OD&D true to the Sword & Sorcery genre?

[Deleted]

I have always been curious, as long as I've been aware of such things, what Dungeons & Dragons would have looked like if it had been more faithful to its Sword & Sorcery roots.

Gygax and Arneson, with the inclusion of dwarves, elves, dungeon focused play, Vancian magic, pixies, unicorns, gnomes, etc. etc., were not actually all that faithful to the Sword and Sorcery genre as a literary form and as a supposedly primary source of inspiration for D&D.

Now, I do not wish this to devolve into an argument about what is or isn't S&S as there is, aside from a few arguable concepts, enough of a presence of non-Sword & Sorcery material in D&D to validate my point I think.

So, What would D&D look like if Gygax and Arneson HAD been more faithful to the Sword and Sorcery genre?

[apeloverage]

It probably would have gotten a lot of reviews that said "great game, but it's difficult to play a campaign in the style of Lord of the Rings. My group lets players play elves using the rules for Decadent Heroes..."

[Deleted]

Oct 14, 2010 3:57:18 GMT -6 apeloverage said:

It probably would have gotten a lot of reviews that said "great game, but it's difficult to play a campaign in the style of Lord of the Rings.

No, what it would get is reviews saying "what a silly wargame! Impossible to play, and vastly overpriced at $3.50 per book".

[aldarron]

Probably it would very closely resemble Zeb Cooks' Conan RPG, except I'm sure Gygax would still have insisted on Vancian magic. Dwarves and elves? maybe, but probably not as PC races since fantasy creatures are usually either much rarer or non existant in most S&S literature.

Frankly it would be dead easy to make a handful of houserules and campaign setting particulars to play OD&D as in a familiar Sword and Sorcery setting - just like Jason Vey's Conan setting or Docs Warriors of Mars. OD&D is not so far from S&S as you seem to imagine. The OD&D rules allow you to change what you need to. Substitute a different combat system not so wargamey and dependant on weapons and armor (A good half dozen or so have been proposed on this board) and replace/adjust your fantasy creatures and OD&D is as close to an S&S game as any. IMHO.

[Deleted]

I don't think I intended to convey that D&D was so far removed from S&S, but that there are a number of elements of D&D that are far removed from Swords & Sorcery.

The intent of my post was to attempt to imagine a D&D that was more strictly of a Sword & Sorcery bent instead of the amalgamation of Fantasy sources that it is comprised of.

[Malcadon]

It would have likely more human-centric, but with a good amount of inhuman elements to be in-keeping to a fantasy genre, and the spell-casting system would likely require a roll to see if the spell was successfully cast - hopefully with some elaborate things a caster has to do in order to improve the odds.

As annoyed I am with High Fantasy in general - mostly with the over-saturation of HF-styled games and novels since the 90s - I'm glade they mixed both genres, as it would play too much like a one-trick-pony.

[apeloverage]

This might be over-analysing, but:

characters' abilities would be based on the civilisation they came from, but their outlook wouldn't necessarily be. For example Conan's prowess in combat seems to come from the fact that he's a barbarian, and magical abilities like Elric's are found in his decadent society but apparently not in the rising human civilisations. However neither of them have the distinctive outlook of their society, which is why they leave them.

On the other hand the Gray Mouser seems not to have a problem with the outlook of Lankhmar, and so he spends most of his time there.

[apeloverage]

On the other hand, you could say exactly the same about Frodo and Bilbo Baggins, so maybe this is a feature of fantasy in general.

[Deleted]

Aside from my original post topic and still in regards to Sword & Sorcery, I am curious as to what a game similar to D&D would have been like if it had come about in, say, the 1930s or 1940s and attempted to approximate much of the Sword and Sorcery pulp fiction.

If Robert E. Howard had some kind of inkling of what a wargame or even more unlikely (impossibly), a roleplaying game was, what kind of game would he have come up with? Would it use dice? They would obviously be six-sided. I imagine that it would be similar to Chainmail, but of course my imagination of such is tainted by what I already know.

Needless to say, it fires my imagination. So much so, that I have begun work on a "manuscript" using an old Underwood style typewriter font outlining a set of rules of what I imagine someone like REH or CAS would create surrounding the whole S&S pulp genre.

Now that is old school!

[apeloverage]

Some of the artwork from Weird Tales would be in the public domain by now (for example these covers)

[apeloverage]

I'd imagine any rules like that wouldn't be 'fantasy' specifically, given these authors' mixing of fantasy, historical, science-fiction and horror.

[Deleted]

Some of the Weird Tales covers are very evocative. Thanks apeloverage for the link!

[apeloverage]

No worries.

