Hmmm…weird to write an Frequently Asked Questions document for a one-page game, but here are a few answers to a few questions that have come up:
RE Bravery (Brv): Do NOT round when calculating Draw or TAC. For example, a Draw of 5 + 3.5 + 2 = 10.5; 10.5 is higher (faster) than 10 but lower (slower) than 11. A TAC of 10 + 3.5 + 2 = 15.5; characters must roll equal or below 15.5 to hit (in other words, roll 15 or less; a 16 is over 15.5 and thus misses).
RE Draw: If Draw is equal, individuals shoot simultaneously. Yes, this can result in Tarentino-esque shoot-outs.
RE Pistols shooting twice: Each shot requires its own TAC roll. Both shots occur at the same time (so the person with Draw 10 shoots twice AFTER everyone with Draw 10.5+ and BEFORE everyone with 9.5-).
[On a related note: if your two-fisted gunman wants to empty both smokewagons at once, all shots go off at the same time...don't forget those TAC penalties!]
RE Clockwork prices: Man, make something up! Generally, never more than a couple hundred dollars (should cost less than a good horse). For pricing in general, I use the costs listed in TSR’s Boot Hill game for both goods and services. Doctor’s fees aren’t THAT expensive (compared to hospital care in the 21st century), and neither should be man-sized clockwork parts (compared to good-excellent horseflesh). Repairs of existing prosthetics should be cheaper than installing new parts (which also require surgery). I assume I’ll be including full price lists in the full-length game (when I get around to writing it).
RE Normal folks: Abilities vary by background. Average townsfolk should have total attributes of 24 or so (Spd 4, Acc 4, Brv 6, Str 10) with only the elderly and young children having less than 7 in Strength (Str). Women of the Old West were just as hardy as the men-folk, as far as I’m concerned.
For those wondering where the hell I got the idea for Clockwork…well, basically I wanted Boot Hill (which I consider to be a mighty fine RPG) to be a bit less deadly, withOUT scrapping the excellent combat system. The only way I could think to do this was to force occasional re-rolls (or “safe” hits) of certain body locations. Since folks in the Wild West didn’t wear Kevlar, I had to think of a way to make limbs resistant without armor. Cybernetic prosthetics sprang to mind, and coupled with the images of the steam-punk anime Steam Boy…well, you end up with Clockwork.
As far as adventures go…heck, pretty much any of the old BH modules can be adapted to Clockwork (just add gears!). I suppose I could write up some quick conversions notes between the original game and the micro-CW, but that’ll have to wait till a later post. Interesting design note: my current “full length” version of Clockwork is much closer to Boot Hill, but due to space limitations of the micro-format I was forced to simplify both character creation and combat immensely…and I think it actually makes the game better (i.e. smoother and faster). I’m beginning to think that the final version of Clockwork will be much closer to the one-page version, rules-wise, than to BH…but we’ll see.
AFTER the B/X Companion of course…
; )
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Conan the Barbarian, B/X Thief
One of the books I picked up at the used bookstore this weekend was the Gregory Manchess illustrated Conquering Sword of Conan, the third volume in a collection of un-edited Howard writings, apparently compiled by Patrice Louinet. Yes, I realize I should probably be reading Sallinger before I dive straight into the “fun” literature of Conan…sue me.
This particular collection showcases Howard’s works in the order that he published them, culminating in his (recently reviewed) masterpiece, Red Nails…which I have never read, by the way. I’m looking forward to it.
Anyway, as I read ol’ REH’s wonderful description concerning his most well-known protagonist, I can’t help but come to the conclusion: in B/X terms, Conan is a thief.
Not a fighter. Certainly not a demi-human or spell-user. But a thief.
I know I mentioned this (briefly) before, but it was more an off-the-cuff remark (I have a tendency to make those a lot). But I am totally 100% in bed with the idea now. If I was modeling a character after Conan for B/X play, the Cimmerian barbarian (rolls off the tongue, don’t it?) would totally be a D4 hit dice thief.
Of course, he’d be a D4 hit dice thief with an 18 constitution; that much is clear. Everything in Howard’s writing details how healthy and wholesome (and ironed stamina) Conan’s constitution is compared to civilized folk and men of lesser stature. He out-lasts and out-paces everyone…that is the mark of a solid 18 in Constitution. And with +3 hit points per die, he’ll have a better hit point average than a standard fighter (5.5 per level as opposed to 4.5). Once he hits name level, of course, his hit points increase just as any other fighter (+2 points per level).
