Old-School Fantasy Rules

A Circular Journey or "There and Back Again"!

As I continue to play role-playing games of all sorts, both old and new, including the "improved" versions of older systems, retro-clones and newer editions of older favorites, and others that are completely new, I find myself returning time and again to the original game I started with. I have often heard others say, "You will always favor the very first game system that you play." I am not so sure that is a true statement for many, but it has mostly been true for me and my FRP game preference.

One reason I like to dispute the "your first game is always your favorite" theory, however, is that it doesn't hold true for me in any other area of gaming. Let me start by saying that I love games of all sorts. Even sports. My tastes have evolved over the half-century-plus of playing all kinds of games, and continues to do so today. 

Like many, I started playing kiddie games - I won't bother to mention more on this subject. With respect to the various games in the genre of "adult" gaming, I have left behind many - probably most - of the games that I started out with and several of the more recently acquired new ones as well. Of all the earliest "wargames" which  served as my gateway to other strategy and adventure games, I have little interest in returning to any of those very  early systems. Computer games of every ilk have all gotten better since I purchased "Bard's Tale" for the Commodore 64 and revisiting an early CRPG, or flight simulator, can have little appeal for me except as a brief bout of nostalgia.     

So what is it about the old-school fantasy game that appeals to me so? The following list includes the reasons I have been able to think of. 

• Character knowledge and player knowledge are aligned in old-school play. 
• There is an emphasis on referee rulings which are based on common sense and the natural laws of what is possible in "the real world".
• A class based character system that reflects classic archetypes.
• Game mechanics that are easily committed to memory, require little thought during play and readily recede into the background allowing the game's fiction to be foremost in my mind.
• It serves as a do-it-yourself outlet for creativity.

Role-play isn't "acting" for me. The RPG is a game we play and knowledge of the game should be useful - at least that's what I think. One of the reasons I tend to shy away from skill-based systems is that they separate what the character knows and is good at, from what the player knows. I find rolling dice to convince the guard to let you pass is less interesting than "role-playing" how your character goes about the "convincing". In a similar way, I also find rolling to search and rolling to detect whether an NPC is lying to be interior practices to the old-school alternative of "tell me how you search" and the referee giving "obvious" hints about how truthful the NPC is being - "wink, wink!"

No rule system can cover every conceivable action a player can imaginatively ask to try - nor should it. Such a tome would be immense and likely require constant consultation during play. Part of the art of running a game is to use one's creativity - making good on-the-spot rulings is exercising that creative muscle. Common sense and knowledge of the real world should guide such rulings unless there is something "magical" or supernatural at play. The magic is that much more powerful when most things follow the familiar way of the real world.

Classic archetypes have their antecedents in the subconscious mind. Also, they have many reflections that can readily be found throughout literature. Leveraging the power of the familiar aids in the believability of the fiction. By contrast, the bizarre is simply that, and usually produces little more than confusion.

For most, learning a new game can be fun, but it takes effort. Sports require training our bodies and tabletop games require training our minds. We learn the relationship of the parts, the procedures and hopefully commit them to memory lest the game be constantly interrupted by consulting the book. I find that it is only after the game is largely committed to memory does it function well as an "adventure" experience where-in one may temporarily suspend disbelief and imagine the shared fiction as if it were unfolding before you. Under these conditions, the "adventure game" or "RPG" can become much more than a game of "Monopoly" or "Life" played with fantasy "trolls and wizards".

Many games, including most boardgames, card games and sports, require a strict adherence to the "rules as written" to ensure "fairness". I see role-playing as a departure from this concept. The nature of those little brown books was "rules are to be added to". This was a common approach seen in many miniature wargames of the day (and so it continues to the present) and I - like many who played such games - assumed that it was/is expected that I use my own creativity to enhance the fun and realism for those who play when I act as referee. It is expected that the referee should draw-up maps - both dungeon and wilderness - and populate said dungeon and wilderness with fantastic creatures. Once the game evolved to the point where we sought to include life among the "civilized" towns and cities, various aspects of the imagined culture and society becomes important and the original rules-as-written (intentionally) say very little about that. Thus we referees are invited to become "world builders". 

