The OSR and My Horrifying Lack of Products

"The OSR is less about the rules and more about the products you use those rules with."--Tenkar's Tavern post, ENWorld Article - Is the OSR Dead?

Given the empty space on my single gaming shelf and my almost complete lack of use of purchased gaming products when I am GMing, it appears that I am somehow aberrant. Does this lack on my part exclude me from the OSR? If one takes Tenkar's ad hoc definition of the OSR to an illogical extreme, then yes. It is a good thing that stuff like this causes no loss of sleep on my part.

I am not going to quibble with Tenkar's definition because I think it is captures where the OSR is today. It is interesting that the focus of the self-identified OSR has shifted not-so-subtly from "process" to "product." It seems we have gone from rulings, not rules to products, not rules. Certainly there has been a desire from the beginning by many to create OGL-based rule sets that would, in turn, serve as platforms for other published products. 

I have good friends who are avid producers and consumers of gaming products. I am happy for them and excited to watch them benefit from their creativity and hard work. Technology has provided marketing and distribution solutions for both producers and consumers. Oddly enough, instead of jumping in myself, I find myself becoming almost Amish in my approach to gaming. No fancy cars or electricity for me.The more there is out there, the less I want it. I have purchased only those items (mainly rule sets) that I knew I would have to use for gaming sessions. But that has been it during this past year. No Kickstarters. No Patreon. No adventures or supplements. 

The funny thing is that I buy far too many books. I have thousands of them. Despite this, I am always buying more of them (mostly cheap used ones through Amazon). With music, I am both a consumer and a producer. I make money playing music but it just results in more musical instruments in our house. But when it comes to gaming, I just need my dice and a pencil. 

Heisenberg's Dungeon

"Intuitively obvious to
the casual observer"
as my college physics
text book would note
(after a page of calculus)

James Mal (Grognardia) published a post back in October 2009, entitled Schrödinger's Dungeon. James' contention was that it is nearly impossible to publish a true megadungeon. Leaving aside the slightly sad irony of this statement in light of the Dwimmermount Kickstarter (unless he has used the Dwimmermount Kickstarter to prove his point, in which case supporters were really funding a research grant to prove his hypothesis...but I digress)...anyway, leaving aside the irony, I actually believe his point has some merit. But I prefer Heisenberg to Schrödinger.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is simple to state (so long as one is not interested in the why, then you have to do math stuff...not so simple): When it comes to subatomic particles, we can either precisely know the location of the particle or its momentum, but not both. The more we know about one, the less we can know about the other.

In my mind, there is a certain analogy with megadungeons, the more we define it by maps, keys, descriptions and tables, the less mega it becomes. Mega implies something that is almost infinite in scope: Endless caverns, layers, an underworld of tunnels and rooms. Defining it with a map limits its size.

I have purchased a number of published megadungeons, including Stonehell, Barrowmaze, Anomalous Subsurface Environment, and Rappan Athuk. I love them (and shamelessly borrow from them) but they all seem like there is something not quite mega about them. Maybe it is just the experience of being able to see a whole dungeon level, just by opening the book and looking at a map, that makes them smaller. But I suspect it is something more. Putting a megadungeon in print is much like adding a butterfly to an insect collection. You have to kill it to keep it. You have to kill the megadungeon, destroying its growth and dynamic qualities in the process, in order to publish it. More than anything, the mystery and the sense of the vast unknown seems to get snuffed by the act of printing.

Maybe it is just me. I am not certain.

Montporte To Do List

I have been running the Montporte Dungeon Campaign more often than I expected, not that I am complaining as it has been a groovy time. However, it started off as a one-shot and I am realizing that I need to do some catch-up work on both the setting and the house rules. I need to get some stuff written up for myself and for the players. I'll be doing it via my blog, not because anyone in the blogosphere would find it interesting, but because it is easy for me to write it and then send out links to the group.

As far as the setting goes, I will need to:

• Flesh out the town of Montporte: Merchants, religious organizations, wizarding-types, and so on. The usual town-next-to-the-dungeon stuff.
• Flesh out the area right around the dungeon: Maps, encounters, etc.
• Write up the Planes: The Planes come into play in this world and there are four "nearby" planes--The home of the Fey; The home of the dragons; The home of demons; and The home of madness.
• Write up the "physics" of the place: The four elements (they are not separate planes in Montporte); the three energies, etc.

As far as house rules, I want to stick to the Blood & Treasure rules as much as possible. I have studiously avoided my usual path of rewriting rules, classes, etc. Mostly I just need to clarify and codify rulings that I have already made in game:

• Flaming oil: The boys are using a lot of it and I need to provide more clarity on this.
• 0-Level Spells: I am allowing spell casters to use there 0-level spells at will, but there are certain spells in Blood & Treasure where this doesn't work. The spells that do healing or damage are the main examples.
• Character Creation: I just need to spruce up the rules we started with.

I want to keep the house rules simple enough so that, if we switch to a different ruleset (e.g. Swords & Wizardry or maybe GURPS DF), I won't have to do a lot of extra to convert the campaign.

