Interesting gaming historian

I thought folks might be interested in Rob MacDougall's blog @ http://www.20by20room.com/2009/04/the-new-history-of-old-gaming.html, in particular his observations on the need for a good, reliable history of RPG gaming.

What applies to Game Rules applies to Game Settings

“The secret we should never let game masters know is that they don’t need any rules”

This quote has been attributed to E. Gary Gygax. I do not know if it truly belongs to him, but I sure see the wisdom in these words.

We’ve been talking for a while now about rules systems and how they stole the thunder of role-playing games. How they have been progressively worked on, refined, and balanced to the detriment of immersion, fantasy and enchantment.

The solution to this death spiral of game design, I believe, is to take a step back and consider the rules as a tool, a mean, and not an end. Rules help bring entertainment at a game table, but they are no substitute to the cooperation and good sense of the people participating around the gaming table. Rules help to support and share the make-believe but don’t replace the imagination of those who end up playing the game.

In game design, I believe one should at all times remember that the game elements offered via products are just that: unfinished, unassembled pieces of a puzzle that will ultimately be pieced together by other people around a game table.

The same goes with game settings. Any world of fantasy presented via sourcebooks is composed of set pieces that aren’t worth anything in game terms until they are brought to life and pieced together at the game table.

If the designer should keep this in mind and make sure these set pieces can be used effectively in a number of different circumstances by a wide variety of users, the user himself should also make sure that the set pieces themselves do not hijack the creative process of role-playing games.

I’m alluding here to the idea of “canon” as it refers to setting materials. To put it simply, the notion that there is a canon to consider when running a game in a particular setting originally designed by someone else is anathema to the raison d’être of role-playing games. If we consider the rules as tools, support for actual role-playing and rulings at the game table, it makes no sense not to consider a published setting any other way. It is a support, a collection of unassembled set pieces which support the backdrop the DM and players use at the game table, but no substitute for the actual process of bringing the setting to life by piecing it together.

This means there is no such thing as “canon” in role-playing games. When a DM peruses through a boxed set searching for ideas and inspiration, he shouldn’t need to consider any of the ideas developed on the paper as more than just ideas. There is nothing sacred in this instance, nothing that would be set in stone, and thus nothing that should or could be considered heresy when the world comes to life at the game table.

Let us start a Greyhawk campaign, for instance. We know that the campaign was run by EGG and Rob in some way. We sure can benefit from the knowledge of how these men managed their games, and came up with this or that element of the backdrop and pieced them together themselves, but it makes no sense to me whatsoever to consider it the right way to play a Greyhawk campaign.

What if I don’t want any Iuz the Evil? What if I want to use the Greyhawk Wars or, God forbid, the Dragonlance Cataclysm components to alter the setting and make it my own? If I discuss it straight and make the changes clear to my gaming partners from the get-go, there can be no objection that this wouldn’t be “the real Greyhawk”.

It is. It is my Greyhawk.

My point here is that role-playing settings are not and should not be evaluated the same way literary settings are. Role-playing game settings are not complete settings in the sense that they only exist when they are actually put into play. Using a setting under the assumption that it has to be played in a particular way described by this or that sourcebook or boxed set is in essence committing the same mistake as assuming the rules have to be played as written.

There isn't, and shouldn’t be, any such thing as “canon” regarding role-playing game settings outside of a theoretical discussion of written sources, but even then, it should be clear that the written material alone is not alive. It is not yet used as it was designed to be used: at a game table, with real people, real needs and wants, real imaginations.

To quote the old-schooler: imagine the hell out of it! Don’t shackle yourselves to game materials written by others. You have to trust in your good sense, your wits and imagination to make the game world come alive. If it contradicts some clause of the written product, so be it! Your game will be all the better for it.

Anima Mundi

The distillation of wonder is always before us as gamers and as game designers, and is no where more prevalent than in life itself, where from all of our imagination springs, but a mirrored reflection which we try to express time and time again.

This cannot be accurately expressed or portrayed through the simple overlay of images and numbers, but only through the derivation of feeling as we attempt to immerse ourselves in these impossible and unyielding moments, timeless in their exercise, unending in their passion.

Enjoy the wonder of life, the ultimate fantasy.

PPP Contest

Ship of Fools, Inspired by the above picture.



Detail in 1,000 words or less what this ship does, how it affects its passengers, who might be associated with it in worldish-terms, etc.


The winner will receive a $25.00 honorarium prize when published and will be listed in the credits for designing the piece.

Open up your creativity and email me your submissions at rjk@pied-piper-publishing.com. Only the winning submission becomes property of PPP.

The Gladiator

My latest commissioned illo,
Inspiration for this piece is definately directed towards Brom and Darksun.

