Much like the word “immersion,” the term “trad RPG” is one that I’ve lately seen confusing conversations more than illuminating them.

The key thing to understand is that “trad RPG” comes from at least three different places, all of them using it to mean different things.

First, storytelling games use it to mean roleplaying games. This arose because STGs – games primarily focused on narrative control mechanics instead of character-associated mechanics – referred to themselves as RPGs, but also knew that they were something different, and wanted (or needed) a term to describe all of the existing RPGs.

Then the Old School Renaissance used “trad RPG” to mean old school play — i.e., the traditional form of play which existed before various “new schools” of play. (With the OSR generally defining the first of these “new schools” as the linear-narrative play that came to domination RPG adventure design post-Dragonlance.)

Most recently, an essay called the Six Cultures of Play defined “trad RPG” as the linear-narrative play championed by Tracy and Laura Hickman in, among other things, Dragonlance. This article was notable for looking at the RPG hobby in terms of cultural behavior rather than mechanical or adventure design. It was filled with severe historical inaccuracies, but, unfortunately, this has not prevented it from being quite popular in online discussions.

And now you can probably spot the problem: You’ve got one group using “trad RPG” to mean pre-Dragonlance play and another group using it to mean post-Dragonlance play. So now “trad RPG” means literally the opposite of itself.

But it gets even more confusing! In response to the use of trad RPG to mean “Dragonlance-style gaming” some segments of the OSR now use it to mean “not the OSR,” which means they also include STGs in “trad” play.

Which means trad RPG now means:

• old school, pre-Dragonlance styles of play
• post-Dragonlance linear-narrative styles of play
• storytelling games
• not storytelling games

So, ultimately, what does “trad RPG” or “traditional RPG” mean?

Nothing.

It’s a term that I’ve used in the past, but one that I generally try to avoid using now. It’s unfortunate because it was a useful term and I haven’t found a reliable replacement, but the reality is that using the term now — no matter how you choose to use it — means that a pretty good chunk of people will end up thinking you meant the exact opposite of whatever you meant. The result, of course, is confusion and needless arguments.

Although, to be fair, what could be more traditional about RPG discussions than that?

On this episode Miskatonic University Podcast, Keepers Dave & Bridgett interview Justin Alexander on the Three Clue Rule and designing mysteries in gaming!

LISTEN NOW!

Original Review Posted May 21st, 2001

A MOMENT OF SYNCHRONIZATION

To get us off on the right foot, let me explain where I’m coming from right up front:

I like The Mummy. I like it a lot. I think its a great film. It’s unique mixture of pulp adventure, horror, and self-aware satire result in a couple hours of rip-roaring fun that’s tough to beat when you’re just looking to relax and enjoy yourself.

So when I look at The Mummy Returns, realize that I’m looking at it with the eyes of someone who truly enjoyed the first movie.

On the other hand, I know quite a few people who hated the first movie and swear that The Mummy Returns is not only a lot better, but a great movie. Personally, I don’t see it – considering that there is nothing remarkably different about the style, approach, or plot-type of The Mummy Returns — but that’s what they say.

Also note that I have seen the movie twice as I write this.

ANALYSIS

Note: I will be discussing some elements of the plot of The Mummy Returns. Expect minor spoilers for the film’s premise and significant spoilers for the original film.

The Basic Premise: The Mummy Returns takes place several years after the first movie. Evelyn and Rick have gotten married and now have a son. Evelyn’s gotten a little bit tougher, Rick is pretty much the same, and their son is a mixture of their best qualities. Rick and Evelyn discover the “Bracelet of Anubis”, which will awaken the Scorpion King – who (of course) is destined to destroy the world. Meanwhile, a group of evil archaeologists is working to return Imhotep (the titular mummy) to life once more for their own nefarious purposes.

Sequels are widely considered to be the domain of suckdom. This is because they generally fall into one of many traps:

1. If two characters fell in love at the end of the last movie, have them separated and bitter at each other at the beginning of this movie.

This is one of the classic “we have to do the exact same movie all over again” traps. In the first movie you have a love story between these two characters, so now you need to have them hate each other so that you can tell the exact same love story all over again.

The Mummy Returns, fortunately, avoids this problem altogether: As noted, Evelyn and Rick are married – and they are happily married to boot. Stephen Sommers wisely takes the course of “been there, done that” and moves onto fresh territory, choosing to develop the relationship rather than tear it apart and rebuild it.

