Nostalgia and Self-Loathing -- "Legends of the Superheroes"

It is the curse of Generation X. In our youth, we experienced some of the best pop culture entertainment ever produced. We grew up watching The Six Million Dollar Man, Starsky and Hutch (you can really tell the Michael Man Episodes), Kolchak the Night Stalker and reading Watchmen, The Killing Joke, Tim Truman's Scout, and the Giffen/Maguire/DeMatteis Justice League, Star Wars, The Terminator, and Tron.

We also had to endure the legacy of the ultra-camp "too hip to like pop culture" mentality of many Boomers. Case it point is the "Legends of the Superheroes" television special. Gen X kids loved the Super Friends cartoon, especially when the show added the Wonder Twins, so we eagerly begged our parents to let us watch the "Legends of the Superheroes" special when it aired.

After all, what could be better than a live action version of our favorite show?

Apparently, a kick in the face would have been better. The show was campy and awful, and the follow-up roast was a mockery of everything the kids loved about shows like Super Friends.

LEGENDS OF THE SUPERHEROES - watch more funny videos

And yet...I still have this compulsion to buy and watch the special and relive the hopes that I had for the show, even as I re-experience the nightmare of its reality.

There must be some connection between nostalgia and self-loathing.

A Defense of D&D Movies and Some Commentary on Playing Styles

Ever since I purchased a copy of Thousand Suns, I have been a big fan of James Maliszewski. It was obvious from this product, and his excellent Shadow, Sword, & Spell, that he and I share a deep affection for many of the same things. It didn't take me long to enter his name into a search engine and find his excellent blog Grognardia where he shares his love of Old School gaming and pulp fiction with an engaged and passionate audience. I'm a big fan of the site and cannot recommend it -- or the two games mentioned earlier -- highly enough.

Though we share affections, his explorations into pulp and old games usually discuss things found on my book shelves, I don't always agree with his critical opinions of new gaming systems. James is an ardent advocate of not merely "old school games," but also of what he considers "old school play." While I advocate owning and playing older games, I have no preference for old or new style play. James is a knowledgeable critic of the gaming industry, and I am a devoted Pollyanna.

A perfect Case Study for how our hobby opinions differ is his recent post regarding Dungeons and Dragons movies. In a post entitled "The Pointlessness of a D&D Movie," James argues that -- regardless of the quality of a D&D movie -- there is no real point to making a D&D movie since any such film would be D&D in name only. In his opinion, it would be difficult -- if at all possible -- to make a film that truly captured the essence of D&D. He argues that any D&D movie would likely be a "generic" fantasy film as much as it would be a D&D film. Therefore the exercise is largely pointless.

I both agree and disagree with his argument, and I disagree strongly with many of those who posted comments on his site -- especially with regard to what constitutes the "feel" of D&D.

While James is correct that most attempts to create a D&D inspired movie would likely be "merely" generic fantasy films, he would be wrong if he thought it were necessary that a D&D inspired film would be a generic fantasy film. To be fair, James asks his audience to give him an example of what such a film would be like rather than to assert that it is impossible.

In my opinion, a D&D inspired film would take one of two forms.

In the first case, one could create a film inspired by the intellectual properties associated with the D&D brand. One could make a Mystara, Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Birthright, Eberron, Dark Sun, or Planescape movie. To be fair, it would be possible that any film set in these creations might end up defaulting to generic fantasy, but it isn't a necessary condition. A Greyhawk film that focused on Zagyg's quest for immortality, Iuz's plans, or on Mordenkainen and friends would be different enough in character to matter. Similarly a Forgotten Realms film about Drizz't or based on Paul Kemp's "Shadow" series would have as distinct a tone as is possible. As for Eberron, Dark Sun, or Planescape, each of these has a character so unique that they would stand out on their own. These settings are rich for exploration and would also have the marketing potential to bring in new gamers, as they have directly related products.

In the second case, I can imagine a film akin to Andre Norton's Quag Keep, L. Sprague DeCamp's Solomon's Stone, or Joel Rosenberg's Guardians of the Flame. In this scenario, players of a D&D game would be transported into a mystical world -- or the actions of players in the real world would be interposed on characters in the fantastic. I also think one could do something like the Gold web series where gaming is used as a setting for a larger story.

