Game Balance: RPGs Aren’t Games. And That’s the Point

In my last post, I argued that “rulings, not rules” wasn’t a gap to be patched but a foundation for how tabletop roleplaying works. The early hobby assumed referees would make calls, and in doing so, developed a craft of rulings. That craft became the foundation for the rulesets that shaped the hobby in the mid and late ’70s.

In this post, I want to build on that idea by asking a deeper question: what are tabletop roleplaying games, really? Why do I approach them differently from most game design frameworks? And how is my approach just one path among many for running campaigns and writing systems?

Throughout the decades I've been playing and refereeing, I've read many of the seminal books and essays on game design. Crawford, Costikyan, and other academic works like Playing at the World and Rules of Play are all outstanding, and they offer detailed and useful analyses of games, including tabletop roleplaying.

Where I depart from those frameworks is in how I classify tabletop roleplaying. I don't view tabletop roleplaying as a game. It is a means for people to pretend to be characters having adventures in other places and times. The "game" elements tabletop roleplaying uses are not the end in themselves, but a crucial aid; they make the experience more engaging than Let's Pretend, and more accessible and entertaining for the average person to enjoy within the time they have for a hobby.

In Salen & Zimmerman's Rules of Play, the issue of game balance is discussed. In Chapter 20, in the opening paragraph of "The Level Playing Field of Conflict," they write:

Competition and cooperation, goals and struggle, victory and loss: how does it all add up? What are the general conditions of a game conflict? One core principle of conflict in games is that it is fair. Game conflict is impartial conflict: it is premised on the idea that all players have an equal chance at winning, that the game system is intrinsically equitable, that the game's contest takes place on a level playing field, which does not favor one side over the other. Anthropologist Roger Caillois points this out in speaking about competitive forms of play: "A whole group of games would seem to be competitive, that is to say, like a combat in which equality of chances is artificially created, in order that the adversaries should confront each other under ideal conditions, susceptible of giving precise and incontestable value to the winner's triumph."

This is excellent advice, and I agree that this is one of the central pillars of designing a good game.

However, I don't view what I do with tabletop roleplaying as designing games. Rather, I view what I do as designing something to be experienced, experienced by people pretending to be characters looking for adventures. Game design considerations are not ignored. For tabletop roleplaying to be enjoyable and feasible as a leisure activity, a good game needs to be part of the package. However, the game elements are subordinated to the larger goal of creating an experience. Anything that gets in the way of that goal is jettisoned.

Next, we need to consider the experience I focus on. There are many ways this can be handled, but every tabletop roleplaying designer has their own creative focus. My particular focus is on crafting products that enable referees to create campaigns that leave players feeling as though they have visited a setting as their characters, while having interesting adventures. 

For example, in a Middle-earth campaign, my goal is satisfied if the players feel they have visited Tolkien's world. However, my goal isn't to leave them feeling like they experienced a Tolkien novel. I'm not interested in recreating particular narrative structures. However, I am deeply interested in bringing worlds to life in a way that feels real to the players.

Given this focus, what does it mean for the tabletop roleplaying material I publish or share? It means that often what I design isn't "fair" to the players. It is not impartial conflict. The players will not always have an equal chance at winning, the system isn't equitable, and the playing field isn't level. Certain aspects of the setting,or sides within it,are favored over others.

Instead, my material is consistent with how the setting is described. It is consistent with its own internal logic, not with the idea of equity and fairness that the concept of game balance addresses.

Now, others, when designing their campaigns for players to experience, or when publishing and sharing material, may not handle things in the same way. I've encountered many who feel that game balance is crucial to the creation of a good tabletop roleplaying campaign and its supporting material. That works as a creative goal; however, it is just one entry among many in the arena of ideas that form our hobby and industry.

And I have no quarrel with designers who go that route and focus on making the game behind their rules or campaigns balanced. Where the rules are judged to be fair, impartial, and create a level playing field. As long as they are upfront about their creative goals and acknowledge that other approaches work just as well for different creative goals and have their own fans. While I have my criticisms of RPGs like D&D 4e, one thing I don't criticize is its quality as a game on its own merits. It is an outstanding example of an RPG that focuses on game balance, and I recommend it to any group that views balance as crucial to their enjoyment of tabletop roleplaying.

Rulings, not rules,” was about equipping referees with craft, not just tools. This follow-up is about why I use that craft: to build campaigns where the setting’s logic takes precedence over balance. Where some designers seek a level playing field, I seek the living world. That’s the design philosophy behind my work, and the experience I want players to step into.

Previous: Rulings, Not Rules: A Foundation, Not an Oversight

Rulings, Not Rules: A Foundation, Not an Oversight

There's been a lot of discussion over the years about how Original Dungeons & Dragons handled (or didn't handle) the common situations you'd expect in a tabletop role-playing campaign. Things like jumping a chasm, climbing a wall, or fast-talking a city guard. The critique often boils down to: OD&D wasn't complete, it left too much out.

