Last night, @theprincesswife and I picked our solo game back up after a monthlong hiatus. June was a particularly stressful month, with many things planned and the ongoing health issues with my father. It was nice to have a couple of hours of game-time and enjoy some simple fun.
When we last left my wife's character, Aeli, she had just gotten herself extricated from jail after a run-in with some bandits. After preparing a fairly interesting version of a large slingshot, Aeli and party set forth to explore an area of a dungeon guarded by skeletons in a tough defensive position.
In an anticlimatic resolution, the hireling cleric turned the skeletons and the party mopped up on them cowering against a locked door. Beyond that door, Aeli found more interesting situations.
One room literally was 10x10 - except instead of an orc with pie, there were the remains of an exploded chest, an intact chest, a burnt body and it's apparent protector, a small dog. My wife kept expecting the dog to morph into a fantastically nasty creature, but it didn't. What the dog did do was prevent Aeli from approaching the body and second chest.
The ensuing ... resolution ... has given the NPCs and hirelings much mirth - Aeli has several new nicknames. However, I've been told that if I reveal exactly what she did, she will post rather embarassing photos of me in revenge. Let me just say that she chose the most difficult way of resolving the issue.
The climax of the evening was when the party followed a group of turned skeletons in a huge cavern and I got to do something I hardly ever do in the game "Dungeons & Dragons" -- I plopped down the miniature of a black dragon in front of the characters. The cavern had a huge brazier on an altar and a "smoke dragon" had appeared to intone a warning to the players.
Aeli promptly turned and high-tailed it out of the cavern. I have to admit, I was proud of her and slightly disappointed - but I know she'll be back. She just has to hire another posse. She had only 3 fighting men with her, a 2nd level cleric and 3rd level mage - but Aeli likes to have armies when facing hard foes.
In the 10x10 room, Aeli found a mysterious set of robes with possibly arcane writing on them, as well as a mysterious iron ring in a silk pouch. I've been told she wants to do some research on these items, as well as the mysterious minotaur symbol found all over this dungeon. Hmmm...
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Dispelling a myth - Sandbox prep
My One Page Dungeon Contest co-conspirator, ChattyDM, is a self-professed aficionado of the "story-driven" "encounter-driven" adventure type. A few days ago, we had a very funny twitter exchange:
ChattyDM: With my summer D&D season starting this week, I may try to let go of scripted homebrewed adventure and try going with just hooks and ideas..
chgowiz: @ChattyDM *gasp* Why.. that sounds like a *whispered* sandbox.
In this post, Phil goes on to say:
The thing is, I’m not interested in doing a classic exploration-based Sandbox game. This actually requires a lot of preparation as you must detail large areas of your setting in order to give your players something to do wherever they go.
That made me sit back a moment and think - did I really prep that much? I'd have to say, "no". Here's why.
1. Just in time preparation
2. One page dungeon levels
3. Write it down - play it on game day
4. Let the players flesh things out
5. Broad brushstrokes to events and plots
6. Don't overprepare
There are a lot of really well done sandbox articles in FightOn! magazine that outline sandbox creation and yes, if you follow the DMG to the letter and prepare many levels, you will have tons of prep needed - but I think that detailed maps and many hexes comes with play. The info I have on Dark Ages now is the accumulation of many months, but in general, I've followed those 6 principles above. So let me elaborate on them a bit.
1. Just in time preparation
A sandbox is inherently player driven. If we go back to D&D's wargaming roots, preparing a sandbox is much like setting up the terrain and starting points of the pieces in a miniatures battle. You have the troops prepared, but you don't know what's going to happen until play begins. I treat a sandbox the same way. I set up the starting points of the dungeons, monsters, set pieces and villians. I may have a note or two about who they are and what's going on. I know the basic rough few sentence outline of what the campaign setting is, but beyond that, I develop it in play.
When I started my Dark Ages sandbox, I had a general idea of the layout of the lands about 5 days travel out. I had three dungeons. I had one town. I had one set piece. Here's the cool part - one of those dungeons is STILL virgin territory for my players (who are now probably scrabbling through notes trying to figure out where it is... ). I had only level 1 done for the dungeons. I didn't even have a map of the town, and only a few NPCs fleshed out.
It worked. The players didn't need a lot of prep to jump and get started. In fact, the first game, my players went to do something I hadn't even thought they'd do! It didn't matter - with the rough ideas of what was where (broad strokes, see that below) and a random encounter, we had a blast and the session was a success.
As the players have moved into places, I've waited to prepare before they got there. When they started exploring the kobold mines in earnest, that's when I started planning/creating the second level. When the players wanted to know more about the town so they could live there, I finally drew a map. As the players meet NPCs and do things, I take notes and factor them into my game as we go along.
That's not to say all details are improvised. As the players move to do things, I try to stay about 1 or 2 steps ahead of them. If my players do something completely unexpected, I can take 5 minutes, toss some notes together, look at my notes from previous games and go with what I have. My 3 ring binder has plenty of loose leaf.