From a marketing perspective any of these would be desirable. The purpose of a film is to help build brand and provide revenue and this would be easily possible with any of the above strategies. Which comes down to the crux of it. It isn't pointless from a business perspective to make a D&D film because it can bring revenue for shareholders while providing entertainment -- and employment opportunities -- for stakeholders.

Almost no one reading James' blog approached the question in the above fashion. Looking at the responses from James' readers though, one is taken aback by a couple of things. First, the venom some of his posters had for existing D&D entertainment enterprises. Commenters disparaged the D&D movies, the Dragonlance animated film, and the D&D cartoon that aired in the 80s.

In future posts I will discuss the various D&D movies individually, but let me just put forward the following. I think that everyone involved in making those products wanted to make something entertaining, and many of them were gamers themselves. I agree that the first D&D movie was a disappointment (though it also had moments). I think that the second film was much better, and on a fraction of the budget. I think that the flaws of the Dragonlance movie stem from weaknesses in the first Dragonlance novel (the weakest of the first six books) and that the film is actually a good translation of that book. I deeply enjoy the cartoon series, as do my twin daughters. Lastly, I eagerly await the next D&D film and know that the people working on it want to make a good film. But I will elaborate on all of these in the future.

Another thing that struck me in the posts, in addition to the venom aimed at existing attempts, was the vision many of James' commenters had for what constitutes "D&D narrative."

Some examples include this one from commenter Johnstone:

A group of adventurers arrives at the mouth of a dungeon. They enter and explore rooms, get around traps, fight monsters, run away from monsters, find gold and treasure, and Black Dougal dies from poison. Then they fight two or three dragons at the end, after which only the fighter and the thief are still alive. The thief backstabs the fighter, grabs (some of/the best of) the treasure and books it. The end.

This one from Reverence Pavane:

Well a good movie about D&D would probably go back and examine the basic tropes of the game, rather than trying to fit a plot to the games. Such as the existence of dungeons. The fact that adventurers form up in small teams of highly egotistical individuals to go down into the dungeon and slay things, loot their victims and furnishings, and then return to the tavern.

This one from Lord Gwydion:

Personally, if I were to write a D&D script, I'd focus on these things:

No big 'save the world' plot.

No 'revenge' plot (although a subplot might involve revenge).

No 'hero's journey' plot.

Those three stances alone mean it would not be made by Hollywood (or they'd hire someone to come in after I was done and add all of those back in).

Each of these, and a couple of other posts, exemplifies a particular view of what constitutes the spirit of D&D play. They also depict a way of playing D&D that I haven't personally experienced since I was in high school. That doesn't mean that this style of play is an "immature" or "childish" way to play the game. In fact, this was a way of playing D&D that was popular among the adults who taught my friends and me how to play the game, but it was one my friends and I abandoned for heroic adventure. It is also a game style that is supported by the rules. One cannot help but to expect a game that gives experience points for how much money you acquire, in addition to how many creatures you kill, will do anything other than foster a "mercenary" style of play.

I call this style of play "D&D as Tomb Raiders," and I don't much like it. I understand that many do, but I think it goes against the grain of what the game is about. I blogged about J. Eric Holmes' opinions regarding game balance and the games spirit last week. To me D&D is a game of "Heroic Journeys," battles against evil, saving the world, and fighting the good fight. It isn't about wandering mercenaries plundering loot -- that's Tunnels and Trolls. D&D is a game that features Paladins battling the hordes of Hell.

In his book Role-Playing Mastery, Gary Gygax writes about how each role playing game rules set has its own "spirit." This spirit cannot often be described in bumper sticker terms, but it is something that will permeate the statistics, mechanics, descriptions included within a game. According to Gary, a game master, and player, is charged with learning more than just the rules of the game, but is also charged with learning the spirit of each game and attempting to play accordingly.

As I mentioned earlier when discussing the recent discussion at Grognardia, one might come to the conclusion that the spirit of Dungeons & Dragons was one of selfish mercenaries, tomb robbers, and skallywags. But this isn't the spirit that Gygax describes. He describes the spirit of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons as follows:

I shall attempt to characterize the spirit of the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons game. This is a fantasy RPG predicated on the assumption that the human race, by and large, is made up of good people. Humans, with the help of their demi-human allies (dwarfs, elves, gnomes, etc.), are and should remain the predominant force in the world. They have achieved and continue to hold on to this status, despite the ever-present threat of evil, mainly because of the dedication, honor, and unselfishness of the most heroic humans and demi-humans -- the characters whose roles are taken by the players of the game. Although players can take the roles of "bad guys" if they so choose, and if the game master allows it, evil exists primarily as an obstacle for player characters to overcome...the goal of the forces of good can only be attained through cooperation, so that victory is a group achievement rather than an individual one.