What people forget is that Gygax wasn't writing OD&D for newcomers to gaming. He was writing for the early '70s wargaming community, people already creating their own scenarios, modifying rules, and running campaigns. His audience wasn't looking for a complete, airtight system with exhaustive coverage. They wanted a framework they could expand on, the kind of framework that would let them run the campaigns they'd heard about, like Blackmoor or Greyhawk.

That mindset shaped the game. Gygax and Arneson distilled what worked in their campaigns into OD&D, trusting referees to fill in the rest. What they didn't anticipate was how quickly the hobby would grow beyond that core group, or how differently newer players would approach rules and systems.

Next Post: Game Balance: RPGs Aren’t Games. And That’s the Point

"Rulings, Not Rules" Is a Design Philosophy

When people talk about "rulings, not rules," they sometimes frame it like it's a patch, something you do because the game didn't cover enough. I don't see it that way. I see it as a deliberate design choice.

A campaign that starts with just a dungeon and a village isn't "incomplete." It's a starting point. The assumption was that the referee and players would build outward together. The game wasn't meant to hand you a world fully realized and mechanized; it was meant to give you a structure for making your own.

OD&D Worked Because of the Gaps

By modern standards, OD&D has "gaps." But those gaps weren't always accidental. They existed because Gygax knew his readers already had the habits and mindset to fill them. Wargaming referees knew how to adjudicate oddball situations, because that's what they'd been doing for years on their sand tables.

What looks like an omission today was often just a silent assumption: "Of course the referee will handle that."

That's why OD&D led to so many variant campaigns. There was no ur-text, no canon, it was a culture of iteration. Try something, tweak it, keep what works. That was the DNA of the early hobby.

The Problem When the Hobby Grew

This is where things broke down. OD&D didn't teach the process of making rulings. Once the game spread beyond wargamers, that missing guidance became a real issue.

Take the example of jumping a chasm. A wargaming referee in 1974 might've looked up Olympic jump distances, considered the character's stats, the gear they were carrying, the terrain, and improvised a ruling from that. That was normal.

But for a brand-new player or referee in 1977? That same situation could turn into a frustrating dead end. There wasn't a shared framework for how to think through it, so rulings felt arbitrary, or worse, like pulling numbers out of thin air.

Coaching and Guidance

The early hobby would have been better served by teaching how to make rulings, not just listing rules. Coaching newcomers through the process of handling novel situations and coming up with rulings, both in general, and using the designer's own mechanics, would have gone a long way.

It's not difficult to do, and it doesn't undermine the open-ended style that made early D&D so creative. In my Basic Rules for the Majestic Fantasy RPG, I wrote a chapter, "When to Make a Ruling," to address this very issue using the mechanics of the Majestic Fantasy RPG. I plan to expand on this and more when I finish the full version.

The Basic Rules for the Majestic Fantasy RPG

Rulings Are Not a Stopgap, They're the Point

Hobbyists aren't wrong for wanting more structure. Games like GURPS, Fate, Burning Wheel, or Mythras provide extensive out-of-the-box support, and that's valuable.

But here's the truth: even those systems eventually run into edge cases, a weird situation, a new setting, or something the rules don't cover. When that happens, you need the same tool OD&D assumed from day one: the ability to make a ruling.

And that's why "rulings, not rules" isn't just a slogan or an excuse for missing content. It's the foundation of how tabletop roleplaying was intended to work.

What we need going forward is more coaching and less telling from designers. Hand a referee a Difficulty Class, and they have what they need for that one situation. Teach them how to craft rulings along with Difficulty Classes, and they’ll have a skill they can apply to every campaign they run from that day forward.

Because rules give you tools, but rulings give you craft, and that craft is what makes tabletop roleplaying campaigns truly come alive.

Next Post: Game Balance: RPGs Aren’t Games. And That’s the Point

The original release of Dungeons and Dragons was a supplement.

It occurred to me recently that the original release of Dungeons and Dragon is best viewed as a supplement. Not to the Chainmail Miniature wargame but to the unwritten rules, systems, and methods the miniature wargaming community of the early 70s were using.

After reading Playing at the World, Hawk and Moor, and other accounts of early miniature wargaming I had a better understanding of why the 3 LBBs of ODnD were organized the way they were. It makes  sense to me to view it as a supplement to what folks were doing at the time. And why everybody else who got a hold of it was scratching their heads over the missing parts.

What got me thinking about this was thinking about my Majestic Wilderlands Supplement. This was written for Swords and Wizardry. I didn't bother explaining what hit points, armor class, and levels were. My target audience was hobbyists playing Swords and Wizardry and other classic editions. I assumed that they would "get" the stuff I left undefined. I did receive a few criticisms and comments early on about where was rest of the system was. I explained that it was a supplement to another game. Luckily for me it was free to download.

