No, They're NOT All "Lycanthropes"

I flipped a coin to see whether I was going to write about weresharks or Batgirl and weresharks won.

[I'm still sick by the way...miserably so, though not nearly as bad as yesterday]

Until a few years ago, if you'd asked me to name my favorite "classic movie monster," I probably would have said werewolf, hands down. This despite never having watched a werewolf film approaching anything close to "good" in quality. Really...I've seen plenty of vampire films that I enjoyed over the years, but aside from (maybe) Brotherhood of the Wolf, I've just been "eh" with all the wolf-man films I've seen...and that one didn't even HAVE a werewolf (in itself disappointing).

Hmm, actually An American Werewolf in London is fairly good (memorable for certain). It's just that there's so many other things going on in the movie, it distracts a bit from the wolfish parts. And I remember being less than impressed with the actual "wolf" of the film.

[oh, and I haven't seen Silver Bullet, based on Stephen King's Cycle of the Werewolf. I quite enjoyed King's book, but most of the films based on his work have been a little underwhelming]

I don't know why werewolves...I can't seem to recall any distant childhood memories of my formative years that would have been an influence. I have always liked (and been fascinated with) wolves...have always gotten along well with canines in general.

But who cares. I like werewolves. Like 'em in the horror genre, like 'em in gaming (though, thinking back, I think I've only had one opportunity to play a werewolf...however, I did run an exceptionally hairy gangrel character back in my Vampire days). And it's time for someone to set the record straight about werewolves: despite what D&D has been telling you for decades, ONLY werewolves can be properly called lycanthropes.

That's because "lycanthrope" is Greek for "wolf man."

Shapeshifters, were-creatures, folks who turn into animals...they're all properly called therianthropes. Yes, it's a thing; go look it up. Plenty of animal-human shifters appear in various cultures throughout the world. They all go in the therianthrope category; lycanthropes are a subcategory.

Anyway, all thanks to Cameron DuBeers for hipping me to the appearance of King Shark on the recent Flash episode (which I haven't seen, by the way) as a beautiful example of what a "were shark" might look like in D&D. The thing definitely looks to be about 5 or 6 hit dice, quite in line with James Maliszewski's version, which was based on Holmes's description. For my money, I'd probably reduce the number appearing to D4 and make its attack damage 2D8 as those teeth give it some nasty potential (a low damage roll would just indicate a thumping/knockdown while a high roll indicates a grab-rip-tear style move). Still a bit smaller/weaker than the Gygax version found in the MM2 (his version is HD 10+3, AC 0, with damage of 5-20)...but that version only shows up as an (evil) great white shark, never the man-shark hybrid, and is statted as such.

Probably at least HD 5+5; no more than 6.

BY THE WAY...while I do like the idea of hybrid-forms when it comes to aquatic-style therianthropes  (since otherwise its easy enough for players to stay out of the water), my default preference when it comes to these creatures is to stick with an animal form and a human form without the in-betweens. For the most part, I think its cooler to savage player characters with a giant wolf or rat, rather than have them attacked by the claw/claw/bite of a movie monster (or, worse, a sword-wielding rat-headed humanoid...couldn't you simply adapt skaven to the game?). Limiting were-creatures to animal form provides some nice limits to the creatures (like the lack of opposable thumbs) that creative players can use to their advantage...even more so if the creature's intelligence is also limited to a close-to-bestial level. Always nice to be able to hide behind a bolted door when you've run out of silver arrows.

Batgirl later.

[by the way, if you'd like another person's opinion of the Flash's shark-man...and would like to see video of the character, here's a link]

Chargen (and Skills!) in Crowns of Blood

[this is probably "Part 1 of Several." We'll see]

Spent much of this morning using Knights Adventurous (the Pendragon supplement for "non-standard" character creation) to see if I could generate something the equivalent of Robb Stark, one of the protagonists of Martin's Westeros saga. Well, at least until he gets the Charley Manson Special (as  happens to major characters with fair regularity). Even sticking "by the book" (more-or-less) I was able to generate a fairly competent young man that roughly models the character at the beginning of the series.

Which was tricky, 'cause we're talking about a guy who had just turned fifteen when the books begin.

Pendragon assumes knighthood (and, it appears, adulthood) round about age 21. Characters created using the default chargen rules of the game all start at age 21 unless a player wants to have an older character (in which case, you were just an old geezer squire...all PCs begin the game with their knighthood ceremony). In the Westeros world, characters are considered adults upon reaching age 16, though many characters begin their "careers" earlier than that (Robb takes up the "King of the North" mantle at age 15, Jaime Lannister was knighted at age 15, women-folk are married off anywhere between ages 13 and 17). The "game of thrones" might be a vicious game, but it's a young person's game.

Knights Adventurous provides rules for creating characters (both male and female) as young as age fifteen. Of course, a 15 year old character to come anywhere near the competency of the 21 year old knights of the Pendragon setting. Hell, it's impossible to even qualify as a knight at that age, unless you get some extremely lucky rolls...the best most can hope for is to become a squire, and then advance (over several years) to a point of proficiency. Usually around age 21.

For Robb, I was able to just barely qualify him for knighthood at age 15 (even though the Starks, and Northmen in general, aren't big on knighthood, I wanted him to be the equivalent). I first selected what I felt was the closest homeland to represent the Starks: Gorre in The North. The most civilized area north of Hadrian's wall, the people of Gorre are culturally Cymric (the default "knight culture" of Pendragon) but religiously Pagan (roughly as equivalent to Martin's "Old God" religion as the Holy Seven is to "Christianity"). Defaulting him to the eldest son of a bannaret knight (the only noble title possible for the region per K.A., though I suppose I could have "cheated" and made him a straight Lord), I was just able to make the bare minimum requirements for being a night by giving him the family characteristic "At Home in Nature" with its associated bonus to the hunting skill.

"Hey! I'm fifteen!"

Even so, he's a less-than-average knight, lacking any martial skills greater than 10 (the "young knight" of the Pendragon NPC lists carries sword at 15 and lance at 13...my "knight" is a closer equivalent to the "guardsman" NPC). A couple years of seasoning (and good training rolls during the Winter Phase) could probably get him up to snuff by age 17, but its difficult to believe he'd be winning as many battles in his sixteenth year.

