The reason for my Nippon mania in Warhammer- 80s Ninja Craze!

As I blogged about here in post here I've been working in my Warband of Nippon in anon again, off again fashion. Currently, its in the on mode, huzzah.

I've just completed a few far eastern/nippon/samuari type major purchases and will be rounding out two units with enough minis to have a sizeable force to play with. I've currently tracking all activity on this particular army over at Dogs of War Online. As you can see I've made substantial progress with the ninja, for those inclined here is a picture from the blog featuring my first unit rounding to form:

I've been having a lot of fun scouring eBay for these guys and I am nearing the end of my quest to have one of one each of the ninjas from back in the 1980s (there were 48 in all).

But, only recently I stepped back and wondered just why? Why the interest in ninjas? No it wasn't the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles either (I missed that by a few years). The roots of my being smack dab in the middle of the 80s Ninja Craze was this awesome great/bad movie, AMERICAN NINJA!

Of course, after watching it on HBO I wanted to be a ninja so of course I then proceeded to make some ninjatō, painted them silver and proceeded to whack the crap out of my friends with them. I also had some ninja stars to fling around too with my main target being the garage drywall. Of one thing I know for sure, I also dressed up as a ninja for Halloween one year too, probably seventh grade. My mom has a picture of it, but I'm not letting that out to become the next internet meme.

So there you go, 80s' Ninja Craze, 3rd Edition Warhammer a few short years later with some vestigial traces (and the let down of no Nippon army from GW*) and then going full-bore later in my life. I guess what was once old is now new again?

As a final thought one does have to deal with a Inverse ninja law...

* Games Workshop teased at Nippon on page 194 of the 3rd Edition Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay book, "For the moment we shall pass over these lands, leaving their exploration to others. A complete guide to the lands of Nippon is already under development." Looks like that became never with the move to 4th Edition Warhammer Fantasy Battle and then "Herohammer".

Dragon Magazine Retrospective: My Favorite Issues and Why They Still Matter

 

Everyone has their “Golden Age” when it comes to Dragon magazine, and in reality it’s no different than say White Dwarf. A lot of one’s views will be dependent on just where you entered gaming. As I’ve discussed on this blog and on sites like Dragonsfoot before, I was a latecomer to 1st Edition AD&D in terms of its product run. I started gaming in 1982, but for years my friends and I really mixed and matched stuff together as we explored the game. In other words, like a lot of kids I suspect we freely mixed and matched 1st Edition and Basic and never thought twice about doing so.

So with that in mind, I really didn’t start reading Dragon on a consistent basis until well after many 1st Edition gamers would consider it to be on the decline. To me this is puzzling because around #105 things started to get really good, again from my perspective.

The run from about issue #80 till around #170 fits my style of gaming perfectly: detailing out first edition stuff (albeit late 1st) that I can easily insert into my 2nd Edition games with little or no fuss. To me there is little I have to change — it fits like a glove. 

In a no particular order here are my top ten all time favorite Dragon magazine issues with their overall themes.
 

1. #134- Dragons - This issue is the be-all, end-all when it comes to dragons and anything dragon-related. It’s a great reference for amping up 1st Edition dragons and good dragon tactics in general. The cover is pretty cool too, a bit weird now, but still cool.

 

2. #125- Chivalry - Back in the day I played quite a number of cavaliers and played them a lot, not for any power-gaming reasons, but more for stomping foes into the dust in the name of king and country! Being the first book I bought with my own cash

aka (Unearthed Arcana) probably had something to do with it). In terms of iconic images, there aren’t many more powerful than a knight on horseback, lance leveled. I think I wore out my copy back in the day reading and rereading this thing. Even the other articles not dealing with knights are damn cool.

As far as the cover, look at that! A historical-based Arthur, how cool is that? Couple this issue with #118 (see below), the Arthurian characters from the Deities and Demigods (Legends and Lore) from 1st Edition, and you’re well on your way to an Arthurian-themed campaign. 

3. #127- Call to Arms - This is just as good as #125 in my book. There is so much meat in this you need a fork and knife. Single-class fighters are probably my second favorite class after fighter/mage. When you look at the options and idea starters this gives the DM and players, you can couple this with #125 and #119 for everything one would need for a strong feudal-style campaign akin to the

Again, the cover on this is epic. I think I drew that cover multiple times as an early teen. There is so much going on. I especially love the one orc saying basically “Ok, let’s go at this one last time!”

