AKA “A World Without Consequences”
All right, time for Bone #3 in my continuing series of “Ranting in the New Year.” I’m sure for many folks that’s a welcome change in conversation from my last post on 2012.
Before I begin my rant, maybe I should give a vague, hand-wavy explanation of what the hell I’m doing. Here’s the deal: the last five or six weeks I’ve been going back and reading a lot of (what I consider) “Old School Fantasy Fiction.” Jack Vance. Anne McCaffrey. Marion Zimmer Bradley. Clark Ashton Smith. Even Lloyd Alexander (just finished re-reading The High King a couple days ago). Looking at the stuff that provided the BULK of inspiration for the Dungeons & Dragons game.
Because that’s what Gygax (and company) SAYS is the inspiration for the game: not movies or TV shows (though I’m sure the films of Ray Harryhausen are the inspiration behind many of the creatures found in the game). The idea is being able to have “fantastic adventures” like those of your favorite literary protagonists.
And, heck, that’s what I want out of my RPG! Oh, I understand that the RPG is a different medium from books and thus does not replace, nor even replicate the book-reading experience…just as you can’t really have “cinematic role-playing,” either…there’s just no such animal. But I want something CLOSER or something that RESEMBLES the adventures found in fantasy literature, even if the game PLAYS OUT DIFFERENTLY from the way the story in a book unfolds.
But that’s already problematic due to the two major strikes D&D has against it:
Strike #1: Silly Premise. There’s nothing inherently wrong or necessarily silly about site-based adventure. The “silly part” is mainly the SERIAL nature…that the protagonists’ whole raison d’etre is to go into hole-after-hole (dungeon-after-dungeon) looking for treasure. Generally, this is NOT the type of adventure found in the inspirational literature, even the short stories of Robert E. Howard’s Conan.
Strike #2: Missing Magic. The totally unimpressive nature of “magic” in the D&D game making players (and by extension their characters) totally blasé about the supernatural. The attitude engendered in players with regard to magic DUE TO THE SYSTEM of the game is totally antithesis to that displayed by protagonists (even magic-using protagonists) in the literature. You never see individuals taking magic for granted in fantasy fiction!
So, yeah…now we come to Strike #3: D&D’s lack of balls.
Guts. Courage. And by that I mean, there’s nothing on the line for players of the D&D game. Playing D&D is about a world without consequence for actions taken.
Gosh…I’m not even sure how I’m going to explain this. Okay, how about this:
Playing D&D with the rules as written (and in the manner outlined), players do the following: they create characters. They send those characters on adventures, risking damage and death in exchange for treasure and points (i.e. XP). Through the acquisition of points and the avoidance of death the player characters grow in ability allowing them to take on greater challenges, accumulating more treasure and more points. If a character dies (and is not brought back to life), a new character is created to take the deceased character’s place. OTHERWISE, play continues until a player gets tired of playing.
Period, done. Players play characters that are treasure hunters, risking life and limb for money. Accumulating treasure means growing in prowess when it comes to accumulating treasure. Failing generally means “starting over” with the same goal/purpose in mind.
How does that relate to ANYthing found in fantasy literature?
I’m not talking about an author’s motives in writing: addressing premise, telling a morality tale, or symbolic analogy of real world issues. As stated, role-playing is a different art form from literature and D&D is not (I believe) the proper vehicle for this kind of meta-game role-playing (there are other indie, narrative-based RPGs that do this: Grey Ranks, My Life with Master, Sorcerer, etc.).
What I AM talking about is translating the literature’s protagonists’ motivations into the role-playing games, providing a role-playing game of a meatier nature than “hunt for treasure.” For the love of Pete, that’s nothing more than the story-line for the Dungeon! board game!
In the inspirational literature protagonists (you know, those people whose adventures the game and your PC are supposed to allow you to emulate?) have MANY different things on their minds besides making a buck. Honor. Love. Revenge. Power. Knowledge. Duty. Lofty stuff, right?
Not only that, but there are real and serious consequences for their failure to accomplish their goals. The world is plunged into war. Their relatives and loved ones suffer or die. They are left empty and alone. A thousand years of darkness covers the Earth. Their children and children’s children suffer for generations after. Etc.
REAL consequences…consequences that force the characters to CARE immensely about the outcome of their endeavors. And not JUST about the outcome, but about the manner in which they conduct themselves. More often than not, for protagonists in fantasy fiction it’s not just “by whatever way is expedient” or “the end justifies the means.” Only certain anti-heroes (Wagner’s character Kane comes to mind) ever operate like that. For the most part, it is as important for character’s to exceed in the “right way” as it is for them to succeed at all.
And “right action” does NOT necessarily mean being a “goody-goody” capital-L Lawful type. It means acting within one’s code of honor. It means not destroying something loved rather than seeing it survive in a corrupt form. It means (in some cases) killing a lot of people because letting them live is an abominable injustice.
But D&D does not provide incentives for right action. It does not provide a framework for it. It certainly provides no real consequences for failure. The game, as written, is barely more than a video game. FInd a way to overcome the challenge, get points. If you die, you simply “re-load”…assuming you can’t “re-boot from a save point” (i.e. resurrect your character from the dead).
Good fantasy literature is so much more than this; it has ethos and pathos and passion. It has pulling of hair and gnashing of teeth…and not just over being level drained or failing a save versus poison. D&D is a neutered animal compared to the bull that is fantasy literature. And yet it claims to be the bull…it claims that it provide the experience of vicariously living the fantastic adventures of your favorite fantasy character.
I call BS on that. Sure, the potential is there for “drifting” play in this direction, but the system provides no tools for this. The text and examples provide no road to this. The published adventures provide nothing of consequence save the barest background which may or may not be completely disregarded depending on the whims of the group.
Yes, yes…I am aware that people enjoy D&D simply to blow off steam and give themselves an evening’s entertainment by delving a dungeon and defeating fiendish challenges crafted by a cunning DM. You can certainly do that…hell, that’s what the rules tell you to do…for as long as it doesn’t bore you or until you “grow out of it” or otherwise tire of the same-old-same-old and move onto a different RPG (or computer game).
But, man O man, is there not a promised potential inherent in a game that says it is inspired by and based on classic fantasy literature? I’d say there is…and D&D does NOT deliver the goods. Which, of course, is what gets me so steamed the more I read these wonderful books and the more I say, “Wait a minute, D&D doesn’t do THAT!”
Because it doesn’t. I know…I’ve been running the game for the last year or two and what the players want to know is “where’s the treasure?” What they want to do is hand-wave leading up to the action. What they can’t wait to do is roll some dice. “Dice rolling is fun!” they say.
Dice rolling is ACTIVE. And people playing a game want to be active in the game. If they wanted to be passively entertained, they’d sit around watching TV, or go see a movie. And it’s a sad thing that the strongest, active part of the D&D game (after the choices made during character creation) is rolling dice. Checking to see if you hit. Checking to see if you save. Checking to see if you find the secret door or trap. Everything else is just tracking of how many arrows or rations or spells or hit points you’ve expended.
THAT is not what I call “fantasy adventure.” But it sure is what D&D calls it.
So, yeah…that’s my third and (for now) final bone that I want to pick with D&D. As with my other rants, I’m not sure what I want to do about it, or what could be done about it…I’m just venting my disgust and frustration. I do have some ideas, but for now I’m not terribly interested in implementing them…more interested in just allowing ‘em to percolate in my brain for the time being.
Okay, that’s it…I’ll be getting back to LAND OF ICE shortly.
: )
Thursday, January 12, 2012
2012, Earth Changes, and 5th Edition
As the Broncos continue to march through the play-offs due in no small part to the faith-powered arm of Tim Tebow, I’m well aware that “the End of the World” is on a lot of folks’ minds. Hell, if Tebow finds a way to beat the Pats at Foxboro, many Denver residents may spontaneously Rapture.
