Endgame

Rain, meet parade.

So I was at DragonCon 40 this past weekend, the first gaming convention I've been to in SIX YEARS (I didn't even realize how long it'd been until I went back through my archived blog posts this morning...wow). My approach...and my experience...was very different from my prior two ventures into con territory. For one thing, I arrived Friday and stayed overnight at the hotel (sans family...they gave me the weekend off). For another, I went there with absolutely zero intention of running a game or hawking some product. For a third thing, I staked out most of my events ahead of time, and unlike prior years I spent almost no time with the "indie gamers" and invested all my attention in D&D...old school D&D. I was able to get into four games...three B/X, one Holmes basic...for a grand total of sixteen hours of gaming over two days (I didn't attend Sunday). Which is about thirteen hours more than I've played for at least a couple years.

And as I sat in my hotel room Friday night, I found myself thinking: Maybe I am too old for this. Maybe it is time to stop playing this damn game. Maybe I have outgrown it after all. 

Such was the ennui that had gripped me by the end of the day.

But the feeling didn't last. I was fine by Saturday and had a very enjoyable day. And despite some negative thoughts that continue to percolate (aren't there always negative thoughts 'round these parts?), I'm not quite ready to chuck the hobby out the door.  Not quite.

Still, it may be useful to consider what exactly led me to that particular mental space. The DMs were all competent in their running of the game. I may have had quibbles with their particular style or procedures (based on my own expectations of game play), but they weren't terrible...not even bad, really; "serviceable" is, I think, the best term I could use to describe them. The folks sitting around the table (many of whom appeared, with me, in multiple games) were all nice, experienced, and engaged participants. The adventures were fine...some were better than others, being more to MY particular tastes, but there was fun to be had. I had fun.

I had fun. I did...

I don't know what it is. Even now, at this moment, I feel the ennui lurking around the edges of my consciousness, like something just out of sight of my peripheral vision. It's not a palpable feeling, the  way it was Friday night...that was something that just hit me like...I don't know what. Like some heavy blanket of "I-just-don't-give-a-blank-anymore" dropping over my whole world view. That pressing feeling has receded way, way back into the background now, perhaps drowned out by other pressures and concerns occupying my attention.

But it worries me. I mean, what the hell was that?

This is what I do. This is what I want. D&D gaming is what I write about, what I read about, what I research shit in aid of. Playing the game is something I've been sorely lacking in the last few years, and here I finally had the chance to play, not just once but multiple times...and suddenly I felt ready to shit-can it? What the heck is wrong with me?

A couple days ago, I started reading the most recent post over at the Tao, and my head started swimming half a dozen paragraphs in. I had to break away from it because it was giving me something akin to a panic attack. Later, calmer, I went back and re-read the whole thing...I've since read it three or four times. I'm not sure these paragraphs completely describes me, but they sure hit awfully close to the mark:

How many of us, as we get into our 30s and 40s, are beginning to wish we'd never encountered the game? ...look around. You can find hundreds of D&D bloggers coughing up their last post, expressing their helpless lack of interest, the cold reality that they're just getting too old to play the game any more. And a horde of others who still "want to play" but can't quite bring themselves - after an absence of years - to get back into it. 

This isn't the reaction that an endlessly fun activity produces. I won't find fanatical skiers talking about not skiing or foodies deciding to purge themselves of cookbooks; car fanatics don't quit going to car shows "because the crowds are different now." The crowds aren't different. We're different. It's not the same game for us anymore...because we aren't 17 anymore... 

Once upon a time I was fairly "fanatical" about fencing. I even entertained some delusions about competing at a high level. But certain life events got in the way, and I ended up not putting in the necessary work or making the necessary adjustments I needed to make. And at some point I said, jeez, this is frustrating as hell, and I'm just not that young anymore, and my knees are shot-to-shit, and so I quit. That was probably close to fifteen years ago and I still miss it...so much so that just in the last few months I've found myself looking for a fencing salle that I can join, trying to figure out a way that I could "make it work" with my schedule/finances. Not because I have any more delusions about what I might accomplish...just because I want to do it.

