The Articles of Dragon: "Presenting the Suel Pantheon"

No one should mistake my many misgivings about Deities & Demigods for a disdain for its subject matter. On the contrary, I've long been fascinated by the treatment of gods and religion in roleplaying games. In fact, it's precisely because of that deep interest that I find Deities & Demigods so lacking. It simply isn't a very compelling or thoughtful exploration of these topics, especially when compared to works like Cults of Prax or Cults of Terror.

That said, I was nonetheless an avid reader of Gary Gygax’s “Deities & Demigods of the World of Greyhawk” series in the pages of Dragon magazine. My appreciation for it was twofold. First, I enjoyed learning more about Gygax’s setting than was revealed in the original folio edition. Second and more importantly, the series made a greater effort than Deities & Demigods to describe the beliefs and practices of the worshipers of these divine beings. It wasn’t perfect, of course; these weren’t theological treatises. Still, they went farther than most in offering a sense of the gods’ societal roles within the Flanaess, rather than simply listing their hit points and powers.

Gygax's "Deities & Demigods of the World of Greyhawk" ran for only five installments, the last appearing in issue #71 (March 1983). At the time, I had the impression that there were many more gods yet to be detailed, but that Gygax was simply too busy with other projects to continue the series himself. That’s why, when issue #86 (June 1984) introduced a new series of Greyhawk-related deities, I was pleased. This time, the articles were penned not by Gygax but by Lenard "Len" Lakofka, and they focused exclusively on the gods of a single human ethnic group in the setting: the Suel (or Suloise). The first installment covered just two gods, Lendor and Norebo.

There was much to admire in this second series. Lakofka had a distinct voice, quite different from Gygax’s, and that difference came through clearly in his descriptions of the Suel deities. One of the things I appreciated most was his greater inclusion of snippets of mythology, like hints at familial and other relationships among the gods. That gave the pantheon a sense of internal coherence and realism often missing from Gygax’s portrayals (a few notable exceptions notwithstanding). Instead of presenting the gods as a collection of isolated and artificially constructed figures, Lakofka tied them together, both to each other and to the world they inhabited. They felt more like a genuine pantheon than anything in the original Gygaxian series.

Another strength of the series was the way it framed these deities as being venerated by a particular culture and ethnic group. That felt more authentic to me. Historically, religions are usually deeply rooted in specific peoples and regions rather than being universally applicable or interchangeable, a tendency too often seen in fantasy settings. Of course, there are many historical examples of syncretism and interpretatio graeca – phenomena I both admire and have incorporated into my Secrets of sha-Arthan setting – but these are rarely explored in RPGs, where religion is typically presented in a dull, mechanical fashion. Lakofka’s articles didn’t completely avoid those pitfalls, but they were a marked improvement over most of their contemporaries. That’s why I still hold them in high regard today.

REPOST: The Articles of Dragon: "For NPCs Only: The Death Master"

Ah, that staple of Dragon from back in the day: the "NPC only" class. One of the oddities of the magazine was that, while there was a voracious demand for new character classes, as a house organ of TSR, it could never offer up a new class for use with D&D without a formal caveat, unless it came from the pen of Gary Gygax himself. Of course, this was done with a nod and a wink, as no referee I knew back in the day ever refrained from allowing his players to use "NPC only" classes if he felt they were well done and fit the spirit of his campaign. I know I never had any problems with it, though, to be fair, I was choosy and, in any event, most of the new classes presented in Dragon were so specialized as to have limited appeal.

Still, the presentation of Len Lakofka's death master class in issue #76 (August 1983) went above and beyond those of most other classes in terms of making it clear that it was intended only for NPCs. You can see the title of the article in which it appeared above. In addition to the "For NPCs Only" phrasing, there's the subtitle that calls the class a "monster" and notes that one shouldn't consider playing as a death master. Even more notably, the article itself begins with an "Introduction/Sermon" where Lakofka opines

The AD&D game should not have assassin player characters. In fact, no player character should be evil at all unless adverse magic affects him.

This is an interesting, though not unusual, point of view, especially as the '80s rolled on. It's also worth noting that assassins were eventually eliminated from AD&D in its second edition, a point of view even Gygax toyed with on occasion, though for different reasons. In any case, Lakofka continues in his introduction to explain that he feels evil is treated too casually in the game. One of his reasons for creating the death master class was to rectify this.

As a way of putting evil in its often without enough of a penalty proper place, here is presented an evil character that makes an assassin look like the boy next door. The death master is meant as a non-player character -- one the player characters and their party have to defeat. Please use the character that way only. If I ever run into a player character death master at a convention, I may turn evil myself. . .