2. One page dungeon levels
The philosophy behind one page dungeon keys is that the DM adds the flavor and plots and "whys and wherefores" at the table. That neatly fits in with "just in time preparation" because now I can just draw a map, populate it using AD&D or OD&D guidelines and boom, done. When the players get to that point, I can look at what's happened, my broad brush strokes, and go from there.
For instance, my kobold mines. I had cavemen on one side, kobolds on the other. I had no real idea how it would work. I didn't plot things out. However, it turned out the kobolds and cavemen were fighting over the cave. The kobolds were scared of level 2 because of the ancient Dwarf ruins on level 2. One of the cavemen fell down a hole and died and the cavemen buried the hole because evil came out of it. The kobolds made some attempts to recapture the mines but failed. The cavemen fled the caves. This all came out as game-day decisions and play and reactions what the players did. I didn't pre-plot this because I didn't need to. I had broad brush strokes and let the game spin it out.
3. Write it down - play it out on game day
That being said, I write down all my crazy ideas and meanderings and my notes. Again, I don't try to detail things out so much until it has to be detailed out, usually in reaction to what the players do. I think that what has happened is the preparation is substituted for reaction notes and reminders and post-game-details. This reinforces the "players drive it" attitude.
Example - the players found a book. They read it and wanted to know what it mean. I told them, based on vague ideas, but I noted on my notes what I said - now there's an entry for this book in my notes so that if the players come back to it, I know what it is.
I also send myself emails or write things in my wiki when they occur to me. It's a bit like mind-mapping, but without all the buzz words.
4. Let the players flesh things out
When I first created Dark Ages, I had no clue what I wanted to do with demihumans, save minimize their involvement in the world - for now. I had no idea on what kind of history I wanted for them. So I let the players tell me. I came up with broad guidelines. I know what won't work for player ideas - and I let them run with it.
I don't want to give away any spoilers, but the littleling (halfling) backstory that one of my players came up with rocks. It's full of puns, but it's really cool. The elf history and story is continuing to be written, but I riff based on what my players give me.
My deities - all player decided, save for the Church of Light - and I've adjusted that based on what the players saw and how the Church presented in game. In fact, one of the players is now a cleric of the Light and it's going to be interesting to see how she maps out how she interprets the Light. I don't expect her to give me 50 pages of notes, but I'm going to go based on how she goes, within the general idea that I have for the Light.
5. Broad brushstrokes
There's a major, huge area to my game - the city of Irecia. Players are DYING to go there, but they know it's seriously in the whilly-whacks in terms of probably being very dangerous. Do I have the city mapped out and populated? Nope. However, I do know this - Irecia was the "diamond of the East" and a beautiful city for learning. I know it was a fairly civilized place. I know there are probably sewers. I know some of the bad mojo that has happened. That's all I need, though, because that sets the stage for "just in time preparation". I also am not locked into something - if the players do something or something changes in the game, I can take that into account going forward.
My broad brushstrokes also apply to events and plots. Yes, I do have a "ticking clock" of sorts in the campaign, but it's not a detailed flowchart - it's broad strokes that I fill in when needed. Although the players drive the plot, the world does continue to evolve and turn around them. There are some things that may happen as the players do things, and there are some things that will happen no matter what. For instance, the Doom in my Dark Ages game was heralded by meteor showers. I knew I wanted to play on that theme. When I realized that in my game calendar the end of summer was approaching, I decided to have a Summer's End Festival (another just in time creation) - and then I decided to have the shooting stars appear and one of the "sensitive" town NPCs go mad. Now the players have something to chew on - the world is doing stuff. What does it mean?
Another example - the first game. I knew that goblins were in the Darkwoods and they had patrols and various camps. I knew they were sparring with the kobolds. That's it. So the players decided to check out the goblins based on some rumors. Uhh... whut? I was so shocked, but I knew they'd run into a goblin patrol - and they did, and it was a good game. I didn't have the encounter planned out to where exactly the left foot would slide on the fourth goblin to the left in the fifth segment of the second round. Nope... buncha goblins who'd rather be camping than marching run into humans that they haven't seen in 50 years. Battle ensues.
6. Don't over-prepare
I think this is a discipline thing. I mean, you look at Gygax's words himself from 1974:
"First, the referee must draw out a minimum of half a dozen maps of the levels of his “underworld”, people them with monsters of various horrid aspect, distribute treasure accordingly, and note the location of the latter two on keys, each corresponding to the appropriate level."
I know that would make me think I had to know the details down to how many pimples are on my troll-mage's arse. (Note, I have no idea. A lot? My players want to know... as they mount his head on a spike... and that day will come...) I've since learned that while it helps to know the areas surrounding, I don't need to have everything detailed out. Only when I need it.
