F is for Forestry

I missed the April A-Z Blog Challenge this year, so I'm doing my own...in June. This year, I will be posting one post per day discussing my AD&D campaign, for the curious. Since 2020, this is the ONLY campaign I run. Enjoy!

F is for Forestry and Forests, something the Pac Northwest has in abundance. All apologies to Davy Crockett, the Evergreen State is "the greenest State in the land of the free;" fight me!

Ha! Actually, when one compares forest cover to square mileage, Washington ranks only 25th at 52..74%, behind Tennessee (52.83% and 23rd) and well behind Maine's #1 position (89.46%!). Blame Eastern Washington with its vast stretches of farmland (or "vast stretches of nothing" as I used to call it). But we do have thick, dense forests from the Pacific coast to the eastern foothills of the Cascades, all (or mostly) evergreen. You can see why a native Seattleite like myself would operate under the illusion that we're all lumber jacks 'round these here parts. 

Just my side of the mountains (at least till you get out to Okanogan and the northeast part of the State). 

Still, it's a D&D campaign and forested wilderness is a necessity...after all, I need some place to stash all the rangers and druids. And for me, these guys are squarely over on my side of the state's political border (i.e. the Cascades), though you'll find them poking around the Inland Empire on occasion.

I've described my rangers before, and I haven't stopped loving them since I made the mental transition from floofy Aragorn to Jeremiah Johnson. These guys are rough, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that PC rangers use charisma as a "dump stat:" it doesn't affect their ability to gain (animal) followers at high level and it's reflective of long periods of time spent living in the woods and not talking to folks. Or only talking to them with an axe. 

If you know what I mean.

; )

Taciturn. Yep, that's the word of the day for rangers. These guys prowl the forested slopes of the Cascades and Olympics making the land safer for the settlements of human woodsmen living on the edge of the wilds. Any half-elf ranger grew up on the peninsula, more likely than not, and their human parent was probably a ranger, too. They are the avenging protectors of humankind (whether they get along with and are appreciated by their fellow humans or not). Gosh, they're a great archetype.

Then we have the druids.

We do have druids on the east side of the Cascades, but they're still in the shadow of the mountains where there's still plenty of forest. I set N2: The Forest Oracle in Thorp, and the Village of Hommlet (with its "Old Religion" druid cult) is set in Twisp. But that latter town is about the farthest east you'll find druids...the wood elves of Colville hold no great love for druid types and do not encourage their sect in the northeastern forests. As with rangers, if your half-elf is a druid, you probably grew up on the Olympic Peninsula (almost certainly the west side of the Cascades) and your human parent was probably a druid, too.

Druids are an interesting bunch. I've mentioned the inspiration my campaign has taken from Bob Pepper's artwork, specifically his DragonMasters card game. Well, one of the "suits" of those cards are the Druids, and one might well wonder if my druids bear any resemblance to Pepper's. The short answer is: no, but there is a little more to it than that. See, Pepper's druids DO make an appearance in my setting...as the (human) Atlantean refugee types that were part of the campaign when originally conceived as South American. Those guys? The shipwrecked Numenoreans that every fantasy campaign needs? They're the folks populating the greater Seattle area.

Yeah, Atlanteans as the Denny Party. Welcome to Hollywood, people.

So the druid religion is tied to the forests of western Washington (i.e. west of the Cascades) and thus tied to the Sea Kings (as I call them...though I'm pretty sure I swiped that term from an MZB novel) who have settled the City of Seven Hills, thus uniting form with function to close the circle. We'll talk about the Sea Kings later, but suffice is to say they're a pretty godless bunch (unlike the actual Denny party, who were devout...if pretty conservative...Christians) with a lot of their own magical woo-woo stuff going on. 

We'll leave Tacoma for a later post, too. There's a reason why there's no "Emerald Empire." Not yet.

Anyhoo...foresters. The sea and the woods have long been the lifeblood of the western Washington economy, but my setting doesn't have the maritime economy of the real world (because there isn't anything beyond the west coast...just endless ocean). As such, it is the forests that are of prime importance, and much of the shipping that does occur (along the coast, down to the mouth of the Columbia) includes a substantial amount of timber.  In a D&D world full of monsters, deep dark forests would be especially perilous to "puny humans," if it wasn't for the work of the rangers and druids. Not that they aren't dangerous individuals themselves, but they act as a balancing 'check' against hostile forces that would quickly overwhelm small communities of ship-building woodsmen. The unicorns of my world aren't very nice.

What Matters

Can D&D save your soul?

Don't actually try to answer that...it's more rhetorical in a Don McLean (American Pie, '...can music save your mortal soul?') kind o way. Looking back over my earliest blog posts from 2009, I see that I still struggle with the same issues regarding my life in gaming as I ever have. 

Regardless of whether or not D&D (or roleplaying in general) has any ability to "save," it has certainly been a large, indispensable part of my life. It would probably conflict me less if its study and practice were more widely accepted as "useful" by mainstream society. But it ain't. And even the gaming thing's popularity of the moment still seems...well, only momentary to me. I might feel differently if I'd managed to make (and/or squander) a small fortune in the gaming industry like a handful of notables have, but perhaps not: I've lived with gaming for decades, and those lean times of yesteryear have left heavy, indelible marks (I won't say "scars") on my memories.

It's just how I'm built. How my brain/psychology has been constructed over the years. My family raised me with a mentality that I could "do anything" with my life, but there were also caveats on what I should do. Those mental blocks remain with me to this day. It has led me to many of my personal life choices. It has bred untold hours and years of bubbling resentment in me. It is why I try to raise my children to be different from me, exposing them to all the things I love for all the reasons I love them with (hopefully) none of the hang-ups I have about them. 

Yesterday's whining was, unfortunately, brought on by the need for a nap. There aren't enough hours in the day to do all the things I want to do AND do all the things I need to do...and there never have been. These days, I don't even have a job to go to and I still can't find the time to do all the things that fit both those categories. This has been a theme my entire life. It's why the idea of my mortality hangs so much over my head. I don't really fear death these days (or what's beyond), but I live in a state of anxiety over leaving this life when thing's undone: from unfinished writing projects to failing to complete the raising of my kids. I've told folks over the years that I hope to live about two hundred years, which seems to be an adequate number for getting all the shit done enough that I'll feel "satisfied."

Prospects doubtful. I get it.

With regard to D&D: the "hiccup" that started about a month ago has just about run its course. We went through the superhero thing. We're finishing up the Star Wars thing. I ended up reviewing my old B/X Star Wars system (most recently in the form of Kloane War Knights...fun fact, but while I never finished posting that particular series, the book itself is just about complete (only missing about 1-2 pages of text). Maybe I'll make that available) and thinking, huh, I could just give that to my kid. I did my annual or bi-annual walk through Palladium's system (this year it was Rifts) thinking about how I might revamp the thing into a workable form. And now we're (just about) back. Back to the good stuff. The D&D stuff.

I've been thinking a lot about interdimensionality lately...perhaps because of Rifts, perhaps because I was thumbing through both Maelstrom and my old copy of Feng Shui recently...and I was thinking about how the idea might be applied to D&D in a way that helps make sense of the strange world that is the default D&D setting. Barker's idea of humans being stranded long ago on a hostile planet (Tekumel) isn't a bad one, and goes a long way towards explaining why humans are constantly fighting against humanoids like orcs and gnolls and gobbos: i.e. they all hate us because we are invaders/encroachers on their territory. Unfortunately, being stuck in such a hostile planet/dimension what are humans supposed to do? Lay down and die and get out of the way of the indigenous folks who were there first?

When have humans ever done that? Even when NOT faced with the prospect of isolation and death?

Unfortunately, this doesn't jibe well with the campaign I've been working on lately (set in Ye Old Evergreen State) which would necessitate blowing things up again...but I can't say I don't like it the more I think about it:

• It explains the anachronistic thinking/sensibilities of players set side-by-side within a pseudo-medieval culture (remnants of former lives passed down to descendants).
• It provides reasons for exploration and adventuring (this new, hostile world is still...largely...a mystery to the newcomer humans).
• It explains justification for why high level (human) PCs are set on carving out empires for themselves (i.e. why the adventuring area hasn't already been settled by the ever-expanding humanity).
• It allows all sorts of explanation for the kitchen sinky fantasy of D&D.

One of the things that helped snap me out of my funk yesterday was looking back over my 2019 posts regarding the Grand Duchy of Karameikos. These were pretty groovy (if I do say so myself)...

