Friday, September 30, 2016

The Strategic Review, April 1976

This is the very last issue of The Strategic Review, and the opening editor's column explains TSR's decision to create two separate magazines: The Dragon and Little Wars, as well as the expansion of each to 32 pages (although this issue already expands to 24 over the previous 16).  I love the explanation that one of the reasons for the decision was the fact that The Strategic Review had become a de facto house-organ, and TSR wanted a more generic magazine covering all aspects of fantasy and science fiction gaming.  I'm not sure they ever really achieved that, as everyone knows that Dragon is/was a house-organ for D&D (certainly by the time I entered D&D it was unashamedly so).  I'll be interested to see how that transition plays out over the course of the magazine's life.

  • The issue starts out with an article by Gygax on the magic system in D&D.  It's not quite as informative as I would have hoped, but it does explain the choice of Vancian magic for the magic system.  (Interesting side note - the concept of a mana-based magic system was still a decade away.  Wikipedia says that the PC game Dungeon Master was the first game to include it.)  It also explains Vancian magic, as apparently many players did not understand the concept of spells having to be memorized and used up (which I can't blame them, given the very loose writing of the original boxed set).  Gygax also states that there is no intention to add any spell levels beyond 9th, a decision which codified an aspect of the game for decades to come.
  • While not D&D related, there's another humorous editorial on TSR's spat with Avalon Hill over which gaming convention is THE national convention - GenCon or Origins.  Then, in the first ever letter column, the very first letter goes to Gary Gygax, who writes even more about this issue!  Apparently TSR really had a chip on its shoulder over this.
  • The very first artifact for the game makes its appearance: the Cup and Talisman of Akbar ("Al'Akbar" in later material).
  • There's a brief table given without context that introduces adjustments to thief skills based on dexterity.  It also attempts to give thieves exceptional dexterity analogous to fighters' exceptional strength.
  • Gygax has another article basically shaming Monty haul DMs (although that term doesn't actually appear), saying they're not playing real D&D.  I have mixed feelings about this.  On the one hand I agree with him, as it's out of the spirit and intention of the game, but I'm also a big believer in people playing games the way they want to play them - if they enjoy the Monty haul style, more power to them.  Ultimately I think games should establish what "normal" play looks like, but ultimately rules should be our servant, not our master.
This issue also contained an add for the about-to-be-released Eldritch Wizardry supplement, and that's where our archaeological expedition takes us next.  I look forward to seeing you there.

No comments:

Post a Comment