D&D Theory: The lost art of fantasy adventure

The Gilded Griffon stands at the village’s edge, deep in the unexplored frontier, its weathered stone walls are bathed in torchlight, the sign of a majestic griffon hanging above the door. Inside, the scent of roasting meat and exotic spices fills the air, while shadows dance across scarred oak tables. A grand hearth crackles, its mantle adorned with ancient weapons and relics of past adventures. Patrons from distant lands murmur in hushed tones, and a minstrel’s haunting melody drifts through the room. Behind the bar, a silver-haired barkeep watches with a knowing eye, recognizing you with a nod as adventurers looking for work.

DM: What do you want to do?

This is the moment, this is how D&D kind of started for me. Not this exact start, but it’s how I imagined it. I was 10 years old, it was 1985, I was for the first time invited to a D&D game, I had my 1st level fighter (Darius) character sheet in front of me and all I knew about the game I was about to play was that my job was to pretend I was this fighter in a fantasy world in which terrible monsters existed.

It was a magical moment, one that would define how I would spend my free time over the next 4 decades. It made me a prolific reader, it drove a lifelong passion for creativity, and resulted in the most memorable friendships of my life.

As far as the game went there was an important discovery that I would not make until nearly 40 years later about how and why this moment was not only unique but why I would spend the next 40 years trying to re-create it every time I sat at a gaming table.

See the magic of this moment is not about nostalgia, it’s not really about old-school gaming, or the OSR, or something about the “edition of the game” or game mechanics specifically either. There were many theories I and others would come up with that would try to explain this moment and why D&D back then was different than today and what has changed and why but they would all turn out to be dead wrong.

The magic of this moment it turns out was simply that, I didn’t know what was about to happen and I was not following any script filled with assumptions. There was nothing that happened before the game other the mechanical work of producing an abstract character which we knew nothing about except a race and class and maybe a name. Meaning, I had virtually no information about the game I was about to play. All I knew was that I was a “Fighter” and that meant I knew how to use weapons and armor, a generalization at best. I knew that the goal of the game was to explore the game world (somehow) and we were told by the DM that “you can do whatever you want, go wherever you want”.

The question was “Why”? Why would I go anywhere? I was instructed that as a 1st level fighter, I was not very good at fighting yet, that I would need more experience (which notably I was unsure how to get), and that the world outside of the tavern was dangerous and you could die easily.

Here was the thing, It was scary and though I just made this character, I was already quite attached to Darius. The act of writing down his name on a funny looking, but intriguing page called a character sheet had built him up in my head, he wasn’t just a “character”, he was a person I cared about and I didn’t want him to die, I didn’t want to do anything “stupid” that would put him at risk. The DM was well known for cruelly tearing up character sheets of dead characters right there at the table, we had all heard this rumor, so I knew and believed in the danger of the game.

One of the tricks of the trade among DM’s in the early days of D&D was that they did not reveal much to the players. It would be several months before any of us even realized that we were actually near the City-State of Greyhawk, a famous place in the D&D “world” we would eventually have the pleasure to visit.

But the DM of course did not make my life easy. He said, “You are hungry and thirsty and tired as you have traveled many weeks to get here and are low on supplies”. The DM told me that you can die of thirst and hunger and you can even die from exhaustion. So we did the natural and perhaps predictable thing, (we being a couple of my friends in similar situations with similar characters in our adventuring party) we walked into the tavern, ordered food and drink, and asked for rooms so that we could rest. It seemed logical and it was our idea, our plan, we made the decision to do that, our first act as role-players. It felt powerful, even though it was very simple.

The DM then, in the voice of the tavern keeper told us that this would cost 2 silver for the food and drink and 3 silver for a night in a room. And in that moment, that split second of pretending to exist as characters in a fantasy world, we all realized what this game was really about. We were about to spend the rest of the money we had collectively together just to eat and sleep for a day. If we didn’t get more money soon, we would probably die of thirst and hunger, it was the harsh reality of the game.

We….. needed money!

And so a purpose was born, we were adventurers, fighters, clerics, and thieves and we needed money because we were just about out of it and we had no jobs and no way to make more and so the game truly began. We were promptly approached by an old thief who had a treasure map of a ruin nearby and offered us 100 gold, not to explore it, but just to find the entrance hidden somewhere in the nearby forest. You can’t imagine what an exciting moment that was. We had a mission..ney, a quest and it felt real, it felt important. We were role-playing and it didn’t take much to get us there.

The 1st edition AD&D DMG had a lot of very strange rules, but of course, none of us ever looked inside of it. It was only sometime in 1992 when I became a DM that I finally read this book, getting my own copy. It never occurred to me that the game we were playing really didn’t have any firm rules and was built on abstract philosophies like 1 gold = 1 XP, things that defined the metagame, but were mere suggestions at best, not really rules.

There was no session zero, no elaborate rules or explanations, no backstory writing, and no “defining” anything about what was about to happen. We relied on our natural and very basic instincts and imagination to create a game of make-believe that we would make every bit as real to us as the world we lived in. We were playing Dungeons and Dragons, a magical fantasy world of pretend, not rules.

This was Dungeons and Dragons to me from 1985 well into 1995. That little gaming group was together for over 10 years and though my fighter from that first session would quickly perish in a terrible incident with a Gelatinous Cube as did many characters that followed, I will never forget him, his adventures, or any of the characters I played in Dungeons and Dragons during these years. Oddly, I never wrote a single word about them down, yet I remember each with crystal clear clarity. I remember their deeds, their adventures, how they grew into power and often how their story ended tragically in some dungeon as we (the avatar and I) pursued our ambitions in the game.

This is Fantasy Adventure, this is what D&D was and I have to be honest and this will make me sound like an old Gronard, but it was so much better, so much more fun and narrative than anything that happens at a gaming table in the modern day. A fact that would plague my group for the many years that followed.

Is it possible to learn this power?

In 1995 my group had been together for 10 years, we had played through 1st and 2nd edition AD&D and while we loved our games, like all gamers do we started noticing that there were “other games” and everyone wanted to try their hand at some new stuff. After all, we loved D&D and we loved role-playing so, doing it with other settings and rule systems sounded awesome. It sounded amazing to be a Jedi in the Star Wars universe, or a Highlander or a Star Trek Captain. The opportunities of other games were very attractive to us and we began exploring them.

For about 5 years we went through what I would call a sort of “role-playing ring around the rosy”. We played everything that wasn’t D&D you could think of. All the world of darkness stuff, various science-fiction games and every system under the sun from GURPS to Warhammer Fantasy. You would be hard-pressed to name a game my group and I didn’t try, we did it all, and nothing was off the table.

It was fun, and I really want to nail this point home here that no one was disappointed, we really enjoyed these games, but….. We all realized by around 1998 that we didn’t get together as often, campaigns didn’t last as long, people got bored and often games died when people didn’t show up to sessions, and really, the entire “magic” of D&D that kept our crew fully dedicated for 10 years prior was missing from all of these games. These games were all a bit empty, absent of the magic and wonder that we found in D&D. By 2000 we barely even played RPG’s anymore.

Then 3rd edition D&D came out and we of course got excited again. We all got back together with fresh new books in hand, everyone read every rule, cover to cover and we were ready to play, invigorated by the hopeful return to those amazing and magical D&D games which at this point were distant, nostalgic memories. There was a promise of a new golden age, a return to the wonderful world of Dungeons and Dragons that we all missed, that in our eyes was “true role-playing”, the only game that ever really gave us that intangible gaming experience.

I think we had all hoped that 3rd edition D&D would bring the magic back to the table, but as I discovered many years later, the problem wasn’t the game system so much as gaming culture that led game design. I don’t want to suggest that AD&D was the only way to create magic at the table, but it was the only game that didn’t get in the way of the attempts to do so. 3rd edition had too many explicit rules that defined what characters could and could not do, a trend that would catch on and became the methodology for game design. It was in a way, the death of role-playing as I knew it. Games no longer lived in our imaginations, we could no longer “do whatever we wanted”. Games now lived on the table with very strict rules about what was and was not possible and we would spend most of our time arguing about whether these rules were good or not rather than playing D&D.