I eagerly watch a D&D movie that embodied Gygax's D&D spirit, and I prefer to play in games that do so as well.

To me "classic D&D" is about saving villagers from ravaging hordes of Giants, only to learn that these Giants were being displaced by Dark Elves, and that the Queen of the Demonweb pits was weaving sophisticated plans that would bring down the forces of good in the world.

That style of play isn't for everyone, but it is a style of play that is fun and would make some good movies.

Of course a dark, brooding, heist film would be pretty good too.

[Lost Games] "The Official Superhero Adventure Game" by Brian Phillips

With the emergence of the role playing game "Old School Renaissance" and the growth of the indieRPG scene, we have seen a number of excellent gaming products released over the past few years. In many ways, it reminds me of the heady days of yester-yore when gamers had "heard" of this newfangled thing "Dungeons & Dragons" and had a vague concept of what a role playing game was. During the early days of the role playing game hobby, there was an explosion of creativity as the market defined itself.

To be fair, there have been several explosions over the decades. There was the garage explosion of the 70s and early 80s where a number of products -- both wonderful and awful -- were created by gaming communities to be shared with friends and sometimes for profit. The best of these games led to the creation of new gaming companies. There was the "corporate" explosion of the mid to late 80s where companies that had once been garage companies exploded with products. Look at the product lines of FASA, Judges Guild, TSR, and Steve Jackson Games during this era. Attempts to enter the market by gaming giants like Avalon Hill and SPI sparked this age where production values increased and new marketing strategies emerged. The 90s brought another surge of independent companies who capitalized on a mature but unsaturated market to bring in new gamers and new games. Companies like Pinnacle Entertainment and White Wolf emerged in this era with new games that had inspired settings and mechanics. Then came the d20 explosion where a large number of companies, big and small, rode the coat tails of one of the largest gaming releases in RPG history. This era also saw the emergence of some small players, but it wasn't until the d20 bubble burst that the works of these wonderful independent creators began to receive their due.

Every era has had many games to offer and experience, but we only have so much time to engage with our hobbies and some games get lost, overlooked, or forgotten. The purpose of my [Lost Games] series, which will have a new entry every couple of weeks, is to highlight some of these games. Sometimes they will be games that I own and enjoy. Sometimes they will be games that have a large community of devoted fans. Other times, like today, they will be games that are lost and difficult to find.

I own almost every super hero role playing game ever published. From Superhero 2044 (original and revised) and Supergame to Icons and Hideouts & Hoodlums, my collection runs deep. There have been a few games that managed to slip past my superhero rpg obsession net though, and one of those games is "The Official Superhero Adventure Game."

According to Heroic Worlds, "The Official Superhero Adventure Game" was self-published by Brian Phillips in 1981 in two separate editions (much like Supergame had two back to back editions). The first edition featured a 52 page rule book and 32 card stock sheets and a blue and white cover. The second edition, published the same year, also featured a 52 page rule book and 32 card stock sheets with a color cover replacing the blue and white one. Lawrence Schick, the author of Heroic Worlds is less than kind in his comments regarding the game and describes it as a, "Superhero system of confused, rudimentary rules, mainly for combat (basic and advanced). Includes dozens of hero and villain character descriptions."

If this were the only review available for the game, I would desire a copy. The inclusion of dozens of character descriptions, regardless of the overall quality of the game, might provide a nice jumping off point to inspire other games. Though I don't get to play them as often as I like, super hero games are my favorite games to play in and run and any game that has more NPCs for me to convert to my favorite systems the better.

This isn't the only review available for the game, there is another review in the invaluable August 1982 issue of "Different Worlds" magazine (Issue #23). That issue provides a much more detailed review by gaming great Steve Perrin who writes:

The rules do provide a 'role-playing game,' but that section simply gives hints for role-playing the characters provided, also providing a somewhat looser scenario plan with another plot and more options for the referee. In fact, this is the only scenario that needs a gamemaster. The previous ones can be played by two players, each taking a side to manipulate.