I guess having a pet dire wolf helps.

[for a dire wolf, I'd probably use the same stats as an Irish Wolf Hound, though perhaps with SIZ and STR equivalent to a carthorse as Martin's "dire wolves" are as large as ponies]

Does this mean I need to rewrite how skill points are accumulated (in order to better emulate the fiction I hope to model)? Mmm...maybe. Probably, if I want to stick to Martin's canon. If I want young, conquering hero types (Robert Baratheon waged his rebellion beginning in his 19th or 20th year of age) to have a chance against veteran military commanders (crown prince Rhaegar Targaryen was 24 and a consummate badass when Robert beat him at the Trident), then there needs to be some adjustment to "even the odds." Probably that begins with the default (Pendragon) assumptions regarding "adulthood." I know that a team of 30 year old professional athletes will beat the hell out of young college players in the same sport every time (and really wipe the floor with high school players). Wouldn't warfare be a similar affair?

Anyhoo...some long time readers are probably wondering how I can reconcile myself to a game system like Pendragon when it includes one of those "dreaded" skill systems that I've railed about in the past (like here, for example, or here). Well, there are several redeeming aspects to Pendragon's system that assuage my concerns:

1. Despite being a "roll D20" system and not the standard Chaosium percentile, Pendragon is still a "roll under" skill system. There's no GM fiat that comes into play...you succeed or you don't based on the roll against your level in the skill (opposed or not), and the most the GM can do is assign a modifier (plus or minus 5) based on advantageous/disadvantageous circumstance.
2. The game doesn't attempt to create a universal matrix for "every skill in the world," instead providing a finite selection based on a unified theme. You won't find skills like "jump" or "listen" or "hide in shadows" or "pick pockets" because either A) they're not applicable to knightly action, or B) they're governed by other game systems.
3. There's a conspicuous lack of player choice in skill selection. Skills have assigned numbers based on culture and background with a very limited number of "extra" picks for the player character (and even where those picks can be placed is subject to limitation). As such, character creation is not especially drawn out as player choice and "customization" is curtailed. This is a good thing.

Because of these three factors (and its overall elegance of implementation), Pendragon's "skill system" is one I can live with. I was actually a fan of Stormbringer's (back in the day), and I personally think Pendragon's variation on the Chaosium standard is a better design. Certainly, less search-n-handling time and quicker selection.

That being said, I think Pendragon still has too many skills for what I need in Crowns of Blood. On first pass, here's how I'd shorten the list:

• Flirting and Romance can be combined into a single skill called Seduction. Dancing might go here too unless rendered as a DEX check (like jumping and climbing) or rolled into the Courtesy skill.
• Faerie Lore can be combined with Folk Lore.
• Hawking will simply be a specialty within Hunting (other specialties might be boar, stag, etc.).
• A single skill Music replaces Compose, Play, and Singing (becoming individual specialties).
• Gaming, Recognize, Swimming, and Tourney removed altogether (medieval gaming being a matter of luck over skill - I don't care if you can play chess - recognition being part of heraldry, swimming being treated like other physical feats, and tourney etiquette being part of the Courtesy skill if really necessary).
• Creation of a specialized Knowledge skill for specific types of lore (like Religion, Orate, speaking/reading a foreign language, or the setting-specific care and use of "Ravens"). 
• Stewardship, while not knightly, becomes a lordly skill necessary for wise governing (and retaining and hoarding resources).

Skills that have "specialties" require the player to choose a specialty; it's simply treated two points higher than the actual skill level, or four points if the character is deficient in other areas (for example, a character with Music 2 and specialty "Harp" plays the harp as if they had four points of skill. If the character has no ability to compose or sing, they play the harp as if they'd assigned six points to the skill).

To sum up, the non-combat skills in Crowns of Blood include only:

Awareness*, Boating (Sailing), Chirurgery, Courtesy*, First Aid*, Folk Lore, Heraldry*, Hunting*, Industry, Intrigue, Knowledge, Music*, Seduction, and Stewardship.

New skills are marked in bold; "knightly" skills are marked with an * (though, I might modify this list). Hunting, Knowledge, and Music all require a character to choose a particular specialty.

Not bad...only about half the number of skills left to worry about.
: )

Riding that Nostalgia Train

I can only take a certain amount of Aerosmith. 

I’m back at the Baranof, knocking back a stiff martini, and have Wolfmother piped into my headphones as I type. Why? Because Janie’s Got A Gun was just calling up bad memories. Not even memories really (there were no images attached); just weird-ass, hinky feelings. That song was popular at a time when…well, I don’t remember exactly what was going on at the time, but it couldn’t have been all that great, as I’ve apparently blocked it out. Let’s see: per wikipedia it was released in 1989 with Pump. Yes, I remember that. Peaked at #4 on Billboard in 1990 and was probably on extensive radio airplay the same year. In 1990 I was 17…that was the year my father left my family. (*sigh*) 

High school was not a fantastic time (for a lot o folks it ain’t; that’s nothing special). There were certainly some high points to go with the lows, and things actually started up-swinging for me in a lot of ways with 1991 so I won’t complain (plus I still have a pretty positive, if distant, relationship with my Dad, which is more than a few o my friends can say). But I was definitely pining for Dungeons & Dragons in 1990, that’s for sure. I stopped playing the game, pretty much cold turkey, sometime around 1987 or ’88. Shortly before the release of 2nd edition, which happened around that time. No, it had nothing to do with 2nd edition D&D; if I’d still been playing when 2E was released, I probably would have jumped on the bandwagon and bought into the Forgotten Realms and all that nonsense. No, my reason was both more simple and more complicated…I didn’t have any players. At least not the players I wanted. 

In high school, I did play role-playing games…a number of them, many of the Palladium or White Wolf or Chaosium variety (how’s that for a “grab bag?”). Hell, I made some pretty good friends in high school, some of whom lasted through college and beyond, and who did indeed play (1st edition) AD&D, even in high school. Plus my younger brother still played for awhile (as did his best friend or two) and I acted as a 1E DM for them on multiple occasions (as I’ve talked about before in this blog). But my little brother and his buddies…and even my peers who were in the same age and class as myself…were not “my type” of gamers. I really don’t know how to talk about this without sounding insulting or snobby, but I’ll give it an (admittedly half-assed) shot: none of ‘em were mature enough to play MY brand of AD&D. 

