False Premises: "The DM should maximize player fun."

What. The. Actual. Fuck.

Someone just said that today. In a public forum. That the only job of the DM is to maximize player fun. This discussion was related to race/class restrictions in 2nd Edition AD&D - but I have to tell you, I've never seen a more stupid sentiment in my life and I decided it needed a blog post. The obvious response is obvious:

NO.

I mean this is such obvious bullshit that no one should say it and expect to be taken seriously as a functional adult. This is the kind of crap I expect from toddlers and anyone spewing this verbal vomit should be treated as such.

Now, being the generally nice chap that I am, I will explain once - and once only - why this is a load of crap. Afterwards, if you still want to hold on to this crap, I'd recommend therapy or maybe electroshock treatment.

First, let's step back and answer: "What is a role playing game?"

Premise of a Role Playing Game

A role playing game is a set of structured rules administrated by a single individual to provide guidance around the actions of the players. In terms of AD&D, and D&D in general, the single individual is referred to as the DM and is given maximum leeway in both interpreting the rules and managing the table - in that, whatever the DM says is what the rule at the table and that is "rules as written." This is often referred to as "Rule Zero."

The players have control over their own agency. What this means is that once the players are at the table, with characters created within the scope of the DM's campaign setting, the players have full control over how their characters will react and explore the world. This is why DMPCs and railroading are terrible - they remove player agency either by making them passive to the world (DMPC) or making their agency and choices meaningless.

The DM, of course, is responsible for creating that world: plots, maps, encounters, managing the reactions of the players, allocating resources, evaluating material/rules, and resolving unexpected or unplanned player actions. Essentially the bookkeeping and management. This usually takes up time before and after a game as well, so once the players are done, the lonely DM is still at the table determining the ramifications of the game and planning the next session.

Now, let's discuss maximization.

The Premise and Problem of Maximization

Maximization, or more properly, the utility maximization problem is a microeconomic theory regarding consumer decisions. Typically the question is asked in regards to purchasing: "How should I spend my money in order to maximize my utility?" Money and time are both finite resources that can be viewed under the scope of this utilization formula. For gaming, the utilization problem can be expressed as: "How should I spend my time in order to maximize my utility?" where utility is fun.

Now there is a whole crap ton of work done on utility maximization problems. It's fascinating stuff and I encourage you to delve into it, but the key point that I think needs to be emphasized for this post is this: Although the theoretical utility curve created by the consumer/player will indicate that a theoretical choice is best, that choice might not exist. This is the opposite case of bounded rationality (where the player is unwilling to put in the time or effort to determine their maximum utility and thus they chose a suboptimal experience or product), but the effect is the same - the consumer/player is left with suboptimal choices based on their theoretical - but nonexistent - maximum.

For our player who is searching for his theoretical maximum, two problems get in the way of maximizing their fun:

1. Demand Pressure: There are only so many DMs. Since demand for DMs is high, and supply of DMs is low, DMs have greater control over the market and can offer those products they wish to offer and not necessarily what the market demands.
    
2. Subjective Probability: Subjective probability is based on a person’s own personal reasoning and judgment. It is the probability that the outcome a person is expecting will actually occur. There are no formal calculations for subjective probability but instead it is based on a person’s own knowledge and feelings. For us, any two given players looking at a proposed game will subjectively come to different assessments of their ability to enjoy that game. As a result, the player base is fractured, there is no agreed upon standard for evaluating and assessing a "fun game" meaning that any efforts by the player to maximize utility will be frustrated first by not having the ability to internally quantify their utility, and second being a part of a large demand side of people in a similar situation.
   
   It's important to note here that the fact that fun is subjective and internal means that it is impossible for any DM to actually meet the maximum utility of all players. Each one will have a utility maximum that is different from the others, including the DM themselves.

By chasing the theoretical maximum, which won't exist in the market, the player fails to maximize their utility. They want to be in the RPG market, they have time to spend on the RPG market, but they burn that time chasing something which they can't have.

Now, a rational actor who examines the market place and finds that there is nothing in that market place that offers what they want can handle it one of three ways. Let's look at the them:

1. Create their own Service: The player will offer to DM, establishing the game they want to play and inviting other players to join.
    
2. Adjust their Expectations: The player will seek to join a game where the game play is as close to possible to the theoretical maximum.
    
3. Do not adjust: The player will either not join games and thus get zero utility, or will join games and attempt to force the games to their preference which results in no one gaining utility (due to stress and frustration at the board, leading to DM burn out and reducing the DM supply, thus making it more difficult for everyone else). 

An additional problem, which makes three above such an issue, is that we're all attempting to maximize our utility. If the DM's maximization is at odds with the player's maximization, then the laws of supply and demand come into play. Limited supply and high demand mean that the player who is at odds with the DM will never be able to play a game. If the player can't adjust, or act as a DM, then the player will enter into a situation where zero utility for anyone is possible. Rational players and DMs, faced with a player like that, will remove the player in order to maximize their own utility.