PPP NEWS: Call for Designers & Graphics People

I am looking for designers and graphics people to assist PPP with several projects.

For details, please forward your credentials, or if unpublished, samples of your work (in both cases) to rjk@pied-piper-publishing.com

Please feel free to cross-post this announcement elsewhere.

Rob Kuntz

NTRPGCon

Just to let everyone know I will be attending the North Texas RPG CON June 5-7. I will be DMing my Castle EL RAJA KEY there. For more information go to this link.

Up The Beanstalk

A follow-up on the fun of role-playing. Thanks to Greg from Ontario for inspiring this entry!

Earlier on this blog, I alleged that gradually, modern game design discarded the Enchanting value of role-playing games in favour of a self-contained, self-fulfilling gaming logic. The fun of the game came from the rules, and the rules provide the fun of the game. To improve the fun of the game, one must then improve the rules.

I believe this is a false premise that just ends up divorcing role-playing games from their unique nature as products of our imaginations.

We play role-playing games, I believe, because one day we felt enthused by the idea of being Jack, now and forevermore, climbing up the beanstalk.

What does this mean? What made this moment so special? What happens then that does not occur, or to a much lesser degree, when playing Diablo, World of Warcraft or when reading the Lord of the Rings for the first time?

I believe the answer resides in countless tales and legends we’ve heard, read, witnessed ourselves at a very young age. This is the substance of what built the Arthurian tradition, the appeal of Greek Myths, the allure of Sagas. What made the stories of Cuchulain, Hercules and Erik the Red ring true for us as young lads. What Jean Markale called this “Eternal now where all the contradictions blend into each other”.

This is the nature of Myth which gives us this ability to connect with what it means to be alive. To quote Jean Markale from Le Roi Arthur et la Société Celtique (King Arthur and the Celtic Society) :

Imagination is real in the sense that it is a reality of thought and that the one imagining is persuaded of the reality of that which he imagines at the very moment this process intervenes. Once again, reality is movement, movement of thoughts which can only cease to exist in the stasis of death, of non existence. Imagination, in this regard, is a personal, subjective movement of individual thought, which can however be transmitted to others, alienated within the context of the tale. Others are then free to consider the tale as real or imaginary: it will in any case result in a movement of another’s thoughts, and this movement will thus acquire a quality of reality, however different this reality might be from the original input. Epic tales, legends and myth are thus perpetual movements of thought which now and forevermore create the Now where all contradictions blend into each other. There is no more Past or Future but an eternal Now which is the only existing proof of a reality of the Mind.

This, I believe, is why we play role-playing games. It is not necessarily, and as a matter of fact, often isn’t, a conscious decision on our parts. We might play because we want a pause from the tribulations of our daily lives, what some would call “escapism”, of all things, while in fact we are doing exactly the reverse: we reach forward to share this perpetual movement of thought that existed since the dawn of time. We take part, not only as witnesses like so many before us, but as actors, due to the inherent magic of role-playing, in a tradition that depicts humanity in its moments of suffering, despair, hope and glory, a Now that makes sense of all contradictions and communicates to us what it truly means to be Human.

I know some will scoff at this. “I play to have fun. D&D is just a game”. It is absolutely true. What I am trying to wrap my mind around here is what, exactly, is fun about role-playing games. It’s not about some pompous definition designed to make the game greater than it already is. It’s not to create some sort of agenda that would point out right and wrong ways to enjoy role-playing games. Not at all.

It is about what makes role-playing so appealing in the first place. It’s about that very first moment we played role-playing games and felt Enchanted by the premises before us.

This notion points out not only the fundamentally social nature of this game which reaches well beyond the gaming table into the unknown depths of our very own souls, but also why the game may feel so right, so personal, so engaging to many of us. This is where we trim ourselves to our bare bones and gaze at ourselves through the eyes of fictional characters in a land of make-believe. This is where we feel we exist, where we can grasp the vibrant reality of our very minds.

We climb up the beanstalk and stare at what makes us truly alive.

Now, and Forevermore.

A Boy & His Dragon - "Jotting" #1*

The teak wood floor planks of the bath are lain with open gaps between them, providing for a simple drainage & sweepage, which enriches the villagers who daily gather the fallen scales of the mystical creatures from beneath the house. These scintillating scales continue to grow for a few days after collection, and are thereafter used as a form of holy currency called Fayr.

Fayr glows in the dark with a feint golden light, by which one may either see the glow of virtue in men's faces, or else recognize the dullness of their uninspired minds. Thus, the children of the village are able to be chosen at an early age for their magical potential. Those glowing and fearless are considered apt for the dragonry and a future life of tending and growing with the dragon spawn, whereas, those with minds more suited to the drudgery of everyday life remain at home, indefinitely.

