Off the Shelf: Swords & Wizardry

I put Swords & Wizardry aside, thinking the OGL-free update was a fun game. I had moved beyond this and started exploring other old-school games. It was a mistake to shelve this game.

Shadowdark is cool, and it is a tight, almost board game-like version of 5E that many thousands of players love. Old School Essentials is the pinnacle of small-book B/X and an expensive set of books to get your hands on. There are many OSR games these days, and they all repeat each other endlessly, with minor changes here and there.

I wrote an article looking for a "treasure system" for Dungeon Crawl Classics since the book explicitly states, "Take a treasure system from another game." So, I went on a quest looking for the ideal "treasure system book" to use with DCC. My best-of-the-best were OSRIC and Swords & Wizardry.

OSRIC was very good, and the magic-item charts in that game are some of the best ever written. OSRIC is the "better AD&D" these days since the AD&D reprint books on DTRPG are so full of errors they are laughable. Don't use your original copies of AD&D; play OSRIC and save those as collector's items. OSRIC and DCC work very well together, the only issue being OSRIC and descending AC conversions to DCC for the monsters.

I found that 90% of Swords & Wizardry can be used as an expansion book for DCC. The monsters import right in, as-is. The single-save number of monsters works better than the 3.5E style saves of DCC, especially for monsters then who cares about 3 saves for a creature? The treasure system and horde generation work perfectly with the game. All the generation charts work perfectly. The only things you don't use are classes and spells.

Swords & Wizardry and DCC are so tight they are almost like sister games.

Do you want classic zero-edition monsters and treasures in DCC? Get this book. S&W is the best "stuff book" ever written for DCC. It has all the missing monsters and treasures.

Once you see S&W in that light, the next step is to consider playing it standalone. The single-save mechanic is a genius-level simplification of the pedantic B/X save system, and if you need to modify it for a single monster, like bats having a +4 to all "reflex" saves, then you just make that ruling and move on. They are bats. If the save is used for a dodge, then bats are good at dodging, and I give the bats a +4. I am done. The game gives me the power to make a ruling.

Swords & Wizardry released an options book this year that fills in all the "missing classes" in newer games. They did an amazing job of "backporting" these classes to zero-edition. You get bards (druids) and troubadours (illusionists) here, so you get both flavors of the class. You get barbarians, warlocks, demon-hunters, illusionists, necromancers, and much more. The barbarian is more of a Conan class and amazingly fun. If you felt S&W was missing the "fun parts" of the newer games, this is your book.

This is the missing expansion. Swords & Wizardry needs this to be on par with modern OSR games. You get all the fun classes of 5E with none of the power gaming, bloat, or overdesign. This is the OSR game most like 5E in terms of classes, but it keeps power levels under control.

Thank you.

They also massively expanded the monsters in a "Foes" book, another fantastic hardcover with over 300 new monsters for the game. Swords & Wizardry is a massive game now, in a three-volume set. It is still a compact game, very streamlined, with excellent presentation and a tight format that packs a lot into its space. The art is consistently outstanding.

Unlike OSE, this game has plenty of demons, and the whole concept of good versus evil is baked into the design. Adding chaos-aligned warlocks and necromancers in the options book adds the evil classes to the game. The options here exceed both Shadowdark and OSE, and the classes feel great. Also, only fighters (and only fighters; not paladins, rangers, barbarians, or any others) get the STR bonus to attack and damage in S&W (to melee and ranged attacks), which is another genius design decision.

The tamping down of die roll modifiers speeds gameplay makes AC numbers meaningful and controls hit-point inflation. Any game that seriously gives all classes the same STR to hit and damage bonuses needs to rethink its design. You also get the lower-than-1-HD multi-attack ability here. You play a fighter because you want to be a lord of war and combat. Other fighter classes get all sorts of special abilities to compensate for the lack of bonuses, so it is fair to everyone. These zero-edition fighters rock, man. They feel like Death Metal should play when your turn comes up.

This is the one change I wish OSE had made, as the OSE fighters feel plain and uninteresting in comparison. All the classes have these fun abilities baked in, and they are far more detailed and versatile than OSE classes. OSE feels too simple compared to S&W, and in other ways, S&W is more streamlined than OSE. The single-save is a genius mechanic.

