Well, my friends over at Olde House Rules recently dropped a blog post asking some important and retrospective questions. I really enjoyed the idea so I decided I better write up my response. I might have talked about some of things on various posts scattered throughout the years or at least in an adjacent way.
1) Are character levels as important as we think they are?
The simple and short answer to this is no. The idea and system of levels is not as important as we think they are even though we have been conditioned to think so since the rise of 3.x and beyond. This is especially true today with the main streaming of ttrpg (Dungeons & Dragons in particular). There has been a shift from domain to play at higher levels to an individualistic focus on power with wanting to hit high levels, collection of magical items, builds, and collecting high modifiers. What is more important then levels is progression because adventures should grow, learn new things, and become more competent as they continue their adventures. This progression does not have to be level based, but can be fiction based, item based, and skill based (both character and player).
If we look at characters in a historic sense, the level cap was 10 and some of the longest running characters that were there at the beginning of the hobby (and are still alive today) are level 6 or 7. A perfect example of this is the legendary Chirin Ba Kal who is a Cleric of those levels that works in a fancy palace and is a military officer of high rank. That is some serious paraphrasing and I may have got some details wrong but the point is still there.
2) Exactly how many classes are needed, and can we have to many?
I am going to answer the second part of this question first. The answer is yes, we can have to many. Certain main stream games have historically (and currently suffer) from supplement bloat with a focus on mechanics and and so on. In the height of the 3.x days (it is also returning to this I fear) there were probably hundreds of classes, prestige classes, and templates. All rating from the standard, obscure, to setting specific. That does not even take into account all of the third party and independent offerings. Don't get me twisted though, more power to all of the independent people out there!
As for how many classes are needed? I think at the core, there needs to be enough classes to cover all of the archetypes so a good ballpark would probably be around 4-6. Though, the classes need to be fluid enough where re-flavoring them with a different name, equipment, and fiction can open up various options. Most of the additional classes are just background changes. I think where the need comes in for additional classes (but designers should proceed with caution) is creating setting or regional specific classes. I think a really good example of what I am talking about is what Shadow Dark did with their Cursed Scroll Zines (#1-3). Simple and full of flavor - the mechanics of those classes had more to do with style and flavor then mechanical badassery. Though, I think some of my favorite class presentations come from Black Hack Second Edition.
3) Is sophistication good or bad for the role playing hobby?
I think this is definitely one of those loaded questions and is probably worthy of an essay on its own. Though, instead of getting in the weeds of the matter I will speak from experience. I am not a fan of the endless dungeon crawl - I prefer a sandbox style where there is plenty of city (use the term lightly) and wilderness in between exploring those dark places. Some of the most fun I have had has been when the encounters are not guaranteed to be a meat grinder and there is a hint of whimsical thrown in the mix. Like coming across a group of skeletons playing dice and complaining about the noise the adventurers are making because it will irritate the spiders or finding a random merchant quirky merchant and so on. I will agree an amount of realism is important to enforce setting and what have you but I cannot count the times that the game has been put on pause or immersion has been broken because of a player bring up real world physics, ecology, and some type of lore that argues about how certain creatures can be found where they are encountered and so on. These pauses and breaks in immersion also come from the GM/DM's side to look something up, discourage a clever but ludicrous idea or plan, rifle through various supplements for a ruling, and so on. I think the level of sophistication requirements will vary from table to table and person to person but I strongly believe a healthy mix is the correct recipe. Games should be full of whimsy, magic, and memories that will last a lifetime.
4) How did gaming's early rivalries impact the Hobby's development?
I have sat here and started at my screen to answer this question for a long time. This questions refers to initial schism between Gygax and Arnseson. A lot of has been written about the early history, the lawsuits, and the fallout. There are books like Slaying the Dragon, Playing at Worlds, other books, even the entirety of the Court Documents about the lawsuits can be found at the National Archives in Chicago. There is even the original D&D manuscript in these documents. The truth is that Gygax, Arneson, and everyone else involved are humans. Humans are inherently flawed, emotional, and make mistakes. There was a lot of personal and business mistakes made throughout the origins of the hobby and as we know it today. To answer the question, the schisms created different companies, games, and takes in the early hobby. Whether this was a better out come then what would have happened if the schisms did not happen, I do not know. I do know people across the board with have been happier then dealing with all of the ugly that happens in situations like these.
5) Rolling dice is a big deal; but just how important are they?
Let's face it, without some type of randomization or way to determine effort for tasks that have a chance a failure then it just becomes group fiction. There is nothing wrong with group fiction but if a game is that it should be up front about it. Now, there are some great diceless games out there (diceless does not mean resolution free) like the classic Amber, Lords of Gossamer & Shadow (which is a spiritual successor to Amber), Diceless Dungeons by Olde House Rules, Undying by Magpie Games, and Dust Devils. There is also a host of games out there that use poker cards, tokens, Tarot cards, and other means of task resolution. So, rolling dice is a big deal as it is part of the experience and your dice (along with your character sheet) are your totem. Though are they more or less important then other means of task resolution? Probably not. Give me a couple D6's, a pencil, and a notebook any day of the week.
6) How have current fashions affected how characters are depicted?
The short answer is yes. Modern fashion as long since affected the hobby for better or worse depending on your point of view. It has changed from the images The Hobbit has put in our heads to the black and white art of early Dungeons and Dragons handbooks/manuals to the more modern "rockstar" art of the modern iterations of fantasy games across the board. We saw this change in 2000 and then with the rise of self-publishing is when the art change cemented. I think another big change over the last twenty-five years is that the industry expectations (or standards) changed from setting provoking black and white art to coffee table books that are busting at seems with full color art on glossy pages.
7) Nostalgia gets a bad reputation; but could it be important?
I think the word Nostalgia and Boomer gets thrown around a lot and are commonly used with a negative connotation. Especially the latter. Nostalgia is used in the negative way when I have had discussions with newer gamers or ones that have only played a certain game or a certain edition. If I am being honest, I think the Nostalgia deeply hits for the simpler times when technology was not a distraction, when you did not need massive rule books, when it was just pencils, paper, and friends. It was about connection and having a good time. I have a friend of mine who pokes fun at me about focusing on older games, clones, the style of gaming that took place with the Twin City Gamers, and my new found love for fountain pens (it is a well known fact I have a minor addiction to office supplies). What makes Nostalgia important is that in reminds us of the spirit of gaming (and inspires us to keep the beacons lit) and trick is not to combine modern innovation with that spirit.
8) Are inherently evil orcs always racist? Or is there more to the story?
Well, there is more to the story and I did a deep dive on this subject here. At the end of the day, it comes down to how they are presented but I am strong advocate of there is no such thing as an inherently evil orc.
9) When did D&D's amateur age end, and where was its last stand?
We went from booklets printed out in the basement (or at print shops) to the semi-professional (for modern standards) of AD&D that kept the eccentric style of art (for the most part) to the rise of a new industry standard with the release of 3rd edition in 2000. This all happened with a time span of about 10 years. I think the last stand can be argued in two different areas. The first point could be argued that it took place when Gygax produced AD&D in the 8.5x11 format so the books could be on Dalton booksellers shelves as that was how Gygax was measuring success. The second point that can be argued for the last stand could be the era of AD&D where the art was still eccentric and at times evocative. Though, with that being said, there is good news in the modern times of gaming. Due to the prominence of self-publishing, a new amateur age is rising the like sun and with it, bringing the hopes of dreams of gamers across the globe.
No comments:
Post a Comment