By 2002, role-playing in our group was all but over. 3rd edition D&D, even though it was Dungeons and Dragons and felt very familiar just had no magic in it, that much was clear. There was no excitement, no mystery, and no mystical spirit in the game. The rules were convoluted and far too explicit and we argued about their abstracted representation of the game worlds living in our head constantly. These rules killed the imagination because they sought to place it with game mechanics.

In many ways, the rules of the game became the only point of any conversation about D&D between us, we no longer wondered about what D&D was, or what mysteries were hidden within its intangible imaginary words. We spent an ungodly amount of time instead trying to fix the rules as we fought among ourselves and the world (internet) over them. To put it plainly, it just wasn’t fun anymore, the year was 2002 and Dungeons and Dragons was over, it was dead and 3rd edition would create 2 decades of terrible game design that would slowly drown out any life D&D had in it. I know that is cruel to say and one might even challenge its accuracy given the popularity of 5th edition, but, modern D&D is popular in the same way McDonalds is popular. It’s a processed and manufactured game for the masses, reduced to the most basic, lowest common denominator. When I tell people about the intangible magic of D&D, they call be a Gronard, a relic that doesn’t know what he is talking about. For a time, I almost believed it.

Our group was pretty much fully disbanded by 2003 and I would not play D&D or anything else with any of those guys until nearly 2 decades later. I did continue playing with other groups myself though. As much as I enjoyed the many people I shared RPG experiences with over the years the games were simply never as good as those original AD&D experiences of the mid 80’s and 90′.

In fact, most of the time I was quite bored and have continued to be quite bored with most role-playing games since, it’s really a rare game that even marginally excites me these days even though I’m constantly chasing that dragon. I still like playing them, I still enjoy the pursuit, but more in a conceptual and philosophical way rather than actually playing. When I play, most of the time, I’m just disappointed that these games are just not as good, not as much fun and lack that intangible spirit of the classic D&D that we played for over a decade in the 80’s and 90’s.

So what really happened? What is the problem with other games? Why is there no magic, no spark, no heart in any of these other RPG including the latest and greatest versions of D&D from Wizards of the Coast? Why did Dungeons and Dragons die around the 00’s? Did it die or did I change?

Not from a Jedi..

I have contemplated this for years, I have researched, I have reflected, I have tested a wide range of theories to try to understand what was so special, what it was that was so unique and/or different that altered the experience and made it so much better in those 80’s and 90’s D&D games that I find missing in modern RPG’s and the modern RPG experience?

For a time I wrote it off as nostalgia and my age. I was between 10 and 20 years of age when I played AD&D, I’m nearly 50 now, it was during a much simpler time in my life and I just presumed that back then I just had more imagination, more energy, and more appreciation that today I lack. The game didn’t change, I changed.

It seemed like a fair and reasonable assessment, one I could accept, but…. then something magical happened. Almost like a fairy tale, as if some genie appeared out of thin air and granted me the wisdom I needed to understand and to find perspective and of course a little help from a little show, maybe you heard of it “Stranger Things”.

One of the oddest elements of Stranger Things is that it’s a show driven by classic D&D tropes and specifically 1st edition D&D fantasy adventure which is played and represented on the show. The very game and very experience I had and missed was right there on the screen, yet oddly enough modern fans would take this inspiration and instead of playing AD&D they would play 5th edition that does not in any, way, shape or form represent what you see on Stranger Things. It’s bizarre to me.

A friend of mine called me up, an old friend from my old gaming group and said “Hey, the old crew wants to get back together and play some D&D, we want to do an AD&D 1st edition one-shot”.

I thought to myself, holy shit yes.

I have the high ground..

In the first 30 seconds of our first session, I was back in 1985 as a 10-year-old playing Dungeons and Dragons for the first time. It required nothing more than the DM using the old formula, the most basic introduction and the simplest core element of D&D to bring it all back.

There was nothing to it, we made characters, essentially randomly generating them as one would in AD&D. Made some basic choices about equipment and who would play what roles, we gave our characters names and we were dropped into the game world with a very basic plot hook to “investigate the evil temple”. It all fell perfectly into place like dominos.

That moment I realized that this game had more story, those characters had more meaning and this game had more role-playing magic than everything I have done at the table for the last 20 years combined. I recall writing entire books of lore, of story, players writing 20-page backgrounds in preparation for a game, doing session 0’s, and endlessly preparing mass plots for my players and none of it compared to the simplicity of the game we were about to play. By comparison, those experiences were lifeless husks, meaningless, about the equivalent of doing your taxes for fun.

So, what was the secret? How did I go from RPG’s feeling dead inside to being back in 1985 as a 10-year-old playing and feeling Dungeons and Dragons again? What did this magical DM do to bring it all back?

Actually, it was pretty simple. It turns out, that it’s not nostalgia, it’s not age or some sort of expertise of the DM, there is no secret knowledge or method. It wasn’t even the system or an edition of the game really, though I do hold that 1st edition AD&D allows classic Fantasy Adventure to happen a lot easier. In the end it was just the simplicity of the role-playing philosophy the system brought to the forefront, plain and simple. It didn’t need to be AD&D and you didn’t need weird old-school rules, what you needed was a system that just got out of your way. That cleared the path for the imagination and allowed you to experience the world in your mind without a lot of input and rules to govern your thoughts and instruct you about what you can and cannot do.

In our game we didn’t have skills and feats and countless “buttons” to press. We had to make decisions, use our imagination, and form plans and our actions weren’t mechanical executions, they were narrative ones. This is what Fantasy Adventure was and in a sense, I feel always should be. I was filled with regret because I realized in that moment that we could have been doing this all along for the last 20 years. There was nothing keeping us from playing this way, but we got distracted and wasted 20 years of gaming out of stubbornness.

For years I had been playing every system under the sun, every game, under every DM, every format, every style, using every method you could imagine. Oddly enough, it never occurred to me to pick a system that just did a lot less, I always thought the more robust the mechanics and infrastructure of the game the more direction you had. So it was just about finding that right system that had the right balance of mechanics. It never occurred to me that the only thing that I actually ever had to do was just to apply the old Gygaxian philosophy about running an RPG, good old 1st edition AD&D thinking was all that was needed.

The feeling, the intangible quality, and the wonder of that moment that made D&D this unique, one-of-a-kind experience, it was all right there perfectly preserved and it wasn’t in rules so much as it was just a philosophy, a way to think and a method to approach the game.

Make a character, give them a name, drop him into the world and see what happens. That’s it…. that’s the magic.

The dark side of the force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural..

It’s true and I have to be honest about this, it was awkward. Playing 1st edition AD&D after years of modern mechanics felt strange but It was the philosophies of AD&D that made all the difference, which in modern game design and modern gaming culture are seen as barbaric and out of date. Hell some even consider using such philosophies antimine to role-playing, as if using them somehow makes you a terrible person.

Does that mean I like THAC0? Am I fan of descending armor class or 1 gold = 1 XP? Am I ok with female characters having reduced max strength or racial ability scores?

hmmm… I want to say no, I really do. I feel like AD&D is like the dark side of the force, that lures you to it by some dark power, some evil energy that is quick, dirty, and easy to attain. That somehow by using this game I have become a lesser man… but then I think about it and realize that…. well, it’s only a game and I think that is the trouble I have always had.

You see, in around the 90’s “being a role-player” became this very serious thing. It was an identity and there was a definitive “right way” to role-play and the right way to setup an RPG campaign. You had to write a really big backstory for your character, it was absolutely paramount. Your DM was expected to take those backstories and write a massive plot with twists and turns that incorporated your backstory into the campaign. You needed to have many many books of rules and options to make sure that the players could “fine-tune” the vision of their characters. There were so many new cultural RPG requirements, things that still persist to this very day that if you don’t follow you are not really role-playing, you are not a good GM or player and, probably you should just not be playing RPG’s if you can’t follow these cultural norms. It is considered virtuous to play this way, it makes you a better person. This is the weird mindset of modern gamers.

More than that, in modern gaming it has become synonymous with using old game systems like AD&D to be a bigot, sexist and homophobic, so not only are you not a virtuous person for not buying into modern gaming cultural norms and expectations, but you are clearly an evil person if you play these old games that teach this old philosophy.