With all the interest generated in the history of our hobby with the Game Wizards, I figure this would a interesting insight when weighing the original release against later editions of Dungeons and Dragons.

Random OD&D Tables updated

 I updated the random ODnD tables on batintheattic.com to include the following

• Updated Unguarded Treasure to the full range of level (1 to 13+)
• Updated To add Generate Magic Sword Only
• Added Dungeon Room Content Generation

Additional web based tools I have are

DnD Combat Simulator (only two folks whacking at each other but handles any edition)

Majestic Wilderlands RPG Tables (only treasure generation at the moment)

Enjoy!

Random OD&D Treasure Types and Unguarded Treasure

A while ago while working on the Wild North for Fight On! Magazine I coded up the ODnD treasure types in Visual Studio using the dotNET library. Unfortunately sharing EXEs is problematic due to the variety of computer out there so it sat there on my hard drive.

In the past two years, I been delving into javascript which is a popular programming language that runs in your browser. As a result I been transferring over some of the random table dotNet stuff I did into a javascript program. The first one done is the ODnD Treasure Types and Unguarded Treasure. You can access it at the following link.

Treasure Types and Unguarded Treasure

I will expand it later with some of the other tables I have coded up with dotNet.

As reminder I have the following javascript programs as well.

Classic Traveller Character Generation with Citizens of the Imperium.

DnD Combat Simulator

Note it is just two character standing still and whacking each other in turn. 

A house rule for OD&D or Swords & Wizardry

In ODnD or Swords and Wizardry, a fighter gets 1 attack per level when facing a group of opponents with 1 HD or less. Note in ADnD this was changed to 1-1 HD or less.

The origin of this rule is found in The Strategic Review, Volume 1, No 2, Page 3.

It is Gygax's adaptation of the Chainmail rule where one hero type worth four figures and a superhero is worth eight figures.

What if we extended this rule

Multiple Attacks for original edition fighters

Every combat around the fighting man can attack a number of hit dice equal to their level with a minimum of 1 attack allowed. If the creature has a modifier to their hit dice round up to the nearest whole number. For example a hobgoblin has HD 1+1/2 for this rule treat this the same as a HD 2 creature.

This means a 4th level fighter while facing a Goblin Chief HD 1+1/2 and five of his minions (HD 1-1) can opt to attack up to four of the goblin minions. Or opt to attack the Chief two times as HD 1+1/2 is treated as HD 2. Or the chief once, and two of his minions provided they are within reach of the fighter's weapon.

Thoughts on Detect Evil

Tim at Gothridge Manor looks at the Detect Evil spells in Old School Essentials.

Old School Essentials Mechanics

Duration: 6 turns

Range: 120'

Objects enchanted for evil purposes or living beings with evil intentions are caused to magically glow.

-Intent only: it does not grant the caster the ability to read minds

-Referee must decide what is 'evil'.

Here is the original found on Page 24 of Men and Magic in ODnD

Detect Evil: A spell to detect evil thought or intent in any creature or evilly enchanted object. Note that poison, for example, is neither good nor evil. 

Duration:2 turns. Range: 6”.

I am also familiar with Sense Foes from GURPS Magic that Tim refers too.

My own take emphasize the danger sense aspect of the spells. While it is something I prefer it is also in part necessitated by the fact I haven't used alignment in decades and still don't. 

I have two added wrinkles that in the case of magic it also senses when somebody been affected by magic against their will. For example a character under influence of a Charm Person spell. This type of magic is considered a hostile enchantment. It also detect demons and anything demonic. In my campaigns demons represents absolute evil in a spiritual sense.

Here the current write up for Detect Evil from my draft rules for the Majestic Fantasy RPG

Detect Evil (Cleric, 1st Level;)

Range: 120 feet; Duration: 1 hour; MI: No; Art: Lantern;

Detect Evil (Magic-User, 2nd Level)

Range: 60 feet; Duration: 20 minutes; Art: Lantern;

The caster detects the following dangers for the duration of the spell: hostile sentient beings, hostile monsters, and enchantments/auras that causes damage or some type of harm. It does not detect traps, poisons, and other mundane dangers. Demonic and demonic effects are always considered hostile.

Focused Art: For clerics the spell’s range is extended to 180 feet and the duration for 2 hours. For magic users the range is extended to 90 feet, and the duration to 40 minutes.

Rob's Notes

I have some additional mechanics in my take on Swords and Wizardry. MI is magical immunity. It determines whether is creature with magical immunity is effected by the spell. Since Detect Evil pertains to the caster it doesn't apply. 

