Evolution of the Orc: Monster progression throughout the monster manuals.

Fire on the Velvet Horizon (FVH) is a monster manual of really unique monsters.  The introduction though is what inspired me to write this piece.  FVH coins the term the M’th person as the perspective monster manuals are written in.  An odd god tense that dictates absolute fact, and at the same time doesn’t always know what is going on with the monster in question as well.  Instead of diving deeper into the strange and unique monsters presented within its own covers (I’m sure I’ll get to this later) it made me think of the common monsters we see again and again in adventures.

Dungeons and Dragons and roleplaying games in general have evolved over time.  While mostly this has focused on rule changes to either add depth or increase ease of play, one thing that has remained constant is the conflict with monsters.  The Orc and the dragon are perhaps the most quintessential monsters within the fantasy genre.   I’m going to focus on the orc because they are a far more common enemy that can be encountered even at low levels as a significant threat, and yet still appear at higher levels (albeit more in the role as cannon fodder for the big bad) while the Dragon tends to be reserved as a more limited encounter.

What follows are the entries on orcs from various monster manuals.  As you will see each section starts off with a few details so you can easily find the entry if you desire to compare to my analysis, but I also include the first sentence from the entry verbatim, as this is obviously the most important this the M’th voice has to tell us about the humble orc.

AD&D 1^st Edition. p. 76 # appearing 30-300

First sentence of MM: Orc tribes are fiercely competitive, and when they meet it is 75% likely that they will fight each other unless a strong leader (such as a wizard, evil priest, evil lord) with sufficient force behind him is on hand to control the orcs.

Orcs primary traits are being bullies that adhere to leadership of the fittest, and will at best intimidate/bully other races into doing their bidding, and at worse enslave them.  They will take slaves for work, food, and entertainment (tourture, etc.) .  This subtle information gives light to how horrible orcs are.  They will eat other sentient races, torture for fun, and as they are described later as being willing to breed with anything, it can be expected that entertainment means sex as well. 

They are capable of being self sustaining being described as being accomplished tunnelers and miners.  Preferring to live in subterranean areas (and having a light sensitivity) their non-combat abilities are further made plain by their above ground lairs consist of wooden huts complete with a palisade, watchtowers, and crew served weapons to defend themselves.  Their greatest limitation seems to be their over aggressiveness leads to infighting with each other as much as them being a threat to anyone else. The only ally they are listed as having are Ogres who may appear in a large enough settlement.  The entry on Ogres describes that Ogres will work for Orcs as mercenaries.  The Ogre probably benefits from the orcs (slightly) higher intelligence.

Appearance wise they are distinctly not human being described as disgusting.  After that a few details of with brown, brownish green skin with pink ears and snouts.  The image of the orc has a porcine face with misaligned tusks.  

Half-Orcs are listed as a sub-entry because Orcs will breed with anything except elves.  Which they have enmity towards and will kill on site rather than even enslave. 

AD&D 2^nd  Edition. p. 281 # appearing 30-300

First sentence:  Orcs are a species of aggressive mammalian carnivores that band together in tribes and survive by hunting and raiding. 

Second edition seems to downplay the internal strife of the orcs (though they will still war with other tribes) and directing it more outwards towards other races.  Their hatred towards elves is to “Historic enmity between elves and dwarves” willing to kill both on sight.  Orcs increase in complexity in this edition, believing that in order to survive they must expand their territory, and value territory above all else.  Although a maximum encounter is still listed as 300, they are able to construct much larger lairs, their numbers expanding to cities ranging from 2000-20000 Orcs.  Orcs are still described as viewing slavery as part of the natural order, the first edition emphasis on slavery is downplayed and they are only mentioned as being part of a baggage carriers.  Their cannibal nature is downplayed as well, stating that they prefer other types of meat to demi-human. Religion for orcs is first introduced as with the addition of shamans or witch doctors in a sufficiently large population.  They have multiple deities with the chief deity being (usually) a one eyed orc.  Absent from this edition is the presence of ogres in orc societies, though the ogre entry still lists them as being mercenaries in the employ of orc tribes. A new addition is the sub-species of Orogs, a smarter tougher orc.  Half orcs are present as a sub-entry though breeding with an elf is listed as an impossibility rather than something that just doesn’t occur out of racial hatred.