Again, it's an interesting point of view, especially when viewed against the changing culture surrounding D&D at that time. Naturally, Lakofka's concerns had zero effect on me at the time, since there was for a brief time a PC death master in my old campaign – brief, because he was eventually slain by the other PCs, but I allowed the class nonetheless. The PC in question was a formerly good character turned to evil by possession of the Hand of Vecna and who became obsessed with eliminating his former companions in the belief that they would eventually destroy him. He was right, as it turned out, though, ironically, his destruction was more the result of his repeated attempts to slay the other PCs than their own desire to see his life ended. In any event, I didn't heed Lakofka's warnings and I'd be amazed if I were the only one.

The death master class itself is somewhat interesting. It's basically a necromancer, with many powers over the undead and a collection of new spells. Beginning at 4th level, the class also gains the ability to make a variety of "potions, salves, and pastes" that replicate some of his spells and class abilities. At the time, I found it an impressive addition, since it spelled out a bit more explicitly the crafting of magic items than was seen elsewhere. In retrospect, I'm not sure a new class was needed, when new spells alone could have probably sufficed, but that was the style at the time. Regardless, I'm not at all convinced that the death master did anything to advance the notion that evil should be Evil and never an option for player characters.

Retrospective: The Assassin's Knot

My appreciation for The Secret of Bone Hill is well known. Alongside The Village of Hommlet, I consider it one of the best low-level adventure modules ever written for Dungeons & Dragons, in large part because of the care author Len Lakofka took to establish its "home base," the village of Restenford. However, in both of the aforementioned modules, there's another important ingredient: the menace that lurks on the borders of the that home base. Without the Moathouse and the titular Bone Hill, I suspect my affection for these modules would diminish considerably, if not evaporate completely. I like both adventures because of the effective contrast between the sleepy outposts of civilization and the evil that threatens to overwhelm it.

In The Assassin's Knot, Lakofka attempts to mine the same vein – to much more mixed results, in my opinion. First published in 1983, the module is a follow-up to The Secret of Bone Hill, starting with the fact that, like its predecessor, it takes place on Lendore Isle in the World of Greyhawk. More importantly, the ultimate antagonist of the adventure is a character first introduced in Bone Hill (where his eventual villainy was explicitly mentioned, the consequences of which would appear in a future adventure, namely this one). Nevertheless, The Assassin's Knot can stand more or less on its own.

The bulk of the scenario takes place in another little town, the implausibly named Garroten. Like Restenford, Lakofka lavishes much detail on this settlement and its inhabitants. We meet Gelmark and Lydia, a pair of retired adventurers who married and settled down to run the general store. We also meet Krak, the half-orc armorer who's sometimes possessed by an evil sword he acquired some time ago, as well as many more characters, each with their own personalities, quirks, and backstories. Most are genuinely well done and it would be very easy for a referee to spin this information into many more adventures. This is where The Assassin's Knot excels and why I still have a soft spot for it.

However, the main action of the module is not as well done. As its title might suggest, The Assassin's Knot concerns the assassination (by strangulation) of Baron Grellus of Restenford. Clues left at the scene of his murder point toward the town of Garroten – you see what I mean about the town's infelicitous name? – and the characters are tasked with discovering the identity of the murderer and bringing him to justice. On the surface, this all sounds compelling. As most experienced referees no doubt know, murder mysteries are a lot more difficult to execute successfully than they might seem and it's rare that published adventure modules do this well. There are simply too many ways that things can go of the rails, which is a recipe for frustration and disappointment for the players.

That said, Lakofka makes a good effort at trying to obviate the most apparent stumbling blocks, starting with information presentation. He provides the referee with a clear summary of who did what when, in addition to their motivations. Thus, the referee is in a good position to handle the characters' investigation of the baron's murder. Unfortunately, the murder itself was motivated by insanity, which makes it much harder for anyone attempting to make sense of it. The matter isn't helped by the fact that the assassin who perpetrated the crime is, in turn, planning to double-cross his patron, thereby creating more contradictory information for the characters to sift. The end result is something of a chaotic muddle, despite Lakofka's best efforts to make things clear.

In the end, I view The Assassin's Knot as a failed experiment – or perhaps, if one is more charitable, a partially successful one. Garroten, its name to the contrary, is nicely imagined place filled with interesting NPCs. Likewise, the module as a whole is notable for not including a single dungeon. Instead, its text is entirely given over to providing clues, information, and NPCs with which to interact. It's an important departure from earlier D&D modules and it's for that reason that I look on it with more fondness than it might otherwise engender. It's not perfect by any means, but it gets a lot of points for effort.

Imagine Magazine: Issue #20

Alan Craddock provides the cover to issue #20 of Imagine (November 1984), which is dedicated, as its cover proclaims, to "Clerics in the Dungeons & Dragons game." Themed issues like this are always a risk, since, if you're not interested in the theme, it tends to damper your enthusiasm for reading the issue. Fortunately for me, this issue's theme piqued my interest greatly, since clerics might well be my favorite class in D&D. I've always felt that clerics weren't given the love and attention they deserve, being reduced to armored medics respected only for their ability to heal and nothing else. Needless to say, I was curious to see what the writers of Imagine had to say on the subject.

