Playing For The Other Side

As I mentioned (briefly) in yesterday's post, I've been thinking a lot about other RPGs lately...that is to say, RPGs other than D&D. I even had this crazy dream this morning that I was a part of of some classic adventure gaming "organization;" I was on some type of "board of directors," a round table of three to five people, discussing the direction of gaming and such, and I broached the subject of such exploratory ideas, to which I received some raised eyebrows. "Playing for the other side?" they asked. Yeah. "Please," one board guy told me. Please go on or please stop? "Please stop."

That's when I woke up.

Last night I bought Kevin Siembieda a sandwich. Maybe a sandwich and a beer. I'm not sure what food prices are like in Detroit these days, but the price of the book I purchased (on-line) was less than I paid for my dinner entree in Bellingham Friday evening...and Bellingham prices are a LOT cheaper than Seattle. So, maybe a sandwich and a beer; perhaps with an upgrade to a side salad instead of fries. Getting his lunch was the least I could do for him, given all the Palladium content I've been consuming 'on the side,' in recent weeks.

Let me give folks the whole skinny.

Waaaay back in June (after school got out) my son was in Mexico, hanging with los abuelos. At the end of his trip, my wife flew down to be with him and her parents the last few days, leaving my daughter and I to fend for ourselves. Sofia is a different beast from her brother...both kids get a lot of their personality from my wife and I (duh), but they get different aspects from each of us. Sofia, I think it's safe to say, has a  lot more creativity and imagination than her brother. He is very "nuts and bolts," very left-brained, very precise and practical. Sofia, on the other hand, is always leaping ahead to the idea of what to do with knowledge. She gets (more-or-less) the same high marks as her brother in writing or math or science...but then she turns around around and writes stories or starts businesses or makes "inventions." Sometimes, she puts the cart before the horse (she started filming a 'movie' with an old digital camcorder before she wrote a script, for example) but she is very "big picture" oriented. She started a band this summer and roped two of her friends into it, learning songs and writing her own (one of her bandmates only plays the trumpet, so she is writing a "trumpet bit" for a song they're working on. Sofia doesn't play trumpet...).

ANYway. Sofia and I were left on our own, and while I was cleaning the kitchen she flipped on the TV and started watching The Incredibles - a film she's seen before, more than once. But it led both of us down a rabbit hole of binge-watching a ton of superhero movies (mostly Spider-Man and Batman films)...all told, I think we watched half a dozen over a couple-three days. 

Which, of course, is the kind of thing that tends to kick my mind into the "superhero RPG" mode, where I will once again, madly comb through the scores of hero games I have, get frustrated, resolve to write my own, and then set down THAT Quixotic road...which never pans out. This time, I used Google's AI to bounce ideas off, and came up with some really cool mechanics...but then my laptop glitched and I lost everything I'd written. I still have the notes to recreate stuff, but writing is...well, it's work. Figuring out how to turn a phrase, how to explain a concept, how to teach and communicate in a text that will be read by people without you there to mentor them...well, all that takes time and effort and recreating that was more than just "rewriting." So...I punted.

Or, rather, I pivoted. At the same time I was working furiously on supers-related stuff, I also started getting into pulp action stuff. I had pulled my copy of Night Owl Workshop's Raiders of the Lost Artifacts to compare it to their Guardians (supers), and that had perked my interest in a whole swath of pulp-related adventure RPGs. Fact is, my own pulp adventure RPG (a long-term project from "back in the day" when I was running games out of the Baranof) was still on my bench of Things-To-Do. So I was considering THAT, mainly in terms of "early 20th century heroic adventurers" (a la Doc Savage and crew)...a different type of "superhero" game, right? But that wasn't the "pivot." The PIVOT was thinking about old movies and shows I needed to show my daughter (like Tales of the Gold Monkey or High Road to China, etc., etc.) perhaps also brought on by reading of ERB's Tarzan novels simultaneously (natch)...and then REMEMBERING an old Japanimation film from my youth that might be of interest to her. My daughter, in addition to all her other quirks and foibles, is an absolute stan for everything 1980s.

So it was I started down the AI road of looking up something I thought was called "Shogun Warriors," but was actually called Starvengers...at least, it was called that in its English dub version. And THAT led me (via AI queries) down the rabbit-hole of the differences between the "giant robot" genre and the "real robot" genre...which led me to Gundam (which I was aware of, but had never watched). Of course, anything futuristic/war-related is pretty much my wheelhouse. Anyhoo, from there I went back to an old fave of mine: Mike Pondsmith's Mekton Zeta. Bought Pondsmith a sandwich, too (and he lives in Seattle these days, so I know how much a sandwich costs).

From MZ and Gundam, I got back into Cyberpunk 2020 and Appleseed which, of course, led me back to cyborgs, including my own World War Borg which I decided to dust off and refurbish...again, using AI to help me refine and expand some ideas to make a really nice little RPG war game. Or the start of one. 

And then I thought: how exactly does 'borg warfare still make sense in our age of drone strikes, AI, and autonomous weapon systems?

Much depressed (although, to be fair, I DID find a way to make it all coherent), I idly thumbed through my copies of Chrome Berets, Warlords of Russia, Advanced Recon, etc., etc. and then threw on the latest Zock-Bock Radio episode (in English) where Settembrini discusses "classic" BattleTech with New Yorker Sleazy_B, a man whose acquaintance I made at last year's Cauldron convention. Back to the giant robots again (so it seemed) but now with a system I've been intimately familiar with since '86 or thereabouts. Again: my wheelhouse.

As always, the discussion was excellent. I'll say this about the Germans' podcast: compared to what you hear in, say, your average (American) gaming pod, they know their stuff and don't just pull stuff out of their ass. When they talk about what works and why, it's because they've tested it, not theorized about it, and they don't speculate about stuff they don't know, or make assumptions or jump to false conclusions just to get things to have "discussion." For me, it's a breath of fresh air. 