Over all second edition humanizes orcs a bit treating their threat more as an imperialistic evil force rather than agents of hatred and chaos.  

Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 Edition.  P.203 # appearing 2-100

First sentence: Orcs are aggressive humanoids that raid, pillage, and battle other creatures.

Orcs get a physical upgrade as their weakness to light is removed.  Orcs get softened up again on a cultural level though, their hatred of elves beginning generations ago, and only “often” kill them on sight.  They have a stronger ties with other orcs as while being willing to work for non-orcs they will rebel unless being commanded by orcs.  The role of female orcs is first described in this edition.  Of course it is not a great role as they are “prized possessions at best and chattel at worst”.  Slaves have been removed from Orc society, rather that all worldly goods belonging to others is rightfully orcs. The one eyed orc god, get a name in this edition: Gruumsh.  The diety from the forgotten realms game setting being made the standard for all orcs now.  Ogres are still absent from orc society, and have no mention of orcs within their own entry in the monster Manuel.  Orogs are gone, being replaced with orcs with levels & class abilities like a player character instead.  Half orcs still make an appearance as a sub entry but they just kind of appear in either orc or human society.  This edition seems to shy away from the grittier aspects of orc life rape, cannibalism and slavery.  Though still imperialistic Orcs seem to be watered down and could easily be replaced with any religiously motivated barbarian tribe.   

Dungeons and Dragons 4^th Edition. P. 203 # appearing 4-7

First sentence:  Orcs worship Gruumsch, the one-eyed god of slaughter, and are savage, bloodthirsty marauders. 

Orc de-evlove in 4^th edition.  Gone is a lot of the more complex motivations of previous editions, the details of society and ecology.  They can no longer build or manage their own culture, instead being scavengers that occupy the abandoned/conquered settlements of others.  Instead they are religiously motivated locusts, that require other societies to raid from to survive, though cannibalism is back.  Orcs are the consummate fodder in 4^th edition.  They rush into close combat with little to no thought of self preservation.  They will fight alongside ogres but no other detail is given on the nature of this relationship.  Orcs are more eclectic, with example encounters including dire boars, dire wolves, and dinosaurs (!)    Orcs are subdivided into specific roles when encountered.  Orc Drudge, Orc Warrior, Orc Raider, Orc Bezerker, Orc Eye of Gruumsch (cleric), Orc Bloodrager, Orc Chieftain.  A bunch of different stats for mostly the same tactic of “rush forward and hit it”.  This complex subdivision of orc power levels handled in previous editions by a simple: for every X orcs encountered is an orc of Y hit dice.     

Dungeons and Dragons 5^th Edition p. 244 # appearing N/A

First sentence:  Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks.

We see a combination of several previous editions here, with several of the ideas expanded upon and blended, though most closely aligning with their 3^rd edition predecessor.  Fifth Edition give the greatest detail on Orcsish religion, and uses this as a springboard for their constant war and aggression to other religions with conflict between deities as the reason for particular Orcish hatred for Elves.   It also expands from naming only Gruumsh to including a fertility goddess, Luthic as well.  Their society is semi-nomadic occupying other species structures and only improving them for temporary defense and then moving on when targets to raid are no longer within striking distance.  Orcs are more inclusive of other races in their groups accepting ogres, trolls, half-orcs, orogs; the last two being sub-races of orc.  There is still very much the feel of orcs being a religiously fueled fanatic, though in this edition it comes across more as this is a cultural explanation/justification for their place in the world.  There is a distinct gap in the information in this edition though with their focus on raiding other civilizations, killing everything, and picking the area clean of material wealth, there is no room for slavery or the cross-race rape associated with previous editions.  As a result it can be assumed that most of this prolific breeding occurs within the orc community or with other goblinoid/evil races (half orc/ half ogres are specifically mentioned).  The status of females in the society also get an upgrade as orc culture is only “generally” patriarchal.  With the focus on breeding and birth by divine commandment it may result in orcish females having a more revered status than the chattel of 3^rd edition. 