Things kick off with Paul Vernon's "Clerics are People Too." The article rightly notes that, whereas fighters, magic-users, and thieves all have clear literary inspirations, the cleric does not. While I can certainly come up with examples to counter Vernon's specific claim, his larger point remains, namely, that D&D clerics lack fantasy role models and that this contributes to their being played badly and banally. What Vernon suggests is developing fantasy religions better so that players of clerics understand what their character should believe and its impact on their behavior. Nowadays, it's an obvious point – though how often it's actually employed is an open question – but, in 1984, I think it was fairly unusual.

Lewis Pulsipher offers "Alignment, Personality & Philosophy-Religion," an extensive examination of all these factors with regards to playing a cleric. Pulsipher is particularly interested in the subject of alignment, which, as we all know, remains a contentious one even today. He argues for making alignment more important, even to the point of suggesting, for example, that Lawful clerics not roll for their hit points but instead get the average amount per level, while Chaotic ones roll as normal. It's an intriguing notion, though not one I expect to catch on, even if it does succeed bringing alignment front and center rather than leaving it a philosophical abstraction at best.

"As God is My Witness" by Graeme Davis examines the judicium Dei, the various types of trials used during the Middle Ages to determine guilt or innocence. This is a purely historical article but a worthwhile one, full of ideas for use in a campaign. "The Necklace of Lilith" by Phil Gallagher is an AD&D adventure intended for a party consisting only of clerics, which is certainly a novel idea. The scenario concerns the recovery a divine item, the titular Necklace of Lilith, long believed lost. Accompanying the article is another, "New Clerical Spells," which is a reprint of an article from Dragon #58 (February 1982) by Gary Gygax and Len Lakofka. The adventure makes some use of these spells and is, in fact, intended as a means of introducing them into an existing campaign.

"New Flail Types" by Graeme Davis does exactly what its title suggests, providing more weapons for use by clerics (along with stats for these weapons in other game systems, like DragonQuest, Traveller, and Bushido). Carl Sargent's "Looking for an Edge" examines the ban on the use of edged weapons by clerics and argues, as others have done, that the ban should not apply to clerics of every god. In the traditional polytheistic set-up of Dungeons & Dragons, I am sympathetic to this perspective, though I also think the prohibition exists for reasons beyond a hamfisted attempted to introduce a Christian worldview into the game.

This issue's reviews include Grenadier's Disappearance on Aramat, which the reviewer, Stephen Nutt, liked even less than I did. There are also a number of reviews of adventures for Star Frontiers, Space Opera, and The Morrow Project, continuing Imagine's commitment to greater coverage of science fiction RPGs. There's also a very positive review of the revised, boxed version of The World of Greyhawk, for which I have many fond memories. "Chain Mail" discusses the postal version of En Garde!, while Colin Greenland gives a strangely positive review of Conan the Destroyer, a movie most people intensely dislike. Conversely, he gives a negative review to the animated Fire and Ice, which, while no masterpiece, I recall being more enjoyable than Schwarzenegger's second outing as the Cimmerian. 

The comics "Rubic of Moggedon" and "The Phalanx" continue in this issue. Roger Musson's "Stirge Corner" continues the discussion of alignment begun in the previous issue. He rightly points out that Law does not equal Good and Chaos does not equal Evil and riffs off of these matters to good effect. Richard W. Lee's short fiction, "Prince of Thieves," is fine for what it is but nothing special. Much more compelling is the Pellinore installment, "Pablo Fanquay's Fair," which details a group of traveling performers, along with ideas for using them in a game. The Cock o' th' Walk tavern gets a similar treatment, including a map by Paul Ruiz. There are also rules for making a living by street performance – including by breakdancing. Yes, you read that right. Forgive them: it was 1984.

This is another fine issue of Imagine, with much to recommend it. I am particularly fond of the Pellinore setting articles. They evince a terrific combination of creativity, utility, and humor that sets them apart from most other TSR offerings at the time. Seeing as many of those who worked on Pellinore would eventually contribute to Games Workshop's Warhammer Fantasy Role Play, this should come as no surprise. 

RIP Lenard Lakofka (1944-2020)

Several people have contacted me to let me know that Lenard Lakofka died yesterday morning. 

Lakofka is, to my mind, one of the most underappreciated contributors to the growth and development of Dungeons & Dragons. His friendship with Gary Gygax predates the game's publication, owing to his involvement with the International Federation of Wargamers, of which he would eventually become president. Just as significantly, he produced a Diplomacy fanzine called Liaisons Dangereuses, in whose pages appeared multiple articles about D&D that were co-authored with Gary Gygax. As Gygax began working on AD&D, he frequently turned to Lakofka for aid and assistance and the final shape of the game owes a lot to their exchanges. 

In Chicago, Lakofka's home campaign was set in a location known as the Lendore Isles. The Lendore Isles were later incorporated into the published version of the The World of Greyhawk and served as the setting for the adventure modules he wrote for TSR. One of these, The Secret of Bone Hill, is a classic and arguably one of the best starting modules ever produced for the game. Lakofka also wrote a regular column for Dragon magazine entitled "Leomund's Tiny Hut." Leomund had been the name of his player character and is associated with numerous magic-user spells Lakofka created.