That being said, you do have some prep. You have to know the area around the "home base". You have to have some places for the players to go. You have to have an idea of what else is out there. I prepared a couple of random encounter charts for the Darkwoods and Dalewoods. That helps me to fill in if needs be (like the Damned attacking Enonia...)
Oh and hooks? I came up with a dozen or so rumors, based on the locations and my broad brush strokes. The players started exploring on their own. As they do things, and the world changes, I provide new rumors, or lay out new hooks (like the battle between cavemen and kobolds, or the sacking of the New Hope settlement, or the Damned attacking, or the strange goings on in the monastery, as a result of the players going there) based on what is going on. That's the nice thing - I can be reactive more than I have to be proactive - because the players are the actors and the drivers, not my story. The campaign is their story.
Summary -
A lot of this might seem like improv and I guess you could call it "inspired improv within a broad guideline" - I fill in the details where needed and I try not to over-reach. Otherwise, I'd never get a campaign off the ground.
You know... maybe we should do this together and prep the Ultima setting for my Ultima rules/sandbox.
[Edited to add - I'd be remiss if I didn't point you to this just-in-time hex map creation technique from the microlite20 Macropedia - a very nice resource and awesome game to boot.)
ChattyDM: With my summer D&D season starting this week, I may try to let go of scripted homebrewed adventure and try going with just hooks and ideas..
chgowiz: @ChattyDM *gasp* Why.. that sounds like a *whispered* sandbox.
In this post, Phil goes on to say:
The thing is, I’m not interested in doing a classic exploration-based Sandbox game. This actually requires a lot of preparation as you must detail large areas of your setting in order to give your players something to do wherever they go.
That made me sit back a moment and think - did I really prep that much? I'd have to say, "no". Here's why.
1. Just in time preparation
2. One page dungeon levels
3. Write it down - play it on game day
4. Let the players flesh things out
5. Broad brushstrokes to events and plots
6. Don't overprepare
There are a lot of really well done sandbox articles in FightOn! magazine that outline sandbox creation and yes, if you follow the DMG to the letter and prepare many levels, you will have tons of prep needed - but I think that detailed maps and many hexes comes with play. The info I have on Dark Ages now is the accumulation of many months, but in general, I've followed those 6 principles above. So let me elaborate on them a bit.
1. Just in time preparation
A sandbox is inherently player driven. If we go back to D&D's wargaming roots, preparing a sandbox is much like setting up the terrain and starting points of the pieces in a miniatures battle. You have the troops prepared, but you don't know what's going to happen until play begins. I treat a sandbox the same way. I set up the starting points of the dungeons, monsters, set pieces and villians. I may have a note or two about who they are and what's going on. I know the basic rough few sentence outline of what the campaign setting is, but beyond that, I develop it in play.
When I started my Dark Ages sandbox, I had a general idea of the layout of the lands about 5 days travel out. I had three dungeons. I had one town. I had one set piece. Here's the cool part - one of those dungeons is STILL virgin territory for my players (who are now probably scrabbling through notes trying to figure out where it is... ). I had only level 1 done for the dungeons. I didn't even have a map of the town, and only a few NPCs fleshed out.
It worked. The players didn't need a lot of prep to jump and get started. In fact, the first game, my players went to do something I hadn't even thought they'd do! It didn't matter - with the rough ideas of what was where (broad strokes, see that below) and a random encounter, we had a blast and the session was a success.
As the players have moved into places, I've waited to prepare before they got there. When they started exploring the kobold mines in earnest, that's when I started planning/creating the second level. When the players wanted to know more about the town so they could live there, I finally drew a map. As the players meet NPCs and do things, I take notes and factor them into my game as we go along.
That's not to say all details are improvised. As the players move to do things, I try to stay about 1 or 2 steps ahead of them. If my players do something completely unexpected, I can take 5 minutes, toss some notes together, look at my notes from previous games and go with what I have. My 3 ring binder has plenty of loose leaf.
2. One page dungeon levels
The philosophy behind one page dungeon keys is that the DM adds the flavor and plots and "whys and wherefores" at the table. That neatly fits in with "just in time preparation" because now I can just draw a map, populate it using AD&D or OD&D guidelines and boom, done. When the players get to that point, I can look at what's happened, my broad brush strokes, and go from there.
For instance, my kobold mines. I had cavemen on one side, kobolds on the other. I had no real idea how it would work. I didn't plot things out. However, it turned out the kobolds and cavemen were fighting over the cave. The kobolds were scared of level 2 because of the ancient Dwarf ruins on level 2. One of the cavemen fell down a hole and died and the cavemen buried the hole because evil came out of it. The kobolds made some attempts to recapture the mines but failed. The cavemen fled the caves. This all came out as game-day decisions and play and reactions what the players did. I didn't pre-plot this because I didn't need to. I had broad brush strokes and let the game spin it out.