[which reminds me...my eldest child was giving me crap the other day for using the word groovy. "No one says 'groovy,' pops." Oh, my...the teenage disenchantment with (and ridicule of) the parents has already begun. Only took ten years... *sigh*]

...and I still feel like those posts (and my hard look at GAZ1) are something that could be plumbed for a decent campaign setting. The image that keeps coming back to my mind is the cover of Bradley's Two To Conquer, one of the handful of Darkover novels that I've never read, despite seeing it on book shelves for years back in the 80s/90s. Even without having read the book, there is the suggestion of an idea here (what with the back page and the cover art) of conflict and warfare fought with blades and psychic powers over feudal territories by the descendants of crashed space colonists that I find...well, very inspirational. I find a lot of interesting and theft-worthy stuff in MZB's Darkover books (as I've blogged in the past), and I can't help but think of Karameikos as ripe for some kind of Darkoverian pastiche.

Anyway. It's 7:36am now, I'm out of coffee, and it's time to wake the kids for school. Later, gators.

Vanilla DM

I have a tearful confession to make. I have all but abandoned my "grand plans" to run a D&D campaign set in the post-Columbian South America. I am, perhaps, being overly sensitive to the historical (and continued) atrocities perpetrated on the indigenous people and resources of the region; however, if anything I'd chalk up my resistance to laziness, seeing as how the sheer effort to create an adventure-worthy setting that neither disrespects nor ignores the actors of history feels like more than I'm willing to tackle.

Here's part of the deal: I'm 45, folks. I might incorporate aspects of Mayan or Incan or Aztec or European culture in my campaign, but I don't want to bother devising and adapting whole new systems that take into account the complex pre-hispanic cultures and crafts...things like advanced technology despite a written language (necessitating swaths of re-modeling for spell-casting), cloth armor and the effects of terrain and climate, manners of advancing in a way that doesn't require treasure-hunting (for the cultures that don't value gold in the same way as Europeans)...or that allow portage with the lack of beasts of burden or development of the wheel (without the need to harness slave labor).

Besides which, the more I delve into AD&D and its rules and systems, the more I find myself wanting to run something closer to the pulp S&S source material. There are fantasy game systems that have done a good job of modeling the pre-Renaissance world (at least in Europe)...Chivalry & Sorcery (1e) springs immediately to mind, though I've owned, and played, others. But while other, brighter minds than mine (like Alexis) have managed to shoehorn elves and dwarves and half-orcs into an historical Earth-based setting, I don't want to do that. I don't want a "real world" setting that has infravision, psionics, clerical spells, or "giant-class" creatures inserted into it. Yes, you can do it without creating a whole "alternate history" for planet Earth...but why would you? I assert that a world with dragons and Drow (let alone mind flayers and aboleths!) would completely and radically change the structure of human history as we know it. You can disagree. But if I can't suspend my own disbelief on the subject, how the heck can I expect to create a game or an experience where my players can?

I don't think I can. Not in a sincere fashion.

Consequently, I find myself wanting to run a game in a setting akin to the ones found in fantasy literature: the same fantasy literature that provided inspiration for the writers of the game. Maybe not Lovecraft or Vance, but certainly Leiber and Moorcock. Some kind of cross between Howard and King Arthur...less Tolkien in scope, more Bradley-type weirdness. With at least a sprinkle of Robert Asprin mixed in.

I know some folks will be a little disappointed by this turn of events. Truth be told, I'm a little disappointed myself, though probably not as much. After all, it's not like I can't (at a future date) drop the PCs through some sort of magical portal that drops them into 16th century South America. Have their sailing ship cross an inter-dimensional curtain and end up broadside of a Spanish galleon, or enter a pyramid in some lost fantasy jungle and end up exiting the Tower of the Sorcerer in Uxmal. Starting with "vanilla fantasy" may be a lot less ambitious, but it's utilitarian, and it provides a lot of possibilities that aren't necessarily present with a setting grounded in real world history and geography.

Plus, it's recognizable. I agree with much of what Anthony Huso writes with regard to using banal fantasy tropes as a starting point. It allows easy entry and buy-in to the players. I am absolutely certain there are plenty of individuals who would LOVE to play in a fantasy Latin America, especially one that is thoughtful, well developed, and semi-authentic/accurate. That being said, there are many, many, many players (including an awful lot of the ones who want to play in the setting) who are absolutely UNinterested in learning the ins and outs of the historical cultures that we'd be playing in...at least prior to play. Most folks (I think) would prefer to have information about the setting unfold in-play over time...the way we're used to learning information about most fantasy settings (in literature and celluloid).

Consider, for example, Tolkien. The Hobbit introduces us to the Shire then the background of the Lonely Mountain dwarves then Elrond and Rivendell then Mirkwood (with rumors of "the Necromancer") - all gradually unfolding background. The Lord of the Rings introduces more history, more geography, more cultures...and not all in the first book (neither Rohan and Gondor, for example, appear till the second book of the trilogy, and Mordor not till the final book). Even then, the events of the prior two ages are only hinted at in any of Tolkien's first four novels, and it's not until the Silmarillion that we even hear the name Illuvatar or the story of Feanor, etc.

Consider, as a different example, the television series Game of Thrones. Even in the first season, we are introduced to very few places and a very small section of Martin's world. We have King's Landing and its politics, the North and its Old Religion, the Wall and the Night Watch, and a bit about the eastern lands (whatever it's called) following the trials and tribulations of the Targaryan girl among the Dothraki plains folk. But huge and important aspects of the setting don't even come into the story until later seasons: the Army of the Dead? the slaver nations? Highgarden? Dorn? The Faceless Men and the Maesters of Old Town and the Three-Eyed Raven? The setting, its geography, history, and cosmology are all revealed over time, as needed.

With a fantasy setting you can do this...you can have only the haziest of outlines, the roughest of sketches, and crystalize things (as necessary) to fit the needs of the campaign as situations arise and adventures happen. The DM is making stuff up, after all. I suppose it's possible to do this with a historical setting, but it requires much more up front work from the DM (unless the DM is already versed in the history and geography of the setting). I suppose I could do this, given the knowledge, notes, and information I've already acquired...I could do it...

But, again, if you (like me) want to incorporate the weirdness of D&D fantasy into your game (aboleths and elves) AND they're not naturally occurring parts of the setting (as they don't in South America), then you need something more open and vanilla-bland to start. At least, I do.

Just so folks know.

Fallen Heroes

You'll have to forgive me for the late start, but I only got four hours o sleep and am moving pretty sloooow today. I was up till 4:30am (my time) re-watching the Seahawks-Denver game which, in case you missed it, was pretty darn good (admittedly, my perception of "good" is colored by the fact they won; a triumph of orky toughness over human ingenuity in Blood Bowl terms). I had been forced to skip most of the 4th quarter due to drawing superheroes for my child's school project (don't ask...but it turned out pretty cool), so I wanted to see what happened that lead to collapse after three quarters of domination. The answer: some great play from the Denver defense (leading to nine points), and an impressive 55 second, 80 yard scoring drive from future Hall of Famer (and ex-High Elf) Peyton Manning. A pretty entertaining affair.

But there are many football fans feeling a lot worse than Denver folks this week. People in Baltimore and Minnesota have been coming to grips with their star players being terrible human beings (even as NFL fans in general have been treated to a bellyful of disgust with the way the NFL mucky-mucks conduct their business, allowing winning/profit to trump basic humanity). This isn't a blog post about that: people can read all about it on ESPN or other news sources. I just wanted to say I understand and empathize a bit with how people in those towns feel.

People outside of Baltimore and the Twin Cities may not really grok how devastating it is to find out "the face of your franchise" is a person capable of such domestic brutality or child abuse. Ray Rice has been the celebrity face of the Ravens for years, and Adrian Peterson has been the only good thing about the Vikings for nearly a decade. These people are more than just touchdown scoring athletes; they are heroes to their communities and role-models to children that have grown up enjoying their teams' sports. Americans have a bit of cynicism when it comes to politics and Big Business (like the NFL), but individuals...heroic individuals that you passionately cheer for on a weekly basis...those are the ones you hope to be "good" and not mired in the same sordidness you've come to expect elsewhere.

I said I empathize with what these communities may be feeling, but I'm not referring to my local football team. Longtime readers of this blog have seen me write on more than one occasion of Marion Zimmer Bradley, one of my favorite fantasy authors, and a tremendous inspiration for many young writers (especially female writers). MZB has inspired my game design on more than one occasion, with both her ideas and storytelling, but that's nothing compared to what she's done for real writers, even helping many to get their professional starts. To many, MZB has been a hero and tremendous role-model to emulate.

Ms. Bradley died in 1999. Her last years were marred with some scandal due to her ex-husband (with whom she remained friends and occasional business partners) being accused and eventually convicted of child molestation, dying in prison in 1993. Bradley's own writing in the 1990s was affected by her declining health and most of her publications were collaborations with other writers. Her books and stories have continued to be published since her death, and new books based on her fantasy worlds (specifically the Avalon books and Darkover novels) have continued to appear in print.

In June of this year, nearly fifteen years after her death, Ms. Bradley's adult daughter revealed that she had been subject to years of abuse...physical, mental, and sexual...at the hands of her mother throughout her childhood. When contacted regarding this, Ms. Bradley's younger (adult) son corroborated her daughter's statement and discussed (briefly) his own abuse at his mother's hands, and how it still affects him to this day.