Focused Art is an option in my rules where a magic user can focus on one of the ten arts of magic. If they do they get a small bonus effect to spells of that art. An aspect of the Art of the Lantern that it covers spells that impart knowledge of some kind. For clerics it depends whether the art of magic falls into the deity's sphere of influence. In the Majestic Fantasy Realms this would be Thoth the Lantern Bearer the God of Sages and Knowledge. 

Originally a focus in the art of magic would meant +1 caster level for that spell. But in Swords and Wizardry so few spells are affected by caster level that I had to come up a customized focus effect for each spell. 

Some thoughts on Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax Part II

This is the second in my series post about the legacy of Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax.

 

I consider myself informed on the legacy of the two men and the history of DnD and tabletop roleplaying. There are other that have spent far more time, and money on the subject than I. Sharing what they learned in formal films and books.

However for each of us to come to our own conclusion on the topic we need a path to get there. The sources I have used were the following

Playing at the World by Jon Peterson
The Hawk and Moor series by Kent David Kelly
The First Fantasy Campaign by Dave Arneson and the Judges Guild Staff
Dave Arneson's True Genius by Rob Kuntz

Gygax Q and A series on various Forums
Dragonsfoot
Enworld

The TSR Q and A series on Dragonsfoot

Old school forums such as
The Comeback Inn
The ODnD discussion forum.
Knights and Knaves

Recently there an another new source of information the Secrets of Blackmoor documentary which I haven't gotten completely through yet.

Browsing through the above when you have the time and interest will lead you to other sources that I haven't mentioned.

The reason I haven't given you my opinion yet is that throughout the recent round of discussion there are lot of editorializing and opinion given but nobody is explaining how you can form your own opinion. Especially in a way that is compatible with the time and budget you have for a hobby. Everything that list except for the First Fantasy Campaign should be readily accessible to anybody reading this. You don't have to digest it all at once. Just read (or watch) through what you can when you can.

Eventually you get to a point where you have your own answer to the questions I posted in Part 1.

And no I am not going to make you wait for a Part III for my answer.

So what does Rob think?

• Would have Dungeons & Dragons be written without Dave's help or Dave running the Lake Geneva session?

My conclusion is no. In the absence of that session happening in Lake Geneva maybe Gygax would have followed up man to man section of chainmail with a Metagaming Melee type wargame or some other type of wargame that had the players playing individual characters (like Gladiators). But it is Dave Arneson who the first to put all the element that we know as tabletop roleplaying. And more important did the work to figure out how to make it fun and interesting.

• What was involved in developing the idea of a tabletop roleplaying campaign in Dave Arneson's Blackmoor Campaign.

Blackmoor started out as a miniature wargame campaign. Not a traditional one where the players were in essence the armies on board. In Blackmoor, like in the various Braunsteins being run, the players played the actual commanders and other important characters. Not just the good guys but the baddies as well. 

Dave's role was that of a neutral arbiter. He created the setting, drew up the rules to resolve battle, logistics, and prices list. Within those constraints the players were free to do anything that they would as if they were there. In short a wargame campaign but a very sophiscated one.

What turned Blackmoor into the first tabletop roleplaying was Dave's willingness to say yes. When Peter Gaylord wanted to play a wizard, he said yes. When Dave Fant figured out how to transform into a vampire, he said yes. And so forth and so on. Week by week the focus of the Blackmoor campaign shifted from a struggle between good guys versus bad guys to the individual exploits of the players as their characters.

My opinion that it is the introduction of Blackmoor dungeons the defines the clear line between two phases of the campaign. Prior the dungeon Blackmoor was mostly a wargame campaign, afterwards it was mostly about the exploits of the individual characters.

The reason I picked the dungeons, because the First Fantasy Fantasy campaign and other anecdotes clearly state that the good guys players were punished with exile because they lost Castle Blackmoor to the baddies by spending too much time exploring the dungeon. Instead of learning their lesson when they arrived at Lake Gloomy they went off to explore new dungeons.

I know my statement makes it sound like a AHA! moment. But I can't stress enough that this developed over weeks and months. With Dave and his players constantly trying things out.

When Dave goes down to Lake Geneva to run that fateful adventure. He has nearly two years of running Blackmoor under his belt. The same amount of time Gygax used from the writing his first manuscript and running the Greyhawk campaign, to the publication of Dungeons & Dragons.

Also keep in mind as Gygax ran Greyhawk, Dave continued to run Blackmoor that the two corresponded frequently.

• What would have happened to Dave Arneson innovations if Gygax never had written Dungeons & Dragons?

So here the thing, Dave does not have a lot of published works to his name. Nearly all of the anecdotes paints Dave as a genius at running campaigns, making wargames.  But shined when it was face to face not words on paper. But Gary Gygax was able to see a project through publications and did so a number of time prior and after Dungeons & Dragons.