Back in 2009, I interviewed Lakofka, the results of which appeared in three parts. I'd recommend taking a look at them, if you haven't done so before. Lakofka had a lot to say about the early days of the hobby and the development of Dungeons & Dragons that I think are still quite fascinating today. In recent years, he had returned to writing and was a frequent guest at conventions.

He will be missed.

Imagine Magazine: Issue #13

Issue #13 of Imagine appeared in April 1984, with an unusual cover by Terry Oakes. Oakes is perhaps best known for his Fighting Fantasy work, including the covers of several gamebooks. 

The issue begins with a three-page article by Steve Norledge entitled "Put a Little Terror into Your Life." It's an overview of the Call of Cthulhu roleplaying game for those unfamiliar with both it and its source material. Paul Cockburn follows it up with a short biography of Howard Philips Lovecraft who, believe it or not, wasn't as widely known in 1984 as he is today. Brian Lumley, who found fame with his Necroscope series in the 1980s, wrote a number (in my opinion) awful Lovecraftian pastiches in the '70s. Issue #13 reprints one of his stories, "The Mirror of Nitocris," which is thankfully short. Rounding out the Lovecraftian coverage is a Call of Cthulhu mini-adventure by Simon Redgrave called "Darklaw." 

The "Illuminations" column announces TSR's plans to revise the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons "perhaps as late as 1987." These plans do not involve a Players Handbook II or a Dungeon Masters Guide II but rather a new, expanded PHB with new classes "like the savant and jester [that] will appear in Dragon and Imagine." Would that that were so! Also included in this issue is an article by Gary Gygax and Len Lakofka new attack, saving throw, and experience tables for use with AD&D. These are reprints from issue #80 (December 1983) of Dragon magazine.

"The Imagination Machine" continues reviewing "micro-computer" games, in addition to discussing the improvements in technology at the time. In 1984, these improvements consisted of affordable 16-bit computers! The "Philosopher's Stone" contests continue as well. Whenever I read over these sections, I am reminded of Pacesetter's Sandman: Map of Halaal and Grenadier's "Wizard's Gold" competitions from around the same time. Chris Felton has penned an AD&D adventure called "Solstice at Castle Falkens." Game reviews focus on new materials for Gamma World, Top Secret, and Mercenaries, Spies & Private Eyes (a game I have still have yet to read, let alone play – I must rectify this).

"The Adventures of Nic Novice" by Jim Bambra and Paul Ruiz deals with the process of finding and dividing up treasure. Dave Pringle's book reviews tackle a number of contemporary releases, the most notable of which is Anne McCaffrey's Moreta, Dragonlady of Pern. We also get new episodes of the comic "Rubic of Moggedon" and "The Sword of Alabron." I wish I were more interested in these, but both comics has failed to grab me and I find myself skimming them. No doubt I am missing out due to my laziness.

Issue #13 is tightly focused on Lovecraft and Call of Cthulhu. When I was a reader of Dragon and White Dwarf, I often disliked such "theme issues" when they covered subjects that mattered little to me. Being a fan of HPL and CoC, I enjoyed this issue, but I wonder what readers at the time thought. Regardless, the evolution of Imagine advances; where it will lead next I do not know.

The Articles of Dragon: "For NPCs Only: The Death Master"

Ah, that staple of Dragon from back in the day: the "NPC only" class. One of the oddities of the magazine was that, while there was a voracious demand for new character classes, as a house organ of TSR, it could never offer up a new class for use with D&D without a formal caveat, unless it came from the pen of Gary Gygax himself. Of course, this was done with a nod and a wink, as no referee I knew back in the day ever refrained from allowing his players to use "NPC only" classes if he felt they were well done and fit the spirit of his campaign. I know I never had any problems with it, though, to be fair, I was choosy and, in any event, most of the new classes presented in Dragon were so specialized as to have limited appeal.

Still, the presentation of Len Lakofka's death master class in issue #76 (August 1983) went above and beyond those of most other classes in terms of making it clear that it was intended only for NPCs. You can see the title of the article in which it appeared above. In addition to the "For NPCs Only" phrasing, there's the subtitle that calls the class a "monster" and notes that one shouldn't consider playing as a death master. Even more notably, the article itself begins with an "Introduction/Sermon" where Lakofka opines

The AD&D game should not have assassin player characters. In fact, no player character should be evil at all unless adverse magic affects him.

This is an interesting, though not unusual, point of view, especially as the '80s rolled on. It's also worth noting that assassins were eventually eliminated from AD&D in its second edition, a point of view even Gygax toyed with on occasion, though for different reasons. In any case, Lakofka continues in his introduction to explain that he feels evil is treated too casually in the game. One of his reasons for creating the death master class was to rectify this.

