A Stack of Sandboxes

or

At what do the Wolfoids howl?

The setting for Metamorphosis Alpha is a colonization starship that encountered “unknown radiation.” Havoc ensued and the inhabitants regressed into primitives, eventually losing the knowledge that they were on a starship. Player characters explore the ship and encounter forgotten technology and mutated creatures.

The starship provided as an example, the Warden, is a huge ellipsoid about fifty miles long, twenty-five miles wide, and nine miles high. (The builders used a futuristic alloy of incredible properties.) The interior of the craft is divided into seventeen horizontal levels. Some levels are devoted to storage and/or the ship's functions. However, many levels are self-contained ecosystems inhabited by a plethora of terrestrial flora and fauna, now altered due to radiation exposure.

Metamorphosis Alpha gives brief descriptions of every level and detailed descriptions of two levels. Yet the rules emphasize (in bold lettering) that the provided descriptions “are intended only as examples...” After all, the focus of the game is exploration and players cannot genuinely 'explore' something with which they are familiar. The rules suggest that the general layout of the Warden should be used, but that the details of the levels should be unique for each referee.

I imagine that a prospective referee in 1976 would find the creation of so much detail to be a daunting task, even if only a small portion of the ship needed to be described for the commencement of play. Another confounding factor for the prospective referee being there was no obvious, introductory motivator for the players – a dungeon (for lack of a better term). In a dungeon, choices are constrained; open the door on the right or continue down the corridor. Relative to the wide open options that Metamorphosis Alpha presents, a 'dungeon' is more easily managed by a referee, but still provides sufficient interest for the players.

Nowadays, 'sandbox' is the term of art for a geographic region with which player characters can interact, pursuing whatever goals they choose. Back in the day, in our ignorance, referees only had maps with keyed encounters (and we were thankful for that much). In essence, the setting of Metamorphosis Alpha is a stack of sandboxes.

If we are going to make each level unique, we should understand the standard features that levels possess.

It seems that each level has artificial gravity, but should that necessarily be the case? Why bother with artificial gravity for a level primarily devoted to storage? Gravity might even be a detriment with regard to certain maintenance areas. According to the description of level 1, “There is a large...hatch...for on-planet removal of supplies.” This means the intent was to land the Warden on the colonization planet! No matter where the Warden sets down, its mass would cause it to sink into the ground, most likely to a depth that would prevent the hatch from opening. Even if the Warden used contra-gravity beams or some other kind of trickery to keep from sinking, there would be a great deal of damage to the 'landing area.' I like to think that the Warden would stay in orbit. Level 9 has “a section housing small space ships for scouting missions.” There's no reason why they couldn't be used as shuttles and 'small' is a relative term compared to the bulk of the Warden.

What about light? The section on 'Forested Areas' makes reference to night cycles and day cycles. Is there a solar disk at the 'center' of the sky for each level? Given the central elevator shaft, I don't think such a thing would be practical. What seems more likely is a 'ceiling' of diffuse luminescence. Along with this luminescence, there would be ultra-violet radiation. This is necessary for many (most?) living things, including humans, and also gives the robots something to do with their ultra-violet lenses. For the night cycles, the luminescence would be diminished significantly. Without a sun, why bother with a moon? Would stars appear on the artificial firmament? I doubt it. Which stars would they be; the stars as seen from Earth? It seems that the voyage of the Warden was to last for several generations. Imagine generations of people who know the sun, moon, and stars only as abstract concepts. Of course, given their lack of knowledge, the player characters and their generation would have no idea of what those terms mean. In Metamorphosis Alpha, poetry takes a backseat to survival.

To replicate the seasons, the length of the day and night cycles would need to change over time. There must also be weather. The description of the Weather Manipulation mutation indicates that “the computer has a 25% possibility of immediately correcting any weather disturbance on the starship.” This means that weather phenomena are somewhat fine-tuned by the computer. Is there a weather schedule? Does it always snow on the 346th day of the year?

P.S. (December 11, 2011)
I am embarrassed that I missed the following item from page 6:

The natural areas have an artificial moon and stars that cast enough light to travel by.

It seems there is the potential for poetry after all!  I assume that the moon goes through its usual phases.  Still, there is no description of an artificial sun, only "diffused [light] throughout the walls."