Neither of Ms. Bradley's children appear to have been seeking publicity: they were contacted for statements and gave accounts because they felt it was safe to do so, at this time, fifteen years after the late author's death. Both had long since distanced themselves from their mother, changing their names, helping to put her ex-husband in jail. Neither appear to receive any money from their mother's estate (the son says he was disinherited and receives no money from his mother's estate). There's nothing they seek to "gain" by their stories: their accuser lies dead and buried, and they agree many people have found their mother's work to be a great help...they were, frankly, afraid to say anything earlier for fear of how her fans would react.

It's extremely difficult to find words to express how terrible this is...the idea of how awful it must be to first live through years of abuse at the hands of your own mother, and then to live in fear of publicly revealing that abuse even years after the abuser's death. It's just hideous.

And to those of us who held this person up as a personal source of inspiration or a hero...well, I've written before that anything is forgivable (it is), and that good can still come from people who do evil and despicable deeds (it can)...but still, it is so disappointing, so saddening, so terribly frustrating to see your heroes are...not just "people with human foibles"...but people with a history of doing terrible,  monstrous things to their fellow humans. Especially those who are vulnerable and powerless to stop them. Your feel for the victims, but there is personal sadness, too, to have your hero knocked down from the pedestal on which you placed 'em.

I first discovered this information about Marion Zimmer Bradley in August. Found out about it while idly surfing the internet during an airport layover, researching something else. Knowing how much I've written in praise of the author over the years (on this blog), I've been meaning to write something about this ever since...not just to explain why you probably won't be reading any glowing reviews of her work in the foreseeable future but to acknowledge I am aware of this news. I don't know why it's taken me so long to get to it, but reading the recent Rice and Petersen news stories and contemplating how their fans must feel just reminded me I should probably get something posted.

Just FYI: since this news has come to light, I have read that all income from e-book sales of Bradley's digital backlist will be donated to Save the Children.

Okay...I'll get back to the saving throw "chops" now...probably starting tomorrow. Sorry (for more than one reason) for the interruption.

Dragones, Navidad, y Comida Mexicana

"Dragons, Christmas, and Mexican Food"

Se acabaron las fiestas. The parties are over...at least for 2011. There's looking to be at least one more late nighter for the New Year, but the next few days should be on the quieter side. Kind of. I'm supposed to be singing Metallica covers with my wife's cousin's band at a bar tomorrow, part of a six-band set (I don't know what order we're in...sometime around 10pm) but I might bag it. The kids aren't bad, considering their age (about half mine or a little more), but only two of the members bothered to learn the song they told me to prepare (Iron Maiden's Hallowed Be Thy Name), and they want me to learn a SlipKnot song (*barf*) by tomorrow so I can "come in on the chorus."

I'll probably do it anyway...my chances at "rock n' rollin'" these days are slim and far between, and I can pretty much do Enter Sandman and Master of Puppets in my sleep...besides that's a lot closer to "singing" than Pantera or Trivium (the band's main influences...oh, and Slayer, of course). The things I do for family (and ego)...

But up until tonight, the partying has been pretty much non-stop since I arrived. Let's see...party Thursday, wedding on Friday, Christmas Eve (till 4am) on Saturday, Christmas Day (party, late night Mass, relatives, party) on Sunday, birthday party (for my son, who doesn't turn 1 till the 19th of January) on Monday (involving about 50+ assorted relatives), birthday party for my wife's other cousin (involving many, many more people) on Tuesday...

Today's Wednesday, right? Yeah, just (very loud) band practice and a quiet chocolate and churros with the wife and baby today. We did some laundry.

In between partying and stuffing myself with excellent food, I've managed to accomplish exactly 0 (zero) as far as writing is concerned. Hell, this is the first chance I've had to type ANYthing (the baby requires quite a bit of wrangling, too)...and I can see it's actually Thursday around 1:14am. And I should be hitting the hay soon.

However, I have managed to squeeze in enough reading time (on planes and busses and in quiet moments) to finish Anne McCaffrey's Dragonflight, something I've long been meaning to do. What an utterly fantastic book...I see how it launched such a successful (critically and popular-wise) series. I'll have to pick up the sequels when I'm back state-side. Just ridiculously good and interesting...it wasn't until about halfway through the thing I realized that it had not ripped off D&D's "chromatic spectrum" of dragons, having been written in 1969, well before Gygax and Arneson (and thus was probably part of the inspiration for the RPG).

And I have to say I prefer McCaffrey's version of dragons to those created by TSR. That is, her color/size/personality/role descriptives for dragons makes more "biological sense" to me than the different color = different breath weapon thang. And this despite the totally bizarre "telepathic/teleportation/time travel" abilities of the Pern dragons. I guess it's just a matter of taste, but her animal mounts had more personality and "reality" (for me) than any of the dragons in the Dragon Lance books (for example).

I have much more to say about the Dragonflight book (not pertaining to dragons), but I'll save that for a later post. I've had an epiphany or two reading these old school SciFi/Fantasy books (I'm halfway through MZB's classic Sharra's Exile, and I hope to finish it in the next couple days) and I want to collate my thoughts in a way that will be useful from a gaming perspective.

Now if you'll excuse me, I am going to bed. Have to get up early tomorrow and download SlipKnot.

Cold Snow Bloggery

Okay, back to work.

Now that the Seahawks have tanked for the season, I can get back to work. Not literally, of course...today I have the day off (though I've been watching my boy all morning; he's asleep right now). And I think it's high time I returned to a bit of B/X madness...specifically with a wintery twist.

Before I explain exactly what I mean, I'd like to make a note of JM's recent post over at Grognardia. I didn't get involved in the discussion (and, frankly, stopped reading the comments after the first 60 or 70) because he specifically asked folks to be polite and respectful and I'm not sure I could have been such on something I consider to be a fairly silly topic.

What do I mean "silly?" Well, there seems to be an implication (and JM's own comments lead me to infer this also, not just the initial post) that there is a greater value to RPG material ("product") that arises organically from play. James isn't just talking about product that's been playtested versus product that hasn't...he's talking about "the origin of the content."

To me, the whole discussion is ridiculous. Look, there are folks who fancy themselves designers and publishers (like myself, in my own admittedly poor, small fashion) and there are those who simply "play." If the latter are creating material/settings/adventures, they probably are NOT interested in publishing their stuff (i.e. for money or "professionally"). If the former, than most ANYthing they create is given at least a cursory glance with an eye for profit.

I know I do...whether it's a one-page micro-system or an adventure for bar-hopping gaming group, there's a part of me that says, "hmmm...should I type this up and sell it as a .pdf for a handful of bucks?" That's just how it is. And when writing adventures for said game group, there's always the idea (in the back of one's mind) that this might be, or could be, a "future product."

Now, perhaps Mr. Maliszewski himself wasn't originally intending to publish Dwimmermount...it appears this was originally more of a thought experiment/blog stunt to see how the whole OD&D/megadungeon thing works. Maybe he never intended it (in the beginning) to be published and it is only now that he has amassed a substantial amount of material that he sees potential (monetary) value in a Dwimmermount product.

Fine and dandy...but most of us in the publishing business (and, yes, I again count myself as one of these, despite having printed only a single book) have more definite objectives in our own adventure creation from the outset. Why? Well:

- few of us have the resources to devote to game design full time

- time to actually game/play is limited

- writing and playtesting takes time as well

- the best way to kill two birds with one stone is to make sure your game/play time is being used to playtest that which you've written

Again, only so long as you consider yourself a game designer/publisher. If you don't, than play/game whatever the hell you want.

Anyway, having said that, I'm interested in writing up a little something-something on the blog for those folks who are into the B/X thang...specifically a series of posts detailing a possible world setting for a B/X campaign. This will, of course, be done with an eye towards future publishing (for the reasons outlined above) rather than for any particular game I'm running (since I'm still intent on playtesting my space game at my weekly session). However, if the series is never compiled/printed, that's fine too...this ain't something I'm particularly attached to, and it IS something of a thought exercise; I'm just not ruling out money as a background motive for the stuff I write.

Jeez...I do live in the real world after all.

; )

So, right...there are two ideas I want to postulate/discuss on this post ('cause I'm not sure how I want to approach them in the series):

Idea #1 - The Setting

My setting is going to be a very specific one, rather than a generic World of Greyhawk/Forgotten Realms/Etc. It's going to be set in a cold and snowy environment...something like the planet Fenris from the WH40K fluff/novels. This is due to my own interest/fear/fascination with things snowy, arctic, and mountainous. Monsters, characters, rules, magic, etc. are all going to be adapted/skewed to this setting. Here's the part I haven't decided: Do I make the default character assumptions one of Norse Mythology? Or do I do something more in line with MZB's Darkover novels (including ancient space colonists and psychic powers)? I have an attraction to both styles of "snow" and can see value in both, but to keep the setting specific, I feel I need to keep on a single tract. Since this is going to be published in installments on my blog, what would readers like to see?