[actually, I checked the numerological implications of Tebow just to see what exactly was going on there; turns out a lot of things point to his potential as a MAGICIAN. While I’m pretty sure Tim isn’t a closet occultist, most of the principles of real magic are based on BELIEF and VISUALIZATION, made possible by a mind disciplined by MEDITATION (which is, in many ways, the equivalent of passive, humble PRAYER). Possibly #16 is working real magic – what a Christian might call Biblical SORCERY – though without knowing it. The power of belief generated by his loyal fans doesn’t hurt much, either]
In all seriousness, I know that there’s been a lot of “2012 talk” buzzing around since the New Year: my wife told me there was an SNL skit based on the Mayan Tzolkin/2012 predictions, and even a local brewery (Tangletown in Green Lake) is offering a series of new Apocalyptic Beers over the next 12 months as we await The End. Oh, yeah…and I heard something about it on CNN the other day, too, when I was watching the Republican debate coverage.
The fact that people are talking about it…even if they are making light of it…tells me that the idea IS out there, and the possibility of the world getting snuffed is probably of at least minor concern nagging the back of some people’s minds. I figured I’d offer my two cents on the issue since I’ve been studying the subject since 1997 or so…longer than some of my blog readers have been playing Dungeons & Dragons.
#1: Sure, We Will All Die. It’s always possible a global disaster (meteor strike, solar eruption, global pole shift) might wipe out the planet. It’s also possible that something else might kill us, individually, and equally remove us from this life we enjoy and all our friends and loved ones. Don’t you people ever watch Spike TV’s “1000 Ways to Die?” Life is a precious, precious thing and both stronger and more fragile than what we generally assume. But it WILL eventually end for each of us (and for our loved ones, our spouses, our children, etc.) and tough as that is to come to grips with, it is the reality of our present, material existence. I’m not saying this to be a downer; I think that embracing our mortality can help us appreciate what we have Right Now…which is one of the best things we can do to live our lives with as much joy and love as possible.
#2: The Earth Will Probably Live. The Earth Changes that have been predicted by most prognosticators mainly spell doom for humanity, NOT the planet. From my studies, the most likely thing to happen is a shift/flip in the Earth’s axis which would devastate civilization, shift continents and oceans, and turn the planet upside down. But the planet (and life on the planet) will continue to exist, even if humanity does not. Should a man-made disaster (global warming, nuclear holocaust, bioengineered disease) cause the destruction of the race, life will STILL survive on the planet, and the planet will eventually recover and repopulate without the destructive interference of humans. And IF humans survive, there will still be a planet for those who are left. For those worried about the ecosphere, this planet will outlive us.
#3: Destruction May Be Avoidable. No, I’m not saying you should move to Montana or build a bomb shelter in your backyard. Most of my readings indicate that any Earth Changes that would cause the massive destruction of human society is directly linked to the actions and karma of the human race: a Cosmic Karmic House-Cleaning if you will. There is precedent in the mythic stories of our race (Noah and the Flood, the Great Deluge of Atlantis, etc.) where God or “the gods” were displeased and rained destruction down upon us…also, that individuals of righteous virtue were saved from death. Whether or not you want to survive and live in a post-apocalyptic world is a matter of debate (I’m not sure I do!), but if that’s your thing the universe is MORE likely to let you live if you have something positive to contribute to what will certainly be a “new world.” AND there is possibility (mentioned in some texts) that the universe will spare us the possible conflagration IF enough of us are on-board with the Universal Will and acting as contributors to the good of our fellow man. Living a “good life” (paying your taxes, treating people with respect, practicing unselfish kindness, etc.) is a start, but STANDING for an ideal, modeling it for others, NOT hiding your light, and CONTRIBUTING to the good of your community (however you can, based on your own individual ability…and, no, not just contributing judgment or “evangelizing,” I’m talking WORK)…that kind of POSITIVE ACTION is needed on a large scale (i.e. from multiple people) if we want to be a group worth saving. And if we’re NOT that…well, perhaps the universe will be better off without us. Try to see it from a universal (non-human-centric) point of view. How are we treating the Earth, really?
#4 Change Will Come Regardless. Whether we have wholesale destruction of the world we’ve built or a sea change in attitude towards our fellow humans and planet, changes WILL come eventually. We are constantly evolving as we journey through life: growing, changing, learning. Whether we do so slowly/gradually or quickly (often with great upheaval/upset to our normal routine) is USUALLY up to us; but sometimes the universe/God steps in and throws us a major Final Exam; whether it be an Ice Age or a World War. For the most part, these “disasters” (“natural” AND man-made, both) are caused by our own actions…karma, the law of cause and effect. And predictors seem to be pointing to the possibility of one of these “final exam moments” in the near future.
Only time will tell what shape such change will take. From an astrological perspective, 2012 looks to be a bumpy ride. Pluto and Uranus will square each other no less than half-a-dozen times this year, starting in June. Uranus is the planet that represents explosive upheaval, and when it interacts with planets it tends to cause upset in aid of cleaning up outmoded patterns and keeping things authentic. Pluto, on the other hand, is the planet that represents volcanic transformation and titanic shifts in consciousness as well as our deep-seated emotional attachments (some of which are left over from past lives). “Square” aspects in astrology are challenging interactions…they tend to be very uncomfortable and have lots of energy and planets in square alignment feel like they’re fighting each other. The coming squares between Pluto and Uranus promise dramatic changes for the entire planet as they are actually aspecting each other, not necessarily planets in individuals’ natal charts. But who knows how that dramatic change will show up? Maybe Ron Paul will cause a major rift in the Republican Party.
Now what does any of this have to do with 5th Edition D&D? Not much, as it’s doubtful anything will be released/published in 2012. However, it is possible that “dramatic changes/shifts of consciousness” will be occurring with the designers working on the latest version of the game. Even so, I’m not sure how much practical impact that will have in the development of the project. For one thing, the game (or rather, the brand) is still owned by Hasbro and as such its design and development is still deeply tied to the normal corporate profit-making requirements. The designers are soliciting feedback from individuals, but many of the young, internet-vocal folks ready to respond are likely to give info that moves 5E farther away from the game’s role-playing origins, developing instead social networking, smart-phone/IPad-style apps, and otherwise incorporating 21st century technology into the game…all wrapped in a new business model that still allows Hasbro to squeeze profit from the consumer (through monthly subscription and/or “collectible” aspects). Even when corporate executives give a rat’s ass about something their hands are tied by the business of business…pandering to share-holders and whatnot. The likelihood anyone will institute an “older approach” to gaming in the design/business model is pretty damn slim, in my opinion, as is the chance of older (“competing”) editions being made available as .pdfs. Far more probable is that the adaptation of certain “old school aesthetics” or even “retro-3rd edition-stylings” in an attempt to woo the OS fan base and Pathfinder players even while moving the game farther away from its original, simple, semi-ambiguous form for something slick and stream-lined and simplistic if “updated for a new century/generation.”
From my point of view, such updating is likely to be a less-than-good-thing (as incorporating technology only increases the likelihood of alienating/disconnecting folks from real human interaction). But, hey, we may all get buried under several tons of rock and water and lava long before that…and if we do the appearance of 5E is sure to be a moot point.