One interesting aspect of the last chapter is the experience point system. Rather than giving points to the character, the points are given to the player, bot for his playing ability and his role-playing. Thus the characters remain the same, but the experience points given the players are used to help determine who gets first choice of characters for the next scenario...

All in all, you get quite a bit for your money, even without the ability to make up your own characters. The characters provided are interesting in themselves, and the scenarios make for a good reproduction of a DC saga, if not a Marvel epic. For character and scenario ideas alone, superhero referees might do well to pick up this game, if they can find it. Write to the author if your local store doesn't carry it.

This review is much more positive than Schick's and sparks my imagination. Just what is this "Official Superhero Adventure Game," and how does it play? Sadly, I'll likely never know. I have yet to see a copy on eBay or in a store. The review provides a PO Box address for Brian Phillips for those who might be interested, but I doubt that it would be useful today.

This one seems truly lost, but I'll keep looking.

D&D in Forbes?

Thanks to the recent episode of Community, the Dungeons & Dragons game is getting some buzz in mainstream pop culture.  Surprisingly the buzz has included the entertainment blog on the Forbes website. 

David Ewalt's recommendations might make some in the internetowebosphere who dislike Hasbro's business decisions in the past year groan.  Ewalt's advice is is a glowing recommendation for Wizards' "Red Box" release, their Encounters program, and praise for Wizards' decision to fight for Wal-Mart shelf space.

When your game is getting positive print time, even digital print time, at Forbes you know you are doing something right.  Though one has to wonder what this says about the role playing game market.  If Forbes -- which prides itself as being a leader in business reporting -- is promoting you game...does that mean that the future CEOs of America will be gamers?  Does it mean that the current crop of Executive VPs are gamers? 

Grognardia had a wonderful post recently about gaming's treatment in Sear catalogs of years past and how RPGs hadn't yet been "ghettoized" out of mainstream gaming. 

But if a Forbes blog that highlights the latest Barbie is promoting your game, haven't you begun to walk out of the ghetto?

The Community episode might have provided the context that allowed for the article, but if Hasbro hadn't made Essentials -- and the Encounters Program -- last year the article wouldn't be making as many recommendations for the novice.

Original D&D, 4th Edition D&D, and "Game Balance"

I recently read a minor flame war on the Wizards of the Coast message boards discussing whether or not Hasbro should sell the D&D license to Paizo Publishing. Like Kobold Quarterly, I am neutral on the edition wars and love all editions of D&D -- including Pathfinder -- equally. I am a supporter of role playing games in general and only Synnabarr and FATAL occupy my list of RPGs to avoid.

My love of the various editions can probably be seen in my having recently begun a series of posts featuring house rules for the 1st Edition "Moldvay/Cook" Basic set that makes it play more like the current 4th edition system. It's a fun experiment and one that I think will bear some interesting fruit.

One of the things that I have noticed as a feature of Original D&D (and the Basic Edition) is how both versions of the game support inter-team dependency and reward the players working together toward a common goal. The fragility of characters in 1st edition, combined with their overt specialization, enforced inter-dependence, and the modern edition's focus on tactical combinations has a similar effect.

That's why I was surprised to read in the "Should Paizo..." thread that one of the things that some players hated about 4e was that it highlighted team play and didn't support a "go for your own" style of game where the players don't work together.

Maxperson (one of the individual's avatar aliases) wrote:

"So, if I may, the argument against 4e is that when you work together as a team you do better at fights?"

Let me correct two misinterpretations. First, it's not an argument against 4ed. It's simply something I dislike about 4ed Second, the argument is that 4ed math is set up with teamwork in mind, so it's more or less essential, rather than optional. Your average player is not going to be on the same level as the guy who claims to have beaten an elite as a solo character in 4ed.

"And this is unrealistic because... (?!?)"

Not everyone does or should have to work as a team.

Maxperson's assertion that 4e enforcing teamwork was a new phenomenon in D&D surprised me. It seems to be an echo of a certain kind of play that some in the OSR community refer to when describing their own gaming history, but it isn't one that I ever experienced. D&D for me has never been a game of wandering self-interested mercenaries each out to get the fat loot at the expense of the other players. I only played in one campaign that remotely resembled that scenario, and it ended friendships. D&D isn't Diplomacy or Risk it is a Heroic Fantasy.

