Feeding the Inner Geek

One of the things I love about the simplicity of older versions of D&D (and their retro-clone equivalents) is that it is an open invitation to create house rules. Whereas this freedom is increasingly limited as the system becomes more comprehensive in later editions, OD&D actually offers up an example of a house rule — the now familiar d20 system for combat. Originally designed to be used for Chainmail, OD&D invited players to come up with their own rules to deal with in-game situations (like how to do combat when you don't own Chainmail). Recently, James over at Grognardia meditated upon the AC adjustment for individual weapons that can be found in 1eAD&D. Specifically, he invited us to understand AC as a class, instead of as a target number. This got my inner geek excited, because armor doesn't prevent you from being hit, rather it prevents you from taking damage. Allowing individual weapons to be more or less effective depending upon armor worn is a simple way to represent this.

Thus, I have taken the invitation of OD&D and of James and come up with my own house rule. Two problems arise out of the system presented in 1eAD&D that make it too cumbersome — too many weapons and too many armor classes. That latter is taken care of if you differentiate armor and a defensive (dodge) bonus. Dexterity, shields, magic and cover all make you harder to hit, therefore affect the defensive bonus. Once the shield is understood as a defensive bonus, that leaves only 4 armor classes in OD&D — platemail (3[16]), chainmail (5[14]), leather (7[12]), and none (9[10]). For purposes of this explaination I will designate them ACI-IV with ACI being platemail. These will provide a target number to do damage (NOT to be hit!) depending on what type of weapon is being used.

Comparing the AC adjustments for these four armor classes in 1eAD&D results in five discernable patterns in meleee weapons and two patterns in ranged weapns. Thus, there are five melee weapon classes (MC) and two ranged weapon classes (RC). The following table gives the target number to do damage against each armor class with each weapon class:

	ACI	ACII	ACI II	ACI V
MCI	20	16	12	9
MCII	14	13	12	11
MCIII	18	15	12	8
MCIV	18	15	12	10
MCV	14	12	10	10
RCI	19	15	12	8
RCII	16	13	10	7

ACI = Platmail
ACII = Chainmail
ACIII = Leather
ACIV = None
Shields do not affect Armor Class, rather they modify the Defensive Bonus.

MCI = Club, Dagger, Staff, Unarmed, Improvised
MCII = Flail, Mace, Military Pick, Morning Star, Warhammer
MCIII = Sword, Axe
MCIV = Spear, Javelin, Trident, Polearm
MCIV = Halberd, Lance (Charge), TH Sword

RCI = Short Bow, Sling, Thrown Wpns
RCII = Cross Bow, Long Bow, Machine (Catapult, etc.)

A player rolls a d20, adds an attack bonus based on Character Level, Strength bonus (for melee), Dexterity bonus (for ranged), and magic, and subtracts the target's defensive bonus (shield, Dexterity bouns, magic, and cover). If the result is the target number or higher, damage is done.

Attack bonuses for Character Level can be determined by either of the following tables (the first spreads bounses out over each level in a 3e fashion based on 1eAD&D to hit tables, the second more closely follows the to hit tables in older editions of D&D):

	Attack	Bonus
Level	Fighter	Cleric	MU
1	+0	+0	+0
2	+1	+0	+0
3	+2	+1	+1
4	+3	+2	+1
5	+4	+2	+2
6	+5	+3	+2
7	+6	+4	+3
8	+7	+4	+3
9	+8	+5	+4
10	+9	+6	+4
11	+10	+6	+5
12	+11	+7	+5
13	+12	+8	+6
14	+13	+8	+6
15	+14	+9	+7
16+	+15	+10	+7

	Character	Level
Attack
Bonus	Fighter	Cleric	MU
+0	1-3	1-4	1-5
+2	4-6	5-8	6-10
+5	7-9	9-12	11-15
+7	10-12	13-16	16+
+9	13-15	17+
+12	16+