Spin offs. 

Between 3^rd and 4^th editions we saw two direct decendedts or Dungeons and Dragons in the form of Pathfinder and Hackmaster.  The evolution of Orcs from these games can be seen as an alternate evolution from Dungeons and Dragons 4^th and 5^th editions.

Pathfinder. P. 222 # encountered 1

First sentence: Along with their brute strength and comparatively low intellect, the primary difference between orcs and the civilize humanoids is their attitude. 

Again Orcs seem to culturally devolve from 2^nd edition to Pathfinder.  Orcs are not component at managing a self sustaining civilization, though this is due to a lack of patience.  Good enough being the Orcs watchword apparently, they are more attracted to the immediate gains of entertainment (eg drinking and fighting) and it is just easier to take things from others. Slaves are mentioned though, there is little evidence of their employment other than being the forced partner in producing half-orcs.  As orcs seem to be aware of their own mental limitations, and understand that this interacial breeding is a solution.  Religion is not mentioned at all.   

Hackmaster 4^th edition (if you aren’t familiar with Hackmaster there is no 1-3 editions) p.32-41.  # encountered 30-300 with war parties of 6-15.

First sentence:  Orcs are man-sized bipeds with the faces and tusks of boars.

Hackmaster spreads orcs out over 11 different entries (which have sub-entries), with additional entries for the half-orc and orkin (half-half-orcs).  The main emphasis on orc culture is the chaotic nature and internal strife that promotes in-fighting as much as fighting with anyone else.  Orcs have a focus on ritual and ceremony to organize their lives.  Slaves still play a major role in orc society functioning as they do not have the ability or patience to have the complex society as described in D&D 2^nd Ed.

Hackmater 5^th edition p.  234 # encountered 1-360+

First sentence:  The most numerous and prolific of the evil humanoid races, orcs are also the most violent and savage.

Orcs are lazy, dumb, and cowardly.  Here many of the established orc reasoning for orcs actions are changed, with the intent of having orcs be as vile as possible.  Orcs take no pleasure in plunder, but rather the violence itself.  Tactics exist, and although not complex, it really portrays the orcs as of low intelligence, rather than suicidal.  Though they have some mining capability, they vastly prefer the use of slaves for any labor they need.  The are preferentially cannibalistic, favoring easting demi-humans to any other meat.  Rape culture defines Orcs here.  50% of orc population is female though very few of those are actually “orcs” rather they are captured females kept as breeding stock.  Life expectancy for these captuered women is woefully short and likely extends to only if they are with child. Religion exists within orc culture, but its prevalence is directly related to the personal power of the shaman of the tribe.  Ogres appear in orc lairs to serve as guards in exchange for food.  Five orc sub races are detailed plus half-orcs.  In my personal opinion the effort the authors go to, to make the orcs repugnant works really well as in this incarnation they seem to be functional on a level that I couldn’t just replace with a human barbarian tribe.  

Product Review: Deep Carbon Observatory

Product Review: Deep Carbon Observatory

From: False Machine Publishing
Cost: 10.00 pdf 13.30 softcover B&W
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/131801/Deep-Carbon-Observatory

Deep Carbon Observatory is very rich on atmosphere.  So much so that "the dungeon" of the adventure only sets up a slight portion of the adventure.  Combat definitely takes a back seat in this adventure, but this isn't to say that it is non-existent or that there is very little threat to the PCs.  In fact there is quite a lot of threat to the PCs.