But enough glaze. Here's what I took away from the 'pod: classic Battletech works in the same way and for the same reason that AD&D works: it forces you to live in a world of dollars and cents. Yes, there is the pressure-cooker environment of being "in an endless war" (danger! danger! all around) but you still have to pay the (c-)bills. You need to buy parts. You still need to buy fuel. You still need to buy ammo. People get killed but there're always new recruits to step up and continue the campaign. BT just does a lot of the world building for you...and then the players live in that world. And the GM runs the world. 

AD&D has a larger playground, but the game is the same.

So, while I momentarily had the (very brief) thought of starting up a BattleTech campaign (after all, the box of all my first edition BT books...including MechWarrior...has been sitting under my bed for the last 18 months or so) I quickly discarded the thought. I wanted to play something my daughter would enjoy, and war games (or games based on a war premise) just don't get her jazzed the same way they do the boy and myself. INSTEAD, I started thinking if BattleTech (a simplistic RPG, but still an RPG if you include MW) can function for long-term campaign play, is there a way this can function for other genres of RPG? 

Can it function for (for example) a superhero game?

I've had long-running "supers" games in the past. I did the Marvel thing for a couple-plus years, and I ran a LOT of Vampire (gothic, blood-sucking supers) in the early 90s. These, like many RPGs, have issues that tend to derail long-term play. And yet, comic book universes...comic book titles...can last decades. Before 1990 there were nearly 800 issues of Spider-Man comic between Amazing Spider-Man, Spectacular Spider-Man, Web of Spider-Man, and Marvel Team-Ups. That's not even counting guest appearances and mini-series (like Secret Wars). If every issue was the equivalent of single weekly game session, that would be a 15+ year campaign...that's a ton of gaming even withOUT the other various franchises of the Marvel Universe.  That's a lot of mileage out of one teenager bitten by a radioactive spider having to deal with school issues and romantic entanglements while fighting bad guys.

[and that's just talking about the first 40ish years of the character's life...not the last 36 years of re-boots and re-hashes in various media forms]

In many ways, I'd liken a "comic book universe" like the Marvel franchise to a long-term D&D campaign. Not in terms of premise, but in how the thing grows organically over time, taking on a life of its own. Places like the Baxter Building, Avengers Mansion, that X-Man school in upstate New York, and various factions (the Kingpin's mafia, Shi'Ar aliens, "The Hand" ninja clan, mutant-hunting Sentinels, Ka-Zar's Savage Lands, etc., etc.) all get introduced over-time, piecemeal, and gradually become a (semi-)coherent...or, at least, acceptable...whole. The first time the characters encounter Atlantis and Namor, it's like "wow...WTF?" But then, as a part of the setting, players can make USE of such things, as necessity demands ('where are we going to find an inter-dimensional gate device? let's call Reed Richards!').  This kind of thing happens all the time in a long-term D&D campaign...and your average comic book universe is just as wild and woolly (if not more so) than an average old school outing. "Gonzo" has nothing on Stan Lee.

But D&D is an easier start. You have its premise of treasure hunters. There's no need for a Big Bad, Sauron-esque figure. There are dungeons: go get 'em. Survive and thrive and the world will gradually grow up around the players, developing as needed to keep the adventure going. And the players will pursue that adventure because it is their livelihood...they need money to survive. To eat. To resupply. To train. To hire. All that jazz. The nuts and bolts of a living, 'real' (if imaginary and fantastical) world. 

The vast majority of supers RPGs? They don't worry about that stuff. It's abstracted because it's not primary to the gist, the premise of the supers game. We don't care whether Peter Parker can pay his rent...we care whether or not he can save Mary Jane from Doc Ock and still make it to Aunt May's 85th birthday (or whatever). Manufactured drama... like so many so-called "storytelling games," this is what is embraced by the superhero RPG. This is their sacred cow; long before 5E started D&D down the road of "not letting the rules get in the way of a good story," superhero RPGs were preaching this approach.

Mostly. There was at least ONE supers RPG that was still willing to dial up the cruft in order to simulate the granular reality of a super "reality." Even as it also went GM-fiat with regard to the reward structure including bonus points for "good roleplaying" (whatever the hell that means).

And so, once again we come back around to Kevin Siembieda (the guy whose sandwich AND beer I purchased) and his RPG opus Heroes Unlimited. A game that I have posted about ad nauseam on this blog, alway coming back to how much I dislike the system, the mechanics, the clunky-ness, the disorganized 'kitchen sink' approach to the whole damn thing. Despite Mr. Siembieda's overwhelming generative creativity, I have never wanted to do more than use the book as the base inspiration for a better game, a game with more elegant design, one that doesn't suck rocks. A game of my own, in other words. One of these day.

*sigh*  Isn't that the same damn thing I was saying about AD&D a decade ago?

Screw it. I really don't have the time to rewrite games, let alone write RPGs from scratch (even when my computer doesn't crash). Why not simply play the game as written, and worry about running the campaign with the system designed? Stop complaining and learn to love the bomb, so to speak. The system is pretty darn easy, after all. A thousand skills all working off a percentile system. A combat system that's both simple and fairly intuitive (so long as you've calculated all the bonuses/adjustments ahead of time); I'll bet with a little practice I could run it with something approaching the efficiency of AD&D. Probably.  And the dumb-dumb arbitrary advancement system? Just a cheat sheet, that I throw check marks in during the course of the game and add-up at the end of the session...easy-peasy. 

BUT...yes, yes, there is a "but" here...BUT there still remains the issue that keeps a supers RPG from functioning like a D&D campaign (or even a wargame like BattleTech): what's the motivation? Heroes aren't getting their hands dirty for money. Well, maybe if they're government operatives or something...but those in THAT boat would be hamstrung as far as being independent adventurers, constrained to "mission parameters." No, that is the antithesis of adventure gaming.