This formula works well for me and has proved a good "fit" lending itself to over four decades of awesome gaming. I continue to consume many new publications each year and enthusiastically "borrow" from them all their new ideas and creative mechanical systems that seem likely to fit with and perhaps improve on those found in the original little brown books.

Who Wants to be Evil?

A Show of Hands

Suppose that Frodo puts on the ring and becomes "corrupted" - eventually becoming like Gollum! The king does not return, rather Aragorn, Gimli, Legolas, Gandalf, Merry and Pippin all die at the black gates along with the hope of  all the free peoples. The scouring of the shire goes unchecked, and the shadow falls across all of Middle-earth... what kind of story would that be?

Most of the fantastic fiction that I read features a protagonist, or several, who work against evil. They play the part of heroes. This inspires me to want to play "the hero" in my own fantasy fiction/ roleplaying. We all play games for different reasons, and there is usually an element of discovery to most role-playing  and even playing at "evil"  (however one defines that) can lead each of us to certain useful realizations about ourselves, or the nature of the "real" world in which we live.

As a referee, I like to present the players at our table with a setting or world under attack from an "evil" force that threatens and imperils others. This gives them a chance to play the part of heroes!

More often than not, it has been my experience that playing an evil character can be non-rewarding. One evil PC will be tempted to turn against their fellows. A party of evil doers will usually devolve into a free-for-all as they all turn to self-serving interest and likely homicide. Occasionally, it can be interesting to explore the grey areas where good and evil are poorly defined, but this practice can become unsettling in a game setting as well. Games are played mostly for entertainment value and becoming troubled or unsettled as a part of "play" seems counter-productive, especially if it happens very often.

A nice abstract, fictional and external "evil" is a more comfortable enemy. Defeating the "big bad" and playing the part of the hero who saves the day - to much positive accolade - is why many of us enjoy playing RPGs. I can definitely see some reasons to role-play the villains as well, especially as an alternative after playing the heroes many times. Or perhaps as a one-off or short pre-campaign one might invite the players flesh out the future villains through their role-play, perhaps as a set-up for later taking the role of defeating those same villains. This was suggested to me and could be quite interesting. 

On the other hand...

I find little appeal in the idea of playing the evil "mythos" cultist, one who strives to usher in the "old ones" just so they can watch them devour the world - my character included. But ultimately, who can say? I have actually never tried it. I have, however, played many a fang-faced goblin as they try to kill the heroic adventurers who are invading their "evil hand" goblin lair - what referee hasn't? 

And tell me that isn't fun...

Tone, Mood and Style

A "Feel" for the Game.

The tone, mood and style of a session or campaign are not as often discussed as they probably deserve to be for the tone (intent or approach to the game) or mood (how the game is perceived or experienced), or style of the game are game features which can add to or detract from a players enjoyment. 

Tone in a fictional sense can be defined as the attitude (or point-of-view) of the subject (player, PC, or referee, NPC) toward story events or other characters. Friendly and cooperative - hostile and suspicious - trusting and caring - these all convey tone in an interaction with the setting and its inhabitants. 

The mood speaks more to the atmosphere of the setting. Is it dark and dangerous, or not? Is the setting a bright and hopeful place where characters can be confident that good will ultimately prevail? Or does the game take place in a world of danger where hope is failing and ultimate doom seems to inevitably await? (Note: A feeling of hopelessness is to be avoided as it generally discourages any action on the part of the player characters.) 

Gaming in a grim-dark setting can be quite rewarding as long as the players feel the actions of their characters can effectively alter to eventual outcome in a positive way. A bright and hopeful place where folks treat each other with respect and kindness can also be interesting, especially if it is facing an external treat that seeks to upset this harmony. This scenario gives the player characters the chance to play the hero and restore order by eliminating the threat. 

Style can mean a lot of things, all pertaining to how the game system is actually played out at the table. Examples could be described as being crunchy with lots of details, or as light and containing lots of abstractions, as high in magic or low in magic, and as using old or new game technology - this last element frequently describes the mechanical techniques used in various elements of  the game and influencing the "game" play experience. It is often said that any game can be played in an "old school style" which generally means using creative interpretation of the system rules, which are frequently intentionally brief and do not cover all eventualities so that there is room left for referee input. 