Compared to Castles & Crusades, S&W is the more straightforward system. I know this is heresy! I love C&C! But Swords & Wizardry does more in fewer pages and leaves much more up to you. This is the best pre-AD&D system, roleplaying at its finest in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It still has the AD&D feeling, though, without all the charts and bloat.

Swords & Wizardry is the game AD&D should have been. I know, more heresy! S&W sticks close to the B/X framework, eliminates all the fiddly bits, and makes every class awesome with signature abilities and party roles. The game is tight and streamlined. It has an ascending AC system, and the math is easy. Modifiers and hit points are under control. The new, OGL-free version is a clean, tight, effortless design with zero baggage.

This is the perfect game to graduate to after Shadowdark when you want a streamlined zero-edition game with many options and that classic pre-AD&D feeling with all the AD&D-isms you love about that game. It is the best reinterpretation of the zero-edition rules, is endlessly expandible, and has those streamlining features we love about Shadowdark. Encumbrance is simplified. Thieves are the only class to get the +4 backstab bonus from behind (other classes get a +2). You get a lot of re-sorting of the benefits newer games tend to "give everybody," and they get parsed out to classes to make those classes unique and meaningful in play and to a party.

As a "stuff book" for DCC, this is the one to go with since the monsters are trivial ports. This gives you a solid treasure system, treasure horde generation, encounter tables, gear lists, and all sorts of missing pieces DCC does not come with. Even the expansions are highly usable. If you have DCC, pick up S&W and thank me later, and you will have all the classic AD&D creatures at your fingertips and a treasure system that works amazingly well with DCC.

Your DCC characters can finally thrash that cloud giant fortress with the white dragon, and get appropriate treasure for each monster there. Finally!

But the two new volumes in the game are game-changers. These take the game from an "oh, this is a cool game" to a must-play standalone system. Swords & Wizardry Revised is my new go-to OSR system, and it has eclipsed many of the standard bearers I have grown used to. Give each class here another look, and compare them to OSE and Shadowdark; you will see a lot of "extra fun" built into each class, with plenty of the best "problem-solving tools" provided.

This game is up there with DCC in terms of fun and design. Where DCC is the gonzo, wild, often very swingy, and hilarious epic experience, S&W is the serious, focused, clean, tightly-tuned, and streamlined design that delivers classic dungeon crawling with minimal fuss and chart references.

Off the Shelf: Twilight: 2000

I picked up the mail and got the boxed set for Twilight: 2000 on the same day the Ukraine War started. In some ways, it feels like we are living in a delayed timeline of this game, and what is here awaits us all. The game hits close to home.

My brother and I were big Twilight players when the first edition came out, and the concept and execution of the premise were second to none for a roleplaying wargame. When this came out, AD&D 1st Edition was dying, Car Wars was starting to fade, BattleTech was taking over, Rifts was doing well, and people were getting tired of the fantasy genre. People wanted something more than "level-based games with dwarves and elves."

We were into Aftermath and Gamma World, so the post-apocalyptic genre was familiar. It hadn't been done like this, though. This was the 1980s-fueled Cold War, with the Soviets as the ultimate bad guys sort of roleplaying. It was D&D meets Rambo to us, and we had a blast surviving, scrounging ammo and parts, navigating the map, and eventually stopping to call a place home. And, of course, taking the war back to the Soviets and chasing the Red Army out of Poland.

There are no drones or cell phones in this world. There is no Internet.

It was more of a peasant army with siege weapons, low-tech and high-tech gear, daring raids, alliances, food shortages, building fortifications, and negotiating with different sources of army supply in exchange for food and resources. It was an excellent post-apocalyptic "kingdom-building game" in this world. The units were scarce modern, mostly archaic weapons, with plenty of soldiers with crossbows, muskets, and melee weapons.

My players were brilliant. They used every source of supply they could find and augmented that with primitive units to hold back areas and keep the peace. It reminded me of how we played Mutant Future, a low-tech world with high-tech treasure. This was a Middle Ages world with limited access to tech, and having modern military gear was like super science stuff. Ammo was scarce and hoarded like gold. Some units used muskets. Everything your enemy had, you took.