; )
[actually, I checked the numerological implications of Tebow just to see what exactly was going on there; turns out a lot of things point to his potential as a MAGICIAN. While I’m pretty sure Tim isn’t a closet occultist, most of the principles of real magic are based on BELIEF and VISUALIZATION, made possible by a mind disciplined by MEDITATION (which is, in many ways, the equivalent of passive, humble PRAYER). Possibly #16 is working real magic – what a Christian might call Biblical SORCERY – though without knowing it. The power of belief generated by his loyal fans doesn’t hurt much, either]
In all seriousness, I know that there’s been a lot of “2012 talk” buzzing around since the New Year: my wife told me there was an SNL skit based on the Mayan Tzolkin/2012 predictions, and even a local brewery (Tangletown in Green Lake) is offering a series of new Apocalyptic Beers over the next 12 months as we await The End. Oh, yeah…and I heard something about it on CNN the other day, too, when I was watching the Republican debate coverage.
The fact that people are talking about it…even if they are making light of it…tells me that the idea IS out there, and the possibility of the world getting snuffed is probably of at least minor concern nagging the back of some people’s minds. I figured I’d offer my two cents on the issue since I’ve been studying the subject since 1997 or so…longer than some of my blog readers have been playing Dungeons & Dragons.
#1: Sure, We Will All Die. It’s always possible a global disaster (meteor strike, solar eruption, global pole shift) might wipe out the planet. It’s also possible that something else might kill us, individually, and equally remove us from this life we enjoy and all our friends and loved ones. Don’t you people ever watch Spike TV’s “1000 Ways to Die?” Life is a precious, precious thing and both stronger and more fragile than what we generally assume. But it WILL eventually end for each of us (and for our loved ones, our spouses, our children, etc.) and tough as that is to come to grips with, it is the reality of our present, material existence. I’m not saying this to be a downer; I think that embracing our mortality can help us appreciate what we have Right Now…which is one of the best things we can do to live our lives with as much joy and love as possible.
#2: The Earth Will Probably Live. The Earth Changes that have been predicted by most prognosticators mainly spell doom for humanity, NOT the planet. From my studies, the most likely thing to happen is a shift/flip in the Earth’s axis which would devastate civilization, shift continents and oceans, and turn the planet upside down. But the planet (and life on the planet) will continue to exist, even if humanity does not. Should a man-made disaster (global warming, nuclear holocaust, bioengineered disease) cause the destruction of the race, life will STILL survive on the planet, and the planet will eventually recover and repopulate without the destructive interference of humans. And IF humans survive, there will still be a planet for those who are left. For those worried about the ecosphere, this planet will outlive us.
#3: Destruction May Be Avoidable. No, I’m not saying you should move to Montana or build a bomb shelter in your backyard. Most of my readings indicate that any Earth Changes that would cause the massive destruction of human society is directly linked to the actions and karma of the human race: a Cosmic Karmic House-Cleaning if you will. There is precedent in the mythic stories of our race (Noah and the Flood, the Great Deluge of Atlantis, etc.) where God or “the gods” were displeased and rained destruction down upon us…also, that individuals of righteous virtue were saved from death. Whether or not you want to survive and live in a post-apocalyptic world is a matter of debate (I’m not sure I do!), but if that’s your thing the universe is MORE likely to let you live if you have something positive to contribute to what will certainly be a “new world.” AND there is possibility (mentioned in some texts) that the universe will spare us the possible conflagration IF enough of us are on-board with the Universal Will and acting as contributors to the good of our fellow man. Living a “good life” (paying your taxes, treating people with respect, practicing unselfish kindness, etc.) is a start, but STANDING for an ideal, modeling it for others, NOT hiding your light, and CONTRIBUTING to the good of your community (however you can, based on your own individual ability…and, no, not just contributing judgment or “evangelizing,” I’m talking WORK)…that kind of POSITIVE ACTION is needed on a large scale (i.e. from multiple people) if we want to be a group worth saving. And if we’re NOT that…well, perhaps the universe will be better off without us. Try to see it from a universal (non-human-centric) point of view. How are we treating the Earth, really?
#4 Change Will Come Regardless. Whether we have wholesale destruction of the world we’ve built or a sea change in attitude towards our fellow humans and planet, changes WILL come eventually. We are constantly evolving as we journey through life: growing, changing, learning. Whether we do so slowly/gradually or quickly (often with great upheaval/upset to our normal routine) is USUALLY up to us; but sometimes the universe/God steps in and throws us a major Final Exam; whether it be an Ice Age or a World War. For the most part, these “disasters” (“natural” AND man-made, both) are caused by our own actions…karma, the law of cause and effect. And predictors seem to be pointing to the possibility of one of these “final exam moments” in the near future.
Only time will tell what shape such change will take. From an astrological perspective, 2012 looks to be a bumpy ride. Pluto and Uranus will square each other no less than half-a-dozen times this year, starting in June. Uranus is the planet that represents explosive upheaval, and when it interacts with planets it tends to cause upset in aid of cleaning up outmoded patterns and keeping things authentic. Pluto, on the other hand, is the planet that represents volcanic transformation and titanic shifts in consciousness as well as our deep-seated emotional attachments (some of which are left over from past lives). “Square” aspects in astrology are challenging interactions…they tend to be very uncomfortable and have lots of energy and planets in square alignment feel like they’re fighting each other. The coming squares between Pluto and Uranus promise dramatic changes for the entire planet as they are actually aspecting each other, not necessarily planets in individuals’ natal charts. But who knows how that dramatic change will show up? Maybe Ron Paul will cause a major rift in the Republican Party.
Now what does any of this have to do with 5th Edition D&D? Not much, as it’s doubtful anything will be released/published in 2012. However, it is possible that “dramatic changes/shifts of consciousness” will be occurring with the designers working on the latest version of the game. Even so, I’m not sure how much practical impact that will have in the development of the project. For one thing, the game (or rather, the brand) is still owned by Hasbro and as such its design and development is still deeply tied to the normal corporate profit-making requirements. The designers are soliciting feedback from individuals, but many of the young, internet-vocal folks ready to respond are likely to give info that moves 5E farther away from the game’s role-playing origins, developing instead social networking, smart-phone/IPad-style apps, and otherwise incorporating 21st century technology into the game…all wrapped in a new business model that still allows Hasbro to squeeze profit from the consumer (through monthly subscription and/or “collectible” aspects). Even when corporate executives give a rat’s ass about something their hands are tied by the business of business…pandering to share-holders and whatnot. The likelihood anyone will institute an “older approach” to gaming in the design/business model is pretty damn slim, in my opinion, as is the chance of older (“competing”) editions being made available as .pdfs. Far more probable is that the adaptation of certain “old school aesthetics” or even “retro-3rd edition-stylings” in an attempt to woo the OS fan base and Pathfinder players even while moving the game farther away from its original, simple, semi-ambiguous form for something slick and stream-lined and simplistic if “updated for a new century/generation.”
From my point of view, such updating is likely to be a less-than-good-thing (as incorporating technology only increases the likelihood of alienating/disconnecting folks from real human interaction). But, hey, we may all get buried under several tons of rock and water and lava long before that…and if we do the appearance of 5E is sure to be a moot point.
; )
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Nothing Magical in D&D
Yep, I’m back…back to (nearly) full health, back to work, back to writing (I hope…this is my first stab at anything), back to ranting. Ready to throw out the next bone I’ve got to pick with Dungeons & Dragons.
I hate the lack of magic in the D&D game.
You see this photo? I took this picture with my cell phone back in October while wandering Greenwood. Halloween styling, you know? I thought it was a real piece of old school horror/mystical imagery: the skulls, the skeleton, the “Gypsy fortune teller,” the tarot cards and crystal ball. This display was in the front window of a local flower shop.
At the time, I snapped the picture with the intent of posting it to the blog and talking about the lack of magic in D&D…but October turned out to be a busy month for me and then there were the holidays, etc. But while delving back into the world of fantasy literature I remembered I still had the image stored on my phone and, well, it’s time for Rant #2 of the New Year.