In fighting ability, being a thief doesn’t make Conan much less than a fighter in the hand-to-hand department. In B/X play, a fighter’s chance to hit increases by 10% every three levels, a thief’s increases 10% every four levels. A name (9th) level fighter and a name level thief have the exact same chance to hit. After 10th level, the hit differential is separated by at least 10%. However, I’d argue the strength of Howard’s Conan is at least 16 (forget Schwarzenegger for the moment) which provides a +10% bonus to hit, allowing our thief to keep pace up until level 22.
Of course, if one looks at the opponent’s Conan fights, one doesn’t see many of particularly potent armor class anyway…if all you’re fighting are dudes in standard armor, a high level thief will need the same to hit in melee (“2”) as a fighter.
Conan uses any and all weapons, just as does a B/X thief. Contrary to his film depictions, he generally goes clothed (often wearing a shirt), though he is more likely to wear little or no armor when adventuring (in warfare he wears mail and carries a shield). This latter IS a bit of a sticky point as B/X thieves are not allowed to wear any armor other than leather. However, I don’t have references to Conan using any of his thief skills while "armored up"…perhaps in his DM’s home-brew the price one pays for violating class restrictions is an inability to use special class abilities? This makes a bit of sense when you figure anyone can “wear” a chain shirt (but you’ll end up a D4 hit dice fighter with neither thief nor magical abilities).
And Conan DOES exhibit thief abilities. Sure, he bludgeons his way out of prison in the story Rogues in the House, but that’s only because he was jailed without lock-picks! In The Servants of Bin-Yatkin he shows his ability to climb sheer surfaces and read languages as a high level thief (in fact, the description of the latter ability perfectly jibes with its explanation in the Cook/Marsh Expert set). If Conan doesn’t “pick pockets” it’s only because he’s a character more prone to the “direct approach” (I know the feeling!). Even so, he still moves with cat-like stealth and often ambushes opponents from the shadows.
His attitude is certainly one of the opportunist and adventurer, not the fighter. Howard’s Conan isn’t motivated by honor, duty, or loyalty (except to his men…see below). In general, he is motivated by sheer greed and looking for an easy score. Even though he eventually becomes king of Aquilonia, it is through assassination and usurpation, rather than carving out a dominion and building a castle (the way for a B/X fighter to obtain a baronial title). More often than not, Conan is a thief, outlaw, pirate, highwayman, and bandit lord. The dude is a thief.
Let’s talk about his other abilities. He is certainly literate (Intelligence of 9+) but speaks only a smattering of many languages, not being necessarily fluent (depending on how one runs a campaign with multiple human/”Common” tongues). Wisdom he does not possess in bulk, except for the wisdom of experience. This he gains quickly which would indicate a high Dexterity (the Prime Requisite of the thief class). As Howard most often describes Conan as panther-like in grace, movement, and reflexes (as well as possessing the speed of a striking cobra), I think it safe to assume he possesses a 16+ in this attribute.
As a leader of men, Conan is described as having a very magnetic personality…a high Charisma, able to inspire his followers by his own deeds and actions, if not any particularly flowery speeches. This and his usually favorable reaction from the lady-folk indicate that he has at least a 13+ in Charisma and quite possibly 16-18. There is, of course, no requirement of being a fighter in order to lead mercenaries in B/X play (oh, and though Conan never creates a “thieves guild” there are instances from the stories that might be considered the establishment of “hide-outs” and the attraction of 1st level thieves, i.e. “bandits”).
Personally, I can’t think of any other genuine way to model Conan in B/X play other than as a thief. At least not given the rules as written (I mean, one could house-rule a bunch of “barbarian abilities” but this simply pre-empts the thief…you know, the way the cavalier class one-upped the fighter in AD&D?). The more I read of his exploits in Howard’s original literature, the more convinced I become. To me, it simply exemplifies how versatile the B/X rule system is…not every thief has to be some glib-tongued con-man a la the Grey Mouser. A brawny, taciturn Hillman from the North makes a fine thief as well!
This particular collection showcases Howard’s works in the order that he published them, culminating in his (recently reviewed) masterpiece, Red Nails…which I have never read, by the way. I’m looking forward to it.
