Wednesday, June 30, 2021

Scripture and Deities & Demigods

For many years now, I have pointed out that D&D's explicit rendering of the various gods of pagan pantheons into creatures and monsters by giving them hit points and other stats in Supplement IV: Gods, Demi-Gods & Heroes as well as the various editions of Deities and Demigods mirrors the Christian world-view. Up to this point, however, I have largely used inferences and implications based on the pre-suppositions of Orthodox Christianity. Recently, I have been reading The Religion of the Apostles: Orthodox Christianity in the First Century by Fr. Stephen De Young, a book I highly recommend to anyone, especially non-Orthodox and non-Christian. 

I can now express my opinion of Supplement IV: Gods, Demi-Gods & Heroes and Deities and Demigods with Scripture.


Before we get to quoting the Good Book, however, we need to take a look at the opening lines of what is known as The Baal Cycle — an Ugaritic cycle of stories about the Canaanite god BaĘżal that is approximately contemporaneous to events of the Old Testament:
Now Mighty Baal, son of Dagon, desired the kingship of the Gods. He contended with Prince Yam-Nahar, the Son of El. But Kindly El, Father Shunem, decided the case in favour of His son; He gave the kingship to Prince Yam. He gave the power to Judge Nahar.
Note that there are three characters here: Baal, who wants to be king over the gods, El (the Father), who has the power to grant this kingship, and his son Prince Yam-Nahar who is made king by El. 

Note also the meaning of the three names: 
  • El is a generic term for god in the Semitic languages, including Hebrew. The root of Elohim is El- and the various angelic names, such as Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, etc., all end in -el because they are named after an attribute of god — Michael means "Who is like unto God," for example. 
  • Yam-Nahar means "Judge of the River" and is an 'ilhm, or son of El or simply "god." It is the root of the second part of the name Elohim pluralized. In other words, the name Elohim can be translated as "God-gods" — one of the ways God has revealed Himself as a Trinity. 
  • Baal means "lord" and is a title and honorific of local pagan gods, especially the fertility god Hadad. 
This all parallels with Deuteronomy:
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. — 32:8
In other words, El — the Most High God — divided humanity into nations and set up 'ilhm to watch over each nation. These sons of God, however, rebelled and took upon themselves the worship due only to the Most High God:
God stood in the assembly of gods; He judges in the midst of gods saying, "How long will you judge unjustly, and favor the persons of sinners?" — Psalm 82 (81 LXX)
The one who is given kingship and who judges is El's Son:
The court was in session, and the books were opened...and behold, One like the Son of Man was coming with the clouds of heaven, until He came to the Ancient of Days and approached Him. Then dominion, honor, and the kingdom were given to Him — Daniel 7:10, 13-14.
The title Son of Man is the one Christ most often uses to refer to Himself. Thus, Scripture acknowledges the existence of these pagan gods who are part of a divine council overseen by Christ in a position granted by the Father. These pagan gods, however, are mere creatures who rebelled against God the Father and turned their back on their original mission of watching over the nations. 

Now we come to the crux of this whole argument. Psalm 82(81) declares to these gods their fate:
I say, "You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, you shall die like men, and fall like any prince."
There you have it. The pagan gods are not only creatures, but doomed to die like any man. Thus, in terms of D&D, they have hit points and stats like any other monster. To put it another way, PCs are free to try to be the instruments of Christ's judgement and kill the gods.

Monday, June 21, 2021

Skylin (Dogfolk) Race-as-Class for BX

Icon of St. Christopher with the head of a dog

Skylin


Prime Requisite: CON
Requirements: DEX 9
Hit Dice: d8
Maximum Level: 12

It is said that during one of the great beastmen incursions, there was a cleric whose face was so disfugured that he was often mistaken for a beastman himself. He took it as a sign that he should proselytize the faith to the beastmen. Despite the seeming foolishness of the endeavor, he did mange to convert a large number of what are derogatorily known as dogfolk. They call themselves Skylin, which means "loyal ones" in their own language (a dialect of gnollish). The name is apt, since Skylin are loyal to a fault. To this day, they honor the disfigured cleric as Theophoros — "The one who carries God."

  • Combat: Skylin may use any armor, shield, and weapon and use the combat and saving throw tables of fighters
  • Bite: Skylin are always considered to be armed and can bite for 1d4 damage
  • Dark Vision: Skylin have 60 ft. of infravison
  • Tracking: Skylin are gifted trackers and have a 4 in 6 chance of tracking a quarry by scent
  • Dog-like Appearance: Due to their beastman origins, Skylin have a hard time recruiting human henchman — all attempts are made at -1 reaction and human henchmen will have a -1 morale penalty
  • Loyalty: Skylin characters must pledge themselves to a cause, nation, or leader before they can advance to 3rd level. Once chosen, the Skylin will never waiver from that pledge, even if it means death
  • Languages: Skylin can speak common and gnollish
  • Stonghold: Upon reaching 9th level, a Skylin may build a stronghold and attempt to establish a Skylin clan. The stronghold may be above or below ground.
XP Progression:
Level 2: 1,800
Level 3: 3,600
Level 4: 7,200
Level 5: 14,400
Level 6: 28,800
Level 7: 57,600
Level 8: 108,000
Level 9: 228,000
Level 10:348,000
Level 11: 468,000
Level 12: 588,000

Sunday, May 23, 2021

Orcs and the One and the Many

Over on BX Blackrazor, JB is meditating on the D&D trope of killing gods. In the comments, I pointed out that the game has been giving gods Hit Points since 1976 and the publication of Supplement IV: Gods, Demi-Gods, and Heroes. I also tried to explain why I (as a Christian) don’t really have a problem with giving gods Hit Points. 

This struck off a conversation that I think deserves its own post, because I make some hefty claims that need their own space to be meditated on and discussed. The most important (and probably controversial) claim is that reality as we experience cannot be fully explained by anything other than the Christianity of the Early Church (by which I roughly mean the first millennia or so). At the core of my argument is a problem that has confounded philosophers since the ancients first tried to understand reality. It is called the Problem of the One and Many. To illustrate this, I present to you this illustration of an orc:

But, Padre, you say, that is not an orc, it’s an owlbear! To which I respond: how do you know?

This may seem an idle question, because it should be obvious that the above illustration is, in fact, an owlbear and not an orc. Even so, in order for us to be able to make that distinction two things need to be very real: owlbears and orcs.

As we all know, however, owlbears and orcs are not real — outside of our imagination. Yet, there exists something that allows us to not only imagine these non-existent creatures but to recognize something we have never before encountered as one of these imaginary creatures. To say that “something” is “the brain,” or “chemicals,” or “an electrical current in our nervous system” side-steps the real issue:

You have very likely never seen the above illustration. I know, because I am the one who drew it and this is the first time I have ever shared it. This new empirical experience that you have just had of seeing this illustration for the first time has triggered an interaction with an interpretive framework that not only allows you to understand that you are looking at an owlbear, but also allows everybody else to see an owlbear despite being potentially thousands of miles apart and growing up in completely different circumstances in terms of language, culture, and beliefs. If we didn’t have this nigh-universal interpretive framework, this brand new experience of seeing my illustration could not result in you seeing an owlbear. It would just be light.

