Looking Ahead

As 2009 comes to a close, it's time once again to look to the coming year and make some foolish and likely mistaken predictions. Last year, I was fairly modest in my predictions, but, unless one is willing to be very charitable, I don't think either of them came to pass. There was no breakout old school product that attracted significant attention from outside our little community and neither did any "big name" company seriously jump on the bandwagon. I probably let my enthusiasm get the better of me last year, but now, with another year of seeing how things played out, I think I have a better sense of how things could unfold in 2010.

So, without further ado, here are my prognostications for next year:

1. The Renaissance Continues: This is a no-brainer. Back in 2008, when I started this blog, there was some doubt in many quarters whether the old school renaissance was just a momentary fad, spurred by anger over D&D IV or sadness over Gary's death or even nostalgia by aging gamers. I think those assessments were mistaken and shortsighted. It seems pretty clear to me that the old school community is here to stay. It's not going to take over the hobby, let alone the industry, by storm. It'll still be a niche within a niche, as it has been for some time. What's different now is that that niche is more accessible, using a distributed network of blogs and forums to discuss and exchange ideas rather than being headquartered in a single place. Even more important, the people involved in this niche are playing rather than merely talking and publishing what they're playing. I suspect there's now more old school gaming going on now than there has been in some time and there's certainly more old school products available than we've seen since the days of TSR. These trends will continue in 2010.

2. "Old School" as Nostalgia: Last year, I said I thought a big name company would make an entry into the old school market. That didn't really happen and the reason it didn't happen is because a lot of gamers' interest in the Old Ways is very superficial. They're interested in being reminded of the stuff they played as kids, but they're not all that interested in actually playing it. Consequently, if the term "old school" gets used outside our community, it'll mostly be a marketing term rather than a prescriptive one, an attempt to draw in older gamers with fond memories of "the red box" or White Plume Mountain or whatever. I don't think the Old Ways have any real traction among mainstream publishers, which is why you won't see any simple, 64-page RPGs produced by WotC or Steve Jackson Games or whoever in 2010. What you will see, though, is ever more mining of the old stuff for names and concepts to be ruthlessly "re-imagined," feeding the serpent that long plagued the industry.

3. Science Fantasy: This is an easy one. The big old school trend of 2010 will be science fantasy. We've begun to see the early fruits of this interest in a lot of places, but next year will see it reach full blossom. I expect at least a couple of campaign settings/adventures, along with at least one full ruleset for playing in worlds like those of Burroughs and Brackett. I also expect more "straight" fantasy to dabble in science fantasy concepts -- not outright adoption of all its elements, but rather the introduction of a few elements borrowed from science fantasy. This was inevitable, in retrospect. Any serious examination of the sources of the hobby would quickly see that, in the early days, fantasy and sci-fi were not contradictory but complementary genres. It was only a matter of time before "John Carter ... groping through black pits" would become a focus of old school love and attention.

4. Other Worlds: Running parallel to science fantasy will be a more general interest in other worlds for old school play, whether it be interplanetary, as in the case of science fantasy, or other planes/dimensions in the case of "standard" fantasy. I think it also possible we might see some interest in "the man out of time" as an important pillar of the pulp fantasies on which D&D was built. If I'm right about a renewed interest in other planes/dimensions, this does open up the possibility of presenting fantasy campaigns as places to which "ordinary" people from our world can journey and take up a life of adventure. This type of approach hasn't ever really been explored in the hobby, which makes it an attractive subject for old schoolers looking to break new ground.

And that's as far as I'll stick my neck out for now. Let's see if I prove a better predictor of the coming year than I was of the last.

What the Future Holds

It's New Year's Eve, the usual time when amateurs can choose to indulge in dipsomania or prophecy (or both!). Being something of a teetotaler myself -- except when it comes to very expensive champagne -- I choose prophecy. My record on this score isn't great, but it's better than most and at least I won't have a hangover tomorrow for having indulged in it tonight.

Consequently, what follow aren't exactly predictions. I'm not going to assign dates and times to anything. Neither am I going to say that either of my statements will occur. Rather, what I'm "predicting," if that's the word, is that 2009 will be the year that'll determine whether the much-discussed old school renaissance fulfills its promise or proves to be just another bout of gaming nostalgia in fancy dress. By my lights, at least one of two things must happen in 2009 for the old school renaissance to have legs outside the thousand or so people who read this blog:

1. New Product: With Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC 2.0, and Swords & Wizardry out there and freely available to any and all comers, we're now at the point where, reasonably, someone ought to use one (or all) of them to create new product. By "new product," I don't mean adventures; we have lots of old school adventures already. Neither do I mean campaign settings or monster books or collections of spells and magic items; we have tons of that stuff too. No, what I mean is something genuinely new, something that hasn't been done before (or at least recently) and that shows off the unique pleasures of the old school in a way we haven't seen (again, at least recently). This new product (or, dare I hope, products?) might be part adventure or part campaign world or part monster book, etc. but it wouldn't just be those things. It can't be or no one is going to care.