Sometimes...much more rarely...I feel that way about other things that I've given up on: acting or singing, for example. Being a middle aged guy, I've tried out and discarded many things over the years, had many hobbies and interests, most of which have fallen by the wayside. Just part of getting older, right? But being a gaming fanatic has been my identity for so long...so long!...that I honestly can't believe I'd ever entertain the possibility of chucking it. Of getting rid of the books I've held onto for decades, across multiple moves, across different countries and different continents.

Hell, I brought my original copies of B/X to DragonCon this year...the same ones I've owned since 1982. The same ones I had with me in Paraguay for years. At this point, they're like some sort of relic or talisman; they'll disintegrate long before I ever give them up.

And yet, I think something has changed for me. Maybe it's the same thing I was blogging about back in May, that desire I have to elevate or evolve my game to something more mature, more "advanced." Maybe I'm still hungry for gaming, but straight B/X gaming does little to satisfy that hunger any more.

Or maybe I'm just not satisfied in the role of player...maybe I just miss being the Dungeon Master. Maybe.

Anyway, that's about the only angst I experienced at this year's DragonCon (thank goodness!). I'd like to write more specifics on the games themselves, but that'll have to wait for another post; tomorrow, perhaps. I just had to get this one out of my brain first.

Later, gators.

Re-Tooling Combat (for FUN!)

Another "thought exercise;" AKA Putting Off The Taxes.

Part of the problem with addressing a single element of RPG combat (like the form and function of armor mechanics) is that you're messing with a complex system that's elements have been designed to work in tandem. At best, it's a "patch" that (often) causes other problems to raise their head, not the least of which might be an impact on that all important playability (making a system clunkier in play, reducing the overall "fun level"). At worse, a change in a single element might cause the whole system to fall apart, and/or wreck playability to a point where it's more fun to not play (or play something different).

"Ooo, how melodramatic, JB." Look, folks...I'm not saying you can't tinker. But I'd guess there are other folks out there (like myself) who have tried other RPGs and simply found they disliked their mechanics for one reason or another, and have set aside a system completely because of it. In fact, I know there are, judging by the blog posts I've read around the internet of people adapting specific game settings to their own favorite system rather than use the system intended by a game's designer. Sometimes a "patch" just doesn't work...and people have different preferences when it comes to the games they play. It happens.

ANYway...when it comes to a complex game system (like combat), tinkering with important elements of said system simply to match your "world view" can have problematic consequences. To really make your system work, sometimes you've got to go for a complete rebuild...if only to ensure that all the different interconnected elements are working together.

FOR EXAMPLE: say you're using the standard D&D combat chassis. You roll a D20 and compare the result to your probability of hitting based on two parts: your character's class/level, and the defender's "armor class." Simple enough, right? But if you restructure "armor" to act as a form of damage reduction (as many game systems do), then what are you rolling against? A reduced "AC" based solely on dexterity and/or magical bonuses? As the alternate rules in Dawn of the Emperors points out, this will result in "a lot more hitting" with less damage being inflicted (at least against armored types). Perhaps this will appeal to some folks ("hey, I whiff less often!"), but it feels like it would simply draw out a fairly simple (often uninteresting) combat system.

There are other alternatives: Saga Star Wars bases a target's AC (I think it might be called "defensive class") on the defender's level of experience (higher level characters are harder to hit), and something like that might be adapted. Games where combat rolls are unopposed skill checks (like Chaosium's base system) only tracks the attacker's proficiency ("If I roll under 75% I hit, and then your armor reduces damage!"), but doesn't account for the defensive ability of the opponent except as an additional system (parry skill, dodge skill) made to resist. Palladium kind of splits the difference: melee rolls use a D20 and any roll over 5 "hits" (yay!), but then needs to exceed a defender's defensive roll (parry/dodge) IF the defender chooses to do so, and THEN perhaps another roll to reduce damage (roll with blow), before finding out how armor reduces damage (which is dependent on the initial roll and the armor's Armor Rating and Structural Damage Capacity).