Prior to high school, I had spent…oh, let’s say five or so years playing hardcore with a small group of friends. Five years is an eternity to a kid who’s 14…more than a third of his life. I’m 38 now…I haven’t even been married for a third of my life, and I’ve been married for more than 11 years. Five years is a shitload of time for a kid that age. And consider how much time we spent on the game of D&D. Sure we had sports, we did Boy Scouts or family activities, and school (of course). But we played at school…the same way people “play” on the internet when they’re supposed to be working at their jobs. And we didn’t have jobs or careers…no soul-crushing 8 hours torn from our waking hours. Hell, we could talk D&D on our “commute” (to and from school, via foot and/or dirt bike) as we wanted. We could talk on the phone after school. We could see each other on the weekends. The only relationships we were bent on maintaining were our friendships…and those imaginary ones created in the game. 

My little circle of friends tired of dungeon-crawling pretty fast, as I’ve discussed recently. After that, it was more about creating a real, living and breathing (if imaginary) world. A world in which we were the “movers and shakers.” Our characters had loves and hates, likes and dislikes, friends, allies, and enemies. Hell, we had “turn-on’s and turn-off’s”…all noted on our (rather extensive) character sheets. All aimed at trying to flesh out the imaginary avatar. Give it life, the way authors do their characters. 

Crazy kids. 

AD&D was our jump board to a “higher state” of role-playing. You may disagree that there’s anything “higher” about it (just “different”), but I’ll stick with the term for a moment. We were still “going on adventures” but the adventures had more to do with the characters themselves than with anything insidious in the virtual environment. And little had to do with “backstory.” 

For example, one girl (yes, members of the opposite sex like RPGs) who played with us, Crystal, created a female fighter named “Tangina.” By virtue of random rolls from the DMG, we discovered Tangina was pretty goddamn strong and over 6’ tall…an f’ing amazon, if you will. Tangina also had plenty of gold to equip herself and spent it on half-a-dozen plus weapons, including both a two-handed sword and a man-catcher (“in case I need to catch me a man!”). Typical low-level character derived from random generation. Her “backstory” was pretty short…her family had tried to marry her off to a minor noble who was an asshole (or she just didn’t want to get married, I forget), and she fled to pursue an adventuring life. No one got killed, there were rumors that her ex- was still “searching for her” but I don’t recall a single appearance by him or his henchpeople. Mainly, she was just a wanderer with a simple story explaining why she wasn’t a medieval (very tall) housewife. She had a Halfling henchman named Shorty who was none too bright (in our games, halflings were always NPC comic relief, never as heroic player characters…I don’t think any of us had ever read Tolkien at that point). The point is, with minimal “characterization,” Crystal was able to drop into an imaginary life completely alien to her 13 (maybe 14 or 15?) year old self. Interacting with NPCs (not just killing orcs), looking to make a good (if imaginary) life for herself and NOT worried just about “gaining XP and leveling up.” 

And Crystal was a very minor player in our circle. There’s a lot of talk (at times) in the Old School realm about “D&D’s endgame:” build a castle, gain a dominion, settle down. See, for us, that wasn’t the end of the game but something around the mid-point. Getting the castle and the followers put you on a footing to interact with other landholders (kings and barons and such). It opened up other “adventures,” more interesting than simply “going down the hole looking for loot.” Political machinations and alliances, romances and marriages and betrayals, power and land grabs, revenge and vendetta…not to mention the quest for godhood (a personal favorite, none of this silly “quest for immortality” schtick from Mentzer…I’m talking about displacing Olympians in the celestial pantheon through right of conquest or occult subterfuge). 

These were the games I played as a kid. This was the type of campaign (and we had several) that we adapted to the AD&D vehicle. This was the kind of campaign I was running as a DM (or running IN, as a player), form circa 1983-1987. And I started playing the game in ’81 or ’82. But I lost those friends when I went to high school: Matt, Scott, Jocelyn, even Jason and Rob. It doesn’t matter terribly why our circle ended…I’ve kept in contact with those folks (off and on) over the years…but we did stop gaming together. 

And while I continued gaming, finding new folks that wanted to game, they weren’t interested in the same things I was. They wanted to go into that hole in the ground looking for loot. They wanted to fight through 20 levels of The Temple of Elemental Evil. They wanted to set-up simulacrums of their high level magic-users, blissfully constructing magic items on other planes for fun and profit. Role-playing was still fun…but when you played AD&D, it all came down to who had the biggest sword. 

And I didn’t want to play that. So when I did game with them, we played other RPGs. Sometimes incoherent, poorly designed games…but at least it wasn’t AD&D. Because I couldn’t bear to play a poor excuse for something that had previously lived and breathed and transported me…as both a player and as a DM. 

And why do I bother to write all this tripe? Who cares, right? Stop living in the past and get on with the good gaming available now…people who care (like me) know AD&D is a pretty crap system as is. [and, yes, I still think that to a great degree] But I’ve started playing in Alexis’s AD&D campaign, and its quickly becoming obvious the guy cares a great deal about the game world he presents…more than anyone I’ve met since those friends from my childhood. His approach is different from mine…more logical, more reasonable, more intelligent…but underneath, driving it, is a very similar passion. 

Look, I am very happy to be living in the time and place and real world that I am. I would not prefer to have been born in a medieval-type world with magic and dragons…I like electricity and running water and not needing to carry a sword on my way to work in case there are highwaymen about. I don’t go to RenFairs; I don’t belong to the SCA. 

[I DO own a real (non-replica) sword…but then, I was a fencer for a number of years and when you’re in Toledo, you owe it to yourself to pick up a piece of Spanish steel when presented with the opportunity]

I am NOT saying that I prefer fantasy to reality. What I’m saying is I greatly enjoy and appreciate a chance to dissolve into fantasy as an escape every now and then. And on a regular basis, if at all possible. And in order to do that, you have to have a certain level of “buy in” that meets your personal expectations. Mine are high. Alexis’s are off the fucking chart. I dig on that. 