If the old school renaissance has one fatal flaw, it's that it's much too easy to dismiss it as simple nostalgia. And the reason it's too easy is because, like the poor Scholastics whose subtle philosophizing and fine distinctions looked like foolishness to people who weren't steeped in the quaestiones quodlibetales culture, we're too insular and self-absorbed to be understood, let alone listened to, by a gaming culture that, for good or for ill, has changed in some very profound ways. To reverse this situation and revitalize the Old School will require someone among us to produce something that's genuinely new and that nevertheless embodies the best of our preferred style of gaming. We can't just keep doing the same stuff we've done for the last 30 years -- not because that stuff isn't "timeless," but because that stuff has already been done, over and over. The closest we've seen in recent years is, I think, Rob Conley's Points of Light, but it's only a first step and the journey ahead is a long one indeed.

2. Big Name Adoption: The second thing that needs to happen is for a big name game company -- one with good retail penetration and distribution -- to show that old school is cool. To date, most old school products have been self-publishing ventures or sidelines by smaller publishers. There's nothing wrong with that, but the reality is that such products aren't going to reach gamers who aren't plugged in to the back alleys of the gaming world and the old school community probably doesn't even qualify as a back alley. We're a niche within a niche and, while we have a lot of admirers among the bigger players in the industry, that admiration only gets us so far.

Goodman Games has put its toes in the water with products like Points of Light and The Random Esoteric Creature Generator. If they catch the popular imagination, Goodman could well become exactly the vehicle I'd like to see. Likewise, it's possible that Necromancer Games, once it sorts out exactly what it wants to do in the future, could play a similar role, although I think the odds are less, given Clark Peterson's stated preference for supporting the latest edition of D&D, regardless of its pedigree. Much as I like Goodman and Necromancer, I'd much prefer to see a company like Paizo step up and promote the old school in some way. Paizo is uniquely placed to show that old school is cool. Even better would be WotC itself, but the design of the new edition of D&D suggests to me that that's not likely, at least not in a way that would benefit the old school community noticeably. Still, much as I dislike the current direction of the game, there's no question that there are some clever designers behind it, so anything is possible and I'll be the first to say I was wrong if WotC publishes The Big Book of Traps that puts Grimtooth's to shame in its fiendishness.

I expect 2009 to be a topsy-turvy year in general, so who knows what the future holds?

Not Your Father's PHB

And so we reach the end of my retrospective about the covers of the D&D Players Handbook with this entry. Before diving in to talk specifically about the cover of the 4e version, a prediction: this entry will receive even more comments than my entry on the 2e PHB. Why do I say that? Well, I've looked at the stats for this blog and it's pretty widely read, with traffic coming a bunch of other gaming forums and blogs. When I restrict myself to musing about old school stuff exclusively, the comments are (generally) sober and considered and written by fellow grognards and those who understand the old school way. When I veer off into newer games, especially when I speak critically of them and their approach, I get even more visitors and even more comments, many of them not so sober or considered and often not written by grognards or those who understand our perspective. This happened once before rather spectacularly and I had to restrict comments only to registered users. That hasn't stopped trolling from time to time, but it certainly has slowed the deluge.

Now I'm tackling the brand spanking new 4e PHB and I don't think I'm ruining anyone's anticipation by saying upfront that I dislike its art and graphic design a great deal, not to mention the game itself. Passions regarding 4e are running very high at the moment and, as others have noted, you can scarcely voice a negative opinion about the game without its fans descending upon you to teach you the error of your ways. I would frankly be amazed if I don't get several such fans posting here, but perhaps I flatter myself in thinking anyone cares about my opinion. To such people, let me say now: I don't hate 4e -- and I certainly don't hate 4e fans. I'm actually almost at the point where I don't care much about 4e at all, except insofar as it pertains to my continuing researches into the history and traditions of roleplaying games. Almost.

What I do hate, though, and what I do not wish to see in my comments is the suggestion that, because I don't want to play 4e and think it has little to nothing to do with the game Gygax and Arneson created almost 35 years ago, I'm some kind of mental defective or an old fogey living out my midlife crisis by returning to OD&D. Play those cards and your comments will be deleted and I'll do my level best to ensure you never post here again on any topic. I don't go around to the forums and blogs of 4e fans and make a spectacle of myself, because I believe in common courtesy and respect. I expect the same behavior here. Disagree with me if you wish, but stay on topic and don't resort to insults, invective, or dime store psychologizing when doing so. Capisce?