 
4. #136- Urban Adventures - Damn, this cover rocks too — see a pattern here? Urban adventures are a very underutilized part of the game in my opinion and often an area where newer players simply see as a “store” to exchange stuff for stuff they want from “shop-keepers.” What #136 does is give the DM a great host of options, and the article “50 Ways to Foil Your Players” is a gem in my opinion.

If that were not enough, there is a great golem article, a very good Star Frontiers one, and a host of others. In short, you can’t go wrong with the options this issue gives you.

5. #138 Dreadful Tidings - This one gets special mention for two reasons: a wide selection of alternative undead types which I’ve used for years (Hungry Dead, anyone?) and the article on the plague. The rest of it is a bit skimpy, but the two articles more than make up for it. The cover isn’t bad and has a good deal going on, but for some reason it doesn’t register with me. 

 

6. #160- The City Never Sleeps - Tie this in with #136 and you’ve got everything you need for down-and-dirty city creation and defenses in a magical world. Thieves guild articles and others fill out the special section nicely. I especially like the maps of the Inn of the Last Call.

For issue #160 the cover is okay, not my favorite, but okay. The real meat in this one is the articles.

7. #123- Arcane Arts - This cover sets the tone and is a great tool to use for the magically inclined characters of the campaign world. The special section has three outstanding articles and the Arcane Lore section with fire-related spells is fantastic. Of special note is the idea of the “Arcane College,” a great tool for DMs to use when PC mages get to higher levels.

Legends and Lore has Oriental heroes and the Marvel-Phile section has some of the heralds of Galactus.

 8. #118- Competitions and Tournaments - Tie this into #125 and Arthurian Britain (legendary, not quasi-historical) and away we go. Ever wonder about how to stage a tourney? Wonder no more — follow the pointers in this section and you’re well on the way to a good framework for a fair, festival, or what have you. Also consider the article “The Fairest of the Fairs” (#137) in conjunction with this issue for further idea kick-starters.

Some folks will not like this issue as it contains the infamous article heralding the coming of 2nd Edition by Zeb Cook — who makes the cut in terms of classes and who doesn’t… I’ll leave it at that to cut down on the rancor. Personally, I think Zeb did a great job given the circumstances.

This cover is awesome and the last of the great chess series that ran for years by the artist Denis Beauvais.

9. #116- Maritime Adventures - 

Long before “Of Ships and the Sea,” I used this issue to great effect as it covers everything needed for ships and sailing in a fantasy setting. As I got older I still liked the idea behind it, but I’ve never liked the idea of Ships of the Line akin to HMS Victory in a world of high medieval tech. To me a cog or at most a caravel represents the levels of seaborne tech for most worlds. And for me a caravel would be on the high side of maritime technology.

The cover is what it is: a picture of a red dragon mini with some smoke effects added. Nice, but not great.

The whole issue is great by my estimation and there really isn’t a bad article in it.

10. #106 - This was tough as I’m tempted to pick the likes of #115, #145, #148, #167 or #178. I give the nod to #106 solely based on the strength of the article “A Plethora of Paladins.” The Illrigger alone is so cool you can’t go wrong with it, and the class has featured in my 2nd Edition games.

In fact, it was the Illrigger that made me reevaluate kits and dump them emtirely much from my 2nd Edition games. I find most of the NPC classes work just fine in 2nd Edition and you can easily use them with the likes of “Sages and Specialists,” which are more akin to NPC classes in presentation anyway.

The cover…while not a "chain mail bikini" it’s starting to get close.

Honorable mention / runner-up status goes to the likes of #99 (for the expanded sword system and troop tables), #102 (Anti-Ranger), #119 (Druids), and #124 (Airborne Adventuring). The cover of #119 is especially awesome! #126 is another favorite of mine, especially for the cover.

These issues for me were the “sweet spot” of gaming articles and heavily influenced my gaming and my perception of the game. It probably also explains why, to some degree, 2nd Edition became such a non-issue to me. My group and I were already mix-and-matching the various gaming systems for years. When 2nd Edition came out we continued to do so.

THAC0: The Great Divide? What the Hell?

F (ExTSR) is Frank, as in Frank Mentzer, longtime cohort of Gary Gygax, writer of the Red Box (1983) of D&D Basic and one of the few active folks from the advent of TSR and the role-playing age on Dragonsfoot (which is now no longer the case).