Anyway, as I read ol’ REH’s wonderful description concerning his most well-known protagonist, I can’t help but come to the conclusion: in B/X terms, Conan is a thief.
Not a fighter. Certainly not a demi-human or spell-user. But a thief.
I know I mentioned this (briefly) before, but it was more an off-the-cuff remark (I have a tendency to make those a lot). But I am totally 100% in bed with the idea now. If I was modeling a character after Conan for B/X play, the Cimmerian barbarian (rolls off the tongue, don’t it?) would totally be a D4 hit dice thief.
Of course, he’d be a D4 hit dice thief with an 18 constitution; that much is clear. Everything in Howard’s writing details how healthy and wholesome (and ironed stamina) Conan’s constitution is compared to civilized folk and men of lesser stature. He out-lasts and out-paces everyone…that is the mark of a solid 18 in Constitution. And with +3 hit points per die, he’ll have a better hit point average than a standard fighter (5.5 per level as opposed to 4.5). Once he hits name level, of course, his hit points increase just as any other fighter (+2 points per level).
In fighting ability, being a thief doesn’t make Conan much less than a fighter in the hand-to-hand department. In B/X play, a fighter’s chance to hit increases by 10% every three levels, a thief’s increases 10% every four levels. A name (9th) level fighter and a name level thief have the exact same chance to hit. After 10th level, the hit differential is separated by at least 10%. However, I’d argue the strength of Howard’s Conan is at least 16 (forget Schwarzenegger for the moment) which provides a +10% bonus to hit, allowing our thief to keep pace up until level 22.
Of course, if one looks at the opponent’s Conan fights, one doesn’t see many of particularly potent armor class anyway…if all you’re fighting are dudes in standard armor, a high level thief will need the same to hit in melee (“2”) as a fighter.
Conan uses any and all weapons, just as does a B/X thief. Contrary to his film depictions, he generally goes clothed (often wearing a shirt), though he is more likely to wear little or no armor when adventuring (in warfare he wears mail and carries a shield). This latter IS a bit of a sticky point as B/X thieves are not allowed to wear any armor other than leather. However, I don’t have references to Conan using any of his thief skills while "armored up"…perhaps in his DM’s home-brew the price one pays for violating class restrictions is an inability to use special class abilities? This makes a bit of sense when you figure anyone can “wear” a chain shirt (but you’ll end up a D4 hit dice fighter with neither thief nor magical abilities).
And Conan DOES exhibit thief abilities. Sure, he bludgeons his way out of prison in the story Rogues in the House, but that’s only because he was jailed without lock-picks! In The Servants of Bin-Yatkin he shows his ability to climb sheer surfaces and read languages as a high level thief (in fact, the description of the latter ability perfectly jibes with its explanation in the Cook/Marsh Expert set). If Conan doesn’t “pick pockets” it’s only because he’s a character more prone to the “direct approach” (I know the feeling!). Even so, he still moves with cat-like stealth and often ambushes opponents from the shadows.
His attitude is certainly one of the opportunist and adventurer, not the fighter. Howard’s Conan isn’t motivated by honor, duty, or loyalty (except to his men…see below). In general, he is motivated by sheer greed and looking for an easy score. Even though he eventually becomes king of Aquilonia, it is through assassination and usurpation, rather than carving out a dominion and building a castle (the way for a B/X fighter to obtain a baronial title). More often than not, Conan is a thief, outlaw, pirate, highwayman, and bandit lord. The dude is a thief.
Let’s talk about his other abilities. He is certainly literate (Intelligence of 9+) but speaks only a smattering of many languages, not being necessarily fluent (depending on how one runs a campaign with multiple human/”Common” tongues). Wisdom he does not possess in bulk, except for the wisdom of experience. This he gains quickly which would indicate a high Dexterity (the Prime Requisite of the thief class). As Howard most often describes Conan as panther-like in grace, movement, and reflexes (as well as possessing the speed of a striking cobra), I think it safe to assume he possesses a 16+ in this attribute.
As a leader of men, Conan is described as having a very magnetic personality…a high Charisma, able to inspire his followers by his own deeds and actions, if not any particularly flowery speeches. This and his usually favorable reaction from the lady-folk indicate that he has at least a 13+ in Charisma and quite possibly 16-18. There is, of course, no requirement of being a fighter in order to lead mercenaries in B/X play (oh, and though Conan never creates a “thieves guild” there are instances from the stories that might be considered the establishment of “hide-outs” and the attraction of 1st level thieves, i.e. “bandits”).