The primary problem created by this system is monsters — what do you use for their armor class, their weapon class, their attack bonuses, and their defensive bonuses? A monster's armor class requires some math. Decide which class best represents the hide of the creature (i.e. leather for mammals, chain for reptiles, plate for insects or dragons). Take the base AC of the monster write-up, take the difference from 3[16] for plate, 5[14] for chain, 7[12] for leather, or 9[10] for none and use the result as a defensive bonus. For example, a Dragon with an AC of 2[17] would use ACI and have a defensive bonus of 1 (3 — 2 or 17 — 16). In another example, a Giant Fire Beetle has an AC of 4. If we determine that the insect carapace is like platemail, the difference is actually a defensive penalty of 1. If you aren't comfortable with a penalty, you can always choose to understand the carapace as more like leather or chaimail and have defensive bonuses of 3 or 1 respectively.

Weapon Classes are easier — just choose a class that best simulates the type of natural attack. For example, claws would act like swords, a rocky fist like a mace, and spikes like a spear. A manitcore's tailspikes would be like thrown weapons and a dragon's breath weapon would be like a catapault.

To determine the attack bonus of a monster, simply use their HD as their bonus with a max bonus of +15. HD less than one receive no bonus. For creatures with HD+X, such as HD 1+1, you can choose whether not to have them fight at one HD higher.

Being There

Over on Grognardia, James Maliszewski wrote:

I don't think pre-fab campaign settings need to be impediments to creation through play. Indeed, in some cases, they can be great spurs to creativity. I do think, though, that there's a danger inherent in such settings and that's the false perception that there's a "right" way to play in Tékumel or Greyhawk or Glorantha. Once this pernicious idea takes hold, you close yourself off to many terrific possibilities and contribute to the reduction of roleplaying games to an activity of passive consumption rather than active engagement no different than watching movies or television. This is the reason why analogies with those media tend to raise my hackles. It's not that I think there's anything wrong with wanting one's campaign to be as exciting and "alive" as the best movies or TV shows; it's that I don't think that worthy goal can be achieved by looking to those media as models rather than inspirations for good gaming.

This reminded me of an incident that happened back when I went to a tiny little college that was settled in the middle of a tiny little town of about five thousand people. While I was there, the local community tried to remove the book Being There by Jerzy Kosinski from the shelves of the school library. Amazingly, Kosinski came to town to defend himself, his book, and his understanding of freedom. I was privileged enough to be present when Kosinski made his defense, and his argument not only deeply moved me, but actually affected the way I understand the world.

He made the observation that fiction is the most democratic form of media. I can pick up any work of fiction anytime and anywhere I wish. I can read it at any pace I choose. I am the one who controls how I envision the world described in those pages. In contrast, newspapers determine what content I am to read. Non-fiction limits the pallet by which I can imagine what I am reading, because these are real people, in real places. Photography and painting determine exactly what it is that I am to see. Television and movies are the most autocratic of all. They determine virtually every aspect of the experience — when and where, what I see, what I hear, how I see and how I hear. Once I turn on the TV, push play, or sit down in the movie theater, I have given up control to the media. I attribute my utter refusal to see any movie on opening day weekend and a preference for watching movies and TV shows on the web or on DVD to this argument. By doing so, in some small way, I am taking back some of the control over the experience.

This argument is quite relevant to the world of RPGs and adds a layer of nuance to what James is trying to say. As James has so eloquently pointed out on his blog, RPGs used to list books to read in order to find inspiration. Now they list TV shows and movies. There is a direct correlation to the amount of freedom players have in the way these games are presented and played to these influences. Campaign settings are a unique form of media. They can act as literature or television in terms of their democracy vs. autocracy that Kosinski was speaking about. This relationship is determined entirely by how it is used. We, as gamers, can choose to use it as inspiration in order for us to freely create our own worlds, taking what we like and discarding what we don't. Or we can use them as canons to restrict not only what we ourselves do, but what anyone else can do with the material.

