Literature Review: "The Doom that Came to Sarnath" (1920)

This week, in honor of H. P. Lovecraft's birthday on August 20th, I wanted to give a shout out to one of my favorite story stories by this preeminent practitioner of Weird Fiction, "The Doom that Came to Sarnath":

There is in the land of Mnar a vast still lake that is fed by no stream and out of which no stream flows. Ten thousand years ago there stood by its shore the mighty city of Sarnath, but Sarnath stands there no more.

With two sentences, Lovecraft quickly sets the mood for the piece: mythic, cryptic and bizarre.  A tale of murder, hubris and otherworldly vengeance follows.  Plus, it has space aliens, weird gods and dread prophecy.  What's not to like? 

An early work by Lovecraft, "The Doom that Came to Sarnath" is still a classic.  Influenced by one of Lovecraft's favorite authors, the great Lord Dunsany, this yarn is set in a fictional pre-historic Earth and is associated with Lovecraft's Dream Cycle stories. 

A wandering group of shepherds establish Sarnath "[n]ot far from the grey city of Ib" and take an immediate homicidal dislike to their neighbors, who "descended one night from the moon in a mist."  Some sacking and pillaging happens, combined with a big dose of ethnic cleaning, and the Sarnathites bring back the idol of the Bokrug, worshipped by the newly massacred beings of Ib, as a token of their conquest.

Ten centuries later, "[t]he wonder of the world and the pride of all mankind was Sarnath the magnificent."  The reigning superpower is at its height and about to celebrate "the feast of the thousandth year of the destroying of Ib. For a decade had it been talked of in the land of Mnar, and as it drew nigh there came to Sarnath on horses and camels and elephants men from Thraa, Ilarnek, and Kadatheron, and all the cities of Mnar and the lands beyond."

As for what happens next, let's just say payback's a bitch.

You can find the full text of the story here.  Alternately, here is a wonderful reading of the same by Nick Gisburne:

RPG Design: Player Narrative Fiat

In the 42 years since TSR published Original Dungeons & Dragons, tabletop role-playing games have seen a number of different design trends, as discussed here by John Kim.  A popular mechanic nowadays that my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, has decided not to adopt is Player Narrative Fiat.


By "Player Narrative Fiat", I mean that game resolution is not determined by one or more of the following:

• The rules,
• GM rulings,
• A randomizer (e.g., dice), and/or
• Character skills/abilities.

Positive examples of Player Narrative Fiat run the gamut from Fate Points (i.e., player narrative currency to alter the outcome of a randomizer) to full blown GM-less story games where a PC doesn't die unless the player chooses so, such as the well regarded Fiasco (2009):

So, am I saying that Player Narrative Fiat is bad?

Not at all!  However, personally, I think it flies in the face of the Old School "feel".

One might then ask, "What about close cousins, such as Force Points in d6 Star Wars?"

The distinction I draw between Force Points and Fate Points (which are mechanically identical), is that Force Points flow from the character (yes, that's a Star Wars joke) rather than the player, thus falling under the fourth bullet point above.  Similarly, I think that Willpower in the Storyteller System or a Wish spell in Old School D&D are fine.

Thus, as you might expect, my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, utilizes no Player Narrative Fiat.  In other words, while my rules set does contain some modern flourishes, the Dice Gods are still to be respected.

Board Game Review: "Dungeon!" (1975)

This week, I would like to take a look back at another well known "Old School" product, albeit not an RPG.  Sort of.

Dungeon! is a competitive board game where players race through the eponymous dungeon, slaying monsters and taking their stuff.  The first to reach their particular adventurer's gold piece goal and race back to the starting point wins.  Since adventurers have different gold piece goals and the dungeon has different levels of difficulty and loot, the game remains roughly balanced even though adventurers have different abilities.

The mechanics are quite simple: upon entering a new room or area, the player draws a monster card appropriate for the dungeon level that lists the target numbers for each adventurer.  If successful, the player draws a treasure card appropriate for the dungeon level.  If not, something bad randomly happens to the adventurer (including death).  Old School!

If fact the mechanics are so simple that for many gamers from the early days of tabletop role-playing, Dungeon! was a gateway to RPGs: you can get your dungeon crawl on without worrying about story or campaign elements.  This simplicity is also a reason for Dungeon!'s recent renaissance, as the children of those same early gamers come of age, such as the daughter of my AD&D DM!