But when you walked the streets of a settlement, it was all Middle Ages farming, food storage, churches, brewing, leatherworking, ranching, foresting, blacksmithing, gunsmithing, and mustering the local men to defend the settlement. Any decent populated town had walls, outposts, watch towers, and defenses. Refugees huddled outside the walls in squalor, with the church giving what they could.

Forget communications and electricity. Animals and carts provided transportation.

The world was a dark place.

Like some places in this world today.

As time passed, ammo and spare parts became scarcer, and the slow realization of 'what have we done' settled into the entire game. The world, month after month, felt like it was sliding back into the Middle Ages. The last battles were hard fought but had real meaning and sacrifice. Some questioned, 'Why do we keep fighting?' Alliances were made and broken, and it was some great Game of Thrones-level stuff when a warlord or baron threw in with the Soviets and betrayed our heroes in a surprise turn. Heroes were captured, rescues were made, and revenge was had.

Is that last piece of land, or that previous ideal, worth driving the world further into the grave? It turns out it was. Like a great Western, there are times when what is right defines who you are. We either fight for this, or nothing we did means anything. The game ran its course, and we moved on. 

The Free League version brings back good memories, and I like this game for the "sim" and solo gaming elements it offers. The rules are more abstract, but I understand why you are tracking many variables, and the dice need to take some of the work off of the group with a few layers of abstraction. It is not the same game, but one more than worthy of picking up the torch.

So, off the shelf, it came, and I am thinking of games to play.

Off the Shelf: Dragonbane

Dragonbane, a game I've been eagerly anticipating, is a d20-style, simplified fork of Runequest. What truly sets it apart and piques my interest is its innovative solo-playable mechanics, particularly the use of initiative cards. The game's 'solo play' rules and grim-fantasy aesthetic, reminiscent of classic Warhammer Fantasy and folklore, further enhance its appeal.

Dragonbane, much like Shadowdark, is a rules-light adventure game with a comprehensive skill system and intricate combat mechanics. However, it distinguishes itself by offering a different experience, one that is less resource-focused and more about the exhilaration of prewritten adventures. This departure from the hex-crawl style of Forbidden Lands adds a unique thrill to the game.

The balance is flatter, again, on the level of a Runequest or other d100 game. Experience comes from skills, and combat is deadly. The game also feels like a "sandbox," like you have a map, and your story is how your character (or party) navigates through this place and all the trouble they find along the way. There are also card elements to the game, like treasure cards, which provide a source of power and "leveling up."

I like the monsters and how their turn actions are randomized. There is also a "random action table" for NPCs in the solo rules, so you can play this solo and manage to have the monsters and enemies surprise you. Very few games do this, and it is a fantastic solo-play mechanic, along with a tool for referees to "run" monsters effectively.

I get most any 5E monster manual, and monsters above a certain CR are always homework assignments to learn how to use effectively. Every D&D-like game post-year 2000 has this problem, from D&D 3.0 on through Pathfinder 1e, and even 5E has these complex "homework monsters" that are a pain to run if the dungeon contains more than a handful of different types. You get an adventure for 12th-level characters and have a weekend of research to effectively run a dozen high-level foes.

Part of why high-level play in 5E seems like the characters are invincible is likely because very few game masters can run those monster stat blocks effectively. Dragonbane solves the problem, eliminating GM bias and aversion to complex magic and condition-based attacks.

You can also randomly create a hero, wholly randomized in kin, class, age, gear, and background. You can play Dragonbane like a rouge-like game, solo, with your character advancing, finding treasures, and completing missions as you go.

The game's solo missions are more abstract than the Shadowdark map-based style; in Dragonbane, you create a dungeon by stringing together waypoints, and you can do a rough map like a connected bubble graph. Once you solve or clear a waypoint, you move on to the next one.