So what would have happened if Gygax never had written Dungeons & Dragons. We would have seen Megarry's Dungeon boardgame at some point. We would also probably seen wargames where the players played individual characters. Probably something like GDW's Engarde, the first Boot Hill, or the later Metagaming's Melee and Wizard by Steve Jackson. We would have probably seen some Braunstein scenarios published.

But without that Lake Geneva session run by Dave inspiring Gygax, we would have not have tabletop roleplaying. When I read through First Fantasy Campaign and the various accounts, I notices there is a lot of focus on the wargame side of the campaign. In terms of rules, scenarios, the miniatures, and the props being made.

But because Dave had to travel to Lake Geneva, he couldn't bring all that so brought the part of the campaign that was easier to transport (and popular in its own right) the dungeons. Hence Gygax was inspired to run his own dungeon campaign, Greyhawk.

My opinion that the dungeon was the perfect setting to convey how different this game was. Compared to other type of adventure locales, the dungeon is clearly focused on players acting as individual characters. In this case exploring the monster filled maze.

Gygax contribution to the development of tabletop roleplaying was to take what Dave did and figure out to make it work for himself. Then write it in a way that was understandable for everybody else to learn for themselves.

In my view that was as an impressive feat as Dave developing the concept of tabletop roleplaying. Is why I view that there is no path to what we have as a hobby and industry that doesn't run through the two of them.

Wrapping it up
There are people who wrote whole books about the subject (and filmed documentaries to boot). I can't encompass all that into two post. What I can do is outline for you the path I took to reach the basic conclusions I reached above. Hope this help.

In the meantime
Fight On!

Some thoughts on Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson Part I

A recent article that was published has ignited discussion, some heated, about the legacy of Dave Arneson relative to Gary Gygax. I have my opinions which I will explain in part 2. But the process I went through involved me answering three questions for myself.

• Would have Dungeons & Dragons be written without Dave's help or Dave running the Lake Geneva session?
• What was involved in developing the idea of a tabletop roleplaying campaign in Dave Arneson's Blackmoor Campaign.
• What would have happened to Dave Arneson innovations if Gygax never had written Dungeons & Dragons?

Link to Part II

In other news
Sorry for the light blogging this month. The time I have for this was mostly consumed by two major projects. Drawing maps for Gabor Lux's upcoming Castle Xyntillan, and the Wilderlands of the Fantastic Reaches. I am happy to say that the guidebooks are going through the print approval process. So release should be in two to three weeks.

The Majestic Wilderlands has gone gold!

It did take ten years but the Majestic Wilderlands has finally achieved Gold status on DriveThruRPG.

As thanks, I am offering the Majestic Wilderlands for $1 over print cost. And half off for the PDF for the holiday week.

PDF Discount $2.99
Print Discount $4.99

The supplement is compatible with Swords and Wizardry and other editions of the worlds first and most popular roleplaying game.

Skills, Abilities, Attributes, and Classes in classic D&D

JB over on B/X Blackrazor has posted some strong opinions on ability checks and skills. It stems from the following

 But for the game I play (and, sure, I understand not everyone plays as I do), I feel that a character's class IS the bulk of the character's training...that's where the emphasis should be and ability scores a minor consideration as far as representing a character's "skill."

That is an approach the could work but what going on here?

It about that players can do more than fight, cast spells, turn undead, etc as their characters. They can sneak past a guard, open a locked chest, or weave a basket.

What important is not which is approach is right. It about what works with one's campaign. Because of my circumstances I opted to come up with an ability system.

Abilities
Going back to OD&D 3 LBBs we have three character classes, Cleric, Fighting-Man, and Magic User along with mechanics to handle combat, spell casting, and a few other things like turning undead. But suppose a character wants to sneak past a guard, open a locked chest, or weave a basket for that matter?

 The 3LBBs imply that the player describe what they are doing and the referee makes a ruling based on the circumstances and what been established about the character. This interpretation is supported by this anecdotes from back in the day. However the various anecdotes and few pieces of documentation (like Judges Guild Ready Ref sheets, Strategic Review) display widely varying methods of adjudicating this things. Some use attributes, some use an arbitrary chance, other account for class and level. Some use %, 3d6, or 1d20 roll low or high.

However there are some common elements among those accounts of using 3 LBBs. The most important is that outside of combat, and spell casting, any character can attempt any action. All three classes can try to stealth past the guard, try to open the locked chest, or try to weave a basket. But it up to the referee to decide on the mechanics of adjudication.

One way is to based it primarily on class and level with some modifiers based on attributes as JB does in his campaigns. His post states the reasons why.

I opted it to handle it a different way. My view is that any character can attempt any action outside of class specifics. That some classes are better than other classes at certain abilities. That attributes are important to determine how good a character is at certain abilities. That like combat, and spell casting not every class or individual character is equally adept in these abilities.

The result is the ability system as outlined in my Majestic Fantasy Basic Rules.