I am not at all surprised that old-school gaming, with its emphasis on creativity, house-rules, player freedom and sandbox campaigns is solidly rooted in literature. I am also not surprised that as TV and movies became increasingly influential on RPGs that campaign worlds became instruments of autocracy and that modern RPGs emphasize plot, story and adventure paths over creativity and player freedom.

I would be remiss if I did not reflect on how this reminds me of our own relationship with the world and sin. As beings made in the image and likeness of God, we are free beings. However, we exist in a fallen world overwhelmed by sin and death. When we ignore God and freely choose a world of sin, we concede control of ourselves to sin, in much the same way we do when we turn on a TV. It has the illusion of true freedom, but in reality we are slaves. However, when we take creation, and use it to bring it and us closer to God, we are taking control of both creation and ourselves. Our creative spirit is set free and we get to taste true freedom. Indeed, this is one the very reasons I write this blog and it is the model by which I play my games.

Erimia Campaign

I have been working on a campaign that satisfies a desire to pay homage to three influences — Pulp Fantasy, Christianity, and the Retro-Clone. I want to share some of my thinking on this campaign, and briefly outline how it interacts with its influences.

Pulp Fantasy

Alternate World: This campaign takes place on an alternate earth that shares the same basic timeline as our own up until the fall of Rome. At this point our paths diverge.

Battle in Space: The Fall of Rome coincides with a battle between two Chaotic factions of inter-galactic/inter-dimensional beings within the solar system. Several ships fall to earth as casualties in the battle.

The Great Cataclysm: During the battle, a device is used in the proximity of earth that causes a violent reaction in its crust and its energy fields. Immense earthquakes, flooding and volcanic activity devastate the planet as the crust shifts almost 90 degrees. Civilization collapses, whole environments change over night, life as we know it is forever changed. An energy field surrounds the world, flowing in constantly changing rivers of energy and pooling in more permanent energy nodes. This energy, when tapped, allows survivors to use what we call magic. The nodes provide beneficial magic, and survivors flock to the few that exist. The rivers are forces of chaos. They sweep across the earth, transforming the natural world and causing all kinds of mutations. The world is now a very dangerous place.

Alien Survivors: The ships that crashed to earth had survivors. Most of their technology is lost, and they are stranded here on earth. So, they make the best of it, and begin burrowing deep within the earth. Sometimes they wait, sometimes they conquer, sometimes they cooperate with each other, sometimes they wage the same war that brought them to earth. They are always alien, and always hate their terrestrial prison. At least one of the factions will be inspired by H.P. Lovecraft. I also love the idea that one of the aliens used to look like this.

Human Survivors: What remains of humanity lives around the few energy nodes that exist. They have built great walled cities to protect themselves from the chaos that reigns in the world outside. However, the journey through the chaos to the energy nodes has left its mark. There have been many mutations, and humanity is much more diverse than it used to be.

We are in the Future: It has taken a couple thousand years to recover from the Great Cataclysm. The technology available is akin to Medieval Europe. This allows for a fantasy setting within a classic pulp fantasy future when compared to our own earth time-line. It also ensures that all of the various elements surrounding the Great Cataclysm are distant memories, the stuff of legend, and ancient.

Christianity

The Geography of Eden: For the land of Eden, the Book of Genesis gives us a basic geography of concentric circles. At the center is the Tree of Life. Around that is a fenced garden. Around that is the plain of Eden. Beyond Eden is the the land of Nod, also known as the Wilderness, where demons live.

Metaphoric Geography: The campaign world is modeled after the concentric circles of Eden. At the center is the energy node, which gives life to those in its proximity. Around the node is the City, a walled metropolis ever watchful for attacks from the outside world. Around the City is a plain, kept open and free by the soldiers of the City to enable a clear view of any invading monsters that crawl out of the Wilderness. This Wilderness, where monsters, demons, and creatures of chaos live, lies beyond the plain.