And finally, we come to the crux of the problem:

This illustration is unique. It is its own particular illustration by yours truly. At the same time, it is also an owlbear — it shares the nature of owlbear-ness that all owlbears do. In other words, it is one and it is many. Ancient philosophers wrestled to explain how it is that everything is both one and many at the same time. We must wrestle with it because it is part of reality. I am Fr. Dave and I am a human being. Without the one and the many we would not be able to function in the world. We would have no idea how to interpret the data coming in through our senses.

Materialism does not do an adequate job of explaining the reality of the one and the many, because it cannot merely come down to physical, material things. Owlbears aren’t material, physical things, after all. Yet they are real.

In contrast, it logically follows that a God that is both one and three, who created humanity according to His image and likeness, and, as Paul says in Romans 1:20, reveals his eternal power and divine nature in the things that have been made, would create a world where everything would demonstrate both His oneness and his multiplicity.

In other words, our modern, secular, materialist explanation of the world as we know it, really doesn’t explain the world as we know it; however, ancient Christianity does.

Sunday, May 2, 2021

Christ is Risen!


Though You went down into the tomb, O Immortal One, yet You brought down the dominion of Hades; and You rose as the victor, O Christ our God; and You called out "Rejoice" to the Myrrh-bearing women, and gave peace to Your Apostles, O Lord who to the fallen grant resurrection. — Kontakion of Pascha

Friday, April 9, 2021

How to Write Strong Women Characters Pt. 2

The Magnificat

My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. For He has regarded the lowly state of His maidservant; for behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed. For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with His arm; He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich He has sent away empty. He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy, as He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever. —Luke 1:47-55
In my last post, I gave a recent positive example of strong women characters; however, these women were playing roles normally filled by men — professional wrestlers. I do not want to take anything away from women who want to excel in those types of rolls; however, it is indicative of our current culture that the best positive example of strong women I could find is were women are exhibiting masculine strength. As a consequence, I am inclined to go back to the greatest story of all time to find the archetype of feminine strength: the Virgin Mary and the Mother of our God. I lift her up not only because of her prophecy from the Gospel of St. Luke — every generation will call me blessed — but because Orthodox Christianity sees her as the best of humanity. In our churches, she sits at the right hand of Christ on the iconostasis and we sing of her almost every day:
Greater in honor than the Cherubim, and in glory greater beyond compare than the Seraphim; you without corruption gave birth to God the Word, and are truly Theotokos. You do we magnify.
No other saint has more hymns sung in their honor than the Virgin Mary, who has been given the title Theotokos — the Mother of God.

Of course, from the perspective of modern feminism, we run into a problem with the virtues that this archetype champions — Chastity and Motherhood. I mention feminism specifically because phrases such as "because it's time" and "young white men have been pandered to" find their source in that philosophy. In addition, our current cultural landscape celebrates, in the name of feminism, the antithesis of Chastity and Motherhood — Promiscuity and Abortion — as virtues.

Couched in the language of empowerment, we have been told that women armed with birth control can stand on equal footing with men in their ability to have sex without consequence and with that most extreme form of birth control options, abortion, can pursue careers over families. This is shouted to the rooftops despite growing evidence that women are less and less happy the further away from the Archetype of the Virgin Mary and Mother of God we get.

Allow me a moment to critically examine what our modern culture calls "empowerment." Promiscuity is never risk-free. There is no type of birth-control that is 100% effective outside of abstinence. Additionally, multiple partners increases the chance of disease. Regardless of all the medical advances we have made, women are still taking the greater risk when engaged in promiscuous behavior.

This risk becomes even greater when coupled with the denigration of men. We have an entire generation of young men that have been told that they are the source of evil in the world, that their natural behavior towards women is hateful, and have been accused of rape for engaging in consensual sex. In other words, we have a culture that expects women to have a lot of sex and for men to behave badly. We live in an upside down world where men are interested in long-term monogamous relationships and women are interested in multiple partners. Given this reality, the type of man who would willingly participate in the promiscuity of women is not the type of man a women is safe to be promiscuous with.

As much as conservatives balk at the existence of rape culture, the #metoo movement has clearly demonstrated that a rape culture does exist in the very institutions that promote the idea: Hollywood, the Media, and other forms of Entertainment. For decades, men who see women as mere objects to use for their own desires have been able to maintain their positions of power by selling us the feminist ideal of female empowerment.

In contrast, Chastity actually empowers women to manipulate the behavior of men. It is quite simple: you want a piece of this? then live up to what I want in a man and commit to being that man for the rest of your life.

Our current culture celebrates abortion as a positive experience. All of the troubles and sacrifices necessary to see a pregnancy through are gone in an instant. What the brochure and abortion clinics across the country fail to mention is that there are consequences. Killing your own child in the womb can and does have long term physical and mental repercussions. Once done, it can never be taken back.

While Motherhood does, in fact, require sacrifice and a radical shift in life priorities, it also is a source of feminine power. Nothing motivates like trying to do your best for your children. Everyone knows not to mess with a mother bear, the same can be said of a mother trying to protect her children. In addition, throughout the ages, women have had access to political power through their children. The term Queen Mother exists for a reason. Let me give an example from Church history:

In the Orthodox Church, we celebrate Sts. Irene and Theodora as critical players in the defeat of Iconoclasm. Both acted as regents for their sons. Both sons were children when they were crowned Emperor. Both women were married to Iconoclasts. Both lovingly bided their time knowing that they would be able to effect change through their children.

While it is true that women can (and even should) excel in professions normally dominated by men (as can men excel in professions normally dominated by women), these are exceptions. While female characters that succeed through masculine characteristics can and do work, the number of good stories that can be told are limited. This can be seen in the failures of modern cinema to shoehorn women into normally masculine roles.

If we are truly interested in strong women and if we are truly interested in telling stories about strong women, I would propose that we embrace the archetype personified by the Virgin Mary. Tell stories where Chastity and Motherhood are not only embraced, but celebrated.

Thursday, April 8, 2021

How to Write Strong Women Characters

Following my last post, I wanted to give a positive example of good storytelling using female characters, since the comment section included a long discussion about turning Dr. Who into a woman. I wanted my example to be current, since my attempts at pointing out extremely well written women in sci-fi/fantasy that can be found prior to our current cultural malaise doesn’t seem to matter. Unfortunately, that meant going to a genre outside my bailiwick: professional wrestling.

There are several things in my life that I personally do not necessarily like and do not go out of my way to watch or participate in, but I do enjoy watching others who do love these things. For example, I love watching baseball fanatics geek out over baseball. I enjoy watching Trekkies being Trekkies. Ever since I became aware of professional wresting (I believe it was Cyndi Lauper’s music video for “The Goonies ‘r’ Good Enough”) I have enjoyed listening to people who wax poetic about the stories professional wrestlers portray inside and outside the ring.

Last month, the wrestling promotion AEW televised a non-sanctioned, lights-out match between the wrestlers Britt Baker D.M.D and Thunder Rosa. For those unfamiliar, that is a match where pretty much anything is allowed: chairs, tables, ladders, weapons, tacks, etc. It was a brutal affair that ended a rivalry that had gone on for several months.