Related to this is my decision to ditch the thief class in favor of a series of Rogue classes. What distinguish the Rogue from the Cleric, Fighter, and Magic User, is that they are better at various abilities than other classes. For example the Burglar class in the basic rules is better at climbing, eavesdrop, legerdemain, perception, and stealth.

Because I had no issues with players trashing my setting as they tried to become kings or magnates I to deal with a player attempting a lot of different things. The climb to power required the players to do more than just fight or cast spells. Adventures and exploration were important in my campaign but often they were just the means to the player's end goal of rising to the top.

Wrapping it up
That why I decided to do things differently from JB. Again what important here isn't that you handle this in a particular way but that you think it through, that the result fits what you want out of the campaign, and that it is fun to play.

Some days this hobby of ours makes one go WOW!

So Douglas Waltman has been busy lately.

I am just simply amazed. Douglas talks about wanting to bring it to GaryCon in this facebook post.

B1 Search for the Unknown has been one of my favorite modules for years. I first encountered it when I got the Holmes DnD boxed set in late 1977. 

The best part of was the dungeon layout with a constructed complex above and caverns below. It has a lot little touches I liked; the fact the upper level felt like something two high level adventurers (Roghan and Zelligar) would make. That the bottom cave level had a back exit that opened to a cliff ledge. The long opening corridor with the magic mouths. And of course the cat in the jar, the room of Pools and the mushroom room.

For more B1 (and B2) goodness there is Goodman Games' Into the Borderlands

Way go to Douglas! Your work is simply amazing.

So about OD&D presentation and style.

There long been a thread of thought that ODnD is poorly written and organized. When criticism is charitable it a result of ODnD being Gygax's first attempt at writing about a tabletop roleplaying game. When it not it because Gygax's ability as an author is also being criticized.

So this came up again in a forum that I participated one. To date the general gist of my response has been

Part of ODnD are uncleanly written but as a whole it is a work of genius and a lot of what is unclear is a result of Gygax writing for the miniature wargaming hobby as it existed in the early 70s.

But this time I got thinking that I never really dug into many of salient. So I decided this time I would look at ODnD with fresh eyes.

Men and Magic

The crucial section is on page 5 of Men & Magic titled Preparations. Here at the first Gygax summarizes and outlines everything he going to talk about.

The referee bears the entire burden here, but if care and thought are used, the reward will more than repay him. First, the referee must draw out a minimum of half a dozen maps of the levels of his “underworld,” people them with monsters of various horrid aspect, distribute treasures accordingly, and note the location of the latter two on keys, each corresponding to the appropriate level. This operation will be more fully described in the third book of these rules. When this task is completed the participants can then be allowed to make their first descent into the dungeons beneath the “huge ruined pile, a vast castle built by generations of mad wizards and insane geniuses.” Before they begin, players must decide what role they will play in the campaign, human or otherwise, fighter, cleric, or magic-user. Thereafter they will work upwards — if they survive — as they gain “experience.” First, however, it is necessary to describe fully the roles possible.

Breaking it down we see this involves

1. the referee must draw out a minimum of half a dozen maps of the levels of his “underworld,”
2. people them with monsters of various horrid aspect
3. distribute treasures accordingly
4. note the location of the latter two on keys, each corresponding to the appropriate level.
5. Explicitly states that the above will be more fully described in the third book.

Then

When this task is completed the participants can then be allowed to make their first descent into the dungeons beneath the “huge ruined pile, a vast castle built by generations of mad wizards and insane geniuses.”

But

Before they begin, players must decide what role they will play in the campaign, human or otherwise, fighter, cleric, or magic-user. Thereafter they will work upwards — if they survive — as they gain “experience.”

Then for the remainder of Men & Magic, Gygax outlines how how characters are defined, and some of what they can do or have like equipment, combat and magic.

It is in the details where writing for his expected audience of miniature wargamers is most evident. He assume that his reader has experience running or playing other miniature wargame campaigns. That they are familiar with the idea of initiative, and combat turns. That what needed to be spelled out are details to make it work at the level of the individual character. One method is the alternative system. Another is how to integrate with Chainmail, a rule system that he know many of his potential customers already have and are using to handle not only medieval melees but one and one combat as well.

Another part where his intended audience comes into play is that he doesn't offer anything like skills or general action resolution. Because he expect his audience to do the same thing they do in the miniature wargames they play. If something comes up that isn't covered by a rule or a chart, then you go back to first principles and reason it out based on how it  worked in life or in the case of fantasy in various movies and books. Something we know was common from the recent work documenting the early days of wargaming and tabletop roleplaying.

Gygax is consistent in spelling out the unique parts of the D&D rules, the parts that his fellow hobbyists would not know.