The book is laid out rather organically. As GM you are introduced to things in much the same way and pace as the players are.  As a result it is a rather "fun" read that had me asking questions and wanting to keep reading to find the answers until the very end where a handy timeline of events serves to tie things together as a sort of "big reveal"  The downside of this is that it is not a quick and easy pick up and run adventure.  Even getting to see "the big picture" as a GM, nothing is outright told to you, you have to figure out a lot of the connections of things on your own.  This is definitely an adventure where as GM you are going to have to be taking notes before, during, and after the adventure. After? I hear you ask.  Yes, the adventure has some definite world affecting consequences.  On the bright side, most of these effects really only occur if the players choose to not be actively engaged in the adventure.  There are several really clever ideas here, but the big take away is that the adventure does not exist in a vacuum frozen in time awaiting the adventurers to awaken it.  The adventure is very organic and could very well resolve itself without any player involvement.

Art is some nice pencil work that conveys a lot of character, the maps have no scale which I feel is a failing.  The authors stress that it is very important to know how many days of food the players have, but provide very little guidance on how long it should take to traverse the various terrain.

From here on out spoilers.  You've been warned.

The adventure is broken into five parts.

The first bit throws the adventurers into the action, and keeps them occupied meeting several colorful characters.  This is a fun different way of introducing the area, and providing one of three hooks to continue on to the rest of the adventure.  Although not overtly stated, probably the most important part of this is to introduce the fact that the area is flooded, and everyone is in bad shape.

The next parts involve the travel up river, then the dam, and the drained lake. All these environments are probably very alien to the players.  The flood has radically changed the "normal" of the path up river.  Things from the lake now traverse the area.  Everything is flooded necessitating travel by boat or a very wet walk for a very long time.  The dam takes the normal dungeon crawl idea and throws it on its side because almost everything has been upturned by the water- traps are already sprung and locked doors are opened.  The drained lake again presents an alien atmosphere of an ecology turned on its head.

and then into the observatory.

I would hope that the PCs would take note of the fact that someone built a dam to keep this place inaccessible under water. Of course that won't keep them out.

Here is a great opportunity to explore the remains of the observatory and the dark elves that once occupied it.

Finally the adventure ends with a timeline of what happened in the past and what will happen if the PCs don't get involved.  So really you could throw this adventure hook at them and have them completely ignore it and then have it come back to bite them in the rear years later in your campaign.
The timeline tracks the progress of another adventuring party interested in the observatory as well as a witch that is an encounter earlier.  With the unfolding of these two parties without PC involvement is really becomes evident that the tracking of time is important in this adventure.  The ration tracking is just as important as there isn't an easy way to re-stock these items and a party may end up quitting the adventure or starving to death if not prepared.


Not every answer is given in the adventure, some  just don't get answered.  What caused the dam to brake, and where did the dark elves go is kind of beyond the scope of the adventure, but may be something to address in your own running of the game.

Rules heavy or rules light?

I started playing Dungeons and Dragons back in 2nd Edition, but it isn't my favorite rule system (I mean really, does anyone love Thac0?).  3rd Edition (3.5 or Pathfinder if you prefer) was the high point for me, in the dungeons and dragons franchise, even though it has its own problems.  4th edition just didn't interest me at all and although I've heard good things about 5th ed I just haven't gotten around to playing it at all.


While I like a lot of different systems for a lot of different reasons, my two preferred systems for fantasy games are Hackmaster 5th Edition, and Lamentations of the Flame Princess (LotFP).


Hackmaster 5th Edition.  Still in its relative infancy, the core books are all out, it was born from the previous edition that spoofed a lot of the classic TSR rules and modules (and is actually a pretty good set all on its own), and their original western game Aces and Eights.  What you get is a rule set that captures a lot of the feel of the original dungeons and dragons, but with lots of detail.  The game repeatedly makes the point that it is a game of tough choices.  You do have to choose between armor to protect yourself or the freedom of movement to not get hit.  While it is fairly rules and dice heavy, there are a lot of tools to keep things moving and everyone engaged during combat.  It provides a fine level of granularity to the game.  The gamemaster book has great advice on how to set up adventures and make them engaging and award players not just for combat but for clever thinking and story advancement.  The only downside of the game I would say is that I am too old.  I don't just feel like whipping up a new monster or converting stuff over to the rules from other systems. 