3. Write it down - play it out on game day
That being said, I write down all my crazy ideas and meanderings and my notes. Again, I don't try to detail things out so much until it has to be detailed out, usually in reaction to what the players do. I think that what has happened is the preparation is substituted for reaction notes and reminders and post-game-details. This reinforces the "players drive it" attitude.
Example - the players found a book. They read it and wanted to know what it mean. I told them, based on vague ideas, but I noted on my notes what I said - now there's an entry for this book in my notes so that if the players come back to it, I know what it is.
I also send myself emails or write things in my wiki when they occur to me. It's a bit like mind-mapping, but without all the buzz words.
4. Let the players flesh things out
When I first created Dark Ages, I had no clue what I wanted to do with demihumans, save minimize their involvement in the world - for now. I had no idea on what kind of history I wanted for them. So I let the players tell me. I came up with broad guidelines. I know what won't work for player ideas - and I let them run with it.
I don't want to give away any spoilers, but the littleling (halfling) backstory that one of my players came up with rocks. It's full of puns, but it's really cool. The elf history and story is continuing to be written, but I riff based on what my players give me.
My deities - all player decided, save for the Church of Light - and I've adjusted that based on what the players saw and how the Church presented in game. In fact, one of the players is now a cleric of the Light and it's going to be interesting to see how she maps out how she interprets the Light. I don't expect her to give me 50 pages of notes, but I'm going to go based on how she goes, within the general idea that I have for the Light.
5. Broad brushstrokes
There's a major, huge area to my game - the city of Irecia. Players are DYING to go there, but they know it's seriously in the whilly-whacks in terms of probably being very dangerous. Do I have the city mapped out and populated? Nope. However, I do know this - Irecia was the "diamond of the East" and a beautiful city for learning. I know it was a fairly civilized place. I know there are probably sewers. I know some of the bad mojo that has happened. That's all I need, though, because that sets the stage for "just in time preparation". I also am not locked into something - if the players do something or something changes in the game, I can take that into account going forward.
My broad brushstrokes also apply to events and plots. Yes, I do have a "ticking clock" of sorts in the campaign, but it's not a detailed flowchart - it's broad strokes that I fill in when needed. Although the players drive the plot, the world does continue to evolve and turn around them. There are some things that may happen as the players do things, and there are some things that will happen no matter what. For instance, the Doom in my Dark Ages game was heralded by meteor showers. I knew I wanted to play on that theme. When I realized that in my game calendar the end of summer was approaching, I decided to have a Summer's End Festival (another just in time creation) - and then I decided to have the shooting stars appear and one of the "sensitive" town NPCs go mad. Now the players have something to chew on - the world is doing stuff. What does it mean?
Another example - the first game. I knew that goblins were in the Darkwoods and they had patrols and various camps. I knew they were sparring with the kobolds. That's it. So the players decided to check out the goblins based on some rumors. Uhh... whut? I was so shocked, but I knew they'd run into a goblin patrol - and they did, and it was a good game. I didn't have the encounter planned out to where exactly the left foot would slide on the fourth goblin to the left in the fifth segment of the second round. Nope... buncha goblins who'd rather be camping than marching run into humans that they haven't seen in 50 years. Battle ensues.
6. Don't over-prepare
I think this is a discipline thing. I mean, you look at Gygax's words himself from 1974:
"First, the referee must draw out a minimum of half a dozen maps of the levels of his “underworld”, people them with monsters of various horrid aspect, distribute treasure accordingly, and note the location of the latter two on keys, each corresponding to the appropriate level."
I know that would make me think I had to know the details down to how many pimples are on my troll-mage's arse. (Note, I have no idea. A lot? My players want to know... as they mount his head on a spike... and that day will come...) I've since learned that while it helps to know the areas surrounding, I don't need to have everything detailed out. Only when I need it.
That being said, you do have some prep. You have to know the area around the "home base". You have to have some places for the players to go. You have to have an idea of what else is out there. I prepared a couple of random encounter charts for the Darkwoods and Dalewoods. That helps me to fill in if needs be (like the Damned attacking Enonia...)
Oh and hooks? I came up with a dozen or so rumors, based on the locations and my broad brush strokes. The players started exploring on their own. As they do things, and the world changes, I provide new rumors, or lay out new hooks (like the battle between cavemen and kobolds, or the sacking of the New Hope settlement, or the Damned attacking, or the strange goings on in the monastery, as a result of the players going there) based on what is going on. That's the nice thing - I can be reactive more than I have to be proactive - because the players are the actors and the drivers, not my story. The campaign is their story.
Summary -
A lot of this might seem like improv and I guess you could call it "inspired improv within a broad guideline" - I fill in the details where needed and I try not to over-reach. Otherwise, I'd never get a campaign off the ground.
You know... maybe we should do this together and prep the Ultima setting for my Ultima rules/sandbox.
