year or two. World building is not about building multiple worlds (drawing new worlds over and over again); 'world building' is about detailing the world to which you're committed. And that detailing can last a lifetime. Look at Tolkien. Look at Gygax. Look at any DM who runs a long-term campaign, or any author dedicated to setting their books in a particular world. 

So make sure you like the world and that it has enough room for the kind of game you want to run. My choice of the Pacific Northwest gives me lots of great stuff: wide open plains, dense forests, mountain ranges, deserts, volcanoes, rivers, population areas and farmland, sea coasts, etc. Lots of places for adventure.

Step 2B: The Starting Location

Once you have your world, you should choose the area you want to start your players. I didn't always do this in the past: in some games I'd run, I'd show the players the map and say "where do you want to start." This is not a great idea (especially if you're creating your world from whole cloth and all the players have is a brief description of various regions). No, decide where they'll be starting. Ideally, it should provide places where they can buy the basic (PHB list) equipment and find safe lodging, as well as several possible adventuring opportunities (i.e. places to make money and earn experience points). Perhaps there's a road that's been plagues by bandits/highwaymen. Perhaps there are man-eating predators that need hunting. Perhaps there's a nearby tomb or ruin that seems ripe for exploration. Perhaps there's a secret slave-ring in the area that's been kidnapping folks.

Whatever adventures you think of, they should be things that are accessible to the players through the normal rumor mill. That is, they've HEARD that travelers have been waylaid or everyone knows the legend of Broken Down Keep or there have been whisperings and worries about kidnappings. Etc. These are the rumors you give the players to start. They don't need to know the history of the region or the various political factions of neighboring regions, etc. These things will come up as the campaign progresses and evolves. For now just think: town + adventures. And make sure at least some of the adventures are suitable for beginning adventurers.

Step 3: Find Players

Ah, the all important "find players" step. The most important step, right?

Nope.

Here is the great secret I've discovered over the decades of playing/running RPGs: there are always more players than there are DMs. Truthfully, there are FAR MORE players than DMs...possibly too many potential players for potential DMs to accommodate. There are plenty of players. What we have a dearth of is DMs.  And competent, committed DMs are even fewer.

Yeah, there was a time 20-30 years ago when it was tough to put together a group of players. But it's not like that anymore. The internet and various social platforms makes it easier to connect with wannabe gamers than ever before. And the D&D brand itself enjoys more brand recognition...and less stigma...than it ever has in its history.

Now, in the past I've written about introducing new players to "old school" play, specifically B/X (I've also written, briefly, about converting existing latter-edition PCs to the same system). But these days, I'm playing AD&D, and those thoughts of six years ago (!!) have changed a bit.

Your potential AD&D player is going to fall into one of these categories:

• "The Enthusiast" - this person is familiar with AD&D, having either played it in the past or researched the heck out of it (reading the PHB, etc.), and is actively interested in a 1E game. This used to be a pretty small group, but they're growing. For these individuals, you don't have to do much but explain your particular house rules up front (and I suggest keeping these minimal).
• "The Newb" - is the person with zero or near zero experience with D&D in any form. I run a lot of these types because I most often run kids; however, I've been approached by several parents of these kids who have 'always had an interest in D&D but never got the chance to play.'  Also, young adults who've only encountered the game through what they've seen on Stranger Things or other television shows. These folks are easily acculturated to AD&D and can quickly become enthusiasts.  Always keep in mind that the AD&D game was built on the backs of newbs.
• "The Old Schooler" - these folks are rather easily found in online spaces, and they are generally experienced with old edition D&D...most often Basic or some sort of Basic clone (OSE, LL, etc.) or 'rules-light' abomination. The good thing about these folks is that most already have an understanding of the basic premise/concepts of D&D, so they require less explanation than the newbs. And many of these would be quite happy to play in a 1E game (it's all just D&D to them, so long as they don't need to 'know a bunch of rules' or act in a DM capacity).  But there are a few of these folks that aren't really interested in D&D in its long-form; for these folks 'old school game play' is just a scene, a lark, a passing diversion. If you find one of these latter type, you're going to want to cull them from your flock.
• "The New Schooler" - these are the folks who play 5E or Pathfinder or some other latter day form of D&D. You can find even more of these folks on-line than the Old Schooler (they are Legion), and here the challenge is their deeply held beliefs/expectations of what the game is and how it operates. Converting them to 1E requires them to let go of these attachments...something that many of them are loathe to do especially if they've achieved any degree of system mastery OR if these 'new school' concepts (character customization, story creation, etc.) are the very things that drew them to the D&D game. But even here you can find potential AD&D players; generally, they fall into one of three categories: "The Burnout" (who's simply tired of the uselessness of short-term new school play and wants 'something more'), "The Open-Mind" (who just likes playing games, baby, and understands 1E is just a different type/style of RPG), and "The Innocent" (who is pretty much a newb, but happens to be sitting in a 5E game at the moment). The important thing when cultivating New Schoolers to an AD&D game is that you canNOT accommodate their new school assumptions and desires to your campaign. No matter how tempting it is, or how much they wheedle that it will 'make the game more fun.' Don't do it, folks. This is POISON to your AD&D campaign. Explain that you're playing a different game, that you are the DM, and that these are the rules. You must assert your authority from the beginning, or the players will have no respect for your world or your game..and you cannot effectively run a campaign without authority, and you will simply grow to resent your players and your own weakness. Don't go down that road!
• "The Hater" - these are the people who assert that AD&D sucks, for whatever reason. Possibly they played it in the past and (having had a bad time) have moved on to editions they prefer...or possibly they don't even game anymore. Or they have heard such terrible things about it that they are altogether resistant to the idea. In rare cases you can still find potential 1E players in this category...but they are probably not going to be part of your initial group. They're going to have to first see (or hear about) you running a successful, enjoyable game, before agreeing to 'try it out.' In some cases, you may have such charisma..or personal rapport with the Hater...that you can convince them to give it a shot from the get-go. But you cannot (and should not!) force or manipulate this type of person into playing the game...they will be a surly, black cloud that will drag everything down. You can extend the invitation, but only allow them in once they are TRULY on-board and open to the idea.

Do not despair if you find it slow-going putting together a gaming group. Dedicated campaigns have (in my experience) a tendency to "pick-up momentum" over time...you start with one or two players and over a matter of months (or weeks) it snowballs into eight or ten. When I ran my weekly game at the bar, I eventually had to turn people away...something I don't like doing. Not because the bar-flies would join, but because enthusiastic players would bring their friends. Who would bring their friends. Etc.

As I said, there are far more wannabe players out there then there are dedicated, committed DMs. Google estimates some 50 million people have experience with D&D and there's 1.35 billion English speakers in the world...that's 3.7%. But let's say that only .001% of people are actually "potential" D&D players...how many would that be in your town?  In Seattle proper (which probably has a higher percentage of nerds than other parts of the country) that would be nearly 800 people; in the "greater Seattle area" that number skyrockets to 4K. Look, I don't really want to handle more than 8 regular players...let alone 800!...and 7 is pretty much my optimal range. I'm perfectly happy running for groups of 3-4 (which is what my current group is) supplementing the party with NPCs and henchfolk. 

The point is: there are plenty of players. Plenty of them around the world (if you're willing to play on-line). But even in your home town...it only takes one or two acquaintances agreeing to sit down and roll dice. And the game will grow from there. Especially if those acquaintances have any acquaintances in their social circles that want to hang and roll dice and "experience adventure." It really just takes ONE DM willing to commit themselves to a campaign, one who knows the rules and who can provide solid, competent refereeing.

Step 3B (or 3A): Find A Venue

This should probably come before Step 3 (Find Players) but a lot of times your choice of venue is dependent on that first player or two. You need a place to host your game and a time to host it. It does no good to invite a bunch of people to play D&D with you if you have no where to run the thing. 