And now the cover to the 4e Player's Handbook


I don't loathe it the same way I loathe the 2.5e PHB, but that's small praise. Illustrated by Wayne Reynolds, the piece is a good approximation of everything I hate about modern fantasy. First, there are the focus characters themselves. The one on the left is a dragonborn, presumably a fighter, wearing ludicrous (though not spiky -- a blessing) armor and wielding an equally ludicrous sword right out of Final Fantasy or perhaps Exalted. I don't actually have a huge problem with the dragonborn in theory; a draconic PC race seems a natural evolution of D&D tropes. However, I do object to their being on the cover of the PHB, as it suggests to me that WotC wishes to make the race a highlight of 4e rather than one option among many. It's another nail in the coffin of pulp fantasy. The figure on the right is your typical "powerful" female figure, which is geekspeak for "attractive and possibly bisexual woman who for some reason is inexplicably attracted to dorks like me." While her eye liner recalls the female magic-user on the cover of the Moldvay Basic set (and even now I know at least one 4e fan out there is claiming that it's a loving homage to that 1981 cover), her pose reminds me of the barbarian on the 2.5e PHB, which is to say, really absurd.

I give big props to Reynolds for the fact that the scene takes place in an underground location of some sort, complete with stalactites. This is essential in my opinion, so bonus points here. I also like the fact that, besides the two central figures, we also see that they have companions. In the background, shrouded somewhat in mist, you can see their buddies, a dwarf and an elf (or is it an eladrin). D&D is not a game about lone heroes, but adventuring parties. So, again, props to Reynolds for showing this. Of course, if you look at the dwarf and the elfladrin, you notice something. Judging by his gear, the dwarf looks like he's probably a fighter, just like the dragonborn. And the pointy-eared guy? Staff in hand and dressed in a robe -- he must be a wizard, just like Eye Liner Chick. Call me paranoid -- no, don't -- but it looks to me as if the piece is almost saying, "See those lamers back in the shadows? Sure, you can play those guys if you want, but wouldn't you rather be one of the cool and/or sexy kids?"

Dungeons & Dragons again gets a new logo, once more with a dragon as the ampersand, but I don't mind this one. I certainly like it much better than the 3e logo, which succeeded at the difficult task of simultaneously looking too professional and too amateurish at the same time. The new logo has no such ambiguity; it's a slick, professional brand-identifying logo. I feel dirty for liking it, but I do. Whoever designed that logo did a fine job in my opinion. I'm far less happy about the subtitle to the book "Arcane, Divine, and Martial Heroes." Leaving aside my issue with the inappropriateness of the word "heroes," the very fact that the PHB is admitting to its limited scope rubs me the wrong way. The 4e PHB is clearly intended to have supplements. Sure, most RPGs over the years have had supplements, but, until the late 80s anyway, they at least made some show of being complete from the get-go. We already know the 4e business plan involves new PHBs, DMGs, and Monster Manuals every year, on the model of card game expansions. Call me old fashioned -- wait, don't -- but I don't like to be reminded right upfront that your company plans to milk me with a stream of supplements until you hit the reset button and start it all over again.

The 4e Player's Handbook also has an illustration on the back cover by Rob Alexander. It depicts a floating castle but isn't connected in any way to the front cover illustration. I don't really have much to say about it, except that it's a bit too high fantasy for my tastes, recalling the Dragonlance modules of old. Perhaps that's intentional, given the continued popularity of that setting. In any case, I will say that I do appreciate that there is back cover art at all rather than just promotional text.

Despite all of the foregoing, I'd like to say that I think the 4e cover actually succeeds in doing what it sets out to do: sell the new D&D. My reading of 4e -- yes, I have read it; no, I won't be reviewing it formally -- is that it's an entirely new game, one that's about as strongly connected to OD&D as just about any random fantasy game produced in the last decade is or, in other words, not very much at all. 4e, of course, has the D&D brand name and access to a few bits and bobs of exclusive IP (like beholders and mind flayers and -- paging the estate of A.E. Van Vogt -- displacer beasts), but it simply doesn't feel any more like Gary's game than does Exalted or Final Fantasy or, yes, World of Warcraft. I don't mean that as a criticism exactly. I have come to see that, for the vast majority of fantasy fans nowadays, the traditions of pulp fantasy mean nothing. If they know Conan at all, it's through the execrable Schwarzenegger movies rather than through the works of Howard and Fafhrd is just an unpronounceable name rather than an icon of the genre.