[Edited to add - I'd be remiss if I didn't point you to this just-in-time hex map creation technique from the microlite20 Macropedia - a very nice resource and awesome game to boot.)
Monday, June 22, 2009
130 Answers to "Why Original Editions/Retroclones" poll
After 130 answers to a non-scientific poll, the answers are clear (at least to the people who responded):
4E did not beget the OSR, it was already alive and well thanks to 3E and a previous interest/use of older editions (previous to 3E).
I compiled 130 answers to the poll that was posted on here, OD&D Board, Swords & Wizardry forum, RPG.net, ENWorld and TheGamerDome blog (where a chunk of this was inspired from), as of Friday morning 6/19. I appreciate everyone taking the time to answer, as well as talk about their own experiences. What I'm VERY appreciative of was that there were no edition flamewars in those threads and blog posts.
If you wish to crunch the numbers yourself, here's a link to the "Why Original Edition/retroclone" Google spreadsheet.
Note that the percentages will not add up to 100%, as these were multiple optional answers to each question.
What are you doing with an original edition/retroclone D&D?
By far, most of the respondents are DMs/GMs or are GM/DM'ing while playing. There is also a good chunk of respondents looking to run a new campaign - a sweet spot for publishers, if I wanted to be one.
What type of roleplaying game were you playing (or are still playing) before you became interested/involved in an original edition/retroclone?
Out of all the options, 4E is DEAD LAST in the picture in terms of active participation prior to looking at OED&D/retroclones. In many of the responses that included some anecdotes, it was noted that people had looked at 4E, or perhaps played it, but it didn't factor into their decision to look elsewhere. What was very apparent was that out of the two later editions, 3rd Edition was the leading edition that pushed people back to OED&D/retroclones.
In retrospect, when you look at when various retroclones were conceived/published, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC and Castles & Crusades were taking off just at what seems to be the high-glut-frustration-point of 3rd edition. Although there might be more of a buzz now - leading some to posit that 4E drives the OSR, perception isn't reality, at least as far as these data show. 4th Edition is the least played edition, for these respondents, even after a year and a popular perception that 4E is a best-seller.
If you were playing 3E, why did you decide to investigate/play an original edition game or retroclone?
A vast majority of those who were playing 3E when they decided to look at OED&D/retroclones did it because they didn't like 3E rules/mechanics. Despite that, there are still a fair amount who responded that they continue to play 3E.
Is the 22% of people who saw the OGL a significant number? Out of 130, no - but WotC and other publishers should take careful note - the OGL had an influence and there's still an interest in rules that are open. 22% of the supposed D&D community is a signficant number, in my mind.
If you were playing 4E, why did you decide to investigate/play an original edition game or retroclone?
I'm impressed that both the 3E and 4E respondents showed a "stickiness" to continuing to play their edition, even for those who also responded negatively about their edition.
Similar to 3E, the majority of people who investigated a retroclone or original edition did so out of dissatisfaction for the mechanics. A low percentage are looking at retroclones while continuing to support 3E/4E - another publishing point to make note of.
Also, a data note - some people responded to playing 3E/4E, but did not give further details, and some responded that they had tried 3E/4E, but didn't list it as an edition they were playing at the time they made the choice to investigate OED&D/retroclones.
What attracted you to investigate/play an original edition/retroclone D&D?
These data show a clear and consistent picture - the retroclones must hit these notes over and over - approach/philosophy and feel, as well as appealing to those who want to "go back".
I was surprised that buzz, existing groups and recommendations answers were such a low percentage. To me, that means that finding OED&D/retroclones is an individual task which may or may not lead to other people playing those same games as well. Publishers and content writers again should take note - getting people to share these games is an untapped area - and something to look at.
How did you learn about the original editions/retroclones?
Here again, the data show that word of mouth or existing play was not a primary avenue for OED&D/retroclones.
Half of those who responded indicated they own their older books, which may lead to an interesting conclusion that I never considered - the retroclones are competing against older editions and the PDFs (if they ever come available again) for shelf space and mindspace. The data also show that forums are an important avenue, even with the advent of the blogs and the RPG Bloggers Network.
Concluding Thoughts and Controversial Tidbits
It can be fairly said that 130 respondents is hardly a scientific and exhaustive set and I agree. Still, given the amount of activity and discussion, I take the 130 as a decent small representation - given that I did appeal to various forums outside of the usual "old school" venues.
I did not post this on K&K, simply because I thought there was enough overlap on the OD&D/S&W boards and my blog. I did try to get this poll posted on Dragonsfoot. Dragonsfoot has a strict policy about not discussing 3E/4E, and I had sought permission for the poll, given the nature of the questions. I was very disappointed I didn't get a response.
I hope the data here serves to refute statements such as "4E drives the OSR". I also hope the data serves useful for other purposes, such as to help OSR publishers and interested content authors. For me, it was interesting to do this and read the responses and see how D&D and gaming has touched lives.