Now the question is, what stars are they?  The stars as seen from Earth?  Which hemisphere?  Is the pattern static or do they change seasonally?  Perhaps they are the stars as seen from the observation deck of the Warden.  Perhaps they are the stars as seen from the planet to be colonized.

P.P.S. (January 22, 2012)
Tucked away in the description of Small Warriors on page 18 there is the following statement...

Its nests are usually found in areas where the artificial sun does not shine...

I think that my notion of a 'ceiling' of light can properly still be called "artificial sun" and more practical than a solar disk that arcs along the roof of each level.

P.P.P.S.  (January 29, 2012)
Jim Ward's short story, "Footsteps in the Sky," contains some germane information.

First, regularly scheduled weather is confirmed.  "In the morning it rained, as it always did every third day."

Second, the statements "the sun was now out of sight" and "the sun went down," irrefutably indicate the presence of a solar disk.

Science Fiction Adventures On A Lost Starship

The first remarkable thing about Metamorphosis Alpha is that it is contained within twenty-four pages (not counting character sheets and reference pages). Many 'modern' Role Playing Games devote that much (or more) to fluff. Of course, brevity is the hallmark of 'old school' and the 'rules' are rather loose. In bold lettering on page 26 we have this decree:

Remember, however, that these rules (and specific portions thereof) are only intended as guidelines – and that many details are best described by the individual game judge.

I think that all RPGs subscribe to this concept to some extent; however, there are certain guidelines that have become standard convention, while alternative guidelines fell by the wayside over the years. Later RPGs (and their players and Game Masters) take these surviving guidelines as granted. I don't claim that this is a bad thing, it's just how RPGs developed.

For instance, I think most of today's table-top GMs would agree that – as an unstated guideline – more than six or seven players in a given campaign would be less than optimal. Metamorphosis Alpha puts the 'Number of Participants' at 2-24. While I think it would be rare that two dozen players would be participating in the same adventure, all of their characters would exist in the same, contemporaneous setting. In truly 'old school' campaigns, any given character could be “off stage” for several game months training, recovering from wounds, participating in a mercantile expedition, etc. A campaign was not merely a sequence of adventures for one party of characters, it was a shared environment for many characters engaged in various activities that could affect one another.

Another 'expected' guideline for modern RPGs is the notion of character advancement, typically in the form of a character 'earning' a volume of abstract 'experience points'; with enough experience points, the character's abilities improve. Character advancement in Metamorphosis Alpha, such as it is, does not follow this paradigm.

JDJarvis of Aeons & Augauries mentions six 'methods' of character advancement available in Metamorphosis Alpha. I have shamelessly copied his list from the OD&D Discussion Boards (for educational purposes).

Explore the ship and learn it's secrets.
Acquire technological devices.
Figure out and use those technological devices.
Acquire new occasionally useful mutations.
Survive mental assault and build mental resistance.
Recruit followers.

The first three are 'practical' while the last three are not necessarily practical. Acquiring mutations requires exposure to radiation. There is a 1% chance per die of radiation damage of getting a mutation or a 20% chance of getting a mutation (instead of dying) when the radiation chart indicates death. Also, the mutation so acquired could be a defect.

Increasing Mental Resistance is possible by resisting mental attacks; for every five such attacks a character resists, he or she gains one point of Mental Resistance.

Only humans can recruit followers.

I would generalize character advancement into two categories, 'physical treasure' and 'knowledge.'

Physical treasure includes not only ship technology; it also includes domars and conventional items like furs and tools that the characters can use or trade away. There is an interesting statement on page 3, “[Characters] can also make use of the secretions and liquids produced by the mutated plants and creatures of the forest levels.”

Knowledge includes how to use treasure (or even if something is 'treasure'). Knowledge can regard what abilities different 'monsters' possess. Characters learn about their environment (geographical features, tribal customs, et al.) through exploration and, as JDJarvis said, the ship's secrets.

We can think in terms of character advancement, but Ward also wrote about player advancement. The players learn how to interact with the fictional game environment, how the rules work, and (given the time when the book was originally published) how to role-play. “As players become more adept, [the referee] can then increase the difficulty of the problems they will face...,” is from page 3.

Revisionist Mythology II -- The Groundlings Strike Back

In the comments of our last thrilling installment, a dispute arose concerning the veracity of a statement made by Alexis:

“...this insistence that [Star Wars] is ‘the greatest movie ever made’ is merely a bit of social wish-fulfillment...”

