Kobold Quarterly #22 - a mini-review

Up front, let me say I am a Pathfinder player, and a fan of Kobold Quarterly magazine, so I am inclined to be positive about KQ right off the bat.  That said, issue #22 (Summer 2012) is – in my opinion – a solid, workman-like issue but lacks any real stand out features this time around.

The write up of Barbatos, Archdevil of the Avernus, is good and creepy – creepier than any other game product I’ve read lately – and presents an interesting bad guy deity for your game, however to me it really never gives any nuts-n-bolts details to hang an adventure on.  Perhaps I’m being lazy, but something along the lines of “10 evil plots for evil cultists of Barbatos” would have been nice.  My other complaint for this article is that I really do not see a devil that wants to break down the laws of civilization, and tempt mortals to violate morals and taboos, as a Lawful being.

The issue also has an article on Dragonkin for 4E, a new Rogue archetype for Pathfinder, some converted monsters for Castles and Crusades, Firearms for Dragon AGE, some new spells, some new magic rings, an encounter area, a guide to part of Golarion, and some editorial features.

Most interesting to me was an article on the Escalation Die mechanic from the upcoming 13^th Age RPG, an essay from Monte Cook on why PCs are more interesting when they are created thru play instead of created at a target level (i.e. a character you have played from 1^st to 5^th level is more varied and quirky than one you generate at 5^th level), and an article on how NPCs will react to being interrogated.

In sum, a good issue, worth the price, but not a great issue.

Obligatory D&D Next Post

There has been a lot of talk about D&D Next in the blogosphere, and while I am late to the game I still want to throw my 2 cents into the pot.

For background let me state a few things:
    * I played and DM'd my first game of D&D in 1976, using the LBBs
    * I have played every major edition of D&D, though very little 4E (not my choice, my gaming group's choice)
    * I once stated that you would need to put a gun to my head to get me to play AD&D again. I've since retracted that opinion, thought 2nd edition AD&D is far from my favorite edition of the game.
    * I've played and GM'd a hell of a lot of non-D&D games (Traveller, Runequest, Champions) and I have enjoyed reading and playing a number of new "indie" games (FATE, Dogs in the Vineyard, Apocalypse World, Lady Blackbird)
    * I am interested in the new edition of D&D and willing to buy it when it comes out if it meets my interests.

So, in my opinion, I am both an experienced D&D player, as well as an experienced general RPG'er with a bit of depth and breadth to his gaming resume. And in my opinion the best RPG is whatever one you are enjoying playing now.  I try to avoid system snobbery.  There are games I don't like, and games I think are "bad games", but I try to stick firm to the belief that my opinions are right for me, and your opinions are right for you.

So when I read the fervor over "descending AC vs ascending AC", or "3d6 in order versus 4d6 drop one place where you will" (or the ludicrous "female PCs have -1 STR" debate) I frankly couldn't care less. Those are trivial issues to me, and ones I can easily house rule to match what I want.

And when I read the folks who state flat out that they have no interest in D&D Next because they have been playing their  version of D&D for years and have no desire to look at, think about or try anything else... well good for them.  I'm glad they are happy with what they have.  I, however, am interested in seeing a fresh take on the game.

So, here is what I want from D&D Next to make we interested enough to buy it, play it and run it:

1) I want it to be recognizably D&D - 6 stats, classes and levels, etc

2) I want a simple but robust skill system that covers all the necessary fantasy stuff (climbing walls, reading runes, riding horses, sailing ships, forging swords, etc).  [3.5E came close, but got too nit-picky; 4E came close but got too vague and hand wavy; 2E was just a mess - too many proficiencies, too few picks]

3) I want a simple but robust feat system that allows a degree of character customization without getting too nitpicky.  [3.5E and 4E both had too many feats. My ideal would be 1 feat every 5 levels or so, but the feat would have a number of mechanical options instead of a single bonus in a narrow situation].

4) Enough character customization that you could have a party of 4 Fighters and each would be a separate character. [I call it the "3 Musketeers" rule.  If I can create 4 Fighters that are as different as the 3 Musketeers I am happy]

5) Enough character class customization so that in one campaign I can run pseudo-generic medieval D&D (classes: Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Thief), the next campaign is 70s Post Apocalypse Fantasy (classes: Duelist, Techno-Arcanist, Psi-Priest of the Fourth Dimension, Dwarf Scavenger), and the next is historical low fantasy (all martial classes, no spell casters allowed).

And these things will make me not want to play D&D next:

1) A MTG style errata system, where you need to follow a website for new rulings and your printed books are obsolete within weeks of purchase.

2) A character creation system of such complexity that you need an online generator.

3) A culture of optimization, where characters like half orc bards and gnome paladins are discouraged and prime stats need to be in the 20s.

I have a few more ideas of what I would like in D&D Next (or any other game for that matter) but I will leave that for another post.