All right, that’s enough for now. I’m just glad I’m getting a chance to play AD&D with some like-minded folks after so many years (you should see how these players get into character…and there are no funny voices or accents involved. Nice). Can't wait to get me some land grants and titles.

; )

Best Basic B/X Monsters (Top Ten)

And by "best" I mean, "best at killing players."

I've read more than a few times that the Holmes basic edition is the most dangerous, mortality producing version of the game ever written. This is due in part to certain "expert level" monsters (like the purple worm, manticore, hydra, and vampire) being included in a game where the characters only go from levels 1-3.

Well, I beg to differ...I mean, dead is dead, right? If you're digested by a purple worm you're not anymore dead than being smacked for max damage by an ogre; there's a point of diminishing returns on that kind of thing (i.e. "death").

[unless, of course, you're killed by a vampire...then I suppose you can be "even more dead."]

But Moldvay's red book has plenty of monsters that will wipe out characters in the 1-3 range...many of whom are listed as standard wandering monsters for those very same levels. The idea that Moldvay's version of Basic D&D is somehow safer or "more balanced" is completely ridiculous. At least in Holmes characters with a high Dexterity will (on average) gain initiative (and thus, the upper hand or opportunity to run) in any encounter. In B/X, initiative is always a crap shoot.

The following list is my Top Ten Most Deadly Monsters from Moldvay's red book. Most of them are also my favorite monsters in the Moldvay set (these I've marked with an "*"). Not surprisingly, they are very real PC killers...only a true asshole of a DM would use these in an adventure for characters under 4th level, at least in the numbers listed in the rules (a singular, lone creature is much easier to deal with than a group, at least for a large adventuring party).

Oh, by the way...dragons (of any color) are NOT on the list. While I will be the first to say there aren't ENOUGH dragons in your average D&D campaign, dragons have such wildly varying ability that one can't really say whether they are consistently deadly (a stupid, sleeping, dragon of young age and no spell-casting ability isn't much of a threat if the party can get the drop on it and reduce its hit points before its first breath attack).

Here's the consistent badasses:

#10 Zombies: If there was any question in my mind whether or not "the damned dead" should be here, it was answered by last Thursday's decimation of adventurers. Unlike every other edition of D&D (including AD&D and Holmes), Moldvay's zombies are CHAOTIC (all undead in B/X are Chaotic), which is to say "unholy" and "evil;" probably the reason holy water is so effective on 'em. I already wrote how nasty these guys are...they beat out other 2HD monsters (like gnolls) due to their fearlessness (no morale checks) and immunity to sleep spells. Used in large numbers they are likely to take apart any 2nd level parties they encounter.

#9 Shadows: Again, a change-up from other editions of the game, B/X shadows are NOT undead, and thus NOT subject to turning...however, they are still immune to charm and sleepspells and being incorporeal, can only be hit by magic weapons. They show up on the 3rd level of a dungeon (1-8 appearing!); how many of your 3rd level character are carrying magic weapons? Strength drain is delicious and even if a party survives the confrontation, will probably be left deep in the dungeon in a weakened condition.

#8 Minotaurs*: I've always loved the minotaur as a monster; dug it in the legend of Theseus, dug it in Saturday morning cartoons (an episode of the old Godzilla, if I'm not mistaken), and loved Willingham's illustration in B2: The Keep on the Borderlands. A 6HD monster that gets a +2 on damage when using a weapon. Being larger than an ogre, it is immune to both charm person, hold person, and sleep, and will probably kill at least one or two PCs before being brought down, even by large parties. Minotaurs are also intelligent, and unlike other monsters "will pursue as long as its prey is in sight" (this one isn't distracted by dropped rations). Vicious...did I mention that the normal number appearing is 1-6? What the hell is this doing in the Basic game?

#7 Harpies*: As with minotaurs, I've always loved the harpy; I've been a fan of Peter S. Beagle's The Last Unicorn (both the book and the very faithful film adaptation) for years, and the harpy is an awesome villain...but which is the adventure module where, if PCs fail their save versus the harpy's song it comes and (automatically) "rips their eyes out?" One of the Slavers series maybe? Or the Master of the Desert Nomads? Regardless, that's the kind of encounter I love to see in adventure modules (and that some players...hi, Luke!...absolutely loathe). But if any monster should be a malicious, de-protagonizing bitch, it should be the harpy. Monsters that fly mean monsters that are hard to bring down (and that circle to keep out of range of spells). Three attacks per round (claw-claw-weapon) makes them exceptionally nasty, even without the charming. I used surgically-modified harpies in my Paschendale Necropolis adventure (no singing and no weapon attacks) and they still killed both hirelings and wounded several party members in nothing flat. The fact that they don't rate higher on this list should tell you something about numbers 1 though 6.

#6 Bears*: My love for the bear as a B/X monster is, I think, fairly well known. The only thing that doesn't rate them higher is their low "number appearing" stat (usually only 1, unless in their lair). Often totally underestimated...what? It's just a bear, right?...they will kill party members very quickly before they even know what hit 'em. Except for the black bear, all bears are larger than the ogre and are thus immune to the sleep/charm/hold spells of low level characters, and being animals are fairly immune to reasoning or negotiation (and since you usually only encounter ONE, they're generally NOT subject to morale checks!). Of the bunch, my hands down favorite is the polar bear (even the non-armored variety), because they seem so mundane...right up until they kill you. "Oh...and the bear hits you several times and does [*roll*roll*] ...30 points of damage to you! Holy crap!"

#5 Ghouls*: While these are a personal favorite (nothing says "terror" in the dungeon like a pack of flesh-eating undead) I almost never use them except in high level games or very small moderation. Why? Because they are Total Party Kills waiting to happen. 2HD creatures with claw-claw-bite ability are nasty enough...I've seen a half-dozen troglodytes with the same D4/D4/D4 take down two plate armored fighters and a plate-and-shield cleric without batting an eye. Ghouls do D3/D3/D3 with the same chance to hit, and every attack that hits forces a save versus paralysis (requiring a 12-14 save roll on the D20 for characters under 4th level). Did I mention they travel in packs of 1-6? And being undead they're immune to sleep/charm/hold? That gives 'em a leg up over the tentacled carrion crawler. Did I also mention that per Moldvay they start showing up on level two of the dungeon? Do you know what a 2nd level cleric needs to roll to turn a ghoul at 2nd level? A nine. Fairly long odds...and if you happen upon a lair (treasure type B = 2,000gp average), you'll encounter 2-16. That's a lot of diseased nails raking the flesh from your bones. 'Course it could be worse: in OD&D and AD&D being killed by a ghoul turns you into a ghoul!