I have to say that I sometimes wonder if my opinion that D&D has always been designed to encourage teamwork and encourage moral behavior is misguided. Otherwise, how can I explain those who argue that an edition that makes D&D about teamwork is a bad thing?

Thankfully, I went back and read my copy of J. Eric Holmes' excellent Fantasy Role Playing Games. Holmes wrote the first Basic D&D set, so he knows a little of what he speaks when it comes to the design intentions of early editions of D&D.

Holmes writes:

I don't mean to imply that the designers of games set out to teach us little moral lessons about everyday life -- except Gygax.

"Except Gygax?" So Gygax did intend to teach us moral lessons about everyday life Dr. Holmes? How?

In the D&D world fighters can not do magic, but magicians are so weak that they need to be protected by fighters. Clerics can heal wounds and do a lot of fighting but are no good at long distance offensives because they can not shoot arrows or throw offensive spells. The constraints of the rules practically dictate cooperation and mutual respect for the talents and weaknesses of each class, and I find it hard to believe that Gygax was not fully conscious of the principle when he wrote them.

Gygax calls this "play balance" and insists that it is not good for one character to grow too powerful with respect to the others.

Holmes goes on to say that it is other games that go against the cooperation principle, but not D&D.

So...D&D has always encouraged cooperation. It has always encouraged teamwork. The fact that 4e has strengthened this interdependence back to levels akin to those of Moldvay/Cook basic, is one of the things I love about the game.

It's fine to play games that don't encourage teamwork.  Games like Paranoia and Boot Hill where players actively act against one another are quite fun.  But D&D is an abstraction of Heroic Fantasy and Sword and Sorcery.  These genre are not quite as mercenary as some might portray them...even when they are purely mercenary like Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser they still work together.

[Heroes of Karameikos] Part 2 -- The Order of the Griffon

As you know, I am working on a set of house rules that adapt the old Moldvay/Cook Basic and Expert D&D rules and make them play more like a 4th edition campaign. I am calling these rules "Heroes of Karameikos" after a country in the Known World setting that was originally presented in the Moldvay/Cook sets. I have always enjoyed the Known World setting and my house rules will attempt to capture some of the flavor of the setting, but they will continually direct readers to the original rule books for additional rules.

Take my most recent addition, the Order of the Griffon, as an example. At the beginning of my Character Classes section, I make it clear that Player Characters are different from normal people. They have the potential to become heroes of legend. As such, most people are merely "Normal Men," and even special non-player characters are represented by the character classes presented in the Moldvay/Cook rules. My house rules tell you to use those rules for non-player characters, but they provide sub-classes specially designed for player characters. These sub-classes have abilities granted to them at every level in a way I believe reflects the 4th edition feel. I wanted the abilities to be significant enough to matter, but not so powerful as to make using them the equivalent of playing D&D on "easy."

For members of the Order of the Griffon, the military order of the Church of Karameikos (you can read more about them in the excellent Grand Duchy of Karameikos Gazetteer), they gain the following special abilities.

Order of the Griffon (Cleric)

• 1st Level – Cure Minor Wounds. A member of the Order of the Griffon may call upon the power of the immortals to heal up to 3 points of damage dealt to himself/herself or allies each encounter. These points of healing may be divided as the Cleric wishes.
• 2nd Level – Military Training. The member of the Order of the Griffon is now trained in the use of Normal Swords and can use them in combat.
• 3rd Level – Strike Against the Stained Soul. Once per Encounter, the Cleric may add +3 points of damage to a successful attack against an enemy of Chaotic alignment.

As always, you can find a working copy of my house rules here.

"X-Men: First Class" Trailer Has Been Released

With the exception of some missteps in the third film, the X-men movie franchise is one of the premier superhero film series. The acting has been consistently good, the stories compelling, and the effects impressive.

If the trailer is any hint, it looks like the upcoming "X-Men: First Class" is a return to the quality of the earlier entries. I'm looking forward to seeing what Matthew Vaughn ("Layer Cake," "Stardust") does with Marvel's Mutant Miracle.



Of the stills released for the film, I really like this one. It has a slight "Tomorrow People" quality, and that's a good thing.