There are people who think of THAC0 solely as a 2nd Edition AD&D creation when in fact according to Frank it predates 1st Edition and may even have been in common parlance around the time of the Lake Geneva Campaign. And again for those that don't know the Lake Geneva Campaign was THE grand-daddy of them all in terms of RPGs campaigns; it was the one that Gary DM'ed and well, pretty much wrote AD&D as we know it.

Now on to THAC0 itself: THAC0 stands for "To Hit Armor Class (Zero)."

In 2nd edition AD&D in melee combat, one rolls a d20 and compares it against their THAC0 score. For example if your THAC0 score is a 18 and you roll a 14 you would hit Armor Class 4. In other words, straight up on the die with no modifiers THAC0 represents the roll you need to hit AC 0 on a d20. In a nutshell that's all there is to it. So why is it that people look like this when you bring up the subject of THAC0 in gaming circles?

"Is it THACO or THAC0? I don't see the difference...

Seriously, simple math is that hard folks? The only argument that I can see possibly being made is for a unified mechanical rule of later editions which THAC0 is not. But, then again 1st and 2nd Edition has lots of wonky bits to it anyways. 3rd edition and later did tidy up stuff, but abandoned this one when it wasn't broken. Plus I'm not a fan of a single mechanic simply for its own sake, but can see the utility in some systems.

Maybe its the seemingly "weird" subtractions say for speed factor where lower is better. Sure AD&D (both 1st and 2nd) are not consistent whether high or low rolls are good or bad.

But the next time somebody starts squawking about the "difficulty" of simple math and unified mechanics being superior just point out they can, you know...do math. For the older grognard crowd point out that THAC0 appears in their "Ye Olde Holy Book" aka the 1st edition Dungeon Master's Guide written by Gary Gygax. For those who want to save vs disbelieve its right there on pages 196-214.

Be prepared to save vs. long winded diatribe regarding about how Gary didn't really like it. Dudes... shut the Hell up, it's in the freaking book, your book no less.

And if you are having issues? Here is a great breakdown of how THAC0 works.

Here We Go Again: 5th Edition D&D and the Familiar Edition Churn

 

 

Normally I’m the type of guy who will let things play out rather than rush to condemn. But the recent announcement of 5^th Edition over at the Wizards of the Coast website made me throw that approach out the window.

I’m generally a “live and let live” kind of guy, but I also like to call out idiocy when it rears its ugly head. All over the web people are talking about what the announcement means. The main question I keep coming back to is simple: Did D&D really need a new edition?

My answer is no. And this isn’t some reactionary knee-jerk response. Wizards has managed to screw up D&D — or succumb to edition churn — at an ever-alarming rate. Take your pick. In fact, it might be both. This is simply the latest chapter.

"I come in brown AND I "squirt."

Some will say, “How can you know it’s going to be bad before you see it?” Sorry, but I didn’t have to reserve judgment to know that Justin Bieber, the Microsoft Kin, Google Buzz and Wave a ave, and the Microsoft Zune were going to be craptastic. Some things are just born to suck.

First, some history is in order for those not in the know. Wizards of the Coast is not the originator of the game. Wizards is a subsidiary of Hasbro that subsumed TSR, thereby acquiring the rights to D&D.

The history of D&D is a sordid one stretching back to its roots in the 1970s. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson are credited with jointly creating the game, but a sealed settlement and both men being deceased means we may never know the full details of what actually went down. Enter the Blumes, and later Lorraine Williams, and you have a situation where the main creative driver of the game never really had control — or had it for exceedingly short periods of time.

1st Edition succeeded in spite of the efforts of those fighting against Gary (as near as I and others can figure). TSR went belly-up in the ’90s through mismanagement (again, largely Lorraine Williams promising to “show how real companies are run”). But I digress. Wizards snatched it up, only to be bought by Hasbro in turn. There you have it: a game of IP hot potato where the name itself became more important than the content.

And there is one of the main reasons Wizards of the Coast is churning out yet another edition of D&D. (For those counting: 3.0 in 2000, 3.5 shortly thereafter, and the miserable failure that is 4e in 2008.) The IP is simply too valuable to ignore, and the best way to exploit it is a new edition. There, I said it.

My suspicion is that this endless edition churn is about money, plain and simple. First off, I have no issue with a company wanting to make money — people have families to support, I get that. But call it what it is.

It’s no different than the Iraq War. Had Bush Jr. just said the real reason we went in was to get rid of Saddam for trying to whack his father, I’d have been fine with it. Instead we got weapons of mass destruction. Wizards is in the same boat: call it like it is, guys.