Idea #2 - The Style

A while back I started working on my own Fantasy Heartbreaker, just to get the damn thing out of my system (basically, "knocking off" D&D with my own "fixes" or "what I would have done different from Gygax & Arneson"). While I made quite a bit of progress on the thing (about 30 pages, last count), it remains backburnered at this time because A) it's a FHB, and B) I have non-FHBs (i.e. potentially lucrative products) waiting in the wings. However, there are plenty of things about "my system" that I like...prefer in fact...to standard D&D. Should I incorporate some of them? A new setting book is a great time/opportunity to throw in some "house rules" that are setting specific. OR should I make the game adhere closer to the standard B/X rules? Or Labyrinth Lord for that matter...I could toss an OGL on the thing and see about making it a semi-official supplement for LL rather than a setting for an out-o-print game system. Again, the only plan at the moment is to post the thing up on my blog (I have one or two other books that need printing before this one)...what style would my readers be interested in? Do you want Vancian magic and Gygaxian combat? Or something different entirely?

All right...so now you know what I'm thinking about/plotting. Depending on feedback, I'll probably start the posts this week.

And whadya' know...I finished my post and the baby is still asleep! Maybe I'll take a little nap!

: )

Recovering...

...from another tough football Sunday. The Seahawks playing better doesn't do anything to remove the sting of a two point loss at home. At home, dammit! I don't care how great the other team...and the Falcons aren't nearly that great.

Meanwhile, ex-Seahawks rang up 28 points for the Tennessee Titans on the road against a Browns team that had been showing some signs of promise. It's funny that so far this season, the Titans have been the featured AFC broadcast every single week...at least in Seattle. It's almost as if the networks had an idea we were interested in following the team from Nashville. Hmmmm...

Things I'm doing, to take my mind off the 'Hawks change of fortunes:

• Finally getting back to my reading of MZB's Darkover series. There really is great stuff in these books; many campaign ideas to mine.
• Considering which of several reviews I need to write first this week: I've got two free RPGs off the net, one purchased RPG, and one novel that I need to write about. I may just talk about the RPGs in the context of my recent series on game objectives. Or not. Maybe I'll just try to be positive instead.
• Re-watching Terra Nova (On Demand) as I type, and thinking this is so much better than Avatar. Unfortunately, it's still a little too "easily-digestible" in content for my taste. Too "family friendly." Not that I object to the main characters being a family, mind you...a film or TV series can still be gritty and hard-edged, even without featuring the hard-boiled protagonist with zero relationships/family ties.

You know, THAT's an interesting game idea to tinker with, come to think of it...there's not enough family drama in RPGs. I mean, Edwards addresses some of this in his Sex and Sorcerer supplement, but a game that actually incorporates a family dynamic as a major part of game set-up and -play? Maybe something like the old Space Family Robinson?

Eh...I'm getting goofy. I better hit the hay; I've got a long day ahead of me tomorrow. And without the high one gets when their favorite team wins on Sunday.

K is for Kinfolk

[over the course of the month of April, I shall be posting a topic for each letter of the alphabet, sequentially, for every day of the week except Sunday. Our topic this month? Things necessary to take your D&D campaign from “eh, fantasy” to “kick ass.” And who doesn’t want that?]

K is for Kinfolk…as in one's relatives and relations.

It’s strange how, even with a DM’s detailed history of a new campaign setting, so often relations and kin get left out of the mix. After all, what gives us a greater sense of our place in a history or society but our relationship to it through the lens of family?

For instance: when I talk to others about myself, I often explain my background as having been born and raised in Seattle, but half my family is from Montana and the other half is from the (Olympic) Peninsula. For folks native to this part of the country, that helps describe who I am as a person…a city kid whose immediate relations are from the Wild West or Fisherman Central. If I say I’m also the first person from either side of my family to get a college degree as a “traditional student” I am also explaining something about myself…and describing myself in relationship to my relatives. The same holds true if I say I was raised Roman Catholic from a long line of such individuals…if I add my “Austrian, English, and Scotch-Irish heritage” I am further coloring my background all in terms of who my family is.

I think most people do this kind of thing to one degree or another…discussing where they’re from not just in terms of PLACE but in terms of relationship to family and ancestry. When you do this, you’re not just explaining who YOU are, but who your RELATIONS are, too.

In D&D, most player characters have no sense of kin.

Certainly, there’s no requirement to describe one’s relatives when creating a new character. “I’m a fighter with an 18 strength! What more do you need to know?” Well, that’s great buddy…but what makes you any different from any other fighter. “Um…I wear a funny helmet?” Okay, fine. But in real life our sense of ourselves come as much from who we are (in terms of family and upbringing) as from our own individual accomplishments.

At least at first…as we get older and do more (cementing our own place in the world), we identify ourselves more by what we’ve done than by where we’ve come from. But certainly when we START OUT in life as young people (1st level characters!), our familial background is much more important than our “deeds of renown.”

And in older cultures (into which, presumably, your pseudo-mythic-medieval campaign world settles) FAMILY and KINFOLK were MORE IMPORTANT than they are today. It shows up in much of the fantasy literature that serves as the basis for the game. Perhaps, not Howard, whose characters were all stand-ins for himself, but in many of the others…including Marion Zimmer Bradley and Tolkien…you find the question of kinfolk to be an important one.

And a practical one…kin relations provide important help (and problematic conflict) in Tolkien’s books (including the War of Five Armies in The Hobbit and the wars of the First and Second Age in The Silmarillion). Oftentimes, kin relations provide the whole reason why certain characters travel together in the first place, creating instant connections and party motivation.

Just like gangs of the Old West (“outlaws have brothers…”).

Now, I will say that I am NOT interested in seeing ANY player (or DM) write up extensive genealogies or family histories for their characters. In a game where you could very easily get turned to stone, shot through with an arrow, or fall on your own sword there is absolutely NO NEED to do a lot of work on an extensive character backstory. I mean, do it if you want to (of course) but if you’re going to go through the trouble why not just write a novel or something?

BUT what I AM suggesting is that you have an idea of where your character comes from and to whom he or she might be related…even in your own adventuring party. This is part of the reason I did the 100 Reasons Table back in the day…it was nice to explain some reason why these characters were riding together. It helps invest more interest in the characters if you know that you’re related…siblings, cousins, half-brothers, whatever.

On a practical note, knowing your character has a younger sibling or cousin nearby also gives you an instant “inheritor of your stuff” should your character bite it…something that, as said, is fairly frequent in the D&D world. Just a little phrase on the character sheet: “Next of Kin: Harold the Bald,” for example, is enough. You don’t even have to note “Harold’s” class…just roll him up if your first character dies; you won’t even have to think of a name.

Another practical advantage of giving PCs kinfolks is the opportunity for contacts in places. Kinfolk should never provide a mechanical advantage to a PC, but I’d say it’s (generally) fine to choose whomever you want as a relation. For example, you’re running your players through T1-4 The Temple of Elemental Evil. Having finished sacking the gate house, the players are tasked with going to Nulb to further investigate the doings of the cultists. One player says:

“Hey, I’ve got an Uncle that lives in Nulb!”

Why not run with it? Pick a likely candidate (any of the NPCs…heck, you could ask the player to describe his uncle’s trade and temperament to figure out a likely candidate), and let it be. It gives the party a starting point to the adventure, rather than making them “canvass the tavern for clues” (again). The NPC doesn’t need to help them or provide any equipment or information that he wouldn’t normally provide the PCs (just because he’s an uncle doesn’t mean he’s had any recent contact/relationship with the nephew/niece).

If you get tired of your players using the tactic with every town they come to limit them to D8 or D12 “random exploitable relations.” So long as the PCs are spending time in a particular part of the game world, why wouldn’t they have relatives in all the nearby towns? I have relatives scattered all around the Pacific Northwest!

So what if one of your players says,

“Hey, the King is my Dad!” What then, huh?