Monasticism: The name of the campaign, Erimia, is derived from the Greek for wilderness or desert. It is also the origin of the word hermit. In the Christian tradition, the first monastics were hermits who wandered out into the desert in order to combat demons where they lived. To carry the metaphoric geography to the PCs, they become these hermits — they are the first adventurers who seek to confront the monsters where they live.

St. Basil the Great: At the time of the Fall of Rome, the liturgy of St. Basil was commonplace in Eastern Christendom. The Anaphora of St. Basil makes this statement:

Through Him the Holy Spirit was manifested, the spirit of truth the gift of Sonship, the pledge of our future inheritance, the first fruits of eternal blessings, the life giving power, the source of sanctification through whom every rational and spiritual creature is made capable of worshiping You and giving You eternal glorification, for all things are subject to You.

I wish to highlight the words every rational and spiritual creature. This demonstrates that Christianity is easily adaptable to include beings that are non-human into its fold and is immune to destruction in the face of intelligent life from another planet. Thus, as humanity mutates, Christians are the most likely to welcome those who are different. Historically this is demonstrable. When plagues hit major population centers in the ancient world, pagans with the means to do so fled, leaving the poor and sick to die. When the plague ran its course, they returned. In contrast, Christians stayed and nursed the sick no matter the race, color or creed.

Thus, it is the Christians who come out of the Great Cataclysm in the best shape. It is Christianity that forms the foundation upon which the City is built. It is Christianity that has allowed humanity to survive in all its mutated diversity.

Retro-Clones

Mutant Future: This campaign is in many ways inspired by Section 9 of Mutant Future. The controlled gonzo effect of this attempt at making it possible to place Mutant Future characters in the middle of a fantasy setting is very much the tone I want for this campaign. Both Mutant Humans and Replicants will be available as PC classes, and Mutant Future's rules on exposure to radiation can be easily adapted for use with exposure to the chaotic energy rivers of the Wilderness. Additionally, with all of the various mental mutations available, Mutant Future makes it easy to create Psionic special effects without having to come up with or use a Psionic system.

Labyrinth Lord: Although I prefer the simplicity of Swords & Wizardry, which invites the use of house rules, for this campaign I will use the Labyrinth Lord rule-set. Mutant Future was built upon these rules. Thus, using large chunks of Mutant Future material will require little or no conversion.

Sandbox: This campaign is designed very specifically to be a classic hex and dungeon crawl. The Wilderness is vast and ready to explore. Housed within the Wilderness are dungeons — ruins from past civilizations, abandoned outposts of alien survivors, and dwelling places of things dark and evil. In order that the metaphor of monasticism and Eden be consistent, the City must remain a safe haven without conflict or adventure possibilities. There are no politics to be had, no plots to uncover, no puppet master pulling strings. The adventure is always out in the Wilderness. The adventurer is always fighting the monsters where they live.

Expedition to the Barrier Peaks: This is one pf my favorite modules of all time. The way this module blends genres is exactly the pulp feel I want for this campaign. The retro-clone movement allows me to ask the question, what if this kind of adventure was more popular or common in the D&D universe? Though not representative of every dungeon that lies in the wilderness beyond the City, there will be more than one opportunity to encounter the remnants of the space battle that created this age.

Am I a Grognard?

I have to admit that I have stumbled into what appears to me to be a magnificent era for RPGs. I have been off the radar, so to speak, for a number of years. My playing days went on hiatus for four years while I went back to school, and even before that I failed to jump onto the 3.0 bandwagon. Thus, until recently, I was completely unaware of the OGL and the veritable garden it has produced. For me, the most exciting (and unexpected) aspect of this flowering of the D&D system has been the advent of the retro-clones. God bless Don Proctor, Stuart Marshall, Matt Finch and all of the others who have so lovingly produced their visions of the game I played as a kid. The variety of choice we now have today for the game we love to play is incredible. I only hope that there is enough support and growth out there to support this lush field that I find myself in.