I realized recently however that this is a hobby, I do it for fun, and I think a big part of the reason why I and so many role-players feel kind of lost in finding the game is that we have created way too many rules for ourselves as barriers to entry. Both culturally and literally. I mean as players and GM’s we have far too many expectations, and place far too many demands on the games and as gamers, we demand way too many rules and mechanics to “support role-playing”, a concept that should never even be part of a conversation about the game in my opinion. We have sort of broken the spirit of the original D&D game and modern games never really tried to understand, how and what this spirit was and so it never found its way into other RPG’s. We sort of killed the magic with our own ignorance and pride.

What I want is to feel the energy and the magic of D&D, that thing that Gary Gygax and his cohorts invented not how the pretenders that followed him tried and failed to re-invent. I want to have THE D&D experience and the only way I know how to do that is with these older systems like AD&D and B/X systems which have that magical simplicity instilled in them, but I don’t think that is the only way to do it.

Today gamers and game designers are making the same discoveries and it catching on. ShadowDark for example won 4 Ennie awards, a game that instills the classic gaming philosophies and uses a modern, digestible system to do it and actually does a masterful job of bringing that magic to the table.

For many years the only way to get the true Fantasy Adventure experience of old was through the original game or retro-clones, but today you have amazing new game designs that are modernizing the game while ensuring that the magic of D&D fantasy adventure is firmly built in. Its a great time to be a D&D fan.

I am Vinz, Vinz Clortho, Keymaster of Gozer. Volguus Zildrohar, Lord of the Sebouillia. Are you the Gatekeeper?

It’s the original, it’s the classic, it’s the only true D&D experience and this is not conjecture, it’s not opinion, it’s not even objective truth, it just is AD&D and games that follow its philosophy like ShadowDark. I know that sounds like gatekeeping but it really isn’t.

To gatekeep you have to want to keep people out and I’m trying to do the opposite, I’m trying to let people in on this strangely kept secret. There is a game that exists and you probably haven’t played it, even if you have been playing role-playing games for years, even if you have been playing D&D. It’s truly a magical experience but it only exists under one philosophy, using one very specific playstyle built into the classic game of D&D. Its a very explicit act to play AD&D and games like it, it doesn’t follow any of the cultural gaming rules of modern RPG’s and lives outside of the sphere of influences on which most modern RPG’s actually function today. Modern RPG’s are not based on AD&D, they are based on 3rd edition D&D which is an entirely different thing.

For this magical, intangible experience, there is only one path, only one way and it lays between the pages of the 1st edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Dungeon Masters Guide. It took me 40 years to realize it, hopefully, you won’t have to wait that long and thankfully that magic is finding its way into other modern games so you don’t even have to go out searching for copies of 1st edition AD&D.

Hidden Gems: Shadowdark

Among the OSR, Shadowdark is a household name already. An old-school style RPG built in the style of classic 1st edition B/X D&D but using modern 5th edition D&D rules. It won several Ennie’s including Best Design last year and stands as one of the premier OSR games for the modern era.

What makes Shadowdark special in my eyes is the fact that it brings back that classic “Dungeon Survival” playstyle popularized by classic 1st edition D&D, but without all the weird (funky) rules that make most modern gamers eyes roll to the back of their head.

This is for the most part a very stripped-down version of 5th edition Dungeons and Dragons, which means that if you are a 5e player or have a 5e group, you could run Shadowdark with minimum explanation required.

Shadowdark is supported by the arcane library, a fantastic site with tons of great material already published for this specific game. If you’re like me and you need a bit more “umf” than most OSR games offer, here you can find tons of additional classes, races and options to give this very simple game a little extra juice.

Shadowdark also borrows heavily from the brilliant editing done on other modern OSR translations like Old School Essentials giving us this amazing book that is table-ready. An easy-to-use reference that allows players to go from “I know nothing” to “Having fun playing an RPG” with virtually no effort.

Considering modern games like the 2024 Edition of Dungeon and Dragons are going the other way with its 600+ page player handbook, personally I think the timing of Shadowdark is impeccable. Right now players and GM’s are faced with the daunting task of having to figure out another D&D ruleset that has more instructions than a Boeing 747 flight manual. In contrast, Shadowdarks pick up and play ultra-light ruleset is looks very attractive by comparison.

If you are a 5e player and you are looking for something a bit lighter, with a bit more focus on rulings over rules and some clear meta-game goals, Shadowdark may be the right game for you and since the basic book is a free PDF, it costs you nothing to check it out!

Hidden Gems: Pox Nora

Hidden Gems is going to be a new article series that focuses on a “short articles” format and approach. This is a slightly new direction I’m going to take this blog where I, as it says on the tin, I will expose readers to some hidden gems (games) that they might not be aware of in a brief outline, short/brief article about it. The goal will be to produce more articles, more often but with a little less definition. It will not come at the exclusion of more robust articles but in addition to.

In today’s article, we will discuss a little PC game, Pox Nora, that you can pick up for free on Steam.

Released back in 2006, this game fell under the radar of most largely because of its rather unusual business model and playstyle.

Pox Nora is a collectible card game that is played as a turn-based strategy game that blends tactical gameplay, collecting and RPG-like combat and advancement mechanics. It’s wildly different than anything we are familiar with today, the closest thing that I can think of is the now-defunct Magic The Gathering Tactics.

Magic The Gathering: Tactics we had a lot of hope for, but Wizards of the Coast and Sony really shit the bed on this one by creating a business model that was so outrageous that people were boycotting it before it was released. It didn’t help that the game sucked some serious balls on top of it.

What is unique about Pox Nora is the overwhelming dedication its original developer has for the game. Even though back in 2009 Sony Entertainment swallowed up Octopi Media Design Lab (original developers) and almost brought the game to a destructive end, in 2014 Desert Owl Games picked it up which it turns out is a studio made up of many former members of the original development team.

Pox Nora is a highly balanced, very addictive, easy-to-learn, impossible-to-master tactic combat game with a huge focus on “deck building”, combining that addictive core of Magic: The Gathering with tactical combat. I imagine its what Wizards of the Coast probably hoped Magic: The Gathering Tactics would end up being. I personally think it’s one of the most overlooked games in PC gaming history. It has a great competitive edge for PvP action, and lots of potential, some of which came to fruition as a single-player (solo) game while simultaneously this very endless replayability on all fronts.

Pox Nora is a very basic-looking game, though I would argue very pretty considering its nearly 20 years old. For people who play tactical games, graphics are usually not your primary concern, most seek a challenging and fun game and Pox Nora is that if its anything.

This is a phenomenal game, It is free to play and actually, these days even building up your collection can be done very easily without spending a penny on the game and even if you do drop some real coin on it, you won’t be disappointed as Desert Owl Games is a very fair developer that doesn’t price gauge and has a long dedicated history of keeping this game going.

Great game, go try it right now!

GM Theory: Running A Good Game

In the last 30+ years, I have experienced a wide range of role-playing games both from the perspective of the GM and the perspective of a player. Many were successful, but quite a few were not while some only marginally so.

Today I’m going to talk about what I think separates a great campaign from a mediocre one, the pitfalls and traps that lead to failed campaigns, and perhaps most importantly what a good GM should be doing to ensure their campaign starts and ends on good footing.

Now I will admit that I have a very unique take on running role-playing games, it definitely does not fall into the “normal” advice category. I would imagine in fact that the instinct of most GM’s as they read this article will be to disagree and that is fine, it’s just an opinion in a sea of opinions. More advice is better than less advice, so I humbly submit my take on the subject, do with it what you will.

Role-playing games are not about story

We start with the most controversial but in my opinion, most objectively true thing about role-playing games and the universally hardest truth to bare for GM’s. Good role-playing games are never about good stories. They are always about gaming systems.

So here is the thing, if you ask any player why they want to play a role-playing game almost all will tell you “for the story” and in large part, I would imagine it’s also why most DM’s would claim they want to run a role-playing game. It’s the greatest lie always told, but it is always pure, unadulterated, utter and complete bullshit.