[gloriousbattle]

Oct 13, 2010 20:58:15 GMT -6 christopher said:

I have always been curious, as long as I've been aware of such things, what Dungeons & Dragons would have looked like if it had been more faithful to its Sword & Sorcery roots.

I think my quibble would be that D&D's roots were not so much sword and sorcery as high fantasy, and to that it is quite true. In fact, of the retro-clones, I prefer those that focus on the struggle between good and evil, like LL, rather than those that focus on a more morally gray world, like S&W. Nothing wrong with S&W, but it does not have the same feel as D&D. YMMV.

[verhaden]

I have to disagree. I think a stronger case could be made for a linkage to the S&S genre than could high fantasy, at least at the beginning.

[Deleted]

Absolutely. My grievance was with the inclusion of high fantasy at all.

My question, put more succinctly:

What would D&D look like without any high fantasy elements?

OR:

What would D&D have looked like if strictly having only Sword & Sorcery elements?

I guess what I am getting at is how would this alter the game, both theme-wise and rules-wise? How different would the game be without unicorns, Vancian magic, and other high fantasy elements?

[terje]

Oct 16, 2010 20:55:32 GMT -6 christopher said:

Aside from my original post topic and still in regards to Sword & Sorcery, I am curious as to what a game similar to D&D would have been like if it had come about in, say, the 1930s or 1940s and attempted to approximate much of the Sword and Sorcery pulp fiction.

If Robert E. Howard had some kind of inkling of what a wargame or even more unlikely (impossibly), a roleplaying game was, what kind of game would he have come up with? Would it use dice? They would obviously be six-sided. I imagine that it would be similar to Chainmail, but of course my imagination of such is tainted by what I already know.

Needless to say, it fires my imagination. So much so, that I have begun work on a "manuscript" using an old Underwood style typewriter font outlining a set of rules of what I imagine someone like REH or CAS would create surrounding the whole S&S pulp genre.

Now that is old school!

Its certainly a great alternative history scenario!

HG Wells Little Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Wars) was published in 1913 so its possible, though perhaps not likely, that RE Howard could have read the book. Given his interest in history he might have been tempted to create his own wargame where he could leed celtic freedom fighters against the roman invaders. And perhaps he would have set the game in the Hyborian era, with wizards and monsters. And if the game had focused on individual combatants rather than whole armies a series of battles could have been strung together within a fictional framework forming a kind of s&s adventure! Not likely, but very fun to imagine!

Please tell me more about that manuscript you are working on, it sounds really interesting! ^^

[Malcadon]

Oct 17, 2010 0:45:53 GMT -6 apeloverage said:

Some of the artwork from Weird Tales would be in the public domain by now (for example these covers)

goldenagecomicbookstories.blogspot.com/
home.comcast.net/~pulpgallery/welcome.html

The last one has links to more pulp covers.

[Deleted]

I did in fact find the 'Little Wars' rules at Project Gutenberg hoping I could mine them for ideas concerning what a wargame might look like during the first part of that century. However, it wasn't as helpful as I imagined it would be.

As for the rules, I would expect them to be either very simple and concise with lots of room for fiat, or else, following the way of such past games as Kriegspiel, incredibly complex. I opted for simple rules.

I can't seem to find where I read it, but it was definitely in one of REH's writings, he gives the most important attributes of a hero/adventurer as being strength, wits and speed. Assuming REH created rules for gaming in Hyboria, and also assuming characters would have ability scores, those three would be it. I also figured, in the tradition of games such as Monopoly (1904), two six-sided dice would be ideal for rolling ability scores.

Next, given the speed at which combat occurs in the Conan tales, combat would be quick, very quick, and armor would be much more negligible. The combat would work in the following manner:

Both combatants compare their speed scores, the higher score attacks first.

To attack, the attacker rolls two six-sided dice. If the result is equal to or greater than the enemy combatant's strength score, the enemy combatant is slain. In this way, fighting is based more on ability than armor which is why Conan was able to fight effectively in loincloth.

Armor is still useful though. Armor offers a "saving throw". A combatant wearing leather armor avoids being slain on a roll of 6 on a six-sided die. If wearing scale or chain armor, death is avoided on a 5 or higher. A shield adds to the saving throw.

I also have been pondering the use of skills to represent a quasi-level system. I dislike using the word 'skills' but have come up with these three: fighting, thieving and casting. Basically, in the case of combat, a character's fighting skill would add to his attack roll. So if a combatant rolled an 8 on two dice, a fighting skill of one would be added making the result a 9.

Magic should be rare and exceedingly dangerous--always a price to pay for involving oneself with otherworldly powers.