4e went out the gates destroying everything that came before it Attila the Hun style — and they did it gleefully. The only problem with scorched-earth tactics is that you ravage the countryside… and then you get a peasant revolt for good measure. That revolt’s name was Pathfinder. As I wrote about last year, the Pathfinder rift vs. 4e was the biggest shift since the 1st/2nd edition transition. The difference is that the move to 2e was a minor tremor compared to the earthquake of customers jumping ship to a competitor.

You created the madness that led to your own fractured customer base.

Edition churn is nothing new. D&D never reached truly self-sustaining numbers even in its heyday, so the only way for publishers to stay afloat is new editions. I’ve talked about this before at Dragonsfoot — the game was always a rather wobbly business model, and it has repeated itself nearly every iteration. In my opinion, the model is not sustainable and requires a reboot every so often to survive.

So now we get to the crux of all this: 5th Edition D&D, which is supposed to be the big tent that brings everyone back in to play. Do they really think we’re that dumb? That their olive-branch “D&D détente” is anything more than a PR move?

Had they really been interested in offering a D&D for all editions all along, they would have done so. Instead they took the approach of trying to force customers to the new edition by cutting off support for the old, reasoning that with no official material we’d come crawling back anyway.

Except that didn’t happen. The peasants banded together, formed their own communities, wrote their own material, and said “thanks, we’ll go it alone.”

The problem only became dire once the money spigot turned off and Wizards was forced to look around for new (old) customers. Prior to the 4e debacle they were doing just fine and wrote us off as lost causes. As I wrote last time, they had already lost the Pathfinder crowd. Those people weren’t coming back, and the industry couldn’t attract enough brand-new players to make up the difference.

So somewhere in the bowels of Wizards someone had a “come to Jesus” moment. Hypothetical Marketing Employee: “I know, let’s release a new edition that promises an old-school feel! Even better, we’ll market it at all those folks we discarded years ago. I’m sure they’ll buy whatever we shovel out. Better yet, they’ll be so grateful!”

Yeah… good luck with that, WotC.

Given my background and interest in computer history, there is one recent company that Wizards of the Coast is doing their best imitation of: Quark. The parallels between QuarkXPress losing the desktop publishing wars to Adobe InDesign are eerily similar. For a good read on the subject, check this article from 2005. It talks about Vista, but look past that and focus on Quark’s history: they made every customer-related mistake in the book and invented a few new ones for good measure. Worse, they didn’t realize it until far too late and alienated a ton of people in the process.

Sound familiar?

Wizards should have read up on this, because they followed the same failed strategy to their folly. Basically, put Wizards in place of Quark, and Paizo with Pathfinder in place of Adobe, and you have the same story in the making. Or as I like to say: “Same circus, different clowns.”

Next up, I keep hearing about the “big tent” approach for 5th Edition D&D. Big tents don’t work, because by their very nature they are a compromise. And compromises, by definition, mean no one walks away from the table truly happy.

Some have countered with “Well, what’s the alternative?” I postulate that maybe there isn’t one. The genie is out of the bottle. It came out in 1985 and isn’t being stuffed back in anytime soon. There is far too much damage to repair and far too much baggage.

And on top of all that, I’m still not convinced a new edition needed to be created in the first place.

On the subject of style of play, I keep hearing that 5th Edition will have a “retro feel.” Well, no kidding? What else are they going to say? Until I see it with my own eyes, color me skeptical. Are they going to admit it plays more like World of Warcraft than traditional D&D?

And if we really need a D&D version that has that old-school feel, then just pick up a copy of Castles & Crusades. No matter what the d-bags and naysayers like to paint it as, it delivers that old-school feel.

Again: is a new edition of D&D needed? Again, no.

Want retro with some new rules? Here it is.

 I should hasten to add, as I’ve stated on Dragonsfoot, that I have no beef with how people want to get their D&D/role-playing entertainment. Go scratch your gaming itch however you want. Unlike some of the ass-hats in the OSR community (some of whom are now quietly deleting their flame-bait, frothing neckbeard incendiary bombs on various sites), I won’t tell a newer gamer that they’re “wrong” for liking what they like. I’ve had that hurled at me for endorsing 2nd Edition, and I’m not passing it on to others.

I’m a big proponent of newer gamers playing what they will look back on fondly years later as their “golden age of gaming.” My game is not their game, and I’m fine with that.

But that leads to the overall point: Why even do this?