The test is quite simple, pick a system a player or group doesn’t like and see if they still want to play. They won’t want to play that game and even if they do, the game will fail no matter how good the story is. Why? If the game is about a story, why would what system you pick matter or cause your campaign to fail if you have done a great job on the story? Why do so many people choose D&D and not GURPS? Why do people pick complex systems like Pathfinder 2e, rather than simple systems like 1st Edition Basic?

If role-playing games were truly just about the story, systems like Pathfinder 2nd edition could simply never find success. There is absolutely no reason anyone chasing an RPG for story would ever need a 650 page rulebook to tell it. Any pathfinder player who tells you they play RPG’s for story is completetly full shit.

The answer is simple, system is everything. Role-playing games are first and foremost games, it’s the systems that get people to sit at the table, it’s what is exciting about the gaming experience and hobby that is role-playing. If I propose running 1st edition Basic to a 5e group, they will reject that game and likely viciously attack me for even suggesting that their precious 5th edition D&D could be replaced by another system. Vice versus, if I walk into an OSR group of old school gamers and suggest that we play Pathfinder 2e their would be absolutely no chance. They would simply rather burn all of their books and never play a role-playing game for the rest of their lives again, than play in a modern gaming system. System matters a lot to people, its not just a game often times, its practically an ID card, your identity as a role-player. People don’t just have strong opinions about what systems and playstyles they like, they are irredemably loyal to them.

Why? I’m a great DM, I have been running games for my gaming group that they themselves without any prompting from me called “the greatest role-playing experience of their lives”. Why would my group with so much faith in my ability to run a great role-playing experience outright reject a game I want to run based on the system I’ve chosen if the game is in fact about story?

The reality is that story is a byproduct, an important albeit side benefit of playing a role-paying game. We all love story, I do not question that, it’s very much a core desire/outcome of the game and why we are drawn to the game, even so far as to stretch the truth and claim it to be the main reason for wanting to play to begin with. The harsh reality is that RPG hobbyists are gamers first and foremost and the game mechanic is a central component of what creates the experience at the table. The story lives as a layer that becomes the output/outcome of the experience, but no one can ever be excited about entering into a gaming social contract without a system they are excited to execute it with. The story will never save your game, a good system always will.

Realistically if story was the most important element of RPG’s to everyone, GURPS would be the worlds only RPG. It has the simplest and most consistent core mechanic of any game in existance, its completetly scalable and functions with all genres. You buy one book and you can write and play any story, any setting, anything you can imagine forever.

Why is this important knowledge for any GM? It’s very simple. Never, under any circumstance convince yourself that the system you want to run is going to create a good role-playing experience for your players unless they are excited about the system as well. Your players have to choose the system, they have to be excited about it, and they have to love it and bare its torch. If a group has even the most minor complain about the system you have chosen, your campaign is already dead and you will never be able to do resolve that. It’s the single most important decision you will make that will define whether your campaign will find success or failure. The system matters that much, more than any other choice you make.

System and setting are often synonymous in RPG’s because most RPG’s are designed for a specific setting, but the same rules apply. If a group isn’t excited and in love with the setting, nothing will save your game. Run a Star Trek Adventures for a group of trekkies and its magic, talk a group of non-trekkies into playing it and neither the system or the story will save the game. A hard lesson I learned first hand. No matter how good of a GM you think you are, no one is that good.

Remember that, accept it, and embrace it. You can write a shitty, linear story in a system your players love and it will be a booming success, alternatively, you can write a masterpiece for a system your players hate and the game will fail miserably. Never forget that, it’s the best advice I can offer after 30+ years of running games. There is no fix for this and the reality is that most games that fail, fail because of this one reason. Don’t let it happen to you.

The busier the system, the shorter the campaign

Most GM’s, when they sit down to create a campaign for their players imagine playing it for years, spinning an epic tale that puts the players on a journey of discovery with twists and turns, exciting reveals, epic battles, shocking events and so on. We all dream about running that Lord of the Rings epic for the ages.

The issue is that the overwhelming majority of systems out there are very specifically designed not to allow that and the reason is quite simple, there is no money in it.

To give an example, I ran a nearly 3 year Vampire The Masquerade campaign for which all I ever purchased was a core rulebook and a setting book. That was it, that’s all white-wolf managed to get out of me for what amounted to hundreds of hours of entertainment. If a gaming group of 5 only buy 1 or 2 books every three to four years, all role-playing publishers become completely unsustainable, and even if they are set up for a low volume, they are not getting rich doing it.

As such, most modern systems are setup to be complex, with tons of design space to create “options” and that is the name of the game for modern RPG’s. Selling option books requires you to be constantly re-starting new campaigns, so you can create new characters and buy new adventure books and so on, all so that you have a desire for more options. It’s a cycle.

Wizards of the Coast and TSR with D&D are probobly the most famous examples of companies that produce a game designed to make sure campaigns fail and have to start over so that they can sell more books. No version of D&D has ever produced a game in which characters of 10th level or more were sustainable in a campaign. The shelf life of a typical D&D campaign is extremely short.

The reality is that complex systems with tons of options will usually result in what I like to call “dead system stops”. This means the system kills your campaign because it lacks the stamina and structure to survive a long campaign as power advancement is at the center of the core mechanic. This is particularly true for most class/level systems that become unwieldy and unbalanced as you rise in level. It is particularly a problem with these systems not just because the increases in level creates unbalance, but because the players have an expectation to constantly level up. They effectively push for the inevitable power creep that will end the campaign early. Play D&D for three months without leveling up and your players are going to start complaining.

The best systems are those that have progression without major impact and are simple so that the character sheet is just a “log” of your character, rather than an elaboration of what your character is and isn’t, or what they can and can’t do. What I mean by that is that if your players are constantly looking at their character sheet to see “what they can do” they are also finding a list of things “they can’t do”. You are playing in a busy system that is designed to create options for players so that they can do stuff, out-level the game and start over.

Original D&D probobly could not have predicted how leveling up, the class structure and focus on experience points would years later become the reason long campaigns would become unsustainable for D&D. In big part it was because these older versions of D&D had a high mortality rate and the high levels where more a carrot than anything anyone had any expectation to actually achieve. In short, high level campaigns were never supposed to be a thing.

A good role-playing system is not going to be about what the system does or doesn’t let your character do, it should be about what your players want their characters to do. It’s not about action economy, but about telling a story, taking “actions” should not be a mechanic in a role-playing system. What characters do should be a story definition, a conscious thought of a player imagining a scene and doing what comes naturally to them with any mechanical elements being customizable and reactive rather than something governed by strict (you can and can’t) rules.

Such systems are becoming rarer and rarer these days, people simply don’t make them that much anymore, which is why we have the OSR because there was a time in the hobbies history when all RPG’s were designed to be free-flowing and free-form story games. The character sheet was an outline of the player’s imagined avatar and it did not define them in any certain terms, it was just a sort of categorization, a layer upon which a player would create their character’s story and what actions they took had nothing to do with the system.

You picked “Fighter” and that could be anything from a Samurai to a Swashbuckler. You did not pick background, you created backgrounds through direct writing or through gameplay. You didn’t select feats and fighting styles, you imagined those things and brought them to the table through the narrative of your character’s interaction with the world. What your character could do was as much an invention of the story as the plot created by the GM. We talk about players always claiming to want the game to be about story, yet, they often choose systems that deny them the opportunity to be creative.

A system like that has no beginning or end, your character is the person you imagine and create and while they will have subtle growth in such a system, it will not offer much in the way of unlocking powers, actions or other gaming gymnastics. Your character is your avatar in such games, the one you created at the start and their progression is their story in the world they occupy, not the mechanical power level they achieve.

In such a system, your campaign can theoretically run forever.

While most players want D&D to be the never ending campaign game, the truth is that D&D is the absolute worst of the dead stop games, in fact, even as early as 1st edition AD&D, the concept of a “long campaign” was dead in the water and impossible under the system. The closes you would ever actually get was 1st edition BECMI, its power progression and advancement was so slow that campaigns could go on for a decade before things got out of hand.

My suggestion is that if you want to run a long campaign that stays healthy no matter how long you run it, stay away from systems that see character progression as a “power” element. That is usually the sign of a busy game not made for longevity, if advancement = power, the game has a definitive beginning and end and the faster that power creep is, the shorter the campaign will be.