The various elements of tone, mood and style can have a significant effect on how satisfying your experience of the game is and is worth giving some deliberate thought to - perhaps even including a discussion among players which can help to get everyone on the same page regarding expectations. 

On Dwarves, Elves and Men

A Consideration of the Antecedents of Milieu for Tolkien and Your Fantasy Game.

The source of inspiration for the so-called "Tolkienesque milieu" in fantasy role-playing games is obvious (at least to me). When reading both the World's First Role-Playing Game booklets and the Fantasy Supplement which preceded those three little brown booklets I can picture Middle-earth. The early printings of those games contain clear reference to ents, balrogs, and even hobbits - all clearly influenced by The Good Professor's popular fiction. Less obvious perhaps is the inclusion of the so-called demi-humans - elves and dwarves - in later printings and editions when-in the Tolkien specific names of specific creatures have been changed to avoid copyright infringement.. 

The "elf" and the "dwarf" are common staples of many stories found in folklore, fairy tales and various other sources and their use predates the life and work of J.R.R. Tolkien- who no doubt read about such creatures and developing his own version of same, includes them in his seminal works of fantastic fiction. Traditional characterization of elves (elfs) and dwarves (dwarfs) include Santa's helpers and the fairy-tale villain,  Rumplestiltskin. Elves and dwarves appear in Norse and other mythologies and in many works of fiction published prior to the works of Professor Tolkien. The exact nature, and stature of such creatures varies considerably depending upon the source and there is anything but a "standardized" depiction of them - at least prior to The Good Professor.

Through the creation of his world setting, Middle-earth, Prof. Tolkien has effectively set THE standard of interpretation regarding "elves" and "dwarves" and their relationship to men - an interpretation that has been followed in various works of several authors and film-makers each focusing on the popular epic fantasy genre, and by designers of fantasy role-playing games, all drawing inspiration from Middle-earth. Early evidence of such influence can be found in the fact that despite his arguing to the contrary, the author of the original Advanced Game tips his hand when he subdivides the elves in the game's default milieu into "high", "grey", and "woods", terms often applied by Tolkien and others to the Noldor, Sindar and Sylvan elves found in Middle-earth.

Borrowing inspiration from a variety of sources is a strength of The World's Most Popular Role-Playing Game and this is not a criticism of the practice. By combining influences from a variety of sources, the designers of the game have enabled the same basic system to be used to explore a myriad of themes, settings and stories through game play. Versatility is a chief element in the game's lasting appeal. Each player brings their own imagination, however colored by personal exposure and experience with their own unique set of inspirations, to the gaming table. Each draws upon that resource when they envision the setting, actors and actions that make up the game session. 

Whether your elves and dwarves closely resemble those of Professor Tolkien, or not, is part of the fun we discover when playing with various other people. It is part of the collective richness of the group activity to share, and be influenced by the vision of others. Whether one prefers a tightly defined milieu where individual character differences are slight and many constants exist among members of a group, or a much looser approach to what makes an elf and elf, how we each choose to play our own unique character is our decision alone. Does your character run strongly to type, or is your player character the exception?

Milieu is one of the more important decisions one must make about the game. Closely tied to setting, defining milieu is often the prerogative of the game's designer or of the referee or "player running the game" if it is set in a world of their choosing. Milieu not only defines who the actors are likely to be, it can establish expectations of behavior and relationships. Or not. How "predictable" do you want your game world? Do you have an "ideal" in mind? Perhaps that vision closely resembles Tolkien's Middle-earth or another work of fiction. Imitation has worked for many a world-builder.

Giving thought to the make-up of the game's milieu - its cast of characters - can only enhance to depth of the game experience and deepen your enjoyment. Knowing what each character is all about - what binds them together with others and what sets them apart - can be very helpful in deciding how they will react to the various situations they find themselves in during play. Whether you control a host of non-player characters as referee, or a single character as a player, the more you know about the fictional character, the better you are able to role-play a consistent and believable protagonist.

For Glory, Gold, and Adventure

Beyond the Gold Box

Sometimes a game comes along that perfectly fills a niche, leaving virtually no room for any other. Sometimes a game gives me just what I am looking for and nothing more, and nothing less. Sometimes, the game seems so perfect "as is" that I am not interested in looking for better, I am not even tempted to tinker with, or "house-rule" the system.