Personally, I can’t think of any other genuine way to model Conan in B/X play other than as a thief. At least not given the rules as written (I mean, one could house-rule a bunch of “barbarian abilities” but this simply pre-empts the thief…you know, the way the cavalier class one-upped the fighter in AD&D?). The more I read of his exploits in Howard’s original literature, the more convinced I become. To me, it simply exemplifies how versatile the B/X rule system is…not every thief has to be some glib-tongued con-man a la the Grey Mouser. A brawny, taciturn Hillman from the North makes a fine thief as well!
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Clockwork Changes
Changed the link to Clockwork (even though it was downloaded 40+ times, I was having problems with it on the Mac...I am so retarded when it comes to this computer hocus-pocus).
The link to A Chronicle of Mutation remains the same.
Ugh...tomorrow I'll answer some questions. I'm going to bed now (letting the wine do its work). Hasta manana, folks!
; )
A Chronicle of Mutation
In a decidedly inspired fit of creativity, I created my second one-page micro-game today (my first being the “Weird Western” micro- Clockwork, for those who missed it).
The new one is called A Chronicle of Mutation and is available for download here.
Heavily based on the setting of the old Heartbreaker game The Mutant Chronicles (duh!), the rules are a fairly radical departure from the original. It’s also greatly reduced in scope, something that I see as a decided plus (if I do say so myself). The earlier RPG suffered a bit from the over-whelming options: if one person wanted to play an Imperial Blood Beret, one person an inquisitorial assassin, and a 3rd a Mishima corporate samurai in giant robo battle gear, and the last one as a freelancer journalist…well crap, how are you supposed to GM THAT type of freakshow? My micro-version tunes it down to the simple freelancer level, though with a twist: you’re nominally associated with the Holy Inquisition (my version of the Cathedral) and thus have a definite type of objective (sniffing out heretics) for missions/adventures.
All-in-all, I’m quite pleased. As with Clockwork, any comments, suggestions, and feedback are truly appreciated.
The new one is called A Chronicle of Mutation and is available for download here.
Heavily based on the setting of the old Heartbreaker game The Mutant Chronicles (duh!), the rules are a fairly radical departure from the original. It’s also greatly reduced in scope, something that I see as a decided plus (if I do say so myself). The earlier RPG suffered a bit from the over-whelming options: if one person wanted to play an Imperial Blood Beret, one person an inquisitorial assassin, and a 3rd a Mishima corporate samurai in giant robo battle gear, and the last one as a freelancer journalist…well crap, how are you supposed to GM THAT type of freakshow? My micro-version tunes it down to the simple freelancer level, though with a twist: you’re nominally associated with the Holy Inquisition (my version of the Cathedral) and thus have a definite type of objective (sniffing out heretics) for missions/adventures.
All-in-all, I’m quite pleased. As with Clockwork, any comments, suggestions, and feedback are truly appreciated.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
NOW I'm REALLY Back
The car is unpacked and the beagles have had their baths (well, after they had a chance to let all the neighbors know we were back...ar-woo-wooooooooo!!!).
Spokane was very nice. Don't know what it's like for gaming but I imagine there must be some role-players SOMEWHERE in that town. Went to Auntie's Bookstore (as well as the attached Uncle's Gamestore) and found no RPGs, used or otherwise. Ugh...what do Gonzaga kids have to do besides drink beer and wait for basketball season to start? Hike and watch cable, I suppose (oh, yeah...I forgot on-line gaming).
Back in Missoula I at least found SOME role-playing games. No this wasn't a "working" vacation, I am simply an obsessive collector and peruser of used bookstores. Plus, I like to see what's going on, ya' know? You can't throw a rock in Missoula without hitting a head shop and three street kids sporting Bob Marley shirts, but where does one go if he wants to play a little D&D?
Well, when I was a kid (a loooong time ago), I spent my hard earned allowance in one of only two places: Circle K (for comic books/candy) and my favorite used book store of all time, the Book Exchange. I bought many of my earliest RPGs (my 1st edition Stormbringer, 2nd Edition Gamma World, Top Secret) and best TSR adventure modules (G1-3, I1 and I2, S2:White Plume Mountain) at this used book store. Heck, I even got my copy of Mentzer's Companion set there.