Again, I’d say why not run with it? Just remember, the character doesn’t receive any mechanical advantages:

• The character still starts with the same starting equipment/money as any standard character. Why isn’t he rich? Maybe he’s an illegitimate child, or an exiled one, or in disguise. Maybe he’s simply the youngest child and his older siblings received all the “perks.” Maybe he HAD perks, but he’s been robbed by highwaymen recently and now needs to adventure to gain gear fit for his royal status.
• The character gets no special treatment with regard to the law and taxes; in fact, he’s probably got to be doubly law-abiding as A) he’s been raised to respect the King’s Law, and B) he has a responsibility to embody the King’s Law. Sure, he might not face impalement like a peasant (unless he’s a magic-user in a land where witchery has been outlawed)…but then neither should most PCs (re-read that part about de-protagonizing).
• What if the character is next in line to the throne? Well, he doesn’t inherit said throne until he’s achieved the proper Name (9th) level of course…and even then, he’ll probably have to prove his worth by first establishing his own domain (Barony). Assuming, of course, he’s even a character class that would be interested in ruling (clerics and magic-users would probably abdicate to a younger sibling). Anyway, he wouldn’t achieve the mantle of King (or Queen) until his parent was ready to step down anyway…probably in about 20-50 years (roll D4+1 x10 to see the current ruler’s longevity)…by which time, the PC will have probably retired from adventuring anyway. And if/when he DOES inherit the throne, he’ll probably need to pay upkeep to get the castle “back in shape” after being run practically into the ground by a doddering old ruler.
• What about favors, special treatment in court, etc.? No more should be given to the child than to any other character of the PC’s stature. Remember, as PCs rise in level, they will be receiving audiences (and quests) from the local ruler anyway…and certainly they will receive fawning attention (and resentful plotting machination) from the normal courtiers. At 1st level, the King has more important heroes to speak and treat with than his beloved (or spoiled) child. The character can still gain audience, but the secrets of State will not be shared with the PC until he or she has “proven their worth” (i.e. gone up sufficiently in level).

The same holds true for any powerful NPC relation a player character chooses to have. “My grandpa is the Archmage of the Wizard College.” “My auntie is the High Priestess of Llolth.” That’s fine…but important NPCs are busy with their important responsibilities, and will have less time to devote to their kinfolk…unless their kin can be of use to THEM.

In the end, such individuals provide MOTIVATION, possibly INFORMATION and ADVENTURE IDEAS/HOOKs, and (most importantly) CONNECTION to the game world. That’s the important part of kinfolk and what they can do for your campaign. Not only do they help players to discover something more about their characters (namely, to whom they’re related) it helps weave themselves into the tapestry of the campaign world.
: )

George Lucas = Freaking Genius

A few days ago, I started an entry with the above title that...after several driveling pages...wandered far astray from my original topic (or rather, from the idea I had set out to blog about). As I was at the car dealership at the time and my car was ready to go, I set aside the damn thing "for later" and have let it stew on the design board without alteration.

Rather than take the time to clean THAT one up (it's got a lot of Forgey-stuff about creative agendas as relates to SciFi RPGs), I'll try to get back to my original idea: George Lucas is an f'ing genius.

Now, of course, this seems like a no brainer statement, right? I mean, even the folks who hate-hate-HATE the prequel films (or even Episodes V and/or VI) generally admit they would rather have a world WITH Lucas creations than without. In other words, bad Star Wars is better than no Star Wars.

If you like Star Wars, that is.

So then what's the point JB? Why the "duh" topic?

'Cause Lucas doesn't get ENOUGH credit...that's why.

Currently, I'm "grounded" from re-watching Star Wars films for a couple weeks (this is my punishment for the aforementioned speeding ticket from Spain), but just PRIOR to that I was re-watching the prequel films with the audio commentary running so I could get some insights into what the hell Lucas was thinking.

Turns out (if one believes what Lucas and co-commentators say) that Lucas WAS thinking throughout the whole process...and thinking a lot. "Visual jazz" is the way he describes the filmmaking process...and make no mistake, Lucas is a filmmaker first and foremost. Storyteller? Eh...only with regard to film being a "story told with pictures." Lucas was NOT setting out to create a mythology, nor a franchise (though the franchise model, firmly established by earlier films, was probably taken for granted as part of the over-all revenue stream). What fans (like myself to a certain degree) have read into the films, or wished for the films, is nothing more than wishful thinking and Our Own Problem. George Lucas had his own agenda when making the prequel films, and it had little to do with making a trilogy that was faithful to the backstory implied by the first trilogy.

Really. Truly.

[and just by the way, Lucas isn't the first storyteller to write prequels that don't quite jibe with the earlier written stories. I need look no further than Marion Zimmer Bradley's own Darkover series, specifically the excellent "prequel" novel Heritage of Hastur. In the foreword, MZB writes that if the story seems to be different from that recounted in the later (chronologically) Sharra's Exile, it was due to faulty memory and/or wishful thinking on the part of the characters doing the recounting...a sentiment I think Lucas would be happy to ascribe to his own "lapses" of continuity!]

And here's the funny part...as I watched The Phantom Menace listening only to the DVD commentary, I began to see the film through Lucas & Co.'s own eyes, and I found myself absolutely falling in love with the visual spectacular that is Episode I. This is a great film...and that's something I never thought I'd ever write.

Granted it probably helped that, without the normal sound, I was not subjected to the clunky dialogue (and often clunky delivery) rife throughout the film. But you know what? There's plenty of clunky/dumb dialogue in the original films. Lines like "Not this ship, sister." and "...made the Kessel run in less than 12 parsecs..." and that whole scene where Luke tells Leia that she's his sister are just as wince-worthy as "Good call my young padawan!" and "This party's over."

George Lucas is not a writer of literature...hell, he's not even a (decent) writer of screenplays. Only the 1st film ever received an Academy Award nomination for Best Screenplay, and I'd guess that was more to do with what was DONE with said screenplay, rather than what was written...the translation of the script into sheer visual magic and spectacle.

And ALL of Lucas's Star Wars films do that.

Even f'ing Jar-Jar Binks who I hated as much as anyone the first time I saw the film...even HE was palatable as I went through the movie with an eye to just what exactly the character was. There WAS a real person in a costume for much of the film, seamlessly interchanged with the CGI character. A movie magic masterpiece that gets completely over-shadowed by the character's ridiculousness and pseudo-Caribbean dialect.

All six of these films are space opera fantasy of the highest order, and they DO have both rhyme and reason to them, trying to walk a line somewhere between gonzo SciFi serial and more serious morality play. There is really good stuff in there to see, once folks lose their attachment to what they feel the movies SHOULD look like and simply enjoy them for what they are: the best space opera films of all time. Better written than Avatar. More serious than Starship Troopers. Possessing more depth and heart than Riddick. Grander in scope than Serenity. More heroic and fun than the Alien films. And, yes...far more imaginative than ANY of the Star Trek films, even the slick new J.J. Abrams one.

These are the best SciFi films of all time. George Lucas is the master of this particular type of filmmaking. Maybe someday, he'll give us another trilogy dealing with the children of Luke and Leia and Han...I'll tell you I would pay to see such a film in the theater, regardless of what the reviews said. And if they happened to completely ignore the "Expanded Universe" stories that have come out over the years...so much the better. F continuity anyway...I want spaceship dogfights, planet-killing super-weapons, and laser sword duels. Give me those plus aliens that smoke hookahs and get liquored up before flying their starships ("one more for the road, bartender...my droid does the flying")...I'll buy into it all.

I only wish we saw more of it on the screen.

Fantasy Females

I just started re-reading Jennifer Roberson’s Cheysuli books, a series I started years ago but stopped collecting due to a lack of funds (a frequent occurrence in my high school and college years). They’re pretty darn good…I had originally thought they’d make a decent B/X campaign setting (and still think that), but now I’m enjoying them just for themselves. Back in high school (my non-D&D years) I attempted to emulate the setting with SSI’s DragonQuest RPG (DQ has a lot of “ups” on D&D for a Cheysuli setting, including shapechanger characters, more accessible magic-use, and knife wielders that don’t totally suck), but in the end no one really wanted to play DQ, not even me.

[side note: If anyone would like to see the equivalent of a literary justification of “all weapons do D6 damage,” check out the Cheysuli books…these guys are like Apache knife-fighters extraordinaire!]

Anyhoo, I was thinking to myself this morning: what the hell is it with all the chick fantasy authors?

That is to say: why do I seem to be drawn to the fantasy writings of women authors? And how has that colored my ideas of fantasy and story and the application of both to my gaming?

Because (after all), the baseline foundation of the DM craft is emulating the stuff that you enjoy or read or watch in the various media available to us: books, comics, film, TV. You can say “well, I base MY D&D campaign on actual history” but I would say you are STILL getting that version of “history” from something: books, comics, film, TV (or possibly university lecture hall).

I think it’s nigh impossible to create something out of a vacuum…and SINCE I’m drawing on my own “memory banks” of fantasy to run my campaigns, and SINCE I’m reading so much fantasy written by female authors, HOW is that influencing me?

Because I do think there are differences in story-telling technique and priorities between genders. That may just be me (I was never an English major, as you may be able to tell from my blog-writing style, so I don’t know if there’s any study/analysis of this kind of thing)…but I certainly tend to gravitate to the woman story authors. Allow me to list some of my authorial inspirations (in no particular order):

Jennifer Roberson (despite only having read 2-3 of her books, she turned me into a knife fan many years ago…also prefer her version of “high fantasy” to others).

Elizabeth Boyer (duh…Vikings. I’ve blogged about this many times; she had major influences on the B/X Companion).