Britt Baker is a home-grown wrestler for AEW. She has been the face of the women’s division since AEW started its Dynamite TV show on TNT. This has not always been a good thing. Initially, she was a bouncy, bubbly character that nobody really liked. So, she changed course and made a heel turn. This means she became one of the bad guys. It transformed her character and her career. Fans loved it.

At the same time, fans were also critical of the women’s division as a whole because it wasn’t producing the kind of stories and matches that the men’s division was (which are some of the best in pro wrestling today). In order to address this situation, AEW brought in Thunder Rosa, who came into the promotion with the express purpose of elevating the quality of women’s wrestling in AEW.

At the time, Thunder Rosa was the NWA Women’s Champion. In other words, she was not only an outsider, but an outsider who was under contract with another promotion. Her presence was a direct challenge to the entire women’s division of AEW and to Britt Baker in particular. Thus, these two were on a collision course.

The two clashed in several matches, interfered with each other when they weren’t wrestling each other and cost each other championships. The rivalry was white hot and when non-champion stories like this are told, the best ones culminate in extreme matches like the one televised last month.

One of the key things to understand about this match is that as a non-sanctioned, lights-out match it had to be the last match of the night. All of the “real” matches that counted for purposes of wins and losses were done. Due to this fact, it was the Main Event of the show. AEW promoted this. It promoted the extreme nature of the scheduled match. It heightened expectation due to its extreme nature and its position on the show. Not only did this match meet and exceed these expectations, but fans immediately started making the claim that this was one of the best matches in AEW history, let alone the best ever women’s match.

Incidentally, this was the first time a women's match had ever been the Main Event in AEW; however, this was not part of the story. Indeed, it was very important that it was not part of the story. Had this been promoted as the first women’s Main Event in AEW history, it would have irreparably damaged everything these two women had been doing over the months they were working together.

Britt Baker and Thunder Rosa pushed each other and themselves to their limits. They earned this spot through their wrestling, through their character work, and through their storytelling. Had they been just the first women’s Main Event in AEW history all of that hard work would have been rendered meaningless. They wouldn’t have earned the match because their work, their characters, and their storytelling, they would have been given the match because of an immutable characteristic they had no real control over: the fact that they are women.

When we, as a culture, promote anyone simply because of an immutable characteristic, we diminish and dehumanize them. Nothing that they personally accomplish means anything because we are promoting the idea that the only reason that have what they have is due to something they didn’t do or choose.

Had AEW screamed to the rafters that Britt Baker D.M.D vs Thunder Rosa was the first women’s Main Event, no one would have had the expectations that they had for this match. Necessarily, expectations would have been lowered because these women would not have earned the position they had due to their hard work. They would have been given the position simply because they are women. As a consequence, the fact that Britt Baker and Thunder Rosa exceeded these lowered exceptions wouldn’t have meant nearly as much. In fact, I don’t think the match would have been as great as it was because the pressure these two would have had to perform under would also have been much less.

Instead, AEW chose to let these two women be wrestlers instead of just women. They let these two characters shine rather than being just women. They expected these two women to excel at their art rather than settling on being just women. As a consequence, both are superstars beloved by wrestling fans and images from this match will be remembered in wrestling lore for generations to come.

In other words, if you want to make Dr. Who a woman “because it’s time” or “because young white men have been pandered to” you will fail. If, however, you write a story where a female Dr. Who or a female lead in the Dr. Who series makes sense in context of the show and its history and is given an opportunity to earn their spot in Dr. Who lore, you have a chance of telling one of the greatest Dr. Who stories in the series history.

So, stop writing stories “because it’s time” and start writing stories where characters earn everything that they have, like Britt Baker D.M.D and Thunder Rosa.

Friday, March 26, 2021

Why Star Wars, etc. Now S*cks

I was one of those kids who saw Star Wars (before it was dubbed A New Hope) in the theater. I was doomed to be a sci-fi/fantasy fan for the rest of my life. I began to buy comic books. I found Dr. Who on my local PBS. My mom brought home the Holmes Basic Box set. I tried reading the Lord of the Rings and found I could scratch my fantasy itch elsewhere. I even tolerated watching Star Trek with my Trekkie friends. Though for many years my entertainment dollar has rarely gone towards anything beyond RPGs and war games, I am still a fan at heart and hope that some day there is a franchise out there that I will find worthy of my time and my dollar.

Unfortunately, companies like WotC, Disney, WB, Paramount, etc. have all decided that I am toxic and whatever is the most recent flavor of -ist this week. I want Star Wars, Marvel, DC, and even Star Trek to be good; however, I don’t just think they won’t be anytime soon, I know they won’t be.

In the past, I have critiqued various movies and shows for abandoning the Divine in their story telling. God is the first storyteller. In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament quoted by the writers of the New Testament and the oldest version of the OT we have today, the verb in the first sentence in Scripture (In the beginning God created) has the same root as poetry. This version of to create is only used when in association with God, and he creates (makes poetry) through speaking, “Let there be light.” Thus, just as all creation was doomed to decay and death by humanity turning its back on God, stories are doomed to meaningless drivel when the storyteller turns their back on the source of all stories.

While I still stand by this critique, there is another level of horrid storytelling that has been cropping up recently that I think needs to be addressed because it goes beyond turning its back on God and turns its back on the human person. Let me explain.

Reality can be broken up into two categories: the general and the particular. For example, I am using a computer in order to write this post. Some portion of those who are reading this post will also be using a computer to do so. While the term “computer” helpfully describes all of these devices, I am using a particular computer and the reader is using another particular computer. All computers = the general; my computer = the particular.

The crux of my critique depends on the fact the human beings always experience the particular and never experience the general. Whenever I encounter “computer” in my life, it is always a particular computer. The general “computer” is an immaterial concept that, although outside the particular experience of human beings, is nonetheless very real. The general allow us to make sense of the particular. Without the general, our empirical experience of the world would be a chaotic string of ever-changing data with no basis for interpretation or understanding.

From a Christian POV, this is how we experience and understand the Trinity. The general is God and the particular is the persons of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is why Christ became a human being — so that we can intimately know God in the particular.

The reason story telling in the present is so awful is that the characters that occupy our stories are the general instead of the particular. Let me illustrate this my favorite literary inspiration for the Thief class — Bilbo Baggins. In JRR Tolkien’s works, Bilbo Baggins is important because he is a particular hobbit with individual quirks, strengths, weaknesses, and interests that qualify him to be the burglar that Gandalf chooses for the purpose of recovering what was lost to the dragon Smaug. If The Hobbit were written by today’s crop of storytellers, Gandalf would have chosen Bilbo because he is a hobbit and no other reason.

Characters today are largely just a collection of general categories based on immutable characteristics. While I acknowledge the reality of bigotry in the world — there is no question that bigotry exists and affects people on a regular basis — none of us have ever experienced “white,” “black,” or whatever category is fashionable in the present moment. We have, however, experienced particular human persons that have these immutable characteristics.

Herein is the insidious nature of the kind of storytelling we see in today’s popular culture, and why it is so awful. Characters are no longer human persons. They are no longer unique, irreplaceable, and valuable individuals. Characters are merely categories. As individual persons, they have no value because they can be replaced by another character from the same general category.