Not everyone wants to run a game out of their own home (my non-gamer wife would certainly pitch a fit if I invited a bunch of rando strangers to chill in our dining room...). So you'll have to find an agreeable venue over which YOU (the DM) has some measure of control (i.e. not a player's house!). A local game shop, a library, a bar (preferably on a quieter night), etc. are all possible venues, making sure you negotiate with the people up front that you plan on running a regular game session at the establishment. Some businesses will welcome such an event (bars and coffee shops generally like the business). But you have to have a place with a committed day and time for your game.

For the players, this shows your dedication to the campaign and (thus) to the players (i.e. themselves) who are participating in the campaign. If they know the day, time, and location they can plan their lives and carve out the time from their schedules; it allows the players to decide whether or not they can commit to the campaign. It does little good to be loosey-goosey with this step, even in the name of "flexibility" for the players...you will reap exactly what you sow in this regard.

Find a time and place that can work for you, on a regular basis.  If it has to change in the future, so be it (and that might cost you some players), but until it has to change, stick with it.

Step 4: First Session

I don't do any kind of "session zero." I don't have that kind of time to waste.

When I sit down with a new group (usually this only happens in a Con or demo setting), I have a little spiel I give that goes something like this:

"So, okay, we are going to be playing Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, called AD&D for short (sometimes known as "first edition" or "1E"). If you're familiar with the game...

[here I do a brief head check or hand raise to see who knows AD&D]

"...I play pretty much by the rules with a few exceptions...

[I briefly list my 3-4 pertinent exceptions for the AD&D players at the table]

"...and perhaps a couple others that will arise later in play. What you need to know, at this point, is that you are a group of adventurers seeking fortune and fame in dangerous locations. You will each create a character that will be your role and vehicle for exploring the game world. As the Dungeon Master, I create the game world and control all the various denizens, people, and creatures you encounter. I run the world, and you tell me how you want to act in the world.

[I'll leave off those last couple sentences if everyone at the table knows what D&D is]

"I want to emphasize from the outset that AD&D is a cooperative game. Each of you will have different skills and abilities depending on your character; you will all find ways to contribute. If you can pull together as a team, you'll have a much better chance of surviving and thriving. I don't allow player vs. player ("pvp") fighting in my game: your characters are assumed to know better than to attack each other when they are already beset by dangers all around."

[again, I might leave off that last bit for folks who've already played at my table]

"As professional adventurers, your job is to face dangers and find treasure. Because treasure finding is your profession and objective of play, any loot you recover during the adventure is worth experience points to your characters. Acquiring more experience points will make your character better at their abilities...but only if they survive. Right now, your characters are beginning adventurers with NO experience under their belts, and the little money you have should be invested in equipment that you feel will help you on your adventure."

We then make characters. When playing in my home, we usually have two or three PHBs to hand around the table. I work with the new players to create their characters. We use Method I from the DMG for rolling ability scores (4D6 six times, take best three, arrange to taste), but the player must have at least two ability scores ranked at 15+ to be considered viable characters (as per the first paragraph on p. 9 of the PHB). In convention settings, or if doing a demo, I always bring pre-gens to the table, but when starting a campaign, I think it's important everyone make a character. Even with rank novices, this process doesn't take much longer than 30-35 minutes to complete.

We then settle in to play. I always offer an adventure scenario (i.e. a "dungeon") that focuses the players and gets them working together, and that is suitable for a group of 1st level PCs. All those other "hooks" created back in Step 2B? Those come into play AFTER the initial dungeon foray. The players need to have a chance to test their skills and mettle...and discover how their fellow adventurers perform...before they can be hit with a variety of choices of "what to do next." Once they've had a chance to enter (and leave) the first dungeon, THEN you give them a bunch of rumors of possible money-making opportunities (all hooks should have some sort of financial incentive to it). They can then decide whether or not they want to continue plumbing the first dungeon, or moving on to other...potentially greener...pastures.