As a way of putting evil in its often without enough of a penalty proper place, here is presented an evil character that makes an assassin look like the boy next door. The death master is meant as a non-player character -- one the player characters and their party have to defeat. Please use the character that way only. If I ever run into a player character death master at a convention, I may turn evil myself. . .

Again, it's an interesting point of view, especially when viewed against the changing culture surrounding D&D at that time. Naturally, Lakofka's concerns had zero effect on me at the time, since there was for a brief time a PC death master in my old campaign -- brief, because he was eventually slain by the other PCs, but I allowed the class nonetheless. The PC in question was a formerly good character turned to evil by possession of the Hand of Vecna and who became obsessed with eliminating his former companions in the belief that they would eventually destroy him. He was right, as it turned out, though, ironically, his destruction was more the result of his repeated attempts to slay the other PCs than their own desire to see his life ended. In any event, I didn't heed Lakofka's warnings and I'd be amazed if I were the only one.

The death master class itself is somewhat interesting. It's basically a necromancer, with many powers over the undead and a collection of new spells. Beginning at 4th level, the class also gains the ability to make a variety of "potions, salves, and pastes" that replicate some of his spells and class abilities. At the time, I found it an impressive addition, since it spelled out a bit more explicitly the crafting of magic items than was seen elsewhere. In retrospect, I'm not sure a new class was needed, when new spells alone could have probably sufficed, but that was the style at the time. Regardless, I'm not at all convinced that the death master did anything to advance the notion that evil should be Evil and never an option for player characters.

Interview: Len Lakofka (Part III)

Here's the third and final part of my interview with Len Lakofka.

---

13. Can you please explain the publication process for L3? My understanding is that you had performed extensive revisions and expansions to the original version but that TSR then either lost them or never used them, or something like that? Do you have any plans to "fix" L3 and to make your updated/expanded final version available?

I sent TSR L3 at same time as L1 and L2. They edited L1 and L2 and we talked back and forth. Then the dark days came and L3 went into a bottom drawer to rot for 20 years.

Of course AD&D had evolved significantly in 20 years. So I went through the laid-out material and updated it. (I don't recall my editor's name... sorry). We were on the same page. Then someone lost the whole thing. They did not tell me they lost it of course. So it went to print and someone else edited it and put stuff in. I had no input. Could I tell you what was put in? I don't think so. I don't think I have the orginal layout and the changed material either.

14. You created a large number of spells for OD&D for Supplement I: Greyhawk, various PC/NPC character classes and spells in fanzines, as well as the whole of the Suel Pantheon for the published Greyhawk campaign. Your contributions to the game via "Leomund's Tiny Hut" were also quite extensive. What do you consider your most valuable additions to the game, and why?

Actually it's something that didn't happen. In the orginal AD&D manuscript (typed double space -- about 800 pages or so) Gary had said that if a person was held (via hold person) he/she had to make a system shock roll! I said to Gary that this would become a "Little Finger of Death." Certainly many NPCs as well as a few characters would have a Constitution score of 14 or lower. A system shock would kill quite a few folks. Since hold person is a 2nd-level cleric spell and 3rd-level magic-user spell, those spell casters needed very little experience to gain access to the prayer/spell. A gaggle of four 3rd-level clerics all throwing hold person at once on the same person would have a very high chance of not only holding him but killing him/her as well. I talked Gary out of it.

15. Given the vast number of rules expansions and additions that you created over the years, can you please describe how your D&D games evolved from when you first discovered the game, and then through your correspondence with Gary, into writing for TSR? Were you playing a proto-AD&D in some form, for example, or were your games always very OD&D-based (or Holmes Basic based, etc.)? Did you regularly use variant rules like spell points, or other variant sub-systems of your own creation?

I stuck to D&D which became AD&D. I wrote quite a few pages that ended up in the Players Handbook and DMG, with Gary inspecting each and tweaking it, as was his wont. As I played D&D, I discovered so many things that were not really explained. How did you get trained for a new level being one of those.

I was at the playtesting of Chainmail (without the fantasy supplement). TSR (Tactical Studies Rules) became the parent of the D&D booklets with time. I played the fantasy supplement of Chainmail on Gary's sand table. It was a simple developement to take it to pen & pencil.

16. From your perspective as one of the key originators and developers of the AD&D system, what words of wisdom would you share with the Old School Renaissance readers, tinkerers, designers, and publishers: words that would speak to your vision for the best possible legacy for D&D?

Well I was there at the beginning but I was not in Lake Geneva. So I had some influence but not a tremendous amount. I got my finger in the pie and no one bit it off. I got a lot of freedom in Dragon. For some number of years I put my stuff in. How much went into later editions or other people's games I have no way of telling. Now and then I hear someone tell me they used this and that but the vast majority of readers never said anything.So who knows?

17. Are you still active in the hobby today?

I have written modules "L4 and L5" and await publication from Dragonsfoot. I will begin L6 once L4 sees actual print. I do not play in any campaign at the moment.