From Wizards of the Coast to Self Published "Devil's Cape" by Rob Rogers Now Available on Kindle

Wizards of the Coast publishes many excellent media tie-in novels, but there was a short window of time when they published a line of original fiction under the "Discoveries" masthead. The line of books had a number of excellent entries, and unlike the media tie-in books the authors kept the copyright to their creations. Of the books published in that line, "Devil's Cape" by Rob Rogers was one of the true gems. Rob's novel is a superhero tale, but one that takes place in a very realistic setting and with a realistic representation of super powered people. The stakes for the characters in "Devil's Cape" are very real, both physically and emotionally.

It is often said that no one ever "really" dies in comic books, and it is true, but it isn't true in "Devil's Cape." The heroes of this novel fight for justice in a world of corrupt politicians and policemen, and where maintaining a secret identity is vitally important for survival. The villains of the book are ruthless and cruel and motivated by real human desires.

In the book Rob asks and answers the question, "what would happen if superheroes behaved like the Avengers, while the villains behaved like real people?" He then asks, "what would the next generation of heroes look like?"

Rob's book has all the craft and seriousness of the Wildcards series with none of the staid Baby Boomer "sex and drugs" clichés that pop up every now and then in that series. The book also provides a perfect setting for a non-alien invasion "Necessary Evil" Savage Worlds superhero campaign.

I count "Devil's Cape" as one of the best books I've read in the past couple of years. It is worth your time and money, and it's available on Kindle and other e-readers as well.

Buy it, and let's get Rob to write some more tales of "Devil's Cape."

I interviewed Rob shortly after the book was originally published for the podcast I had at the time.

Origins RPG Submissions?

Have Wizards of the Coast, Fantasy Flight Games, and Paizo submitted RPG entries for the Origins Awards? If not, why not?

Are they boycotting the Oscars of the gaming community in favor of the Ennies in order to promote their products at GenCon rather than at Origins?

What is the status of their submissions?

I ask, but don't know.

What I do know is that it would be a travesty if none of these companies submitted their excellent products from last year for consideration.

D&D Essentials was remarkable, Deathwatch is great, and Paizo's Advanced Player's Guide is inspiring.

What's going on here?

[Heroes of Karameikos] Part 1 -- Character Generation

I have just finished writing my "working" text for my attempt to create a game that has a "4th Edition Feel Using 1st Edition Rules." So far, I have laid out the initial steps of character creation, which only have a couple of distinct differences from standard Moldvay Basic.

First, characters pick their class before rolling statistics. A player then rolls 4d6, taking the best 3, for their prime requisite and rolls 3d6 in order for the remainder of their statistics. For those classes that have more than 1 prime requisite, they only roll 4d6 for one of the player's choice.

Second, I included my "death" rules. A character that is reduced to 0 hit points is only dead if they are at 0 hit points at the end of an encounter and fail a saving throw versus death. Otherwise they are merely unconscious.

Third, the Dexterity modifier adds/subtracts from damage as well as to hit rolls. This reflects 4e's philosophy of specialization. A philosophy I am trying to move over to my HoK rules.

You can read the full working rules here.

Free PDF of "Kobold Quarterly" #11

I'm convinced that one of the reasons that the online versions of Dragon and Dungeon magazines haven't received as many submissions as they once did is that many people are submitting to Wolfgang Baur's excellent Kobold Quarterly magazine. I've been a subscriber since day one, and have one of those rare Issue 1 print copies.

Wolfgang and crew are currently offering issue #11 for free as a pdf. Just add the issue to your cart and enter the code KQ11Gift at checkout for your free copy -- offer ends February 9th, 2011.

Let's get some more pro-4e and pro-Dragon Age people into the Kobold Community!

Hulu Recommendation Friday -- Community: Advanced Dungeons and Dragons

After a long hiatus, here is the much deserved return of Hulu Recommendation Friday. This week's offering is very near and dear to my heart. I have thoroughly enjoyed the NBC sit com "Community" from its pilot episode, but now that it has fused itself with another of my loves the show has my undying loyalty. If NBC execs try to cancel the show...I'll have them performing Otto's Irresistible Dance.



Gamers...

Note the fusion of new school (Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms) with old school (Queen of the Demonweb Pits, Unearthed Arcana, The Dungeon Master's Guide) in the products featured.

To those of us who saw "Role Models," it's no surprise that Ken Jeong knocks the ball out of the park in this episode.