#4 Mediums: 1st level magic-users come in packs of 1-4. The only reason they don't rate higher is it's always possible the PCs might get the drop on 'em and take 'em down with a sleep spell of their own. Otherwise, it should be short work for one of the mediums to get off a sleep spell and drop an entire adventuring party. Heck, a magic-missile might well finish off that rival party mage hiding in the back ranks, and if accompanied by their "master" (only a 3rd level magic-user in the B/X monster description!) the party may well find themselves trying to push their way through a web spell to get to said magic-users. In the lair (a school?) mediums are encountered in groups of 1-12...that's a lot of charm spells. Personally, I'm surprised it only rates as a 3rd level encounter.

#3 Lycanthrope: Werewolves*: Although these don't show up in B/X until the 4th level of the dungeon, they are present in the Basic book, and are one of my all-time favorite monsters. I almost never use them. Generally found singularly in old TSR adventure modules (a la the standard horror cinema "wolfman"), when used as written, they can be one hell of an encounter: number appearing 1-6 (2-12 in lair/wilderness). In addition, lycanthropes can each summon 1-2 normal animals to aid them and werewolves "summon normal animals to form large packs with them." On average that's nine monsters (3-4 werewolves and 5-6 normal wolves) or double that (around 18!) in the wilderness or dungeon lair. Any group of five or more has a 5HD, 30 hit point leader that does +2 damage (and is, of course, immune to sleep and charm and hold person spells...at least in wolf form), and all werewolves require silver or magic weapons to injure. Assuming you can tell which wolves are the lycanthropes and which are the normal wolves (how many silver arrows are the low level archers packing?). Wolf packs tend to maul the hell out of characters anyway (I saw three or four normal wolves take down a charmed ogre during a run of M1: Blizzard Pass) and werewolves fight and attack like dire wolves. Such an encounter with "average" numbers will kill several PCs, especially the lighter armored party members. And even should they run, wolves are some of the fastest pursuit critters in the game (180' move compared to the un-armored PC's 120' move). It would be a small matter for such scent hounds to run the PCs down.

#2 Owl Bears*: Probably my all-time, hands down favorite monster of the Moldvay Basic book, they are also probably the baddest of badasses. Cross a grizzly with a griffin and what do you get? A creature that can't be stopped by the spells available to characters level 1st through 4th and that can do up to 40 points of damage in a single round. Claw-claw-bite at D8/D8/D8 plus "bear hug" for 2D8...and did I mention they hunt in packs of 1-4? A normal grizzly is only ever found solo in a dungeon...you can encounter up to 4 times that many owl bears on the 4th level of a dungeon, and they will rip you to shreds. Bears of a feather flock together, I guess. Need it be mentioned that with 5 hit dice they're immune to charm, sleep, hold person, etc.? Oh, yeah...I already said that. When these bad boys come out, even 4th and 5th level fighters tremble in their boots.

#1 Medusa*: Another monster I almost never use. Interesting that the OD&D version had the lower body of a snake, like the classic gorgon of Greek myth...not sure why they changed it in later editions except possibly to not confuse it with the (confusingly-named) bull-like creature. Moldvay's description of the monster constantly refers to it in the singular, which I find strange as the number appearing is 1-3 (1-4 in lair). An average of 2 medusa per encounter, each one of which is 4HD with an auto-death attack (poison) AND and an auto-petrifaction effect (no attack roll necessary). The medusa (in numbers of 1-3) first show up on the 3rd level of the dungeon. What party of 3rd level characters is going to survive a wandering encounter with three medusa? That's just a ridiculously tough encounter...you might as well call 'em half-hit dice mind flayers. I feel mean just putting ONE medusa in an adventure; as I said, most of the time I just leave 'em completely out of the game. Too bad, though, because Perseus and the gorgon is probably my 2nd favorite Greek myth, right after Theseus and the minotaur.

All right, that's the list...and glad I am to get it off my chest. One of the monsters on this list will be featured in blog posts all week long, starting tomorrow, but for right now I'll let you contemplate the sadism of Tom Moldvay's "Basic" set and the death and destruction it is possible to unleash even before opening the "Expert" box. I know I did, back in the day, as I owned the Basic set probably for a whole year prior to getting the Cook/Marsh Expert rules.

Prost!

: )

Hay Problemas...

Actually I have a couple problemas. The first is that no one seems to believe me. I told my wife that I put the baby to sleep by dancing him to Lady GaGa and she thinks I'm just making it up to be funny. Then I show her and she flips out! Like I've discovered something amazing or something. No...he just likes rhythmic dance music. He digs on Black Sabbath, too (the Ronnie James Dio years), and I'm trying to get him into Wolfmother (the latter depends on his mood, really), but GaGa is always a hit.

Which is good, 'cause I get tired of singing him show tunes.

The OTHER problem (probably a bit more interesting to my blog readers) is the new book. "Which new book, JB? You've got, like, four or five hot irons in the fire!" Right. Got it. Yes, I am as prone to the famous "gamer ADD" as anyone, and the fatigue/sleep deprivation thang doesn't make that any easier.

However, right now I am referring to the new book that is almost ALMOST complete (at least the writing)...the only one I'm currently soliciting (and accepting) artwork for, my little B/X player supplement whose name I am withholding because...well, because I'm a might superstitious if you must know.