By its nature, a modular approach is going to mean that even if you somehow got everyone to stop playing their current edition and move to 5th, they’re still only going to buy the parts that recreate the game they actually want. It also limits who will buy any given add-on. Or, put another way, this is what TSR did with all the campaign settings back in the ’90s that helped lead to its demise.

Wizards will (whether they know it or not) put everyone into separate buckets. It was Bill Slavicsek who said: “It’s raining money outside and you want to catch as much of it as you can. You can either make a really big bucket or waste your time and attention by creating a lot of really small buckets — either way, you’re never going to make more rain.”

In this case, Wizards is hoping to get some people who haven’t spent money on them in years to do so. Call me foolish, but while this is similar to the 1st/2nd Edition split, it’s far worse. It’s like they forgot the whole episode that led to the decline of 2nd Edition. At least 1st and 2nd are nearly compatible.

And that is about the only area where Wizards has a shot with me personally: stuff that I could use with my existing 1st/2nd Edition material for adventures. I’m highly unlikely to buy the core rules. Maybe that is their intention, but either way it’s unlikely that all players will belly up to the same table.

"Still need some help lugging this! Where's Nodwick?

Tangentially related to all this is the matter of style, look, and feel. To me this has never been a major issue the way it is for some. I’ll admit I’m not a fan of the manga dragonborn/tiefling goth assassin/warforged “over-sized weaponry, armor, and more gear than a U.S. Marine” aesthetic (see left), but it’s not enough to make me refuse to buy something on that alone.

Grognards need to get over the fact that nudity was going to be excised from the game, as were its more violent elements, in any edition that came after 1st. 1st Edition was created during the free-wheeling 1970s. The conservative 1980s were a reactionary phase, and thus the more toned-down feel of 2nd Edition was very much a product of the times. In short, don’t expect it to look like it did in First Edition.

I must confess that Bill Willingham was my favorite TSR artist back in the day for either First or Second Edition, but I don’t expect he’s getting hired back anytime soon.

In closing, a version of D&D designed to appeal to all players of all editions is likely going to satisfy none of them. I hear talk of a modular approach — a core game with optional parts you can add? What, you mean like people have been doing since RPGs began?

While I may end up being wrong about this, I don’t think that will be the case. And if I’m to shift my opinion on this and open my wallet, then Wizards of the Coast had better be bending over backwards to make up for the treatment we (I’ve) received as customers since 2000.

Until they do, I’ve got this, mixed with Fifth Edition, and Wizards can’t do a thing to stop me.

Stoneskin: The Most Abused Spell in 2nd Edition AD&D?

Ahhh Stoneskin... I've thought I had this spell down pat over the years then looked at others' interpretations of it and thought they were right and then went back to the source and wondered if there is no clear-cut definition on perhaps the most abused spell in 2nd edition AD&D.

I must admit I've played 2nd Edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons for years and thought I knew this spell inside and out. But much like a quirky politicians language in a law it's a bit puzzling in its phrasing. There is one pertinent part that is unclear or at least hinges on how it's interpreted. By this I mean consider the following:

Stoneskin
4th level Mage spell (page 163 in the 2nd Edition Players Handbook)
Range: Touch
Components: V, S M
Duration: Special
Casting Time: 1
Area of Effect: 1 creature
Saving Throw: None

When this spell is cast, the affected creature gains virtual immunity to any attack by cut, blow, projectile or the like. even a sword of sharpness cannot affect a creature protected by stoneskin, nor can a rock hurled by a giant, a snake's strike, etc. However, magical attacks from such spells as fireball. magic missile, lightning bolt, and so forth have their normal effects. The spell blocks 1d4 attacks, plus one attack per two levels of of experience of the caster has achieved. This limit apples regardless of attack rolls and regardless of whether the attack was physical or magical. For example, a stoneskin  spell cast by a 9th-level wizard would protect against five and eight attacks. An attacking griffon would reduce the protection by three each round; four magic missiles would count as four attacks in addition to inflicting their normal damage.

The material components of the spell are granite and diamond dust sprinkled on the recipient's skin.

Now I'm no rules lawyer, but the section that says "This limit applies regardless of attack rolls and regardless of whether the attack was physical or magical."

Now you can interpret it to say: Attack rolls whether the hit or not remove one "skin" from the spell.

Or you could say it doesn't, much...

So what did Sage Advice have to say about it?