For my taste, there is a profound lack of magic in the game.
What? Disagreement? The appearance of enchanted items and mythical monstrosities and pages and pages of “spells” is evidence to the contrary?
Hardly. There’s nothing all that magical about the treatment of such things in D&D - neither by the game, nor the players (and I include “DM” as a player in this context). When I say “magical,” I’m talking about effects that produce a sense of wonder and a healthy fear (or respect) for the profund mystery of the supernatural. That ain’t what you get in D&D.
See a magical monster: “How do we kill it? How is it vulnerable?”
Find a magic weapon: “What is its bonuses? Does it have charges?”
Cast a magic spell: “What is its effect? Does the target save? How many spells do I have left?”
There is no sense of wonder, nothing that evokes awe in the players. People who play D&D are considered “people of great imagination,” both by outsiders and by themselves. Ha! To me they’re just about the most blasé bunch of adventurers you’ll find in the fantasy game world.
Everything is sooo “ho-hum” to the D&D player when it comes to magic. You find a shiny sword…perhaps it glows in your grip or seems incredibly sharp despite its great age. What do you do?
Player #1: “Hey, who needs a magic sword?”
Player #2: “My cleric can’t use one.”
Player #3: “My dwarf can but I already have a magic axe. Do you think it’s a better weapon?”
Player #4: “Maybe the thief should keep it; she can use it and it’s one more magic weapon doing damage in encounters. Plus, extra backstab damage!”
There’s nothing magical about a magic weapon (or any magic item…they’re generally treated in similar fashion, perhaps with a bit of caution against possible booby-traps, i.e. “curses” or malignant enchantments) in a game of D&D; only a question of its practical value. It’s like finding a box of unused hand grenades while patrolling the jungle in some 3rd world bush war or something: a handy windfall, not anything supernatural or mystical.
Contrast that with the fantasy literature purported to be the basis for the game. Remember my previous rant? No one in a sword & sorcery tale takes such an item for granted. Enchanted items are viewed with suspicion and superstition; fear, awe, and wonder…and a healthy sense of whoa!
Likewise, no one’s blasé about enchantments encountered during adventures or the strange and twisted monsters they encounter. Hell, few fantasy heroes will ever seek to go toe-to-toe with a magical monstrosity unless they either A) have a distinct advantage, B) are faced with life or death choice based on circumstance (i.e. no choice), or C) have been invoked to high passion/emotion (usually revenge or love for an imperiled/harmed companion). Few epic heroes march like Beowulf into the jaws of the dragon…and even Big B might be constrained based on who he is (as Beowulf, he has an honor and duty to fight the monster…to not do so is to extinguish his identity as surely as his death).
But on a D&D adventure, an owl bear is simply a large beast with claws, beak, feathers, and fur. A dragon is simply another beast that may require more cunning tactics to defeat due to breath weapon and spell use. A group of gnolls or bugbears? The only question is: how many are they?
Monsters may be monstrous, they may have a weird appearance, they have dangerous attacks…but it is still just a “thing” to be overcome, through combat or stealth or trickery. Nothing about the D&D monster is respected, save for its potential to kill your character. It is simply a barrier to the accumulation of treasure, i.e. experience “points.”
Where is the awe, the fear at the un-naturalness? Where is the desire to bow down and worship the supernatural monstrosity…or the urge to kneel, weep, and pray to one’s own God for salvation? Nothing compels players to treat these twisted nightmares of imagination as anything more extraordinary than a rabid mastiff.
Spell use, of course, is the most jaded and cynical of all the “magic” found in D&D. What is the ability to cast spells but a simple class ability, no different from a fighter’s ability to wear armor and shoot arrows?
Certainly there is no respectful treatment for spells or those who use them. The only pertinent information players require is the number of spells available and the variety of spells in one’s repertoire. No one consults a priest or wizard on the meanings of dreams or omens, or ask for soothsaying on the future. No one worries that striking or attacking a sorcerer will bring all manner of curses and demons down on the head of the offender. No one wonders at what infernal powers or celestial beings were cajoled into granting the spell-worker his authority over the forces of nature.
Nope, a magic-user is just a dude in a gown, perhaps with a pointy hat and wand, certainly slinging a heavy spell book…and probably the guy forced to carry the light source and extra gear for the party.
And YOU, fair reader, may say “yes, of course it’s like that because that’s what’s in the GAME RULES. In D&D, magic-users (and clerics and druids, etc.) are none of those things found in that good old fantasy literature.”
And I say unto you:
That’s my point exactly.
That’s what sticks in my craw about the game. D&D does NOTHING mechanically, system-wise, to instill any sense of MAGIC or wonder or the supernatural in the players. Ho-hum, it’s O so very interesting to have D&D’s “magic” because it adds a different variety of challenge. But if a glyph of warding is no better or different from a trip-wire arrow trap (save that it requires a different method of disarmament), don’t tell me D&D is some sort of wonderful “fantasy” game based on “fantasy literature.”
And the problem is, I’m not sure how one would make it more magical except by getting “buy off” from all the players that they’ll metagame (i.e. “act out”) the fear and awe and superstition, even while trying to figure out if the magic sword is +1 or +2. But that’s hardly satisfying…I don’t want to have to tell players “okay, suspend your disbelief.” They’re already doing that by pretending to be dwarves and elves. Wouldn't it be cool if the game would do a little bit of the work for you? Meet you halfway?
I think it is the lack of real magical mystery in the D&D game that partly drives James Raggi to do the things he does: Death Frost Doom, for example has multiple instances of unexplainable “weirdness” that attempt to instill awe or dread in a party. But I’ve read play-test reviews where the DM’s players were completely unimpressed with ANY of it, saying, “oh, ok, so what? Where’s the treasure?” Now, I’m sure there are DMs that can exercise a Svengali-like influence over their players generating a suitable mood of discomfort and fear and superstition, BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT THE D&D GAME DOES. And just playing the game as written (with its silly premise) is not going to get anywhere close to it.
D&D lacks magic. All you get is an adventure game with a few types of technology, some different types of fauna from what you find at the local zoo, and a couple character classes with super powers of a decidedly UN-mysterious nature. Compared to the books that “inspired” the game, that’s pretty lame.
“Mundane adventure in a pedestrian world.” Make that your tag-line!
I hate the lack of magic in the D&D game.
You see this photo? I took this picture with my cell phone back in October while wandering Greenwood. Halloween styling, you know? I thought it was a real piece of old school horror/mystical imagery: the skulls, the skeleton, the “Gypsy fortune teller,” the tarot cards and crystal ball. This display was in the front window of a local flower shop.
At the time, I snapped the picture with the intent of posting it to the blog and talking about the lack of magic in D&D…but October turned out to be a busy month for me and then there were the holidays, etc. But while delving back into the world of fantasy literature I remembered I still had the image stored on my phone and, well, it’s time for Rant #2 of the New Year.
For my taste, there is a profound lack of magic in the game.
What? Disagreement? The appearance of enchanted items and mythical monstrosities and pages and pages of “spells” is evidence to the contrary?
Hardly. There’s nothing all that magical about the treatment of such things in D&D - neither by the game, nor the players (and I include “DM” as a player in this context). When I say “magical,” I’m talking about effects that produce a sense of wonder and a healthy fear (or respect) for the profund mystery of the supernatural. That ain’t what you get in D&D.
See a magical monster: “How do we kill it? How is it vulnerable?”
Find a magic weapon: “What is its bonuses? Does it have charges?”
Cast a magic spell: “What is its effect? Does the target save? How many spells do I have left?”
