Thursday, October 24, 2024

Gaming with Allen Hammack

I played in several RPG sessions while at Gamehole Con this year. Though I enjoyed them all – and will eventually discuss each in turn – the one I most immediately want to talk about is The Ghost Tower of Inverness, refereed by its original author, Allen Hammack. The AD&D module was published in 1980, having been used before that as a tournament scenario for Winter Con VIII in late 1979. Like many tournament scenarios, this one is rather contrived in its set-up and features a funhouse dungeon filled with all manner of puzzles, trick, and traps. 

For the purposes of this post, I don't have a lot to say about the scenario itself, since it's old and probably quite well-known to most readers of this blog. Instead, what most interests me and that I think is most worthy of attention is the way Mr Hammack ran it at the table during the con. Bear in mind that Hammack was employed by TSR Hobbies between 1978 and 1982, where he worked as a writer, designer, and editor, primarily on the AD&D. I mention this to provide some context to what follows.

The module is designed for five pre-generated characters, all human – a fighter, a cleric, a magic-user, a thief, and a monk. I played the cleric, Zinethar the Wise, who was 9th level and, oddly, had slightly more hit points than the fighter. The module assumes that all the characters with the exception of the monk are condemned criminals who are offered the opportunity to escape imprisonment by undertaking a dangerous mission for the Duke of Urnst (in the World of Greyhawk), namely, the recovery of the Soul Gem from the titular Ghost Tower. I knew none of the other four players prior to play, so we had to learn to work together to succeed.

Mr Hammack is an older gentleman. I have no idea his actual age, but I suspect he's probably in his late 60s or early 70s at least. Despite this, his mind is very sharp, especially when it comes to the AD&D rules. More than once during the four hours we were at his table, a player asked a question about how, say, a spell functioned. Before someone could find the appropriate page in the Players Handbook, Hammack recalled the relevant information – and correctly. After a while, we learned to trust his memory over our ability to flip pages quickly. I bring all this up, because it supports my long-held contention that hobbies like roleplaying are good for the health of your brain. 

Given how well he remembered the rules of AD&D, another question that came up was how strict Mr Hammack would be in applying them. He chuckled and said that he was generally quite flexible about doing so, with a couple of exceptions. Going back to spells, Hammack explained that he is often loose with spell durations but he was more rigid about areas of effect. Likewise, he noted that he was loose with encumbrance, unless he felt a player was trying to take advantage of a situation. He then told a terrific story about how he and other AD&D players of his acquaintance would use 3×5 index cards for character sheets, with stats being written on the front and equipment on the back. Anything you could fit on the back of an index card – in legible writing – would probably not bring encumbrance penalties into effect. 

Mr Hammack's overall approach to rules was governed by common sense. He clearly knew the rules and was prepared to apply them when he felt it necessary or appropriate, but he never felt bound by them. Indeed, he could be talked out of applying them by a good argument from a player, as he was on at least one occasion. At the same time, Hammack was also quite clear that his decision was final. Once he'd made a decision and considered any input from the players, there was no further arguing of the point. That he was fair and judicious probably explains why no one argued with his final decisions – that we were all middle-aged men, not children probably helped, too. I found the whole experience quite refreshing, to be honest.

I should note that, despite his extensive knowledge of AD&D rules, Mr Hammack was not above introducing house rules into play. For example, there were many occasions when he asked us to roll under a character's ability score to determine if our characters succeeded at some action or other. Likewise, he made use of a simple critical hit/fumble mechanic that's definitely not something Gary Gygax would ever have approved of. The mechanic worked fine in play and even contributed to a number of fun moments, which was exactly what we all hoped for.

In sum, I had a great time at Allen Hammack's table. He was a charming, knowledgeable, and imaginative Dungeon Master and he made me appreciate how good a module The Ghost Tower of Inverness actually is. I consider myself very lucky to have played with him at Gamehole Con this year.

8 comments:

  1. This account brings to mind a question I've had about playing a classic module at a convention (or anywhere else, I guess). You are familiar with C2, so you likely know the best way to navigate some of its challenges. Your character would not know this, though, so how do you proceed? Do you let others who don't know the module take the lead in deciding what to do? What if you all are familiar with the module?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An excellent question. I hadn't played or even looked at the module in decades, so my recollection of its contents was hazy at best. I believe the same was true of most of the other players. However, Mr Hammack stated at the start that, if he got the sense anyone was using knowledge not available to his character, he'd make changes and alterations to the scenario's contents.

      Delete
  2. That makes sense, but a player who knew the module would still be in a bind. How do you convincingly avoid doing something that isn't obviously dumb but that your meta-knowledge tells you will have bad consequences? For example, if I were playing S1, I would know which tomb entries were false, where the concealed door out of the first hall is, and above all not to mess with the green devil face. I guess I would prefer it if the DM went ahead and changed things and let the players know; then I wouldn't worry about knowing things I shouldn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When do you ever want to mess with a green devil face?

      Delete
  3. I've never actually read or played Ghost Tower, but I am curious - is it in any way connected with the 1972 audio drama Fourth Tower of Inverness (which started the enormous and still-ongoing series of Jack Flanders radio plays)?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fourth_Tower_of_Inverness

    For the actual play:

    https://www.radioechoes.com/?page=series&genre=OTR-SciFi&series=The%20Fourth%20Tower%20of%20Inverness

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The idea of the illusory tower (at least) has to be an influence on the module.

      Delete
    2. The rest of the radio play...not so much. (Maybe if the module had been written by Greg Costikyan...)

      Delete
  4. Your account makes me want to pull out my copy (which I also haven’t perused in decades) and run five players through it. Did you know in advance of going that you were going to be playing with Hammack? I’m wondering how you happened to have a copy of the module for signing.

    Also, as a counter to the argument that RPGs retard brain aging, why did the (presumably younger) players not know the rules better?

    ReplyDelete