The fact is that (within the genre) the super-protagonists ARE motivated by all that heroic do-gooder stuff that is absolutely cringe and/or vomit-inducing when forced down the throats of D&D players. And, as with the premise of D&D, this isn't something that holds universal appeal for gamers. Not everyone is going to dig it. And, yet, that's the game. Do you want to be a heroic adventurer, finding a way to fight crime and super-villains while navigating the problematic aspects of your secret double-life? Because that's the game...and if that's not your cup of tea, no sweat, but that's what we're doing. 

It's a different type of RPG...pure and simple. It certainly was back in my old Marvel Superhero days. That was almost all "soap opera" (compared to AD&D) with far fewer fights and battles and far more situation and relationship challenges. Vampire was a tad scrappier (it really depended on the players involved in the various 'sagas' I ran) but, again, a different animal then D&D. A sillier animal, if I'm being honest...and that's saying something.

I digress. The point is long-term campaign play for a supers game has to be considered in terms of a different foundation modeled on the "universes" of various comic companies. And yet, it requires many of the same tenets as are needed for an AD&D campaign...not genre emulation and attention/championing of tropes. But the same serious mind, iron fist, hard limits, rules of engagement, allowance of metagaming, etc., etc.  that is part-and-parcel to running a successful AD&D game...it's got to apply here, too, no? Regardless, I find that I'm willing to give it a try. Call it curiosity...or the thought that doing something different is better than repeating the same madness and expecting results to change.

That's where I'm at; that's what I'm thinking. I own (and have read) Aaron Allston's Strike Force, detailing his eight year Champions campaign. I own (and have read) some of the comic versions of Martin's Wild Card stories, ostensibly based on his own Superworld campaign. I remain unconvinced that these are quite the thing I'm looking for...again, I am NOT trying to tell stories with my RPGs or explore what it "means" to be "super," or the psychology of characters, or their personal story arcs of discovery, redemption, revenge, or what-have-you. Instead, I want to run a world that my players can live in. I'm not sure that will fly, but I haven't yet attempted the thing.

For my daughter: I wonder if this is what she's looking for in a game. She likes superheroes (comics, TV, and film versions) but not ALL superheroes. She's not a fan of the Avengers films (for example) feeling that all they are is one fight after another, which is samey-same boring. On the other hand, she dug the Thunderbolts film, because she felt there was more story going on and more "interesting" (I think she means "psychology-based") stuff to explain the show's conflicts. Heroes Unlimited has some tools that help this kind of campaign (i.e. "world") development...which I will discuss in a later post. 

BECAUSE, as is, this post has gone on for a looong time. And I'm sure it's bored some folks and felt idiotic and meandering (or even misguided) to others. That's okay, by the way...I just wanted to write something for Ye Old Blog, and showing people where my head is (currently) at and the sick way I migrate from one thought to another in the gaming realm is...well, it's what I do. 

Nothing more concrete tonight (er, today. It's Monday morning at this point). I'm calling it. But I'll keep folks posted with updates, as I can. 

Cheers.

Roughed Up

[not talking about the Mariners]

Mm. It's...what day is it? Saturday? Man...that month went by fast.

Currently writing from a hotel room in Bellingham, and I don't have a helluva lot of time. Maybe ten minutes or so. The internet is CRAP-tastic here; I'm using my iPhone "hotspot" to get my laptop on-line.  Jeez...what we pay for amirite? At least the coffee is free(ish).

I've had something like four soccer tournaments in a row, in addition to...everything else. Raccoons. Driver's Ed. Doctors and dentists and camps and kids. Practices. Just...stuff.

No gaming. 

Game-related news? Not much. Was working on a writing project. It got eaten by my computer after a particular glitch destroyed a bunch of documents. That was....frustrating. Another project fell through. Them's the breaks. 

I'd like to switch gears and talk some non-D&D-type gaming. I've been getting that itch, that hankering, to play other styles of RPG. Not that AD&D isn't still 'the King,' but there are other genres I'd like to explore, other concepts I'd like to revisit. I want to take the lessons I've learned over the last six or so years of hard core AD&D deep delving and apply (what I can) to other games. Just for a lark. Just for a bit of a stimulus...a jump start to my creative juices.

I'll probably be talking about this...in fits and spurts...on the blog.

Speaking of "jump starts," I forgot I have a run-down car battery to deal with back in Seattle. Sheesh. The grind never stops. 

All right. Time's up. Time to hop in the shower. Later, gators.

Orlando

Apologies. Not dead. Just in Florida. Not the same thing.

It's been one soccer tournament after another, and now we're in O-town (do locals call it that?) for a one last volleyball blow-out ("the Nationals"). It was a long year of multiple club and school sports...next year, the plan is just sticking with soccer.

[albeit, this is easier since I agreed to coach the co-ed v-ball team which is far more casual...and has a much shorter season...than the club circuit]

Speaking of soccer: congrats to Vozinha and Cabo Verde taking Argentina down to the wire yesterday and putting the fear of God in la Albiceleste. Really thought they were going to pull it off (I predicted the Sharks would beat them 2-1 in regulation, actually, especially after they subbed Martinez off). But it was a great game and Vozinha remains my hero for this particular World Cup...you don't see many goalies block on-target shots from Lionel Messi. As it was, Cabo made it through the entire tournament NOT being out-scored on by opponents...the deciding goal was an auto-goal. In the end, they could only beat themselves.

Gaming has been a big nada-burger.  I've actually been working on a couple different projects (specifically two), neither of which is at a stage that I want to discuss at the moment. Both are, more or less, fully conceptualized (like 80%+) but now it's down to the nuts-n-bolts of constructing them in a useable format for people. Which takes time and effort. The effort is happening. The time is...happening...slowly. As it can. 