Monsters & Treasures

Then after Men & Magic, he launches into Monsters and Treasure. Which important details about two of the elements he outlined in preperation

1. Monsters
2. What treasure monsters have
3. The available treasures.

The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures

The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures is where the rest of what outlined in preparation is broken down and reinforced by examples of play.

Starting from the first page.

1. Gygax describes what he meant by levels of the "underworld" and give examples. (pg 3 to 5)
2. Offers details on distribution monsters & treasure as well other things that can go into the underworld as well as tips for keeping things fresh throughout a campaign (pg 6 to 8)
3.  Gets into the logistics of handling characters exploring the Underowold including encountering Wandering Monsters ( pg 8 to 12)
4. Give an example of play. (pg 12 to 14)
5. Presents an alternative to the Underworld the Wilderness. Like the details for an Underworld, he discusses how they are setup and the logistic of handling character exploring a wilderness.
6. The above also touts the board for Outdoor Survival game by Avalon Hill as a useful aid as well as how to use it. Which to me echos the inclusion of Chainmail in Men & Magic.
7. Then gets into constructing castle, undoubtedly something of interest to his player and his audience. (pg 20 to 21)
8. And since we are on the topic of castle, he now talks about the troops and men a character could hire as well some of the logistics of being a lord. (pg 21 to 24)
9. We now talked about castles, and troops lets talk about warfare in general including rules for stuff you wouldn't have (not found in  Chainmail) like aerial combat and naval combat. Again another example of where he writes for his audience. (pg 24 to 33)
10. And since the last thing he wrote about warfare naval combat, here are some ideas for naval adventures (page 24 to 36)

Finally wraps it up with

There are unquestionably areas which have been glossed over. While we deeply regret the necessity, space requires that we put in the essentials only, and the trimming will often have to be added by the referee and his players. We have attempted to furnish an ample framework, and building should be both easy and fun. In this light, we urge you to refrain from writing for rule interpretations or the like unless you are absolutely at a loss, for everything herein is fantastic, and the best way is to decide how you would like it to be, and then make it just that way! On the other hand, we are not loath to answer your questions, but why have us do any more of your imagining for you? Write to us and tell about your additions, ideas, and what have you. We could always do with a bit of improvement in our refereeing.

And of course

Wrapping it up
To me the above looks like a reasonable way of presenting something as novel and different as DnD was at the time. The most serious issue, that it written for the audience of miniature wargamers  resulted because the idea outlined in preparation proved so compelling that it expanded far beyond it intended audience. One that didn't share the experiences and assumptions of miniature wargamers of the early 70s. This resulted in novices to the hobby confused about aspects of ODnD.

In addition Gygax could have written a better explanation with some of the unique details of ODnD like spell memorization.

It is evident that Gygax recognized these issue given the Holmes Basic D&D was commissioned within two years of ODnD release. Then later followed up with B/X DnD, BECMI, and ADnD.

But after looking at it again I feel the presentation is solid and explains fully the most important and unique concepts that made D&D different from the miniature wargame campaigns of the day. Concepts that propelled DnD and tabletop roleplaying into their own category of gaming.

Those pesky D&D Saving Throws

Take a look at this chart

This chart continued in one form or another up into the release of DnD 3rd edition when it was replaced with Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saves.

I apologize for not rememberin= where I first read this, but it was pointed out that if you look at the original saving throw chart a pattern emerges.

You will see see that for all classes save versus death ray/poison are clearly better than save versus staves/spells. It not unreasonable to suggest that given the severity of save or die that Gygax opted to give his player a significant (10% to 20%) break at lower levels.

It appears that Flesh to Stone occupied a middle ground between the two. An effect that takes a character out of play but there is a way to restore them to full functionality (Stone to Flesh).

That wands were considered an advantage compared to memorized spells and thus easier to save against  And finally that a dragon's breath was more easily resisted by a fighter than a magic-user/cleric.

Looking at the original saving throws categories this way lead to a straightforward procedure on determining what category to use.

1. Use Staves/Spells
2. Unless it is something more easily resisted by a fighter than a cleric or magic user then use Dragon Breath. 
3. Unless it is a Save or Die effect or something similar then use Desth Ray/Poison. 
4. If it is a incapacitating effect that is reversible then use Stone.
5. If it anything but a Save or Die effect and it comes from a wand use the All Wands save.

I still prefer Swords and Wizardry single save with specific bonuses but I appreciate the original saving throw system better now that I took another look.

Baseline D&D Combat Simulator

For my final post of 2018, I am posting a link to a DnD combat simulator.

DnD Combat Simulator

While having two combatant whack at each other until one of them is dead is not very realistic in terms what goes on in a campaign. It is a useful baseline to have while designing a combat system.

The source code for this can be downloaded from.

