Archive for the ‘news’ Category

plundering Dragonlance: how to make first level characters seem awesome

Friday, August 23rd, 2013
This entry is part 4 of 11 in the series dragonlance


“Ast tasarak sinwalan krynawi,” Raistlin murmured, and then moved his right hand slowly in an arc parallel to the shore.

Tanis looked back toward land. One by one the goblins dropped their bows and toppled over. […]

“What did you do to them?” asked Tanis […].

“I put them to sleep,” Raistlin hissed through teeth that clicked together with the cold. “And now I must rest.” He sank back against the side of the boat.

Tanis looked at the mage. Raistin had, indeed, gained in power and skill.

OK, Raistlin had gained in power and skill since when? Exactly what level was Raistlin when Tanis used to adventure with him? Sleep is a FIRST LEVEL SPELL. If Raistlin wasn’t high enough level to put goblins to sleep, what was he casting back then? Cantrips?

Later on:

Caramon was even snoring. The kender remembered Raistlin’s sleep spell and figured that was what the draconians had used on his friends.

I guess every draconian is also an unusually promising student whose power frightens even the mages of the High Tower or whatever it is called.

plundering Dragonlance: how not to do dwarves

Friday, August 16th, 2013
This entry is part 1 of 11 in the series dragonlance

“Bah!” Flint snorted. “If a gully dwarf can open this, I can open it. Stand aside.” The dwarf elbowed everyone back, plunged his hand into the water, and heaved. There was a moment’s silence. Flint grunted, his face turned red. He stopped, straightened up with a gasp, then reached down and tried again. There wasn’t a creak. The door remained shut.

Dwarves are often treated without dignity. As far as I remember, Gimli wasn’t a comic-relief character in the Lord of the Rings books, but movie Gimli fared much worse. The repeated dwarf-tossing jokes in the movies had to be a low point of… well… anything. Just a universal low, low, low point.

Flint gets pretty much the same deal as Gimli. He actually gets tossed a couple of times during the course of Dragons of Autumn Twilight. He’s hilariously short. In his very first scene, much comic hay is made of the fact that he can’t see over people’s heads, and he has to ask his companions what’s going on!

As is ancient dwarven tradion, Flint has a phobia: as Gimli fears forests, Flint fears water. At one point, when he hears a lake is nearby, he actually runs in the other direction. He’s also allergic to horses. He can’t catch a break, travel-wise.

I wonder if Mr. T is a dwarf? Sure, he’s tall, but he’s burly, bearded, and has an irrational fear of a means of transportation that causes comic inconvenience to his party.

plundering Dragonlance: whistling in the dark

Monday, August 12th, 2013
This entry is part 2 of 11 in the series dragonlance

I read a Dragonlance novel when I was a wee lad, and I didn’t think much of it (putting me on the other side of the gender divide, I guess). My memory is that Tanis spent a lot of time standing on battlements brooding about his half-elven nature, the kender was irritating, and Sturm was a big dull dud. Now, I loved knights acting on punctilious points of honor, so Sturm should have been right up my alley, but I couldn’t like him. Maybe it was the moustaches.

(Dragonlance experts: Did Tanis ever actually stand brooding on battlements? I have a very specific memory of battlements.)

Raistlin I liked, up to a point — and that point was True Neutral. I was a sanctimonious child and couldn’t really get into an evil antihero.

Recently I decided to reread Dragons of Autumn Twilight. I’m finding that I like it more now than I did as a kid. There are some things done well, and the writing isn’t as bad as I remember (or I’ve read a lot more bad writing in the meantime). As a novel, it’s decent. As D&D adventure material, though, it’s inspiring. Not surprising, since the first book is, I understand, basically a novelization of an adventure module.

Even if you’re not using the Dragonlance campaign setting, there are some pretty good DM tricks in Dragons of Autumn Twilight – just remember to file off the serial numbers. Chances are, at least one of your players read these books as kids.

I’ll probably write a couple of posts about Dragonlance tricks for non-Dragonlance campaigns. Here’s one:

goblin whistles

What are those sounds?” Goldmoon asked the knight as he came up to her.

“Goblin search parties,” Sturm answered. “Those whistles keep them in contact when they’re separated. They’re moving into the woods now.”

This is cool, and a little spooky. A DM could add some atmospheric dread, I think, by using whistles to indicate that the PCs are being hunted. It could either be used, with frightening effect, as the signature of a pack of some horrifying hunting monsters, or used, as here, to spice up the lowly goblin. It’d be best used repeatedly: you’ll get some tension out of the first escape scene punctuated by whistles, but a session or two later, when the PCs think they’re safe, and they hear that whistle again: that’s your payoff.

This trick would work best with a DM who could actually whistle. “You hear a whistle” doesn’t have the same effect.

Play Dungeon Robber version 1.1! Fan art! Kings crowned!

Monday, August 5th, 2013

Lots of Dungeon Robber progress was made this weekend, in terms of recordbreaking, bugtesting, and coding!