On the other end of the spectrum is LotFP.  It is an OSR clone that takes a very rules light approach to the game.  When I first introduced it to players some balked at it because the fighter class was the only class that advanced in combat abilities.  I saw this as a feature though, as in many other systems the magic user classes soon eclipse the non-magic classes in versatility and power.  In this way the fighter remains the king of combat.  The balance come in little things like there are no monsters with armor better than plate mail, so even a non-combat class has a chance to affect physical combat at any level.  Pretty much any adjustment I need to make on the fly during the game can be made with a +/- 1 or 2 to a roll and move on.  The adventures published by LotFP is where the game really shines.  Most of the adventures are system neutral and so can be easily ported to any game (I might even take the effort to port them to Hackmaster!) because they aren't filled with combat for combat's sake.  If a monster is present, there is generally only one and it is an important part of the story rather than just an encounter.  Like Call of Cthulhu though, the adventures are harsh and unforgiving. 
The downside is that I have had players quit because of these adventures.

There are plenty of other systems that I like for specific games too.  Usually because the rules provide incentive to, or not to do certain types of behavior in the game, or help establish the feel the game is going for.

I like Deadlands classic for this reason, it uses a poker decks and chips to assist in the game mechanics, which provide a unique system that helps with the whole wild west theme.  It is far more complex then the streamlined savage worlds rules, but I think it also provides a lot more depth.  One of my favorite bits is the use of "wind" and "wounds" which is much like non lethal vs. lethal damage, but also handles the wider range of terror, needing to catch your breath etc. compared to a broken leg or a shot up gut.

The meat grinder

There is an imaginary line I draw between the first two editions of Dungeons and Dragons published by TSR and everything that came after produced by Wizards.  While there are many differences to be sure, the demarcation for me is the lethality of the games.   1st level was a very precarious position for any class in the TSR editions.  Games were lethal and a making it past first level was kind of a big deal.  The wizard editions went to grate pains to make it easy to have party level encounters, so nothing too difficult was ever encountered.  While generally I think this is a good thing, it does eliminate a certain caution amongst the players.  They don't every expect to interact with anything that could cause instant death, nor is there a concern that the dungeon may take more time and resources then they have. 


The last campaign I ran started off with the quintessential introductory adventure: The Keep on the Borderlands.  We pulled out the AD&D 2nd ed rules (which were a lot more clunky than I remember, but that is a story for another time) and had a run through it.  Most of the players were more well versed with 3rd edition rules, and so there was some definite growing pains.


The leader of the group kept on pushing the party farther and farther into what was in fact a very large dungeon without ever thinking to go back to town to rest or resupply.  Little things manifested as play continued as well.  At one point they asked where something they had previously encountered was and I asked them who had been mapping out the dungeon, they had just expected that their characters were doing it automatically (with their hands full of swords and shields etc.) and none of the players were making any notes.  So they were lost.  A lot of what I grew up with as a player was either forgotten by, or never experienced by this group.  So we had some talks about expectations part way though and things continued.  Then the character deaths started.  Some of it can surely be blamed on the luck of the dice.  One player in particular, ended up losing a character every session. Ultimately I decided that no amount of pre-briefing can change what a player expects an adventure to be.  There was a definite learning curve between the two editions.  This got me thinking, is there a way to introduce people into a harsh and deadly adventure without turning the players off?
Does this mean I should do away with the adventures that are by their very nature "hard" especially for 1st level characters?  No.  Though perhaps I should change my approach.



Two very clever ideas (neither one that I came up with) may provide an answer.