OH! And Happy Fourth of July!  I happen to be wearing all red, white, and blue today (counting my white tube socks), but mostly blue because, well, you know.  Anyway. Hope everyone celebrating today has a happy, fun, SAFE July 4th. Another time, another place, this would have been a great weekend for some marathon D&D sessions. For those of you who can get to it...God love you...I hope your dice give you a helluva' good time. Me? I've got about 100K steps to do in 90 degree heat (plus humidity) at some crowded theme park before the mandatory fireworks display. Eh. It'll be a blast (no pun intended), but hopefully next year will be the books and dice thing.

All right that's it. Bless you all, and Lord this country remember just what the heck it's supposed to stand for. Later, gators.

Slumming

Lazy as hell. That's what I've been lately.

It's tough, folks. The kids are out of school, the weather's been beautiful, and the World Cup has been going since last Thursday. 

So much soccer. But it's great. The kids' club season just started (after a fantastic high school season for the boy) and we're already doing jamborees and whatnot, so having FIFA running non-stop is just keeping everyone pumped...apologies to the non-soccer fans.

[did you see that Spain'Cape Verde game? Vozinha is my new geezer hero]

But D&D has been on the backburner.

I mean, not TOTALLY...I have a project I'm working on, at the moment (more on that later), but playing D&D has been OFF the table the last month or so. Doesn't help that one of my players (Diego) is currently Mexico with his grandparents.

[he says he's training/conditioning for soccer, but he's mainly been hanging on the couch in his jammies with abuelo watching TV...again, it's the Mundial, folks]

And so, as happens at times (maybe when I've been drinking a lot...), I had a rather loopy idea. It was late, the soccer was over for the night but it was hot (it's been hot lately), and I was scrolling through random, terrible, Reddit posts trying to put my eyeballs to sleep and I thought:

What if I joined them?

What if I joined a 5E game...as a player?

Because, here's the thing: I know what these DMs want.  Unfortunately (stupidly, even), I was once looking for something very similar from my players. They want players with a high level of investment, who can "role-play" (in the play-acting sense), yet who still know the mechanics/rules and who can operate within those rules while maintaining the "fiction" of the story.

I get it. It's a fool's errand to hope for or expect this type of game because A) so few people have the capacity to operate in this way, B) it holds so little appeal to those who might have the ability, and C) the egos between such players and DMs can so easily get in the way or cause breakdowns in play. But I'm a rare unicorn in this regard. I can "role-play" and create characters that are "quirky" or "interesting" while still being cooperative, I can absorb and recall rules and mechanics, and I can have absolutely  no ego with regard to the "play of the game," because I have no attachment to playing 5E. I don't give a rip. 

I'd just be a mercenary character actor who knows how to roll dice and ham it up...easy-peasy. Plug me in. And...regardless of the relative ability of the DM or the other players, I won't say "boo;" rather, I'd act as the glue keeping the players together. As best as I can. Because I know how to do that.

But it would be "slumming" for me. And I think, while I might be able to contribute to a game session or two, I'd be doing a disservice to the others at the table because I "don't give a rip" and would have absolutely no loyalty to the game, the DM, or the table. I have no interest in staying for the multi-week (or -month) story arc that passes for a "campaign" in the 5E community. For me, it would just be passing time...just for the hell of it. Yes, I could provide the illusion of engagement...and it would be a type of "engagement"...but it would be an exercise devoid of caring. As I said: mercenary. And since (presumably) no one would be paying ME to play, I'm unlikely to stick around long.

Still, the idea started rattling around in my skull. 5E's a pretty simple game, and I'd just stick with my favorite character type: the Plain Jane human fighter. Durable, fight-worthy, and a "blank enough" slate that you can put whatever "character-isms" you want on him, and specializing in a single character combo makes my "roolz larnin" even easier. 

Admittedly, I'm not terribly original, so I'll repurpose my "old warrior" idea from back in 2010 because, why not? It's still good and (for me) a fun concept. Perhaps, we'll do him a bit 'looser' than King Haggard...a little more of Harold Lamb's Khlit, or even a bit of Don Quixote (without the delusions). Feisty, but not quite so mean...after all, he does have to work with the other PCs!

Pulling my son's 5E PHB from the bottom of his shelf, and just going "by the book," here's how I'd stat my not-so-OC:

Appropriate
Thousand Mile Stare

DON SALAZAR

Neutral Human Fighter, 1st Level

STR 14 (+2)

DEX 11

CON 9 (-1)

INT 13 (+1)

WIS 16 (+3)
CHA 15 (+2)

AC: 19

Hit Points: 9

Fighting Style: Defense, Second Wind

Skill Proficiencies: Animal Handling (+5), Intimidation (+4), History (+3), Persuasion (+4)

Equipment: chain mail, shield, longsword, dagger, spear, 2 hand axes, explorer's pack, fine clothes, signet ring, scroll of pedigree, purse with 22 gp

Background: Noble (Feature: Retainers)

Tale: For decades I have watched my family estates diminished, our debts take our land and livelihood, my father reduced to a doddering wretch. The time of my inheritance fast approaches, and yet what remains is little more than a ruin. There is nothing to build upon, nothing to start anew, our coffers empty of all but pride and what little respect remains for our name. 

Thus you find me as I am: a soldier-of-fortune, living by my sword in hopes of restoring the fortune that was my birthright. A man with courage and wit can find a way, even when the cause seems hopeless. I am not so young as I once was, but the time for adventure is now...for me, there is no other choice.

As I said, pretty easy to knock these things out...I am just a hack after all. But great literature isn't needed here...just a starting point for interaction with the other players in the game. If I do decide to "slum it" in a 5E game, this is the kind of approach I'll (probably) take. 'Cause it's easy. Plus I can use my "old man" voice to entertain people.

But right now, I have an Uruguay match to watch.