I’d like to thank everyone who submitted bugs. You guys kept me busy this weekend, and you found lots of things I might never have found on my own. There’s a new version up: if you want to see the changes, or haven’t tried it yet, or the server was down while you tried it before:

PLAY DUNGEON ROBBER NOW!

To make sure you have the latest version, look for “version 1.1” on the bottom right. (Hopefully you guys don’t crash the server this time. I looked into hosting it on the cloud, but changing its URL might have meant deleting everyone’s savegame, and I didn’t want to do that. If you can’t get in, wait an hour and try again.)

What’s new in this version? We’ll get to that below. First of all, I want to congratulate the first player to become KING: Nathaniel Doherty! Long live King Nathaniel I!

I’d also like to thank the second player to become King, Edwin Porteous-Coté, who takes away the record for the most bugs discovered. And check out his kingdom! So many buildings!

Even cooler, check out this Dungeon Robber fan art: an awesome comic series from Shane Hosea:

Will Simon ever find riches? How about a blind cave fish? Read the rest of Simon’s adventures!

I was also happy to get a good mention by Rodney Thompson, one of the 5e designers and the guy behind Lords of Waterdeep. I’m glad the official D&D guys don’t mind me messing around in their sandbox.


OK, now on to the bugfixes I promised!

Here’s what’s fixed in version 1.1 of Dungeon Robber:

* Fixed a number of problems with Armor Class, attack and damage bonuses stacking with multiple items. I know, usually that doesn’t get fixed in a game until 3rd edition, but I’m ahead of the game.
* Prices are now listed for henchman-hiring measures at the inn. Who knew placards were so expensive!
* Removed the duplicate listing for room exits.
* Fixed a bunch of errors causing “undefined” items in the inventory.
* Killing monsters with items like the Wand of Magic Missiles gives you XP.
* Put in a tooltip in character creation telling you the requirements for a character class.
* Fixed various spelling errors and incorrect text.
* Elevators and other traps descend the proper number of floors, and make you lost.
* When you enter a shop, your money is changed to gold.
* If you have exactly 10 GP, you can rest.
* You can now heal henchmen with spells and food even when you’re healthy.
* You can turn left by hitting either L or T, so that you can do the most common dungeon exploration tasks with your left hand.
* You can buy items in a store over #9.
* Fixed scroll of animate dead and potion of quickness, which weren’t getting used up.
* Fixed Sanctuary spell, which wasn’t ending.
* Fixed a problem where high-level henchman portraits weren’t disappearing.
* Fixed an issue where the boring beetle didn’t get highlighted in combat (it’s easy to overlook the boring beetle)
* Fixed issues where nonviolent outcomes in the Coliseum would cause problems (just like in ancient Rome)

SOME OF THE BUGS I PLAN TO FIX NEXT VERSION:
* Some situation I haven’t identified can cause a henchman’s name to be “undefined”.
* There have been reports of monsters not getting their turn occasionally.
* A few savegames have disappeared. This is my highest priority bug.

This was meant to be a strictly bugfix build, but I did add a few little things: new treasures like a Jacinth of Estimable Beauty and a ewer (can you believe I almost missed an opportunity to include ewers in a game?) I also added Iron Rations, which are a convenient way to buy food in 10-packs.

I have lots more stuff I’d like to add to this game, but since we’re just around the baby’s due date, there’s no timeline for new features! Bugfixes come first!

OK, that’s it! If you fire up Dungeon Robber today, let me know what new bugs I’ve introduced and which bugfixes didn’t take! And thanks again for playing, reporting bugs, reading my blog, and kickstarting my project!

And here’s the link again:

PLAY DUNGEON ROBBER NOW!

the month door

Monday, July 29th, 2013


For all of Mira’s assurances, nothing was simple about entering the cavern, in Farideh’s opinion. First, there was a climb up a nearly sheer rock face, the stream that seemed to trickle out the broken door pouring down on her head. She hauled herself up onto the narrow ledge behind Mira, not wanting to consider how they would get back down.
Lesser Evils by Erin M. Evans

One of the things I liked about Mike Mornard’s old-school dungeon crawl was that there was a significant cost to entering the dungeon each time. You had to negotiate past a mad wizard on each trip. This encouraged you to stretch your resources, which made things a little more tense.

You can’t come up with a gimmick like that for every dungeon, of course. But you can come up with a gimmick like that for a LOT of dungeons.

In the passage above, the difficulty is simply a dangerous climb to the dungeon entrance. That’s not bad at all. (In the book, there’s also time pressure on the dungeon excursion – another classic.)

Another way to increase the dungeon-entry cost is to institute, not a fixed cost, but a lottery. Every time you open the door, there’s a visible risk. In the simplest case, there’s a wheel-of-fortune roulette wheel on the door, and it spins every time you open the door. If you get double zeroes, something bad happens. Maybe a trap is spring, or maybe the dungeon just collapses, leaving you unharmed but burying any treasure you hadn’t looted yet.

Free-associating from the idea of an ancient roulette wheel, I’m thinking of one of those round calendars like the Mayan calender.

