Femen Demonstration

Six members of the activist group Femen pose in front of WOTC
headquarters before rolling up characters and buying equipment.

There was no OSR Art Friday post yesterday, due to this author's desire to express a day of blog silence in solidarity with three Femen members still detained by Washington authorities.

RENTON, WA, December 5 (AP) – Members of the topless feminist group Femen staged a demonstration today against the “anti-sexual prudery” of the new 5th edition Dungeons & Dragons and against “New School” gaming mechanics in general, stripping down to what one activist called “our sacred chainmail bikinis” in front of the gates of Wizards of the Coast headquarters in suburban Seattle. Three members were arrested.

More than twenty demonstrators stood silently for ten minutes with slogans etched in black marker across their chests, such as “Take your Clothes Off My Body!” "Imagine the Hell Out of It!" and “Fight On!” They then unfolded a card table and proceeded to “role play” a game of what one demonstrator called “Holmes Basic”, led by an activist wearing nothing above her waist except a three-paneled cardboard screen emblazoned with the words “Dungeon Mistress”.

A spokesperson for Wizards of the Coast commented, “I have no idea why they are mad at us. For the text of 5e we consulted all the experts on game design and gender equality. We believe our product reflects the latest consensus of people whose opinion we care about. Where did we go wrong?” When informed of this statement, one of the demonstrators held up what she called a “twenty sider” and shouted, “Save or die, Fascist!”

“What’s all the fuss about,” said Sally Layton, a software engineer from Microsoft, who happened to be on her way to work. “5e is the new thing by the dominant company in the industry. That means it must be good. So, why are these women, like, getting naked or whatever?”

“I find it appalling and highly offensive,” said Matt Vickers, another software designer, who was recording the event with a high-resolution video camera.

Irina Gygaxocova, a representative of Femen from the Ukraine, said the demonstration was intended to highlight how the corporate patriarchy intended to keep women out of tabletop gaming by making the new editions as stupid and boring as possible. “1974 was a liberation for us. Soon there was so much to choose, including Warriors of Mars, original Boot Hill and Gamma World. It was a love orgy of freedom that lasted for more than a decade. But beginning with 3e, and even more with 4e and now 5e, they tried to re-enslave us with their rules for everything, $50 core books and sexually repressive art. (Bleep) them! We can now get whatever OSR games and modules we want from Lulu and RPGNow for less than 1% of the cost of a leather skirt.”

Femen calls its form of protest “Hextremism”.

Natalia Arnesoneskva, a Femen member currently serving five years of hard labor in Moldova for possession of a paperbound copy of Labyrinth Lord was more circumspect. Reached for a comment during her weekly five-minutes exercise period, she said, “I support my sisters, but I now feel that edition wars are counter-productive. As long as the game group is having fun, that’s all that matters. I intend to make that point during my next parole hearing.”

Police detained three demonstrators after they refused to remove a banner they had pinned to the company gates. The banner contained the letters “OSR”--thought to be the abbreviation of a political slogan used by Danish feminists. In a press release on their website, Femen stated that lawyers were working to get the three released as soon as possible. “No laws were broken. They’ll be out quicker than the time it takes to fight a melee engagement in 4e.”

Uncharacteristically, the RPG Pundit had no comment.

OSR Art Friday: The Adventuring Party

This piece was one of the first published by the artist and game designer Tom Wham, who joined TSR is 1977. It first appeared in the 6th printing of the original 'White Box' edition of Dungeons & Dragons, replacing the section of text that in previous printings had described the Balrog--excised due to legal pressure from the Tolkien estate. It also appeared on the front page of the 1979 bluish 'wizard logo' Character Record Sheets.

Here they all are--the Fighter with his sentient magic sword, the conical-capped Magic-User hiding behind him, the Thief in the process of picking the Magic-User's pocket and the beneficent Cleric (is he trying to gently dissuade the Thief or naively oblivious to his action?). To me, they are united in having an almost maniacal look about them, as if to say, this is what the lure of treasure does to everyone.

Wham would do many other drawings for TSR and later other companies including his own, often combined with game design such as in his brilliant Awful Green Things from Outer Space. Most of his drawings were comical or light-hearted in style but not all of them. He also composed the Monster Manual's Beholder. (Though, now that I look at it again, even that awful creature appears ever so slightly comic.)

In a blog post contrasting his work with that of David Trampier, Matt Finch references the above drawing while aptly describing Wham's contribution:

...Tom Wham's picture is an adventuring party seen from the outside, from the perspective of the gamer looking in. Because let's face it, most of our gaming sessions have plenty of Tom-Wham-adventurer moments in them. Quoting Monty Python? That's the Tom Wham guys. Dancing around the table when your roll for dexterity comes up triple 6's? That's the Tom Wham guys.