For me Tunnels & Trolls is this game. The incomparable Tunnels & Trolls, or "T&T" as it is lovingly referred to by its many fans, is just perfect for solo play. I believe its originators recognized this early on in T&T publication as the very first solo module I am aware of of any kind - Buffalo Castle - was written by Rick Loomis in 1976 for T&T.

The orange box was not my first copy of T&T. That introduction came in a spiral bound 4th edition paperback booklet that I picked up during a late 1970s Gencon trip to Kenosha, Wisconsin (1978 or '79?). The first edition of T&T was released in 1975 - just a year, if that long, after the publication of the World's First Role-Playing Game that came in the now-famous "wood-grain" box; Tunnels & Trolls quickly progressed through several editions leading up to the 5th edition (released in 1979) when they seemed to find the "sweet spot" and let things rest for a time. The 5th edition became the standard T&T for many of us and I believe it was in print and available through the original publisher Flying Buffalo until the Kickstarter for Deluxe Tunnels & Trolls happened in 2014-15.

The above pictured box contains the Flying Buffalo United Kingdom (F.B.U.K.) 5th edition rulebook - a saddle-stitched orange softcover slightly larger in size than a digest journal - packaged together with the solo adventure Buffalo Castle and included a couple of adventures designed for the T&T referee to run for their players - Trollstone Caverns, included as an example adventure in the rulebook, and the freestanding loose-leaf Dungeon of the Bear written by Jim "Bear" Peters - who incidentally was one of the original players of T&T and seems to have remains actively engaged with the game to this day. I have played both the included solo adventure and the mentioned group dungeon adventures many times and I find them entertaining (and to provide a little "tongue-in-cheek" humor at times).

Tunnels & Trolls has used the same basic system mechanic across all the editions. Therefore adventures written specifically for one edition are easily played using any other edition - older or newer. The mechanical edition changes have mostly been directed at "play balance" and consist of more tweaking than redesigning. From its first edition, T&T has used "roll the dice and compare the total" to resolve conflict between player characters and monsters. The rolls of players are added together and likewise all the monster dice are summed and the lower sum (loosing side) is subtracted from the higher sum (winning side). Hits are assigned based on the difference in the sums with the losing "team" distributing damage among its crew. 

I real genius in the system mechanics of the T&T game. Even better than combat is perhaps its saving throw mechanic. A T&T "Saving Throw" involves rolling two six-sided dice and comparing the total to a target number that is determined by subtracting an attribute score from a "Saving Throw" level number. An example of a common T&T Saving Throw as made during play could be found when either the player asks to make a "First Level Luck Saving Throw" in order to try some maneuver or is told to do so by the referee. Depending on the edition, the player may subtract their character's "Luck" score from either 20 or 25 and try to equal or exceed the difference on two dice - T&T uses only six-sided dice. Doubles on the dice add together and are rolled again with the new dice total added in again. This is an open-ended rolling technique used as long as doubles are rolled, thus "making the long shot" is always a possibility. A minimum score is required, such as a total of "five" on the two dice, in order to be considered a "success". The "Saving Throw" can be used to avoid a trap, or just about anything else the referee agrees to such as convincing a guard to "look the other way". 

The game of T&T works quite well with a group or as a solo game and I have also enjoyed playing T&T many times with friends, using either an adventure of my own making or one of the published modules for designed for group-play. I have also played the group-play adventures as a "solo" using my party of adventurers and acting as my own "GameMaster". (The unique game mechanics of T&T lend themselves quite well to one player rolling for multiple characters.) Although I do play other games in a solo style, T&T has remained my favorite for those games. It is a game I am always excited to play and is my "go-to" system pick for a rules-lite style game to introduce beginners to table-top adventure gaming. 

Expectation, Surprise and Disappointment

Anticipating a New Edition

As anyone who reads this blog is probably tired of hearing, I have been enjoying this wonderful hobby of ours for over four decades now and during that time I have seen a few games come and go - at least in-print and out-of-print. 

The good folks at Wiz Bros announced this week that the World's Most Popular Role-Playing Game will be getting a new treatment in 2024 just in time for a much anticipated anniversary party. News which brings to my mind a number of previous occasions where I found myself looking forward to what the next iteration of my favorite FRP game would be like? 