The Mayan calandar has 20 months – convenient for D&D random number generation! But luckily, a 12-month calendar comes with its own die as well.

In fact, I have a d12 with the months on it, just begging for its own house-rules subsystem. Maybe this is it!

In order to open the door, you have to spin the stone calendar disk on the door. We’ll associate a god or demon with each month. The evil god, or the scariest demon, is associated with January (or a roll of 1 on the d12).

We could further tie the dungeon to the die roll: based on the season you roll, the dungeon is altered. If one god is associated with lightning, then lightning crackles down the hallways and powers otherwise inoperable machines. Or maybe it’s based on the season. If you roll a spring month, the dungeon walls are covered with climbable ivy: some new areas are now accessible. In winter, snow and ice coat the floors, and you need winter clothes to avoid exposure damage. In summer, it’s hot, and the dungeon’s pools and rivers are dried up, revealing treasures and secrets. Fall? Well, fall is a time of death and decay. So, business as usual in the dungeon.

Random Dungeon video game

Monday, July 1st, 2013

Technically, the Random Dungeon Generator as a Dungeon Map kickstarter is complete. I’ve delivered everything that I said I’d deliver. However, I do have one more Dungeon Map-related project that I’d love to finish.

One of the Kickstarter rewards was a board game where you play a dungeon explorer, navigating the poster and trying to stay alive. Another reward was an interactive, online version of the poster, to help people generate Gygaxian mazes. The obvious intersection of those two projects, and one that I’ve been working on for months, is a Random Dungeon roguelike video game.

Like most of my projects, this one has succumbed to “featuritis” – it’s a lot more ambitious now that it was when I started programming. Here are some of the features I didn’t know I needed until I added them:

  • You can get yourself a pet. Unlike Nethack, you don’t start with a kitten or puppy. You have to earn it. If you find a whip, you might be able to tame a giant lizard or a carrion crawler. Some characters might one day gain the capability to raise undead minions. Or, if you prefer human henchmen, you might be able to hire them back in town – once you’ve built an inn. Speaking of which:

  • Unlike many roguelikes, you can leave the dungeon and return to town. The town’s economy is dependent on your success in the dungeon. When you start, there’s not much available besides a handful of weapons for sale at the market, a graveyard to commemorate all your dead characters, and a few other buildings. But as your characters loot the dungeon and retire as independent yeomen, wealthy bishops, or even nobility, new buildings will spring up, and new treasures will become available for sale for new characters.

  • The Dungeon Robber game is about what happens before your first game of Dungeons and Dragons, before your character has fighter or wizard skills and can afford decent equipment. But if you’re successful enough to retire as a merchant, a thieves guild moves to town. If you retire as a knight, you’ll be able to start your next game as a fighter. Eventually, when you’ve unlocked the four original D&D classes and starting equipment, you’re actually playing D&D.

    So will I even finish this game? No promises, but I think I might. I have a deadline in mind. My wife and I are expecting our first child in early August. I’ve heard that babies are a lot of work, so I’d really like to get a beta of the game done in late July.

  • why you want Domains at War

    Friday, May 17th, 2013

    There’s about a day left in Autarch’s Adventurer Conqueror King: Domains at War kickstarter. I was lucky enough to get a Domains at War war-game playtest with Tavis Allison. It’s very impressive for the same reason Adventurer Conqueror King is impressive: it marries simple D&D mechanics with rock-solid behind-the-scenes mathematical rigor. That may not sound like much, but that combination is a rock on which many RPG-design ships have foundered. I still can’t believe that ACKS has pulled it off, and I keep peeking behind the curtain, only to find that the system is even more solid than I expect.

    Let me tell you two stories: the first is why you should have ACKS on your bookshelf, and the second is why you should back Domains at War right now.

    Ask Adventurer Conqueror King: How many knights per square mile?

    Right now I’m reading Charles Oman’s A History of the Art of War, a giant volume that, according to Jon Peterson, was a primary text for Gary Gygax’s Chainmail. I’m reading a chapter chock full of the meaty medieval economic information I love:

    We have seen that “knight-service” and “castle-ward” were ideas not altogether unfamiliar before the Conquest, and that the obligation of every five hides of land to send a mailed warrior to the host was generally acknowledged […] A landholder, knowing his servitium according to the assessment of the vetus feoffamentum of the Conqueror, had to provide the due amount of knights. This he could do, in two ways: he might distribute the bulk of his estate in lots roughly averaging five hides to sub-tenants, who would discharge the knight-service for him, or he might keep about him a household of domestic knights, like the housecarles of old, and maintain them without giving them land. Some landholders preferred the former plan, but some adhered, at least for a time, to the latter. But generally an intermediate arrangement prevailed: the tenant-in-chief gave out most of his soil to knights whom he enfeoffed on five-hide patches, but kept the balance in dominio as his private demesne, contributing to the king for the ground so retained the personal service of himself, his sons, and his immediate domestic retainers.

    OK, this seems pretty clear: each knight needs five hides of land to support him. Problem is, what’s a hide? Apparently, it’s an extremely variable amount: the land needed to support one farming family. Its area is most often given in old texts as 120 acres.