I have also stumbled across a term that I find fascinating — the grognard. It is a term, I must admit, that greatly appeals to me, and I wonder if I deserve the mantle. I played war games before I role played. I was heavily involved in miniature war games just prior to going back to school because I had no desire to play 3rd edition. I own the original edition Chainmail and have actually played it. However, my introduction to D&D was the Holmes edition, and I jumped onto the AD&D bandwagon long before I ever found the OD&D ruleset, which I do own, but never played. There are aspects of the 3.0 and 3.5 rulesets I do enjoy, intellectually. However, the next game I ever Referee (yes, Referee), I will insist on using Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, or OSRIC in that order of preference. Regardless of which edition I use, I will seriously consider stealing some of the mechanics used by Jason Vey's Spellcraft & Swordplay, especially his take on Vancian magic, as it is inspired by the magic system of Chainmail.

Does this make me a grognard? In a way, yes. However, behind the term "grognard" is a way of doing things and living a life that are the very things that years ago attracted me to Orthodox Christianity.

Orthodoxy has a deep respect for the past, for the wisdom of those who came before, and is loathe to change for the sake of change. However, it does take what has been given it and engages the culture around it to see how that encounter can transform the culture and enrich what has come before. If I may be so bold, this is exactly what the term grognard and the retro-clone movement are all about (or at least should be about). If this is so, I was a grognard in the way I live my everyday life, long before it became a term that describes my gaming inclinations. If this is so, I embrace the term whole-heartedly.

Here There Be Monsters

In discussing monsters, I feel it necessary to actually ask the question: What is a monster? Being an Orthodox Christian, to answer this question, I'd like to go to Scripture and one of the original languages of Scripture, Greek. Looking up the word "monster" in a Greek dictionary reveals the word teras. I never trust language dictionaries when only going from English to another language, so I went to my handy Liddel & Scott Greek-English Lexicon, which gives teras two definitions:

1) a sign, wonder, marvel
2) in a concrete sense, a monster

These two definitions are not unrelated. There are other words in Greek that denote signs, wonders, and marvels. The word teras, being related to the English word terror, indicates that the sign, wonder or marvel brings with it a sense of fear.

Teras is not used in the New Testament, but is found in Greek Translations of the Old Testament. It is used to denote the revelatory aspect of certain events — the event somehow reveals that God makes concrete decisions in the present, that He is in control, and these affect not only the present, but the future. In other words, they are frightening events that remind us that God is the master and creator of the universe, not us. I find this fascinating because of the ramifications it has on role-playing.

In my own experience, the most terrifying opponents in RPGs are humans. The reason for this two-fold. Firstly, having humans as the primary bad guys engenders fear and paranoia because they are not easily identifiable. Whereas an orc is easy to spot, an evil human can be anywhere and be anyone. The second, and more important for this discussion, is that they serve as mirrors — they reflect back at us what is worst in us.

In Orthodox Christian theology, this revelation of sin is understood to be a blessing. It allows us to take control of what is sinful in us, and repent — turn back towards God. This is an unending process that continues until we die and has been compared to purifying gold with fire.

For the purposes of D&D, monsters can be understood as the concrete consequences of sin. God, being creator of everything, including monsters, allows them to exist in order for us to come face-to-face with our own sins — to confront our own monsters and demons, as it were. This brings to life one of my favorite passages from the OT — Genesis 4:6-7 (NJB):

The Lord asked Cain, 'Why are you angry and downcast? If you are doing right, surely you ought to hold your head high! But if you are not doing right, Sin is crouching at the door hungry to get you. You can still master him.'

The word for "sin" in the Hebrew denotes a demon or a monster waiting to devour. This is a marvelous image of our life-long struggle with sin.

Also related to this image is the monastic tradition of Orthodox Christianity. In the Hebrew mind, the desert or wilderness was where demons lived. Thus, monastics would wonder into the deserts and wilderness in order to take on the demons in their own territory — to be that expeditionary force to tame the wilds for the rest of us.