Palladium system's are over on the extreme side of granularity in combat (though I'd argue against them modeling any type of "reality") but they're certainly not the MOST granular. That distinction belongs to The Riddle of Steel, whose system I won't bother to detail here, as it's system mastery requirements are a bit outside the pay range of myself and most of the dudes I play with.

Instead, let's just stick with D&D for the moment. What's nice about D&D (for me) is it's ABSTRACT nature. In a ten second round, my mind's eye imagines two combatants attacking back and forth and the success of their attacks can all be boiled down to a couple D20 rolls. Still, though, there are aspects that bug me: should a 1st level cleric really have the same chance to damage a 3rd level fighter, given that they're both wearing plate-&-mail and they're weapons do D6 damage? Should a wizard really be wicked in a knife fight? I had the chance to watch a midnight showing of The Revenant last Friday (need to write about THAT), and the whole climactic battle I'm thinking, who the hell thought it was a good idea to make the dagger the go-to weapon of a spindly academic?

SO (just to keep going with the thought exercise), if we take armor out of the equation, and we decide we want to leave combat abstract (unlike the multiple maneuver monstrosity of TROS), how can we determine if a character's attack is successful? Well, just looking at man-to-man...er, human-to-human combat for the moment, let's consider perhaps the concept that (given both individuals are aware of each other and fight-worthy) the chance of inflicting mortal injury comes down to your own combat ability in relation to your opponent. In other words, if you're a better fighter than your opponent, you'll have an easier time, and if not, you'll have a harder time.

Sound good? Well, I'm going with it anyway. Exactly what determines "combat ability" is pretty easy with respect to humans: training and experience (i.e. class and level) with fitness/athleticism (ability bonuses) playing some part, too...perhaps as a bonus or penalty. It would be a ridiculous exercise in "clunk" for me to do up tables cross-referencing every level of every class against every other level of every class, so what I need is some sort of short-hand for cross-referencing. For example, what level of experience would a cleric need to be to have the same combat ability as a 4th level fighter? 7th? 9th? In B/X a cleric of levels 5-8 have the same attack abilities of a fighter of levels 4-6, and while I may not agree with the scale of B/X, I do agree that when determining combat proficiency, there should be tiers of ability, with each tier containing a range of levels. It's not just as simple as "gain a level, earn a +1 base attack bonus."

[of course, that's my own bias when it comes to modeling. For me, there just shouldn't be much difference between a 4th level fighter and a 6th level fighter when it comes to attack ability...we tend to learn in stages and have sudden "leaps" of realization. In my experience fencing, I can easily take apart someone who has little or no experience, but would be hard-pressed against people of equal experience unless I had some advantage in athleticism (not bloody likely). Meanwhile, I might score a few touches against an opponent with a couple more years of experience, but would be hard pressed to win...and against my old instructor (only a few years older than myself) I probably wouldn't score even a point. And he wasn't even in the same league as individuals who pursue the sport on a national or international level...]

So, strike bands (as in bandwidth)...that's what I'm calling my "tiers of combat ability." Consider a range of about five bands (labeled A-E), with A being your average "normal, non-combatant trying to fight" and E being reserved for truly legendary fighters (and non-fighters being limited to D as their maximum ability). Strike bands would be cross referenced to find the target number needed for an attack to succeed, with two opponents of equal ability having a 50% of succeeding on an attack and success being adjusted upwards (and downwards) from that baseline.

It's not really a new concept...very similar to Warhammer (the war-game's) comparison of WS versus WS in melee combat to determine the number needed on a D6 (WS stands for "weapon skill" and represents hand-to-hand ability). My initial thought would be to have the percentages scale like: 95% (the maximum...for an attacker with 3+ strike bands more than the opponent), then 85%, 75%, 50% (even ability), 25%, 15%, 5% (the minimum...against a defender with 3+ strike ranks more than the attacker).