There is no sense of wonder, nothing that evokes awe in the players. People who play D&D are considered “people of great imagination,” both by outsiders and by themselves. Ha! To me they’re just about the most blasé bunch of adventurers you’ll find in the fantasy game world.
Everything is sooo “ho-hum” to the D&D player when it comes to magic. You find a shiny sword…perhaps it glows in your grip or seems incredibly sharp despite its great age. What do you do?
Player #1: “Hey, who needs a magic sword?”
Player #2: “My cleric can’t use one.”
Player #3: “My dwarf can but I already have a magic axe. Do you think it’s a better weapon?”
Player #4: “Maybe the thief should keep it; she can use it and it’s one more magic weapon doing damage in encounters. Plus, extra backstab damage!”
There’s nothing magical about a magic weapon (or any magic item…they’re generally treated in similar fashion, perhaps with a bit of caution against possible booby-traps, i.e. “curses” or malignant enchantments) in a game of D&D; only a question of its practical value. It’s like finding a box of unused hand grenades while patrolling the jungle in some 3rd world bush war or something: a handy windfall, not anything supernatural or mystical.
Contrast that with the fantasy literature purported to be the basis for the game. Remember my previous rant? No one in a sword & sorcery tale takes such an item for granted. Enchanted items are viewed with suspicion and superstition; fear, awe, and wonder…and a healthy sense of whoa!
Likewise, no one’s blasé about enchantments encountered during adventures or the strange and twisted monsters they encounter. Hell, few fantasy heroes will ever seek to go toe-to-toe with a magical monstrosity unless they either A) have a distinct advantage, B) are faced with life or death choice based on circumstance (i.e. no choice), or C) have been invoked to high passion/emotion (usually revenge or love for an imperiled/harmed companion). Few epic heroes march like Beowulf into the jaws of the dragon…and even Big B might be constrained based on who he is (as Beowulf, he has an honor and duty to fight the monster…to not do so is to extinguish his identity as surely as his death).
But on a D&D adventure, an owl bear is simply a large beast with claws, beak, feathers, and fur. A dragon is simply another beast that may require more cunning tactics to defeat due to breath weapon and spell use. A group of gnolls or bugbears? The only question is: how many are they?
Monsters may be monstrous, they may have a weird appearance, they have dangerous attacks…but it is still just a “thing” to be overcome, through combat or stealth or trickery. Nothing about the D&D monster is respected, save for its potential to kill your character. It is simply a barrier to the accumulation of treasure, i.e. experience “points.”
Where is the awe, the fear at the un-naturalness? Where is the desire to bow down and worship the supernatural monstrosity…or the urge to kneel, weep, and pray to one’s own God for salvation? Nothing compels players to treat these twisted nightmares of imagination as anything more extraordinary than a rabid mastiff.
Spell use, of course, is the most jaded and cynical of all the “magic” found in D&D. What is the ability to cast spells but a simple class ability, no different from a fighter’s ability to wear armor and shoot arrows?
Certainly there is no respectful treatment for spells or those who use them. The only pertinent information players require is the number of spells available and the variety of spells in one’s repertoire. No one consults a priest or wizard on the meanings of dreams or omens, or ask for soothsaying on the future. No one worries that striking or attacking a sorcerer will bring all manner of curses and demons down on the head of the offender. No one wonders at what infernal powers or celestial beings were cajoled into granting the spell-worker his authority over the forces of nature.
Nope, a magic-user is just a dude in a gown, perhaps with a pointy hat and wand, certainly slinging a heavy spell book…and probably the guy forced to carry the light source and extra gear for the party.
And YOU, fair reader, may say “yes, of course it’s like that because that’s what’s in the GAME RULES. In D&D, magic-users (and clerics and druids, etc.) are none of those things found in that good old fantasy literature.”
And I say unto you:
That’s my point exactly.
That’s what sticks in my craw about the game. D&D does NOTHING mechanically, system-wise, to instill any sense of MAGIC or wonder or the supernatural in the players. Ho-hum, it’s O so very interesting to have D&D’s “magic” because it adds a different variety of challenge. But if a glyph of warding is no better or different from a trip-wire arrow trap (save that it requires a different method of disarmament), don’t tell me D&D is some sort of wonderful “fantasy” game based on “fantasy literature.”
And the problem is, I’m not sure how one would make it more magical except by getting “buy off” from all the players that they’ll metagame (i.e. “act out”) the fear and awe and superstition, even while trying to figure out if the magic sword is +1 or +2. But that’s hardly satisfying…I don’t want to have to tell players “okay, suspend your disbelief.” They’re already doing that by pretending to be dwarves and elves. Wouldn't it be cool if the game would do a little bit of the work for you? Meet you halfway?
I think it is the lack of real magical mystery in the D&D game that partly drives James Raggi to do the things he does: Death Frost Doom, for example has multiple instances of unexplainable “weirdness” that attempt to instill awe or dread in a party. But I’ve read play-test reviews where the DM’s players were completely unimpressed with ANY of it, saying, “oh, ok, so what? Where’s the treasure?” Now, I’m sure there are DMs that can exercise a Svengali-like influence over their players generating a suitable mood of discomfort and fear and superstition, BUT THAT’S NOT WHAT THE D&D GAME DOES. And just playing the game as written (with its silly premise) is not going to get anywhere close to it.
D&D lacks magic. All you get is an adventure game with a few types of technology, some different types of fauna from what you find at the local zoo, and a couple character classes with super powers of a decidedly UN-mysterious nature. Compared to the books that “inspired” the game, that’s pretty lame.
“Mundane adventure in a pedestrian world.” Make that your tag-line!
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Sick as a Dog
...just in case anyone's wondering.
I am hoping it's just a chest cold and not f-ing bronchitis (again).
My son got this Elmo airplane from his grandparents that he has been riding up and down the hallway. It is cool (he loves it) but it plays this eerie flute music that sounds like something described in a Lovecraft story...creeps me out, especially with the background propeller noise. Like some bizarre machine of ancient evil space gods.
Probably doesn't help that I've been reading Clark Ashton Smith stories the last couple days.
Ugh. Fever dreams.
I am hoping it's just a chest cold and not f-ing bronchitis (again).
My son got this Elmo airplane from his grandparents that he has been riding up and down the hallway. It is cool (he loves it) but it plays this eerie flute music that sounds like something described in a Lovecraft story...creeps me out, especially with the background propeller noise. Like some bizarre machine of ancient evil space gods.
Probably doesn't help that I've been reading Clark Ashton Smith stories the last couple days.
Ugh. Fever dreams.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Addendum to the Rant
Sometime between this morning and now, I managed to fall prey to a dastardly cold, which is damn irritating as I was very much looking forward to going out with "the boys" tonight (yes, I am back in Seattle, no longer in Mexico). Instead, I've been sleeping away the day and just got up to eat some soup (and what's up with Ritz crackers? Didn't they used to be salty or something?). As such, I am not in a great mood, so if this addendum to my earlier rant has a rather pissy tone, you'll know why.
There are things a game purports to be about and then there are things the game is actually about; unfortunately, these two things don't always synch with each other. Such a disconnect is all too common in table-top RPGs; the classic example is Vampire the Masquerade. VtM states its game is about telling tragic and/or meaningful stories in the gothic-punk/alternate reality world of the supernatural. What it's actually about is killing cops and drinking their blood. I know this because I played Vampire for many years (at least the first two editions, circa 1990-95). No matter what high falutin' concept or idea you came up with, eventually cops were getting killed and their blood drank...usually in aid of killing more powerful beings (like other vampires) and drinking their blood. "Did you learn anything from the session?" "Yep...give me my bonus experience point."
