The Templar Variations

 It's amazing having the time and focus to work on my games again. It almost feels like a luxury.

Oh! Wait. That... that is a luxury.

Nevermind.

Anyway, one of the projects that's been on hold is my Templar class.

The Godless Priest

For those who don't know, the Templar was a pseudo-priest introduced in the Dark Sun world that gained power from dedication to a Sorceror King (rulers of the few city states scattered throughout the land).

The original 2nd Edition Templar class picked spells from the Cleric list and had fewer spell slots per day. Most of their "power" other than spells was of a political variety, which was great for RP heavy campaigns, but not for hack and slash style play. Effectively, the Templar was a weak priest until high level.

There was no official 3rd Edition Dark Sun product and the third party offerings were weird if you're kind and straight up racist bullshit if you're not. 2nd Edition was bad enough (all these desert dwellling white folks trying to free the slaves), but the 3rd Edition.. Slave Scent anyone? 

Well, the Templar there was even more RP/NPC focused with a power set that can in no way be viewed as anything other than Evil. It wasn't a good look.

4E brought Dark Sun back, but by this point the Templar had been demoted to a character Theme. This provided a few extra "thematic" powers the character had available when they wished. This did make the character more useful in combat and meant that anyone could be a Templar, irrespective of class. This was a nice addition.

The 4E theme only added powers up to 10th level, so the player would not be bound to their Sorceror King and could focus on whatever they wanted to beyond that point. With Epic Desitinies to focus on, the theme didn't have to be a defining part of the character.

Modern World Interpretations

5E has shook things up again. Despite the recent Apocalyptic Subclasses Unearthed Arcana, there are unlikely to be any plans to introduce a Dark Sun world to 5E as we've seen it before. This is possibly because the community as a whole doesn't seem to have an appetite for the themes introduced in the Dark Sun setting. Slavery, tyranny, the oppression of social class, these are not part of the modern game.

Somehow, as an outsider, this feels very similar to the US Administration removing references to slavery, inequality, and black people from Government websites and from education programs. It smacks of a bad case of whitewashing.

The old narrative, prompted primarily by the artwork, did carry a heavy "white saviour" mentality. That's problematic enough. But is it also problematic to ignore the theme of slavery entirely in our roleplaying games? Or should we be facing up to our place in history?

The Templar represents something we see often in history. Oppressors put systems in place to ensure the hegemony and sometimes even the oppressed will join that system in the hope of affording themselves protection. We shouldn't look away from that, but neither should we celebrate it.

I'll continue to develop my Templar, but I will unapologetically make it as a tool of oppression and the players can decide how they sit with that. Let them tell on themselves.

Unfun

There's an attitude in gaming at the moment of Unfun. It's quite prevelant and I'm not sure I like it. Some of it is justified: racially sensitive content has no place at my table and I would encourage others to think of what it is they are putting out and ask themselves who might be harmed by the story they're telling.

But one thing that gets me is hyper positivity. Having bad things happen to characters is becoming more and more taboo. I've heard people online talking about people retconning entire combats because a character died and they weren't having it.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you're coming into a game where, canonically, there are creatures that can wipe out an entire town with a breath weapon, then you must accept that there are likely to be creatures that can potentially hurt your party, and maybe even kill them.

Another thing is increasingly frowned upon is "taking away player agency". There are these spells, called enchantment/charm spells, that make people behave in ways they normally wouldn't. They are, by design, supposed to usurp the will, but apparently there are players who complain about this. Why? You get to use those spells too. If you refuse to suffer the consequences, you don't get to use the spell either. There! Enchantment/Charm school is now banned.

And there starts the problem.

I have no problem with removing notions like bio-essentialism. No person is inherently better or worse than another person, and I have no issue with that, and I would also defend never forcing a player to experience something or force their character to act in a way that is likely to be a trigger or a trauma, it remains part of the game that you can be forced into a state of fear by magic.

Expecting everything to go your way all the time feels childish. Avoiding "Unfun" seems like something that should only happen at a kids' table.

Am I the problem?

It could be that I'm missing some Zeitgeist here, but I want my challenge to be challenging in game! That's the important part for me. This is all in game stuff for me. I am going into the dragon breathing, spell casting, monster infested world of dangers. I can't expect to walk out completely unscathed.

Or my character can't. I shouldn't be harmed by something I'm doing in an imaginary space for fun through a proxy character. 

Therefore, neither you

Now, am I saying you shouldn't play that way? Not at all. I think you should run your table how you see fit. But I don't think I'd be comfortable at your table.

Grim Up North

Yesterday I received the Vaesen starter set and a few books from the Kickstarter. In many ways it's a pretty standard Starter Set with basic rules, character sheets, initiative cards, "what you can do on your turn" cards, a mini bestiary and some handouts for the included adventure. 

The print quality is very good too, with full colour art, glossy covers and a nice feel to the paper. If anything is off-putting it's the shortness of everything. If the basic rules are anything to go by, the main book isn't going to have a lot in it that isn't filler. The adventure comes to 12 pages plus cover.

I'm still looking forward to running it, though. The system is based on d6 rolls and count 6s for levels of success. I'll post again when I can fully describe the experience.