    Given this information, I extrapolated two useful pieces of information: how many families can be supported by a square mile of farmland, and how many knights defend it? (Stuff like this can be very useful for D&D worldbuilding, whether you need to know, for instance, the size of a country’s army or, conversely, the size of the country needed to support the army you want to use.) According to my initial calculations, a square mile of farmland, 640 acres, contained about 5 hides: about 5 farming families and one knight.

    I thought I’d compare this to ACKS. I discovered that each hex of civilized land contains, according to ACKS, about 4x as many peasant families as I expected. I had a feeling that Autarch hadn’t missed a trick here. I emailed Tavis and Alex to see if they could unravel this riddle for me. Alex responded:

    It’s quite confusing because a hide is not a fixed area of land. It’s 60-120 acres, but the acres in question are “old acres”. ACKS uses “modern acres”. A hide is about 30 modern acres. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_medieval_land_terms. […] Now, 1 6-mile hex is about 32 square miles, which is 20,480 acres, which translates into 682 peasant families. At sufficient densities I assume a surplus that includes non-farming craftsmen, so we end up with the cap of 750 families per 6-mile hex in ACKS.

    In any event, 5 hides supports 5 families in ACKS. Each peasant family generates on average 12gp per month in revenue for their lord. 5 x 12 gp = 60gp. The monthly cost for a knight is 60gp (see Mercenary Wages, Heavy Cavalry). So each 5 hides can support 1 knight, as per The Art of War in the Middle Ages.

    Mystery solved! My estimate for peasants per mile was off by a factor of 4 because the area of an acre had increased 4x! Furthermore, I was delighted to see that five families exactly supported one knight, as Oman suggested.

    That’s one of the big selling points of ACKS for me. I like to do historical research and tweak my game accordingly, but if I want to double-check my answers, having ACKS on my shelf makes things easier. And if I consistently fall back on its prices, domain rules, end economic model, I’ll end up with something more plausible than what I could cobble together on my own.

    Domains at War: Richard and Saladin

    A few nights ago I went over to Tavis’s house for a playtest of the Domains at War system. I hadn’t read the rules, but I was deep in Oman’s descriptions of the major battles of the Crusades, and I’ve read a lot about medieval tactics. I figured that my ignorance of the Domains at War rules was actually a boon for the playtest. If I could command an army using only the tactics described in historical battles, and get plausible results, without knowing rules, that would be a win for the system.

    On the train ride over, I’d been reading about the battle of Arsouf between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. I think Tavis had some other playtest planned, but after I enthusiastically recounted the battle, he said, “That sounds fun: let’s play that.” Oman gives a rather detailed troop breakdown of both sides, including the generals in charge of various divisions of the Crusaders. D@W includes rules for subcommanders, each with their own initiative and attributes, so the wings of my army were led by their historical commanders: King Richard at the center, King Guy of Jerusalem in the rear, and the Duke of Burgundy in the van. I put the Bishop of Bauvais, a cleric, at the head of the small band of heavily-armed Templars at the fore. Although D@W includes rules for battlefield heroics by PCs, King Richard and Saladin never met for a decisive D&D-encounter showdown.

    The Battle of Arsouf is exceptional because the Crusaders, for once, held their ground and stuck to their game plan instead of charging disastrously into traps set by Saladin’s more mobile cavalry. I set myself the same challenge: could I maintain discipline and resist the temptation to charge Tavis’s skirmishers?

    NO!

    After a few turns of being peppered by arrows, I deviated from King Richard’s strategy. I saw an opportunity to send my cavalry into the flank of Saladin’s wheeling cavalry. It was worth it to see how beautifully my rolling cavalry charge checked Tavis’s advance and sent a few of his units fleeing for the woods.

    After a few turns of opposed cavalry charges and countercharges, I was rolling up Tavis’s left wing while my own left wing was close to routing. We’d each taken a lot of casualties. Tavis needed to kill only one more of my units to force a potentially game-ending morale check; I needed two. And in real life, it was well after midnight. We played one more turn. On my left wing, Saladin concentrated his forces on one of King Guy’s cavalry units, trying to force it to flee, but it held. Meanwhile, on my right wing, I chased down and defeated one of Saladin’s light cavalry units, and sent a thundering charge into a second, but, bad luck for me, it made its morale check. Night fell on the battlefield, ending the battle inconclusively after a tense final turn. I got home around 3 AM on a work night – the sign of a good game.

    As the game went on, I found myself trusting the rules more and more. If I had just role-played the part of King Richard, I think the game system would have given me the victory. In fact, I role-played the part of an undisciplined, impetuous Crusader cavalier, and, as they so frequently did, I nearly turned victory into defeat. Maybe Tavis will give me a rematch sometime. This time I’ll stick to the plan.

    my poster on Wired

    Monday, April 29th, 2013

    My Random Dungeon Poster kickstarter was featured in a video on Wired:

    It’s fun to be in Wired, although the video is of the “look at these silly people” variety familiar to D&D fans. The tagline for the article is

    How do you define something like Kickstarter? Well, here’s one option: “An opportunity for your nutty friends to realize their nutty dreams.”