This type of storytelling can only produce uninteresting and valueless stories because the individual characters that occupy these stories have no intrinsic value in their particularity. As consumers, it becomes increasingly difficult to care about these stories because there is no particular to encounter — these stories deny us the very basic human experience of the particular that is our reality.

This also explains why it is so easy to label fans who demand the particular as toxic and -ists of various flavors. We are denying and criticizing the immutable characteristic — the general category — of the character. Since there is no particular and only the general, we must therefore be toxic and -ist.

All of this dehumanizes everybody. History has shown again and again that when we dehumanize the other, nothing good follows.

Thursday, December 31, 2020

Half-Ogre/Ogre Race-as-Class for B/X

In a wonderfully weird way to end 2020, this post exists because the cleric in my solo campaign just got polymorphed into an ogre when setting off a magical trap...

Half-ogre PC by  Timothy Truman


Requirements: STR 9, CON 9

Prime Requisite: STR

Hit Dice: 1d10

Maximum Level: 10

Armor: Any appropriate for size, plus shields

Weapons: Any

Languages: Alignment, Common, Goblin, Orc

Combat Progression: as a Fighter

Saves: as a Fighter

XP Progression: as a Fighter

Ogre Strength: +2 to Attack and Damage in Melee Combat

Stronghold: An Ogre may start building a stronghold at 2nd level

Weaknesses: -2 on all Reaction Rolls; -2 to hit Small Creatures (like Halflings and Dwarves)

After Reaching 9th Level: An Ogre will be recognized by humanoid populations as a Warlord and the Ogre will attract humanoid followers from far and wide. Ogres may only hire humanoid mercenaries. Specialists and retainers may be of any race.

Here's to better polymorphs and transformations in 2021.

Have a happy and blessed New Year.

Friday, December 25, 2020

Christ is Born!

Notice that the Christ child is wrapped in burial clothes and lying in a tomb underground

 I wanted to take a moment on this strange and lonely Christmas to not only wish you joy and a Merry Christmas, but to remind all of us that Christ is born today because we are in pain. The peace and the joy the Christian world proclaims today may seem hollow, but contemplate the following hymn of the Orthodox Church:

Born of a Virgin, O Good One who also endured crucifixion for our sake, who by death took the spoils of death as plunder and showed resurrection, being God, O despise not the ones that You formed with Your own hand. Demonstrate Your love for man, O Lord of mercy, and accept Your Mother, the Theotokos, who intercedes on our behalf, O Savior, and save us a despairing people.

He who holds all things in His hand is lying in a feeding trough. He is preparing to go to the Cross, to suffer and to die so that we might have a path through the pain and the despair into the hope and joy of His Kingdom. I am always reminded that He knew me then, when He was born. He knew me when he went to the Cross. Despite this, He still went, for me and for you.

Christ is Born! Glorify Him!

Thursday, December 10, 2020

TLoS: The Fighter

One of my goals in this little experiment is to demonstrate that at its core, 5e is just a bunch of mechanics. The reason this is important to me is that once seen as simply mechanics, there is a tremendous amount of freedom that we have as players of the game to describe those mechanics any way we want to.

At a fundamental level, this is why I prefer older versions of the game and the retro-clones that emulate them — they deal mainly with mechanics rather than the special effects those mechanics represent. It frees those of us who play the game to interpret those mechanics to look the way we want them to without all the effort that I am putting into this little project.

For someone like me, the level of detail that 5e goes to when it describes what their mechanics look like is an unending irritation. For example, one of the 1st level spells available to the TLoS fighter is Hail of Thorns. We are told that:

 the spell creates a rain of thorns that sprout from your ranged weapon or ammunition

What if I want it to be a troop of fey that appear and fire their weapons with my character? Or what if I want the plants of the area to throw parts of their leaves and bark at the creature my character is firing at? Why can't the arrow hit the ground in front of the target and then explode into hundreds of little thorns into the face of the creature? There are all kinds of ways the mechanics of this spell can be described and rather than allowing imagination to run wild with the rules as written, I am forced to ignore hundreds of pages of fluff.

Enough whinging...here are a pair of .PNG files that redefine the 5e mechanics for the Ranger and turns them into an evocative version of the fighter, in the spirit of BX:

 


 


Wednesday, December 9, 2020

5e & 4+3 Campaign Notes: The Land of Songs

 My eldest requested that I do a write-up of one of the worlds suggested by my last post. I'll cover some of the foundational stuff in this post, and then follow up with the seven classes re-skinned so as to make sense in the world that emerges from this little thought experiment. Thus, I bring you The Land of Songs:

Known by the humans as Leóthland and the dragon kin as Eordracân, The Land of Songs is what most of the world calls the largest island in the world, at the center of the map above. The people of that island, however, know the entire world as The Land of Songs. This is due to their songs of how the world came to be.

The humans and dragon kin of The Land of Songs worship the Song of the Land, who is known in three particularities: WĂłthbora the Singer, LeĂłd the Song, and C'hor the Dancing. The Land was once one, sung into existence by WĂłthbora through His Song while C'hor was dancing over the abyss. 

WĂłthbora gave language to the dragons so as to help teach humanity, to whom he gave the ability to sing — to be co-creators with Him. Rather than use their gifts to sing in harmony with LeĂłd, humanity and dragon kind built an earthly empire that sought the heavens by their own power. So, WĂłthbora stripped humanity of the Song, and the dragon kin of either their wings or their intelligence and ability to speak. He then broke the Land into islands separated by the sea. 

Humanity and the dragon kin fell into silence and darkness; however, WĂłthbora preserved one peoples and gave the Song back to them. These are the people of the Land of the Song, who strive to heal the wounds of the Land by teaching the world to Dance with the Song.

This is no easy task. It takes brave adventurers to cross the sea into unknown territories filled with ancient ruins from the fallen empire of humans and dragons. Shadows and monsters lurk within. The people of the Land, however, know that each island has its own melody that can add to the Song. Should the island be cleansed and  that melody be found, the island will return to its place as part of The Land of Songs.

Saturday, December 5, 2020

5e & 4 + 3

Last month, James over at Grognardia reflected on how the "4+3" structure of how B/X presents classes is simple, sturdy, flexible, and helps build a world that feels real

While 5e is not my preferred rule-set (I would play 0e, Holmes, or B/X before I play any other edition), I think it is by far the best of the "new school" editions and (depending on the day) I might even admit that I would rather play it than 1e ADnD. 

One of the reasons I am not enthusiastic about 5e is precisely the reason that it so radically departs from the 4+3 presentation of classes. If one looks merely at the core rules, there are 9 races each with at least two variants and 12 classes with at least two variants each. All told, there are thousands of different mechanical ways to represent a character. Add in the various splat books and this number goes up exponentially. In other words, the only descriptor that can still be applied to both BX and 5e is "flexible," though I probably prefer the word "chaotic" in the case of 5e.

As one might infer from reading my blog the over years, I take great delight in building worlds based on what can be inferred from the rules and mechanics of the game. BX is a fantastic vehicle for this approach. 5e makes such a project virtually nigh impossible due to information overload; however, one of the things I do like about 5e is that it does present all this information as optional. It empowers the DM to put limits on which rules get used and which do not. 