; )

"JB's Mailbag" Returns!

The "Q" post in my A to Z series is on the way, but it needs a bit of a re-write (it's just overlong and "over-meander-y"). So in the meantime, I thought I'd give folks something to chew on.

I still get Reddit spam in my inbox and (when bored) I still check these on occasion. A couple 'good' ones recently made me decide to throw up another Dear Reddit post; hopefully, some will find it useful....

Dear JB:

I would like to apologize for all of this, but it is something that i must take out of my chest. I'm an DnD 5e player for the last 7 years, i still, never finished one campaign at all. That's because all of the groups i end up joining get their campaingns cancelled by problems out of my reach.

• The DM just gives up 
• Players just leave and ghosts the party. 
• A player makes bigs mistakes on purpose and end up breaking up the party. (Last one)

All those things makes me feel frustrated and sad, because i never get to finish my characters stories. I get so engaged and immersed with the story, and then, it all crumbles instantly. All the adventure disappears, the ideas of roleplaying with others just vanishes.

As i am someone who really is fond of the characters i make, I've been reusing them just hoping they would get a good ending, but it never happens. All i wished was a game where i could share a story with others, and others could share theirs stories as well, as we have our adventures to defeat a great villain, or unvail secrets.. I don't know. Really I'm starting to lose hope, as I can't feel happiness with my favourite hobby, which is RPG.  I simply don't know what to do anymore at this point.

Sorry to bother you, I just needed to share it with someone.

The Campaign I Was On Just Died

Dear Sad Player:

I feel your pain. I do. I have empathy for you. I want to write that at the outset, just because the advice I have for you might sound a little...hard.

The frustration you are describing is the product of the type of game you are playing. It is not the Dungeons & Dragons I play...it is the prevalent style of today, and it is a style that is far more conducive to disappointment, exhaustion, and frustration than it is to "enjoyable lasting gameplay." There are reasons why I prefer AD&D (first edition) to 5th edition and this may be the biggest one of the bunch.

But you don't have to play 1E. You just need to change your mindset. You need to stop believing what the internet (and the publisher trying to make a buck) has been shoveling in your direction.

Let's start at the beginning.  You state:

1. You are fond of creating characters.
2. You want to share those characters' stories with others.
3. You want others to share their characters' stories with you.
4. You want to have adventures where you defeat a great villain or unveil secrets, etc.

What this sounds like to me is that you want to star in your own fantasy epic, playing a character like what one might read in a fictional fantasy novel or see on the screen in a film or television show. 

Do you not understand how self-centered and selfish this is?

I say that without judgement (as in, I don't think you're a "bad person"). To accomplish what you want, you need a DM who is willing to cater to your character's story and a group of players who are willing to be foils (i.e. play "bit parts") to the story you want to "share" with others. That's a lot of people working (and working hard) to give you the experience you are hoping for. 

And, of course, you're not alone. There are PLENTY of players (probably even the same ones sitting at your table) who want the exact same thing. That seems to be the main draw (for players) of 5E these days, when you get right down to it.  And I'm not judging THEM either.

But consider THIS: the author of a novel (or the scriptwriter for a film or television show) is ALSO a person who wants to "create characters" and "share stories with others," right? Of course they are. They might want to make money doing it, too (who doesn't?) but storytellers USUALLY get into the business because they have a passion for making characters and sharing stories.

And they do the work themselves. 

That's the important bit. An author is the one who writes the story; they then share the story with others to read. Some folks may not be interested. Some folks may read the story and not like it. Some folks might read it and love it. But regardless, NONE of those people had to do anything but pick up the finished product...the AUTHOR did all the work for them.

You don't want to do the work of an author. You want others to work for YOU.

Can you not see how this can cause DMs to "give up?" Can you not see why other players (whose expectations of their own protagonist character are not being met) "just leave and ghost" the play group? Can you not see how one frustrated player might (in their frustration) choose to "make a big mistake" that ends up "breaking" the party?

This is all the usual results of the narcissistic play you are looking for.

You  are hoping for something that looks like the pantomime you see in an internet-streamed "show;" but understand many of those people are there for VERY DIFFERENT REASONS. They are making money. Or they are promoting themselves. Or they are fueling their egos with their fifteen minutes of fame. For them, there is a REASON why they are performing (not playing) in the way that you would hope your group would resemble. That 'other incentive' (whatever it is) is the glue that keeps them together and keeps them coming back to the table (and the video camera) to perform their pantomime of play.

As a game, this is not what D&D is; it certainly isn't what D&D was. And those of us still playing the game as it was in the early days (pre-1985) can vouch for the fact that the game is still a game worth playing, still a game worth loving, still a game where "fun" is had, even though we do not have the same expectations of play (nor do we achieve the desired outcomes) that you and your likeminded fellows have. 

I'm not saying that to indicate we are "better" than you; I'm just telling you that we are not experiencing the sadness and frustration that you are. 

I've seen what other people have written in response to your post. Most of the folks have shared that they are in the same boat and decry that this is just a "fact (or "curse") of D&D play." No. It is only a fact of this type of D&D play. Some of the people reading your post have suggested you hire a "paid DM" to run the game. Well, sure...because, as I said, with this style it requires ADDITIONAL INCENTIVE (just like those streamers get) to get the type of experience you are seeking.

You want someone to do the work for you? You've got to pay someone to do it.

But if you don't want to hire people to do the work for you and you're unwilling to try for three or seven of 40 years (as your "helpful" responders suggest) to find the occasional bunch of rubes willing to give you the play you want...well, you MIGHT consider playing the game in the style it was originally intended to be played. Which is incredible and amazing and wonderfully energizing.

Can I share with you the basics? You're welcome to quit reading at any time.