    Whether or not it’s meant as a compliment, I’ll wholeheartedly embrace the definition. As D&D fans, we’re proud of pursuing our nutty dreams. I imagine we’ve all been told something like “You must have WAYY too much time on your hands.” For creative people, that’s never true. I bet most DMs have way more campaign ideas than they have time to run them, and that usually extends to other areas of life as well. For myself, I may never finish my Mazes and Monsters RPG, or my board game in which the players are Italian Renaissance art patrons, or any of the dozens of web games half-finished on my test server. Who knows if I’ll even start my orcs-and-elves online hockey game (“Hack and Slash”), or my fanfic rewrite of Brideshead Revisited with all Harry Potter characters, or my sequel to Quest for the Crown (Quest for the Ruby Emerald).

    My hope is that I’ll always have some new inspiration: some new thing I want to make just for myself, and the luck to find some other people who just might like it too. That’s my wish for you, too, whether you’re a DM, a writer, an artist, or the inventor of a bad-ass automatic drummer.

    In that spirit, I’d like to pass on some of the awesome projects of my nutty friends:

  • Today is just about the last day to jump on nutty friend Stephan Pokorny’s Dwarven Forge kickstarter. It’s way past a million. I’m backing this to the hilt, and I can’t wait to recreate my dungeon map poster in 3D.
  • Nutty friend Anna Raff illustrated World Rat Day, a book of poems about “real holidays that you’ve never heard of”, like World Rat Day and National Sloth Day (each holiday made up, I presume, by nutty friends I haven’t met yet). I’m proud of my autographed copy.
  • Nutty friend Jason Hurst of Two Kings Games and Gygax Memorial Fund is organizing a RPG convention near Macon, Georgia, with board games, card games, and RPGs, including his Gygax-inspired D4: Basic game.
  • From my nutty poet friends: Kate Durbin’s got a new chapbook, Kept Women, a poetic tour of the Playboy Mansion. Marisa Crawford’s 8th Grade Hippie Chic, about what other cool people were doing in jr. high while I was rolling dice. Becca Klaver’s Nonstop Pop features an elegy to analog TV and crazy user testimonials about the book “The Secret” (which has so much magical thinking in it it’s practically a D&D manual).
  • Nutty musician friend Chris Warren is inventing some crazy electronic music techniques that are going to change music. If you’re a musician, you should check it out. Also, its name, Echo Thief, sounds like a pretty awesome 3e prestige class.

    What have I missed? Plug your creative projects in the comments! I’d like to check them out!

  • an early bad review of D&D

    Thursday, April 18th, 2013
    This entry is part 17 of 18 in the series New Schooler Reads OD&D

    Issue #3 of the Strategic Review had this editorial from Gary Gygax:

    EDITORIAL

    Donald Featherstone once said in WARGAMER’S NEWSLETTER that he believed Arnold Hendrick’s chief talent and claim to fame lay in his “pinching” of Fletcher Pratt’s Naval Wargame – alluding in all likelihood to similarities between Mr. Pratt’s game and the set of rules for naval miniatures authored by Mr. Hendrick. I concurred with what was said in WARGAMER’S NEWSLETTER, and when the good Mr. Hendrick “reviewed” CHAINMAIL in a highly uncomplimentary manner I ignored what was written, for surely most hobbyists could be assumed to be able to read this “review” for what it was worth and in light of Mr. Hendrick’s talents otherwise. As an example of the comments he made regarding CHAINMAIL, the most amusing was his assertion that heavy cavalry was rated too high, imagine! In a period where the armored horseman dominated the field of battle, heavy horse are too strong! Anyway, the learned Mr. Hendrick subsequently “reviewed” DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, again in a very uncomplimentary manner – after all, he had gone so far as to play a game of
    D&D as a Cleric, completely armed with such edged weapons as spear and arrows . . . Again, this so called “review” was so obviously inaccurate and biased that I ignored it completely, although numbers of letters and telephone calls from irate D&D fans who had read the comments and wished to let me know that the
    “review” outraged them assured me that Mr. Hendrick would not escape totally unscathed. Eventually the magazine which retains Mr. Hendrick as a “reviewer” did print a contrary opinion – how could they ignore a counter-article written by Mr. James Oden, President of Heritage Models, Inc.? This brings me to the point
    of this editorial. The axe that Mr. Hendrick has been grinding so loudly and long has been exposed.