Here's an interesting thought to leave you with... did WotC already know all this prior to the design/development of 4E? I can't imagine, with the marketing muscle of Hasbro, that WotC didn't know that 3E was having a negative effect.
If you look at how the miniatures gaming world is taking off with many titles and interest, perhaps the handwriting on the wall from 3E forced WotC to move D&D towards what is selling these days? Perhaps the comparisons to MMOs aren't the true picture - but rather a comparison to other miniature games is more appropriate? After all, if you can combine some of the obsessiveness of MtG collectors with the most popular RPG and aim it at the (what seems to be) accelerating market of miniature gaming - perhaps WotC did have a plan?
I dunno, I did not pay attention to what was blogged or written about during 4E design/development. It's an interesting thought.
What do you think? What do these numbers say to you?
4E did not beget the OSR, it was already alive and well thanks to 3E and a previous interest/use of older editions (previous to 3E).
I compiled 130 answers to the poll that was posted on here, OD&D Board, Swords & Wizardry forum, RPG.net, ENWorld and TheGamerDome blog (where a chunk of this was inspired from), as of Friday morning 6/19. I appreciate everyone taking the time to answer, as well as talk about their own experiences. What I'm VERY appreciative of was that there were no edition flamewars in those threads and blog posts.
If you wish to crunch the numbers yourself, here's a link to the "Why Original Edition/retroclone" Google spreadsheet.
Note that the percentages will not add up to 100%, as these were multiple optional answers to each question.
What are you doing with an original edition/retroclone D&D?
| I'm playing in established campaign as a player | 30 | 23% | |
| I'm playing in established campaign as DM | 83 | 64% | |
| I'm looking to play in a new campaign | 15 | 12% | |
| I'm looking to run in a new campaign | 49 | 38% |
By far, most of the respondents are DMs/GMs or are GM/DM'ing while playing. There is also a good chunk of respondents looking to run a new campaign - a sweet spot for publishers, if I wanted to be one.
What type of roleplaying game were you playing (or are still playing) before you became interested/involved in an original edition/retroclone?
| I've always been playing original edition/retroclone D&D | 55 | 42% | |
| 3rd Edition D&D (includes 3.0/3.5) | 70 | 54% | |
| 4th Edition D&D | 30 | 23% | |
| I was playing something other than D&D | 45 | 35% |
Out of all the options, 4E is DEAD LAST in the picture in terms of active participation prior to looking at OED&D/retroclones. In many of the responses that included some anecdotes, it was noted that people had looked at 4E, or perhaps played it, but it didn't factor into their decision to look elsewhere. What was very apparent was that out of the two later editions, 3rd Edition was the leading edition that pushed people back to OED&D/retroclones.
In retrospect, when you look at when various retroclones were conceived/published, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC and Castles & Crusades were taking off just at what seems to be the high-glut-frustration-point of 3rd edition. Although there might be more of a buzz now - leading some to posit that 4E drives the OSR, perception isn't reality, at least as far as these data show. 4th Edition is the least played edition, for these respondents, even after a year and a popular perception that 4E is a best-seller.
If you were playing 3E, why did you decide to investigate/play an original edition game or retroclone?
| I still play 3rd Edition | 28 | 36% | |
| I'm not looking to replace 3E with original edition, just curious | 9 | 12% | |
| My group of friends are playing OED&D/retroclone and I went along with it | 3 | 4% | |
| I was unhappy with the 3/3.5E rules, mechanics or approach | 54 | 70% | |
| I was unhappy with how Wizards of the Coast published/marketed 3E | 14 | 18% | |
| I like the OGL and wanted to play games that use it | 17 | 22% |
A vast majority of those who were playing 3E when they decided to look at OED&D/retroclones did it because they didn't like 3E rules/mechanics. Despite that, there are still a fair amount who responded that they continue to play 3E.
Is the 22% of people who saw the OGL a significant number? Out of 130, no - but WotC and other publishers should take careful note - the OGL had an influence and there's still an interest in rules that are open. 22% of the supposed D&D community is a signficant number, in my mind.
If you were playing 4E, why did you decide to investigate/play an original edition game or retroclone?
| I still play 4th Edition | 17 | 46% | |
| I'm not looking to replace 4E with original edition, just curious | 7 | 19% | |
| My group of friends are playing OED&D/retroclone and I went along with it | 0 | 0% | |
| I was unhappy with the 4E rules, mechanics or approach | 22 | 59% | |
| I was unhappy with how Wizards of the Coast published/marketed 4E | 11 | 30% | |
| I like the GSL and want to play games that use it | 0 | 0% |
I'm impressed that both the 3E and 4E respondents showed a "stickiness" to continuing to play their edition, even for those who also responded negatively about their edition.