The PROBLEM is that it is shaping up to be FRIGGIN' HUGE, on account of the spell lists. Let me break it down in terms of "good/bad news:"

The Good News: I have completed all the spell lists, including the mammoth final spell-caster spell list (170 spells from levels 1 through 10). You think that was easy? No way, Jose. Choosing which spells in the list would over-lap (there are hardly more than 170 spells in all of B/X...and that's counting the B/X Companion) and which would be saved for various "niche protection" consideration was its own ball game...as was deciding on the particular order in which spells would be acquired (what is a 2nd level spell for one class is sometimes 1st or 3rd for another, you know?)...not to mention that I still needed to come up with more than 50 new spells to round out the list (51 in fact, not counting half a dozen or so reversed spells). So, yeah, list complete, even if the writing's not (and I plan on doing some work on that tonight, if I can keep my eyes open).

The Bad News: Even shrinking the font down to 9 and leaving no space for pictures, the spell lists clock in at 21 pages. 21...without fleshing out 170 spell descriptions! I figure to have at least (or close to) 30 pages by the end...and this is a book I wanted to come in at 40 or so TOTAL. The rest of the book is already 23 pages (21 shrinking the font) with at least 6 or so pages left to compile.

Why 40, JB? Isn't "more" better? No, it is NOT. This is supposed to be a slim supplement, not an f'ing huge-ass tome! What's more, this one is going to be "perfect bound" (meaning more cost on my end) and I had hoped to price it cheaper than the B/X Companion. I don't know how I'm going to manage that without shrinking the page count...and right now, I'm not liking where the page count is heading.

SO...I will probably be placing a poll on the blog in the very near future regarding the issue, but does anyone have any suggestions for me? Dare I take the font down to 8? Should I skimp on artwork (*shudder*)? Drop the demi-human classes (who like that "race as class" thing anyway)?

OR...right now, I've got the spell lists in the same format as the B/X Companion. Meaning the same format as B/X: each spell is presented including "range" and "duration" and a brief description...even if that description is "this spell is the same as the 5th level magic-user spell of the same name." Maybe I should just drop all the repeats?

But isn't nice to have them in the book? Even if all it does is tell you where to reference the actual spell description?

Ugh. All right, it's 9:15 and I got too little sleep last night and I've got get up hella' early tomorrow as well. I'm probably just a bit "over-tired." Hasta manana!

Wolfmother (Redux)

Sequels can be challenging.

I wrote a while back how much I enjoyed the Wolfmother CD. It was so good and I listened to it so much, I asked the Doc to send me a copy of their second album (Cosmic Egg)…even though I had heard from multiple people that it “wasn’t as good as the first album.” In fact, some of the things I heard about album #2 were even less complimentary. Apparently, the band only contains one of the musicians from the original line-up and the sound has changed substantially.

However, I was willing to give it a shot…after all, their first album was so good, I couldn’t imagine the 2nd would be TOTAL crap. I mean, there had to be some nuggets of goodness, right?

Well, once I started listening to it, I started to see what the disappointment was all about. The first song on the album was a total “eh.” The second song was likewise “blah.” The third song…same story for the most part. Whereas the band’s self-titled first album had four kick-ass songs right up front, right from the get go. And THAT’s the way to start an album…put something awesome up front, top it (White Unicorn is my favorite track on the record), and then top it AGAIN (Woman won a Grammy for Best Rock song of 2005). Start an album great and a lot of later stuff can be forgiven by the ear.

After the third disappointment on Cosmic Egg, I nearly set aside the album…but I didn’t. I kept the faith…helped a bit by a semi-inspired ending to the 3rd track. And my faith was rewarded: the FOURTH track of Cosmic Egg is where the real album starts as far as I’m concerned. #4 is great. #5 is derivative but good. By #6 I can see what the new direction is all about. Overall, the album may not be as consistently as good as their first record, but it’s nothing to sniff at…provided you start listening with Track 4. And track 15 is on the album is probably my favorite song of Wolfmother’s on either album. Now that I’ve got the “key” to the record, I’ve been listening to nothing else for the last few days.

There’s no accounting for taste in aesthetics…I know my buddy likes song #3 the best, and that’s his “key” into the album (and others, like my friend Craig, don’t like it at all, though perhaps he never made it past those first three tracks). The same holds true for RPGs, of course…an aesthetic of a different flavor, but still an aesthetic.

Take my B/X Companion, for example. Five different artists contributed their work to my book. I know which ones are MY favorite (and, no, I’m not going to say who), and I figured my qualitative taste would be…well, universal or something. Such is not the case. My brother prefers one of the interior artists to all the others, going so far as to say he wishes the cover had been done by this particular individual (and my brother is an artist with a critical Virgo eye himself). On the other hand, my friend Steve thinks the cover is the best thing about the book and wishes all the interior art had been done in a similar style. Likewise, my wife has HER favorite artist/image in the book, and it is not the one preferred by myself, my brother, nor Steve-O.

The mix of art and aesthetics by different artists is a GOOD thing. Changing up one’s style or approach between projects can be good as well…provided you manage to retain the quality and some of the sensibilities that made people like it in the first place. It accomplishes two things: the possibility of widening your target audience, and the broadening of the audience’s own mind with regard to “what is cool/neat.”

But just the challenge of trying to follow up a project can be a daunting task; knowing where to start, knowing what to do; knowing how to please your target audience while still being true to yourself and expanding your own horizons…that can be tough.

I say this as I simultaneously begin work on three different projects as a follow-up to the B/X Companion. Hoo-boy!

Badass Mapmakers Wanted

I've been listening to a lot of new music lately.

I know, I know...what the hell does that have to do with ANYthing, JB? Is this going to devolve into another anti-war, anti-4th edition, let's all study astrology and become socialists -type rant?

Bear with me, folks.

I've been listening to a lot of new music lately. Well, new to my IPod anyway. A little Black Sabbath (Mob Rules and Master of Reality...I love you, Sweet Leaf!), a little Merciful Fate (Melissa), a little Metal Church (actually, haven't really found my groove with this one), Ratt (Out of the Cellar), some Def Lepard (Pyromania...that cassette I still have), and a LOT of Wolfmother. Plus an assortment of others including Dio, Zeppelin, and old Crue.

Let me just wax a bit on Wolfmother for the moment. My buddy sent me this CD three or four years back and I promptly lost it (I do that sometimes) before I'd even listened to it. He re-burned it for me after I begged him, having heard good things about the album from a co-worker about the 1st album (prior to the band's line-up change). I have NOT been disappointed...this is the kind of psychedelic weird-ass rock music I need MORE of in my life.