Retrospective: The Secret of Bone Hill

Published in 1981, The Secret of Bone Hill is the first module in the L-series, so designated either because it was set on the World of Greyhawk's Lendore Isle or because it was written by Lenard Lakofka, a long-time contributor to Dungeons & Dragons and a regular columnist to Dragon magazine. Whatever the case, L1 is, in my opinion, an under-appreciated classic, a low-level introductory module that nicely occupies a middle ground between The Village of Hommlet and Keep on the Borderlands. Allow me to clarify.

The Village of Hommlet is often praised -- and criticized -- for its mundanity. Hommlet is Exhibit A of Gygaxian Naturalism in action. Nearly every inhabitant of the village is given a name, a personality, and a place within its little society. Likewise, the nearby moat house dungeon is subdued, with a semi-realistic ecology and suffused with a sense of foreboding rather than blatant evil. Keep on the Borderlands, on the other hand, offers very little in the way of context. The titular keep is a lone outpost of undefined civilization, beyond which there exists only the wilderness and the forces of Chaos who dwell within. It's almost purely fantastical in conception and the Caves of Chaos are frequently cited as an example of bad dungeon ecology, with numerous antagonistic humanoid tribes existing cheek by jowl with one another.

The Secret of Bone Hill presents the town of Restenford, which is as well imagined as Hommlet, complete with unique names and personalities for even the most minor of NPCs. In addition, there are maps aplenty for the town and its buildings, making it very friendly to referees who give their players the freedom to wander about the place as they wish. Surrounding Restenford is a dangerous wilderness filled with bandits, humanoids, and other threats. And of course there's Bone Hill itself, home to numerous undead, including such foul things as ghoulstirges, stirges who paralyze as well as drink blood. Bone Hill is a dangerous place, one that beginning adventurers ought to avoid until they've gained sufficient experience to tackle its horrors.

To my mind, the beauty of module L1 is the way it combines the mundanity of Hommlet with the otherworldly fantasy of the Caves of Chaos. Much as I love B2, it sometimes feels a little too de-contextualized -- perhaps by design -- but I find I like context for my adventures, particularly low-level ones. Hommlet and Restenford are both very good "home bases," whereas I don't find the Keep particularly compelling, a problem made all the more obvious to me in my own Dwimmermount campaign, where Muntburg is a close relative of the Keep in terms of depth and detail (which probably explains why both the players and myself prefer to visit Adamas, even though it's farther away from the dungeon).

Bone Hill is a weird place. During the day, bugbears hold it, while, at night, they cede control to the undead who rise up from their graves. This fact gives it a peculiar vibe for me and one that I think helps the module considerably. And the number and strength of the surrounding creatures, both at Bone Hill and elsewhere, ensures that PCs have good reason to spend a lot of time in Restenford, getting to know its inhabitants and their peculiarities, rather than just treating the town as "flyover country" they can simply ignore. The result is a terrific dynamic that I've always liked and that has probably informed my own campaign design as much as anything else.

If you haven't read The Secret of Bone Hill in a while, I recommend you do so. I think you'll find it better than you remember its being and a genuine classic of the early 80s.

Interview: Len Lakofka (Part II)

This is the second part of my interview with roleplaying pioneer Len Lakofka. In this part, Mr Lakofka answers questions about his writings in both Dragon and for the World of Greyhawk setting. Thanks once again to Allan Grohe for providing some of these questions.

The third and final part of the interview will appear tomorrow.

---

6. You've been immortalized in D&D as Leomund, after whom several spells are named. Was Leomund your original D&D character?

Yes, I played Leomund for a few years in Chicago. I've published his stats a few times.

7. You once had a long-running series of columns in Dragon entitled "Leomund's Tiny Hut," many of whose articles were highly regarded and much loved. How did that column start and what was its intended focus?

I think it was Tim Kask who approached me to write a regular column for The Dragon, but I'm not 100% certain it was he. In any case, I had already been published in The Dragon by this time, issue 1 and issue 3, which included “Notes on Women & Magic.” I wrote the majority of the "Leomund" spells and they were edited by Gary and appeared in AD&D. I did not create “Leomund's Endless Belaborment,” however. (They paid by the word, so of course I added some detail. Ahem)

8. It's interesting you mention “Notes on Women & Magic,” since it frequently gets mentioned in discussions of the early days of the hobby. Lots of gamers nowadays can't fathom why such an article was written or published, given how much things have changed since the 1970s. Can you provide a little background for the article?

There just wasn't any real mention of women as player characters. The vast majority of the players were males and none of then wanted a female character, especially when it came to the role play part of it. Since it was a vague area, I decided to give it some attention. No more complicated than that. I did have players who were willing to step up and play a female character. I believe that Dave Rogan playing the Magic-User Andrella. One of the Nystuls played her as well. There was a female druid and a cleric but no one tried either a thief or fighter.