Marion Zimmer Bradley (the Big MZB…one of the All Time Greats. Her books are wonderful and pretty much un-translatable to a visual medium making them real “book books”).

Margaret Weiss (I know she only co-authored Dragon Lance, but her name does get first billing, and not out of alphabetical order…the DL books renewed D&D for me in middle school).

Wendy Pini (artist and writer of ElfQuest comics…probably the most engaging and gripping fantasy graphics of all time).

[Colleen Doran, artist and author of the weird sci-fi comic A Distant Soil has also had some small, if strong influence]

Anne McCaffery (mixing SciFi and fantasy is a good thing!).

J.K. Rowling (not an influence in my formative years, and certainly fairly cheesy compared to my usual literary fare, but I admit I have read all seven Hairy Bottom novels…probably the most books I’ve read from a single author in the last ten years).

[regarding my formative years, I will say that before I started reading fantasy, I read quite a few (10 or more) of the old Nancy Drew books at my school library. Although “Carolyn Keene” is a pseudonym, the authors of most of these books were women, with Mildred Benson and her daughter Harriet Adams being the ones primarily credited]

Susan Cooper (this one WAS during my formative years…read the entire Dark is Rising series. Wouldn’t mind revisiting that one, one of these days).

Robin McKinley (another one from my youth; author of The Hero and the Crown and The Blue Sword. The plots of these books impacted much of my early D&D gaming).


Now this isn’t to say that I haven’t read and enjoyed the works and writings of male authors over the years…however, most of these guys (like woman author Anne Rice) are folks that I’ve read once and not returned to…or authors I’ve grown beyond. For example, I read quite a bit of Piers Anthony back in my youth, but I can’t stand his stuff anymore, and none of it has impacted my gaming (I don’t do puns of the Xanth variety, and his Apprentice Adept series is the kind of simplistic fantasy/scifi that makes me wretch)…despite the sex and violence of his books, they seem squarely aimed at the age 12-15 demographic.

Sometimes, it seems like male fantasy authors only fall into two camps: the humorous/whimsical and the ugly. Humorous/whimsical would include Robert Aspirin’s books (which, like Anthony, can get tired after awhile), while “ugly” is the term I use to describe, say, Stephen King’s Gunslinger series. The latter is a series I read compulsively/raptly as it was published, but as with all of King’s books, it doesn’t shirk from the coarse, the gross, the gritty side of life, instead delighting in showing off just how bad things can be. Reading his books isn’t always “fun.”

However, there ARE male authors that fall into the “inspiring, impactful fantasy” category for me: Howard, Moorcock, Lovecraft, Tolkien, George Lucas, Lloyd Alexander, and C.S. Lewis (especially The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, which I have read half a dozen times at least). Interesting that of these authors, Howard, Lovecraft, and Tolkien had very strong female influences on them from a young age (Tolkien’s father died when he was 3 years old and he was raised by his mother)…but then, who’s to say that the female authors I cited didn’t have strong masculine influences?

The point is: it is the female fantasy authors that have had the larger impact on my concepts of fantasy (and directly translated to my fantasy gaming). ESPECIALLY with regard to gaming, only the Big 3 (Howard, Moorcock, and Tolkien) have had as much impact; the first two with regard to tone, the third with regard to mythology (and I would cite the Silmarillion and Children of Hurin as the main influence, not LotR). “Character,” “setting,” and “plot” (for what that last is worth; call it “scenario”), as well as “theme” (if any) comes from my female authors with the occasional random dude (Beagle’s Last Unicorn, Ellison’s Run for the Stars, Steakley’s Armor, and Boyett’s Ariel) sometimes throwing up an especially noteworthy piece of fiction.

[this, of course, is only in reference to my fantasy fiction influences; history and folklore also has a major impact/influence on my gaming and “fantasy life”]

Well, anyway, I thought it was interesting. I'll think about the subject a bit more and see if there are specific things about woman-penned fantasy that I really admire or if the whole discussion is ridiculous...more (hopefully) later...

: )

What Marion Zimmer Bradley Taught Me (Part 2)

[continued from here. Please note that while the entire first half of this post was written while flying across the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the night, much of this half was written AFTER being back a couple days]

Hmm….okay, what else have I learned from MZB and the Darkover novels? I mean, in addition to the fact that Carcosa was the name of a Darkover domain long before it was used for what’s his name’s supplement? And that cultural differences based on gender can make for interesting campaign settings by themselves?

Well, let’s see: fantasy and science fiction (i.e. “futuristic fantasy”) can work just fine, in tandem, when done in the right scale…that’s something I think MZB got right (though, again, I really want to check out Sharra’s Exile and The World Wreckers to get the full scoop on the Terran-Darkovan relations).

Not to dwell too much on this particular issue, but from MZB’s own notes I gather she felt this was part of what made the Darkover setting fresh or different from other fantasy worlds: the juxtaposition of two disparate cultures (one high-tech/space-spanning and one “barbarian”/sword-wielding). While I’ve yet to read the earliest books/stories in the series, the subject matter appears to be similar to the “stranger in a strange land” fantasy recently discussed over at Grognardia…not surprising when you consider works like Star of Danger were being written in the early 1960s.

What else…well, I’ve also learned that the right cultural bias for a game/campaign can be used to justify a lot of house rules. For Example: why do Darkovans carry swords instead of firearms? Because of their cultural contract, The Compact, that makes it un-lawful to attack anyone at distance (as any person must face the same threat of dying as the person against whom they seek to do harm). See the Battle Tech Clans as an RPG example using the opposite tact.

I’ve learned new ways to use intrigue and political ramifications (as well as family ties and loyalties) to create discord, drama, and conflict. But that all’s just window dressing (I didn’t LEARN anything, per se, but there are plenty of ideas and plots that are totally ripe for plundering for my own games)…let’s get back to another “ah ha!” moment.

The campaign setting.

I’ve mentioned before that one of my new writing projects is, in fact, a campaign setting or “world setting” for the B/X game, a little thing I’m calling Land of Ash. In fact, it was research for this particular writing project (still in its earliest stages) that led me to the Darkover books in the first place (to get some fresh ideas on the use of psi powers).

Now, I could write a few dozen pages on how reading Darkover actually made me want to chuck the whole Land of Ash “desert setting” in favor of a Darkover knock-off “snow setting” (as with Spain, I find a LOT of campaign inspiration in MZB’s world of Darkover). But those “second-guessing” notions have been put to rest at this point…cool as it would be, I’ve already done a chunk of work on Land of Ash…not to mention I am totally Jonesin’ to see some sepia-toned artwork (*hope*hope*). Also, why flirt with potential lawsuits from the MZB estate (my understanding is they’ve already put the kybosh on Darkover fan fiction)?

No, I’m still talking about learning new stuff…and Bradley’s approach to her own setting material is plenty educational, specifically with regard to the multiple epochs of Darkover.

The Age of Founding
The Age of Chaos
The Age of the Hundred Kingdoms
The Age of the Seven Kingdoms
The Age of Terran Re-Contact

What you have in Dakrover is not one particular campaign setting but FIVE. All are set on the same distinct world, with the same specific geography, inhabitants, and climate (not to mention little things like a LACK OF METAL and PSYCHOTROPIC FLORA)…but each different Age/epoch determines what the base conflict of the time IS as well as the cities/political structure and the technologies (i.e. “equipment list”) available to the characters.

How sweet is that? If I was to set Keep of the Borderlands in a Darkover-like world (not a bad idea when you think of it), it would become centuries old fortress-monastery much like Nevarsin or Castle Alderan and the conflicts and drama would change simply depending on the epoch used.

And every time I succeeded at achieving a TPK with a particular party of adventurers, I could change the setting and give the new PCs legends from the old PCs’ actions/demise.

I dig on this and really find it an exciting possibility for a D&D campaign setting. After all, most “settings” presented by TSR-WotC assumes a kind of everyone’s-all-adventuring-around-the-same-year kind of thang. It’s not much different for other RPGs either…Middle Earth Role-Playing assumes you’re somewhere in the 3rd Age, Stormbringer that you’re adventuring sometime AFTER the decline of Melnibone (but before Elric blows up the world), Pendragon places you square during the reign of Arthur (not in the age of Uther or post-Morte).

I suppose the Star Wars RPG (beginning with WEG’s 2nd edition up through WotC’s Saga edition) provides the closest thing to a Darkover-like campaign setting. There are distinct “eras” one can play in (Knights of the Old Republic, Clone Wars, Empire, or New Republic to name the four main ones), all set in the same universe. However, while the villains may change somewhat from Era to Era, the technology (ships, sabers, blasters) stays pretty much the same.