[there is a degree of diminishing returns. I would fare no better against an Olympic-level fencer than I would against my instructor (at least, back when we were both in our primes)...but I'd fare no worse, either. I mean, how do you do worse than "losing quickly and embarrassingly?"]

The neat thing about the strike band idea is that it's fairly easy to slide them up or down to account for  specific circumstances. A fighter using a shield increases her strike band by one when defending (for example). A magic weapon increases a strike band by one (when attacking). Characters using missile weapons would simply use strike band A, and then range would be considered for defense (with A, B, and C corresponding to short, medium, and long). Specialist marksmen could increase their missile strike band to B. Cover could increase range by one step (to a maximum of D).

Monsters would be assigned strike bands based on their size, speed, and general ferocity. I can see something like:

A: used for creatures who are small (kobolds) or slow (skeletons and zombies)
B: used for man-killers (orcs, tigers, etc.)
C: used for exceptionally large monsters (ogres, trolls, etc.)
D: used for incredibly fast, strong critters (dragons, bloodthirsters, tyrannosaurus rex, etc.)

You could even combine it with 5E's advantage/disadvantage mechanic. A (slow) giant might use strike band D with disadvantage, while super heroic types (vampires, wraiths) might use strike band C with advantage. Ability bonuses (for strength and dexterity) would still add to the D20 roll (yes, I'd change those percentages into D20 target numbers) rather than shifting strike bands.

Anyway...that's just one idea. I'm sure there are others. Now, I really need to get back to my taxes.

+1 Strike Band (offense AND defense)
when attacking unmounted opponents

Holy Toledo!

Yes, I am still in Spain.

For the most part, I am loving it, though I will be back stateside soon enough (i.e. in roughly two to three days). I'm sure you folks can wait THAT long. Jeez!

While I've had internet access for the last couple-couple, I've been mainly too busy sightseeing or too exhausted (from sightseeing) to bother blogging. Also, it sure would have been smart if I'd bothered to bring a cable for uploading photos from the cam to the blog, 'cause I'm sure I'd have plenty to say when one considers the mishmash of cultures and multi-thousand year history of this incredible country. Pretty f'ing fantastic.

Right now, I'm in the city of Toledo, the main city I wanted to see on our trip (though the Basque country was a lot of fun and Granada and Madrid were nice as well...all right, as I said, everything has been cool. Though I would strongly recommend NOT driving in Granada. No! NOOOoooo!!). Toledo, not to be confused with the city in Ohio that bears its name (they even have a street here named after Toledo, Ohio)...TOLEDO, the REAL Toledo is about 2500 years old, and was the capital of Spain until Phillip the Dos (that's "II") decided he'd rather move the political seat of the country to a little village called Madrid in 1561.

I'm not sure what's more impressive...that Madrid will be celebrating its 450th birthday next year (only about twice as old as the United States) or that the original capital has more than 2000 on THAT. Well, actually, that's a lie...I DO know which is more impressive to moi.

Anyway, MY reasons for wanting to go to Toledo were a little more...um..."base" than simply wanting to soak up the beautiful architecture, history, and cultural gumbo (Islam, Catholicism, and Judaism have been peacefully coexisting in Toledo for several centuries). Nope, all that is great, marvelous in fact. But I came here for the swords.

I can remember the first time I handled a replica katana in some Seattle cutlery shop, more than 20 years ago, and naively asking where in Japan it had been made. "Spain," was the reply. I was told there weren't any swords being forged in Japan (at least not for export) and the only real blades still being commercially manufactured THESE days (this would have been the late 80s) were being forged in Spain.

Now, of course, there are plenty of replica artisans all over the world. Ahh, the magic of the internet which allows hack writers like myself to self-publish all over the world...and hobbyist sword-makers to manufacture all sorts of edged goodies for a profit.

But still, there's a difference between buying an "authentic Scottish claymore" hand-forged locally from your neighborhood Renaissance fair, and picking up some real Spanish steel in the world's sword-making capital. Or maybe there ISN'T a difference...except in MY mind.