Dungeons in Dragonbane are smaller; encounter sites have from 1-4 locations, medium ones have 4-10 areas, while the larger dungeons have 12-20 rooms. Most places have just 1-2 locations of note and a story point that happens there. I would keep most dungeons in the 6-9 "bubble" range for solo play. You aren't mapping and exploring as much as solving problems, fighting, and using your skills in these places.

I see a lot of similarities to Forbidden Lands here. Still, Dragonbane feels like a simplified system focused on the "situation and character sheet" dungeon and fight gameplay loop. Forbidden Lands feels like a Civilization-style game, where you are simulating a grand and epic quest of exploration, where the action feels a step away, and you are exploring hexes, building strongholds, and discovering ancient places of wonder. The broad sweeps of narrative action, timekeeping, and resource management while in dangerous lands make Forbidden Lands compelling from a "sim" perspective and dip a little into fantasy wargaming.

Forbidden Lands feels more like a "fantasy novel simulator" than a "dungeon game." Characters die frequently here; there are even stickers to mark where your heroes met at the end of their tales. If Gorm the dwarf died on this hill protecting his friends from skeletons two years ago, we mark this map spot with a sticker (and perhaps, in-game, a small memorial of stones) and call it "Gorm's Hill" in his honor.

Forbidden Lands is a "sim" style game.

Everything you do in Forbidden Lands is worldbuilding. There is a map where everything happens during play and is generated organically. It is a "Legacy" style game, where the map and "game board" change each time you play, and a fresh start is called for. You can keep one map going for years over dozens of parties and adventures, with new generations picking up the sword for adventure.

Forbidden Lands is also more complex in mechanics. There are a lot of special rules and dice with symbols, each of which has a special meaning. The book has "subsection rules" that make sense of the results, what can happen when, and how to take the abstract dice results and make those work in the game. You must keep an "operating system layer" in your head when playing; much like Savage Worlds, the game relies on a translation layer framework between the die results and your character.

Dragonbane feels more "play from the character sheet" than Forbidden Lands.

Dragonbane focuses on the "here and now dungeon game" and succeeds wildly. It is more character-focused, with more skills and character details than Forbidden Lands. It is less "Lord of the Rings" and more "Conan" in a novel perspective. The action and mystery are immediate. Characters have three times the depth. The fights are visceral and detailed. You have thirty skills that define your character, plus unique heroic traits, spells, and other abilities. This is a "zoomed-in" fantasy with the character in tight focus.

Dragonbane is an action RPG.

Dragonbane has a map and campaign setting; the first adventure focuses on that valley. You can ignore it and create your own setting, like a hew-crawl or dark fantasy style. Dragonbane has a cartoonish, gritty, dark fantasy vibe, almost as if Darkwing Duck were a mature graphic novel for adults and published in Heavy Metal, with plenty of blood, violence, and classic Batman Animated Series character designs out of the 1990s. Forbidden Lands feels like Larry Elmore Dragonlance art, by comparison.

Dragonbane is a good game. It is simple, fast, playable, and fun, and its art style inspires daring, dark, gritty, pulp adventure.

AI Will Kill 5E

But not in the way you think.

There has been a lot of noise regarding AI in D&D, and I have seen the light. I used AI as a hobby when it was new, but I have since realized its threat to the traditional art market. The potential for a generation of artists to give up on their craft is a genuine concern. We want a marketplace for people's works and art to be art - not a product of an endless, corporate-censored mix-and-match machine that can't draw hands or profiles. The risk of losing the human touch in art is a sobering thought.

But AI itself will kill 5E. It won't be the AI inside the game; it will be the AI outside of it, casting a shadow over its future. And "killing 5E" doesn't mean "gone forever for everyone" just - not in the central cultural relevance and back to being a niche game, as it was.

5E has positioned itself as a "pen and paper MMO" - that only relies on the input of a live DM to provide what a machine can't. I have seen this over the years as the character options in all the various versions of 5E seem to be less and less with each new edition, as the designers dictate to you "what you should play" and "how you should play it."

Having reviewed many 5E character designs recently, I can say GURPS beats 5E any day in building the characters I can imagine. My problem with 5E is my imagination is more extensive than that game, and I am tired of "paying for options I already have in other games." 5E takes it all away and sells you each option back, one at a time.