Dungeon! is also of historical interest since Dave Megarry, the primary designer, was a friend of Dave Arneson and a member of the Blackmoor campaign, from which grew the rule set that eventually became into Original Dungeons & Dragons.

So, gamers can see and experience a version of the earliest days of tabletop role-playing.  Thus, in a way, Dungeon! is the closest that many gamers will get to adventuring in Castle Blackmoor.

RPG Design: The Thief Class

Two weeks ago, I discussed the Core Four Classes of tabletop role-playing (i.e., Fighting-Man, Magic-User, Cleric and Thief), drawn from Original Dungeons & Dragons and Supplement I: Greyhawk.  Today, I wanted to look in more detail at the Thief Class:

New Schoolers might be more familiar with the term "Rogue," which was a 3e D&D change (although the move started with 2e) and fallout from the "Bothered About Dungeons & Dragons" (B.A.D.D.) hysteria.  I prefer not to lend any kind of credence to Ms. Pulling's baseless accusations so the Thief has kept his original moniker in my rules set, Sorcery & Steel.

There are some Old Schoolers who don't feel that the Thief belongs among the Core Four, since it is not present in Original Dungeons & Dragons and because ALL characters are thieves in the general sense.  While I understand this point of view, I do think that it is useful to have thieves in the professional sense.  In other words, it's hard to disbelieve that a barbarian from the wastes, a warrior priestess or a newly-minted apprentice would have dedicated the bandwidth to competently and consistently pick locks or other nefarious professional skills.

This is less of an issue with rules sets that have a strong skill system (e.g., BRP, Classic Traveller).

In any event, there is a long tradition of sneaky and lightly armored adventurers in tabletop role-playing and in the fantasy literature (e.g., the Grey Mouser) from whence it came.

A glaring problem for the Old School D&D-brand Thief is that his professional skills begin far too low!  For example, let's take a look at the AD&D variety:

Aside from Climbing Walls (why this shouldn't be included among the Thief's professional skills is a whole other topic), he begins with  an average 18.3% chance of success.  That's miserable!  And it's actually an improvement from B/X!

In my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, I've started the Thief's professional skills at a far more competent point and adapted the rule from 2e allowing the player to allocate professional skill points.


One thing that's changed for the worse IMHO over the years is massive hit point inflation for Thieves in Dungeons & Dragons: in OD&D and B/X, Thieves used a d4.  In AD&D, this was upgraded in a d6.  But now, in 5e, Thieves are rocking a d8!

This hit point inflation, combined with other things including without limitation generous healing and an increasing reluctance to allow PC death, has given newer editions of Dungeons & Dragons a video-gamey feel: rather than being terrified of the dark, typical PCs now often adapt a kick the doors down approach.

This, of course, dramatically changes the tone and feel of adventuring by altering the risk/reward ratio.  At my table, the role of Thief general goes to the most clever and daring player, as it is the Thief that most often is called upon to match wits by his lonesome with the GM.

This is in line with my own preference to emphasize and encourage player skill over character abilities.

Video Game Review: "Warhammer Quest" (2013)

I wanted to give some love for the "Warhammer Quest" port for iOS devices!

The port is based on the short-lived but well-loved "Warhammer Quest" board game, which is, in turn, basically the 2nd edition of the "HeroQuest" board game but set in the Warhammer Fantasy world and using dungeon tiles rather than a static board.

If you are a fan of the above board game, you'll like this port.  The mechanics are largely faithful to the original, so it's unsurprising that this iteration is a turn-based, top-down view CRPG.  This set up works really well for iOS, with the computer dutifully crunching numbers whilst you get to focus on tactics, movements, etc.

If you are a fan of dungeon crawls, you'll also like this port.  The dungeon tiles are beautifully rendered, with lots of interesting details:

The blood and gore effects are also effective, especially since they don't cross the line into cartoonish.

Gathering of loot and gear is also quite addictive and, as a nice touch, your characters' avatars update as you change their kit (e.g., if you switch to a different type of shield, the avatar's shield changes accordingly).

The dungeons do, however, become samey after a while, which is unsurprisingly since they recycle the dungeon tiles and the text blocks!  This is less of an issue for the iOS port, since you'll likely be playing in 15-20 minute increments, but is more of an issue for long plays.

There isn't a true instruction manual, just a journal that explains certain things as you go along, so this game involves a bit of trial-and-error, especially if you aren't familiar with the source material.  However, it is fun to figure out that, for example, wizards can be a pretty decent combatant since, in Warhammer, they, unlike in D&D, can use swords!