This image, of course, brings to mind the traditional dungeon crawl and hex crawl of old-school D&D. It also reinforces the idea that PCs are that part of civilization whose calling is to go out into the wilderness to confront the demons and monsters in their own territory. In doing so, we are confronted by our own sin and are afforded an opportunity to turn back towards God.

Let me give you a concrete example. One of my all-time favorite pulp authors is H.P. Lovecraft and my favorite monsters in D&D are those that pay homage to Lovecraft's dark vision. For me, these grotesque, hungry, consuming, terrifying creatures and their call represent what awaits creation without God. At the heart of Lovecraft is this sense of inevitable decay, madness and destruction from beyond. At the heart of Orthodox theology is the belief that God created everything from nothing. Without God, all of creation will return to nothing. Lovecraft's call of Cthulu is a personification of this reality. Thus, in terms of D&D, an adventure where PCs enter into a dungeon controlled by Cthulu-inspired monsters is a concrete expression of our own struggle against the nothingness that awaits us if we do not have God to sustain us into eternity.

In other words, these are teras — they are frightening events that reveal to us God and that without Him, we are doomed to the creeping nothing embodied by Lovecraft's horrific visions.

A Guy Named Nestorius

Recently, James Maliszewiski wrote a nice piece on how Christianity was implicit in early D&D. What I found fascinating was not the implicit Christianity (D&D did come out of a Medieval European combat simulator, afterall), but was this:

Gary Gygax . . . explained that he felt it unseemly to include anything too explicitly Christian in a mere game, even if he assumed a kind of quasi-Christian or crypto-Christian underpinning for the whole thing.

In my experience, Gygax is fairly representative of the gaming community — that to explicitly include God in the equation is uncomfortable, odd, or downright blasphemous. I find it ironic (and not a little telling) that this discomfort has contributed to a trajectory that has led to polytheism being explicitly expressed in the game system. That gamers have no problem with various iterations of pagan gods, but hesitate to include the Christian God because D&D is a game, suggests that gamers implicitly understand pagan gods are fictitious whereas the Christian God is very real.

As an Orthodox Christian, this phenomenon reminds me very much of a guy named Nestorius. The word "dogma" in modern America has a lot of baggage, and is seen by many to be a bad word. However, Orthodoxy has long understood that belief systems have consequences — they result in behavior. This behavior, in turn, reveals what we really believe.

During the 5th century, Nestor was a priest whose teachings attempted

to rationally explain and understand the incarnation of the divine Logos, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as the man Jesus Christ. Nestorianism teaches that the human and divine essences of Christ are separate and that there are two persons, the man Jesus Christ and the divine Logos, which dwelt in the man. Thus, Nestorians reject such terminology as "God suffered" or "God was crucified", because they believe that the man Jesus Christ suffered. Likewise, they reject the term Theotokos (Giver of birth to God) for the Virgin Mary, using instead the term Christotokos (giver of birth to Christ) or Anthropotokos (giver of birth to a man). — http://orthodoxwiki.org/Nestorianism

This is in contrast to the Orthodox understanding that Christ is perfect God and perfect man; that the divinity and humanity in Christ are two natures in one person; and that these two natures do not change, are not confused with one another, cannot be divided into isolated categories, nor be separated in terms of area or function.

These different understandings of Christ result in different kinds of behavior. Nestorianism results in the compartmentalization of life — one's work life is cut off from one's home life which is cut off from one's recreational life which is cut of from one's religious life. This results in a kind of schizophrenia, where one becomes a different person for every aspect of their life. I actually know of a guy who politically claims to be a communist, who religiously claims to be Christian, and economically is a ruthless, exploitive capitalist. This schizophrenia allows us to justify destructive behaviors, because we believe that the behavior of one aspect of our lives does not affect the others. This, of course, is an illusion.