DnD Combat Simulator Source Code

I developed a similar utility to use with a Majestic Wilderlands RPG based on Fudge and confirmed the feedback I got from my players that a +1 advantage seems to tilt the odds by a lot. No matter how I tweaked the combat procedure the steepness of the bell curve of 4DF dominates how bonuses work.

Ironically it wasn't until two years later I found d6-d6 fixes the issue as the bell curve is now the same as rolling 2d6.

With this utility one get a rough idea of how the changes over various DnD editions effected combat by plugging the various numbers as they existed in ODnD, ODnD+Greyhawk, ADnD and so on.

Hope this proves useful for your campaigns and I wish everybody a Happy New Year!

Original Southlands Map redux

Back in 2009 I released my take on the Outdoor Survival Map mentioned in ODnD. Modifying the map using the guidelines found in Book 3 Underworld and Wilderness Adventures along with substituted Judges Guild icons in place of the original.

Since then it made the rounds appearing in projects like Autarch's Dwimmermount.

Recently +Nathan Jennings requested a version that didn't have the title block in the upper left. Since I still had the original files it was easy make a version that does just that.

So here it for everybody else to use for whatever project they have in mind. Just click here to get the full resolution version.

Updating the OSR Survey

For a long time I had this page attached to the blog. It is a survey of selected sites and links that promoted themselves part of the OSR or were about playing, publishing, or promoting a classic edition of D&D. It needs updating as it still get a significant number of hits

So  calling on the wisdom of the crowd for updated links and additional links to be included. The criteria is either it promotes itself explicitly as part of the OSR or the link is about playing, promoting, or publishing something based on the classic editions of DnD. This includes material like White Star or Star without Numbers.

I will look at the comments made for the next two weeks as well add in my own decisions.

My goal for the survey to give a novice a taste of the range of material and fuel further searches on their own. Along with selected items of personal interest that I wish to highlight.

With 3,000+ works identifying as OSR on RPGNow alone there no way a single individual can hope to present a comprehensive list unless that their primary interest. Even Guy Fullerton with Hoard and Hordes with a narrower focus on material supporting Gygaxian DnD, had to switch to a methodology of "stuff I am aware of" after 2012.

Making a campaign human centric with the least amount of violence to RAW

+Joshua Macy has a complaint that not uncommon, all the players in his campaign made non-human characters. Let's face it, non humans are cool kids of fantasy roleplaying. Most races have interesting backstories, memorable characters, and of course the racial abilities. Sometimes all three like with the Drow.

Starting with DnD 3.0, later edition attempted to rectify this by giving Human their own racial abilities. Typically extra flexibility by granting a feat or two, increased ability of the player's choice, or more skills. But still it seems lacking and rather bland.

The primary way I fixed it was to grant a 15% XP bonus for humans that works the same as the XP bonus due to having a high prime requisite. Read below the fold for my reasons why.

First Edition Woodgrain OD&D boxed set

If folks want to take a look at a First printing OD&D Woodgrain Box there is a ebay sale going on with detailed pictures.

Has a interesting back story to go along with it.

This set is in Very Fine condition with one small stain on the front label and very minor scuffing on the corners of the box. Note that the Reference Sheets are not stapled, but loose sheets folded together. This was the original condition.
It was acquired by the present owner in an interesting way.
In 1974 I worked in a project offering supplemental educational materials to four school districts in Northwestern Wisconsin. I met Bill, an elementary school librarian, who was very excited about working with his students using role playing games. He had a friend in Minneapolis whom he had met through their shared interest in war gaming. This friend, “Lance,” was involved with creating a new project, a fantasy-style wargame in a box that could be played by anyone.
My librarian friend was working with a sixth-grade class to create a book based on playing the game. Included in this set is a copy of the booklet that his students created using the game.
Bill also used a 20-sided die that he had hand-colored to differentiate scoring. Adding to the charm of this set, the die is included, as is a hand-written note from Bill, the librarian, explaining the use of the die. He added that there was currently a shortage of these dice, but they were available in England. He was going to England for a vacation, and would be bringing some back with him.
I hope the new owner of this game enjoys owning this piece of gaming history.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions. I will try to reply to all inquiries within 24 hours.

The seller appears legit and is answering questions on the Acaeum Forum[/URL].

Ten days left to get onto Operation Unfathomable.

+Jason Sholtis and his team are putting together Operation Unfathomable. A adventure/setting setting set in a weird fantasy underworld. I only had the pleasure of playing once in his setting but it was a pretty cool experience. I found myself enjoying it a lot which was surprising as weird is really not my thing as a referee or a player.

So you know I am biased when it comes to Jason and his team work. I did some maps for one of his products as well as he did the art for Scourge of the Demon Wolf.

Even if you don't think this is a thing for you, you owe yourself to check out their intro video. Definitely one of the best I seen for RPG Kickstarters.

Just read the below and just ask yourself whether this is something you can pass up.