Retrospective: Bifrost

When it comes to the rules of roleplaying games, my long-held preference has been toward simplicity. In large part, this is because I'm lazy and cannot be bothered to remember complex rules (a situation that only becomes worse as I get older and my memory grows poorer). At the same time, I recognize the value of greater rules complexity. Almost a decade ago, I had the opportunity to play in a Rolemaster campaign refereed by someone very experienced with the system. In playing it, I came to see the genuine benefits in Rolemaster's higher degree of granularity. Combat, for example, offered a wider range of tactical choices than in Dungeons & Dragons, right down to what weapon my character chose to wield. I had a lot of fun and left the experience with an appreciation of why one might prefer complex rules.

In the years since, I've tried to look at complex RPGs with new, or at least more sympathetic, eyes. My preference for simpler games remains, of course, but I'm now better able to understand why some players and referees see a need for more detailed systems. It's with this perspective that I took a look at Bifrost, a very curious British roleplaying game released in four volumes between 1977 and 1982. The first volume, entitled "Faerie," primarily covers character creation, though it also treats such diverse topics as movement, morale, fatigue, religion, and experience. The subject matter of the second volume, "Combat," is self-explanatory, as is that of the third volume, "Magic." The fourth volume, which bears no title, functions more or less as a referee's volume, offering advice on playing and running the game; it also includes descriptions of many monsters and similar opponents.

The title page of the first volume indicates that the "rules [were] compiled … over the period June 1974 to February 1977" by members of the East London Wargames Group and students at the universities of Newcastle, Bath, and East Anglia. This is important information, since it clearly situates Bifrost within the early wargaming tradition of roleplaying. I think that provides some insight into the peculiarities of the rules, particularly the attention paid to distance, movement, and scale. That said, it's also clear that the game's writers – there are many, varying by volume – understood how fantasy roleplaying games differed from traditional miniatures wargames, despite their continued use of wargaming terminology (and indeed their calling Bifrost a wargame).

Characters in Bifrost are of three types: warriors, wizards, and warrior-wizards. There are a total of twenty abilities, divided into two groups, physical and mental. Initially, ability scores range from 1–20, with most being in the 1–10 range (generated by a 1d10 roll, with a roll of 10 granting a second additive 1d10 roll), but scores can theoretically go much higher through experience. These scores are then cross-referenced and "graded" by means of a chart, with the results of said chart determining bonuses and penalties to attack, defense, casting, and energy. Each ability has its own table, enumerating its benefits based on its score. The overall level of complexity is high, though, to its credit, the rules of Bifrost due seem to take them all into account. Other typical RPG topics, such as, for example, alignment, are similarly complex, with fine gradations between shades of Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil. I found it quite overwhelming.

Reading through Bifrost, it soon became clear that these rules were the result of much thought. The writers wanted the game's rules to be exhaustive and complete, covering as many common elements of fantasy roleplaying campaigns as possible and doing so thoroughly. Consequently, there are lots of cross-referenced tables and charts, derived statistics, and calculations. It's all quite impressive and, on some level admirable. I've noted before that, in many campaigns, rules additions and new interpretations multiply over time, making it increasingly complex and inaccessible to newcomers, even as those deeply involved have little trouble with it. Bifrost has that quality to it. Over the course of its four volumes, it presents rules that probably made a great deal of sense to those who used them but were difficult to fathom by anyone else. 

I can't dismiss Bifrost completely out of hand. I suspect that, in the hands of a capable referee, it could be fun and its detailed rules could be put to great use. Simply reading it, though, it's hard to see this. Bifrost looks like someone's obsessive house rules for their multi-year D&D campaign, which they typed up for distribution to other members of their gaming group. That's not a damning criticism as such, but it's not a recommendation either – especially when you consider that, in 1977 alone, games like Traveller and The Fantasy Trip were being published and both were readily accessible. Even so, I find something strangely fascinating about games like Bifrost and Fantasy Wargaming, products of another age, equal parts imaginative and baffling.