At the very least you should asses the system and calculate how much life it will have, at what point you reach the dead stop so that you can plan for the campaign’s inevitable end.

Meta Gaming Is Where Good Stories Come From

As a long-time GM, one of the oddest gaming culture developments that has taken place over the last 30 years is player and GM attitudes towards meta-gaming.

For posterity, we should define what Meta-Gaming is, as there are quite a few definitions and variations of the term. To me, meta-gaming is the act of the players using player information to influence results in the game world. Meaning, the player knows what a typical Orcs AC is and they use that information to their advantage to illustrate the most basic of examples. More commonly the use of meta-gaming is less about the game mechanic and more about the game’s story. For example, a player knows that the prince is secretly a vampire, but their character doesn’t, however, they use their player knowledge to expose him as a vampire breaking the continuity of the game world. Their character is behaving as if they have information that they don’t, because the player does. A more complex example, but typically more along the lines of what people mean when they say meta-gaming.

The modern attitude and culture towards meta-gaming is that it is associated with a really negative result. Meaning, people get pissed about it and the insinuation is that it’s akin to cheating at role-playing.

I’m here to tell you that meta-gaming is the most positive thing you can add to your game and here is why.

The object of a role-playing game is to tell a cool story, but cool stories can’t be told consistently out of a vacuum or through random dice outcomes. Cool stories come from our imagination and that requires a certain level of control. Meaning if you want to make cool things happen, you simply need to decide that they do and this is the collaboration that should take place at the table between players and between players and the GM.

There is a very natural resistance by both players and GM’s to simply side with the system, despite any insistence that the story comes first. Often players and GM’s alike want to side with the dice results or with realism (what would really happen in a situation) or worse of all, with the intent to control the path of the story so as not to derail the pre-ordained set of events. In this struggle, gaming culture has vilified meta-gaming as a negative, but it’s meta-game information that actually allows cool things to happen.

The meta game argument is really old, I was 10 years old and watching this cartoon the first time I had it and I’m 50 now and it still comes up at my tables all the time.

What’s more interesting, a player having to pretend and act intentionally ignorant to the fact that the prince is actually a vampire, or a cool scene where the character appears to be a brilliant investigator and makes the discovery creating a feel-good and heroic moment? Who or what is hurt by the latter?

I don’t know about you, but I love feel-good moments. I want the players to succeed, to do unexpected and fun things that create unique story’s and outcomes. I want large story progressions with each session, I don’t want to delay or make players impatiently wait session after session, sitting on information they have as players because things haven’t worked out for them as characters or worse yet make them feel like they are being punished for being or acting foolish in an RPG.

There is hidden meaning in this quote, but basically what he is saying is that role-playing games aren’t really games, they are storytelling tools. Rules I think are important and so did Gary, but they just don’t apply to GM’s who has the burden of making sure the story is fun.

This also ties into the concept of “yes” GMing. Meaning, creating a game in which the players, no matter how silly and outrageous the things they do are, let them progress, succeed, and move forward, let things work. I don’t want to punish players for doing something stupid, I want everything to appear to be smart, I want everything to be a “Han Solo” plan, something so crazy and outrageous that it works, no matter how unrealistic it is, no matter what the dice say. I want the characters to be the stars of the show, not the victims of circumstance.

My point is that meta-gaming is THE best tool that the GM and players have in their tool bag for creating a great story. Let the story happen and not just that, but push it to happen, resolve the story in such a way so that it’s always a feel-good moment. That doesn’t mean everything that happens is positive, but that the story feels good, like that feeling you get when you just watched a great movie, whether it’s Lord of the Rings or Shindlers List. You want that great storytelling impact at every session, in every scene. It should be happening all the time and meta-gaming is a fantastic tool that allows the players to help you on collaboration of creating that effect at the table.

The Game Has To Feel Threatening

Fear of losing your character has to be foremost on everyone’s mind, you have to make that fear real but you should rarely ever execute anyone. Make an example to prove the point if needed, but remember that the game is all smoke and mirrors,

This last point is short and sweet and self-evident, the question I think that needs to be answered is why I think this is critical enough to put on the list of advice.

Before I answer however, I will say that this advice lands in the “style of play” preference category more than the rest which I consider “general good practices and advice”. Still, I’m quite convinced that my preference here stems from my experience of trying all the different methods and landing on this one by default of it being the most optimal and practical for any RPG.

The other thing to note is that this is not a system thing, it’s not about “choosing” a deadly system, quite to the contrary, I would advise against using that as a crutch, this is more about perception which can be created with any mechanic. It’s a conscious choice as a GM to create an environment of high risk, not a gameplay thing, this danger should not be decided by dice.

Ok enough disclosures, why do I think players should fear for their character’s lives. The answer is actually quite simple, it creates tension and drama at the table that exists in the minds of the players. By creating an environment where the players have a legitimate reason to fear losing their character at the hands of their enemy every time they fight or face other dangers, these things become a tough, dramatic choice that comes with potentially the ultimate consequences and this tension rises up the longer the campaign goes on. The more attached the players are to their characters, the greater the drama.

More than that though, players will steer their characters very differently with such high stakes at the table and this draws the game that much closer to a role-playing environment instead of a mechanical one. Further still, when fights break out in a high-risk game, players will have the natural tendency, as will you as a GM, to elaborate on the events of the fight. You are going to want to squeeze out that last ounce of story when you know that the story of your character may very well end right then and there. You are going to want to make every in that fight a scene of deliberate and player-driven (rather than mechanic-driven) actions. It’s how you make fights less a miniature combat game and more of a role-playing scene, even if the system itself is a very tactically oriented one.

Setting Specific Games Are Better

The final piece of advice which I know most people will hate hearing, but systems made as generic genre games like D&D is for fantasy are never even close to as good as specific games with mechanics designed specifically to a setting, for example what The One Ring is to the middle-earth setting.

The reasons are many but it boils down to the fact that a setting-specific game only needs to think about how the rules apply to that one world, theme and atmosphere. Generic systems need to have this broad coverage and you always end up with an overcooked system which despite being overcooked is missing a lot of stuff you may need once you choose the specific setting you will use in your campaign. Its the default problem that systems like D&D have.

Setting specific systems have such an overwhelming advantage over generic systems in the design space that even a really shitty system made for a specific setting is going to be overwhelmingly superior to the best generic system. When a system is actually good and for a specific setting like Alien RPG here, its pure fucking magic.

This is particularly true if you are using a setting that is pre-defined. For example lets say you want to run a campaign in Westeros, using the story of Game of Thrones as your backdrop. Now you have a lot of detail that whatever system you choose needs to cover. Could you run D&D for example using the Westeros setting? Sure, but there are no fireballs in Westeros, in fact, very little magic at all. How do you handle running your own house? Mass combat? You get the idea. The robust and complex system you picked, suddenly has massive gaps in the infrastructure you will need to run your setting and story.

A game designed to serve a specific setting is always going to give you much better results and what you will find is that most systems, even when they are in the generic category, serve a specific styleof play best. D&D for example is great for high fantasy adventure games, it is, its bread and butter.

My advice is always to do this. Figure out what world/setting and style of game you want and then pick the system that supports that, don’t try to squeeze shit into systems that are clearly not designed to support what your looking for. This advice is very much in turn with the opening advice for this article but this is a bit more specific.

Big Board Gaming Weekend 2024

Every year like clockwork, my crew and I get together for a 4 day super weekend of nothing but BBQ, beer, and board gaming. We call it the “Hassela Weekend”, named after the sleepy little Swedish town where the event takes place. It is always the gaming highlight of every year and this, our 8th year of the event was no different.

Today we talk about all the games that were played, how they landed with everyone, and what I think. Enjoy the article!

Bang The Dice Game

Bang The Dice Game has been a Hassela tradition since 2019 when it was first introduced and has become a group favorite filler, usually played before or after dinner. This year the weekend kicked off with it and as always the game was played several times with the usual chaotic antics and gaming group chemistry that comes naturally for us.