--

Thayish Dragons spawn of the coastal mists of Thayland, without kinship to each other. Occasionally, one of the dull minded villagers witnesses a glint of light, called an inkling, which leads them deeper into the shore's permanent haze, where they disappear. The inkling continues to travel the mists while gathering an ever longer tail of followers, whose energies feed it until it matures and spawns in the high reeds of Grick swamp, down the shoreline.

None dare enter this swamp on foot, as the reeds are set in an untraversably deep muck. Thus, the Dragon boys of Thayland ride their immature dragons into the Grick to harvest the teak trees that grow out of its occasional islands of scorched clay. Rarely, a dragon spawn presents itself, gripping the trunk of one of these trees, which the boys then harvest, whole, by enticing the dragon with their magics, leading them into the village in flight. A dragon unable to magically uproot a teak tree is considered too immature to make the return, and the boys are prohibited from assisting with their own magics, in just this one case.

Apart from dragon magic, the dragonry's armory finds teak swords, story books and soap are sufficient tools for developing the kinship bond between boys and dragons.

* "Jottings" appearing on Lord of the Green Dragons blog remain the copyright of Eric Nelson Shook, however incomplete and imperfect they may be!

Sail On My Friend

David L. Arneson Passed On

From the family:

Shortly after 11pm on Tuesday, April 7th, Dave Arneson passed away. He was comfortable and with family at the time and his passing was peaceful.

The Arneson family would like to thank everyone for their support over the last few days, and for the support the entire community has shown Dave over the years.

We are in the process of making final arrangements and will provide additional details as we work them out. We will continue to receive cards and letters in Dave's honor. We are planning to hold a public visitation so that anyone wishing to say their goodbye in person has the opportunity to do so.

Cards and letters can continue to be sent:
Dave Arneson
1043 Grand Avenue
Box #257
St. Paul, MN
55105

Visitation will be on April 20th
Time: yet to be determined
Address:
Bradshaw Funeral Home
687 Snelling Avenue South
St. Paul, MN 55105

Link to the original post (which the family checks regularly).

Role-Playing Must Be Fun

This gradually became, within the past few years, how all instances of evolution of the game's design have been explained to the masses.

D&D is a game that ought to be fun. To increase the fun, it thus needs to be faster in game play. It needs to be easier to grasp. It needs to provide all sorts of elements that help players and DMs imagine as quickly as they possibly can, with the most "fun" value out of it. Okay, I guess, but... what kind of "fun" are we, in fact, talking about?

Never, in the last edition's text, do we get a comprehensive explanation of what, exactly, is supposed to be fun when playing role-playing games. I suspect that's where the fallacy of Fourth Edition began: the challenge of 4e's "design team" was to pick up Third Ed and instantly wonder "how do we get this game to be more fun?" rather than "what makes role-playing games fun?" in the first place!

I suspect that the fun that makes one play role-playing games has in fact nothing to do with "game balance" (which truly means "rules' balance in a vacuum" - maybe more about this later). It has nothing to do with the relative complexity of a game system, though it can affect the long term engagement of a player with a particular game.

Nope.

The Fun of role-playing games has to do with that very first day we were given the occasion to play them. It surely varies in tone, feelings and experiences for each and every one of us, but I suspect it always comes down to "wow. I can actually be part of the fantasy world". Some will call it immersion. Others will call it escapism.

I prefer, like others, to call it Enchantment with a capital E.

Yes. Enchantment.

This "wow" factor of "Yes! This time and forevermore, *I* get to be Jack climbing the beanstalk!"

This has been ignored in game design for some time now in favor of a self-contained, self-contaminated, self-inflicted obsession about the rules and how these rules bring about fairness, choices, support to the fun of the game.

This is my theory, and this is why I think it is valuable to get back to the Lake Geneva campaign as a sort of cartharsis to our own first role-playing experiences. A way to understand why role-playing was so fun in the first place, and how, so that we can make our own games profit from this experience and become more "fun" themselves.

I suspect this post may be quite controversial to some people, and to tell you the truth, this is fully intended. Am I wrong in thinking this way? Then please, tell me so by leaving your comments! Whatever your thoughts may be, I hope you will share them and fuel this conversation. I feel this is part of the reasons why we are all here.

To Send Dave Arneson Your Best

I received this e-mail today from Dave's family in which they asked me to post this for the community, fans and Daves's friends. I imagine that similar requests went to other forums/contacts, also.