It may be that I'm more of a "hard rock" guy than a metal head...the guitar isn't nearly as important to me as good vocals and a strong drum line. But what the hell do you call a band that includes a jazz flute solo in one of its tracks? And still somehow manages to rock? I don't even know.

This morning I was reading grumpy Ryan talk about what he wants in an RPG. I feel his pain. Sometimes I feel this way about music...I try listening to the local rock station for NEW music that's good, and everything not written by a band that's been around since the 70s or 80s sounds like crap more often than not. Personally, I was starting to worry that I was getting too old. I can remember my father complaining in the 80s how they didn't make good music anymore (regarding the pop music of the time, he probably had a good point...they made "Oldies stations" for guys like my Dad), and thinking he was stuck in the past; maybe I was undergoing this same transformation? That I am just so STUCK, that I am unable to recognize good music when I hear it?

But then I hear an album like Wolfmother that totally kicks ass, and I feel frigging redeemed. It's not ME...there are exceptions playing Grammy-worthy rock music. There just isn't enough of it out there (hmm...come to think of it, I really dug that Avenged Sevenfold track, too, but then I always liked Mike Patton and the singer reminded me of him).

Today, I was down at the local game shop, hawking my wares and is my want, I made a quick perusal of everything on the shelf, new and used. And after looking around I had the realization: I do not want to play ANYthing here. Nothing. At all.

What I WANT to play is my own damn game. But even if my game was available for purchase, it's got no support. I looked through Gary's small retro-clone section, and while there's plenty of adventures for OSRIC and Pathfinder, there was nothing adventure-wise for Labyrinth Lord. Or B/X.

And that's the thing about listening to new music. Good music. Psychedelic music. Inspiring music. It makes me want to write adventures. Not just adventures...adventure modules. I've had three or four new ideas just listening to Wolfmother alone. I've been jotting down notes here and there as they've come up, but what I really want to do is get to writing.

'Cause if WotC/Hasbro is intent on selling the Arneson & Gygax & Moldvay legacy down the river, turning a game of imagination and exploration into a combat board game, a table-top CRPG...well, we've got to fight back. And we've got to have weapons with which to fight back.

I'm not saying I want to have a "living campaign" or return to tournament scoring or anything like that. I don't want to force ANYONE to follow MY campaign world. When I was a kid, my best friend and co-DM Jocelyn owned the Mentzer's BECI (for whatever reason, we never picked up the M) AND the World of Greyhawk. Our (AD&D1E) campaign started in Threshold...even though our characters had relations in Willip or grew up on the streets of the Free City. It was a friggin' mish-mash that would mix in a bunch of our own adventures with classic TSR modules.

That's the thing about modules: they are modular. Or they should be: you should be able to drop them into any campaign with only minor adjustment needed. They should be useful in any person's campaign, whether you prefer Krynn, the Forgotten Realms, or some homebrew-type.

Regardless of the campaign, though, we (we meaning "players of Old School fantasy RPGs") can have a shared experience, despite the fact we are separated by state lines or oceans, without the need to be part of a "living campaign." People who played in the original Tomb of Horrors, can swap war stories with each other based on the shared experience...likewise with those who tried to beard Lolth in her lair or discover the mystery behind the monsters infesting the Barrier Peaks.

Here's my dream: organization is required. Coordination is required. Adventure modules ARE required. But we can start a new wave of gaming, REAL RPG gaming with a little effort.

Right now, though, I don't have the weapons...I don't have the adventure(s). I've got some ideas. I've even got some stuff written up. But this self-publishing thing can be a bitch...trying to put out a quality product all on your lonesome can take a long-ass time. If I'd had to do my own art for the B/X Companion, it would have sat on my computer hard drive for a long, loooooong-ass time.

Visual illustration is NOT my forte. Map-drawing is not my strength. I know there are some folks out there who are great at this...I'm looking for collaborators. I'd like to invite anyone interested in working with me on an adventure module or two to drop me an email of interest.

Once we've got the product, then we can organize the revolution. Let's rock this thing.

; )

The Problem with "Heroes"

Everyone wants to be the star of their own show. I think that’s what it boils down to.

Even me. ESPECIALLY me. But I don’t get to do that ‘cause I’m the Dungeon Master…which is great by the way, because then I get to be the master author/playwright/director and exercise my control-fetish over the game.

But the players? These days they seem to be a bunch of prima donnas…albeit without the chops, generally speaking.

Okay, folks are asking what the F are you talking about (if you’re asking “where the F is this coming from; just keep in mind it’s been a long time brewing).

IN GENERAL (I’m speaking in generalities right now) RPGs are about fantasy…whether the fantasy of slaying dragons or being a super-spy or flying a space ship it’s all fantasy NOT reality. And players who love RPGs love that fantasy and want to live in that fantasy…at least for a short while around the gaming table. And in peoples’ fantasies? Well, of course we are the heroic star of the show!

Few people WANT to play the bit part character actor. As a guy whose did a lot of acting in my early years (that’s one of my university degrees actually), I’ve had a chance to play both stars and bit parts. And as any actor can tell you, playing a bit part is a blast! It takes just as much commitment to the character but you have more leeway and less pressure and (depending on the role) just as much stage time (sometimes great QUALITY stage time) even with fewer lines. But no one tries out for the bit parts. You audition for the star role and get called back for the role the director things you’re best suited.

In a role-playing GAME (acting is role-playing too!) players have much more control over the part they play, assuming they get to create their own character. Which is kind of F’d in and of itself if you hope to create some semblance of a coherent tale from your “adventure” (I’ll explain why in a second). Much more control, I said, but not TOTAL control. Depending on the game being played.

FOR EXAMPLE: in AD&D one is constrained by the classes available (under the rules) and the results of one’s random die rolls for ability scores. In a way, this is much like a real life audition for stage. If I don’t have the pipes, there’s no way I’m going to get cast as the Phantom of the Opera, no matter how dashing a figure I cut in a cape and mask. In the same way, if a player can’t roll a helluva’ bunch of good rolls, there’s no way he’s going to get to play a paladin. That’s too bad…but you can still (in AD&D) play a fighter as long as your Strength is at least a 9…and you can role-play the hell out of him, making him a young paladin-in-training or a very ethical fighter, etc. Hell, if you really missed the spells and such make him a cleric; holy avenger swords are few and far between anyway.