Adventure Gamebooks as RPGs Part 2 -- Sagard the Barbarian: #1 The Ice Dragon

Gary Gygax, the co-creator of the Dungeons & Dragons role playing game, dove into the adventure gamebook craze in 1985 with his Sagard the Barbarian series of gamebooks. This series of four interactive novels took place in Gary Gygax's signature "World of Greyhawk" campaign setting. Sagard's adventures in The Ice Dragon begin in a mountain range called The Rakers which make up the border of Ratik and the Theocracy of the Pale.

Gygax co-wrote the Sagard series with Flint Dille. Dille's other works have included the Transformers and GI Joe TV series, as well The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay video game. Gygax met Dille while he was in Hollywood working on the Dungeons & Dragons animated series, and his relationship with Dille led to Gygax asking Dille's sister Lorraine Williams to help save a floundering TSR in 1984. The Williams saga is its own story, one which has left Lorraine's name an epithet in some gaming circles. By the end of 1985, the same year that The Ice Dragon was published, Gygax sold his stock in TSR to Williams and ended his relationship with the company.

All of this leaves one to wonder what Gygax thought of Dille and whether the Williams affair is one of the reasons why the Sagard saga is limited to the four existing volumes.

The Ice Dragon is an engaging gamebook, but is its game system sufficient to support game play outside of the game book environment?

Let's have a look at the rules.

Game Mechanics

With the exception of rules for keeping track of "trophies" that Sagard collects during his adventures, The Ice Dragon rules set is entirely limited to combat mechanics. By itself, this doesn't automatically mean that the rules won't be able to be expanded into a complete rpg, combat is a central part of most rpgs, but it does mean that there will be some work for the game master who tries to adapt the system. If the combat system is robust enough, than one could extrapolate from those rules to create mechanics for other actions as well. Games like Dragon Age use the same mechanics for combat resolution and task resolution, so it can be done.

The Ice Dragon's combat mechanics are relatively simple. Characters and opponents are rated for Hit Points which determine how much damage an individual can take before being defeated. These are a common mechanic in D&D descended rpgs. Characters and opponents are also rated by level which represents their skill in combat. Their effectiveness in combat is determined by rolling a 4-sided die and comparing the result to the character's statistic block. An example of a character's statistic block looks something like the following:

SAGARD (LEVEL 2: 1/0, 2/1, 3/1, 4/2)
[20][19][18]...[3][2][1]

This stat block tells us that Sagard is level 2, has twenty hit points, and how much damage he does depending on the roll he makes on a 4-sided die. For example, if Sagard rolled a 3 on the die he would do 1 point of damage. Given that each number has an equal chance of occurring, this gives Sagard a Damage per Round of:

DPR = (.25)(0) + (.25)(1) + (.25)(1) + (.25)(2) = 1

A level two character like Sagard delivers 1 point of damage per round to his opponents, so it would take Sagard approximately 20 rounds to defeat someone as tough as himself. Thankfully, most monsters don't have the same number of hit points as Sagard or game play would be quite time consuming. The full chart for combat effectiveness can be seen in the table below:

Combat Ability		1	2	3	4
Level 0		0	0	0	4
Level 1		0	0	1	1
Level 2		0	1	1	2
Level 3		1	1	2	3
Level 4		1	2	3	3
Level 5		2	3	3	4

Looking at this table, I can see one quick discrepancy. Level 0 characters have the same average DPR as Level 2 characters, and are more effective than Level 1 characters. I understand that the mechanics are attempting to represent Level 0 characters as "unpredictable" and capable of "getting lucky" but the results don't seem quite satisfying.

These mechanics are easy to understand and present a fairly limited combat system. The system doesn't compare the combat abilities of combatants, like Fighting Fantasy, nor does it offer the possibility of maneuvers like Fighting Fantasy does with its "luck" mechanic. The system could be used as a basis for a skill system. Players could receive level ratings in skills. For example, Sagard might have a Level 2 skill in Stealth. This would allow him to roll 1 or 2 "skill success points," on a roll of 2 or better, demonstrating how stealthy the character was. These points could be compared to an opponent's Perception skill. If the opponent generates more skill success points than Sagard, then Sagard fails to hide.