First: when you make a character, leave aside any "story" you have about the character. You have a wizard who has a background as a sailor or whatever...fine. Don't make it MEAN anything besides what it says. It's just a character...and all a character IS is a vehicle with which you can interact with the game. In other words, your character is NOT a vehicle for "telling stories."

Second: ...*sigh*

Unfortunately, this is the really hard part. The part that's hard to hear. Up until now, I was trying to be as gentle as possible and give you information that would apply regardless of whether you played 5E or 2E or Pathfinder or whatever. 

But the hard part is this: SECOND, you have to approach the game as a game to be experienced, not as a story to be told. And...unfortunately...you cannot do this if you're playing with a 5E DM or a group of 5E players who are operating under the same assumptions of game play you describe in your letter. If they think the game is about telling stories, well, you're going to run into the same issues, over and over again: DMs quitting, players ghosting, players "breaking" the game out of frustration. 

So, the real "second thing" you need to do is find a competent DM running a competent game of D&D. And, unfortunately, there's damn few of us around these days. And just as with the 5E crowd, it's more challenging to find people willing to take up the DM mantle than it is to find people who want to play. And you, yourself, are one of those who want to play. Plus, per your letter, I presume you are unfamiliar with older edition games (and thus need someone to teach you the rules of those games). All of these are barriers to you getting the exciting, entertaining experience that made D&D a hit in the first place.

It's not an impossible row to hoe...but it's definitely not an easy one.

As I said, I feel your pain. I understand what you're looking for, because you've been sold a bill of goods. The truth is this: if you really want to make characters and share stories, your best bet is to become an author and start writing. There's still a healthy market for fantasy fiction, and if you don't mind just giving away your stories for free, I'm sure there are some people who will jump at the chance to read your stuff. Everyone needs a creative outlet...you can have yours, especially if you have no attachment or expectation of being financially rewarded or lauded by the masses. 

But if you want to play D&D...a cooperative game of fantasy adventure...with people in a campaign that lasts,a group that doesn't quit on you, your best chance of experiencing that is with a group of "old edition"-minded players. They're out there, and they're not all geezers like me (my kids play 1E and they're in their early teens; the Cauldron convention in Germany features players in their teens through their 60s and draws people from a dozen plus countries around the world). The old books are still available, print-on-demand, and the old ways are still alive and kicking. Maybe it's time you tried something different from what you've been doing?

It would be cheaper than hiring a "paid DM," and there's quite a few of us trying to cut costs these days. PDFs of the "core" first edition books (the PHB, DMG, and MM) can be picked up for under $30...that's a lot cheaper than a tank of gas! For complete beginners, I also suggest Tom Moldvay's Basic D&D set as an introduction (only $4.99 for the PDF). Something to think about.

Whatever you decide to do, I wish you the best of luck.

Sincerely,

JB

P is for Profundity

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

P is for Profundity...the profoundness of the AD&D game.

It should be fairly obvious to long-time readers of this blog that I'm a pretty passionate guy, especially when it comes to D&D and (these days) particularly when it comes to the Advanced version of the game. If it's not, please allow me to be clear: I am passionate about the AD&D game. If my more than 2000 blog posts on the subject over the last eighteen years isn't evidence of the energy the game instills in me...well, I'm not sure what more you need. Another book or two, probably.

[still hopeful for those projects]

But while D&D generally (and AD&D specifically) has had a profound impact on my life and attitude, can I really say the game is profound? Again, let's be clear about what I mean; the M-W definition of profundity is:

1. Great depth. 2. Depth of intellect, feeling, or meaning. 3. Something profound or abstruse.

[and for the sake of completeness that 3rd definition is referring to something "beyond the obvious or superficial" and "not entirely understood"]

Certainly, in some ways, AD&D meets the terms of the definition. It is clearly a "deeper" game than other editions of the game (such as B/X) and offers more "depth" of game play than many other games that might be played around the kitchen table. As well, I'd say it most definitely has "hidden depths" that are only revealed over the long-term...one of the major reasons I'm such am advocate for long-form campaign play.  

However, while the game may inspire depths of feeling and intellectual exercise, would I call the game particularly deep, in and of itself? 

I would not. It is still just a game...and a fairly simple game when it comes to game play, despite the radical way in which it departs from other prior games. The DM creates a scenario and describes it to the players. The players describe their behavior in relation to the situation. Dice are rolled as/when necessary and resolutions are tallied...often literally in terms of the "points" of the game (x.p., g.p., h.p., etc.). That is all there is to it.

And at this point, I'm sure readers are asking "what does any of this have to do with the theme of this particular series?" Please, allow me to explain by quoting from my introduction:

Our topic for the month is Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: how to approach it, how to run it...

This post relates to the proper approach to running AD&D.

AD&D is a profoundly affecting game, one that tends to inspire passion in others...I am not the first person to gush enthusiastically about it. And yet we passionate AD&Ders...both DMs and players...often assign it more seriousness and depth than the game warrants or, indeed, benefits from. AD&D is not an altar to be worshipped at, and we DMs are not its high priests. It is still just a game to be run, no matter how high a regard we might hold it in. 

Understand that I am writing this from my own experience of 40+ years of gaming. There have been PLENTY of times over the decades that I took the game too seriously, in which my approach to running the game was as one would something sacred. Doing this creates a myriad of problems, all of which are detrimental to the actual running of the game.Briefly they are the following:

1. There is the tendency to over-analyze, over-think, and (Lord knows) over-story your campaign, leading to an actual stoppage in game design due to "analysis paralysis" and the vain seeking after "perfection." Since the latter is never obtainable, it can likewise lead to depression and disenchantment, ennui and (eventually) the chucking of one's campaign altogether. 
2. There is a tendency to curtail the agency of players and to subvert the game design, in attempt to mold play into something that is "more worthy" or creates "more meaning." This will eventually lead to resentment and disenchantment from the players and a breakdown in the game systems that will derail the entirety of the game...either one of which situations can (again) lead to depression, disenchantment, ennui and the binning of your campaign.