Similar to 3E, the majority of people who investigated a retroclone or original edition did so out of dissatisfaction for the mechanics. A low percentage are looking at retroclones while continuing to support 3E/4E - another publishing point to make note of.
Also, a data note - some people responded to playing 3E/4E, but did not give further details, and some responded that they had tried 3E/4E, but didn't list it as an edition they were playing at the time they made the choice to investigate OED&D/retroclones.
What attracted you to investigate/play an original edition/retroclone D&D?
| It was recommended by a friend | 7 | 6% | |
| It was what my game group is playing | 10 | 8% | |
| I used to play these games and wanted to "go back" | 61 | 51% | |
| I liked the approach of the rules/mechanics | 84 | 70% | |
| I liked the philosophy behind the rules/mechanics | 81 | 68% | |
| I liked the "feel" (Swords & Sorcery or pulp) of the game | 60 | 50% | |
| I was attracted by the amount of "buzz" on the Internet | 31 | 26% |
These data show a clear and consistent picture - the retroclones must hit these notes over and over - approach/philosophy and feel, as well as appealing to those who want to "go back".
I was surprised that buzz, existing groups and recommendations answers were such a low percentage. To me, that means that finding OED&D/retroclones is an individual task which may or may not lead to other people playing those same games as well. Publishers and content writers again should take note - getting people to share these games is an untapped area - and something to look at.
How did you learn about the original editions/retroclones?
| It was recommended by a friend | 10 | 8% | |
| It is what my game group is playing | 10 | 8% | |
| I already owned my older books | 65 | 52% | |
| From a blog | 35 | 28% | |
| From a D&D related forum | 60 | 48% | |
| From the retroclone publisher's website | 34 | 27% |
Here again, the data show that word of mouth or existing play was not a primary avenue for OED&D/retroclones.
Half of those who responded indicated they own their older books, which may lead to an interesting conclusion that I never considered - the retroclones are competing against older editions and the PDFs (if they ever come available again) for shelf space and mindspace. The data also show that forums are an important avenue, even with the advent of the blogs and the RPG Bloggers Network.
Concluding Thoughts and Controversial Tidbits
It can be fairly said that 130 respondents is hardly a scientific and exhaustive set and I agree. Still, given the amount of activity and discussion, I take the 130 as a decent small representation - given that I did appeal to various forums outside of the usual "old school" venues.
I did not post this on K&K, simply because I thought there was enough overlap on the OD&D/S&W boards and my blog. I did try to get this poll posted on Dragonsfoot. Dragonsfoot has a strict policy about not discussing 3E/4E, and I had sought permission for the poll, given the nature of the questions. I was very disappointed I didn't get a response.
I hope the data here serves to refute statements such as "4E drives the OSR". I also hope the data serves useful for other purposes, such as to help OSR publishers and interested content authors. For me, it was interesting to do this and read the responses and see how D&D and gaming has touched lives.
Here's an interesting thought to leave you with... did WotC already know all this prior to the design/development of 4E? I can't imagine, with the marketing muscle of Hasbro, that WotC didn't know that 3E was having a negative effect.
If you look at how the miniatures gaming world is taking off with many titles and interest, perhaps the handwriting on the wall from 3E forced WotC to move D&D towards what is selling these days? Perhaps the comparisons to MMOs aren't the true picture - but rather a comparison to other miniature games is more appropriate? After all, if you can combine some of the obsessiveness of MtG collectors with the most popular RPG and aim it at the (what seems to be) accelerating market of miniature gaming - perhaps WotC did have a plan?
I dunno, I did not pay attention to what was blogged or written about during 4E design/development. It's an interesting thought.
What do you think? What do these numbers say to you?
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Swords & Wizardry Quick Start
Posting has been very slow for me this week for a number of personal and work related reasons - as well as that I'm going on a much needed mini-vacation up north into the woods of Wisconsin. No, I'm not LARP'ing, but it will be a nice camping trip to recharge the batteries and spend quiet time with The Princess Wife.
I've also been swamped with commitments to my Examiner.com column, to my GameCryer monthly miniatures-related review column and various projects, such as judging the One Page Dungeon Contest. I've also taken on a personal project that will help me at Gen-Con and also address an interesting need in the Swords & Wizardry world - a Quick Start set of rules.
I've based this in part on the idea that Jeff Rients came up with for his Winterwar game - a players handout that gave chargen and class rules in one page. I've added more content that would allow a player to take this portion of the Quick Start and roll up a character in 10 minutes or less. I've also got a Game Referee part that will include rules on combat, help on running a dungeon and a fully fleshed out key for the sample dungeon shown in the Core Rules book.
It's my goal that someone could take this, print it out and be playing tonight with a group of friends as first level characters.
I'm getting through it slowly - given the other commitments, but I'm a good chunk of the way there. I'm mainly filling out the dungeon key as well as dropping in "HOW-TOS" within the key, such as adjudicating poison saving throws, or dealing with combat with unintelligent monsters. Once I'm done, I'll release it, free of course, for your use.
