Something I Miss

I'm rather enjoying both of the games that I have underway - "Mists of Lamordia" is now running along at a good pace again, and "The Quest for Memory" is heading rapidly to the first crucible. However, I do find that there is something I miss: playing with gamers.

The thing is, enjoyable as they are, both of the ongoing campaigns are run with casual gamers, people who enjoy the game, to be sure, but whose experience with it is on the more limited end of the spectrum. The great benefit of that is that such players tend to be rather fresher and less jaded than those who have been playing for years.

The flip side of that is that players who have been playing for years tend towards a greater depth - their greater experience of the game lends to a slightly more immersive, and perhaps more challenging style of play.

That's not to say that either is better than the other, nor to imply any criticism either way. They're just different - and it is something that I find that I miss.

A Quick Note on Exploration

I love that the designers of D&D identified three pillars of play, and I really like the three pillars they have identified (combat, exploration, interaction).

But I really hate that they've basically made exploration the "anything else" pillar. And, in particular, they really shouldn't have stuck travelling through the game-world in that pillar. Walking down the road is no more a meaningful exercise in exploration than ordering from a fixed menu is really a meaningful exercise in interaction. Yes, if you absolutely have to tag those actions in one of the pillars, that's where they would go - but for the most part they should just be glossed over and moved past.

"Exploration" would much better be summarised as "finding things out". So exploring a hidden and unknown land is exploration, of course, as is traversing a dungeon... but so too is solving a mystery, defeating a puzzle, or anything of that ilk.

Careful Inconsistencies

There are (at present) two massive secrets at the heart of my work on Terafa, the nature of which I'm not going to state here, what with them being secret and all. The truth is that I'm not sure if they will ever be revealed - indeed, they may well work better as some sort of "something isn't right here..." feeling.

However, I do most definitely want to lay out hints about the fact that some things are badly out of kilter. And the way to do that is to very carefully build in some inconsistencies into the setting material - bits of history that don't line up quite right, dates and durations that can't be made to work together, and other such things.

The only problem with that is that the setting material will also include some number of outright mistakes and changes as I go, which will tend to obscure my intent. But that's just one more fun element of discovering the setting, I guess.

The Spheres in their Courses Above

There are few astronomers on Terafa, but those who do exist have charted the other planets that orbit the suns of that world. In addition to Terafa and the Suns, they have identified five planetary bodies, most of which are associated with greater gods of the Unbalanced Pantheon:

The Twins: At the centre of the system lie the two suns around which everything orbits. These are two spheres of fire, one larger and more constant, the other brighter but fickle.

Thought: The smallest and newest of the spheres, Thought is a relatively tiny, burnt cinder of a world. Its proximity to The Twins must surely mean that nothing could survive on this world. As such, it is closely aligned with the element of earth, in its least hospitable incarnation.

Terafa: Unaligned with any particular element, Terafa is a lush, green sphere that is the home to multitudes of beings. Terafa has two moons (now!) - Melira and Kalis.

The Shield: A thin ring of rocks of all sorts, the Shield is a belt of asteroids that is believed to protect Terafa from the greater dangers the lie beyond.

Naris: In many ways a near copy of Terafa, Naris is another sphere unaligned with any particular element. It is a lush, green shere, that is also home to much life. Transit between Naris and Terafa is exceedingly rare, but not entirely unknown. As a rule, inhabitants of Terafa consider those from Naris to be harsh, impolite, and arrogant; while those from Naris consider inhabitants of Terafa to be absurdly innocent and optimistic. Perhaps curiously, the people of Naris worship entirely different gods to those observed on Terafa, and yet respect the same planetary names. Naris has a single moon.

Klos: A giant green sphere, Klos is aligned with the element of air. It is a stately figure in the heavens, progressing through the night sky in a calm, untroubled progression. Klos has a multitude of moons, some of which may support life similar to that on Terafa and Naris.

Choriam: The largest of the planets, Choriam is also the brightest thing in the night sky other than the two moons. A huge red sphere, Choriam is aligned closely with the element of air. Choriam has many moons, but these are devoid of life - the gases that make up the great sphere are poisonous, and taint all its satelites.

Li: Another great sphere aligned with the element of air, Li is a fickle wandered in the skies - at times, she even crosses the orbit of Choriam, becoming closer to Klos for a time. She is a great purple sphere marked with many bands of green, pink, and other bright colours. Li has many moons, but the number is constant - something within the sphere periodically spawns entirely new moons, while others are ejected from her orbit like unwanted children.

Regarding Spelljammer

Terafa (and Naris also) was once the home of a Spelljammer campaign. Consequently, each of the planets has at least some alignment with one of the four classical elements. I'm disinclined to formally place Terafa within a Crystal Sphere in its "Ultimates Version" - not least because my inclination is that it's better only to do that when actually playing a Spelljammer campaign. However, if and when I do run a Spelljammer campaign again (and that's a big 'if'!), it's likely that Narispace will be one of the spheres likely to be visited - I might as well get the benefit of all this work!