Back to Gaming

So what does this all mean for role playing games? Simple. Be respectful when you're at the table. When a DM outlines their world take notes. If you like it well enough, play it. If you hate it, but can carry on, do so - nothing stops the player from taking notes and saying to the DM: "Hey if you want to take a break at some point, I came up with an awesome idea..."

Your DM would probably appreciate it.

Neat! I got reviewed!

Adventure Anthology One: Shepherds of Pineford

I wrote an adventure many years ago called Shepherds of Pineford for the Basic Fantasy Role Playing Game. You can find it here. It's on page 28! Recently I was shocked to see that Jon Bupp had decided to review my adventure and noted that he really enjoyed it - and that it was an easy convert to 5th Edition! Thank you Jon!

The kind words:

The Shepherds of Pineford has two locations, the town of Pineford, and the simple ruins. I may use the town at some other time. Pretty straightforward, but with a few hooks, and a few suggestions on why the party might be there. Perfect for a sandbox game. I was able to to a quick read thru shortly before our session and felt comfortable running it.

You can find the full review, as well as some of his play notes, at his blog.

For Gold & Glory

An OSR Version of 2nd Edition AD&D
So today I wanted to talk about the OSR version of 2nd Edition AD&D: For Gold and Glory. For those that do not know, the OSR is an open source version of the D&D role playing game. This is intended to allow people to develop games and material for older versions of D&D, using the open game license developed by Wizards of the Coast. There are a number of options out there for the various systems, such as Basic Fantasy, Swords & Wizardry, Labyrinth Lord, and OSRIC.

For a long time, these were really the only options, and they reflect game rules essentially from the beginning of D&D to the release of 2nd Edition. For a while, it seemed that 2nd Edition was pretty much abandoned until the release of for Gold & Glory.

Why OSR?
Although much of the 2nd Edition material is still available, and Wizards of the Coast in the run up to 5th Edition released the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master Guide, and Monster Manual, there are reasons to support the OSR. First, it's free. If you've purchased the 2nd Edition material, and you want to run a game - but your players aren't convinced - they can get the core rules to build their characters and learn the rules for free. Second, it provides a convenient PDF with bookmarks that you can use to navigate when you're running your game.

Finally, if you want to go into self-publishing, Wizards of the Coast prevents third party publishers from using the trademarks and brand identities of the 2nd Edition game. As a result, you cannot publish an adventure module as "Compatible with 2nd Edition AD&D" due to current trademark law. One work around would be to write: "Compatible with the World's Most Famous RPG from 1989" which was the original publication date. That's a hassle. Although I support Wizard's of the Coast, and am a huge fan of 5th edition, for those that love 2nd Edition and want to find official publications for it - For Gold & Glory is an excellent thing.

How do the Rules Compare
Frankly, very well. For Gold & Glory is as close to a straight up clone as you can find out there. Every clone takes some liberties, and For Gold & Glory they did as well. Certain sections are slightly changed in their organization. Non-weapon Proficiency points have become skill points. Weapon groups, from Player's Option: Combat & Tactics, was also placed into the rules. However, for the most part the rules are exactly the same, and the slight changes are minuscule. This is not clone of the 2.5 era from 1995 onward with the PO options fully integrated into the game.

Quality
For quality, I rate a product on three different categories: layout, editing, and artwork. And for Gold & Glory, I give them full points on all three counts. Let's address each point one at a time:

Layout
The layout for the book is two column with some tables taking up the whole page. Navigation is quick and easy in such a format. However, I find that the rules themselves are well structured, with standard conventions across classes and races. For example, each game related skill block is put into a bullet list - instead of just left hanging like in the original rules. I appreciate that because it makes it easier to find the rules later on. Paragraphs also have headers in bold, such as "Armor" or "Weapons" that allow you to quickly isolate where those rules are - again, something that was more hidden in the original rules.

Editing
I've read through the rules multiple times to compare them to the original rules that they are based on. Despite that, I have found few editing problems. For a free text, that is impressive. There are some conventions that they have employed which are the reverse of similar presentations in the original work - I'm assuming that was partly for legal reasons - however, it also makes the material smoother and easier to absorb. If you are rusty on your rules knowledge, I'd recommend reading through Gold & Glory before going to original material. A very high mark indeed for the publisher.

Artwork
I like the artwork, but let's ignore the subjective and instead focus on the objective: Most free versions of the various OSR products do not include artwork. The fact that this work has so much art in it, much of it full page and full color is impressive. Artwork is expensive, so it makes sense that an OSR product that commissioned art would need to charge to cover that cost - and that makes sense. The full team (Edit: see comments below!) went out of their way to find appropriate artwork that was free, so that they could create a free resource for players that was also visually appealing. I appreciate the work and effort that went into that.

Final Thoughts
I wanted to post this early on to show my appreciation for one of the louder advocates for my favorite edition. I think they have put something together here which is really great and should be supported for their effort. In the future, as I put the final touches on my campaign settings and resources, I'll be happy to use the For Gold & Glory branding.