2. If there was a funny gimmick in the first film, repeat it here. Only make it bigger and more impressive.

Another “we have to do the exact same movie all over again” trap. Unfortunately, Sommers steps right into this one: For example, you’ve got a 360-degree shot of a circle of bookshelves falling like dominoes in the The Mummy; so in The Mummy Returns you’ve got a 360-degree shot of a circle of pillars falling like dominoes. Fortunately, Sommers seems to get these all out of his system in roughly the first fifteen minutes of the film – and from that point on you can settle down and actually enjoy the film in its own right.

Note that Sommers also employs the flip-side of this trap: Using the established elements of the first film to create bigger pay-offs in the sequel. For example, the first film firmly established the threat of the mummy. Rather than making the mistake of trying to rebuild that threat, Sommers simply takes it at face value – and then proceeds to heighten the stakes so that the foundation of the first film is just a place to build from. Basically, Sommers manages to defuse most of the potential bombs by having the characters acknowledge them – using the repeated motifs both for comic relief and to establish (and re-establish) character.

I also don’t have any problems with Imhotep using variations of his powers (most notably, a transplanted sandstorm effect). Those are established powers, and as long as they’re used in the service of the story, it just makes sense.

3. Flashback to scenes from the original film, but show stuff you didn’t see the first time.

Sommers does this – but he makes it work. I won’t say any more because I’ll tread on the film’s central plot points, but suffice it to say that Sommers makes this work better than just about any other film I’ve seen.

4. Bigger, better, more expensive!

Sommers also goes in for this – but he doesn’t fall into the trap of simply repeating the first film with a bigger budget. He uses his bigger budget to tell a much bigger epic – but one which is distinctive from the first in many ways.

The only drawback I detected, upon watching the film a second time, is that several of the larger special effects shots look rushed – and don’t hold up very well to repeated viewings (ie, when you are taking the time to look at the background elements of the shots). The ending, in particular, suffers from this (unfortunately, because the first time through the ending is fantastic). This is unfortunate, considering that the special effects in The Mummy really hold up well to repeated viewings.

THE VERDICT

One last pet peeve: The airship just doesn’t work for me. It does one too many impossible things – and I need to forcibly prop my suspension of disbelief up at several points.

The Mummy Returns avoids the typical pitfalls of a sequel and delivers in a big way: Sommers uses the foundation of the first film to build a terrific second film, rather than simply rehashing what had already come before.

Outside of the repeated gimmicks of the first fifteen minutes and a few special effects shots which aren’t quite up to snuff, The Mummy Returns more than delivers exactly what its supposed to: A fun, pulpy adventure flick.

Have fun.

Style: 4
Substance: 5

Director: Stephen Sommers
Writer: Stephen Sommers
Distributor: Universal Pictures

This review was born out of Discourse™. For some reason, The Mummy Returns became a hot button topic on RPGNet back in 2001 and I used this review to summarize my thoughts. It was an early example of me getting tired of repeating myself in forum discussions and writing something more permanent that I could just point people towards as necessary. This, of course, is basically the entire foundation on which the Alexandrian is built (giving rise to articles like D&D: Calibrating Your Expectations, the Three Clue Rule, and many others).

If memory serves, this review became something of a hot topic in its own right, as people debated whether or not it was “appropriate” for RPGNet to publish non-RPG reviews. This is, oddly, also something that’s been revisited at the Alexandrian. I’ve not infrequently had people tell me they were upset that I’d posted something other than RPG content on the site. In this case, of course, it boils down to the Alexandrian simply being a place for me to post my stuff. All my stuff. A lot of my writing is about RPGs, but from the earliest days of the site there has also been politics, Shakespeare, media reviews, history, and all kinds of stuff.

For an explanation of where these reviews came from and why you can no longer find them at RPGNet, click here.

WITH JUSTIN ALEXANDER, PANAVIOTIS LINES, AND ALED LAWLOR

Today, we’ve got a four-way with Ben Riggs! Listen and marinate in the brilliance of Justin Alexander, Panayiotis Lines, & Aled Lawlor!

Aled Lawlor and Panayiotis Lines are the creative duo behind Leyline Press. In just a few short years, Leyline has carved out a reputation for distinctive, atmospheric RPGs that blend striking visual design with elegant, playable mechanics. This includes Salvage Union: Beautiful art, and delightfully mashes up mecha combat, exploration, and socialism. Aled and Panayiotis are reshaping what small-press tabletop games can look and feel like.

