The Scry/Teleport Exploit

Back when 3e was new (perhaps before then, but 3e was when I really started to hear about it), an exploit of the rules appeared - because attack is so much more effective than defence in D&D, high-level characters could (and should) routinely bypass adventures by first scrying extensively on the end-boss of the adventure, then teleport to his or her location, and kill said end-boss.

Of course, various suggestions were put forward for combatting this. And, indeed, with 4e (and now 5e), WotC provided a solution by removing arbitrary teleport and instead imposing teleport circles - and without the secret code for a given circle, teleport was impossible.

Which is fair enough, but I prefer a different approach.

(Of course, the best solution is just to agree with the players, "gonnie no do that". But that's crazy talk, of course.)

My preferred solution is to add a small bit of text to the teleport spell (and variants) noting that it does not allow you to pass a threshold. That is, you can teleport anywhere in the public realm, but it simply isn't possible to teleport into a temple, dungeon, home, or whatever else. (It does allow you to teleport within one of these buildings, but that same would apply to an inner sanctum, bed chamber, or similar.)

This mostly solves the problem, without getting rid of arbitrary teleports (which are a feature of some of the source material). It also, usefully, mostly fits with the genre conventions (although note what I said recently about purity in fantasy!).

Mostly, though, I just like it as an easy fix for the issue.

A Bit More on Dwarves

I'm still working through some of my ideas on the dwarves of Terafa. My basic concept is that they're heavily based on Samurai - hence their warriors being sworn to service of a named lord, and their use of the two ceremonial weapons (though typically not together), and indeed the banded armour and helms.

The other key element, of course, is that bit of their history that concerns the great loss of racial memory - they have existed for longer than they know, but at some point they were enslaved by masters who stole their ability to form memories. This, of course, influences their psychology profoundly, giving rise to the importance of old tales and history, of ancestor worship, and of questions of identity.

Incidentally, this has the effect that "dwarven" runes are, in fact, not dwarven at all - the runic alphabet they use was something they inherited - dwarves awaking from their fugue came to consciousness in full possession of their language, skills, and the like and have never seen any need to change. But the language isn't theirs. It may or may not be that of their former masters, of course. It is therefore entirely possible for adventurers deep in the Underdark to encounter text that looks like dwarven runes, but is not.

The seven dwarven subraces are the well-known Hill and Mountain dwarves, plus the Sundered (dwarves who quit their underground homes immediately after reaching the surface and now don't/won't go back), Deep Dwarves (who ended their exodus early and so remain in homes in the Underdark), and three subraces that the dwarves don't talk about. Each of these has been scarred by the enslavement in one way or another: the Dvergar remain in their old homes and comfort themselves in endless, pointless labour; the Derro are simply insane; and the Lost had their intellects broken by their enslavement.

(The association between dwarves and the number seven is, of course, intentional.)

And that's more or less where I am on that. I'm sure there's more to come, but it will come if and when I can firm up my ideas some more.

Guns and Psionics in D&D

One of the never-ending debates in D&D circles concerns the big question of whether or not guns and/or psionics 'should' be in D&D. Some people really like one or both of these elements, while some others really don't - typically based on some notion of purity in fantasy and/or historical accuracy.

A large part of the issue with purity in fantasy is that the genre has been very self-referential for a very long time - Tolkien was by far the biggest influence prior to D&D, and much of fantasy since the late 70's has aped either Tolkien or D&D. That's why we keep seeing the same Tolkien-derived races over and over again, it's why we keep seeing the same pseudo-medieval trappings, and so on.

But D&D's influences were much wider than just Tolkien, and while neither the Conan or Lankhmar stories featured guns, Barsoom did (and not just Renaissance-era flintlocks, either), while Elric had all sorts of things going on.

Indeed, much of D&D in actual play resembles the old He-Man cartoon, or the "Flash Gordon" movie, or indeed something like "Guardians of the Galaxy" a lot more closely than it does "Lord of the Rings". (And, in fact, the two "Avengers" films show a much better example of high-level play than just about anything else.)

So, yeah, it's probably a good thing for D&D to support firearms and psionics both - as options. In fact, ideally, the game should be much more modular across the board, so that the DM can build his setting and/or adventures to suit his group. (Want "Guardians of the Galaxy"? Include everything. Want "Lord of the Rings"? Use only the divination and enchantment spells. Or something like that.) So, yeah, let's have firearms suitable for pirates and swashbucklers, and also ray guys for He-Man and Flash. Lets have telepaths, and empaths, and weird scientists and artificers, and elementalists and diviners, and...

Of course, that requires that the DM be empowered to pick and choose from the available options as he sees fit, which was something WotC resisted for a long time (since player empowerment sold books), and it also requires that those various options actually exist (which is, unfortunately, not so much the case now).

(Also, it would really help if WotC would step away from their D&D branding iron. While I can understand why they want to say "in D&D, psionic powers are this", that tends to be less than helpful for the DM who wants to flavour things differently - especially if what the DM wants proves incompatible with the mechanics WotC construct to support their concept. But that's not going to happen - given the size of the beast, the needs of the brand are going to triumph over all else.)