Thus, it invites me to apply the "4+3" paradigm to the races and classes of 5e. What follows is, I hope, inspiring because what I consider to be the "core classes" is, in some cases, not what one might expect. 

Note:  I do have access to a pair of the splat books and am taking advantage of them due to some thematic elements found therein.

 

World One 

Core Classes 

Cleric

Paladin (Oath of Vengeance), Variant Human with Heavy Armor Master Feat 

Fighter

Barbarian (Path of the Zealot), Variant Human with Durable Feat 

Magic-user

Rogue (Arcane Trickster Archetype), Variant Human with Ritual Caster Feat 

Thief

Monk (Way of the Shadow), Normal Human 

Race-as-Class 

Dwarf 

Barbarian (Path of the Berserker), Mountain Dwarf 

Elf 

Fighter (Eldritch Knight Archetype), High Elf 

Halfling

Rogue (Assassin Archetype), Stout Halfling

 

World Two

Core Classes 

Cleric

Sorcerer (Divine Soul Origin), Variant Human with Fey Touched or Shadow Touched Feat 

Fighter

Fighter (Rune Knight Archetype), Variant Human with Fey Touched or Shadow Touched Feat

Magic-user

Warlock (Archfey Patron), Variant Human with Fey Touched Feat 

Thief

Rogue (Phantom Archetype), Variant Human with Shadow Touched Feat

Race-as-Class 

Dwarf 

Ranger (Fey Wanderer), Half-elf

Elf 

Wizard (Blade Singing), High Elf

Halfling

Wizard (School of Illusion), Forest Gnome

 

World Three

Core Classes 

Cleric

Cleric (Tempest Domain), Normal Human

Fighter

Barbarian (Path of the Storm), Normal Human

Magic-user

Sorcerer (Storm Sorcery), Normal Human

Thief

Rogue (Swashbuckler Archetype), Normal Human

Race-as-Class 

Dwarf 

Warlock (Genie Patron), Dragonborn

Elf 

Wizard (Blade Singing), High Elf

Halfling

Warlock (The Fathomless Patron), Half-elf

 

World Four

Core Classes 

Cleric

Monk (Way of Mercy), Variant Human with Healer Feat

Fighter

Monk (Path of the Kensei), Variant Human with Weapon Master Feat

Magic-user

Bard (College of Swords), Variant Human with Ritual Caster Feat

Thief

Rogue (Swashbuckler Archetype), Variant Human with Dual Wielder Feat

Race-as-Class 

Dwarf 

Rogue (Assassin Archetype), Half-orc

Elf 

Bard (College of Whispers), High Elf

Halfling

Rogue (Mastermind Archetype), Half-elf

 

What I love about this approach is that each world has a distinct feel, grounded in the mechanics of the classes themselves. One can start imagining reasons why each class has the mechanics they do. Speaking of the mechanics, since that is all they are, we are free to re-skin everything within a class to better explain them in context of the world in which they appear.

So, which world would you like to run or adventure in?

Saturday, October 24, 2020

R.I.P. Lenard Lakofka

I just read over at Grognardia that Lenard Lakofka has passed away. James makes the observation that Lenard may be

one of the most underappreciated contributors to the growth and development of Dungeons & Dragons.

I would have to agree, especially when it comes to understanding my own history with the game. Therefore, let me set the record straight. 

As much as I love Gygax, Arneson, Holmes, and Moldvay, none of them taught me as much about being a Dungeon Master as Lakofka did. He put to page blueprints for what I experienced as a young high school kid in a sandbox campaign run by a college student. That campaign opened my eyes as to what D&D could be and I wanted my campaigns to look and feel like that one did. The only TSR publications that ever came close to showing me how to duplicate that experience where Lakofka's The Secret of Bone Hill and The Assassin's Knot.


Though I never ran Bone Hill, I am always striving to make sure my campaigns have the feel that exudes from Bone Hill on paper. Though Assassin's Knot was one of my first true failures as a DM, I still make sure my worlds have factions and humans as the true villains and monsters. Yeah, of all the guys who ever wrote for TSR, Lenard is the one who really taught me to be the DM (or Referee as I prefer) I am today.

Thanks Lenard, and as we Orthodox say, may your memory be eternal.

Tuesday, September 15, 2020

Holmes and AD&D Weapon vs Armor Class

There is an interesting comment on this post over at Grognardia that points out that the 1e PH has a relatively simple set of rules for combat on pages 104-5. Since the Holmes Basic Set suggests Advanced Dungeons & Dragons as the "more complete rules," I found it very interesting that there are some significant differences between the way combat is presented in these two editions: initiative and the length of a combat round. 

Holmes bases initiative on Dexterity, the 1e PH has each side in a combat roll a d6. In Holmes, a combat round is 10 seconds, in the 1e PH the combat round is 1 minute.

Also interesting is the following quote about Weapon Factors:

You have already seen information regarding the damage each type of weapon does, how heavy each is, how long and how much space each needs, and each weapon's relative speed factor. The same charts also give relative efficiency against armor types. Your referee will use these factors in the determination of melee combats by relating them to his Attack Matrices.

I love how the war gaming roots of D&D can be seen in those last two italicized words. More interstingly, however, is the fact that all of this information about weapons don't really belong in the abstract 1 minute rounds of the 1e PH. On the other hand, the 10 second round of Holmes invites the kind of realism these Weapon Factors seem to want to emulate. 

Long time readers of this blog will know that I have a deep fascination with both Holmes and Weapon vs. Armor Class tables. Given the fact that Holmes states:

The combat tables used by D&D gamers are often extremely complicated. Full tables are given in Advanced Gungeons & Dragons. The tables below are deliberately simplified...

I began to wonder if it were possible to reconcile the "extremely complicated" combat tables from the 1e PH and the Holmes Basic Edition by assuming the Holmes was more correct than the 1e PH. The result was the following table:


A couple of notes before I begin explaining some of the implications of this table:

  1. I interpreted Space Required as how many people could fit in a 10 foot square, with a maximum of 3 standing shoulder to shoulder.
  2. I used the variable damage dice from the 1e PH rather than a universal 1d6
  3. I only used those weapons listed in the equipment list of Holmes and their cost
  4. I averaged all of the various factors of all the pole arms not explicitly named in Holmes to come up with stats for the generic "pole arm" listed in Holmes
  5. I did the same for the generic "sword" listed in Holmes
  6. I stuck to Melee weapons for the present, because Missile Combat in Holmes is a completely different phase of combat
  7. I chose to use armor class ranges to represent Plate Mail, Chain-type Mail, Leather Armor, and Unarmored so as to make things easier when looking at Monster Stats
  8. I used AC 3, 5, 8, and 10 in the 1e PH to represent the armor classes from Holmes 
  9. Note: all of this is possible because Dexterity in Holmes does not affect Armor Class

Lets deal with Speed and Initiative first. Holmes has Dexterity = Initiative. Speed would subtract from a character's Dexterity Score to end up with a final Initiative. Thus, a Fighter with a Dex 11 using a Sword would have a 6 Initiative. 