It’s about the most basic hidden identity game around, you have effectively three factions (The Sherrif and his deputies, The Outlaws, and The Renegade(s). The makeup of who’s who depends on how many players you have, but this is a game where the more merrier. It’s more or less a simple guessing game where everyone wants to appear to be whatever they think will keep them safe, long enough to figure out who everyone else actually is. You roll some dice and shoot people and hope you kill the right person who is not on your team.

It’s fun, quick, and quite perfect as an entertaining way to spend a half hour while you nurse a beer. It’s not something you want to take seriously and I would argue it’s only barely a hidden identity game as the revelations/discovery is pretty quick. For more robust hidden identity games that focus more on the hidden identity theme and mechanics, I would probably recommend Coup or One Night Ultimate Werewolf. Still Bang The Dice Game lands well mainly because you don’t have to go through any weird opening phases like you do in One Night Ultimate Werewolf which can suck up a lot of time nor do you need to fully grasp the powers of the hidden identities like you do in Coup. Here hidden identities are clearly just teams and the discovery is mostly just about trying to figure out who is actually on your team. If you get it wrong you are likely to shoot the wrong person and that is the punchline of the hidden joke within the game.

It’s silly and very basic fun, it’s universally loved in our group.

Jabba’s Palace – Love Letter

Love Letter is a staple filler for any gaming collection and has been for a couple of years for us. It’s got a bit more strategy and “umpf” in my opinion than most fillers. This is one you’re going to really want to win as it’s very satisfying when you do. I’m not at all surprised that Love Letter makes so many “favorites” lists out there.

For all intents and purposes, Jabba’s Palace is a standard Love Letter with Star Wars art, a basic game of trying to keep track of what cards are played and using the special abilities of the card you play on your turn and the strength of the card you keep each round to ensure you are as protected as you can manage to outlast all of your opponents.

There is quite a bit of luck involved in successfully navigating any round of play, but over the course of several hands that make up a full game, usually, the most clever player will win, so it’s definitely not just luck of the draw here, there is a reasonable level of skill and strategy involved.

Love Letter is a perfect filler game, find a theme you like and there is a Love Letter version out there just for you. I’ve never met anyone who doesn’t like the game, it’s one of those card games that works with everyone, gamers and non-gamers alike.

Game of Thrones: The Board Game

Game of Thrones – The Board Game is another Hassela tradition in my gaming group going back all the way to the early years of the event. In fact, I would say for most of us the term “Hassela Weekend” is synonymous with a round of Game of Thrones The Board Game.

It’s a brutally tough game to win with a lot of strategy and politics at its core. It handles the Game of Thrones theme with perfection, with all of the amazing feints and double-crossing you would expect. There are so many trick plays, subtle chess moves with big pushes, and usually big finishes. In particular, if everyone at the table has a firm grasp of the game’s many subtleties. Our game this weekend was no different, it was a struggle all the way to the bitter end with huge ups and downs, massive upsets and ultimately being decided in a single final battle in the last round of the game. It’s exactly how you hope a Game of Thrones game will go down.

The game does have a few lumps that can be both frustrating and can at times spoil the fun. For one, this is a 6 player game, practically unplayable in my opinion with any other player count. I say that with my group having tried and tried on my occasions, it just doesn’t work. It’s 6 players or bust.

It’s also an absurdly long game, your mileage will vary but you can count on a roughly 5-6 hour game like money in the bank, and if you go the full 10 rounds, you may very well exceed 6+ hours.

It also has some very obvious “balancing” flaws that are very difficult to massage out. For one, Lannister’s position on the board, their starting conditions, and early game options are extremely poor and limited. I would say if you can win as the Lannisters in Game of Thrones the Board Game, you are either a freakish master of strategy or playing against incompetence because they stand very little of doing much more than being a fly to swat at worse to kingmakers at best.

You also have some issues like the Grey Joys which opposite to the Lannisters just have outstanding options and starting conditions as well as a stupidly strong character deck. They are beatable so I wouldn’t call them broken as I definitely would the Lannisters, but it’s going to be a group effort to keep them under control. Starks are also very strong and the Baratheons can quite literally win the game in two rounds if people aren’t very attentive and actively invading them from all sides from the very start. They are like a time clock that tests your knowledge of the game, if you don’t know what to do, THEY WILL win.

Some of these things are just nuances of the game and are part of the charm and challenge. I might make a few changes, via some house rules to help out the Lannisters, but warts and all this is a fantastic strategy game even though it’s very tough to get to the table and is definitely a “once in a long while” type of game at best. I would not want to play this game with any regularity but it’s always welcome at Hassela (as long as we have 6!)

Game of Thrones Trivia

When it comes to judging or even speaking about trivia games, my feeling is that they are basically all the same. It’s a game of questions and you try to answer them, you either like that sort of thing or you don’t. Trivia games with a theme like Game of Thrones, challenge your knowledge in a specific area, so if you are into a show, book, movie or whatever and you can find a trivia game on that topic it can be fun.

I’m a bit indifferent to this sort of thing, I mean, I like trivia well enough so I have no issue sitting around a table and trying to test my knowledge for a bit in particular on a subject I enjoy, but I don’t think this sort of thing falls into the realm of “boardgame” in the same sense of the word in which I normally would use it.

Still, this particular trivia game has an area control mechanic, the questions had multiple choice answers, and the difficulty, at least for my gaming crew who are all Game of Thrones fans was relatively easy. I think about 80% of the questions asked were answered correctly so the game played quickly, it was fun to reminisce about the show, and as a group of fans, it went over pretty well.

I don’t know that I have much more to say about it, trivia games are trivia games. They neither surprise nor disappoint, they just do what they do and you either like that sort of thing or you don’t, the specific version or topic of a trivia game isn’t going to change your mind.

Eclipse: Second Dawn For The Galaxy

Eclipse was number 6 on my all-time favorite games list from this year and I was excited to bring it to Hassela for a big 4x game event, showdown. This epic level 4x game is a cross-over game between classic Ameri-Trash war games and modern Euro’s which might seem like a strange combination but is actually the norm for most 4x games in general. Twilight Imperium of course immediately comes to mind which also had classic Euro game mechanics like role-selection and token-based action economy mixed in with rolling handfuls of dice.

Eclipse I always felt should be great at bringing a Twilight Imperium experience to the table in a much more reasonable amount of time with a lot less nuance, but more “core gameplay”. The mechanics of Eclipse are very efficient and streamlined, there is a very quick progression toward conflict and the hope is that you end up with games filled with big battles and tight final moments as players try to squeeze out as many points as they can out of every aspect of the 4x civilization building experience.

Unfortunately, our experience this weekend was considerably less exciting than that in my opinion, in fact I would say it brushed up against being boring.

I think part of the problem with Eclipse is that many of the games mechanics don’t play out like you hope or imagine they should. The game is about controlling space with spaceships, expanding your civilization, building technologies and upgrading your ships and it tries to encourage conflicts between players through generous victory point rewards for fighting. All the mechanics and the play loops are there to encourage exciting games, but typically what ends up happening is just a lot of turtling and build-up to a very anti-climatic end.

There is just no push and pull on the territory control part of the game and because your economy controls your action economy, very often once you have built some ships, did some research and some upgrades, you are out of steam. Since the game is a race to build up and there is a lot of pressure to “keep up”, you end up getting the build-up without the release.

There are 8 rounds in the game and with a 5-6 player game, it can and does still take 5-6 hours to complete, so in the end the main sales pitch “Twilight Imperium – Light” really is very marginal at best. You shave off a couple of hours, but I’m not sure the investment of time is well spent. I think I would much rather play a 7-8 hour game of Twilight Imperium than a 5-6 hour game of Eclipse and after this weekend’s play, I’m seriously questioning Eclipse’s position on my best-of list.

I think it’s a game with a lot of potential, but this last playthrough was disappointing, there just wasn’t any fire, and no memorable moments. It played like a stale and very uninspired cube pusher. It was a bit of a bummer because this was the game I think I was most excited to get to the table this year and ended up being the biggest disappointment of the weekend for me.

Red Rising

Red Rising was introduced to the crew at the event for the first time. It’s a relatively simple game of hand management and building combinations of cards to create a victory-scoring bonus at the end.