But MAYBE you’re part of a group where Player Joe always plays a cleric and Player Sal always plays a dwarf fighter. If it’s the accepted practice of your group (your “troupe”) then allow the players to rearrange those random rolls so that they can play the character they want. Guess what, though: you’ve been type-cast!

HOWEVER most RPGs written since the 90s have moved far and away from this type of “role-playing game” (as in, a game of role-playing) by allowing extreme character customization at the hands of the player. To what end? Well, ostensibly it was to either A) provide “variety,” or B) allow players to re-create favorite characters of fiction. In practice, it simply allows players to create the maximum badass possible.

No, I am not talking about min-max hardcore gamists who are use break points, feats, and merits/flaws to push game rules towards their shatterpoint (and sometimes beyond). I am talking about the ability to customize an “ultra-kewl character” no matter what stands for “kewl” in YOUR brain, in order to star in your own personal fantasy.

Ugh. Ugh. Ugh.

This is what really makes me throw up my hands and say, “why the F bother?”

And why should I bother to play a game where everyone is simply dancing around with their own fantasy masturbation exercise? If I want to daydream, I can do that without any books or games at all. If I want to tell a story about a heroic persona, I can write a damn short story for my own amusement…hell, I can write a whole string of stories about my favorite character and publish a blog about it.

But of course, many folks aren’t interested in this kind of “work.” They’d rather put together their tall, dark badass (or quirky-yet-powerful badass) and strut him or her about at someone’s game table. And boy howdy, whadya’ know…everyone else is doing the same damn thing, so I guess it’s ok, right?

Three to five prima donnas is what you get, hoping to massacre a bunch of random opponents. “Tactical exercise?” Sure. “Requires more imagination and social interaction than World of Warcraft?” Absolutely. But are you role-playing? Not in my opinion.

Sure you are “playing a role,” the badass fighter or beefy barbarian for example. But only as a means to a single metagame goal: fulfilling your own fantasy. Not in aid of manufacturing a story (except perhaps in your own head) and probably not in exploring the story/world created by the GM/game setting (that only matters as to how it relates to “your guy”).

I used to own an Xbox (before it burned out) and I would play games like Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic on it. This allowed you to create a badass Jedi character and customize him (or her) with looks, feats, skills, and force powers…all the while kicking ass and exploring the story line that the game designers had programmed (and that you paid to purchase).

That’s not an RPG. That is living one’s solo fantasy.

To play that way at a table with others is, frankly, madness. Or masochism (if you’re the DM). No one’s paying to play (except the folks that bought their own books). Yet all are expecting the limelight. It’s supposed to be interactive. It’s supposed to be exploratory. It ain’t supposed to be Twister (figuring out which character fits best where, i.e. “tactical”)…at least not as the major impetus to play. At least not if it’s being billed as a Role-Playing Game.

Where is this rant coming from? I don’t know…I’ve felt pretty ranty lately. Last night I was perusing my old copy of Werewolf: the Apocalypse, thinking of giving it another try. God I desperately wanted to like that game (werewolves being one of my all-time favorite monsters of film, lit, or comics). It starts out with a cool premise (you’re a werewolf!) and then quickly degenerates into the dumbest RPG ever invented. You are a big, hairy, ass-kicker in a tribe with other big, hairy ass-kickers. Your powers make you a great fighter. Being in fights makes you more powerful. Blah blah blah.

Yes, I suppose you could create a weakling Werewolf character. Who would then get upstaged by the others of the group (because the game is all about fighting “the Wyrm,” dontcha’ know?). Or you could play one-on-one (one player, one Storyteller)…but again, that is living one’s solo fantasy, not role-playing.

This afternoon I ran across some notes from back in my 3^rd edition days. I had done the math necessary to creating highest hit point character possible under the 3.0 rules. It ended up being a gnomish barbarian/fighter. This is the stupidest thing ever. There’s no way I could have ever justified playing a character like that. I think he had over 800 hit points at 20^th level (when raging).

All the characters I created under the D20 rules were dumb. I mean, some were cool, many were fantastic and most (besides my gnomish barbarian) were NOT min-maxed. But they’re all dumb. Because all they did was allow me to play out private fantasies…whether my Halfling ninja, my Dwarvish duelist, or my half-elf ranger/bard/assassin. Sure…I could give them justifying back-stories (for my own amusement), I could play them (until they got upstaged by someone else with an even cheaper-ass character and no back-story). But hell, it’s more fun to make them than to play with ‘em.

THAT is not role-playing either. Just thinking about it made me depressed earlier today…in fact it was the last straw that touched off this little piece o crap prose.

Older games (and by older I pretty much mean pre-1991, though certainly some older games diverge into the realm of “make your badass”…Champions, for example) are far more likely to facilitate role-playing and exploration than wish fulfillment simply by dint of their more randomized character creation models.

Look, metaphysically speaking I DO believe that we all choose the time, place, and body of our incarnation here on this Earth…that’s something I take on faith, though. From my human perspective it just seems random chance that I was born the guy I am and not a linebacker for the Seattle Seahawks (good thing, too, as then I’d probably be sitting out the season with some painful injury like the rest of ‘em). Random character creation mimics this human perspective of our birth and life…not everyone is born a badass, that’s just the way it is. When we play RPGs, we sit down to play a GAME, we are not sitting down to write a novel or screenplay of our favorite monster-killing wizard. Forcing players to invest hours of time into crafting a super-cool avatar is antithetical to what role-playing IS, at least in my opinion.

Anyway, that’s my perspective. I’ve ranted here and other places about why I don’t like elaborate chargen systems. This is something new. From now on, unless I’m creating a game that facilitates a narratavist agenda (where shared narration/”screen time” is part of the game design objective), any system I write is going to be heavy on the random chance factor. Certainly this won’t appeal to everyone…too f’ing bad. There are ways to balance RPGs without giving players the option of crafting their characters from the ground up.

Don’t believe me? Exhibit A: Marvel Superheroes.