In contrast, the Orthodox understanding of Christ leads us towards a holistic understanding of the human person, where everything we do affects every aspect of our lives. Thus, Gygax's notion that including Christianity in a mere game is unseemly makes little sense to my Orthodox mind. My belief in Christ must necessarily inform my role playing. One of the reasons I feel more comfortable with older versions of D&D is that the game system, by implicitly assuming Christianity, makes this possible. As we have increasingly put D&D into a box, trying to isolate it from this aspect of its heritage by systemically requiring polytheism, the more schizophrenic it has become.

We have been given the illusion of freedom — more choices for creating characters, creating monsters, creating magic items, etc. However, since all of these creative processes have been systematized, we are far from free of doing things in our own unique way. If we don't follow certain paths, we've thrown the game out of balance and/or broken the game. I cannot speak for 4e, as I have not actually read or played the game. However, judging from the reactions of many people about the game, its affinity to video games and for reducing every aspect of the game to a formula does not bode well for a systemic support of freedom and creativity.

From my own Orthodox perspective, this does not surprise me. God is ultimately free. He has made us in His image and likeness, thus giving us freedom. When we freely choose to bring Christ into every aspect of our lives, we experience His freedom. When we freely choose to deny him from any aspect of our lives, we step into the illusory world of sin and darkness. We imagine that we are free, but we are limited by our passions, our sins, and our fallen nature.

This is the very reason I freely choose to embrace the Christian roots of the game of D&D, and carry it through into my own gaming experience.

Whys and Wherefores

Back in in my 70s childhood, I was given the Holmes Boxed set of D&D. This singular event set me on a course of events that has very largely made me who I am. Let me be very upfront. I am a devout Orthodox Christian. Having played D&D and RPGs of every stripe, throughout the last 4 decades (!), I am acutely aware that D&D and Christianty have a history. I vividly remember going through the list of 10 warning signs that your child might be a Satanist with my friends. We laughed ourselves silly, because we wouldn't have touched a Satanist cult with a 10 foot pole, and yet qualified for 8 or 9 of the warning signs, not the least of which was playing D&D. However, it must be acknowledged that a lot of the pulp fiction that inspired D&D is at best unconcerned with religion and at worst has a polythesitic bent. This bent was not explicit in OD&D (as a matter of fact, Christianity was implicit as James Maliszewski has recently pointed out), but it did make its way into the game over time. Starting with AD&D 2nd Edition, the game I love systemically supported, and even required a polythesitic world view. This has only gotten worse over time. As an Orthodox Christian, it is something that I lament and have been increasingly uncomfortable with.

This discomfort, however, is tempered by the reality that D&D is one of the reasons I am an Orthodox Christian in the first place. The game sparked in me a fascination in medieval European history that had me jumping at the chance to study in Russia, Estonia and Hungary. It was while wandering the streets of Moscow that I first ecountered Orthodoxy. It was while searching out a medieval castle in southern Hungary that I felt the shockwaves of bombs dropping during the Yugoslavian civil war. These bomb shattered me, in ways that I am still recovering from. It has been my faith that has allowed me to start putting the pieces back together. This trajectory proves a point made by Alexander Schmemann:

In the Christian worldview, matter is never neutral. If it is not "referred to God," i.e. viewed and used as a means of communion with Him, of life in Him, it becomes the very bearer and locus of the demonic. — Of Water & the Spirit, pg. 48.

D&D is not by nature evil. In my life, it has been a great blessing. I allowed it to point me towards God. Through D&D Christ came into my life, and that has been huge. Whether or not something is good or evil depends on how we use it.

Thus we come to the reason for this blog. I fully realize that when the words "Dungeons and Dragons" are mentioned, a lot of Christians cringe. I also know that the same is true of many RPGers who hear the word "Christianity." I hope to stand firmly with one foot in the world of D&D and another in the world of my faith and thus reduce the number of cringes in both worlds. I still love D&D. I still love the culture, the people, the game. And I am a Christian. So, I will muse on how Christianity informs my view of D&D, how I play it and how the two can affect each other in a positive way. Enjoy.