Uranium

The concept of an imprisoned evil (or mad, or both) god is pretty common in fantasy. D&D has Tharizdun, Pathfinder has Rovagug, the "Wheel of Time" series has The Dark One, and Middle Earth has Morgoth.

Of course, Greek mythology had Uranos. From whom we get the word 'uranium'.

As noted in "The Long Tomorrow", uranium is of course a source of immense power. And it is also a dangerous source - it can be harnessed, but absolutely must be handled with care.

For RPG purposes there's a fairly thick seam of material to mine there. Maybe that's the thing that dwarves are really spending all their time digging for, when they "delve too greedily and too deep". Maybe drow equipment is infused with radiation that renders it magical but extremely dangerous. And, of course, there is also the possibility in a fantasy realm that what is being mined is not merely an element named for an imprisoned deity, but actually the very stuff of that deity itself. In which case, what manner of powers, and what manner of dangers might be unleashed?

(I don't particularly have a conclusion at this point. Just musing on the topic...)

Two Problems with Appendix N

I'm currently reading "The Long Tomorrow", which is one of the books on the legendary Appendix N - the inspirational reading list from the 1st Edition DMG. (Now superseded by Appendix E in the 5e PHB.)

I've found that the Appendix N books make for fascinating reading, partly from a historical perspective, partly from a "you're doing it wrong", and partly just out of interest in the works that inspired the young Gygax.

(One thing that is particularly of note is the sheer range of material there. To a certain extent it is a shame that first "Lord of the Rings" and then D&D itself cast quite such a large shadow, because of how those influences have affected everything since. I might even argue that while modern fantasy is by and large much better written than the older works, it's also rather less imaginative in many ways.)

I have, however, found two small issues.

The first of these is that many of these books are very old, and were never much more than fairly obscure, and as a consequence they are hard to find and/or very expensive. And while I'm interested to see what Leigh Brackett did in "The Sword of Rhiannon" (for example), I'm rather disinclined to spend £50 for the privilege. Oh well.

The other issue is rather more contemporary. D&D is, quite rightly, going through a period of excising itself of some of its more troublesome and problematic baggage. Which is fine, except that it probably means removing certain items from Appendix E or its successor in later editions.

The big problem there is that chief amongst these is H.P. Lovecraft, who it's fair to say was a big old racist. More to the point, though, his brand of horror is inextricably linked to his own fear of miscegenation. That is, without the racism underpinning his works they don't really work.

So they kind of have to go.

But H.P. Lovecraft is one of, if not the, biggest influence on early D&D - his fingerprints are on huge elements of the game, its lore, and so forth. Any list of inspirational reading would, quite frankly, be incomplete and lacking without those works on it.

I'm not really sure how WotC can square that circle. I certainly don't envy them the task.

(Ultimately, I suppose we'll end up with some sort of disclaimer about "product of the times", "modern sensibilities", or something like that. Which, frankly, would be rather a cop out. But given that there are problems either way, that may be the least-worst option.)

The General and the Specific

I've been doing quite a lot of thinking about the various peoples of Terafa recently, but also considering one of those big questions that doesn't really come up anywhere except in RPGs: what if the player doesn't agree. That is, what if I say in my campaign guide that "an elf is this", but the person playing an elf character wants something different from their character? And what if, despite our negotiations, we just find that the two notions don't work - that the player wants something from the character that is just impossible in the context of the lore of the setting?

I've gone back and forward on this issue several times over the years. Eventually, what I have settled on is this: the character belongs to the player, and what they say goes... for that character. Obviously, their character is a one-in-a-million exception, for whom the normal lore just doesn't work. And, for the duration of that character's existence the normal lore will be suspended.

It is, of course, entirely possible that at some point I may come back and write the "official history" of the setting. And in the event that that character plays a notable part in that OH, at that point the character's story will be moulded to fit the ongoing lore of the setting. But that would only happen after that character was no longer in use - once the character is indeed a matter of history.

So, for example... I hae established that elven Lord and Ladies are infertile amongst themselves - only the elven Queen can have elven children. Suppose, however, that the player wants his character to be married and have children, and wants those children to be elven (as opposed to half-elven).

Well, fair enough. As indicated, that will indeed be the case for that character for the duration of his career as a PC. But later, in the official history, if the character features at all, it will be massaged - perhaps he and his consort found themselves the adoptive parents of some young elven children, or perhaps he married a human and had half-elven children, or something else.

Ultimately, the point is this: the lore of the setting will not be used to constrain player characters any more than is absolutely necessary; but once they are no longer player characters, those characters will most likely be made consistent with the setting lore.