D&D thoughts
I'm running a D&D game for the first time in... maybe five years. So here are some random thoughts about D&D.
I've gone through a period of not being interested in D&D. A long period. It's not that I don't like D&D. I think the rules, and I really mean the latest editions, are elegantly well-tuned, tactically rich, coherent and well-rounded.
D&D is, in essence, a really good board game that you can combine with as much or as little roleplaying as you like. The rules are certainly not about roleplaying. I've played some indie RPGs for the last year or so that have rules that are very much about roleplaying. Those've been interesting experiences, but the truth is I can be (and long have been) satisfied with a roleplaying experience that isn't governed by rules. And I like board games, too, so having some abstractified tactical combat in the midst of the roleplaying is just fine with me; it's like pearls on a string.
My biggest problem with D&D isn't the system, and it isn't the supposed lack of roleplaying. It's the setting. I'm not a big fantasy fan. I loved Lord of the Rings. But, beyond that and a few good fantasy movies, I haven't found much in the fantasy genre I enjoy. As a milieu for an RPG, I find fantasy even less satisfying. It's so much harder to create a sense of belonging in a fantasy setting than a modern or future setting, and I just don't think it's worth the trouble.
On the other hand, it's the fantasy milieu that makes D&D work as a tactical game. When you add in a high reliance on firearms, skirmish-level combat is a lot more about just rolling to hit. So, in spite of my indifference toward fantasy, swords and shields just makes the battle-on-a-grid thing work so much better.
This time around, like the last time I ran D&D, I'm using a published module -- in this case, The Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde. The Slaughtergarde module is very different from the Witchfire Trilogy, the last D&D module I ran. Witchfire was a very story-driven module, which also made it a bit of a railroad. It was a very good railroad, but there wasn't much creative work for me. The critical conversations with NPCs were scripted, and the outcomes of most quests were pretty much governed by simple contingencies. It was a great adventure -- I'd consider running it again -- but that's what it was.
Slaughtergarde, by contrast, has only a barebones storyline. It's essentially three dungeons and a few suggestions about how to get the player characters to go explore them. That means the crunchy work is done for me, and the creative work is left to me and my players. Until I try it, I won't know which I prefer, but in theory I like the Slaughtergarde model a lot.
After hearing really good things about Paizo's Age of Worms series, I'm intrigued by the idea of adventure paths as a whole. Age of Worms was a series of twelve adventures, levels 1-20, written by different authors and published in a year's worth of Dungeon Magazine. Now that Dungeon is shutting down, their upcoming Pathfinder line sounds like a very interesting model. Every month, a 96-page adventure/sourcebook is released, for $20... only $14 (plus S&H) with a subscription, and they run for six-book arcs.
I'm really tempted to jump on board. I'm afraid that I run D&D so infrequently that there'll be a new edition out before I get to play it.