Now, they are desperately trying to add AI to a system and hack together a static virtual tabletop, expecting people to read to get fulfillment and move around stiff figures purchased with microtransactions. The map will be static, present, and need to be purchased. The system likely still needs a DM to initiate and "run the AI." This is not a system designed to work together; it is a patched system trying to force AI into a human-to-human interaction model, it will come off like a chatbot trying to run a game. It's a disappointing direction for 5E.

5E is an MMO. It is also an inferior MMO, and it takes much longer to "get in and play." World of Warcraft still has them beat; I can be in and in a group adventure in 10 minutes in that game, with that "instant playing with others" checkbox ticked.

No, it is not "roleplaying or D&D" at all.

But add AI to an MMO?

Allow for dynamic scenario, mission, story, character, and zone creation? The MMO has the assets, animations, voice acting, art, delivery channels, existing customers, scale of operations, and framework to make this experience happen much more straightforwardly than D&D on a static tabletop. The lines will be blurred between traditional static quests and dynamic ones. People will not know what prewritten content is and what AI is, and it won't matter.

In an MMO, I don't have to "buy 3D maps and figures." I am not stuck with "what I own" for content generation. The paywall levels here are too high for players to get over, and the expense of generating all this 3d content is too high for a company delivering static assets. I have been in this industry, I know. It is brutal when you consider the costs of support and paying 3d artists for their work, along with the time needed to get one character or map out the door. Wizards of the Coast is not a 3D modeling company, and it does not have the artist community or sales market to feed such a ravenous customer base.

The MMO has a built-in market, delivery system, beta-test framework, community, content, models, and support for rapid delivery of AI-generated content. They can start small and work towards the larger scales. AI is in a few missions here and there; test and scale it up. Tabletop game AI models and play experiences need to be built from scratch.

The AI will pull people with similar interests together as it grows beyond story generation and moves into matchmaking. The MMO company has more data than Wizards on player preferences and behavior. AI relies on data, and character sheets and session logs on D&D Beyond are not enough data for a "meta AI" to begin to shape group and guild experiences.

Once MMO makers start adopting AI for dynamic online experiences, the mass market will follow.

The MMO will be indistinguishable from a DM-curated experience.

D&D will be seen as "a static tabletop plus an AI chatbot."

That is when 5E dies.

Tales of the Valiant: Pocket Editions

When I got them, I thought they were a waste of money and that I would need to wear reading glasses. Even with my older eyes, I can still read them (a little slower, but not unreadable due to the font they used).

These have become my daily go-to for rule lookups, surpassing the 5E SRD and the Black Flag SRD. Their compact size allows them to sit on my table, ready to be grabbed like a paperback book. I can quickly flip to the rule I need, making my reference process quick and efficient. Regarding usability, the PDF on my computer is the most convenient, followed by the pocketbook, then the iPad PDF version (which can be a bit slow to navigate), and finally, the hardcover.

I am truly enamored with these hardcovers. I envision using these smaller books as versatile table references. Their value extends beyond desk use, as they also serve as quick and easy table references, making them an invaluable resource for any situation.

Level Up A5E and D&D have nothing close, and only Pathfinder 2 has something similar. However, that font is tiny for me. This is really the best pocket-sized 5E reference out there.

Surprisingly, these smaller books outshine even the iPad version. While the iPad is undeniably portable and my preferred choice for on-the-go, these little books are hard to beat regarding desk reference.

I am taken with ToV and feel a sense of freshness here. Kobold Press avoids controversy and does not make players angry. The game doesn't surprise players with new rules. It feels playable and "innocent," like the original B/X. Yes, it is in all respects "5E," but more importantly, it isn't D&D. With D&D, I get this feeling of sadness, even with the old versions, knowing what it became. I know, my games are my games, but it feels like trying to get excited about the original Matrix movie knowing how bad the sequels sucked.

ToV feels fresh; it is like "my game" to do what I want. Nobody tells me how to play it, not the game, anyone online, the mainstream, or the art or words in the books. The mainstreaming of AD&D 2nd Edition killed the game and TSR along with it, and stripped anything cool out of the game for fear of upsetting anyone.