Given that, it makes a certain amount of sense to reinvent the franchise -- D&D Extreme! -- rather than to stay true to hoary old tropes and archetypes. But no reinvention, however good, will ever be D&D to me. It may be good in its own right and indeed may even be better in some sense than its theoretical inspiration; I'm simply in no position to judge one way or the other. I can only say that, for me, D&D has never been just a rules set. To me, D&D is a love letter to pulp fantasy and to the spirit of reckless creativity seen in the wargames hobby of the late 60s and early 70s. It's of a certain time and place, even if that time and place can still be enjoyed today. I'm not of the opinion that all ideas are infinitely malleable and can be "updated" or made more "relevant" without destroying their essences.

D&D is such an idea. For a book dedicated to the memory of the Dungeon Master, I doubt a single polysyllable of High Gygaxian verbiage remains between the covers of the 4e PHB, let alone the spirit that animated them. This is D&D only in the most equivocal, corporate sense. I haven't yet played the game, though I hope to, but I think it unlikely my opinion on this particular point will change. I have no problem with the existence of new fantasy RPGs. Heck, I wrote a couple of supplements for Exalted and I appreciate its take on the genre. But Exalted doesn't claim to be D&D or an inheritor of the Gygaxian mantle. It's a different game and knows it. 4e doesn't seem to realize it's a different game entirely. Reading the PHB, I kept wanting to shake someone and say, "Get your own damned game."

4e's only been out a month. With time, I'm sure it'll become just another fantasy RPG in my mind, but then that's what it is.

4e GSL Released

Yesterday, the Game System License for the new edition of Dungeons & Dragons was released. I honestly didn't think we'd ever see one, as I predicted earlier. So, let the pillorying begin: I was wrong about this. In my defense, though, I stand by the fact that 4e is not an open game. The GSL is not an open license but instead a limited use trademark license. And now that we can see the license itself, we can see just how limited use it actually is.

Lots of people better versed in the intricacies of legalese than I have already dissected the GSL and found it wanting. Even Clark Peterson of Necromancer Games, one of the biggest boosters of 4e, seems to have had the wind taken out of his sails by the GSL. The long and short of it is that the GSL, far moreso than the OGL, is designed to sell copies of WotC-produced D&D products. It is not about expanding "network externalities" or growing the hobby or anything else beyond making WotC money.

Now, that's WotC's prerogative, of course. They are under no obligation to anyone, except Hasbro's shareholders, to do anything, least of all give away their intellectual property for free for others to use to produce their own products. So let there be no mistake: I don't think WotC has done anything wrong with the GSL. But I do think the restrictiveness and narrow-mindedness of the GSL serve to highlight just how revolutionary than OGL was (and is). Apparently, the guys in charge of WotC agree and they're launching a counter-revolution in the form of the GSL.

Assuming anyone still places any faith in my predictive abilities, I will now make two further prognostications. First, I think we will see very few non-PDF publishers use the GSL. Instead, almost all 4e support will be done through separate licensing agreements, a possibility even the GSL notes as an option. Second, I think Paizo's Pathfinder RPG will now become a much more powerful force in fantasy gaming. No, it won't be a serious rival to D&D in terms of numbers or profit, but it will do very well for Paizo, far better than they were expecting and it will quickly rise to be the linchpin of the remnant OGL hobby/industry.

(I also think the GSL will also create more fertile conditions for the old school renaissance, but that's a topic for another day)

A Prediction

I have a minor sideline in the prognostication of future events. Normally, I confine myself to US presidential and papal elections (the last two of which I got right -- I even successfully predicted what the new Pope's regnal name would be), but this is a gaming blog, so I think I should confine myself here to gaming predictions.

Fortunately, I have one and it's this: Dungeons & Dragons, Fourth Edition, will not be an open game -- at least not in the usual sense of "open." The mysterious GSL (né OGL 2.0) has still not appeared and my guess is that it never will. Much more likely is that WotC will partner with a small number of select third party publishers (such as Necromancer and Goodman Games), granting them limited use trademark licenses. Heck, WotC might even call the license they grant to such companies the GSL to save face. They'll almost certainly come out with a press release saying that they're "working with the finest companies in the gaming industry to produce the best 4e support products imaginable." But there will not be an open game license for 4e that anybody can use to make their own 4e-compatible product.

Now that I've said it here, feel free to laugh and make fun of me when it turns out I'm wrong. I don't think I will be, though. The reality is that the guys at WotC who pioneered open gaming and who really believed in it are long gone. Their successors possess neither the zeal for nor the understanding of why the OGL/D20 STL was so successful and so official support for that movement will die. I've said it elsewhere but it bears repeating: the advent of 4e is not so much about making a better D&D -- though I don't doubt that its designers firmly believe that's what they're doing -- as about shoring up the value and profitability of the D&D trademark and IP. By bean-counting metrics, D&D is hugely under-performing compared to similarly well-known IPs and 4e is intended to fix that, which is why 4e won't be "giving the store away for free" this time around.