Contrast that with Darkover: playing during the Age of Founding (shortly after Darkover Landfall) would mean access to nothing but the most primitive gear and the very beginning of psychic technology (pre-Tower). During the Age of Chaos, laran tech is at its height with air cars and super weapons. The Hundred Kingdoms is well-established feudal kingdoms (a la Pendragon with psionics) but very few holdover remains from the Age of Chaos...kind of a post-apocalypse setting, really. And by the time of the Seven Domains and the Compact (but pre-Terran contact) the use of laran at all is extremely limited (and its technological “wonders of the past” are safely locked away).

And when you get to the final Age with the Terran spacemen? All bets are off as high technology meets barbarian feudalism and ancient laran secrets being unearthed to compete with the Terrans on an equal footing!

One small geographic map, limiting the realms of exploration to certain accessible, non-polar ice cap mountains, valleys and cold desert plateaus. A couple-few types of native fauna and flora to lend consistency (not to mention “other-worldliness”). Psychic powers in varying (if limited) degrees of potency. And then a cross-section of choice on antagonists, political spectrums, CUSTOMS/TRADITIONS (an important part of Darkovan life and one that varies from Age to Age), and technology.

That’s a tasty setting. And one that could probably be mocked up in 64 pages or less.
; )

Okay, okay…ENOUGH! I’ve got other things to get to today (including prepping for yet another session at the Baranof after a two week lay-off…and I’ve got two new players showing up!). MZB is a great read, with plenty of food for thought. I’d strongly suggest checking out some of her work (I know she’s not in the Moldvay bibliography, but perhaps she’s in Appendix N?) for ideas and inspiration.
: )

What Marion Zimmer Bradley Taught Me (Part 1)

I’ve been reading a lot of Marion Zimmer Bradley lately…which is to say I’ve been reading A LOT lately (or a lot for me, anyway…my days of reading a new novel weekly or even monthly are long in the past). However, I purposefully picked up a whole slew of MZB paperbacks from the used bookstore the other day as I was doing research into the literary tradition of psionics (or more accurately, “mental powers”) within fantasy, and I remembered Ms. Bradley using a lot of that in her writing. So I picked up half a dozen Darkover novels.

Wow.

Let me first say that I’ve long been an MZB fan, though I haven’t read all that many of her books. I think I first came across her in her Lythande character portrayed in the Aspirin's Thieves World books. Later, I read The Mists of Avalon (of course…absolutely required reading for any King Arthur buffs) and The Fall of Atlantis (because I’m an Atlantis buff, too).

[and, yes, I’m aware that the latter book is actually a republishing of two earlier stories that had different titles]

But Darkover was never a series I got into. For one thing, it’s not really a “series” so much as a SETTING for a bunch of novels and short stories. Similar to McAffery’s Pern, Darkover is a planet that has been colonized by humans of the future…humans that lose touch with their earth roots and develop their own culture and history over several hundred or thousand years.

As with Pern, the Darkover setting and extensive history provides fertile ground for a number of different tales that highlight the human experience without being set around any particular protagonist or set of characters. In fact, I’ve so far read four of the Darkover novels and each has been from a vastly different epoch of the world. For those familiar with the series, the books I’ve read so far are:

- Darkover Landfall
- Stormqueen
- Hawkmistress
- Heritage of Hastur


Right now I’m working on The Shattered Chain, and I really want to pick up The World Wreckers.

Okay, so, great JB. You like the books. You’re a fan. Now let’s get to the point of the post…exactly WHAT has Marion Zimmer Bradley taught you?

Lots.

In some ways, she’s RE-teaching me things I already knew but forgot. For example, fantasy/sci-fi adventure doesn’t have to include combat to be powerful, dangerous, dramatic, or life-and-death.

Really.

I remember reading a comment on someone’s blog (maybe even mine), that fantasy role-playing games require some sort of combat system because, for a game to BE a fantasy adventure RPG, COMBAT needs to be involved. I know this echoes a sentiment expressed by my brother in a discussion we had awhile back (when talking about RPG design) that people EXPECT some sort of combat/fighting action to take place in any role-playing game.

Bullshit. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

Just because Dungeons and Dragons has a combat system and makes combat a part of the game does NOT mean combat is a requirement for any fantasy adventure game. ‘Fantasy adventure” is NOT defined by fighting or mortal conflict. It isn’t. The classic “hero’s journey” involves over-coming strife and proving one’s courage (and may involve mortal combat…I’ll have to check that on wikipedia), but it isn’t necessary for a fantasy story to be an “adventure.” I think I was two to three hundred pages into Hawkmistress before any sort of armed encounter occurred…a bird got shot by an arrow (and let me tell you, that was a deeply moving and emotional chapter!). Prior to THAT, the only “fight scene” in the book involved a girl kneeing a dude in the crotch to prevent attempted rape. Period. End of fight.

Was there adventure and danger and dramatic conflict present within those several hundred pages? Yes. Was there mortal peril for the protagonist and companions? Yes. Was their hardship and challenge, both physical and mental? Yes.

But combat? Melee? Armed conflict? Nope, none of it.

Darkover Landfall has no armed conflict at all. Yes, many people die. A guy does get killed by a “monster” (he is stung by a tiny scorpion ant) and some throats get slit in their sleep…but nothing that would require a combat “system.”

Heritage of Hastur talks a lot about the martial training of the Guard corps. It has a lot of talk about the breech of weapons compacts. There is much discussion on duels and challenges and several instances requiring/demanding revenge/justice. But the only “fights” involve one guy getting held (on two separate occasions) and being beaten unconscious.

Stormqueen! has some more siege stuff, but not a single fight involving any of the main characters.

All of these books are “adventures.” They have people traveling/going places, facing hardship, experiencing conflict, being “challenged” (physically, mentally, and emotionally)…and yet no one draws a sword and fights anyone. And on Darkover, most everyone carries a sword at some point. Darkover is nothing if not a sword culture for God’s sake!

Okay so that’s #1 that I’ve learned from MZB…you can have people going on adventures and not getting involved in “combat” per se. People being conflicted…hell, DYING…and no weapons being drawn. That’s Numero Uno.

Numero Dos: A party of adventurers can have multiple motivations and yet still be cooperative in the aid of a greater whole.

Not sub-plots (though motivations in novels/stories often lead to sub-plots and side treks), but MOTIVATIONS.

Now, I realize that novels and RPGs are NOT the same thing…just as novels and films aren’t (they both tell stories, but they do so in entirely different fashions). RPGs are GAMES and as such they are PLAYED. While you can have a story develop from an RPG session (and can even actively work towards that end with a game that facilitates a narratavist agenda…like, say, Sorcerer), any story that is created is a cooperative or JOINT venture between the players involved, and thus cannot readily be dictated by any one single author…not even a railroading DM…without some consent of the players involved.

[don’t believe me? I (as DM) say, “okay, you guys are here.” Player A says, “My character would never go there.” I (as DM) say, “tough, you are there” (or DM provides some complex justification for the use of force, it doesn’t matter). Player A says, “I kill myself.” End of story…literally!]

In general, when the desired outcome of an RPG session is to have SOME semblance of story (even just, “we all went to this place and did X, Y. and Z”), the easiest way to get that cooperation between players is for the DM/GM to get players motivated in the same direction. For example:

“The Big Bad Guy threatens the kingdom. You have heard that the Amazing Artifact can put an end to his evil reign, if you only you can retrieve it from the Mysterious Dungeon.”

But characters CAN have major motivations…in fact, their whole raison d’etre…as THE THING that determines/inspires action, even though it seems a minor “plot” to the whole grand scheme of things.

For example, often in the Darkover books there’s some grand overarching plot that is DIRECTLY IMPACTED OR PERTAINING TO THE PROTAGONISTS (for example, the whole “realm” is in danger due to a war of succession…and the protagonist is the actual heir to the throne, not some side bystander/rube that gets drawn into the mess a la the Dragonlance heroes, for example), and yet the whole world shattering plot is a SECONDARY motivation to the character’s own likes/loves, hates/schemes, whatever. And having it as such does not prevent the characters (often, Ms. Bradley’s books present more than one protagonist or “main character”) from working as a team towards the main goal…but it enriches how they get there, the journey they are taking.

Again this is not something that’s especially new, just something I haven’t sat down and considered for a while. I may not be especially clear, so let me see if I can illustrate with an example:

Imagine a (D&D) adventuring party as a “special forces” type unit…a small group of proficient, heroic types designed to work together as a team to overcome obstacles and succeed at mission scenarios…you know, 4th edition style play.

I realize that this is the way Dungeons & Dragons has evolved through the last 2-3 iterations, but understand it bears NO semblance to the original literary traditions that inspired it. Instead it seems more inspired by The Dirty Dozen, The Seven Samurai, Mission Impossible or some other action film designed to spotlight a variety of special effects in different action sequences…the better to amuse and entertain the audience (in this case, the audience being the RPG players themselves).

Even The Lord of the Rings is somewhat guilty of this type of dross…especially the film version (which showcases the burly axe-swinging dwarf, versus the suave sword-swinging ranger, versus the acrobatic arrow-slinging elf). But Tolkien was telling an Epic story and the true protagonists are, of course, Frodo and Sam and their heroic struggles…NOT the actions of certain flamboyant characters.