    Possibly in light of TSR’s success in publishing miniatures rules and games, Mr. Hendrick has decided to begin peddling a line of his own creations. If these creations are as well-thought out as his “reviews”, as learned and clever, they will be rare products indeed. However, being inclined towards fair play, I invite any readers who wish to submit reviews of any of these sets of rules, and as space permits we will publish as many as is possible. Note TSR is not having one of its writers or designers review the products of a competitor. If we receive several reviews for one set of rules we will publish that which is most thorough in our opinion, regardless of what its recommendation is, and as an editor’s note include the conclusions of any other reviews of the same work so as to give all opinions expressed to us from disinterested reviewers. After all, could one expect honest and fair reviews from a source directly connected with a competitor of the product being reviewed? Certainly not. As an author of rules and games I have refrained in the past from reviewing the work of other writers and designers for just this
    reason. This policy will be continued in the pages of SR, despite less scrupulous methods employed in the magazine which carries Mr. Hendrick’s “reviews”. We will depend on you for product reviews, and when we plug our own staff it will be clearly labeled as an advertisement.

    Gary Gygax

    I believe this is the first recorded case of “Gygax spleen” directed at haters — we’ll see more of it over the years.

    I don’t know about you, but reading this editorial made me want to read the original review!

    I tracked down Arnold Hendrick’s review from this dragonsfoot thread. Not sure what publication it was originally in… The Courier? Someday I’d like to find it and see Mr. James Oden’s rebuttal.

    Rules Review
    BY ARNOLD HENDRICK

    DUNGEONS & DRAGONS BY GARY GYGAX & DAVE ARNESON
    three soft-cover volumes, totalling 112 pages, with five chart sheets, availible from Tactical Studies Rules, 542 Sage Street, Lake Geneva, W.I. 53147 for $10.00

    Subtitled “Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures,” these booklets attempt to outline a system for “playing” the kind of fantasy adventures one previously read about in paperpacks. The concept is remarkably interesting, since the same person interested in matching himself against Napoleon or Manstein might also find comparisons with Conan or John Carter enjoyable.

    The “game” is played by various adventurers and a referee. The players, starting in near total ignorance, attempt to adventure in the wilderness around them, or in dungeons and underground chambers beneath them. The referee is informed of each action, and after consulting the maps he has made, the basic tables and information in the booklets, and his own imagination, gives the player a response. Those who rememeber Korn’s “Modern Warfare in Miniature” will see the parallel, although Korn’s rules were much more tightly constructed. Here, introductions are made into many possible areas of interest: finance, magic, fighting ability, language, and monsters of every type and description (from goblins, orcs, giants, and dragons to the more esoteric manticores, chimeras, wyverns, and the hollywood mummies, purple worms, green slime, grey ooze, and black pudding).

    For personal combat, “Chainmail” is referred to, but the multiple-damage characteristics of characters in this game does not fit with the life-or-death struggle in “Chainmail”, and neither gives a clue for the effect of missile fire, save perhaps the firer’s normal ability is extended up to the range of the missile weapon, with restrictions and special options as allowed in the multi-figure section of the “Chainmail” rules. The resulting mess in interpretations is enough to tax the patience of most gamers to the extreme. Worse, personal combat is the area receiving the most attention, things go downhill from there.

    Play in person is usually impossible, since the referee can only show the adventurer the terrain he is crossing at that instant, plus whatever is in his sight. Only large battles are suitable for the tabletop. The optimim solution seems to be play by phone, or when distances are too great, play by mail. For those without gasoline to visit their fellow wargamers, or without a car, Dungeons & Dragons can be very, very interesting indeed. For example, in a test adventure recently concluded, the Acolyte Dorn from the village of Thane ventured into the ruins of Takator, opting for an underground Dungeon adventure instead of an above-ground wilderness expedition. After finding numerous doors beyond his strength to move, he finally opened one that woke four ghouls, who charged him directly. The well-equipped Dorn (with mail, shield, spear and crossbow) was allowed to fire by the kindly referee, and then strike first with the spear. Being rather handy with weapons and things, Dorn neatly felled two of the ghouls, but was then touched by the third, a circumstance which petrified him, while the ghouls proceeded to kill him, thus turning Dorn into a ghoul. So much for the Acolyte Dorn. Better luck in the next life!

    Beyond the problems involved in play (find an intrepid referee), the other discouraging factor is price. These booklets are roughly comparable to “The Courier” in physical quality, but at $3.50 each are priced rather high. Worse, all three are necessary. Graphics, considering the format, are decent, with some excellent illustrations, but some space could have been saved without compromising appearance.

    In general, the concept and imagination involved is stunning. However, much more work, refinement, and especially regulation and simplification is necessary before the game is managable. The scope is just too grand, while the referee is expected to do too much in relation to the players. IF you need ideas to help you along into your own fantasy adventure games, these booklets will be of use; otherwise you ten dollars will be wasted. I do not suggest these to the average wargamer.

    Gygax was mad because he felt his game was being attacked by a lesser game developer, and because he perceived a lack of ethics about Hendrick’s journalism, but let’s be fair: Hendrick’s review is not the biased screed I had been expecting. His understanding is as shallow, but perhaps not more so than most reviewers of most games. He doesn’t see that D&D is an entirely new type of game that can’t be judged by wargame standards; but that’s hardly surprising in 1974.

    Here are some interesting points in Hendrick’s review:

    “These booklets attempt to outline a system for “playing” the kind of fantasy adventures one previously read about in paperpacks. The concept is remarkably interesting, since the same person interested in matching himself against Napoleon or Manstein might also find comparisons with Conan or John Carter enjoyable.”