This is the game; it only expands from there. You will build more onto your campaign between sessions, possibly expanding things that come up on the fly during the running of the game. But the players who enjoy this type of "adventure gaming" will be hooked, and they will endeavor to make it back to the next session (possibly bringing buddies)...which is why you need to already have a commitment to a scheduled place/time on the books.

Okay, that's a lot. Any questions?

; )

D&D Combat

Good morning! Sorry, it's been a while...last week was busy, as was the weekend, though we did have a chance to get back to our on-going exploration of Dragon Wrack. Unfortunately for the kids, the session didn't end well.

It started well enough: they found the hoard of great the red dragon, Usumgallu, and looted the hell out of it for about an hour (for the adventure module, I created a procedure for searching dragon hoards, given that players generally want to pick out the best bits of these piles; it's in the appendix). Time was of the essence as the approaching Red Wing of the dragon army was close to arriving...had they exited the temple-fortress via the tunnel to the dragon pits outside the city, they would have found themselves quickly barbecued. 

However, they instead decided to go back up to he temple proper and find a different exit, blundering into the Black Wing's color guard standing watch over their army's battle standard. While four elite orcs aren't a match for an eight-strong band of seasoned adventurers, the horns and sounds of combat brought another 40 orcs who completely surprised the party and quickly grappled them...all except the assassin, Salamander, whose 17 dexterity allowed him to react, and whose boots of speed allowed him to escape capture.

Total treasure found: 296,147 g.p. plus a huge assortment of unidentified magic items. However, more than half of that was in a bag of holding that was captured by the orcs. Salamander absconded with the party's other bag of holding (it is his, after all). Diego plans on attempting a rescue of the prisoners (that will be our next session). but he's not terribly thrilled at the prospect.

I wanted to write a bit about running D&D combat, especially AD&D combat. I get a lot of questions on the subject (usually via private email), and have thrown in my two cents on various blogs and forums elsewhere. Combat is not, in my opinion, a very difficult thing to do, but one needs to approach it from the right perspective; the correct mindset, I find, is incredibly helpful.

First off, remember D&D is a game. Hold that firmly in mind. I will elaborate on this in a second, but it's important enough to mention first. 

Second, one has to understand that D&D's roots are literary, not cinematic. It is to be expected (these days) that a lot of people coming to the game form many of their assumptions of fantasy adventure from films and television shows (both live-action and animated) that they have watched.  However, it is not useful to think of D&D combat in terms of what one sees on the screen. Cinematic combat, like all things in a cinematic story, is supposed to exist for one (or both) of two reasons: to develop a character or further the plot. 

[of course, some filmmakers will also do combat simply for entertainment (fan service/expectation, etc.) which is why some combat scenes might be called "gratuitous," but let's not digress too much]

Because cinema is a visual medium, combat needs to be visually interesting, and over the years elaborate choreography has been developed to appeal to an audience that (presumably) has watched countless "fight scenes" over the years and need different, more elaborate or intense, forms of stimulation to maintain the viewers' engagement. Scenes play out with fancy maneuvers, camera zooms on individual 'moves' and actions, each swing of the blade being emphasized, each punch or kick being given attention, slow motion being employed to show the specific tripping or headbutting or individual wound that causes a specific form of pain and suffering.  

It is akin to the comic book form of story telling, where each individual panel is a moment of frozen time, to be lingered over by the reader's eye.

Generally speaking, combat in literature is nothing like this. Whether you're talking Tolkien or Howard or any of the other fantasy/pulp influences on D&D, the literary medium is not a place you will find blow-by-blow combat scenes...certainly not on the scale one finds in TV and film.

"About turn!" [Gandalf] shouted. "Draw your sword Thorin!"

There was nothing else to be done, and the goblins did not like it. They came scurrying around the corner in full cry, and found Goblin-cleaver, and Foe-hammer shining cold and bright right in their astonished eyes. The ones in front dropped their torches and gave one yell before they were killed. The ones behind yelled still more, and leaped back knocking over those running after them. "Biter and Beater!" they shrieked, and soon they were all in confusion, and most of them were hurling back the way they had come.