The 1e PH describes surprise in terms of 6 second phases and states that a surprise attack can happen in that short amount of time. Given that a combat round in Holmes is 10 seconds, it suggests that a character with an Initiative of over 10 could attack twice in a round. Thus, anyone with a Dex 13+ could attack twice a round with a dagger and thus explain that most controversial statement by Holmes that daggers can be used twice per round. It also suggests that ending up with a negative Initiative means that a weapon is too unwieldy for the character to use.

This creates a problem when it comes to Pikes, which have a speed of 13; however, I would argue that with their extreme reach, they can engage targets while Missile Combat is still in effect. The huge speed indicates that a Pike in normal melee is too cumbersome for most characters to actually use.

Another implication of this table is that Plate Mail is better than advertised. Most weapons have a penalty to hit it. The real exception to this is the Two-Handed Sword; however, it has a 10 speed and only one person can wield it in a 10ft. corridor. I also find that the Morning Star is possibly the best weapon overall, rather than the ubiquitous Sword.

While this might all be fascinating, it does run up against a serious problem when trying to apply all of this to monsters. There are several of solutions here that I think would be fair:

  1. Make use of all those detailed weapon % tables that the MM1 has for most of the humanoid monster entries
  2. The average weapon speed of all the weapons above is 7. This can be universally applied to all monsters who use weapons. The 1e PH lists Fist, Unarmed with a Speed of 1. This can be applied to all monsters that don't use weapons.
  3. One could use an Initiative system based on size: Small Creatures get 3d6, Medium get 2d6, and Large get 1d6 with no additions or subtractions.
This, of course, would need to be play tested, but I think this is the closest I have ever come to making a Weapon vs. Armor Class Table that I would actually use at the table.

Friday, September 11, 2020

Towards a Holmesian Dungeon

What follows is not anything particularly new. Many of these ideas have been present within the hobby and explored throughout the years I have been maintaining this blog. My interest here is codifying what I consider to be the characteristics of a dungeon that can truly be called Holmesian — by which I mean a dungeon that puts into practice what the Holmes Basic Edition presents as Dungeon. It has been a quest of mine to find and/or create such a dungeon. This is intended to help both me and anyone else who shares this particular quixotic quest. 

My introduction to the hobby of RPGs was the Holmes Basic Edition. While it did excite my imagination and was the gateway for me to spend years of my life playing various RPGs, I never really played the game as Homes presented it until Gary Gygax’s death. In the wake of this great loss to the hobby, I returned to the pages of Holmes to revisit my youth. What I found inside that blue cover was eye opening. Not only was it as inspiring as I found it back in the late seventies, but it presented a kind of dungeon design philosophy that I have only seen put into practice in part over the many years I have played the game. 

In other words, what might be called a “Holmesian Dungeon” doesn’t introduce us to any really radical new ideas about what a dungeon is (it has been around since 1977, after all). Rather, it combines extant ideas about dungeon design in a distinct way. This uniqueness teases us with a dungeon adventure experience that, though filled familiar tropes, is, at its core, something that I really haven’t ever seen in all my years of playing. 

What I seek to do here is delineate what I believe are the explicit and implicit characteristics of what I call a Holmesian Dungeon with the aim of creating a template for such an adventure to be created.

Explicit

Large Rooms 

The Example Dungeon in the Homes Basic Edition provides for several large rooms with at least one dimension of 80 to 100 feet or more. 


At first brush, one might not place much import on such a design feature, but a close reading of Holmes reveals that it is a deliberate choice. Melee movement in Holmes is slower than any other edition: an unencumbered character in Leather Armor moves 20 feet per round. Thus, larger rooms allow for encounter distances that make moving into melee a tactical choice. This is especially important for magic and missile weapons:

A magic-user must concentrate on his spell, so he cannot cast a spell and walk or run at the same time, and he certainly cannot cast a spell while engaged in combat.
Once the party is engaged in melee, arrows cannot be fired into the fight because of the probability of hitting friendly characters.

In other words, designing a dungeon with large rooms specifically allows party members to take advantage of both the magic and missile phases of the game and to choose how long these phases are in effect by determining when the party engages in the melee phase of combat. It also allows the Referee to create encounters where it is the PCs who must figure out a way to close the gap in order to avoid the magic and missile phases. 

Doors are Stuck or Locked 

Holmes states that doors are usually closed and often stuck or locked. Opening doors is an important part of the game. It affords an opportunity to surprise monsters beyond the door, but also involves a risk of ruining that surprise. Brute strength can always open a door; however, failure means alerting any monsters that are behind the door. Thieves afford the party a means of opening doors where failure is silent. Magic-users can use a valuable spell slot for a Knock spell which guarantees a silent open door. Additionally:

Doors opened will usually shut automatically unless spiked or wedged open. Doors open automatically far monsters, however, unless held or spiked shut.

Every door in a Holmesian Dungeon is a consequential tactical choice. 

I should note, that in practice, I have found that failing to open a door with brute force shouldn’t result in the door remaining shut, it simply means that the door has been opened in such a way that surprise is impossible. Having players roll again and again just to open a door is tedious and ruins the flow of exploring the dungeon. 

Traps as Non-lethal Time Wasters 

Unlike Moldvay, whose trap examples include poison gas with a Save vs. Poison or die, a ceiling block that does 1d10 damage if a Save vs. Turn to Stone is failed, and a pendulum blade that does 1d8 damage, Holmes understands that traps normally do not serve the purpose of causing damage to members of an adventuring party:

Traps should not be of the "Zap! You're dead!" variety but those which a character might avoid or overcome with some quick thinking and a little luck. Falling into a relatively shallow pit would do damage only on a roll of 5 or 6 (1-6 hit points at most) but will delay the party while they get the trapped character out. Hidden rooms, movable walls, teleportation devices, illusion rooms, dead ends, etc., make interesting variations.

Traps play the role of time waters. While some might pose an actual physical threat to player characters, they can be worked around given enough time. Along with trying to open doors, players must make the choice as to whether or not the time wasted on a trap is worth it. This choice becomes meaningful when one considers the real danger of a Holmesian Dungeon. 

Wandering Monsters are the Real Danger 

Holmes states that a Wandering Monster check should be made every three turns. Thus, everything that takes time in a dungeon brings with it the threat that monsters will come and investigate what the characters are doing. Given that Holmes specifies that a Wandering Monster on the First Level of a Dungeon might come from the Second or Third Level indicates that these Wandering Monster Encounters are not meant to be balanced or even winnable situations for the players. Dropping treasure in order to have the movement rate fast enough to run away can become a necessity. Larger rooms also allow for tactical retreat to be a realistic possibility. Implicit in this Holmesian reality is that a Dungeon Level can never truly be cleared…but more on that below. 

Empty Rooms 

Of the twenty-two rooms keyed in the Sample Dungeon of the Holmes Basic Edition, eight are labelled as Empty. Like the locked doors and time-wasting traps, these serve the specific function of forcing characters to make tactical choices as to whether or not spending time in a room that may or may not have a secret door or hidden treasure is worth it. Of course, there is a danger that game-play with become monotonous and boring as players encounter empty room after empty room. This is where the Implicit characteristics of a Holmesian Dungeon become important. 