9. The Lendore Isles of the World of Greyhawk are largely your handiwork. Were they originally part of a separate campaign world or did you create them specifically for Greyhawk? If the former, how much of your original material was incorporated into the Greyhawk setting?

I did have a campaign world and a section of land where the campaign occured. When Gary was drawing the Greyhawk map he offered to let me have a place on the map for my campaign. Since Loreltarma (not Lo Reltarma -- that was the cartographer's invention, one of the many things she decided to change without asking anyone) was on a peninsula of land, I saw this island in the south east that could conform to my ongoing campaign. (Darlene also moved the whole city from one the northeast corner of the island to the southwest. Needless to say that made my campaign maps worthless!) I picked the Island and named it Lendore Isle.

10. Did the Suel deities also arise out of your campaign?

Gary listed the Suel gods in the World of Greyhawk. I said that, from their migration, that many of the Suloise ended up on my Island. Therefore, the inhabitants of Lendore Isle would have a significant Suel background. When the Suel gods were not fleshed out, I took it upon myself to do it. I did not give them “standard diving powers” but Gary insisted that they have them. He usually read my stuff before it went into Dragon and occasionally made changes. That was his prerogative, of course.

11. I've long been very fond of module L1, The Secret of Bone Hill, since it presents a very flexible "sandbox" framework for a low-level campaign. Does this reflect the style of play of your home campaign or did you write the module in that way for some other purpose?

I had two sets of players do what is now L1; they played L2 and L3 as well. Then they split up and did other things on Lendore Isle. The whole east coast of the island was played by one group while another went north.

I did L1 because I was not seeing many basic towns fleshed out very much. L4 goes three small hamlets and L5 does a town of a few hundred folks, all of whom have stats, names, gods, professions, treasure and weapons (except some of the non adventuring types. I think I did do all of the men-at-arms.

L4 is about a new group that lands on Lendore Isle after the raid on Restenford. They land there as the humanoids leave and a band from the town are chasing them. They have another mission and head toward Kroten but do not arrive there until L5 starts.

L5 is about the town of Kroten which is in the center of the Island.

L4 promises to be in print. Someday. In theory it is in final layout. I'll not hold my breath.

12. You ran convention tournaments at GenCon and other cons over the years (including a version of L3 Deep Dwarven Delve in 1979 at GenCon 12); do others of those tourney scenarios survive, and if so do you have any plans to publish them as part of your Dragonsfoot series of modules?

I made each scenario up for each convention. I did not keep copies. Please don't cringe. I was not a hoarder of paper and, at the time, who knew anyone would give a *&^% 20 years or more later?

Interview: Len Lakofka (Part I)

Len Lakfoka needs no introduction to long-time readers of Dragon, who will remember his recurring column from that venerable periodical, "Leomund's Tiny Hut." Indeed, Mr Lakfoka began writing articles for Dragon in its very first issue and continued to do so until after the magazine had reached over 100 issues. He is also the author of several AD&D modules, most notably The Secret of Bone Hill, a personal favorite of mine. Mr Lakofka kindly agreed to answer some questions about his involvement in the early days of the hobby and his many replies will appear here over the next three days.

Thanks to Allan Grohe, who supplied many of the Greyhawk-related questions that appear in later parts of this interview.

---

1. How did you become involved in the hobby of roleplaying?

I started playing Avalon Hill Games and answered an ad for the International Federation of Wargamers. Gary Gygax was vice President of that group. So many of the PBM groups sounded like warmongers that I was not interested in them. Terry Stafford introduced me to Gary at Farmers Insurance where Gary was an underwriter. We had played Battle of the Bulge or some other AH game.

I was told that the IFW was having a convention in the near future in Lake Geneva, so I decided to go and to help. I helped a bit with set up and tear down. It was a one day event. On Sunday, however, we took some time before locking up the Horticultural Hall and played a handwritten sent of medieval miniatures rules. This set later became Chainmail. Gary was seeking a publisher.

Once he did publish it, he added the "fantasy supplement" which had some Tolkien references, like Hobbits, Ents, a Balrog etc. It became the tail the wagged the dog. The fantasy supplement became very popular. I traveled to Gary's home a number of times to play various games on the sand table in his basement.

It was the popularity of the fantasy supplement that led to Dungeons & Dragons. Gary and I also played PBM Diplomacy, which was very popular back then.

2. You were also involved in Diplomacy fandom and issues of your fanzine Liaisons Dangereuses recently caused some excitement in the old school gaming community because they included some hitherto unknown D&D articles under your byline with Gary Gygax. Can you provide a little historical context for these articles?

I wrote the articles and added E. Gary Gygax's name to preserve his copyright to D&D. He was in control of D&D and any material I published was not "official" unless Gary blessed it. He did not see the text prior to me publishing it in LD. Some of what I did to in LD ended in up The Dragon -- issue #1 actually.

3. So, none of the material in LD was actually the work of Gary Gygax?

Correct. Gary did not author anything in LD.