[and by the way I DO enjoy the LotR films and have watched them multiple times]

Now, compare THAT type of “special forces for the sake of overcoming evil obstacle” group with a group of individuals, each with his or her own motivation (and not necessarily possessing aims in line with their fellows), that happen to be joined in common cause, but whose cause comes SECONDARY to their own personal (and sometime selfish desires)…you know, kind of like real life with real, independent thinking folks?

For a “cheesy example” let’s look at the protagonists of the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon. Silly, right? But look at these misfits. They have great powers at their disposal (when they occasionally get their shit together) AND they have an over-riding goal (to find some way home), and yet their own motivations and desires often overwhelm practicality or actually sabotage and cause their own group trouble. Eric is an f’ing coward hiding behind his wealthy background, Diana is some sort of foolhardy adrenaline junkie, Presto and Bobby are constantly attempting to “prove themselves” to the others (Bobby that he’s old enough to hang with the big kids and Presto that he’s not some gigantic nerd with a “worthless gift”). Hank is the Boy Scout, always trying to “Do the Right Thing,” and Sheila secretly carries a torch for the blonde archer and hopes to impress him. I mean, all of them are teenagers with self-esteem issues, but they manifest those issues in different ways, making for an interesting mix (if not one that is incredibly efficient in overcoming obstacles/challenges). And cheesy or not, the cartoon wasn’t something I’d call a comedy.

In my old D&D campaigns, players DID have motivations for their characters, and any particular adventure dreamt up by the DM was totally secondary to the aims of the characters…Lucky was always looking for new magical writings to fatten his spell book, Sunstarr was always trying to impress the ladies, my character was always trying to amass power and show everyone else up (‘cause I was a big jerk)…whether or not we actually achieved any GOAL for an adventure was completely secondary to the story that we were telling about our characters and what they did and how they did it…in other words, by their actions, which were often in conflict with any actual objectives set forth by our GM.

In fact, this harkens back to what my brother was saying the other day about wanting more motivation, more background for his characters…that the random Hat and Relationship charts were a good start but not enough, and that the adventure background itself didn’t seem to be enough motivation. It’s one thing when players bring their own specific, concrete goals and motives to the table…but the Dungeons & Dragons itself doesn’t necessarily provide “meat enough” to build a character.

Too Much to Blog, Too Little Time

I don’t know what’s wrong with me. Or rather, I know what’s wrong with me (I have a completely obsessive need to write-blog-comment-write-blog-comment) but I’m not sure WHY. Is it just that I haven’t had a proper creative outlet for the last couple weeks while traveling in Spain? Is it that the two week vacation rested me enough that I’m able to better access my inner inspiration? Is there just a ton of stuff to comment on, going on around the blog-o-sphere?

Who knows? I don’t, that’s for sure. Heck, maybe I just have too much to do this week (like going back to work, and unpacking, and getting ready for a number of Very Important Family Events, not to mention following up with my printer about the new print-run of the B/X Companion), and blogging is simply a way for me to procrastinate all the “responsible things” I should REALLY be working on.

C’est la vie.

Tim Brannan (he of the many blogs and Johnny Quest-like icon) has published a dandy little write-up of Count Dracula using my B/X Companion. This has touched off a whole bunch of thoughts (for me) on both the undead AND the role of the Companion in high level play. Two completely separate subjects really, and both worthy of their own posts. However, a preview question to consider:

- Does your use of undead drop off in high level D&D play? And if so, why?


Then, of course, there’s the leprechaun, which also really deserves its own post. Which would you rather have first, folks? Faeries or the walking dead? I know, I know…it’s a tough call. Probably the leprechauns will win out (I am part Irish, after all).

In political news...well, let’s just say I hope you all are voting this November and that you’re educating yourself at least a little on what’s going on, rather than just watching attack ads from either side. I’ll leave it at that for now.

In local news…Gary’s Games in Seattle is celebrating an anniversary of some sort (Tim told me how many years, but I forget) and is celebrating by having a week of events and festivities all next week. I’ve been asked to run my Thursday night Baranof game AT Gary’s rather than the bar next door (they’ve even agreed to keep the store open a little later on my behalf…nice!) as part of the celebration. Despite their lack of cold draft beer (or any alcoholic beverages), I’ve given it the “thumbs up.” AB and I might need to get our drink on BEFORE going, but I have promised to run the game more “family friendly.”

Though if recent experience is any indication, I expect a lot of the family to die.

What else, what else…so many commentators on my pistols post giving positive kudos has led me to think I need to include firearms in my B/X game. Between SpellJammer, the 1st edition DMG, Warhammer FRP, and Mordheim, I’m pretty sure I can come up with some simple/cool rules. Will there be warplock muskets A LA the skaven? Doubtful…unless I write-up skaven for B/X (and then I’d need mutation rules, and then I’d want Chaos powers, and by that time I’d be re-writing Slaves of Darkness and The Lost and the Damned for use with Labyrinth Lord…and I’ve already got plenty on my plate).

Actually, though, it’s not a TERRIBLE idea. If the Keep on the Borderlands was set in the Norsca parts of the Auld World…no, no, that is too ambitious for right now! Not to mention definitely cruising for a bruising of the lawsuit variety (that’s a lot of Games Workshop IP!).

I would love to write more about Spain…especially as relates to Strongholds and Mass Combat. As I’m sure I’ve mentioned, Spain is littered with ancient castles and fortresses, both Christian and Islamic. Both types have something in common: beefy practicality. These are not the fantasy castles of Ludwig the Mad (sorry, Bavaria), but are squat, thick strongholds that were the sites of bloody skirmishes. They are also quite a bit bigger than the dimensions given in the D&D rulebooks (towers at the Alhambra are at least the size of “keeps”…we’re talking 60’ X 60’ square plus).

Regarding mass combat, the new Army Museum at the Alcazar in Toledo had plenty to say, including the practicality of stand-up fights on the medieval battlefield (i.e. NONE). In the “Good Old Days” the object was NOT to commit ones’ troops to a toe-to-toe fight as this would generally lead to a ton of dead men…the idea was to drive the other guys off, or intimidate them into surrendering the field, so that you could claim territory with minimum loss of force.

Which makes me feel all warm and fuzzy that I made the Morale rules a major part of my mass combat system in the B/X Companion.
; )

Let’s see…even though Spain has been a major inspiration of late, Marion Zimmer Bradley has given me even more “school for thought” (maybe…Spain IS a big country, after all). However, THAT’s going to be a two or three part post that I’m currently in the process of “cleaning up.”

Oh, yeah...any my 2nd print run should be finished by next week. Keep those orders coming!

All right, that’s enough talking ‘bout talking. Time to get to work!
: )

When Kris Tells Me...

...I need to throw something up on Ye Old Blog, you know I've been being neglectful. He only reads the damn thing once or twice a week!

Yakima was great (and scorching hot), and I've made it back safe-and-sound to lovely, rainy Seattle. That's right...the season has turned to Autumn and once again we have that oh-so-fine wet-and-gray gaming weather that makes me love this town so much.

[the wife, a transplant, is NOT a fan]

Anyway, sorry I've been lax in my blogging duties. Sunday I was pretty wiped out after driving all day and Monday was spent being as lazy as hell in honor of the Labor Day holiday. Heck, I didn't even watch that much TV...mainly just read my book (Hawkmistress! by Marion Zimmer Bradley...my third Darkover novel this week as I try to bone-up on my psionic fantasy literature...I'll say more about that later). Very relaxing.

Anyhoo, I could say a thing or two about what's been going on around the blog-o-sphere: a couple-three new reviews of my B/X Companion for example (so far, still positive)...or Grognardia's latest-greatest on Star Wars and space opera (a favorite topic of my own, and one likely to throw me off on a two week tangent if I let it)...or how I lost a couple followers after last week's rants and gained another two over the weekend somehow without posting a blessed thing.

But I'd rather tell you some more good/interesting news...two projects both underway and me in a creative frame of mind which is good. It means that I HAVE been writing, just not blogging. Land of Ash is still piece-meal, but it's in a good state right now...piece-meal armor rules have been written up which take into account both protection value and bulk (with actually hinders protection value) as well as how to do piece-meal magic armor (oh, you're wearing bronze vambraces +1? Let's see how that stacks with your laquer-wood greaves +2 and your steel great helm). Along with some super-dope gladiator rules and arena maneuvers, I think that section is going to turn out fairly nice.

However, THAT's not nearly as cool as the other not-so-secret project. As usual, the thing I was dreading the most was the thought of working up new spell casters.

Wait.

Wait. Whoa!

I just realized something. Oh, man. Sorry, there's something I need to blog about RIGHT NOW that I just thought of. Holy crap. We'll get back to spell-casters in a bit!