    It’s so interesting how important the John Carter Martian novels were at the beginning of the hobby. Gygax himself wrote rules for Martian adventures (John Carter is level 13). Carter has really fallen off the map: he has nowhere the kind of name recognition of, say, Tarzan. The John Carter movie did nothing to change that.

    “Vastly too much has been attempted in these booklets, with very little detail, explanations or procedures.” This is an entirely just description of the original D&D books. OD&D is the framework of a game. It’s pretty difficult to play without making a lot of interpretations on your own. In fact, it’s not really a game in the traditional sense: more of a set of guidelines for making games. Imagine if Clue came with vague instructions on drawing a map of an English manor, and instructions on making characters (“Appendix I: Forms of Address” “Appendix K: Colors”). OD&D is a game you have to unpack yourself over years of playing.

    “The optimim solution seems to be play by phone, or when distances are too great, play by mail.”
    I love the idea of Hendrick playing solo D&D over the phone with his spear-carrying cleric, while his referee moved figures around a detailed castle model (no doubt on a sand table). He really hadn’t made the mental switch from a wargaming table to a shared fantasy.

    “The well-equipped Dorn (with mail, shield, spear and crossbow) was allowed to fire by the kindly referee, and then strike first with the spear.”
    As Gygax sneered, Hendricks missed the section about cleric weapon restrictions. But fighting alone against four ghouls, he needed all the help he could get.

    Hendrick does come off as hapless n00b in this review. I hope Gygax’s army of fanbois weren’t too tough on him.

    By the way, Arnold Hendrick is actually a pretty interesting guy. After a little more work in boardgames and RPGs, he went into computer gaming. He worked on Sid Meier’s Pirates, one of my favorite games ever, and seems to have been a driving force behind its respect for period detail (perhaps because of his knowledge gained while “pinching” Fletcher Pratt’s Naval Wargame).

    Hendrick also worked on Darklands, which I never played, but I remember thinking it looked awesome based on its ads in Dragon magazine. Darklands seems to have sunk under the weight of featuritis, some of driven by Hendrick’s interest in obsessively modeling period detail. (Gygax was luckier. His obsession with polearms didn’t drag down his entire game.)

    Check out this interview from 2009.

    Rangers! An Exciting New D&D Class

    Friday, April 5th, 2013

    Strategic Review #2 featured the first appearance of the Ranger class, by Joe Fischer. I think it’s one of the few pieces of OD&D that Gygax didn’t have a hand in writing.

    Gygax says: “Joe Fischer played in my group, and he did an article in THE STRATEGIC REVIEW introducing the Ranger Class for the D&D game. From that I built the AD&D version.”

    Let’s compare the Strategic Review ranger with the PHB ranger to see how much building Gary had to do.

    Alignment

    From Strategic Review:
    Rangers are a sub-class of Fighting Men, similar in many ways to the new sub-class Paladins, for they must always remain Lawful or lose all the benefits they gained (except, of course, experience as a fighter).

    OD&D’s alignments were limited to Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic, with Lawful often standing in for Good. In AD&D, where we had the full dual-axis alignment system, “All rangers must be of good alignment, although they can be lawful, chaotic, or neutral otherwise.” The main literary model of the ranger, Aragorn, is probably Lawful Good, so I guess he can play in OD&D and AD&D games.

    Prerequisites

    From Strategic Review:
    Strength is their Prime Requisite, but they must also have both Intelligence and Wisdom scores of at least 12 each, and a Constitution of at least 15.

    In AD&D, the prerequisites are changed to 13 Strength, intelligence 13, wisdom 13, and consitution 14. Both classes are pretty hard to qualify for, although not as hard as the AD&D paladin (whose stat prerequisites were so demanding that, paradoxically, anyone who claimed to have rolled up a paladin was by definition a liar and not worthy of paladin status).

    Hit points

    The Strategic Review Ranger got 2 Hit Dice at level 1, while everyone else got one (“either with the standard [d6] system or the alternate system which allows fighters 8-sided dice”). That’s what happens when you let a player design his own class: you get power creep. Oddly, when Gygax revised the class for AD&D, he let the ranger keep its weird bonus level die, but to balance it, he gave the ranger d8 Hit Dice while the other fighter classes got upgraded to d10s. It sort of balances out, but it gives rangers a big lump of HP at level 1.

    Spells

    The SR ranger got alternating levels of cleric and magic-user spells starting at level 8, so that a 13th-level ranger could cast level 3 cleric and level 3 magic-user spells. The AD&D ranger had a slightly slower progression, starting at level 8 and ending at level 17. Also, instead of cleric spells, the ranger got druid spells. That makes sense: druid spells didn’t exist when Joe Fischer first wrote the class, but they’re more woodsy and ranger-appropriate than cleric spells. I’m sure Joe Fischer approved.

    Disadvantages

    In older versions of D&D, mechanical bonuses were often balanced by role-playing and campaign-world restrictions.