But you know me...I'm kind of "old school," like that.

So, anyway, Toledo. I heard that swords were big in this town...hell, in the whole country for that matter, and yeah, it appears to be true. Even up North in the Basque region, the wedding we went to featured sword salutes and sword dancing (outside the church) not to mention a big-ass broadsword being used to cut the wedding cake. And yes, there's plenty of sword history in the country (what with the violence of the Reconquista and Crusades). But Toledo?

This town is something else entirely.

Now, of course I should note that Toledo isn't just the "place of swords." It's really the "place of swords and marzipan." You know, that sweet almond-paste candy? Apparently it was invented here. There are nearly as many shops selling marzipan as selling swords...which is a good thing, since my wife is far more interested in the tasty confections than the edged bad-ness. But pretty much EVERY shop, EXCEPT the confectioners sell swords.

Every shop. Like every single window has a prominent rack of blades of all types, styles, designs, and craziness. For a sword enthusiast, this place is hog heaven.

Moreso...I've actually become a bit jaded to the whole experience. The place is also a Mecca (no pun intended) for tourists and history buffs (duh) and the place must sell more swords than...

Well, shit. Than anywhere in the world. I mean supply and demand right? Could these businesses stay in business without moving all this inventory? Come on!

Every time I turn a corner (and like Venice, this place is filled with medieval, winding streets...all old, all stone, though thankfully all marked) I half-expect to see a pair of tourists, duking it out with replica swords like some Highlander-style alley fight. I mean, what else could they be used for? Is there some type of underground, Toledo duelist club (Spain's answer to Fight Club?) that I'm not privy to? If so, they must be doing it somewhere well concealed...the main thing I see cruising the streets at night are young people in tiny cars, blasting loud dance music and looking for a party. That particular scene is no longer my thang, but honest-to-God fencing in the streets of historic Toledo? I have to admit, the idea holds a certain appeal as I find myself approaching middle age.

Too much D&D I suppose.

; )

Anyway, I did buy a sword today...much as I would have liked to forge my own (I've read too many books as well), I did get an excellent piece from a real Toledo sword-smith...a 4th generation hombre who's been forging for 40 years and works out of a shop more than three times that old (we got to tour the shop...it looked like your average extremely crowded garage plus forge, work tables, and stacks upon stacks of half-finished pieces). Much as it would have been nice to pick up a cruciform broad sword or bell-guarded rapier, I settled on a tasty small-sword...all hand-crafted, even the quillons (several of his commercial pieces incorporated molded pieces into the hilt as a means of expedience). It's simple and elegant, and the blade is supple enough the espadero could bend it at a 90 degree angle without snapping it, the whole flexing swiftly back into its original position. Ugh! It's so beautiful and so completely impractical (I certainly hope never to poke someone with it!) that I'm really at a loss for words. As with other parts of this trip, the thought of it just fills me with...well...with a lot of feeling.

Fortunately, it was in my price range (it wasn't made with meteoritic iron after all!), and my wife and I both knew there was a very good chance I'd purchase a sword in Toledo (I never did have much of a poker face). Wow...I can only hope it clears customs so I can unwrap it and revel in its shininess...right now, it is boxed and taped and it ain't coming out till we get back to Sea-town. Hopefully, no fat tourist in the midst of a mid-life crisis slaps me with his glove while I'm prowling the city, looking for a churro (the wife is already stocked-up on the marzipan).

However, if some deathwish-craving Yankee DOES hit me up for a duel, I'm sure I'll be able to pop into whatever shop I happen to be browsing, and nip back out, blade in hand. I mean, really, it is THAT easy in Toledo. I kid thee not...every single block. There are enough armas blancas in this town...replica AND authentic...to arm every single tourist and stage a mass battle scene that would put Nightwatch to shame. Maybe not enough claymores to do Braveheart...but I wasn't a huge fan of that flick anyway.

All right, all right. That's enough for now. I've got another 48 hours or so "in country" and I need to spend some of it sleeping. Adios, amigos! Nos vemos!

: )