Stoneskin:

"This spell is subject to considerable abuse by player characters. Multiple stoneskins placed on a single creature are not cumulative. If two or more stoneskin spells are cast on the same creature, roll normally for the number of attacks each spell protects against. If a new spell protects against more attacks than the present spell does, the recipient gets the benefit of the increased protection; otherwise there is no effect. The caster does not necessarily know how many attacks the spell can shield him from.

Stoneskin protects only against blows, cuts, pokes, and slashes directed at the recipient. It does not protect against falls, magical attacks, touch-delivered special attacks (such as touch-delivered spells, energy draining, green slime, etc.), or non-magical attacks that do not involve blows (such as flaming oil, ingested or inhaled poisons, acid, constriction, and suffocation). Stoneskin lasts for 24 hours or until the spell has absorbed its allotment of attacks."

Well...this helps, but only a little.

Restless Rust Monster Games- WA2- Assault of the Hill Giant Raiders, a Free Module

 

Raiding and pillaging just for fun!

 

(Edit 7-6-26) This post has been rewritten to allow for the free download of one of my modules WA2- Assault of the Hill Giant Raiders, set in my campaign world. In the end I decided against becoming a published module writer and focused on other endeavors.

WA2- Assault of the Hill Giant Raiders can be downloaded here. 

Original Post

I've mentioned it a few times on various websites, but I've been ever so slowly expanding my written modules for 2nd edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. The ultimate goal of this is to get a number together for sale and make them available for print-on-demand at Lulu.

Eventually I think I might include some 1st edition ones as well but we'll have to see where this takes me first. One idea for 1st edition I've been mulling over is a Tiamat inspired adventure. Plus as time and creatively allows I'm re-writing the Planar Webs of Lolth (in place of Queen of the Demonweb Pits).

The Tiamat one could be sprawling and like the redo of the Webs is planar. Maybe I should key them as modules OP2 and OP3; after all I don't think there were any that I remember of after OP1...But I digress.

As of right now I've got my first one WA2 - Assault of the Hill Giant Raiders well underway, but at the rate I'm going it still could be a while. The reason it's WA2 and not WA1 is that WA1 is mammoth and is taking forever to write. What I need to do is focus and finish on something. WA2 is the closest to being done as I ran it in my 2nd Edition AD&D game a few months back. I'm at the point where the layout is largely ready and it's finally down to art being needed. And therein lies the tough part: As I've said at www.purpleworm.org (now mirrored here). I'm willing to meet an artist(s) in terms of "talking turkey", but the costs I've heard so far are way up there. 

Bear in mind this is an old school hobby individual (me), not a major, mid or even lower level publisher we are talking about.

In any event, keep an eye out for Restless Rust Monster Games in the future, but just don't hold your breath for things being quick unless I see a high level of demand.

Who Inherits Old School? A Look at D&D’s Generational Divide

 

Buckle up...this one could get bumpy.

On the way to work the other day, I found myself thinking about succession—not in the Game of Thrones sense, but in the natural evolution of Dungeons & Dragons. Specifically, who are the heirs to the older editions of the game? Where does the torch pass, and when does that lineage end?

The Dungeon Master himself!

To even begin to answer that, you have to look at the early generations of players—those who played Basic or 1st Edition AD&D when those were the current versions. These were the gamers of the late ’70s and early ’80s, many now in their 50s and 60s (and now even older). A number of the original creators: Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, are no longer with us. And with each passing year, the pool of gamers who experienced that era firsthand grows smaller. 

OD&D (as its called retroactively) got the ball rolling with the first iterations of the game and Chainmail that proceeded it. Those guys were the start of RPGs as we know them now.

Even 2nd Edition AD&D, the version many of us later adopters came up with, is now over two decades old. A whole new generation has emerged since then, shaped by modern design philosophies, digital interfaces, and the ever-growing influence of video games.

It’s easy to forget that there was a time when RPGs had no expectations or templates. Some of the earliest players were literally inventing the hobby as they went. Many of them were gaming when computers like the Altair were considered cutting edge( see below). Compare that to now; when the average new player likely encountered role playing first through a Twitch stream or a sleek, modern rule set like 5e.

Never had one, I had an Atari 800 XL!

As someone who was born in the early ’70s and got the Moldvay Basic Set for Christmas in 1981, I straddle a particular generational line. I’m certainly not one of the original "old-schoolers", but I’m also not part of the modern wave. I sit squarely in the middle: a "hybrid player" as I call them who grew up with Basic, 1st Edition, and eventually 2nd Edition, sometimes all at once.

And I think that "middle-ground generation", players like me—might be the last true link to the wild, formative years of tabletop role playing. This is for no other reason of timing of our age.