Your options are a bit limited with the base package for the iOS port: you get four characters (Marauder, Dwarf Ironbreaker, Wood Elf Waywatcher and Grey Wizard) and can adventure in one province (Stirland).  You can add more characters, provinces, special items, monsters, etc. but the price adds up quickly!

With the in-app purchases and the relative dearth of in-game treasure, it's easy to feel nickeled and dimed.  However, there is plenty of gameplay with the base package for the iOS price (I paid $2.99), though I hear that the return on investment isn't as good with the PC port because of how that port is bundled.

Like the source material, this "Warhammer Quest" CRPG is pretty much all about dungeon crawling, aside from some short trips into towns or the simplistic overland travel.  If you're looking to be fed an immersive storyline, you'll be disappointed but this type of organic, emergent storytelling that you create for yourself about your characters' adventures is, in fact, quite Old School.

In addition, it is possible to get a string of bad dice rolls that quickly cumulates in a TPK, but frankly, that's quite Old School, too!

So, if you are looking for a casual, Old School dungeon crawler that's easy and fun to play, you could do a lot worse than "Warhammer Quest".

RPG Design: Core Four Classes

I've mentioned before that my rules set, Sorcery & Steel, grew out of, among other things, countless hours analyzing the mechanics of 1e Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.  However, in addition to 1e, several other Old School products have also provided inspiration.  For example, the Core Four Classes are drawn from Original Dungeons & Dragons and Supplement I: Greyhawk (i.e., Fighting-Man, Magic-User, Cleric and Thief).

One might ask, "What about the Paladin?" (which is also featured in Supplement I), to which I would reply, "The Paladin in Supplement I, unlike 1e, is not a standalone class but rather an option for Fighting-Men who meet the prerequisites."

Also, I should add that Sorcery & Steel uses the term "career" rather than "class", both because the former more accurately maps what this rules set is trying to accomplish and because the latter is one of a number of unintuitive word choices in D&D.  My rules set does add a bit more crunch, adapting 1e's weapon proficiency system to allow players options to customize.

Nevertheless, I do quite like the minimalist approach of only a handful of classes.  Not only does this streamline character creation, but it also encourages player creativity and imagination.  For example, if you are a "Fighting-Man," what does that mean beyond your stats?

You might be a mighty bear of a bruiser, able to absorb and dish out tremendous amounts of damage:

Alternately, you might be a lean, pantherish warrior, relying on your quickness and cunning:

Or whatever else suits your fancy.  It is up to each player to supply their own answer.  In other words, you have to think for yourself.

Literature: "Elric of Melniboné" (1972)

This week, let's take a look at Michael Moorcock's seminal Swords & Sorcery novella "Elric of Melniboné":

Elric of Melniboné follows the eponymous protagonist, Emperor of the titular island nation of  Melniboné, fend off the multiple blatant and unclever attempts of his cousin Yrkoon to usurp the crown.

The story works both as a straightforward Swords & Sorcery yarn, but also as a deliberate deconstruction of the genre: Elric is physically weak and dependent on drugs, highly flawed and a master of dark sorcery.  This is where the novella shines, as Moorcock is intentionally playing against the archetype.

There's also an interesting gothic and moody vibe with the protagonist as the doomed ruler of a doomed people.

Unfortunately, Moorcock shatters my sense of disbelief with an unbelievable (in several senses of the word) own goal at the very end: he tries to play up the tragic angle by making Elric a complete moron and by making the Melnibonéans completely unrealistic: placing would-be usurper Yrkoon as regent should rightly shatter confidence in Elric and his government.  Furthermore, Yrkoon's heel-turn is telegraphed from approximately a bazillion miles away.

I realize that Moorcock is trying to show that Elric is different from the rest of his people because he is thoughtful and capable of mercy.  However, by flying in the face of common sense and basic self-preservation, he merely comes across as unbelievably stupid.   For example, Elric pointedly ignores the prudent advice of his trusted advisors, while offering nonsensical counterarguments.

I also realize that this work was written over 40 years ago, but if one attempts to defend the above idiocy on those grounds, they are admitting that the story is horribly dated, as successful modern authors are typically far more sensible on matters of political science (at least post-Babylon 5).  I mean, even Ned Stark would do the smart thing and kill Yrkoon!