And then we’re thrilled to welcome a name familiar to just about every GM who’s ever looked for deeper insight into the craft, a man whose influence on the culture of TTRPGs is hard to overstate, the human responsible for the Alexandrian, Justin Alexander. His essays, reviews, and innovative techniques, such as like the “Three Clue Rule,” have become touchstones in modern RPG discourse. His book, So You Want to Be a Game Master, is absolutely outstanding and has been read by I think four different tweens in my classroom.

Watch now on Youtube!

What do you do with your character sheets between game sessions?

If you’re using an online service for your character sheets that everyone in the group can access, this will largely take care of itself. But if not, then this is one of those little technical flourishes that you probably never think about, but which can nevertheless have an impact on your game. (And particularly so with some RPGs.)

Broadly speaking, there are three competing interests when it comes to the disposition of your group’s character sheets.

First, and most importantly, the players need to have their sheets during the game. (Obviously.) So if they forget to bring them or, worse yet, lose them entirely, that can derail an entire session.

Second, between sessions, the GM may want to reference the PCs’ sheets while prepping adventures. (Is anyone proficient in a particular skill? What spells do they have prepared today? Who’s carrying the Eye of Miebalung? And so forth.)

Third, and this is where it gets tricky, the players may want to have access to their sheets between sessions. This will be particularly true if they need to advance their characters between sessions or if there’s any form of intersession play. (For example, some groups might run domain play or downtime actions on their Discord server.)

Laying out all of these competing interests like this, it’s easy to see the points of tension.  In fact, if we assume there’s just one copy of each sheet, it would seem impossible to satisfy everyone’s needs, although whether or not this will effect a particular group will depend on their personal tastes and predilections.

(For example, I mostly prep my scenarios while thinking about the “logic of the world,” so I rarely, if ever, design with the PCs’ characters sheets in mind. In other words, I set up problems and let the players worry about how their characters will solve them. Although there are exceptions, like how the GUMSHOE system spreads its Investigation Abilities between the PCs, and it can be useful to do some spot-checking to make sure everyone is getting access to the spotlight.)

MY SOLUTIONS

In my dedicated tables, my players usually keep their sheets, taking them home with them between sessions. (Many of my players are copious note-takers, and they’ll often have a fistful of handouts they’ve collected over the course of the campaign. So they’ll just keep all that stuff together, sometimes even reviewing it between sessions.)

However, I do make a point of periodically making a copy of their sheets. (This usually just means taking pictures of them with my phone, although if the players are using a digital sheet – e.g., form-fillable PDFs – I’ll just have them e-mail me copies.) I generally don’t do this after every session (too much hassle), but instead aim for the moments where the sheets have been significantly updated. In D&D, for example, I try to remember to do this each time the characters level up. In my Night’s Black Agents campaign, on the other hand, I’ll do it after each major operation (which is, again, when character advancement is happening).

This works well because my copy is generally up to date enough to be an effective reference for adventure prep when I need it. If a player forgets their sheet for a session, it’s also “good enough” (or, at least, close enough) that I can print temp copies for them.

For my open tables, on the other hand, I’ve defaulted to keeping all of the character sheets. I’ve discovered that the more casual nature of the game and/or the long breaks between sessions for some players meant that it was much more likely for character sheets to vanish into the ether if they left the table. For open tables I’m also usually running RPGs with streamlined character creation systems, so players also don’t need as much time to advance their characters and are unlikely to be doing it between sessions.

OTHER SOLUTIONS

This is a good example of how the specific needs of your group may shift from one campaign and game to the next. So what you want to do is keep the general principles in mind, while thinking about how they can be fulfilled and the tensions between them resolved in each specific case.

For example, if the game is being hosted at the apartment of one of the players, it may make sense for that specific player – rather than the GM – to keep all of the primary character sheets. (If they never leave the gaming room, they can never be forgotten.)

As another example, the GUMSHOE roleplaying games all include worksheets that GMs can use to specifically track the Investigative Abilities of the group. By capturing the essential information the GM is most likely to need while prepping adventures between sessions, a tool like this may reduce the GM’s need to make duplicates of the PCs’ sheets.

Similarly, the digital tools I mentioned earlier can almost automatically resolve these issues by making access to the character sheets ubiquitous and the number of copies functionally infinite. But this can create tradeoffs for players who would prefer to play with paper-and-pencil (how often are they required to update their digital sheets? how can printing off up-to-date copies for each session be facilitated?) and potentially raise other questions. (For example, what will you do if an online service goes offline? Do you want to archive older versions of the sheets? If so, how often should you do it?)

There are undoubtedly solutions and creative approaches to this stuff that haven’t even been discovered yet. So keep experimenting!