We were there for the late bloom of 1st Edition, with all its quirks and contradictions. We embraced Unearthed Arcana, the Wilderness Survival Guide (somewhat) and all the other modules and side books that added flavor to our sessions despite their flaws. We transitioned into 2nd Edition when it launched in 1989 and treated it not as a hard reboot, but a continuation. We didn’t draw stark lines between editions; we mixed and matched freely, long before the idea of edition purity became a talking point.

Sure, purists might argue that only the earliest wave of solely 1st Edition players are the real inheritors of “old school.” But I disagree. That later wave, those who played Basic and 1st and 2nd concurrently, were the last ones who treated those versions as living systems, not museum pieces. We were the ones who grew up with the original rules. We may not have written them, but we lived them.

And then came 2000...and everything changed.

That year marked the release of 3rd Edition, and with it, the true dividing line between old-school and new-school D&D. It wasn’t the 1989 launch of 2nd Edition that splintered the player base. It was the OGL, the d20 boom, and the re-imagining of the game as a more balanced, codified system. It introduced a new design era, one heavily influenced by the structure and sensibilities of video games, MMOs and tactical skirmish rules.

From that point forward, the DNA of D&D started to shift. Not for the worse—but certainly away from its roots.

So who, then, are the true heirs to “old school?"

This awesome art made a huge impression on an 8-yer old gamer...

In my view, it’s the "hybrid generation": the kids who played Moldvay and Mentzer versions of Basic, who experimented with 1st and 2nd, who witnessed the transition but were shaped by the era before it. We’re the ones who were some of the last who grew up on when D&D was scribbled maps, inconsistent rules, and house-ruling everything from initiative to encumbrance. We’re the ones who saw the pulp inspirations firsthand, (but not necessarily the pulps themselves). Those who read The Sword of Shannara and The Hobbit before we even heard of Vance, Lieber, or Moorcock. Our aesthetic and influences were already a generation removed, but the game wasn't per se.

We were the last generation raised solely on print modules, on Dragon Magazine articles, on clashing art styles from Elmore to Otus. We didn’t just play D&D, we absorbed it in all its chaos, contradictions, and creativity. When we eventually aged out, the game moved on without us. But the memory of what it was that remains with us and all at a time before the rise of the internet.

So yes, the OSR (Old School Renaissance) has taken up part of the mantle. But it’s not the same as having been there. You can emulate the rules. You can recreate the vibe. But you can’t replicate the culture of discovery and experimentation that surrounded the game in its early years. Fans who superscribe to OSR have their own place in all this in my pinion it simply differs on the the lineage.

Eventually, even we hybrid players will be gone. And when that happens, the link to the original age of RPGs, warts and all, will be gone too. What’s left will be interpretations, homages, and inspired re-imaginings.

Still, it’s a fascinating position to hold: one foot in the origins, the other foot in the modern age. Not the pioneers, but the last of their direct descendants. It also mirrors a lot of Gen Xs experience in life so probably not too surprising.

And maybe that’s not such a bad place to be.

Edition Wars Redux: D&D vs. Pathfinder and the Cycle of Schism

VS.

Taking a short break from Warhammer, I wanted to share some thoughts on the current rift brewing between modern Dungeons & Dragons and Pathfinder. Not as a partisan—but as an outsider. I say “outsider” because I’m not really on either side. No one in this fight is on my side, and frankly, I don’t have much skin in the game.

I don’t play either version

Not my cup of tea either...

Pathfinder is, for all intents and purposes, the natural continuation of D&D 3.0/3.5 after Wizards of the Coastpivoted sharply into 4th Edition territory. Paizo wisely stepped in and offered a home for those cast adrift by 4e’s direction. Thanks to the OGL, they could legally build on the previous edition’s bones—a twist of fate that’s nothing short of poetic. And from all accounts, Pathfinder has done very well for itself.

But for many long-time gamers like me, D&D stopped being “our game” long before Pathfinder ever hit the scene. Some folks fell off with the release of 2nd Edition. For me, it was 3rd. I bought the core books, gave them a go, and found them… meh. Then 3.5 dropped not long after. It felt like a video game on paper. Over time, it began to resemble World of Warcraft more than Dungeons & Dragons.

What finally sealed it for me was the creeping prevalence of phrases like “character build” and “optimized path”. If your tabletop RPG revolves around those concepts, you’re either going to attract MMORPG players—or you’re already emulating that structure, consciously or not. That isn’t inherently bad—but it is a far cry from the games many of us grew up with.