Tales of the Valiant does not have the D&D baggage.

I can also mod the rules, like the promise of the original 2014 5E. The core books are just that, core books. I am glad they did not add too much; this lets the game be itself and open to modding, which it should be. A "community rules platform" like 5E should have been, with no one trying to roll it back or telling you the game is a social platform for identity marketing.

ToV is still innocent and fresh and reminds me of the days when D&D was still that way.

ToV Game Master's Guide, Part 2

Chapter two, Adventures and Campaigns, has three sections: Flavors of Fantasy, Adventures, and Campaigns. This is a short chapter, and I wanted more from it, so while it is more of an overview, it still lays out the general concepts and lets you five in from there. They couldn't have done this as in-depth as I would have liked since each topic could be a book in itself of information.

Flavors of Fantasy is the first, covering the significant subgenres of fantasy. It positions ToV as "fantasy," a middle-of-the-road genre, and keeps "high fantasy" as a different genre. It is nice to see dark fantasy mentioned here, and including this opens the door for ToV to be more than just a dragons and treasure game. The fact that the genre is in the book opens the game up to play the genre and empowers groups to change the game to meet their needs.

High and low fantasy are discussed, and limiting magic is a huge help. They mention that magic-using characters may not exist, which is a massive help to settings like Primeval Thule, which did not work under 2014 D&D because of "too much magic" in the system. People played it; the caster classes cast flight and zapped people with laser cantrips, and the fighters stood there with broken bone weapons.

Sword and sorcery are kept apart from low fantasy, which is also a fascinating choice. I would love to see guidelines on running the game this way or even an S&S guide with new subclasses for the genre.

The final types covered are portal fantasy, science fantasy, and weird fantasy. I like the discussion here since this "opens the door" to modding the game to play more than just the standard fantasy-setting assumptions. If low fantasy is mentioned as a viable option in the book, then the group is invited to limit magic in the game under that umbrella. Laser rifles appearing in the game are allowed if science fantasy is chosen. We can bring Conan-style tropes and mature themes if sword and sorcery is a supported genre. The door is opened for modding and discussion.

What is my dream for this section? A "how to" for making these happen within the game, including what spells and classes are appropriate for each, discussions on allowed types of magic, and the nuts-and-bolts details of making each genre work in the game. Granted, each one of these genres could be a "how to" book in itself, so my wants for this section are probably way too wide-eyed than what they had room for, and even a chapter a few dozen pages long would not feel adequate. For example, my dream science fantasy section would include technological artifacts, monsters, robots, and themes - which would be a better subject for an entire hardcover.

If you need more information, the Kobold Guide to Plots and Campaigns is a good resource and expands on all the information presented in this chapter. Some of the things discussed here feel like the missing parts of this chapter. There is a good chapter in this book about running evil campaigns, which is admittedly an advanced topic but worth adding to the information in this chapter as additional material and the "201" level of the subject study of Adventures and Campaigns.

The following section is on adventures, which covers tiers of play (thank you), running published adventures, and the elements of adventures. I like the tiers of the game since they remind me of D&D 4E, and they provide a good overview of how your game's "scope" naturally increases as your character gains power. This discussion also suggests advancement progression, and you could forego XP entirely and just use these guidelines as milestones.

The published adventures section is excellent, and reading it inspired me to change things up in published adventures, something early D&D modules often failed at terribly. Room three, 30 kobolds. Room four, 10 tougher kobolds, and 1500 silver pieces. Keep on the Borderlands is a classic adventure, but parts of that get too repetitive and lack story, conflict, plot, or meaning. Wizards, feed that module into AI, and you will get rooms with 50 kobolds created everywhere.

But it was fun back in the day!

The game and player expectations changed.

The chapter ends with campaigns, including advice on building your own and using published settings. The game also says you can modify campaigns, mix and match pieces, or mash two together. This is nice to see since many beginning GMs get intimidated regarding settings and don't feel they have the freedom to make a setting their own.