That's about where I'm at. I'm not sure if it all feels right and if I haven't slipped in a little too much "modern" RPG concepts.

EDIT: Addendum

Conan's stats, perhaps earlier in his career.

Strength: 11
Wits: 9
Speed: 10

Fighting: 2
Thieving: 1
Casting: 0

And of course, whatever equipment he may have: broadsword, maybe chainmail or scalemail, a bag of coins, and a dagger.

I think we're thinking along the same lines terje. Battle would punctuate a loose-knit fictional framework. There wouldn't necessarily be rules for movement, light, encumbrance, etc. as there are in D&D. More of a free-flowing story with choices here and there with a few brief but very important battles. It certainly does sound fun, if done correctly.

[apeloverage]

I'd consider having at least one attribute that covers willpower, courage, sanity, how intimidating you are and so on.

[verhaden]

Sounds like a forge game.

[geordieracer]

Oct 17, 2010 21:32:40 GMT -6 apeloverage said:

I'd consider having at least one attribute that covers willpower, courage, sanity, how intimidating you are and so on.

Rather than a separate attribute you could derive it from the existing: (Strength + Wits)/2

I assume there's no need for an attractiveness stat as heroes are obviously good-looking ?

[Deleted]

What is a forge game? Is that good or bad?

I agree with deriving all other facets of character personality from the already existing attributes.

And yes, pulp fiction heroes are always good looking, and the bad guys, well, they're not as good looking.

[coffee]

One thing you're going to want to consider is that the spell-casters are ALWAYS the bad guys. Certainly in Conan and most likely in the rest of the S&S genre.

Power corrupts, and magic is the most power you can get.

[apeloverage]

Oct 17, 2010 21:56:32 GMT -6 @geordieracer said:

I assume there's no need for an attractiveness stat as heroes are obviously good-looking ?

From what I understand of Conan, women fall in love with him because of his spirit/power/inner barbarian-ness, rather than because of he's good-looking as such. So it's more a 'willpower' thing than a 'charisma' thing.

[Deleted]

I have played around with the idea that all spell-casters are evil, and I think that you're right coffee. Sorcerers make good baddies and thieves make excellent comic relief/fodder. I think I will go with that. So perhaps for attributes: strength, wits, speed, and presence?

Dropping the skills thieving and casting, and maybe even fighting too, gets rid of that whole bag of worms, so to speak. As far as character advancement then, maybe an occasional increase to stats, particularly strength, would appropriately model character progress. Then again, tracking progress may not even be necessary, but it is such an ingrained part of my D&D experience. Any thoughts?

I like how this is going so far!

[gloriousbattle]

Oct 17, 2010 10:09:33 GMT -6 verhaden said:

I have to disagree. I think a stronger case could be made for a linkage to the S&S genre than could high fantasy, at least at the beginning.

Can't imagine why you would think that. D&D was based on LOTR, whatever Gygax may have said, and D&D was high fantasy. Yes, it had S&S elements in it, but it got its popularity by riding the coattails of LOTR, and so it mirrored that universe to a great extent.

[apeloverage]

IMHO, a discussion of whether D&D is more high fantasy or more sword and sorcery could derail this thread completely. Everyone seems to agree that it has elements from both, the OP wants to know what it would have been like with no high fantasy.

[apeloverage]

Oct 17, 2010 22:08:44 GMT -6 christopher said:

What is a forge game? Is that good or bad?

A 'forge game' is a game which would be at home on The Forge website (www.indie-rpgs.com).

What I think verhaden means is that such games often emphasise player characters' internal psychology. For example you might have a 'Drive' like "avenge my parents' death", and get a bonus when you're acting to avenge your parents' death.

I'd say that having willpower/sanity is appropriate for 'Weird Tales' style adventures. From the little I've read, Robert E. Howard seems to emphasise the 'inner strength' of his characters, which overcomes all odds. Whereas HP Lovecraft seems to have an equal emphasis on inner states, but in his case it's all about how characters can't deal with the truth about the universe.

[Deleted]

Thank you on two counts apeloverage.

I'm not sure I am attempting to emphasis the inner struggle of characters but rather I am more interested in the explicit expression of a character. I meant the game to be more wargame-y than "indie" or psychological. There are not necessarily any in game bonuses derived by fiat, but rather the physical journey, in the form of a tale beginning at A and ending at B and how the character navigates it, the choices that are made by the player, is what I am interested in here.

The only fiat I am interested in is, for example, when a character is interacting with the game world, there are no rules such as Hostile/Friendly Reaction rolls or rules for traveling--these can be left to the discretion of the game referee, judge, dungeon master, what have you.