The Hobbit, Chapter 4 (Tolkien)

He beat the creature off with his hands -- it was trying to poison him, as small spiders do to flies -- until he remembered his sword and drew it out. Then the spider jumped back, and he had time to cut his legs loose. After then it was his turn to attack. The spider was evidently not used to things that carried such stings at their sides, or it would have hurried away quicker. Bilbo came at it before it could disappear and stuck it with his sword right in the eyes. Then it went mad and leaped and danced and flung out its legs in horrible jerks, until he killed it with another stroke....

The Hobbit, Chapter 8 (Tolkien)

Jehungir did not try again. That was his last arrow. He drew his scimitar and advanced, confident in his spired helmet and close-meshed mail. Conan met him half-way in a blinding whirl of swords. The curved blades ground together, sprang apart, circled in glittering arcs that blurred the sight which tried to follow them. Octavia, watching, did not see the stroke, but she heard its chopping impact, and saw Jehungir fall, blood spurting from his side where the Cimmerian's steel had sundered his mail and bitten to his spine.

The Devil In Iron (Howard)

Shifting his reddened scimitar to his left hand, he drew the great half-blade of the Yuetshi. Khosatral Khel was towering above him, his arms lifted like mauls, but as the blade caught the sheen of the sun, the giant gave back suddenly. 

But Conan's blood was up. He rushed in, slashing with the crescent blade. And it did not splinter. Under its edge the dusky metal of Khosatral's body gave way like common flesh beneath a cleaver. From the deep gash flowed a strange ichor, and Khosatral cried out like the dirging of a great bell. His terrible arms flailed down, but Conan, quicker than the archers who had died beneath those awful flails, avoided their strokes and struck again and yet again. Khosatral reeled and tottered; his cries were awful to hear, as if metal were given a tongue of pain, as if iron shrieked and bellowed under torment.

Then wheeling away he staggered into the forest; he reeled in his gait, crashed through bushes and caromed off trees. Yet though Conan followed him with the speed of hot passion, the walls and towers of Dagon loomed through the trees before the man came within dagger-reach of the giant.

Then Khosatral turned again, flailing the air with desperate blows, but Conan, fired to berserk fury, was not to be denied. As a panther strikes down a bull moose at bay, so he plunged under the bludgeoning arms and drove the crescent blade to the hilt under the spot where a human's heart would be.

Khosatral reeled and fell.

The Devil Iron (Howard)

Five Picts were dancing about them with fantastic leaps and bounds, waving bloody axes; one of them brandished the woman's red-smeared gown. 

At the sight a red haze swam before Balthus. Lifting his bow he lined the prancing figure, black against the fire, and loosed. The slayer leaped convulsively and fell dead with the arrow through his heart. Then the two men and the dog were upon the startled survivors. Conan was animated merely by his fighting spirit and an old, old racial hate, but Balthus was afire with wrath. 

He met the first Pict to oppose him with a ferocious swipe that split the painted skull, and sprang over his falling body to grapple with the others. But Conan had already killed one of the two he had chosen, and the leap of the Aquilonian was a second late. The warrior was down with the long sword through him even as Balthus' ax was lifted. Turning toward the remaining Pict, Balthus saw Slasher rise from his victim, his great jaws dripping blood.

Balthus said nothing as he looked down at the pitiful forms in the road beside the burning wain. 

Beyond the Black River, Chapter 6 (Howard)

I could go on, of course, citing other examples. I'm currently reading E.C. Tubb's Dumarest saga, a series of science fiction books that seem to have been a major influence on Marc Miller's Traveller game (I am considering starting a classic Traveller campaign and want some inspiration). Reading these old SciFi pulps from the 60s and 70s, one finds plenty of action (Dumarest is a pretty beefy action hero) is less "dripping blood" than in Howard's Conan stuff, but it's still pretty good adventure fiction. It is also well devoid of blow-by-blow tactical exchanges. The specific details of fights are glossed over, unimportant: "they attacked." "he struggled." "the enemy fell, dead." Etc. And then the book goes back to the story, the adventure, at hand.