Hmm...I actually like that. In this case, a Sagard stat block might look like the following:

SAGARD
Combat (Level 2: 1/0, 2/1, 3/1, 4/2)
Stealth (Level 2:1/0, 2/1, 3/1, 4/2)
Perception (Level 1: 1/0, 2/0, 3/1, 4/1)

[20][19][18]...[3][2][1]

The Ice Dragon, unlike the Fighting Fantasy Gamebooks, does provide a simple system for character advancement. As a character wins and loses combats he acquires and loses "experience marks." When Sagard has acquired enough experience marks, he acquires the abilities of the next level. One could easily expand the experience mark system to the skills system by giving 1 mark per successful use of the skill, or even failures if the attempted use was creative enough.

As you can see, the system in The Ice Dragon taken by itself doesn't provide a full game system, but that it can fairly easily be expanded to create one. Were I to use the "Sagard System" as the basis for a game though, one of the first things I would change is the use of the 4-sided die for resolution determination. There isn't enough variety in it and when comparing the different levels it allows for a Level 0 individual to be as good as a Level 2 character on average.

[Heroes of Karameikos] 4e Feel, 1e Rules -- It's George Strayton's Fault

I have been haunting the blogs of various members of the Old School Renaissance gaming community for some time now. Some of the ideas coming from that community are quite inspiring to the role playing game fan and I heartily recommend that you hunt down several of the many blogs devoted to the OSR movement. Start over at Grognardia as he has a wonderful collection of links to OSR sights and is a consistently good blogger on topics gaming and pulp related. Up until yesterday my interest in OSR gaming has been primarily as a consumer. I own the "Swords and Wizardry White Box," "Lamentations of the Flame Princess," and the "B/X Companion" in print and several other titles as pdfs, and have enjoyed reading them. Reading the works of these creators created a small spark in the back of my imagination, but that spark had no kindling to feed it into a flame.

That kindling came from reading George Strayton's excellent "Legends & Labyrinths" blog. Unlike many OSR gamers, and I'm not sure George would consider himself completely OSR, Strayton's blog wasn't devoted to using the OGL to create a re-envisioned version of the D&D of old with "old school mechanics." Those blogs often, though not always, have a certain disdain for 4th edition D&D in general and a special ire for D&D Essentials. Strayton's blog was a sharp contrast to the typical older edition nostalgia blog. His blog was dedicated to playing 1st edition style games where death is around every corner and adventurers aren't necessarily "heroic" using the 4th edition D&D rules set. His particular recommendation was to use Essentials as the basis, and his house rules as a modification to that core rules set. Most of his house rules are excellent and are finding their way into my regular 4e game.

He also inspired me to try to get my group to play Moldvay/Cook Basic D&D again. The group's session wasn't quite what I had hoped it would be. I measure the quality of a game session by how much fun the players have in a session, and one player felt particularly hopeless during the very first encounter. It wasn't a good start, and I blogged about that yesterday, but it did turn out fun for me as the adventure continued -- and I hope the group enjoyed it as well. The experience made me realize what I really like about M/C Basic and what I really like about 4e.

I love the archetype driven nature of M/C and its quick and easy mechanics, but I don't like its almost capricious lethality. Characters can die at a moments notice. While this is fine for a horror game, I don't like that in a High Fantasy game. My favorite D&D setting, Mystara, can in no way be considered anything other than High Fantasy and a capricious lethality seems out of character for the setting.

What I enjoy about 4e is the clarity of the rules set, how the actions of one player interact with the other characters in the game. The rules reward and encourage team play. The game also allows players to feel heroic, while still feeling at peril during combat. I have considered using Robin Laws' mark up system in Hamlet's Hit Points to highlight how 4e combats nicely follow plot beats, but others have already touched on the topic. What I don't like about 4e is the tremendous number of powers, feats, and magic items. Yes, they allow for creativity, but they also create so many combinations that a player can become lost examining the puzzle pieces and never get around to actually playing the game.

I've decided to take my love for these two systems and post my own modified rules set temporarily called Heroes of Karameikos. The house rules will be based on the Moldvay/Cook rules sets, but they will incorporate some of what I like from 4e. In a twist on the traditional "old school" line "New edition rules, old edition feel," my game rules will be "Old edition rules with a new edition feel." I'll try to post at least one Heroes of Karameikos update a week starting with character generation and moving on to each of the classes. For those of you wondering...

Yes Elf will be a Class!

Dungeons & Dragons: Daggerdale Looks Like a Good Time

I am eagerly awaiting Atari's Dungeons and Dragons: Daggerdale which will be released for the Xbox 360 and PS3 later this year. If it is as fun as prior D&D console offerings, it should be a nice way to waste a few hours.