The first is the funnel method of dungeon exploration.  Instead of each player having a character and a handful of NPC / henchmen accompanying the party (because really, who wants to play a henchman anyway, after their PC dies) Every player makes two or three characters and the entire mob of adventurers enter the dungeon.  In this way the party has a fair number of combat ability, supplies, and redundancy of skill sets where loosing a character isn't a big deal either for the party or the player.  Lessons can be fatal and the game still moves forward and by the end of the adventure, perhaps only a few of the characters have made it through the dungeon, but those that survive and passed through that first crucible are the party that continues on through the campaign.  Natural selection of dungeoneering if you will.



The second is running the adventure through two different parties method.  This came from the Thulian Echos adventure by Zzarkchov Kowolski.  In the adventure the party finds a journal detailing the exploration of a dungeon.  The players then take the roles of the adventurers described in the journal and play though what the journal describes of the dungeon.  After getting a glimse of the dungeon and what it contains, the party then follows the journals instructions to delve through the very same dungeon having the advantage of knowing the lessons the previous party learned so painfully.  Of course the adventure itself has some wonderful twists and turns, but the concept I think is sound for anyone who wants to really set the tone of not pulling any punches, but having the players experience the feel of the game while keeping their characters relatively safe until the initial learning curve is past.

Adventures and World Building

I'm looking to add two things over the next couple of months.  Some adventures and a campaign world. 


The first adventure is up.  You can check it out by navigating to the "Adventures" tab at the top of the page, or directly to it here.  It is still in draft form, needs a name and some drawn maps.  But I would love to hear what you think, or how it worked out for your adventuring party. 


I'll post up others as they work into my brain.


The second goal is to post a campaign world.  I've always liked world building in principle and I've made several small settings for one off games.  So I've decided to compile some of my ideas and grow a campaign world here and see where it goes.  Part of the motivator for this is a game I played many years ago.  We were playing Tunnels and Trolls and the GM had an adventure planned based around an archipelago.  As we played I quickly found that the world was not pristine and just sitting there waiting for me to loot.  Instead several places were in the process of recovering from events caused by previous players.  I've decided to try to capture that feel and am going to set up a "living" campaign world.  So once I establish it, it will be permanently changed and evolved by the players that participate in each adventure or campaign.

What makes a monster?

Traps, monsters and treasure.  The big three of fantasy roleplaying.

Today I’m going to talk about Monsters. In full disclosure this was heavily inspired by another blog I’d read some time ago, and if I can ever find the article I’ll edit this and give credit where credit is due.

The quintessential monster of fantasy lore is the Dragon.  You don’t even have to look beyond the title of the world’s most famous roleplaying game, Dungeons and Dragons, to find them.  Why is this, perhaps because they are the combination of all the things primal man most feared in a predator. 

Combine the tearing claws of a Jaguar, the needle teeth of a wolf, the armored hide of a lizard, the ability to fly and strike from above like a raptor, a gigantic size that would make man’s tools seem feeble, and above all an inherent ability to produce on of the most amazing things to primitive man- fire.  The dragon is not only the sum of everything we fear, but greater than each of its individual parts. 

It is the culmination of the fear of a mighty predator.  This is different than fear of death in battle by another human being.  Because unlike being killed in combat by man where death is the end, in combat vs. a dragon death is just the end of your life.  This is followed by being eaten, chewed up, digested, and eventually being no more than a pile of dung.  

You might ask, so what?  You’re still dead at the end.  Physiologically it does two things.  One is that it is a reminder that we are not on the top of the food chain in a fantasy setting.  The second is that there isn’t much reasoning with a predator.  Sure there might be some dialog as a precursor, be it a dragon, vampire or other intelligent foe, but this is more akin to a cat playing with a mouse from their point of view.