"Please pass along the following from the family of Dave Arneson:

As of this writing, Dave is still with us. We have moved him into a facility where we can focus on keeping him comfortable. We have been and will continue to watch the forums and blogs and are passing along everyone's thoughts and prayers. Right now our focus is on getting Dave into the best possible position to maintain his comfort and his dignity. We will update the community as we can. We want to thank everyone for your thoughts and prayers and ask that you continue to send Dave your support in whatever form that means to you.

An address has been established to receive messages to Dave.

Dave Arneson
1043 Grand Avenue
Box #257
St. Paul, MN
55105"

An Exhortation For My Friend DLA

Don't Give Up the Ship, Buddy! The Whole Gang's
rooting for you!!

Round... About?

I recall the very first time I sat at a game table with a battle mat. The DM drew a long, 20' wide passageway and asked us to place our figures in marching order. Someone asked if one of the squiggly lines was just a mistake, since it exceeded the grid marks by a 1/4 square in several places, so the DM used a folder edge to redraw & conform the line to the grid. Instantly, I knew he was going to map out everything ahead of us as we moved through the dungeon. I was stunned by a sense of loss, where everyone else seemed to think of it as a convenient innovation.

Previous to crossing this dividing line, I had endured years of getting lost on maps made for their difficulty. Frustrating though that often was, my sense of loss at the battle mat was my sense of adventure being sucked out of my brain. I quickly became bored, as we were constantly watching the DM draw the map in front of us, often erasing huge portions, like a lecturing professor who thinks they must write everything they're saying out loud. During these moments, I went off the grid, so to speak. I spent time imagining the shock of the character's as a great hand constructed the walls of their world ahead of them. I tried to imagine exactly how that absurdity would work. I recall also being particularly amused by the theological implications resulting from moments when the DM would reconsider his map and make painstaking alterations to his battle mat pen work.

Undeniably, the supplies we've used to create our worlds have conformed them to subtle metaphysical rules. Millions of pages of graph paper have conformed the adventuring experience to a basically square experience. Anthropologists describe the world we westerners live in as a square world. Our houses and streets are relatively square. Whereas, many tribal cultures live in a round world, where their most basic structures are round (by no coincidence, Gary's college work was in anthropology.) Of course, the popular interpretation of this difference is that round is organic and natural, and square is artificial. This also correlates well to the idea that pen and paper gaming is natural and computer gaming is artificial, as if pen and paper gaming wasn't also constrained by limiting conventions.

Robert and I disagree a bit on this. I'm a computer geek, and I believe there is hope for a more fluid and virtuous computerized fantasy role playing experience, even if I suspect that I may be doomed to begrudgingly admit he's right. Computerized play may never admit to the beauty of direct interpersonal experience. But, we do watch movies instead of attend the theater, and there was a time when theater in the round was considered the best way to holistically experience a play. Still, I'm recently drawn to experiment with virtual tabletops, such as Fantasy Grounds or Battlegrounds. However, it appears that one of them might not allow you to mask parts of the map, which means you have to chunk your map up into presentable parts in order to limit the player's view. And how do you chunk up organic settings like the fluid turns of caves? In any case, the move from smooth hewn passageways into caves, perhaps carved by erosion or burrowing, marks more adventure. Imagine the surprise possible where monsters live in the square spaces and humans live in the caves of the dungeon - the grid/non-grid exepectancies reversed.

Sometimes you know you're getting into some adventure when you encounter a pattern that can only be interpreted on a large scale, which only had a loose structure on the small scale. Now, just how do you discover this on a battle map or when using a virtual table top? The magic of gradual realization is lost in such mediums. For example, consider this map on the right here. Imagine the odd spiral of chunks as gigantic stepped pillars. The ceiling is too high for light to touch, thus the chunks appear on the map as walls, not gigantic stepping stones.

You can see how I am gradually realizing the extent of my agreement with Robert, even if I am stubbornly pro computer. But what does this mean?

I see the rigid artifacts of our gaming materials, wherein we see that we have already conformed ourselves to a grid, in the same way as I see the effects of computing on gaming, or movies on plays. It doesn't mean there isn't a magnificent art to delight in. It just means that different signs and methods are used to reproduce Peter Pan's magic. Our magical Pan may be strung up on stage, while on TV he's framed by a rectangular viewing port, yet his flight appears free of attached strings. There's a trade off. And to end these thoughts, since they could sprawl into the gigantic "extense" of another 30 columns of text, we can be certain there were critics of theater in the round, who must have seen within it the hand of the devil... perhaps descending upon the audience... from above, where balconies no longer protected the aristocratic viewer... who could be seen by anyone looking through the play....

“Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.” - Exodus 23:20

My thoughts go out to Dave, tonight, may peace be with him.