4. Given the large volume of material produced for LD, it'd be great to see it all reproduced in a single volume from high-quality scans. I understand that Tadashi Ehara is doing this with Different Worlds. Is this something you'd ever like to see happen?

LD was a fanzine which was not profread or spell checked. If it were retyped and those things done that would be awesome. I would not want it produced "as is". My grammar, spelling and proofreading skills bite! I don't want to reveal that to world.

5. The Pyrologist class appeared in two places, your own LD fanzine and in a Chicago-based one called The Wizard. Are they variants versions of the class or the same class appearing in two different places?

It should be same but without seeing the text I can't be sure.

The Wizard was from a local group in Chicago, the name of which I've lost.The president of that group had a connection to FASA if I remember right. I'd have to kick myself in the head a few times to remember. If I'm right, his father financed FASA to produce a large generation interplanetary space ship. You would have to look at the first things from FASA and that would jar my memory.

The Pyrologist was an attempt to do special Magic-users. There was an Illusionist already. We were looking at a Magic-user specializing in fire spells. We did not do anything with earth, water and air. We were considering combining those three under one heading.

"Lost" Gygaxian Classes

As I reported yesterday, Randall at RetroRoleplaying found a number of "lost" D&D articles, written by Gary Gygax and Len Lakofka, which appeared in Lakofka's Diplomacy fanzine, Liaisons Dangereuses. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I printed off many of the articles he found and have been reading them with great interest. Of particular note, to me anyway, were issues 74 and 76 (September 14, 1976 and December 14, 1976, respectively), each of which included D&D classes I'd never seen before.

Issue 74 describes the Pyrologist or "Fire User," a magic-user sub-class specializing in, as you'd expect, fire magic. There are many interesting things about this class, which, in some ways, resembles the more well-known Illusionist. Firstly, pyrologists seem to have strong clerical connections, as it's noted that they "may also progress as clerics," although the text adds the cryptic qualification "but they must do so in separate campaigns," whatever that means. Though both good and evil pyrologists are possible, evil pyrologists can advance higher as clerics (8th level as opposed to 6th). Speaking of alignment, there's a note that fire users "are always highly Lawful" and, from the text, it's made clear that this applies to both good and evil members of the class. Elves may become pyrologists, but, if they choose to do so, they "may not later choose to be an Illusionist, Alchemist or normal Magic User though Fighter and Thief are still available" as options.

Like illusionists, pyrologists have their own spell list, including a large number of new spells, many of which I've never seen before. Some re-appear in other contexts under different names, so Gygax mustn't have forgotten about the class, even if he never updated to AD&D. I'm not sure I'd use the class as written in my own campaign, but it's intriguing nonetheless. For one thing, it's a potent reminder of the days before D&D had been rationalized, when neither its designers nor players balked at special cases and one-off rules. I'm actually a big fan of pre-2e "specialist magic-users" and deeply regret that we never got to see Gary's proposed savant class for this reason. I feel strongly that 2e's approach to the concept was deeply wrong-headed and it's a pity subsequent designs have followed its lead rather than that of classes like the illusionist and pyrologist.

Issue 76 is, in many ways, even more interesting, since it tackles "dwarves & hobbits & magic." The article provides rules for hobbit druids (who "may advance separately as a Druid and a Thief"). Interestingly, such multi-class druid/thieves "fights as a Thief but has saving throws as a Cleric," which is highly suggestive about the mechanics surrounding multi-class characters in the old days. Both hobbits and dwarves may also be clerics or cleric/fighters. Both races are limited to 7th level and many of their spells, including healing, cures, and raise dead, are either less effective or ineffective against races other than their own. This puts comments about dwarf clerics who "can cure and resurrect their own" in Greyhawk in a new light.

Issue 76 also gives us the dwarf craftsman class, which gains "abilities" as it advances through levels. Abilities have levels, like spells, and a craftsman character must choose which ability he wishes to learn from a list. Unlike spells, many abilities can be used more often than once per day, although some are similarly limited. Abilities range from low-level ones like "Wedge Door" and "Dig Trench" -- both obviously useful in dungeoneering -- to high-level ones like "Summon Earth Elemental" and "Make Mithril Coat." It's an interesting concept for a class and one I'd actually be keen to see someone use in a game. If nothing else, the craftsman provides a good model for creating other "semi-magical" classes or indeed even classes distinguished by specific "abilities." Heck, part of me ponders and alternate thief class based on the craftsman.

Two final comments: First, throughout both articles, the term "character" is never used; the word "figure" is used instead. Second, I am amazed that, in a fanzine devoted to Diplomacy, there was so much D&D-related content. Taken together, these two things reveal the extent to which D&D took the wargaming community by storm in the mid-70s.

Yet More Gygaxiana

Randall over at RetroRoleplaying has links to even more early articles by Gary Gygax about D&D, this time from Len "Leomund" Lakofka's old Diplomacy fanzine, Liaisons Dangereuses.

Awesome stuff.