I am also mindful of the fact that there are some things that I need to do a better job with...mainly tracking time and resources. It gets tricky when we players are not always available every session or we put Montporte on hold for a few weeks while adventuring in Rob's (Bat in the Attic) Majestic Wilderlands campaign.

My Random Class

Pic Source: The Handsome Nerd

I used the Custom Class Generator and ended  up with the following. Interesting that I have a charisma prime requisite and can waterbreath but I restricted to using only polearms. That seems about right.

Requirements: none
Prime Requisite: CHA

 

Hit Points

Level	Hit Points
1	1d6
2	2d6
3	3d6
4	4d6
5	5d6
6	6d6
7	7d6
8	8d6
9	8d6+2
10	8d6+4
11	8d6+6
12	8d6+8

 

Armour
Members of this class may not wear any armour.

 

Weapons
Members of this class may only use pole weapons (polearm, lance, javelin, spear).

 

Attacking
Members of this class roll to attack as a cleric or thief.

 

Magic Items
Members of this class have no restrictions on the use of magic items.
Note that, for magic armour, weapons and shields, characters can only use a magic item if they could use the normal version of that item.

 

Breathe Underwater
Members of this class can breathe underwater.

 

Saves
Members of this class save as a magic-user of their level.

 

Advancement

Level	XP required
1	0
2	1260
3	2520
4	5040
5	10080
6	20160
7	40320
8	78750
9	182500
10	273750
11	365000
12	456250

The Dungeon 2: Comparing GURPS and D&D on Dungeon Design

My very first view of a dungeon via Dr. Holmes' edition of Dungeons & Dragons

I have been working my way through the GURPS Dungeon Fantasy material and I have also been following Peter D's Dungeon Fantastic and Patrick's Renovating the Temple. While I cannot speak from personal experience, it is clear to me that running a GURPS fantasy dungeon campaign is not only doable, it could be very groovy. That being said, it is also clear to me that Dungeons & Dragons is a hand-to-glove fit for dungeoneering while GURPS requires a few tweaks. Despite the need for tweaking, GURPS offers up an approach to dungeon adventuring that Dungeons & Dragons cannot readily duplicate as it allows the GM to set aside the most fundamental controlling element of dungeon adventuring in D&D.

Using GURPS Dungeon Fantasy and Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1e as my points of comparison, I have made the following observations:

• GURPS DF characters start out tough (250 points) compared to AD&D 1e characters (1st level). 250 points is considerably tougher than the average low-skill militia guard whereas a 1st level character in AD&D 1e has only the slightest edge against a similarly armed 0-level human.
• GURPS characters do advance and gain in strength but this is nothing like the huge power increase that AD&D 1e characters experience.
• GURPS character advancement is gained per session for good play whereas character advancement in AD&D 1e is based on experience points gained through slaying monsters and bringing home treasure.
• Encounter planning for AD&D 1e is simple as hit dice are an accurate measure of power. In GURPS, the ability to move and attack is maybe the best reflection of power but it is much more difficult to assess and compare (at least it is a challenge for me as a GURPS newbie). While old schoolers often mock the concept of encounter balance, the basic design of an AD&D 1e dungeon is built around it. It is a basic necessity.

I have summed up this comparison as a visual (very much a handwaving exercise):

Hidden in plain sight is the fact that the design of a traditional megadungeon and the most fundamental aspect of AD&D 1e, character advancement, are mirror images of each other. Monte Cook made "Things get more dangerous as you go deeper" is #1 Assumption when creating his Dungeon-A-Day project a few years ago. That is not merely a dungeon design convention, it a reflection of the most intrinsic element of the D&D  game system (regardless of edition). It is really a necessity. 1st level characters have no chance against even the wussiest of creatures on the 10th Level Wandering Monster Table.

AD&D 1e character level advancement (the reflection of power) generally matches the encounter difficulties as one goes deeper in the dungeon because it has to. It is the way the developed and it is the way the game works. 1st level characters may survive an encounter with an angry elder titan, their survival is based on running and avoiding (not that this is a bad thing). My point is that the most basic element of dungeon design, Things get more dangerous as you go deeper, is not just an adventure design approach, it is a reflection of how the game system works.

A dungeon that is actually designed around GURPS can start with different assumptions. To be sure, GURPS characters do advance in ability, but it is their starting point that is the primary determinant to their toughness.  A 250 point character and the GURPS system provides the GM (and the players) with a lot more freedom for encounters than is really possible with AD&D 1e. As a consequence, there can be a lot more variety (and surprises) to dungeon design. GMs do not have to adhere so closely to Things get more dangerous as you deeper.

This is a very elementary conclusion; one that is, in the words of my old physics textbook, "intuitively obvious to the casual observer." There are a lot of the observations that could be made and implications drawn. I am interested to gain a deeper understand and also have the opportunity to actually play GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. I have the thought of tweaking GURPS DF along the lines of my first dungeon experience with the Holmes version of Dungeons & Dragons, at least in terms of class and race, but I am not ready to be a GURPS GM quite yet but I am getting there.