Implicit 

The Three Eras 

(Empty Rooms are Not Really Empty) 

One of the curiosities of the Holmes Basic Edition can be found in its presentation of Magical Scrolls. Besides those that have a Protection Spell, scrolls are only usable by Magic-users. Additionally, there are scrolls that have spells that mimic the special effects of Magical Rings, Potions, and Wands. Implicit in this presentation of Scrolls are at least two different eras: 

  • The Present Era, in which Divine Magic is something new enough that scrolls cannot be found within the Dungeon. 
  • The Ancient Era, which knew powerful spells which now only exist on scrolls buried within the Dungeon. 
  • Since the difference between these two is so stark, there probably is also a Quondam Era between the two in which the ancient arcane magics are lost. 

Thus, an empty room need not simply be empty, but can tell a story about a bygone era through the materials used to construct it, the mundane items left behind, and the art and architecture of those who once lived there. This information adds to the weight of the players’ tactical choice of whether a room is worth exploring. 

Powerful Magics Lie Within 

Spells once existed where creatures like dragons and giants could be controlled. Thus, the magics available to those who came before are far beyond what player characters might ever be able to accomplish. Thus, a Holmesian Dungeon itself would reflect this reality — magic was once far more powerful than it is in the present. 

The Dungeon is Malleable 

The primary way this reality manifests itself is through malleability.In its most basic form, this malleability is demonstrated by the ever-present threat of Wandering Monsters. There is, however, an implication that this malleability affects the physical nature of the Dungeon itself. Over time, the dungeon changes to adapt to the new realities of the adventurers that explore it. 

The Dungeon itself is an NPC 

In other words, the Dungeon itself acts as a semi-intelligent, malevolent creature that continually offers up the lure of powerful magic and treasure in order to entice adventurers of all stripes, hoping to lead the to their potential deaths. It is never too challenging, else why would just anyone venture into its depths? No, it offers just enough to make things interesting; however, those ever present Wandering Monsters are there to devour the unsuspecting.

Question: Is there a published Adventure Module out there that ticks all of these boxes? I do not know of one.

Sunday, September 6, 2020

Saintly Saturday: The Miracle of Archangel Michael at Colossae

…on Sunday 

It has been quite awhile since I did a Saintly Saturday, where I look to the Feasts of various Saints as an inspiration for RPG world-building and adventure. In my last post, I noted how James Maliszewski of Grognardia fame published a post about a map I drew for him about a decade ago. The map is of a ruined monastery that once guarded the world from foul aberrations of Chaos that bubble forth from the crags of Urheim. 

It occurred to me that the The Feast of the Miracle of the Archangel Michael at Colossae, celebrated on September 6th, tells a tale that could have been an inspiration for someone running a campaign around the concept of The Monastery of St. Gaxyg-at-Urheim. 


In what is now southwestern Turkey, there was a region called Phrygia and a city called Hierapolis. 

Roman Amphitheater at Hierapolis

Not far from the city was a church dedicated to the Archangel Michael. It was built by a pagan who had a vision of the Archangel directing him to have his mute daughter drink from a spring. After partaking, she gained her speech. He converted and had the church built over the spring.

The region had once been dominated by a pagan cult dedicated to some kind of serpent god. According to a 5th-7th century account of the Miracle at Colossae, Sts. John the Evangelist, Philip the Apostle, and Mariamne, Philip’s sister:

Slew the viper with prayer, as with a spear, putting it to death through the power of Christ.

The Tomb of St. Philip at Hierapolis

It should also be noted that there was a pagan underwater spring called the Plutonium. It emitted poisonous gas and was thought to be an entrance into Hades. 

Plutonium: Enter at Your Own Risk

About ninety years after the church was built, a boy called Archippos traveled to the Plutonium. Repelled by the gas, he went to the spring at the church and decided to dedicate his entire life to Christ. This was a pattern that repeated itself enough that the local pagans decided to destroy the church. For ten days, they worked to divert two rivers in order to wash away the church and the spring that was attracting so many to Christ. Archippos remained in the church praying fervently for the protection of God. Just as the pagans released their dam to unleash the rivers, the Archangel appeared and drove a staff into the ground, causing an earthquake that opened a chasm down which the waters flowed. 

Waterfalls at Honaz

The pagans ran and the locals changed the name of the place from Colossae to Chonae, which means “plunging.” Today the city is called Honaz. In subsequent years, the area was ravaged by Persian invasion, multiple earthquakes, and civil war. The ruins of Hieropolis are a tourist spot where people bathe in baths and springs to this day. 

Thermal Springs near Hierapolis
This story has everything for the beginnings of a megadungeon-centered campaign:

  • A snake cult 
  • The tomb of a saint that fought the snake cult
  • A ruined church/monastery
  • A chasm with a waterfall
  • Magical pools
  • An entrance into the underworld
  • An earthquake revealing parts unknown underground
  • A miracle describing the local geography
  • Invasions and civil wars of civilizations past
I think the lovely part of all this is that implied in this story are multiple entrances into the dungeon where the snake cult  still harbors hatred for the civilizations of humanity that rejected it. How cool is this?

The Monastery of St. Gaxyg-at-Urheim

About ten years ago (has it really been that long?) I drew a map for James Maliszewski over at Grognardia. At the time, there was a bit of an effort to create a "crowd sourced" megadungeon that used contributions from a variety of volunteers. Being a bit of a map geek, I drew several that James was pleased enough with that he shared them with the world at large. 

If you hadn't noticed, after a long hiatus, James has started posting again over at Grognardia. He also let me know that he wanted to do something with one of those maps I drew all those years ago. You can find his musings here

As a thank you, I thought I'd share another map that I drew for my own version of St. Gaxyg-at-Urheim. It briefly showed up in my Lost Colonies campaign very early on when Hamlen lost his beloved spiked club down an underground river. That river led to an underground waterfall which is at the bottom of the map. The club was found, some orcs were felled and then the party went off on one of their many tangents. Enjoy!

 

Friday, August 28, 2020

5e Also Knows How to do Monsters

In my last post, I admitted that I could not speak for 5e, due to my relative unfamiliarity with it, but made that case that monsters in MM1 are implicitly and explicity personifications of something seriously wrong with the world. Out of curiosity, I decided to look up the monster descriptions from several of the monsters I used as examples from the MM1 in the 5e MM. This is what I found: 

Blink Dog

Blink dogs harbor a long-standing hatred for displacer beasts and attack them on sight. 

Bulette

Some sages believe the bulette is the result of a mad wizard's experiments at crossbreeding snapping turtles and armadillos, with infusions of demon ichor. 

Displacer Beast

The warriors of [the Unseelie Court] selectively bred the beasts to reinforce their ferocious and predatory nature, using them to hunt unicorns, pegasi, and other wondrous prey. 

Gnoll

The origin of the gnolls traces back to a time when the demon lord Yeenoghu found his way to the Material Plane and ran amok. 

Hobgoblin

Across the borderlands of civilization, settlements and settlers must contend with these aggressive humanoids, whose thirst for conquest is never satisfied. 

Orc

Grasping his mighty spear, he laid waste to the mountains, set the forests aflame, and carved great furrows in the fields. Such was the role of the orcs, he proclaimed, to take and destroy all that the other races would deny them. To this day, the orcs wage an endless war on humans, elves, dwarves, and other folk. 

Owlbear

The most common theory is that a demented wizard created the first specimen by crossing a giant owl with a bear. 