D&D comes from a literary tradition. It is not D&D's fault that people don't read like they used to; it's not D&D's fault that people discover fantasy through a movie or cartoon instead of a book. But it is OUR fault, if we make the mistake of wanting combat in D&D to be as elaborate and cinematic as we see in an episode of Game of Thrones, and feel disappointed by what the game offers.

Again, back to my first point: D&D is a game. It is NOT a game of combat...it is a game of fantasy adventure. Combat is an important aspect of fantasy adventure: you see this in the literary medium which spawned D&D. Thus, one needs specific rules for running combat. However, combat in and of itself is not the be-all, end-all of the genre. It is just one aspect, and requires only as much importance as what it gets.

Thus, we have D&D (or, for my purposes, AD&D) combat. We have attack rolls and damage rolls and hit points. We have initiative. We have surprise. We have lists of armor and weapons, and we have rules for minor tactical maneuvers: charging, attacking people that flee, auto-hits on characters that have been paralyzed by magic effects, etc. It is not an elaborate game of strike, parry, dodge, roll with punch, strike for weak spots, etc...it is an abstract system for resolving fights quickly and simply. Because that's what it emulates. You want that other stuff, go play Palladium (Kevin Siembieda was a comic book guy FIRST, and it shows in his system). You want realism with regard to death and dismemberment, go play 1st edition Stormbringer (which wonderfully emulates the non-heroic literature of Moorcock's fiction). That's not what D&D is. 

Heroic. Fantasy. Adventure. Game. 

Characters fight until they're dead, they flee, they surrender, or they're victorious. That's it. And then...back to the adventure. Back to what's going on. In a game of "resource management," hit points are the characters' most important resource...because when they're done, you're done.

Mm. Of course my players had plenty of hit points remaining when they were captured. I suppose hit points and brains are the players' most important resources, followed closely by luck. Guess I should have said "hit points are the characters' most important measurable resource." Yeah, that makes more sense.

All right...that's enough for now.

Filling Holes

 Two more "capsule reviews" of NAP entries and then some comments (maybe):

TOMB OF THE TWICE-CROWNED KING (Hawk)

A moderately good adventure. Highlights include a nice, sensible map with the illusion of verticality (rather than practical verticality) and clear, usable text with tight themes. It has received excellent reviews here, here, and here.

Written for levels 8th - 10th, this straightforward tomb includes a lot of undead monsters and appropriate traps for this level range (disintegration rays, 6d6 attrition, pop-up banshees, etc.). The adventure nerfs turning with a -2 penalty, but communicates this from the outset, which should be a clue to experienced PCs to stock up on barrels of holy water and protection from undead scrolls.

It's not bad, it's just not that spectacular. It's written for OSRIC, so perhaps that explains some of the oddities (like "hill giant skeletons" that are somehow more powerful than standard "monster zombies," or little inconsistencies with magic item values). I feel like a lot of this can be bypassed in a party with a 9th level magic-user and cleric, and maybe that's the point. There's some whimsical fantasy elements here that don't make a lot of sense (the iron golems, the giant king and his (human?) wife), but I know the standard line: "It's D&D, it doesn't have to make sense." I'm okay with letting some things slide.

Treasure is quite light for the level range. Because characters in this level range have the resources to power through standard dungeons, I'm inclined to halve the normal amount I'd expect for a 30 room adventure: call it 750,000 x.p. worth of treasure, for a six PC operation. Unfortunately, even if you acquire every last scrap and SELL all the magic items (some of which are quite nice: a cubic gate, a dwarf thrower hammer, a mace of disruption, etc.), you're going to net less than 400K...and retaining/using the magic items will mean taking home barely 150K. 