    From the Strategic Review:
    Until they attain the 8th level (Ranger-Knight) characters in the Ranger class are relatively weak, for they have a number of restrictions placed upon them. These restrictions are:
    – They may own only that which they can carry with them, and excess treasure or goods must be donated to a worthy cause.
    – They may not hire any men-at-arms or other servants or aides of any kind whatsoever.
    -Only two of the class may operate together.

    The AD&D ranger kept most of these rules intact, except that “no more than three rangers may ever operate together” (emphasis mine). Did Gary end up with some D&D group where three players wanted to be rangers? Heaven help him.

    XP Bonus

    From the Strategic Review:
    They receive no regular bonuses for advancement due to ability, but they automatically gain 4 experience points for every 3 earned.

    OK, Joe, this is a bad rule. Granting an across-the-board 25% bonus to ranger XP is exactly the same as lowering the XP needed for each level, except it’s much more of a pain in the butt this way, since players have to fiddle with their XP every time they get it. Now if this rule were introduced into 3e, where every class uses the same advancement chart, it would actually mean something (and it would still be a bad rule).

    Gygax, an experienced game developer, of course removed this rule in AD&D. He also lowered the XP needed for level advancement to compensate.

    Tracking

    From the Strategic Review:
    They have the ability to track the path of most creatures when outdoors, and even in dungeons they are often able to follow:

    There follows charts for the ranger’s ability to track in the dungeon and the wilderness – the dungeon subsystem is based on the d6 and the wilderness subsystem is based on percentile dice.

    When Gygax reprinted the tracking subsystems in AD&D, he converted them both to percentile systems.

    Surprise

    From the Strategic Review:
    Because of their ability to track Rangers also are difficult to surprise, requiring a roll of 1 instead of 1 or 2.

    In AD&D, Gygax saw that, and raised it: “Rangers surprise opponents 50% of the time (d6, score 1 through 3) and are themselves surprised only 16 2/3 of the time (d6, score 1).

    Damage Bonus

    From the Strategic Review:
    All Rangers gain a special advantage when fighting against monsters of the Giant Class (Kobolds – Giants). For each level they have gained they add +1 to their damage die against these creatures, so a 1st Level Ranger adds +1, a 2nd Level +2, and so on.

    (I guess this is because Aragorn is really good at killing orcs?) Gygax kept this rule in AD&D. It’s especially good at low level because so many low-level D&D battles are against kobolds, goblins, orcs, and hobgoblins. That plus the 2d8 HP at level 1 make the ranger a low-level juggernaut.

    Special Followers

    From the Strategic Review:
    -From 2-24 followers will join the character as soon as 9th level is
    attained by him. These followers are detailed later.

    […later…]

    Special Followers: For each of the 2-24 followers the Ranger gains
    a dice roll must be made to determine what the follower is. Further
    dice rolls to determine type, class, and/or level will also be necessary.

    Type
    01 – 60 Man
    61 – 75 Elf or Half-Elf
    76 – 90 Dwarf
    91 – 99 2 Hobbits
    00 Extraordinary (see below)

    Class (Men Only)
    01-50 Fighter
    51-75 Cleric
    75-95 Magic-User
    95-00 Thief

    Multi-Class (Elves Only)
    01 – 50 Fighter
    51 – 75 Fighter/Magic-User
    76 – 90 Magic-User
    91 -00 Fighter/Magic-User/Thief
    Level of Ability (Roll for each)
    01 – 50 2nd Level
    51 – 65 3rd Level
    66 – 80 4th Level
    81 – 90 5th Level
    91 – 99 6th Level
    00 7th Level

    Extraordinary Followers
    01 – 20 Ranger, 3rd – 7th Level
    21 – 40 Lawful Werebear
    41 – 55 2 Unicorns
    65 – 70 Pegasus
    71 – 80 Hill Giant
    81 – 90 Stone Giant
    91 – 99 Golden Dragon
    00 Take two rolls ignoring any 00%u2019s which might come up

    A couple of things to note on the Extraordinary Followers table:

    -2 Hobbits? Why do hobbits come in pairs? Well… there is some precedent, in Merry and Pippin… and Frodo and Sam… I withdraw my objection.

    -2 unicorns?? Why do unicorns come in pairs? The second one is wasted, unless you plan to have them pull your coach. Or start a unicorn breeding program, I guess.

    Unicorns are a symbol of all that is wild and unattainable. It just seems like a waste to have two of them. It’s like finding two philosopher’s stones.

    -If you roll a 91-99 on the Extraordinary Followers chart, you get a GOLDEN DRAGON. How awesome is that. You’ll pretty much be the baddest ranger in the room (which isn’t saying much, since only 2 or 3 rangers may ever share a room).

    The odds of getting a golden dragon aren’t very good: each follower has a 1 in 1000 chance of being a golden dragon. Rangers do get 2-24 followers, though, so the odds are actually better than 1 in 100.

    The kinds of people who “honestly rolled up” a character good enough to be a ranger, though, probably ended up with 2 or 3 golden dragons.