So, 5e also knows how to do monsters, too.

Tuesday, August 25, 2020

D&D Does (Did) Know What Monsters Are

Talysman, over at Nine and Thirty Kingdoms, has highlighted a post over at Throne of Salt which makes the claim that D&D doesn't know what monsters are.  Their conclusion is that monsters should be a symptom that somewhere, somehow the world has gone seriously wrong and that the way D&D does monsters fails in this regard. 

Now, I cannot speak about later editions of the game (though I can believe this of 5e, which seems to have forgotten how to teach players how to play the game), but I can speak for 1e. The MM1 was one of my very first purchases when I got into the hobby, and I spent many hours as a kid being inspired by what was depicted therein. I can, without hesitation, say that the MM1 explicitly and implicitly depicts monsters as symptoms of something gone horribly wrong.

Take the entry on the Bulette:

 The bulette (or landshark) was thought to be extinct until recently when this horror reappeared. It was a result of a mad wizard's experimental cross breeding of a snapping turtle and armadillo with infusions of demons' ichor.

Some idiot magic-user went and pulled a Frankenstein, but we took care of it. What? The monster is still out there? Who has been mucking with magics that shouldn't be messed around with?

Or, how about the Ghoul:

Ghouls are “undead” once human creatures which feed on human and other corpses. Although their change from human to ghoul has deranged and destroyed their minds, ghouls have a terrible cunning which enables them to hunt their prey most effectively.

Couple this with the entry on Ghasts, which boast an Intelligence of 11-12, you have the makings of a cult that seeks to cheat death through cannibalism. While functionally undead, these creatures are actually human.

Of course, there is the Owlbear:

The horrible owlbear is probably the result of genetic experimentation by some insane wizard.

Those pesky wizards, trying to play God in their towers, churning all kinds of vile things into the world. 

My favorite examples, though, are statements like this one, under Hobgoblin:

If elves are nearby, hobgoblins will attack them in preference to any other troops because of the great hatred they bear.

Similar statements can be found under kobolds, blinkdogs and displacer beasts. These statements invite us to imagine why such hatred exists in the first place — something is terribly wrong and these monsters are personifications of it.

So, for those of us who want to have archetypal evil in our FRPG worlds with monsters who personify sin, D&D has done us right since at least 1979.

Saturday, August 8, 2020

World Building with the Noahide Laws

In my last post, B.W. Byers asked me if I had ever looked at the Noahide Laws as a model for a pre-historic law/religious system for a FRPG setting. For those unfamiliar, they are a set of laws said to have been followed by Noah and his descendants after the flood. They seem to be implied in the admonitions God give Noah in Genesis 9:
But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.
They are also implied by both the Book of Jubilees, a pseudographical book dated to the second century B.C., as well as Acts 15, where the Council of Jerusalem decides that Gentiles do not need to be circumcised but:
that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality (v.29).
The earliest compilation of the laws can be found in the Tosefta, a collection of Jewish oral law dated to A.D. 189. The laws can also be found in the Talmud.

Traditionally, the laws can be enumerated as follows:
Not to worship idols.
Not to curse God.
To establish courts of justice.
Not to commit murder.
Not to commit adultery, bestiality, or sexual immorality.
Not to steal.
Not to eat flesh torn from a living animal.
The Noahide Laws are simpler than the Ten Commandments and yet still feel very grounded Scripture. In other words, this is an interesting starting place to create a world that feels both similar yet alien.

Bringing out the alien nature of a campaign world can begin with the law about murder. In Genesis, this law concerns bloodshed and this is echoed in the Tosefta. This brings up a dilemma, because God seems to demand that blood be shed for blood. While one could argue that He is warning us of the cycle of violence that revenge creates, it is also an opportunity to start building a society around the Noahide Laws based on various castes where a Law is either abrogated or specifically applied. If blood is to be shed for punishing murderers or in defense of a city from an invading force, a society needs a caste or classification of people who are allowed to break the Law of Bloodshed without fear of retribution from the Law.

Thus, I decided to take an ancient Hebrew letter and use it as both a symbol and a name for each of the castes:

Bet


Related to the Latin letter 'B'

The letter 'Bet' is associated with Family, so I thought it appropriate for representing the caste associated with sexual immorality. In a Scriptural context, this caste would be a place to protect victims: widows, orphans, and the abused. It is here that I am going to borrow one of the better ideas from The Witcher practitioners of arcane magic are rendered sterile in exchange for the power they gain from becoming a spell caster. Since, victims are damaged and see sexual relations in a broken way, the choice to become sterile in exchange for power becomes a much easier choice. Consequently, it would make sense that in context of the Noahide Laws that the Wizard's Guild would be the new family for the widow, orphan, and abused. One interesting side effect of this idea is that Magic-users are more likely to be women than men.

El


Related to the Latin letter 'A'

The letter 'El' is associated with Leadership and Power, appropriate for the caste responsible for setting up courts of justice. This would be the de facto aristocracy of the society, where leaders are known by the title Judge. Given that this is a pre-Davidic reality, however, this caste is not hereditary. It is something one must earn.

Hey


Related to the Latin letter 'E'

The letter 'Hey' is related to the verb Reveal. Societies are quite capable of mistaking medicine, science and certain creative acts as blasphemy by muscling in on what properly belongs to God (as the creator of all things). Thus, I thought this caste would be a place where such endeavors can happen in their proper context. Alchemists, blacksmiths, physicians, etc. all belong to this caste.

Mem


Related to the Latin letter 'M'

The letter 'Mem' is related to Blood, so it was a no-brainer to have this be the caste responsible for soldiering and execution.

Shin


Related to the Latin letter 'S'

The letter 'Shin' is associated with Eating, so it made sense to have this caste be related to the law against eating from a live animal. This caste would involve all those professions responsible for  processing animals into food: butchers, herders, hunters, etc.

Sin


Related to the Latin letter 'X'

The letter 'Sin' is related to the verb Grab. As such, I thought it a good fit for those who need to Steal legally — tax collectors; however, in context of a FRPG it also opens up the possibility for a legitimate version of the Thieves' Guild trope and a place for the Rogue/Thief class to have an official place within society. I am reminded of the classic Japanese movie The Taxing Woman.

Yad


Related to the Latin letters 'I & 'J'

The letter 'Yad' is associated with Worship, so this is another no-brainer: this is the priestly caste and a home for clerics. As an aside, the Noahide Laws are a polemic against paganism. The implication here is that the 'gods' worshipped by pagans are creatures, something that I have mediated on before in context of Deities & Demi-Gods.

Ghah



Finally, we have the letter 'Ghah' which is associated with Rope, Twisting, Dark, and Wickedness. This symbolizes everything outside of Society — Chaos, in the tripartite alignment system of older versions of D&D. There are several things I like about this. Rope implies that those who have rejected the Noahide Laws are bound by sin. Twisting dovetails nicely into my Tolkien-inspired understanding of humanoids. Dark and Wicked nicely describe what monsters ought to be. As a bonus, while every letter used above has an analogue in the modern Hebrew, Greek, and Latin alphabets, Ghah has none. It is a nice reminder that Scripture tells us that God created everything from nothing and without God we return to the nothing from whence we came.