However, this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that MOST of the magic items are directly applicable to the circumventing the tomb's dangers: oil of elemental invulnerability, the aforementioned magic weapons (good against both undead AND giants), a scroll with spider climb, knock, and detect magic, stashes of holy water, etc. The dungeon is designed like a puzzle of moderate difficulty, where solving things in the correct order make it a lot easier than a straightforward "bashing;" but it feels like the scale is off a bit, and successful parties are going to walk away with a NUMBER of very powerful, very rare items.

This adventure is 'okay.' I can place it in a a small section of the Snake River canyon. Probably won't do the whole "golem smashes bridge thing" which is kind of silly given the PCs should have a method to climb (or fly!) up the cliff face and all this does is prevent the golems from getting to the tomb-robbers (also, a 2d6 damage fall is nothing to a party of 9th level characters). The -2 "defilement" penalty to turning attempts doesn't mean much when a 9th level cleric automatically destroys wights and turns ghasts (half the wandering monster table)...I might change how that functions. Maybe. 

DUST & STARS (Settembrini)

This is a tough one. It appears that it suffers from being translated from a previous (German) text. Having met Settembrini, I can attest that his command of English is excellent, but this needs a little editing for coherence.

I'll not prolong this one: it's not going to work for my campaign. There is a LOT of campaign-specific backstory to this one that simply won't function in my world. The author has re-skinned a lot of D&D's fantasy to function in a weird sci-fi fashion and while I appreciate that (I do that myself), it is very specific in its "lore"...basically, his re-skins don't match with my own.

Also: don't like the giant serpent folk (sorry). Also: don't like the cataclysmically explosive potential of the "star pump." Sorry: I intend my world to far outlast the player characters, and I don't relish the idea of blowing it up or turning it into a post-apocalyptic hellscape.

*sigh*

Treasure amounts are fine, given the "cheats" in area K (i.e. DM gets to make up how much the rare elements are worth/valued...potentially "millions"). But I'm not going to use this one so it doesn't matter. Space/time wars are cool and DO fit with the ancient history of my campaign world...but the details of that history are lost in the depths of centuries and the specifics are unnecessary for the campaign to progress. 

Sorry, Settembrini: probably won't be testing this one any time soon. You can read the more detailed, original review here (and, also, Bryce's gushing). 

SHIP OF FATE (Yours Truly)

As my players are currently in a land-locked, desert region, this one isn't going to work in my campaign as currently constructed. ALSO: I don't anticipate the PCs reaching the requisite levels for at least a couple years. 

*****

Mmm. Ten "AD&D" adventures read. Six deemed "usable." Of those, only TWO are properly stocked, treasure-wise.  That's...not a lot, considering I had a pool of 19 published NAP entries from which to draw. NAP entries that received fairly high marks from all the reviews I've seen.

What does that say about the "standard fare" these reviewers are usually subjected to?

I'll admit that I am a crank, a curmudgeon, and an elitist snob. Perhaps some of the OTHER (non-AD&D adventures) are better written, better adventures. Perhaps. But they're still not written for 1E, so how good are they? How good can they be? Good enough to make up for the deficiencies inherent in running a campaign using a lesser (OD&D, B/X, etc.) ruleset? I know there are plenty of DMs out there who run a much more "loosey-goosey" game drawing pieces from ALL the various editions of D&D that have been published over the years, but (and I know people will object to this statement) that is a pretty miserable way to run a D&D campaign. 

If you disagree: that's fine. If you're having fun, running your OSR/edition-agnostic campaign...well, that's all the evidence to the contrary you need. I can only say: I doubt I would be having as much fun at your table as you do. 

So I guess it's on me? 

But would you be disappointed at my table? Now THAT is an interesting question. And maybe the answer would be "YES," especially if you were used to (and had an expectation of) playing tieflings or dragonborn or being able to cast magic missiles "at will." Yeah, if you needed those kinds of 5Eisms to have a good time, you'd probably HATE my game. 

But, then, you'd probably NOT be the kind of person I want at my table.

All right, that's enough for now; I've got a lot to do today.