You laugh, I'm sure. JB, you just wrote how we can't take the game too seriously! And, yet, here you are talking about worrying that this will lead to the trashing of your campaign...isn't worrying about THAT the same thing as "taking the game too seriously?"

No.

AD&D is designed to be played over the long-term. The campaign is the vehicle for long-term play. World creation (which includes adventure/situation design) is the way the DM interacts with the campaign; the "character" is the player's vehicle for interacting with it. Ending your campaign is ENDING PLAY. No campaign, no play. Do you want your play to end? I don't...I'm pretty into playing the game.

Just one of the (several) reasons my campaign is PERPETUAL these days.

In order to explore the true "depths" of the AD&D game, you must have a campaign. You start it and then you run it, you build on it, you grow it. Like a master gardener, pruning here, grafting there, and providing plenty of fertilizer. You don't rip it up and start over ever few weeks or months. It is a constant work in progress, something you take satisfaction in, something you enjoy and share with others...the fruits of your labor.

Every time you end a campaign, you are starting from scratch. You are doing the OPPOSITE of "putting down roots;" you are ripping up whatever roots have grown. Instead of cultivating your garden, you are burning it down and salting the earth. 

But perhaps you're only interested in a window box. And, maybe, dumping it out and re-starting it every season gives you all that you're interested in: a constant rotation of different veggies in an easily managed space. Not everyone is a master gardener, after all. And, perhaps, not every Dungeon Master has the taste for the kind of work I'm describing here...work that takes time and endurance.

When I say the game isn't "profound," I mean it. It is a simple game, easily explained, easy to participate in. It is not meant to be worshipped or held on a pedestal. And while every DM should have self-respect...respect for their campaign, for their work (which, by the way, is only possible when one respects the game)...that doesn't mean the DM has any delusions of profundity for AD&D.

Respect for the game and approaching the game in a deliberate, serious fashion does NOT mean considering it to be something more than it is. The participants are playing a game of fantasy adventure. They are not curing cancer. They are not writing "the Great American Novel." They are having fun. Mistakes will be made...these are easily corrected (and sometimes ignored). Jokes will be made...my tables are often full of snark and wisecracks from the players. It's not an uncommon phenomenon to make nervous jokes when you believe death may lurk around any corner.

And I don't pull punches.

No. AD&D is not a "profound" game, except (perhaps) in relation to other games. But it can have a profound impact on those who play it. I can say this is true for myself, and I've read many anecdotes from others for whom this was the case (Sherman Alexie penned a rather touching tribute to the game in the 2004 retrospective 30 Years of Adventure...and he's not the only one). But there's a difference between respecting the game and running it in serious fashion and worshipping the thing or formulating attachments and meaning where none are required, or even wanted.  And, unfortunately, when you spend a lot of time with something you love this much it is EASY to fall down that rabbit hole. 

"Touch grass" might apply here, despite the game's analog nature.

We sit at a table with our fellow humans: hopefully friends but, at least, potential friends. We each have our role to play, whether it is "Player" or "Dungeon Master." The DM describes the situation; the players describe their actions. Dice are rolled. The game is played. And by the end, when the books and dice are put away and we stand up from the table, hopefully we will have enjoyed ourselves such that we will want to gather again, on a future occasion, and play once more. 

That is as "profound" as D&D play gets.  And, yet, there is so much more there...so much of the experience that is more than what people can find in other arenas of life. Just because it lacks profound, deep meaning, doesn't mean that the game's not worth playing.  Quite the opposite, in fact.

That's all for today.

O is for Originality

[over the course of the month of April, my plan was to post a topic for each letter of the alphabet, sequentially, every day of the week except Sunday. While I was unable to complete the project on time, I find I still have things to say. Our topic in question is Advanced Dungeons & Dragons: how to approach it, how to run it, how to enjoy a system that deserves to be played NOW, nearly 50 years after its inception. Consider this a 'crash course' in the subject]

O is for Originality...something that is overrated within the so-called "Old School" community.

Not that this series is meant to slam the (mostly commercial) venture that is the OSR these days. But many of the new DMs coming to the AD&D game these days...or even old DMs returning to AD&D after decades of hiatus...are doing so by way of the Old School Revival that's rumbled along these last 17+ years. And in the commercial offerings that carry the "OSR" branding...specifically the for-purchase, pre-written adventure modules (of the kind that new and/or rusty DMs lean on to both inspire themselves and polish their chops), you find a particular type of pathology on display: the urgent need to add "original content" that never was to their offerings.

As if the game didn't offer enough content already.

I write quite a lot of adventures for use at my own table (both for my home campaign and for gaming conventions I attend). And when it comes to designing adventures, especially for convention play, I do not include "original content;" that is, I do not create "new, original" monsters, or magic items, or spells. Oh, you'll see some adventures I've penned for various writing contests that include one or two of these things (because they are elements of the contest), but these adventures don't see actual running at my table except when/if "play-testing." For my own campaign...and when demonstrating AD&D at cons...my adventures don't include anything you wouldn't normally find in the books...for a number of reasons:

1. The content already included in the books is (for the most part) tried and true and already tested within and against the (long-tested) rules of the game.
2. There is more content in the books than I have ever used in totality...which is to say, I've yet to use EVERY monster, or EVERY magic item, or EVERY magic spell over my 40+ years of gaming.
3. For purposes of playing (and "mastering") a game, players need a consistent structure within which to learn and hone their skills, not a rug that gets pulled out from under them with every new dungeon. As I wrote earlier, I am all for metagaming as it IMPROVES player engagement.

Thus, I have no need or desire for adding "original content" to my games...in fact (as per reason #3), I find original content can be detrimental to one's campaign if used in a less-than-judicious fashion.

