The Caller and the Mapper

Iosue

Legend
The complete and seemingly permanent removal of the caller and mapper from the game is much higher.

The what now?
I've started a new thread to give this a fuller response.

In OD&D, AD&D, and Expert D&D (<- my more accurate alternative to "Basic D&D"), there were two roles that players could take on for the party.

The Caller's job was to keep track of what the party was doing and relay this information to the DM. Despite popular misconception, the caller never did this during combat. It was a turn-based role, not a round-based role. (Turn in this case meaning the unit of game time and action that typically represented 10 minutes.) Another misconception (admittedly fostered by the published examples of play) was that the caller was the "party leader" who could make unilateral decisions about what the party was doing, both individually and as a group. The caller essentially acted as a "commit button" for the players to the DM.

The mapper's job was to draw out, on graph or hex paper, a map of the dungeon or wilderness being explored, according to the DM's description. It was often a good idea to have at least two mappers, because the mapping was considered something being done by both player AND character, so if something happened to the character, it would happen to the group's map, as well. (This was part and parcel of the general fuzziness regarding IC and OOC in early play -- a topic for another post another time.)

One reason I lament the loss of these roles is because they existed due to D&D being not just a generic fantasy RPG, but rather a fantasy exploration RPG. So, in the course of play, you would have many people doing many different things. Someone's investigating a pile of rags in the corner, another is checking for secret doors, another is keeping lookout outside the door, etc. And since the goal of play was exploration of the dungeon or wilderness, a premium was put on efficiency and orderly play. (Mainly because, as just about everyone knows who's played, groups of players are seldom efficient and orderly as a rule.)

So, for example, a common issue is one of sequence. One player says, "I'm searching for secret doors!" The DM says, okay, and rolls their search die. The roll is successful! "I open it!" the player says immediately, revealing the monster lurking behind. The players now deal with the monster, without getting around to the actions the other people were doing. Or perhaps the most common pitfall -- the party enters a room, someone trips a trap, and then there's an argument/discussion about which players were inside the room vs. outside the room.

To be sure, these issues can easily be handled with an experienced DM who knows how to organize, prioritize, and sequentialize. But the caller allowed for the DM to focus on DM-stuff like reviewing the map and key, rolling wandering monsters, and other busywork, while the caller worked out with the players who was doing what where and when, and relayed that to the DM.

As for the mapper, IMXP few things really brought out the fun of an exploration game as starting out with a blank sheet of graph paper and watching as the map slowly took form, giving the players a tangible sense of their progress, as well as providing them with a physical thing they look over, analyze, and think about.

In my most recent groups, I've also utilized a Quartermaster -- someone who keeps track of who's carrying what, to facilitate the logistical side of exploration.

Some things have always remained the same in D&D. There are always fighters, magic-users, thieves, and clerics. Everyone always has the six ability scores. But exploratory focus of the game when I first started playing has largely fallen by the wayside. Forget callers and mappers, people don't even want to keep track of light-sources and simple encumbrance. So, on the those rare times when I'm inclined to feel sad about modern D&D, it's mostly along those lines. It is a major disconnect between myself and players who've started since the late-90s. In the 80s and early 90s, whether one preferred D&D or AD&D, whichever of the many diverse playstyles one might have settled into, the great many D&D players shared the common experiences of playing B2 and/or hating Bargle, the experience of mapping, and a good chance of having used callers.

That most post-2000 players don't have those shared experiences is not a knock on them or even on post-2000 editions. It just makes me feel old.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
Yes, you are old! :)

The role of the caller is a particularly interesting one as it also derives from the days when there could be very large groups playing the game. When you have 15-20 players, having someone to wrangle them all so the DM doesn't get overwhelmed is tremendously important. There are certainly times today when you've got a group of five or six players that behave like a group of squabbling cats that it would be very advantageous to use the Caller again. I have considered it at times.

The role of the mapper is a very specialist one which really shines when you're running a megadungeon - lots of windy passages, confusing layouts and (especially) secret rooms. With the move away from large dungeons to a more story-orientated (small) dungeon layout, it's not so important. It's interesting the change of focus when the DM draws the map himself. One drawback we've found with the mapper (which I have in my ongoing AD&D game) is that the game can become a dialogue between the mapper and the DM without the other players being involved. Once again, it's a matter of balance.

Cheers!
 

Jack Daniel

dice-universe.blogspot.com
Add a Quartermaster... brilliant!

I am DEFINITELY doing this for my next dungeon campaign. (And maybe finally I can keep the players' inventories and encumbrance figures straight beyond the time when players reach 4th level or so.)