Wondering: How would it be different? 

What would be improved? 

Would there be things left out of the new edition?

What would it look like?

So many other questions. 

Like many, I look forward to what is "yet to come", and I can't help but speculate about what might or probably will change in the new material. Once the much anticipated product arrives, I will no doubt be among those rushing to purchase and see what it all amounts to.

Many of us have been down this road before. Most of us can look back on some earlier release and recall things that we love and things that we are/were less than happy about finding in those "new" versions. 

For whatever reason, I find myself returning this week to 2008 and the release of the fourth edition volumes. My first memory of this sometimes "controversial" edition is that I really enjoyed reading the text introducing a fresh new approach to an old subject. I recall how useful I believed the defender, striker and controller ways of defining character class roles could be. The "powers" concept - daily, encounter and at-will - was a fresh new way of looking at the actions that your character could take during your turn. And I must admit, I was really excited about playing my first fire-breathing dragonborn character.

The new fun was not limited to just player characters in 2008. The 4e MM I welcomed as referee/DM and found full of surprises, some of which still delight me, and some of which have become part of the way I run the game - any game - to this day. Scaling monsters, that is making bigger, more deadly versions of any monster, (orcs and goblins are good examples) was a widely practiced theme in this edition allowing creatures to stay useful at higher levels of play and incidentally making the game more consistent with some popular fictional sources in which some orcs are way more deadly than others! Boss monsters in 4e are frequently attended by a number of "minions" - creatures with a single hit point who are good at "spreading the love" and controlling the battle grid. Players will find such "minions" in most games that I have run since 2008.

The 4e DMG is full of advice and for my money is one of the best of this kind of book for explaining how to set-up and run a game at your table. I rank this volume (together with the AD&D 1e DMG) as an essential resource for anyone occupying the post "behind the referee screen".

Unlike some, I do not have disdain for 4e. I enjoyed playing the game regularly for a number of years and give it credit for the part it played in the rise of the "old school" gaming scene. And to top it all off, I really loved (still do) those awesome 4e Wayne Reynolds illustrations!

A Resting Problem

Healing the Natural Way (and other mysteries.)

Healing in the original little brown books is commonly interpreted as occurring at the rate of one hit point per day. This is likely based on the following statement found in Volume III of the Little Brown Books. "On the first day of complete rest no hit points will be regained, but every other day thereafter one hit point will be regained until the character is completely healed. This can take a long time."

The nature of hit points is often discussed among gamers and the question of "What do the hit points represent?" is frequently pondered. Returning to the original source, the statement in Volume III that immediately precedes the above quote refers to healing "common wounds" by natural means. Turning to Volume I we find the following reference to hit points, "being the number of points of damage the character could sustain before death." Reaching "zero" hit points must therefore mean that character death is imminent? That is the way it is often interpreted. As with many aspects of the original rules, much is left open ended and it seems the intent is for the referee to add additional detail where desired.

Under the heading "Hit Dice" the author of Volume I addresses this intent when he states, "Whether sustaining accumulative hits will otherwise affect a character is left to the discretion of the referee." will the character suffer a specific "wound" that limits their ability to move, engage in combat, cast magic or perform any other adventuring task is left to referee discretion - presumably by development of a personalized method (such as a random table) whereby the nature of any such injury will be adjudicated beyond the application of mere referee's whim (although nothing in the rules prevents just that). 

Let's suppose that our adventuring character is ruled to have sufferer a specific "wound" to their leg. (The classic, "arrow to the knee"?) Applying the rule that the character will recover no hit points on the first day of rest, but will "heal" one hit point each day spent resting following the first, we can imagine a somewhat natural healing of such an injury, especially if ours is an experienced adventurer with more than a dozen hit points that have been lost. 

An explanation of the "hit point" concept and the associated increase in HP corresponding with a rise in level can be found in many sources (and I have red and listened to a number) over the decades with a common one being something along the lines of the explanation given by the same author of those 3 LBBs in his Dungeon Masters Guide:

Because these (hit points) reflect both the actual physical ability of the character to withstand damage — as indicated by constitution bonuses — and a commensurate increase in such areas as skill in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the “sixth sense” which warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck, and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine protection.