The Quest for Memory

The dwarves of Terafa have no creation myth. Their earliest tales tell of their ancestors waking as if from a dreamless slumber, finding themselves on the banks of sightless seas within the earth, surrounded by the tools of their labours. What those labours were, or on whose behalf they worked is a mystery.

In the aftermath of their Awakening, most of the dwarven peoples began a great exodus, travelling ever upwards and away from their enslavement. Along the way, they established new traditions, a new history (oral first, and then written). As the generations passed, they came to venerate their ancestors, and then to worship them outright. In time, they rediscovered the gods that they had forgotten.

Finally, they reached the surface world, a shattered people but also one tempered by their great ordeal. And, alas, they promptly found themselves caught up in a battle for survival and for freedom again, the former against hordes of orcs infesting their new lands; the latter against the Sol. The dwarves won the former, but their success in the latter was certain - one of their great mountain holds remained free while the other fell into slavery.

Today, the dwarves are again free. Once again, it is no great rebellion or quest for freedom that has seen this occur, but rather the disappearance of their former masters. Regardless of the cause, the dwarves celebrate.

Dwarven society in Terafa is structured along clan lines, with identity being of paramount importance to them - the loss of their ancient history has left them sensitive to questions about who and what they are. Consequently, every dwarf expects to know his place in society - his family and his craft, his superiors and those who owe him homage. The loss of such things, and the dishonour that goes with it, is the most grevious wound a dwarf can suffer.

Dwarves are strongly associated with the number seven. They have seven gods, each of whom has an appointed time to rule (with the god of justice, Klos, currently being in the ascendency). There are seven great dwarven subraces (though they do not speak of some of these kin). There are seven great trades, and there are seven things they seek to extract from the earth in their mines (coal, diamonds, iron, salt, silver, tin, and adamantium).

Dwarven military forces are based on skirmish units and small forces rather than massed groupings. This is largely a consequence of them fighting mostly within the earth where space is at a premium, and proved a weakness against the forces that awaited them on the surface. Dwarven chiefs will have a small number of sworn warriors, each of whom will command a small squad. Dwarven sworn warriors are typically equipped with banded armour and close-faced helms. These warriors tend to favour an axe, hammer, pick, or sword, and will carry two such weapons - a larger weapon wielded in both hands, and smaller one for close-in work. Dwarven sworn warriors tend not to make use of shields, though the squads they command are skilled in forming the shield wall.

History Through Storytelling

Last night, LC and I were in Waterstones Glasgow where Alan Lee was doing a book signing as part of a tour to promote "Beren and Lúthien", the 'new' J.R.R. Tolkien book. (Like with "Children of Húrin", it's constructed from various drafts and notes that he left. Unlike the previous book, though, it doesn't appear Tolkien left any real ending to the extended version of this story, so it will be curious to see how that is handled.)

While at the event, I found myself considering the Silmarillion, the history of the First Age of Middle Earth, and also the handling of history in RPG books (especially setting books).

Very frequently, I've found that setting books do two things that I don't much care for: firstly, they seem almost duty-bound to present a whole bunch of crappy fiction throughout the book. This is generally intended to set the scene and provide flavour, which would be a noble end if it wasn't generally awful.

And then, secondly, when the book finally gets around to presenting history, it does so as a dull recounting of facts, probably starting with a thousand-year timeline, followed by a lengthy essay detailing what happened in the various ages. Again, it's information that absolutely is relevant to the setting... it's just deadly dull. (Or, at least, that's the case far too often.)

What occurred to me last night is that, actually, the first of these problems is quite possibly the solution to the second.

The thing is, if you take an average person (that is, someone who hasn't studied history), and quiz them on the past, you'll almost certainly find that they don't know nothing about history, but that what they do know is probably a bunch of fragments, a number of stories (generally around the 'great men'), all very disorganised and rather unreliable. Go back in time to a period before literacy was near-universal, and it becomes even more of a mess.

So... why not present the history of your RPG setting in the same way?

If I recall correctly (which is unlikely, since it was nearly a decade ago that I read this), one of Tolkien's intentions when presenting the history of Middle Earth, was that he'd have four long-form stories making up the tent-poles of his mythology (of which "Children of Húrin" and "Beren and Lúthien" are two), plus a whole bunch of other, shorter stories to round it out.

So, I could envisage an RPG presenting the history in much the same way - instead of the crappy fiction at the chapter breaks, present at each of them a two-page short-form version of one of a dozen historical tales for the setting. Instead of the standard ten pages of history, present a one-paragraph synopsis of a bunch of other stories. And then, for those who are particularly keen, present a book "The History of {Setting}", giving fictionalised accounts of the history of the world - focussing heavily on the heroes and villains, the big acts and events... and not so much on the minutae or even the dates. Just a rough chronology where this story happens some time after that story, but who really knows?

This has the potential advantage of being a little more interesting, it makes the history of the world a source of flavour rather than just data, it presents it in a manner that most of the characters in the setting would know it... and it also has the key advantage of making it all usefully ambiguous and unreliable, allowing the DM to run with it in all manner of ways.

Of course, maybe it's a crazy idea. Given that nobody much seems to be publishing settings these days (except Golarion, which has the history pretty well documented), I guess we're unlikely to find out.