[granted, I haven't played any of the recent re-boots of the Vampire line, but when I see the cover of books like Damnation City it makes me think the game is STILL about killing cops and drinking their blood. What is this? Goth Frank Miller?]
In D&D the disconnect is (for me) pretty frustrating. You're asked: haven't you ever wanted to play a game where you're Conan or Elric? Haven't you ever wanted to travel the worlds of Leiber or Tolkien having grand adventures just like their characters? Now you can! Except that's NOT what the game's about. It's about you and a group of buddies going down into a hole and looking for treasure. Yes, you can play it in a different fashion, but that's what the rules are guiding you to do...that's the direction you're being given by the game designers.
D&D may have evolved from wargaming (and that may be part of the issue) but that's not what the later editions (1976+) purport to be about, and scant information is provided on any kind of warfare (other than the price of hiring troops) anyway until you get later supplements like BattleSystem, etc.
And while those earlier editions (AD&D, Cook/Marsh) discuss eventually taking the characters OUT of the dungeon and expanding the scope of your fantasy gaming, there is extremely little-to-none information on HOW one is to go about doing this. For the most part, players are simply left to "winging it." Which is what many of us did...but it is frustrating to have a game with so little guidance in this area when so much attention is given over to the "delving" aspect of the game. Like it or not, doing so emphasizes the importance of that particular aspect over any consideration of "expansion."
With results evident in later (21st century) editions. 4th edition appears to be designed in such a way as to reconcile the disconnect: the game is about dungeon delving and blowing shit up and it provides rules for doing that. To those of us who grew up with earlier editions of the game, this may seem like heresy (and really it's just that the thing bears little resemblance to earlier editions and yet continues to bear the brand name)...but it's hard to fault the designers for making a game that is exactly what it purports to be about.
[doesn't mean one can't fault the company for making a stupid game and calling it "role-playing"]
But even before that, 3rd edition/Pathfinder had pretty much gone the way of "all dungeon delve, all the time" with only ancient gamers like myself trying to bend the thing into our earlier models of gaming, with varying degrees of success. For me, I found the experience to be excruciating as the system is too complex to "get out of its own way" and open up the possibilities of role-playing found in the earlier, simpler editions. On the other hand, creating dungeon encounters and planting treasure is dead easy using the Challenge Level system and tables regarding how much loot characters of various levels should have in their possession (despite such mechanical "adventuring" being a soul-less shade of the earlier editions).
Here's the bottom line: if you want fantasy adventure role-playing of the sort found in the literary tradition that D&D states is the basis and inspiration for the game, then the game does not have the chops it needs to accomplish it. It needs to be bent and broken and pushed by the players in ways that are not explained but only hinted at. Which is terribly unfortunate as it means NEW players, just coming to the table (and terribly distracted by all the other forms of entertainment available to us in the 21st century) are probably NOT going to see the potential in the game, or invest the time needed to make the game into something bigger and better than what it is. Instead, they'll say "huh, you go into a hole in the ground and look for loot. Not exactly Michael Moorcock." Or whoever the fantasy author is that may have piqued their curiosity at the idea of trying a fantasy role-playing game.
There are a lot of things D&D has offered that made it into a popular pastime over the years, and I don't think it's just because people liked "pretending to go down into a hole once a week" to blow off steam. Sure there are those of us who are returning to the game after 20 years and doing just that (and to me, this is what smacks of "nostalgia gaming"), but I do NOT believe that style of gaming is going to be enough to sustain the hobby...or, at least, enough to sustain the game of Dungeons & Dragons. Maybe that's why folks eventually jump ship to other systems (for instance, Savage Worlds or White Wolf) and write-off D&D as simplistic and childish.
Despite its potential, the premise of the game falls a little flat.
Ranting in the New Year
Ready for my first rant of the New Year? This one has actually been bubbling in my brain for a few days, but I just haven’t had a chance to get it posted till now.
I have a bone to pick with D&D. Actually I have several bones to pick with ‘em, but here’s the one for today.
Dungeons & Dragons is dumb. I’m talking basic premise here: it is really dumb.
I’m not talking about role-playing itself. I’ve written often enough that role-playing as an art and a hobby is something I value greatly and seek to promote as best I can. I think the RPG, in its traditional pen-and-paper form, is probably the greatest contribution to the whole concept of GAME…at least since the invention of “team sport.” Sure, it can cause obsession and inward focus that distract people from making a positive contribution in the world, but it still involves community and real communication/rapport, and can provide introspection that helps in other aspects of life…not to mention exercising one’s imagination and brains.
I’m also not in any way denigrating the SYSTEM of Dungeons and Dragons…at least in its basic format (and by Basic, I mean its first quarter century of iterations). The more I’ve looked at and analyzed various RPGs over the last few years, the more I feel that the class/level system of D&D is a fantastic-fantastic short-hand for building the heroic avatar (i.e. the “player character”), providing all the necessary tools in a simple, easily identified, easily varied package. The over-emphasis on granularity and minutia through the addition of a skill system (the usual MO of most all “adventure RPGs” of recent years, including the iterations of D&D over the last decade plus), has only served to HURT role-playing games…increasing learning curves, slowing game play, and hamstringing chargen…even while appealing to a certain percentage of gamers who dig the minutia. The system of D&D is simple enough to get out of its own way and allow maximum role-playing with a minimal amount of identifying data points.
So to be clear: role-playing is great (thanks D&D). D&D as a system is great. THAT’s not what I’m talking about.
I’m talking about PREMISE. The foundation of the game. That characters are adventurers going into one underground lair after another to fight monsters. Like mongooses looking for cobra eggs or something. Over and over again.
‘Cause that’s what D&D – OD&D, Holmes D&D, B/X D&D, BECMI/RC D&D, AD&D, 2nd-3rd-4th edition D&D – that’s what D&D is (at its base) all about.
And that’s dumb. I’m not even sure if “childish” is the right word. It’s just DUMB. Silly. Tonto (that’s Spanish, folks).
And as far as “fantasy adventure role-playing” is concerned, it’s incredibly limiting. It’s a board game mentality…which, I suppose, means 4th edition really is on track with its latest version of “Dungeons & Dragons.”
What-what-what?! I can hear people saying. Let’s look at this rationally for just a moment: 4th edition provides a (rather complicated) board game for people who want to have an interesting “delve” experience with tactical action. A board game where you create your own “pawns” (within strict guidelines) but, still…who wouldn’t want a customizable playing piece in a board game? What if your little dog in Monopoly was able to adversely affect property values by crapping on the sidewalk? What if your little train piece got to move instantaneously between railroad spots? What if your little hat could be turned upside down to get a little extra cash (representing begging for handouts) from the bank?
The designers of 4th edition looked at D&D at “face value” and said: what’s this game about? Going into dungeons (“adventures”) and fighting monsters/picking up loot, all the while growing into more powerful characters, gaining neat “special powers.” And THAT’s the game they designed…period. A dumb game, but one that is essentially an upgraded distillation of the original game’s premise. Not a bad bit of design, that.
Okay, now pull back for a second: most of us long time D&D players (“old school” or not) have found that there is a lot more to the game than that basic premise…at least, there’s the POTENTIAL for a lot more. If you started playing as a kid with the basic “dungeon exploration” and eventual moved into the expert (“Expert”) realms, you eventually came out of the dungeon, wandering the wilderness, fighting armies and gigantic creatures and exploring strange new lands and interacting with nobility and carving out your own kingdoms, etc….basically creating your own heroic legends and mythological world.
But I daresay that is not the explicit objective of the game. The EXPLICIT objective is something about going into subterranean labyrinths. One session = one “adventure.” Power/effectiveness is accumulated through the defeating of challenges (monsters) and the acquisition of treasure. The more monsters overcome, the more treasure acquired, the more effective the characters. And the bulk of these monster/treasure pockets are to be found in adventure sites (“dungeons”) that just happen to litter the imaginary countryside, waiting to be plumbed.