Quick quiz: In what fundamental ways does 2nd edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons differ from 1st edition? THACO and skills would be possible correct answers, of course. But here's another one:

There are no cartoons in 2nd edition AD&D.

Or at least there aren't in the 2nd edition Dungeon Master's Guide. Contrast this with the multiple cartoons (with captions!) liberally sprinkled throughout the original DMG:

P. 34:

P. 35:

P. 44:

So here's another difference between the old school and newer editions (for those of you still keeping count). The old school had a sense of humor. Newer editions often give off a ponderous air of humorless self-importance, as if to say, 'don't laugh, it will break the spell'.*

Also, prestige classes aren't funny.**

Recently Jon Peterson unearthed and published a sort of variant or possibly even proto-version of Dungeons & Dragons, played in Minneapolis in 1974. Among other things it featured giant carnivorous meatballs. I think many of us would agree that 'official' OD&D was wise not to go that far, though if you wanted more of that sort of thing, there was always Tunnels & Trolls.

However, in the Golden Age of the game, there was a sense (at least at some level) that things shouldn't be taken that seriously, partly because we all were well familiar with how the game was actually played. Despite some of the fantastical depictions in the media--like Tom Hanks and friends sitting around a spooky table that featured candles and crystals--we all knew that in the end we are all just a bunch of pimply kids getting potato chip grease on our graph paper and riffing about Monty Python or Doctor Who in between rolls.

The game was cool. No question about it. But what was wrong with laughing with it and at it from time to time, as well as (on occasion at least) laughing at ourselves?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*2e was still old school in many ways, and to be fair, I liked much of the art in 2e, but on some things the vibe had already changed.

**Unless you say some of the names aloud to your wife. For the list of over 800 prestige classes I published a few weeks back (stolen from Wikipedia), I stuck a few phony names into it--such as inserting 'Swiss Burger with Bacon' in between 'Swift Wing' and 'Sword Dancer'--to see whether anyone was paying attention. My wife, at least, thinks I'm a funny man.
'Wearer of Purple.'
'That's hilarious. You're a funny man.'
'I didn't make that up. It's one of the real ones.'
'You're lying. You made that one up.'
'I didn't.'
etc.

Daddy, I Want to be a Slutty Lollipop Princess!

This post is dedicated to Hasbro, who in its most recent incarnation of Dungeons & Dragons, asked children (among others) to:

Think about how your character does or does not conform to the broader culture's expectations of sex, gender, and sexual behavior.

The slutty lollipop princess image is from Hasbro's current (2013) version of the classic game Candy Land (for ages 3+):

"Daddy, I Want to be a Slutty Lollipop Princess!"

"No son, not until you're potty trained."

Okay, that conversation never happened. But this one did:

"Daddy, She's pretty."

"You think so?"

"Yes."

My daughter wasn't referring to Princess Lolly (above), but rather, the current Candy Land's Princess Frostine:

"But Lydia, look at her eyes. Don't you think her eyes are a bit far apart and her lips are a bit weird?"

"She's pretty."

"She injected a chemical into her lips with a needle. It's called Collagen and it's poisonous."

"Oh."

"She'll die horribly from the poison and other people will then take her toys."

"I understand. Dad, can I have her magic wand?"

"Yes, I'll buy you one tomorrow at Target."

Okay, so the second half of that conversation never happened either (though my daughter does indeed possess a magic wand that I bought for her at Target). But the first half did.

Now to be serious:

Implicitly offering Lolly and Frostine as role models for 3-year-old girls (aimed at the mass-market suburban toy store crowd) while simultaneously hectoring older kids and adults about sexual and gender stereotypes (in the manner of the most humorless and ideologically puritanical sociology textbook) is about the most cynical thing I've seen in a long time.

Okay, I've seen a lot of cynical things recently, but still.

As some of you know, I can be fairly accurately characterized as a social conservative. A close friend--a social liberal--agreed with me about Lolly and Frostine (liberal feminists and, say, conservative Christians can unite on that, I think), but she made the point that Hasbro is a large company, different people are responsible for writing different games, etc. etc.

Not good enough.

There are people in the company that vet all these games concerning these sorts of issues.

Tailoring the message is a cynical calculation. Nothing more and nothing less.

Hasbro is beneath contempt.

D&D 5e Basic Rules: A Random Review

As most of you probably know by now, the free download of the Basic Rules is available here.

In the spirit of the OSR I thought I would write a review based on random tables. Grab a six-sided die and enjoy!

1. COMMENT ON THIS SAMPLE EXCHANGE:

Dungeon Master (DM): OK, one at a time. Phillip, you’re looking at the gargoyles?

Phillip: Yeah. Is there any hint they might be creatures and not decorations?