I have a couple of players who love to map and love to call, and I can just picture now who will want to handle equipment (and, *rubs hands together connivingly*, unsplit treasure) for the party....
 

GMMichael

Guide of Modos
Wait, so OP is saying that PCs should do something beyond running one, single character?

This should be revolutionary. And it will also likely not appear in D&D 5e.

Why the heck not? Do I want PCs controlling the outcome of my story? No! Do I want them taking care of some logistics so I don't have to wipe their diapers? Yes please!

For the record, I have never had to wipe a PC's diaper. And many of them deserve such mature treatment.
 

pemerton

Legend
In the 80s and early 90s, whether one preferred D&D or AD&D, whichever of the many diverse playstyles one might have settled into, the great many D&D players shared the common experiences of playing B2 and/or hating Bargle, the experience of mapping, and a good chance of having used callers.
I have played D&D (B/X, AD&D, 2nd ed AD&D, 4e) with quite a few different people since the early 80s. I've done plenty of mapping (or seen it done) but have never encountered the use of a caller, or had it suggested by another participant that we should use one. I think the caller really went out of fashion very quickly (especially, as [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION] notes, because many groups weren't all that big).

Since the early 90s, though, at least in my own campaigns, mapping has been confined to sketch or line maps (if anything at all) so the players can have a general sense of the layout of an area. No graph paper mapping has taken place for a long time.

In my most recent groups, I've also utilized a Quartermaster -- someone who keeps track of who's carrying what, to facilitate the logistical side of exploration.
My group uses a party treasurer. The player's PC is a dwarf fighter Eternal Defender with a Handy Haversack, and so has an encumbrance limit probably equal to the rest of the party's put together, or more. So in game the PC is carrying all the treasure, and in the real world that player is meant to record it and keep track of distributing it from time to time. (I'm pretty sure errors are made and records not kept of everything they find. This would be a pretty big deal in more classic D&D play, but isn't such a big deal in 4e, especially when most "treasure" is in the form of GM-awarded item power-ups.)
 


Jan van Leyden

Adventurer
I have played D&D (B/X, AD&D, 2nd ed AD&D, 4e) with quite a few different people since the early 80s. I've done plenty of mapping (or seen it done) but have never encountered the use of a caller, or had it suggested by another participant that we should use one. I think the caller really went out of fashion very quickly (especially, as [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION] notes, because many groups weren't all that big).

The same experience, here. Even with a group of some 10 not overly disciplined players in AD&D 1e we didn't use a caller. Even today I can't see any sense in this role. It would make the game even slower, as the step of telling the caller and the caller telling pretty much the same contents to the DM should take more time. And the DM being free to concentrate on his tasks and notes would be pretty hard, when a dozen people are discussing their tacticts and precedures in the same room. Oh, and don't forget the players asking the DM for details.
 

Pickles JG

First Post
Wait, so OP is saying that PCs should do something beyond running one, single character?

This should be revolutionary. And it will also likely not appear in D&D 5e.

Why the heck not? Do I want PCs controlling the outcome of my story? No! Do I want them taking care of some logistics so I don't have to wipe their diapers? Yes please!

I am not sure if there is irony here?

The OP says nothing about running multiple characters & it would hardly be revolutionary being a feature of quite a bit of AD&D play & also of Ars Magica from 20 years ago.
It's not something I care for as I like to inhabit one character & that is hard enough without trying to be 2 people.


Did you really say you do not want the PCs controlling the outcome of your story? Are they merely along to spectate as you show us you great unpublished novelist skills?
Again this is a style of DMing/game structure I detest. PCs need to have agency.

As to logistics well I am not interested in bean counting in a game I want derring do, action, drama & funny dialogue.
 

Pickles JG

First Post
As to the original topic I have never seen a caller in 35 years. Mapping used to be common when exploration in the literal sense was more of a feature of the game. It was something I sometimes enjoyed, last in a 1e module run in 3.5, but that was very much a 2 player puzzle game played by myself & the DM. The whole idea of a caller seems to promote this with some players being more important than others.

Every party seems to generate a "quartermaster/treasurer" to do the admin no-one else really cares about (except in 4e or things like PFS where there is no party treasure). This is something I can do without as for some reason long lists of made up mundane "treasure" have lost their lustre of over the decades.

I am not very excited by the whole exploration pillar. I did however realise that the games I run can be very combat light & hve strethes where players are not interacting (with other characters) so I guess this would be exploration. Planning robberies, organising banquets, fixing livestock competitions & the like do not seem to happily fit under the title exploration.
 

reiella

Explorer
I don't really see mapping so much anymore. I think it's because of how often we use battle mats now though. As an overall group, we don't want to 'map' it twice.
 

Remove ads

Top