Which is just dumb.
I’ve been reading fantasy adventure stories lately…OLD fantasy adventure stories, the types that are found in the references and inspirational reading lists of Dungeons and Dragons…and nowhere is there anything resembling this premise. Fantasy adventure books offer a LOT of interesting things to sink one’s teeth into: danger and daring, but politics and family, world shattering invasions, confrontations with the strange and deadly but in a context that matters to the tale of the heroes.
Look at Gary Gygax’s own Gord books: how many “dungeons” are found in ‘em? Um…pretty close to zero. There’s a lair with a demon in the first book…but that’s about it. Doesn’t mean Gord doesn’t have plenty of roguish adventures (and, per Gygax’s end notes, achieves mid-level ability through the course of his journeys). My own AD&D campaigns of the mid-1980s (when I was a kid) looked very similar to the first couple Gord novels…which is to say, very little like the explicit game play outlined in the rule books.
Similarly with the Dragonlance novels, wholly based on the AD&D game and designed in part to sell adventure modules: there’s really only two “dungeon” scenarios (Xak Tsaroth and Pax Tharkas) in the first six novels. Well, I suppose Neraka (Spring Dawning) might count as a “site based adventure” but little of the plot could be considered a normal “dungeon delve;” and after the first novel, most of the dungeons marketed as DL modules (Thorbardin, Icewall, Huma’s Tomb, etc.) occurs “off-camera” in the books…they’re just not important to the story of the "player characters."
Even starting a campaign with 1st level characters, we 13 and 14 year olds (back in the day) did not start with adventure scenarios. We started with CHARACTERS, building relationships with each other, and relationships with the fantasy world around them. The PCs had some backstory…rough sketches that helped provide them with history and personality…which would lead to role-playing, even as they made careers for themselves as “adventurers.” But adventures involved freebooting around the countryside, not invading orc holds and looting ancient tombs. Sure, there were trolls and whatnot, but there was a lot of intrigue and war and political interest and romance and personal ambition, too. If we went into a dungeon, it was with a very specific objective or purpose. For example, if we invaded the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, we were searching for a specific artifact, not just looking for spare coins and notches on our sword belts. When we invaded an assassins den, it was on a specific mission of vengeance, not just because it was an appropriate adventure for characters of our level.
For the most part, we grew out of dungeon crawls by age 11 or so.
The basic dungeon delving premise of D&D is a dumb one. Delving to acquire power to delve deeper is not fantasy role-playing: it is a complex board game. I know I've spent mucho time over the last 18 months or so creating adventure sites for my B/X players, but this was mainly due to circumstance:
- new players needed introduction to the game and its mechanics
- players had expectations of delving
- players lacked interest in anything resembling "deep" role-playing
- (large) size of the group precluded serious specific "side plot" adventures (for the most part)
- rust and re-visiting of the (B/X) materials of my youth led to the classic adventure creation outline (i.e. "making dungeons")
Also, I'd been out of the whole loop of reading fantasy fiction for awhile (these days I prefer more history, biography, philosophy stuff).
But getting back into the reading habits of my youth have led me to realize just how wanting the whole premise is. How long can it sustain itself? I see why people can get sick of playing the game after 8th or 9th level...if all you do is delve tougher and tougher dungeons, doesn't the "story/plot" get a little repetitive?
I don't think the original game system(s), as written, do enough to provide the tools for REAL fantasy adventure role-playing...to exploit the potential of D&D. Sometimes, we come to these things as a natural evolution of long-term play and vested interest...as I and my friends did in our youth...but there's little in the game rules to suggest this, or provide a sketch as to how it's done. Even though there are clues scatttered throughout the history of the game (including the old articles in Dragon magazine).
It's a damn shame, in my opinion. The farther we get away from that "old way" of playing (which is to say, adapting the rules to the texts the rules purported to emulate and take inspiration from), the more that knowledge is lost and all that's left is a silly game that resembles a poor man's version of the World of Warcraft. Or any other computer "RPG." Totally lame.
Oh, yeah...so what am I going to do about it? I'm not sure just yet...I'm thinking on it now, though. Hopefully more to come...
I have a bone to pick with D&D. Actually I have several bones to pick with ‘em, but here’s the one for today.
Dungeons & Dragons is dumb. I’m talking basic premise here: it is really dumb.
I’m not talking about role-playing itself. I’ve written often enough that role-playing as an art and a hobby is something I value greatly and seek to promote as best I can. I think the RPG, in its traditional pen-and-paper form, is probably the greatest contribution to the whole concept of GAME…at least since the invention of “team sport.” Sure, it can cause obsession and inward focus that distract people from making a positive contribution in the world, but it still involves community and real communication/rapport, and can provide introspection that helps in other aspects of life…not to mention exercising one’s imagination and brains.
I’m also not in any way denigrating the SYSTEM of Dungeons and Dragons…at least in its basic format (and by Basic, I mean its first quarter century of iterations). The more I’ve looked at and analyzed various RPGs over the last few years, the more I feel that the class/level system of D&D is a fantastic-fantastic short-hand for building the heroic avatar (i.e. the “player character”), providing all the necessary tools in a simple, easily identified, easily varied package. The over-emphasis on granularity and minutia through the addition of a skill system (the usual MO of most all “adventure RPGs” of recent years, including the iterations of D&D over the last decade plus), has only served to HURT role-playing games…increasing learning curves, slowing game play, and hamstringing chargen…even while appealing to a certain percentage of gamers who dig the minutia. The system of D&D is simple enough to get out of its own way and allow maximum role-playing with a minimal amount of identifying data points.
So to be clear: role-playing is great (thanks D&D). D&D as a system is great. THAT’s not what I’m talking about.
I’m talking about PREMISE. The foundation of the game. That characters are adventurers going into one underground lair after another to fight monsters. Like mongooses looking for cobra eggs or something. Over and over again.
‘Cause that’s what D&D – OD&D, Holmes D&D, B/X D&D, BECMI/RC D&D, AD&D, 2nd-3rd-4th edition D&D – that’s what D&D is (at its base) all about.
And that’s dumb. I’m not even sure if “childish” is the right word. It’s just DUMB. Silly. Tonto (that’s Spanish, folks).
And as far as “fantasy adventure role-playing” is concerned, it’s incredibly limiting. It’s a board game mentality…which, I suppose, means 4th edition really is on track with its latest version of “Dungeons & Dragons.”
What-what-what?! I can hear people saying. Let’s look at this rationally for just a moment: 4th edition provides a (rather complicated) board game for people who want to have an interesting “delve” experience with tactical action. A board game where you create your own “pawns” (within strict guidelines) but, still…who wouldn’t want a customizable playing piece in a board game? What if your little dog in Monopoly was able to adversely affect property values by crapping on the sidewalk? What if your little train piece got to move instantaneously between railroad spots? What if your little hat could be turned upside down to get a little extra cash (representing begging for handouts) from the bank?
The designers of 4th edition looked at D&D at “face value” and said: what’s this game about? Going into dungeons (“adventures”) and fighting monsters/picking up loot, all the while growing into more powerful characters, gaining neat “special powers.” And THAT’s the game they designed…period. A dumb game, but one that is essentially an upgraded distillation of the original game’s premise. Not a bad bit of design, that.
Okay, now pull back for a second: most of us long time D&D players (“old school” or not) have found that there is a lot more to the game than that basic premise…at least, there’s the POTENTIAL for a lot more. If you started playing as a kid with the basic “dungeon exploration” and eventual moved into the expert (“Expert”) realms, you eventually came out of the dungeon, wandering the wilderness, fighting armies and gigantic creatures and exploring strange new lands and interacting with nobility and carving out your own kingdoms, etc….basically creating your own heroic legends and mythological world.