So don't expect to hear from me until Tuesday - in the meantime, Game On! and Have Fun!
I've also been swamped with commitments to my Examiner.com column, to my GameCryer monthly miniatures-related review column and various projects, such as judging the One Page Dungeon Contest. I've also taken on a personal project that will help me at Gen-Con and also address an interesting need in the Swords & Wizardry world - a Quick Start set of rules.
I've based this in part on the idea that Jeff Rients came up with for his Winterwar game - a players handout that gave chargen and class rules in one page. I've added more content that would allow a player to take this portion of the Quick Start and roll up a character in 10 minutes or less. I've also got a Game Referee part that will include rules on combat, help on running a dungeon and a fully fleshed out key for the sample dungeon shown in the Core Rules book.
It's my goal that someone could take this, print it out and be playing tonight with a group of friends as first level characters.
I'm getting through it slowly - given the other commitments, but I'm a good chunk of the way there. I'm mainly filling out the dungeon key as well as dropping in "HOW-TOS" within the key, such as adjudicating poison saving throws, or dealing with combat with unintelligent monsters. Once I'm done, I'll release it, free of course, for your use.
So don't expect to hear from me until Tuesday - in the meantime, Game On! and Have Fun!
Monday, June 1, 2009
PrincessWife's OD&D Solo game - Games from last week
Last week saw my wife finally face something that seriously conflicted with her plots and plans - the fact that not everyone might just trust her.
Her character, Aeli, set a trap for bandits who had been plaguing the road between Valetown and Westport. The trap succeeded and she captured seven of the scoundrels. The town scoundrel who she'd shanghai'd into assisting her (at sword-point) somehow escaped and ran off into the darkness soon after the battle.
She approached Valetown - which is a sleepy little farming/produce trade center - with the bandits tied up. Said town's sleepy townsguards were a little surprised and somewhat intimidated, especially when the bandit leader started arguing that Aeli was the bandit herself!
The townsguards were not amused by the arguing, nor were they willing to just take Aeli's word for it, so they marched the whole lot to jail. Although Aeli had just helped Valetown with a ghoul problem, the Patriarch admitted that it was possible the bandit leader was right - Aeli could be a bandit herself. The scoundrel who could've confirmed Aeli's story had run off. They all cooled their heels until morning while the Patriarch confirmed their story. He did, so Aeli was freed.
It was interesting to watch my wife as a player deal with an unexpected turn of events. She coooperated and roleplayed quite well in arguing her case, and she knew that she would eventually be found to be in the right - but I also attribute that to her taking good notes as she could now produce names and information.
She now has her "slingshot" rock launcher to take out the skeletons at the bridge, should Brother Atu fail in his turn - I'm really curious to see how the dice roll to see if she'll be able to smash skeletons with this thing. She's really put some thought into it!
Things will be a bit tougher this week, for playing OD&D - we have a camping trip we're preparing for, and a lot of extra things going on - but I hope to get some time soon.
And no, I don't fear the doghouse if she doesn't "win". In fact, I love giving her obstacles and challenges - because the PrincessWife is EXTREMELY competitive when faced with challenges.
Her character, Aeli, set a trap for bandits who had been plaguing the road between Valetown and Westport. The trap succeeded and she captured seven of the scoundrels. The town scoundrel who she'd shanghai'd into assisting her (at sword-point) somehow escaped and ran off into the darkness soon after the battle.
She approached Valetown - which is a sleepy little farming/produce trade center - with the bandits tied up. Said town's sleepy townsguards were a little surprised and somewhat intimidated, especially when the bandit leader started arguing that Aeli was the bandit herself!
The townsguards were not amused by the arguing, nor were they willing to just take Aeli's word for it, so they marched the whole lot to jail. Although Aeli had just helped Valetown with a ghoul problem, the Patriarch admitted that it was possible the bandit leader was right - Aeli could be a bandit herself. The scoundrel who could've confirmed Aeli's story had run off. They all cooled their heels until morning while the Patriarch confirmed their story. He did, so Aeli was freed.
It was interesting to watch my wife as a player deal with an unexpected turn of events. She coooperated and roleplayed quite well in arguing her case, and she knew that she would eventually be found to be in the right - but I also attribute that to her taking good notes as she could now produce names and information.
She now has her "slingshot" rock launcher to take out the skeletons at the bridge, should Brother Atu fail in his turn - I'm really curious to see how the dice roll to see if she'll be able to smash skeletons with this thing. She's really put some thought into it!
Things will be a bit tougher this week, for playing OD&D - we have a camping trip we're preparing for, and a lot of extra things going on - but I hope to get some time soon.
And no, I don't fear the doghouse if she doesn't "win". In fact, I love giving her obstacles and challenges - because the PrincessWife is EXTREMELY competitive when faced with challenges.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)