And it's really not needed! Again, I will make use of a metaphor suggested to me by a DM of far more experience and wisdom than myself: AD&D can be compared to a piano. Consider the ubiquitous piano with its 88 keys...the industry "standard" since 1890. How many people have studied and learned and composed music on a piano over the years, challenging themselves and entertaining others? And how many of them have attempted to add "more keys" to the piano to make the thing "more original?" How many have said, man, these 88 keys aren't enough...there's just not enough sound here to make a decent song!

The idea is ridiculous, as anyone with the slightest  passing interest in music might tell you. And, yet, how many DMs are unsatisfied with the content of the core D&D books? How many have said that the 350+ monsters in the Monster Manual or the 300+ magic items in the Dungeon Masters Guide or the 400+ spells in the Players Handbook are insufficient for their crafting of adventures? Are you kidding me?

There is a TON you can do with the "limited" amount of content in the books: writing an adventure is much like composing a piece of music on a piano. And just as a piece of piano music can be played differently by different musicians (softly, loudly, quickly, slowly, jazzy, or arranged with other instruments, or whatever), a single adventure can be "interpreted" differently by different DMs...or run differently by the same DM on different occasions depending on the players involved.

Orcs aren't "boring." YOU are boring. What is needed is NUANCE, not novelty. Situationally, there are as many different ways to use orcs in your game as there are to use humans...these are intelligent (if imaginary) creatures after all. Consider all the way humans can differ...not just in form or function, but culturally.  I know that many of my fellow American look at all Latin American people as one big mass of brown-skinned, Spanish-speaking people (I know this as I was once one of those Americans) but it is so, so not the case. Even if you ignore the individual differences of individual Mexicans (for example), Mexicans are VERY different from Ecuadorians who are VERY different from Panamanians who are VERY different from Paraguayans who are VERY different from Brazilians who are VERY different from Argentinians or Chileans, etc., etc.. In fact, they are SO DIFFERENT from each other, that unless their country is right next to another they tend to know NOTHING about the differences they have...yeah they know the people there speak Spanish (and, perhaps, have a decent soccer team) but they are often completely ignorant when it comes to someone else's history, politics, customs, food, etc.

It's like the way MUCH of the western world thinks of Africa as one big, homogenous country with border lines drawn on it. There are THOUSANDS of different ethnic identities in Africa and wildly differing genetic diversity even amongst people who share the same color of skin. Would a westerner consider all white people to be one big group? Is a Dutchman really the same as a Sicilian? My Basque friends from Bilbao certainly don't consider themselves "Spanish" in any way, shape, or form. "Your Catalan is getting quite good" they tell me (in English). 

As an American I know there are huge differences of culture between our 50 States. Yes, there are plenty of similarities, but a Washingtonian is a LOT different from a Hawaiian or a Georgian or a New Yorker or a Texan. It's not just politics that divides my country: we are (and always have been) separated by regional and cultural identity, even if we've been united (for most of our history) by some rather singular and lofty ideals that...once upon a time...we all agreed on. But are we different? Do we vary? Hell yes! Even within my own State of Washington, there is a vast difference between the "island folk" of the San Juans and the hard drinking/snorting fisher folk and lumberjacks of the Olympic Peninsula and the multi-generational farmers of the Palouse and the military folks in Everett and the very complicated metro area that is Seattle. Seattle, itself, is large enough that different neighborhoods have their own cultural identity...we're not all elitist tech-savvy "Lib-tards." Far from it! I've lived here since I was born (in '73) and MOST of that time, Seattle was pretty darn "working class" and that's how a lot of us "long timers" still see ourselves. Besides, everyone knows the elitist, tech-money d-bags live in Bellevue.

[haha. I joke. Bellevue is full of wealthy Asians, duh]

The POINT is, just saying an orc is a 1 HD antagonist and that we need a blue-skinned version that explodes when you hit it or one that has feathered wings or an orc that shoots lasers from its eyes in order to "spice things up" is simply showing a profound LACK of imagination. And it's short-changing both your players (who are trying to master the system...something they can only do when there is consistency of application) and yourself (as a designer and Dungeon Master).  What? Are you afraid that if you start "humanizing" orcs (or goblins or lizard folk or giants, etc.) by giving them nuance and ethnical variety that you're going to somehow turn them into something the players don't want to kill and then there goes the game? Have you not noticed how many different motivations, excuses, and justifications humans have found to kill each other over the centuries? My cup runneth over!

Yes, I am well familiar with the classic TSR modules of early days of AD&D and how the MAJORITY of them (pre-'85, i.e. "the good years") would include a new monster or two. I would just point out the following for consideration: A) you almost never see new magic items or spells, things which (in my estimation) have the highest potential for unbalancing or "breaking" the game, B) many times these new monsters are unique encounters and/or thematically linked to the adventure (i.e. not likely to show up elsewhere in a campaign), C) compared to the MAJORITY of the monsters in a 30-60+ encounter area, one or two new critters are a pittance, and D) you generally do NOT see these shenanigans in adventures designed for introductory, low-level play (no new monsters in B1, B2, N1, N2, etc.). Players have to learn the ropes before you start serving up curve balls!

SO...to bring this entry to a summation and close: it is NOT a mark of "creativity" or "good Dungeon Mastery" to be adding new, unique content to your game. Anyone can do that; the Fiend Folio is an entire book filled with new creatures created by a wide swath of designers (more than 70). Pursuing "originality" (in terms of content) as a goal in and of itself isn't the best use of your time and energy as an adventure designer. In my estimation, you'll get far more value out of finding ways to use that which is already present in ways that are unusual, challenging, surprising, and in ways both deeper and more nuanced. Engage your players through good system use, rather than novelty. 

AD&D campaigns can last a long time and you can get a lot of mileage out of it as written. However, when it comes to the vehicle's actual components, there's still a lot of tread left on the tires; no need to change them out so soon!

; )