But I daresay that is not the explicit objective of the game. The EXPLICIT objective is something about going into subterranean labyrinths. One session = one “adventure.” Power/effectiveness is accumulated through the defeating of challenges (monsters) and the acquisition of treasure. The more monsters overcome, the more treasure acquired, the more effective the characters. And the bulk of these monster/treasure pockets are to be found in adventure sites (“dungeons”) that just happen to litter the imaginary countryside, waiting to be plumbed.
Which is just dumb.
I’ve been reading fantasy adventure stories lately…OLD fantasy adventure stories, the types that are found in the references and inspirational reading lists of Dungeons and Dragons…and nowhere is there anything resembling this premise. Fantasy adventure books offer a LOT of interesting things to sink one’s teeth into: danger and daring, but politics and family, world shattering invasions, confrontations with the strange and deadly but in a context that matters to the tale of the heroes.
Look at Gary Gygax’s own Gord books: how many “dungeons” are found in ‘em? Um…pretty close to zero. There’s a lair with a demon in the first book…but that’s about it. Doesn’t mean Gord doesn’t have plenty of roguish adventures (and, per Gygax’s end notes, achieves mid-level ability through the course of his journeys). My own AD&D campaigns of the mid-1980s (when I was a kid) looked very similar to the first couple Gord novels…which is to say, very little like the explicit game play outlined in the rule books.
Similarly with the Dragonlance novels, wholly based on the AD&D game and designed in part to sell adventure modules: there’s really only two “dungeon” scenarios (Xak Tsaroth and Pax Tharkas) in the first six novels. Well, I suppose Neraka (Spring Dawning) might count as a “site based adventure” but little of the plot could be considered a normal “dungeon delve;” and after the first novel, most of the dungeons marketed as DL modules (Thorbardin, Icewall, Huma’s Tomb, etc.) occurs “off-camera” in the books…they’re just not important to the story of the "player characters."
Even starting a campaign with 1st level characters, we 13 and 14 year olds (back in the day) did not start with adventure scenarios. We started with CHARACTERS, building relationships with each other, and relationships with the fantasy world around them. The PCs had some backstory…rough sketches that helped provide them with history and personality…which would lead to role-playing, even as they made careers for themselves as “adventurers.” But adventures involved freebooting around the countryside, not invading orc holds and looting ancient tombs. Sure, there were trolls and whatnot, but there was a lot of intrigue and war and political interest and romance and personal ambition, too. If we went into a dungeon, it was with a very specific objective or purpose. For example, if we invaded the Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, we were searching for a specific artifact, not just looking for spare coins and notches on our sword belts. When we invaded an assassins den, it was on a specific mission of vengeance, not just because it was an appropriate adventure for characters of our level.
For the most part, we grew out of dungeon crawls by age 11 or so.
The basic dungeon delving premise of D&D is a dumb one. Delving to acquire power to delve deeper is not fantasy role-playing: it is a complex board game. I know I've spent mucho time over the last 18 months or so creating adventure sites for my B/X players, but this was mainly due to circumstance:
- new players needed introduction to the game and its mechanics
- players had expectations of delving
- players lacked interest in anything resembling "deep" role-playing
- (large) size of the group precluded serious specific "side plot" adventures (for the most part)
- rust and re-visiting of the (B/X) materials of my youth led to the classic adventure creation outline (i.e. "making dungeons")
Also, I'd been out of the whole loop of reading fantasy fiction for awhile (these days I prefer more history, biography, philosophy stuff).
But getting back into the reading habits of my youth have led me to realize just how wanting the whole premise is. How long can it sustain itself? I see why people can get sick of playing the game after 8th or 9th level...if all you do is delve tougher and tougher dungeons, doesn't the "story/plot" get a little repetitive?
I don't think the original game system(s), as written, do enough to provide the tools for REAL fantasy adventure role-playing...to exploit the potential of D&D. Sometimes, we come to these things as a natural evolution of long-term play and vested interest...as I and my friends did in our youth...but there's little in the game rules to suggest this, or provide a sketch as to how it's done. Even though there are clues scatttered throughout the history of the game (including the old articles in Dragon magazine).
It's a damn shame, in my opinion. The farther we get away from that "old way" of playing (which is to say, adapting the rules to the texts the rules purported to emulate and take inspiration from), the more that knowledge is lost and all that's left is a silly game that resembles a poor man's version of the World of Warcraft. Or any other computer "RPG." Totally lame.
Oh, yeah...so what am I going to do about it? I'm not sure just yet...I'm thinking on it now, though. Hopefully more to come...
Monday, January 2, 2012
Last Day in Orizaba, Veracruz
At least for this particular trip...we'll be heading back to Mexico City in a couple hours and returning to the U.S. in the next day or so.
There is much I could write about Mexican culture, both very good things and very bad. It is always with mixed feelings that I leave the country: a bit of melancholy to be leaving friends and family (and food) behind, excitement of seeing friends and family (and food) in the place of MY birth, Seattle. And yes, some relief to go back to a country where law enforcement is generally trusted and technology tends to work more often than not and the usual attitude is "the customer is always right" instead of "sorry, it's not my fault."
[regarding food in Seattle: it's January, which means we are in the middle of the shellfish season. Most seafood is better in these winter months, and I am looking forward to some fresh Dungeness and oysters...not to mention nigiri and alder-smoked salmon. No, NOT all at the same sitting!]
It'll also be good to get back to my ESPN and American coverage of the NFL. 2012 is officially upon us, and the regular season has ended: here come the play-offs! Trying to find a broadcast football game in Orizaba (especially the Seahawks) is pretty tough, but I managed it. I'm looking forward to watching with ease from the comfort of my own couch.
[long break...hopped my bus and was in traffic for an extra two hours...that's not-quite-hell with a small child. Fortunately my boy, while easily bored, also managed to take two naps during the six hour ride. I am now writing from the comfort of the Mexico City Hilton]
Regarding the New Year: there's a tendency to post "state of the [RPG] industry" blog posts this time of year. I won't be doing that as I have no idea what or how the industry is doing; much as I'd like to claim otherwise, I'm no insider (though I do try to keep my ear to the ground). I can only take a look at my own industry/industriousness (or lack thereof) and say: um, yeah, 2011 wasn't a banner year for yours truly as far as being a contributor.
Yes, I got a few interesting blog posts up and maybe gave some people some food for thought; I also had a chance to play-test some things that might contribute to the industry somewhere down the line. And, of course, I was able to distribute more than a few copies of my own book, hopefully generating some interest in the original fantasy adventure game...especially in taking that game to new heights (heights of level, that is).
Oh, yeah...and I roundly panned DCC on more than a few occasions, quite possibly being a stick in the craw of Goodman Games. 'Course there's no such thing as bad publicity, right? I don't know; maybe that counts as a contribution.
; )
Anyway, I got nothing done the last few days, that's for sure. Well, except for finishing two books (McCaffery's Dragonflight and Bradley's Sharra's Exile...both damn good, as well as thought provoking) and getting almost entirely through a third: Farah Mendlesohn's The Inter-Galactic Playground. The sub-title of this latter is A Critical Study of Children's and Teen's Science Fiction and, no, it is not a novel but someone's published doctorate thesis on the subject. It's also quite fascinating and thought-provoking; makes me want to write children's literature.
Of course, the titles that keep popping into my head are things like "The Littlest Viking" and other non-child appropriate subjects.
All right, the family's hungry, so we're going to go grab some tacos. Literally. Later, folks!
: )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)