Now, this isn’t to say older editions didn’t have powerful characters or min-maxing, but that wasn’t the point. Today, characters are often designed with end-game blueprints in mind. There’s a roadmap to becoming a specific “build.” What you play matters less than what you build. And for me, that’s a shame. Don’t get me started on equipment overload.

Now before anyone places me as an old-school purist; hold up. I’ve played 3.0, 3.5, and enjoyed d20 Star Wars quite a bit (honestly, more than the West End d6 version). I don’t hang out on the Knights & Knaves Alehouse, and I’ve disagreed with my fair share of Dragonsfoot arguments. I’m not anti-WoW or anti-modern gaming. If I had more free time, I’d probably play the hell out of it. I truly believe people should play what they love.

But not everyone feels that way. And that’s where this schism starts to resemble something eerily familiar.

We've Been Here Before...Twice

his whole D&D vs. Pathfinder showdown? It’s basically the 1989 edition rift all over again—but magnified.

Back then, Gary Gygax was forced out of TSR after Lorraine Williams took the reins. When 2nd Edition dropped, it came with the baggage of her reputation. A lot of players rejected it not because of radical rules changes, but because of who was behind it. And to be fair, mechanically, 1st and 2nd Edition aren’t all that different. It was more about the drama behind the scenes than the game it

Sound familiar?

Back then, the fan-base fractured into edition loyalists. Now, we’re seeing a repeat—but this time, it’s companies going head-to-head. Wizards of the Coast vs. Paizo. D&D vs. Pathfinder. And just like last time, lines are being drawn, and sides are being taken.

Except now the stakes are higher. The editions are more divergent. The business models more aggressive. And the player base more fragmented than ever.

Wizards of the Coast pulling a bait and switch?

 

The Market Is Shrinking—and Splintering

Some in the Old School Renaissance like to believe that retro clones and classic games are on the rise. And sure, in a niche sense, they are. But let’s not kid ourselves: the market for any tabletop RPG is smaller than it was in its 1980s heyday. And within that smaller market, we’re seeing further division. Instead of unity, we get micro-communities and echo chambers.

The irony is that D&D, once the 800-pound gorilla of the hobby, now feels more like QuarkXPress circa 2002—slow to adapt, vulnerable to competitors. Could Pathfinder be the InDesign of our hobby, quietly taking over while the original giant stumbles?

It’s possible. Pathfinder is gaining steam. Paizo has momentum. Wizards has the name, but that’s starting to feel like an anchor more than an asset. Worse, Wizards' strategy around “Essentials” and rumored plans for a new edition feel like confusion, not clarity.

If 5th Edition ends up being yet another hard turn from what came before, they risk alienating what's left of their already fractured fan base. And if the goal is just to get people to re-buy books again and again, well… eventually, players notice. 

Same Circus, Different Clowns

At the end of the day, we’ve seen this before. The fan base fractures. The “wars” get fought online. And somewhere in the background, players just want to roll dice and tell stories.

So maybe it’s not a Kid Rock song—but it does feel like déjà vu. Once again, we’re at one of those once-in-a-generation turning points for the hobby. Last time, the split was ideological. This time, it’s corporate. And as usual, the players are caught in the middle. 

As a (mostly) disinterested observer, I’ll keep watching. Neither company is making what I want—but maybe that’s okay. Maybe that’s the lesson here: the industry doesn’t need to serve me anymore. But it does need to decide what kind of game it wants to be—and who it wants to keep around.

Because if things keep splintering like this, there might not be many left.

Writing and Producing 2e Modules for sale, eventually.

For those of you not in the know I also play 2nd Edition AD&D. I am not a big fan of either 3rd or 4th edition and would play it if I had to, but fortunately I do not ;)

Right now I am DMing once a week and have been working on a high level adventure on and off for a while. Considering the success of the Word of Hashut I am pretty confident I can produce a good layout. I am thinking about writing a module and possibly selling it at Lulu. I am in the process of putting together a high level adventure based on a few ideas that I have had for some time now. Cool thing is there is a homage to both the remake and original Clash of the Titans in it.

I do not expect this will happen soon, but I do think that once I finish up Gold and Glory #4 I will have a bit more time.

So as time goes by I will update here with more bits and pieces.

(PS: Wow first time I made more than 2 blog posts in a month!) 

UPDATE: as of 7/4/26. I decided a long time ago to not push forward with publishing 2nd edition modules.