This was a tricky game because, in addition to the scoring points on the cards and the combo bonuses, you also had some secondary resources and tracks to manage which also scored points and were key to triggering the end game. It kind of made the game a race to build up your hand, but you had to keep up on the tracks because your hand was not going to be sufficient to win on its own.

One of the key features of the game is of course the setting and having read the first book (Red Rising), I had a connection to the game that not all the players shared, but as a whole, it was a very abstract card game that really focused on mechanics more then bringing the setting to the forefront. If you are looking to play a game in this Dystopian future, know that besides some familiar names and setting concepts like Hellium and The Institute, the representation here is pretty light.

There is a lot of timing and manipulation in the game that determines your decisions but the moves boil down to play a card and pick up a card from four different tracks. The “player choices” are fairly slim as is the impact of any single play. I would put this into the “light” game category, even though it takes about 45-60 minutes to play, it sort of felt like a fun little filler that went on a bit longer than most fillers would.

I thought it was a competent game mechanic but there really was no twist to the game, it kind of had limited energy that was mostly spent after the first play. I can’t see myself getting excited to have repeat plays of this one, though I would not object to either. It was a fine, middle-of-the-road card game. I will say, I thought the art style was great, it was very easy to learn and there was something very intuitive about how it played. It didn’t require anyone to explain the strategy of the game to me, it unfolded in front of you very quickly and obviously. There are many different routes to victory and I’m not sure I uncovered anything specifically that I could point to and say “do that and you can win”, but it was very clear which cards went with which cards and how you could combo them. The issue wasn’t understanding what cards you wanted into your hand, but manipulating the game to ensure that you got what you wanted.

Tapestry

Tapestry is one of those games that is difficult to define, you just know you like it and you want to play. In our gaming group, this one has shown up in the Hassela weekend lineup several times over the years and is one of the very few games that ever see’s repeat plays at the same event. We ended up playing it twice this year again.

I think if push comes to shove, the only thing I can say about it is, play it at least 3 times before you decide if you like it or not. It may seem strange but this is a game of subtlety and nuance, there is so much genius built into this very simple mechanic of moving cubes up a track. It’s absolutely fascinating to see the kind of growth and expansion you can create from such humble beginnings as the starting conditions of this game. 4 resources turn into a massive, sprawling empire!

There are no “big moves” in this game (usually). It’s a slow and methodical manipulation of resources to squeeze every last ounce of juice out of them. It’s a game about optimization of your actions and efficiency.

Frankly, it’s addictive, I play this game a lot on BoardGameArena and even though I have probably played it more than 30 times just this year, I still feel drawn to it.

To play it in person has its own charm because this is also one of the most beautiful games you could ever put on the table, the production quality is extreme. It’s Kickstarter magic and we are lucky that a member of our group is a super fan and has purchased all of the expansions.

If there is any drawback to the game is that experience = points. When you play with people who have taken the time to unravel the puzzle that is Tapestry, you can have very tight and competitive games, but new players, no matter how competent they are as gamers are going to struggle for quite a few games before they hit those 300-400 point scores that are pretty standard finishes for experienced players. I recall the first game I ever played of Tapestry I barely managed to score 60 points, these days I consider any score under 250 a complete failure. The road to experience is filled with brain-busting analysis and acquisition of micro experiences which for a gamer is basically “the juice” that keeps them coming back.

I love this game, I think it’s one of the finest examples of original and modern game design.

Dumber Than A Box Of Rocks

It’s a silly trivia game, we play it, we like it, and no one knows why. It’s the board game equivalent of a youtube video of a guy taking a golf ball to the balls, I don’t care who you are, that shit is funny and so is competing in a trivia game in which a literal rock can outsmart you.

Valor and Villany: Minions of Mordak

When we played this one, I was ready right then and there to call this “The Best of Hassela 2024”. It was so good.

When it comes to these “you get a character, let’s fight monsters” games, I’m usually not a fan and I have played a lot of them. The main logic is almost always the same for me…. Why are we playing this? Why not just play a role-playing game like D&D?

Valor & Villainy separates itself from the pack of “adventures fighting monsters” games in so many ways. I think its charm above all else is that it doesn’t take itself seriously, in fact, the game is, itself from the instruction book, to the spells, to the monsters, just a series of fantasy genre-driven gags that fit neatly into a well-executed combat mechanic. This is a game where you draw a loot card, read it and laugh, because whoever created that card, has clearly played a lot of D&D. They know the inside jokes and the silliness of the fantasy genre and just leans right into it.

Valor & Villainy is about as close as you can get to watching a comedy cartoon as a board game. Beyond silliness, however, you have very smooth mechanics with a ton of strategy and challenge. It doesn’t punish you for failure as so many of these games often do and so the game never pumps the breaks, it’s always full-force action sequences.

The combat mechanics in this game are perfectly tuned to the theme, the flow of the game is quick and the results are always fun. Right now if you asked me what the best fantasy adventure board game I have ever played was, even after a single play I would instantly point you to Valor and Villainy. It was just perfect.

The core premise of the game is simple, one player is the main villain and for the first 5-6 rounds, they are spreading “evil” in the land in the form of monsters and curses that the player characters, aka, the heroes have to deal with. The main purpose of these early encounters is the same for both the villains and the heroes. For the villain, it’s to try to kill the adventurers so the villain can gain power in preparation for the big fight and for the players it’s to kill monsters and find loot, for the same reason.

After a few rounds, the villain arrives on the battlefield and you have a big fight for the win. There are exploration mechanics, spell mechanics, and several distinctively different characters to choose from. Everything you want out of a fantasy adventure game.

So why is it not “The Best Game of Hassela 2024”? Well, the competition was pretty stiff, more on that later.

Suffice it to say if you love fantasy adventure board games, whip out the credit card, this one is worth every penny!

Condottiere

This 1995 classic filler shows up to the big Hassela weekend event every year like clockwork and this year was no different.

This trick-taking game with an area control element is all about trying to get the most out of your hand so that you can either win the battle, or exit it with sufficient strength to win the next one. You stretch your hand but you have to be careful about overcommitting because you might find yourself winning one hand, but then not even able to functionally participate in the next.

The decisions about which fights are important are driven by the area control mechanic which defines the lands you fight over and you need to pick your battles carefully. It’s not about winning every trick you can, it’s about winning the trick that matters.

It’s a straight shooter kind of a trick-taking game, no big bells and whistles, just play your cards right and know when to hold’em, know when to fold’em and know when to run.

Fun game, I think it’s a staple game that belongs in everyone’s collection.

Factory Funner

I’m a bit hesitant on this one, which is not to say I didn’t like it, in fact, I liked it quite a bit but…. there was something off about the sequence of the play that spoiled it a bit.

In Factory Funner you get some tiles that represent machines that produce things, requiring a couple of inputs of “fluid” of different colors and producing some kind of “fluid” output of different colors. As you lay out tiles and build connections between machines you score points for your efficiency. The fewer pipes and connectors you put down the more points you earn. It is effectively a puzzle game you have to solve on the fly without knowing what all of the pieces you will need to put down will be.

It’s a bit strange, but the factory building part and the stress of trying to make things fit and figuring out the puzzle was fantastic, I loved it right out of the gate. However, the method of how you get the tiles you are actually using has this live-action “grab it quickly or miss out” part, which sort of lacked fluidity and ended up kind of roughing up an otherwise good game.

I can see what they are going for here. You have to build a factory from a limited selection of tiles and you have to decide which tile you are going to take quickly to add extra stress to that key decision. I think that is fine, I actually like it, it reminds me a bit of Galaxy Truckers. I just don’t think they got the sequence of play right.

I would have preferred a drafting mechanic, or some sort of draw 3 tiles, you have 5 seconds to pick one, or some sort of turn-based thing. Anything but the “how fast can you grab the stuff you want before the other players do” thing which works fine in Galaxy Trucker but it’s because you have tons of tiles to pick from in Galaxy Trucker. Here you have as many tiles as there are players and you end up picking your own tiles most of the time just because you at least have some semblance of control that way.

I don’t know, for me the whole “grab a tile quickly” thing spoiled a pretty fascinating puzzle game of building factories. With this mechanic, I put it in the “ok” category without it, meaning the puzzly bit alone, I thought it was very good.