Of course, I haven't visited this store in nearly 20 years. I simply figured it no longer existed (if you know how much Missoula has changed in the last twenty years, you'll know what I mean).
So when my grandmother mentioned the shop still existed, just having been moved to a new, larger location. I was pretty excited. And since the wife and me were driving into Missoula anyway (to meet some friends from Helena) I decided I absolutely must check out this font of wonder from my youth.
They even have the same sign from when I was a kid.
The new store is huge, spacious and bright compared to the shadowy and dusty shop of my youth. Hell, they even have a coffee bar inside...quite fancy. They also sell new stuff in addition to the used books.
What they did NOT have was the large selection of RPGs. In fact, it took me quite a bit of searching to find the limited selection of game materials they did have...probably 6-7 inches of total shelf space. And what was there? A single copy of a 4th edition PHB and MM, a few random 3rd edition texts, maybe a couple old White Wolf books. Definitely nothing worth purchasing.
O how the mighty have fallen.
Well, the place served me well in my youth, and I'll still be sure to check it out whenever visiting Missoula in the future. I did pick up several tasty book finds...Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye (never yet read it), a collection of Robert E. Howard's non-Conan stories, and a biography of Grigori Rasputin.
Oh...Auntie's and Uncle's also provided several gifts as well (my niece is coming to town, and we bought her a book and several games). Just doing my part for the economy.
: )
Back in Civilization (Almost)
Welp, me and the fam are almost back to Seattle (been up on Flathead Lake in Montana the last few days) and I finally have a place to connect to the internet: the Oxford Suites in Spokane, Washington. Spokane (or "Spokavegas" as my friends from WSU always called it) has grown up a lot in the last 20 years...for a change, my wife and I have decided to linger a bit in the town rather than drive straight through, and it's quite nice. Riverfront Park has many of the same sights I recall from my youth (the Carousel, the mechanical goat) but also has new stuff (a friggin' gondola?!). I am forced to admit it's quite beautiful...though I think I'm still too much of a "city slicker" to live in Eastern Washington.
Anyway, it's been very relaxing...I've let my cell phone run out of juice (not that I'm a big cell user...I only picked up my first one in January...talk about geezers!), and I didn't turn on a television my whole time in Montana. I didn't crack a book, either...instead simply enjoying the outdoors, the company of my family and relatives, and lots of card playing.
My family are game players from waaay back, though mainly it's cards. Not poker (they do some of that but mostly they're not gamblers) but rather pinochle, cribbage, bridge, and rummy. Montana winters tend to mean lots of snow, and all my relatives are skilled card players...most of my card knowledge was taught to me by my grandmother. Like Old School RPGs, cards have a simplicity and portability that allow for hours of entertainment with very little space requirements. Personally, I love playing cards...which is probably one of the reasons I have so much fun in Montana despite my general aversion to hunting and fishing.
Anyway, despite taking my computer and references with me, I did very little writing. Well, I DID write up my own one-page micro-game a la Searchers of the Unknown, Mutant Scavengers of the Ruined Earth, and Scavengers & Spacewrecks. My little game is called Clockwork...it's a one-page version of an RPG I've been working on for awhile. Those familiar with Boot Hill will recognize some of the obvious similarities in the game system...it's not really compatible with the other micro-games, because of this. But hanging out in Montana always gets me fired up about the Old West, so Clockwork is what I wrote up.
Actually, I found the one-page model to be pretty fun to work with...I have a couple of other half-written RPGs that might be good in this format. As well as one more knock-off of an existing RPG....
Oh, any comments on Clockwork are appreciated. I'll probably get back to the full length version once I've completed my B/X Companion (one thing at a time).
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Review of a Review
I started writing a post about experience points, “rewards,” and its influences on behavior, as well as the strange differences between B/X and AD&D in this regard. But then I thought, “why would anyone care what the hell I have to say?” especially in light of the fact that I need a few more references in order to make my point (or even formulate one worth posting!).
So instead, I’m posting a link to this ancient (1975) review of the then-newly-published Dungeons & Dragons game by Messrs. Gygax and Arneson.
I know this has been referenced/posted before at both The Forge (in 2003) and Dragonsfoot (in 2004), but it’s new to me. And if nothing else, I want a link on my blog for future reference. While not a historian or archivist, I find this incredibly fascinating, as it gives a peek into the perception of D&D to a true wargamer, prior to the spread of the RPG hobby.