This is the primary motive I like to have for my monsters.  With the starting point of humans=food I go from there.  I am more concerned about this than I am about is the monster “evil” 

Then there is alien intelligence.  Again this motive may be thought of as evil, but the point isn’t about food. However generally the outcome is the same or worse as they creature is making decisions completely out of line with the world it is existing in. A creature whose very nature cannot be comprehended by the human mind and drives others to madness is a threat to the PCs and the surrounding area, even if its very nature is that of a docile herbivore.  A creature with a hive mind that expects the humans it encounters to be part of a hive mind as well. These can be just as much a threat and a horror to the characters as one that means them to be food, but for completely different reasons.  The players don’t have to ever find out the “logic” behind the actions, and sometimes this is for the best as it keep mystery for both the characters and the players.  (As often I have found once a player identifies a pattern of behavior or reasoning for a monster it is far less frightening or interesting).

So what about evil monsters then?  Surely some actions of monsters from the predator motive above are considered evil, and there is some cross over in the choices they make- but these are more an offshoot of thinking of the PCs and other denizens of the world as food at some level.  I tend to relegate evil to the peer group of the players.  In most games this means other humans/demi-humans but may extend out if we are playing vampires/werewolves or things traditionally thought of as ‘monsters’ (thank you World of Darkness).  At any rate, evil is a conscious choice by individuals to exploit others for personal gain. 

The thing I have never cared for is the civilizing of monsters. The most common version of this I have found is the “noble orc” stereotype.  Making them an extreme warrior culture or so forth that is general just “misunderstood”.   If I want to have that in my games I can just make another human culture.  We do pretty good at misunderstanding each other already, or finding reasons to hate and fight each other even when we do understand each othe

Green Faced Devil

Traps.  Monsters and Treasure.  These are the three things that are the signature occupants of fantasy dungeons.  Today I want to focus on traps. 

Long ago I heard the story of a brilliant party destroying trap.  It was the a wall decoration of a carved devil face with its mouth open, the inside was pure blackness.  The blackness was caused by a small sphere of annihilation being set inside the mouth, so anything that went into the hole just ceased to be- no saving throw, no damage, just gone.  There was no reason a party needed to interact with the object.  It didn’t block their way- but curiosity being what it was the story went that someone stuck their 10 foot pole into the hole.  10 foot pole was gone. The rogue stuck his head in to see what happened to the pole and lost his head.  They then tried to attack “the thing that attacked the now headless party member” i.e. hole and lost a weapon.  I would have thought that this would have made them learn the lesson, but the party proceeded to reach in after the weapon and loose limbs etc. This continued until the party was completely maimed or killed. Years later I would find out that this story was from a trap in the Tomb of Horrors module, so I ran out and bought it almost immediately. 

Traps fall into two varieties.  Those that are there are those that are hidden like the hidden pit trap in the floor or poison dart in a treasure chest.  And those that are obvious like the green faced devil from the Tomb of Horrors and can be readily observed by the players who can choose to avoid the object or investigate at their own peril.

While both have their place how I approach them when it comes to game mechanics is different.  One of the primary roles of a rogue in the party is to detect and disarm traps.  I use these for the more common, hidden trap.  So to speed up game play and make life (a little) easier for the rogues.  As long as the party is moving at adventuring speed, taking their time to observe their surroundings, I give them an automatic roll for checking for traps when they enter a room.  I leave it up to the player if they want to make this roll every time or if I should just make it for them as I give out room descriptions etc.  This way the rogue’s player doesn’t have to tediously ask with every door and room if there are traps.  I’ll afford the rogue a 2^nd check for traps roll if they are specifically inspecting the item in question, again I don’t make them ask for checking traps, we just assume they are as long as they aren’t madly grabbing things and stuffing them into bags. I just tell them to roll and let me know if they beat the minimum threshold we establish.  This way they can take care of all the dice rolling while the other party members are giving their actions and it keeps things moving smoothly. 