Hunt For The Ring

A hidden movement game based on the classic Lord Of The Rings story where Frodo (one of the players) and his companions make their way from The Shire to Rivendell while trying to avoid the pursuit of Nazgul represented by the rest of the players.

There are not very many hidden movement games out there and even fewer good ones. I’m reminded of another game on my shelf collecting dust with a similar premise called Fury of Dracula which I used to favor but have found over the years is just a bit overcooked in certain places.

Hunt For The Ring succeeds where Fury of Dracula fails in that they really focus on the “searching for them” part of the game and don’t try to overcomplicate the “finding them part”. In Fury of Dracula when you finally locate Dracula you have to fight him using one of the most convoluted combat mechanics I have ever seen put into a game. The result is this weird anti-climatic ending to this great first part of the game where you play hide and go seek with a pointlessly complex combat mechanic to resolve the winner of the game.

Hunt For The Ring keeps that “we found him” part of the game simple using a familiar corruption mechanic from War of The Ring (a game made by the same designer). The result is very satisfying and Hunt For The Ring ended up being one of the highlights of the Hassela weekend as a result for me.

They nailed the hide-and-go-seek part of the game, they did a great job keeping the rules simple and interruption shinanigans to a minimum. It’s a straightforward game of trying to find and trap the fellowship.

I like this one, I would happily play it again. The great thing about hidden movement games like Hunt For The Ring is that they are generally very simple, Hunt For The Ring did have some complexity to it but most of it was there to serve the hide-and-go-seek game which is exactly where the focus should be in a game like this.

A+ from me on this one.

Hegemony

Last but certainly not least is Hegemony, the game I would put as the firm winner of the 4-day weekend and even a contender for my pick for game of the year.

Holy shit my mind was blown by this one. I don’t even know exactly how to put it into words, but this was without question one of the most unique games I have played in a long time. It’s fair to say the game is pretty complex, in fact, I know we did several important things incorrectly on our first playthrough, but even with that, it was abundantly clear that this game was going to be hitting the table in the future. There is a lot of juice to explore here and right now, I’m completely fascinated by the possibilities.

Essentially the game is about navigating the very real feeling issues of social economics from the perspective of one of the four asymmetrical classes (factions in the game) of society (Working Class, Middle Class, Capitalists, and The State). A concept so thematically executed in these mechanics, that it’s almost uncomfortable.

In the game each player has to navigate their social class to success by scoring victory points related to the class’s core function in society. The catch is that the requirements for success aren’t always crystal clear in the sense that there are many combined causes and effects that are not always in your control or fully predictable. The game has a lot of complex interactions in which you are trying to adjust society to serve you, while making sure your competitors are also served, because they are ultimately responsible for serving you in many regards as well (their success is often your success), even though by serving you they are also screwing you most of the time. I don’t know if that makes sense, it shouldn’t, but it’s how it works and the weirdest thing about it is that you end up feeling both the connection to the real world and a sense of compassion for the class you’re representing whether you agree with the abstracted political implications or not.

There is a kind of rhythm to the game that feels very personal in a way. You are hitched up to a mode of thinking depending on your faction and there are basic instincts and an almost belligerent-like execution of actions sometimes where you forget that you’re playing a game and your brain gets wrapped up in the abstracted politics of the fictitious world your playing in. Emotions can run quite high.

For example, the tax rate, a critical policy in the game has a wide sweeping impact on everyone, but there are both benefits and consequences for having a high or a low tax rate for everyone. Meaning it’s never exclusively good or bad. Make the tax rate too high and suddenly businesses start shutting down and creating unemployment, make the tax rate too low and the state might fail resulting in massive penalties for everyone including wage reductions, tax hikes, and potentially mass unemployment.

There are various policies like this each with their own very global impact, but managing these isn’t the only social issue to contend with. The economics of an always-growing population create all manner of issues for everyone and the working class in particular has a core reliance on everyone else’s ability to manage their faction. More to the point, if players fail to manage the society well enough the working class can create stiff consequences which include strikes and demonstrations that can cost everyone both production, money, and victory points.

As such there is a need to cooperate to a certain degree even between the most obvious competitors like the working class and the capitalists, but how do you cooperate with someone who wants the exact opposite thing as you do and neither side can win the game if the other gets what they want.

The whole game falls firmly into the “impossible to resolve” category and so the trick to the whole thing becomes one of maneuvering and clever and well-timed strategic moves in an attempt to simply out-pace everyone else on the victory point track as society is catapulted towards inevitable disaster. Failure in a word is imminent, but from the ashes, one of these classes will emerge to claim victory.

A big part of the game that sort of “breaks the rules” is in the action cards each player has, which are also asymmetrical decks unique for each class. These cards allow you to do things the basic actions don’t and it’s in the smart use of these cards that most players will find their victory. As a general rule, each time you are forced to take a basic action instead of leveraging the effects of a card, it is a step towards defeat as it’s only through the use of these cards you can get ahead. Basic actions are a recovery or corrective measure, not a plan. Playing these cards however, is tricky because you have to create just the right conditions in most cases to really get the most out of them. If you are constantly forced to take corrective measures by discarding cards for basic actions rather than focusing on the execution of a plan that involves the effects of your cards, your chances of success dwindle in the very esoteric and hard-to-see math behind how victory point acquisition works.

There is a natural rhythm to the game that creates inevitable hostility. Basically in a status-quo environment in which everyone cooperates and the game simply plays out at a “medium” give and take, the state is the automatic winner, this is by design as the state essentially wants to keep everyone at an even keel. No one can keep up on points with the state if they are simply collecting medium salaries, paying medium prices for goods, at a medium tax rate with the population growing at a medium level. For each class, there has to be some major advantage in the policies in their favor for them to get an edge in the victory point acrobatics.

Each class has its Achilles heel sort of speak, a single policy that when it’s in their favor to an extreme will guarantee that they will continually outscore everyone else during the scoring round. Manipulating circumstances to get that in place is difficult, usually unlikely as long as all the players are aware of the impact, but inevitably there are short-term gains to be had sometimes by siding with someone to give them what they want.

For example, having a low tax rate can help the working class to expand a little quicker and have some reserve cash so that they can react a little better to a constantly changing game state, but low tax causes problems for the state and the reserves of affordable resources dries up opening an opportunity for the capitalist to capitalize on a starving market. The result is a working class that goes plus-minus, a failed state while the capitalist and middle class score obscene amounts of points.

Often you have to make unfavorable decisions to keep a particular class from failing outright because each class has a failsafe response that screws everyone when they are pushed too hard. The working class can demonstrate and protest shutting down production, the state can fail and do a hard reset causing high taxation and the capitalists and middle class can sell off companies and cut deeply into everyone’s bottom line sending them to the unemployment line. The results are always pretty devastating to everyone when any class fails to remain stable and most often the person least affected is the person’s faction that failed, which is key to the balance of the game. It forces others to worry about your success to some extent. You don’t want to be too helpful, but you also don’t want to outright crush anyone either.

There is so much more to say about this game and its many nuances if you can imagine that all the above is from a single play of the game.

If there is a negative to Hegemony, it’s that the rules are quite intricate and it’s very easy to get them wrong and when you do, even if it’s just a small rule, it has a huge impact. For example in our first play-through, we did the check IMF test after paying taxes, but you actually do the IMF check first and the taxes second. This completely changes the game, yet there is only one line in the entire rulebook that mentions it despite it being a very critical rule. The rulebook however is well written and the cheat sheets that come with the game are very helpful, so once you learn to play the game properly, that initial difficulty of the game which coincidently adds a lot to the length, goes away. Our first game took the better part of 7 hours, but I’m 100% certain we will cut that time in half quite easily for our next playthrough.

Hands one of the best games I have played this year!

Conclusion

All I can ever say about our Hassela weekends each year is that it’s the gaming highlight of the year for me. A fantastic weekend of pure and uninterrupted fun time in the company of the best group of guys I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. It is pure bliss!

Every year I hope that when I return from the weekend I have made a new discovery and most years that ends up being true. This year Hegemony blew the doors off, but I think a big nod of approval has to go out to both Hunt For The Ring and Valor and Villany, two absolute gems.

Can’t wait for next year!

Dedicated To All Things Gaming