Don't laugh; the "that isn't in canon!" crowd exists to bully GMs into adhering to someone's preconceived notion of what the "perfect" state of a setting should be. If a town is in a fantasy novel, and the players visit that in the game, then it should live up to the exact ideal of that novel (which everyone should have read), and that one player gets disappointed since the setting isn't perfect and doesn't live up to their expectations. See also: playing in the 1990s Forgotten Realms setting.

The chapter ends with a sample "act structure" of a campaign, which is helpful when considering the larger narrative arc of metaplot. Of course, the players should be driving this and saying where things go, but in a larger sense of "the stakes rising," this is an excellent example of a story arc.

We get a paragraph at the end discussing character deaths, but I would have liked to have seen more discussion here on replacement characters that fit in with the story.

This is a chapter I wanted to see more about, but there are many subjects in which I am very interested. As a result, the chapter fell short for me, reflecting my interest in campaigns and these topics more than most. The Plots and Campaigns book fills in much of the information I wanted. For beginners, this is good information and a worthy chapter. For experts like myself, get the companion book, and that fills in the gaps. Given the size of this subject, this chapter does a good job of introducing the concepts.

ToV Game Master's Guide, Part 1

I started reading the Tales of the Valiant Game Master's Guide (ToV GMG) last night and read the first 30 pages. I also completed the "How to Be a GM" and "Adventures and Campaigns" sections, with some excellent advice here.

The 'How to be a GM' section is a treasure trove of practical advice. It's a 'blue collar' guide that breaks down the nuts and bolts of game mastering, from understanding game dynamics to managing interpersonal issues, maintaining player agency, and even advice on note-taking and pacing. Even if you're well-versed in these areas, the practicality of this section and its ability to set you up for success before gameplay make it a must-read.

It's a common misconception in the hobby that 'being a Matt Mercer equals success.' However, the reality is far from it. YouTube and scripted "let's play" shows can give people terrible misconceptions about gamemastering and make it seem more like TV and play-acting. Success in game mastering involves a lot of preparation, social skills, coordination, and the ability to keep the game engaging and balanced while respecting player agency and keeping stories on track and progressing.

The game master is the movie's director, producer, crew, set builders, supporting cast, special effects people, grips, sound people, and everyone else on set. It isn't a movie since the players are in control, but the metaphor holds regarding building a believable world for the players to play in.

There is more to being a game master than most know, and the first part of the GMG tackles the issue and lays out everything clearly, which is a huge help to new game masters. The hobby still has a game master shortage, and one great GM can sell dozens of players on games and books.

If Wizards thinks they can get an AI to be a DM, just watch those insane AI videos and realize that a machine can't keep a narrative story consistent or even sane for one minute. This takes real, living people, and the ToV GMG's first chapter is akin to a Game Mastering 101 college course. Training current and future GMs is player acquisition and retention since they are the "face" of your business.

If you want the Game Mastering 201 book, check out the Kobold Guide to Gamemastering, which contains about 150 pages of excellent articles and advice. Even if you have been doing this for 40 years, don't think you "know it all" because even I found a lot of great ideas and inspiration for games just by reading these. Reading the experiences and stories of other game masters inspired me in my games, and even if you know it all, their enthusiasm will spark yours and bring that energy to your craft.

Storytelling is an art; listening to other artists discuss the craft is beneficial.

A lot of "how-to game master" books and OSR games skip over the basics or sound "blah blah" when discussing the dirty, gritty, dealing with other people, and "at the table" topics. The ToV GMG dives straight in, lays out all the roles and responsibilities nicely, and creates an environment that lends itself to success when running a game.

Even I, who has been game mastering for most of my life, learned a few things and was inspired to run games by reading this chapter. It is nice to see a company that cares about your success and training the next generation of game masters to enjoy the hobby. It won't just become an "AI-run" activity without a soul behind the story and disappear into the machines. Once you let AI run the show, the hobby is dead.

The tabletop RPG hobby is still "real" and is a form of storytelling between living, breathing, feeling, and thinking people. The competition between D&D 2024 selling its soul to AI and Kobold Press banning AI and going all-in on the traditional game is more significant than just the OGL. This is a battle for the heart of roleplaying.

Next time, chapter two, Adventures and Campaigns...