The second type of trap is there to be solved as a puzzle or only activates by direct interaction.  These are not nearly as common and I don’t tell them that these exist even if they succeed in their roll.  The trade off is that it is always part of the room description. So they know it is there- just not what it does.  Think of the dart shooting walls from Indiana Jones.  It was obvious something was up in the room between the holes in the walls and the pressure plated floor.  So that would be a description of the room for the entire party.  Solving the problem isn’t just a disarm traps roll, it is creative thinking to walk carefully across the floor, have the wizard levitate across, or take another path through the dungeon.

While these types of traps are my favorite they take a lot more work to set up.  One of the reasons I like them is that they can be figured out by the non-rogues in the party as well.  

How playing Call of Cthulhu ruined gaming for me and why I love it.

How playing Call of Cthulhu ruined gaming for me and why I love it.

Like most folks, Dungeons and Dragons was the first roleplaying game I played. It was full of wonder and adventure and even though it was just my friend Ben and I it was amazing and enchanting beyond anything I had experienced.  Pretty soon I was hooked, and was making up my own monsters even though I didn’t grasp all the rules because it was exciting and could literally be anything!

Then my parents banned me from playing after they heard some bad press about Dungeons and Dragons.  My dad warned me about how guys in the Air Force would play the game all day long while on lock down during an alert.  I know this was an attempt to warn me away from something, but it had the opposite effect of just confirming that this game was THAT good.  But despite all that, I was a generally obedient kid, and so I told my friend I wasn’t allowed to play anymore and roleplaying died out for about a year.  Then I got introduced to the Star Wars Roleplaying game by West End, and I was hooked anew.  But this was good jedi and spaceships and not evil wizards and rogues so my parents were fine with it. That was my go to game for years.  Eventually D&D worked its way back in, and I encountered many other games, like Vampire: the masquerade and Shadowrun. 

But then one day a friend invited me over to play Call of Cthulhu. 

I was pretty excited to try this game out since about a year before I’d picked up my first Lovecraft short stories and quickly fell in love with the world that was created.  We investigated a haunted house, lost some sanity with the dead rising around us and the great thing that was being summoned in the basement and in the end closed the gate and lived to tell the tale another day, primarily due to some lucky rolls involving Latin. 

This caught my attention in a way that hadn’t been since my first dungeon crawl many years before.  These monsters weren’t a collection of stats to be beaten.  In fact at best we could stop them, but never really defeat them.  Orcs and Goblins and even dragons had just become stat blocks and often were just battles of attrition, you couldn’t do that with a thing that couldn’t die.

The next time I ran a Star Wars game it was with a new group (several from the Call of Cthulhu game) so I used an adventure I had run before and the group of rebels trying to defeat the mechanizations of the evil Empire.  I found though that when they encountered the giant sewer rats I wanted to take the game down a darker path.  I actually had to stop the game for a moment and poll the players –high adventure heroics, or dark and gritty.  They chose the high heroics and so I played out the adventure as I had before and everyone had a good time, but I really wanted it to be something else.

Since then I’ve found that most of the games that attract me have that dark overtone.  Be it Warhammer Fantasy Role-play or Lamentations of the Flame Princess there is an attraction I have found to these heavy metal inspired games.  If I wasn’t paying one of those games, I was generally finding ways to shift the tone of some other game or system so it was more grim and dark and perilous.

I think the reason why is the monsters.  As a young role-player every monster encounter was something new and exciting. As both a player and a character I never knew how things were going to react.  As time went on many of the foes became cookie cutter and even though there was threat presented to the character, it was just a matter of scale.  Every monster was SUPPOSED to be defeated, so I came to expect to always meet opponents of an appropriate difficulty.

Call of Cthulhu changed all that.   Now the answer isn’t that I always have to have a grim-dark setting.  But rather to present new and different threats to players.  Things that make them scratch their heads and wonder.  There is probably even room for re-tredding old monsters and just presenting them in different ways.  It has given me a push where in any genre or setting, I want to present new and interesting things to the players to push not the bounds of their characters abilities, but to elicit the best of the creativity and ingenuity of the players.