"Skill in combat", the "sixth sense" that would allow a character to side-step danger and "sheer luck" or "divine protection" are all factored into the danger equation as hit points - a finite sum that can decrease to zero resulting in the character's death. Obviously not every incident of "damage" being deducted from the character's hit points need represent an actual wound. Some could be explained by using up one's luck, or divine favor, or what-ever. The accumulated loss of hit points would expose the character to a point where the "fatal blow" is delivered as hit points reach zero.

I must query, "How does the character die?" Provided the final hit point is lost at the point of an enemy's sword, is it a thrust through the heart? Death by a thousand cuts? Decapitation?

Ultimately this doesn't matter - dead is dead. But suppose zero hit points means fatally wounded instead? It is common practice for players to attempt to stabilize or "heal" a character who is at death's door - usually through the application of some magical means. Healing magics are included in the game and the question of whether it's "too late" seems seems legitimate.

With the single exception of rolling dice for ability scores, no aspect of the rules-as-written have received more attention than death. It is therefore essential that the referee give some thought to how death will be handled in the campaign - preferably prior to the first session. A discussion with the players can ensure that everyone is on the same page and will go a long way towards building trust - an essential aspect in any relationship.

Alongside "death" rests the topic of damage and healing. While it is not strictly necessary to discuss the nature of hit points and what they represent, it is a good idea to establish and discuss how lost hit points will be recovered. It certainly helps players to plan use of their resources - including magical healing. My experience with various editions has emphasized the vast difference between healing a single point of damage overnight and recovering all lost hit points after a long rest (usually defined as a single 6-8 hour period of inactivity). 

Resources other than hit points are associated with "resting". The so-called "Vancian" magic system deployed in the original 3 LBBs and continued through subsequent editions is a traditional part of the World's Most Popular Role-Playing Game mechanics. The authors of the original edition describe spells and character class levels in Volume I of the 3 LBBs in this way:

The number in each column opposite each applicable character indicates the number of spells of each level that can be used (remembered during any single adventure) by that character... A spell used once may not be reused in the same day.

The exact interpretation of the phrase "remembered during any single adventure" deserves close attention. The most common practice used in various editions that follow the original 3 LBBs is that a caster will consult a spell book and memorize a number of spells per day limited by level and may cast each memorized spell once. 

This method of handling spell memorization and recovery is explained in the Dungeon Masters Guide (printed 1979) to the first Advanced edition wherein the author states:

Spell recovery, whether cleric/druid or magic-user/illusionist, requires about the same period of time. In order to pray and meditate for a new spell to replace one used, or in order to study and memorize such a spell, it is necessary that the spell-user rest and revitalize his or her mental faculties.

The author goes on to establish a time frame for memorization as follows: 

Whether one or more spells are to be regained, the minimum time required for complete rest (usually sleep) is that required for the highest spell to be recovered. Minimum rest periods are shown below:

SPELL LEVEL    1-2        3-4        5-6          7-8            9

      Rest Time   4 hours  6 hours  8 hours  10 hours  12 hours

Thus we can see how the memorization method is established which has been followed since. Personally, I prefer to extrapolate upon the wording. Borrowing an idea found in sources of literature and other games, I wonder about the connection with certain supernatural beings who perhaps aid the magic user in acquiring the magic spell - in a manner rather similar to a cleric who prays to their patron deity for their spells. Is the magic user tapping into a relationship with some powerful entity which is assisting them in gaining their memorized spell (I am thinking about the Warlock class from later editions, perhaps)?

Once again while consulting the words I find in Volume I of the original 3 LBBs I postulate; what else might the phrase "during any single adventure" imply? 

I like to think that each spell is prepared in a laboratory or seclusium and involves a more extended and "magical" formula be followed than spending a few minutes with one's traveling spell book as described in the Advanced game. Once a spell is "remembered" in this manner, it may be cast once each day - at least as long as the material spell component supply holds out. This interpretation seems just as easy as the more popularized method and I find it more evocative of the tone I like to encourage in the games I run.

I hope this brief discussion highlights a couple of the interesting ways that our old tried and true rules can be re-examined and creatively recast to deliver a fresh and exciting new slant on fantasy gaming. The do-it-yourself spirit of the early days of role-playing is what grabbed my attention from the start and continues to keep me excited about the hobby forty-some years later.