DM: Make an Intelligence check.

Phillip: Does my Investigation skill apply?

DM: Sure!

Phillip (rolling a d20): Ugh. Seven.

DM: They look like decorations to you. And Amy, Riva is checking out the drawbridge?

Die	Result
1	A clear presentation of the current state of the art in RPGs. Thank the goddess we’re not living in the 1970’s anymore.
2	I skip these sorts of things.
3	I wanted to write something but I just failed my Intelligence check.
4	That this is featured on the first page of text does not auger well.
5	The above is an example of ‘New School’ roleplaying at its dumbest.
6	That one of the female characters is named ‘Riva’ brings up bad memories.

2. OVERALL THE RULES ARE:

Die	Result
1	Way too complicated.
2	Not complicated enough. Bring on the full $40 manuals!
3	Appropriate for the 'Basic Game'. It will lure novices in.
4	A precise simulation of reality down to the tiniest atom.
5	Fascinating! I've always wanted to act out a fantasy story. Now I understand how to do it!
6	Way too complicated. But then again, I've had a few drinks.

3. IF I WANT TO, CAN I PLAY A DWARF WHO IS NOT 'DWARF-LIKE', AT LEAST ACCORDING TO THE TWO PAGE DESCRIPTION OF 'DWARF-LIKE' RACIAL AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS, ATTITUDES TO THE OTHER RACES, ETC?:

Die	Result
1	No.
2	Yes.
3	That you even ask shows that you are a reactionary.
4	Yes.
5	Only if you make your Constitution check modified by your Arrogance score.
6	Perhaps, but only after private consultation with your DM.

4. IS THE ELF TRAIT 'MASK OF THE WILD':

Die	Result
1	Evocative.
2	Confusing.
3	A further sign that Elves are a bit magical.
4	Silly.
5	Cool.
6	Cribbed from 50 Shades of Grey.

5. PERSONALITY TRAITS (IDEALS, BONDS AND FLAWS) ARE:

Die	Result
1	Boring and too new school.
2	An enhancement of role-playing, and isn't that what it's all about?
3	Appropriate for the 'Basic Game'. Freudian analysis only comes with the Advanced edition.
4	Confusingly presented. Are they chosen or randomly determined? The rules are unclear.
5	Fascinating! I've always wanted to act out a fantasy story. Now I understand how to do it!
6	Way too complicated. But then again, I've had a few drinks.

6. COMMENT ON THIS TEXT:

You don't need to be confined to binary notions of sex and gender. The elf god Correllon Larethian is often seen as androgynous or hermaphroditic, for example...You could also play a female character who presents herself as a man, or a man who feels trapped in a female body, or a bearded female dwarf who hates being mistaken for a male. Likewise, your character's sexual orientation is for you to decide.

Die	Result
1	I'm sorry, what is there to comment on?
2	Whatever, as long as the all the NPC Elven chicks have lesbian tendencies.
3	Oh, please. Must we have this in a game written primarily for children?
4	Yes, we must, and the author of the above statement is obviously a homophobe. There's no place for that in the RPG community. Take your hate and go home.
5	Personally, I've always felt I was a bearded man trapped in the body of someone who can't grow a beard.
6	Perhaps, but only after private consultation with your DM.

7. IS THE LIST OF 'TRINKETS':

Die	Result
1	About the only thing worthwhile here.
2	Too random. What if you end up with a bad one?
3	Too simple, without description or explanation. It's not clear how to DM it. Will the Advanced edition have rules telling us how to use these in play?
4	Cool.
5	So old school that it almost seems out of place.
6	Cool.

8. DO THE 0-HIT POINT, DEATH AND HEALING RULES SEEM ANY MORE 'DANGEROUS' THAN 4E:

Die	Result
1	No.
2	Yes.
3	Extremely unclear. Mixed signals are sent.
4	No.
5	Probably not.
6	No, and that's another huge problem with this game.

9. IS THE PRESENCE OF A MAGIC MISSILE SPELL THAT AUTOMATICALLY HITS:

Die	Result
1	New school.
2	Old school.
3	Heresy.
4	A carryover from the original game that has no deep significance whatsoever.
5	A good thing for all M-U's to have, if they have a spare spell slot.
6	Pretty damn powerful considering that in general you get one 'dart' per level. (Though in the context of the relatively high hit points and other special powers of PC's and Monsters in this game, is it really that great? I have no idea.)

10. WAS THE AUTHOR OF THIS REVIEW:

Die	Result
1	Fair and balanced.
2	Unbalanced.
3	Mixed. It depends on how the dice were rolled. Hence the 'Random' title.
4	Predisposed.
5	Inebriated (but what else is new?)
6	All of the above

Fight On!