The Anonymous Timothy expressed a desire for Alexis to prove this statement; after all, the burden of proof lies with the party making the assertion. Alexis indicated that Alec Guinness' autobiography contains sufficient proof; alas, Guinness' statements are hearsay and we cannot accept them as proof. Alexis then said, “Try Google.” Personally, I take this to be a cop-out. Nonetheless, as a nascent blogger attempting to cater to his audience, I followed up on Alexis' suggestion. (I used dogpile instead of Google, but that's how I roll.)

Of course, nearly every movie has its proponents. (Some wag has even put forth an argument for The Dukes of Hazzard.)

Anyway, this BBC poll from ten years ago seems on-point...and, yes, it tends to support Alexis' position. So, there are (many) people who consider Star Wars to be “the greatest movie ever made.” We may not concur but, to these people, Star Wars is the greatest movie ever made. The world will never come to a consensus as to “the greatest movie” because such a determination is inherently subjective. Certainly Star Wars is a very popular movie but, in terms of cinematic art, it is subject to criticism.

Thus we have an elitist/populist dichotomy; the intelligentsia as opposed to the groundlings, the people who read Proust as opposed to the people who don't and (if I may be permitted once again to invoke Orwell) the Party as opposed to the Proles.

So where does Joseph Campbell fit in to all of this? Well, Alexis suggests the possibility that Campbell may have been misquoted. This is a valid observation and if we expect Alexis to provide proof of his assertions, we should practice what we preach. However, it doesn't really matter what Campbell said because, according to Alexis, Classicist academia considers Campbell to be “something of a whack job.” Thus, the elitist/populist dichotomy is at work again, academics versus the mythology of pop culture. Whether whack job or uncultured dolt, we are back to where we began.

I find Campbell's insight to be fascinating and educational. Without further ado, here are some quotes from Campbell's The Power of Myth.

BILL MOYERS: Do you think...that a movie like Star Wars fills some...need for a model of the hero?

CAMPBELL: I've heard youngsters use some of George Lucas' terms – “the Force” and “the dark side.” So it must be hitting somewhere. It's a good sound teaching, I would say.

…

CAMPBELL: Well, you see, that movie [Star Wars] communicates. It is in a language that talks to young people, and that's what counts.

…

CAMPBELL: ...Star Wars is not a simple morality play, it has to do with the powers of life as they are either fulfilled or broken and suppressed through the action of man.

…

CAMPBELL: Certainly Lucas was using standard mythological figures.

...

I think these quotes give us a good idea of Campbell's attitude about Star Wars.  This movie may no longer 'speak' to Alexis' view of life, but it 'speaks' to a great many others' view of life.

As this post draws to a close, I pose a question. With regard to “social wish-fulfillment,” isn't that the basis of mythology after all?

Revisionist Mythology

The other day, Alexis at The Tao of D&D* trash talked Star Wars. Alexis is kind enough to inform us that any adult who appreciates Star Wars is an uncultured dolt. Joseph Campbell believed that Star Wars re-introduced modern audiences to the concept of the monomyth. Ergo, by Alexis' estimation, Joseph Campbell was an uncultured dolt. If I am an uncultured dolt for liking such a well regarded film, then at least I'm in good company.

Star Wars is an example of intellectual property with significant cultural impact. Sometimes there is conflict between the 'owner' of such a property and the people ('fans') deeply affected by that property; such has been the case with some of George Lucas' efforts to 'revise' certain details of Star Wars. (For the record, not only did Han shoot first, but Greedo didn't get off a shot at all. Those are the facts. Deal.) I am reminded of when Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed off Sherlock Holmes; public outcry was so great, he was eventually compelled to bring Holmes back. When does should an artist lose control of his creation?

Another intellectual property with significant cultural impact (well, impact to Our Hobby at least) is The World's Most Popular Role-Playing Game. There is occasional discord between the owning Wizards and those who cherish the game's origins. At least we have the Open Game License; the Wizards are free to take the path where My Little Pony leads them and we are free to preserve, if not enhance, what we hold dear.

Han shot first.

The Great Detective lives.

D&D is ours (except for beholders and displacer beasts and stuff).

* Alexis is like Emmanuel Goldstein in Nineteen Eighty-Four. Just as Goldstein served as the focus of the Two Minutes Hate, Alexis is a target for cathartic release. If Alexis did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.