It is amazing to consider how different the game is/was from the standard wargaming practices of the time. For example, the reviewer’s statement that “play in person is usually impossible, since the referee can only show the adventurer the terrain he is crossing at that instant, plus whatever is in plain sight.” Clearly, the idea of a “shared imaginary space” (or “playing without a board”) had yet to be developed. As a “wargame,” the inevitable assumption is that the game will be played on some sort of battlefield, or at least with miniatures to one degree or another.
I can’t help but smile when I read that “Vastly too much has been attempted in these booklets…the resulting mess in interpretations is enough to tax the patience of most gamers to the extreme.” Indeed, which is why the game was so open to interpretation by individual gaming groups for so long. This is follower up by the similar chuckler “Worse, personal combat is the area receiving the most attention…things go downhill from there.”
That the wargaming reviewer felt the game’s emphasis on personal combat was “worse” than the overall lack of clarity says A LOT. A wargamer (then or now) was generally more interested in combat between armies or multiple units, not the heroic action of individuals. Folks may consider 4th Edition a return to its “wargame roots” but I don’t think Mr. Hendrick would!
Ha! Even in 1975, gamers were complaining about the price of RPGs; at $3.50 per book, the price was considered "rather high" despite the “decent” graphics format and “excellent illustrations.” Bitching over a few dollars...I wonder how much it is when adjusted for inflation?
: )
And the final analysis? “The scope is just too grand, while the referee is expected to do too much in relation to the players.” Indeed, indeed…unfortunately, the creation of rules to help circumvent DM fiat failed to result in the “refinement” and “simplification” called for by the reviewer. Recent indie games of the last couple years HAVE attempted and often succeeded!) in creating games both simple and elegant, often by placing more narrative authority in the hands of players…but none of these could rightly be called “wargames.”
Clearly RPGs have been a very different breed of animal for a LOOOONG time!
: )
So instead, I’m posting a link to this ancient (1975) review of the then-newly-published Dungeons & Dragons game by Messrs. Gygax and Arneson.
I know this has been referenced/posted before at both The Forge (in 2003) and Dragonsfoot (in 2004), but it’s new to me. And if nothing else, I want a link on my blog for future reference. While not a historian or archivist, I find this incredibly fascinating, as it gives a peek into the perception of D&D to a true wargamer, prior to the spread of the RPG hobby.
It is amazing to consider how different the game is/was from the standard wargaming practices of the time. For example, the reviewer’s statement that “play in person is usually impossible, since the referee can only show the adventurer the terrain he is crossing at that instant, plus whatever is in plain sight.” Clearly, the idea of a “shared imaginary space” (or “playing without a board”) had yet to be developed. As a “wargame,” the inevitable assumption is that the game will be played on some sort of battlefield, or at least with miniatures to one degree or another.
I can’t help but smile when I read that “Vastly too much has been attempted in these booklets…the resulting mess in interpretations is enough to tax the patience of most gamers to the extreme.” Indeed, which is why the game was so open to interpretation by individual gaming groups for so long. This is follower up by the similar chuckler “Worse, personal combat is the area receiving the most attention…things go downhill from there.”
That the wargaming reviewer felt the game’s emphasis on personal combat was “worse” than the overall lack of clarity says A LOT. A wargamer (then or now) was generally more interested in combat between armies or multiple units, not the heroic action of individuals. Folks may consider 4th Edition a return to its “wargame roots” but I don’t think Mr. Hendrick would!
Ha! Even in 1975, gamers were complaining about the price of RPGs; at $3.50 per book, the price was considered "rather high" despite the “decent” graphics format and “excellent illustrations.” Bitching over a few dollars...I wonder how much it is when adjusted for inflation?
: )
And the final analysis? “The scope is just too grand, while the referee is expected to do too much in relation to the players.” Indeed, indeed…unfortunately, the creation of rules to help circumvent DM fiat failed to result in the “refinement” and “simplification” called for by the reviewer. Recent indie games of the last couple years HAVE attempted and often succeeded!) in creating games both simple and elegant, often by placing more narrative authority in the hands of players…but none of these could rightly be called “wargames.”
Clearly RPGs have been a very different breed of animal for a LOOOONG time!
: )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)