[D&D as conflict simulation] Muster: A Primer For War (first impressions)

I'm excited about Eero Tuovinen's new book "Muster - A Primer for War. Advice for playing D&D the wargaming way!" (Muster - Arkenstone Publishing | DriveThruRPG.com) and want to share my first impressions and ask for yours.

I'm not much of an art guy normally but the art immediately grabbed me. I may wind up printing this one out.

I'm also impressed by the clarity of the layout/organization and by the fact that he immediately contextualizes it with Kriegspiel and open-ended conflict simulation. I can totally imagine myself printing out the Manifesto section to routinely hand to new players to inform them what my game is about, which of the 8 types of fun I intend to serve. I love how the work positions gaining insight as a core motivation for play:

D&D is a roleplaying game that is also a wargame. Its philosophical basis is in conflict simulation gaming of the war-gaming tradition. The principles we insist upon here are only novel compared to other types of roleplaying games.

Wargaming originates in the 19th century as a hobby and training tool of military men. Its creative ideals are about learning and sportsmanship; we play to understand conflict dynamics, learn culture and science, and grow in the contest.

Although this may often be ignored today, D&D remains one of the high achievements of wargaming.

Yes! A thousand times yes!

I'm getting new ideas for my game already, just from pondering the manifesto. What if I made my Dungeon Fantasy dungeons (hexcrawls) increase in realism as you go deeper (northward), instead of increasing in difficulty? What if going deeper (northward) is how you give the DM permission to stop telegraphing danger, introducing monsters in small numbers before encountering them in large numbers, following the Three Clue rule, and avoiding effective-but-unfun traps and security protocols (like magical claymores that obliterate you with overkill, instead of just scaring you with medium damage)? What if player actions can signal the GM to stop doing the things that make it a fun game, and start doing the things to make it more of a realistic conflict simulator?

Those are my first impressions. What are yours?
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Another idea I just had: if the GM's job at the end of the session is to "score" the players' actions by handing out character points (or XP)... then in some scenarios, I should hand out character points for retreating! If retreat is a wise course of action given what has just been learned about the opposition, I should reward that intelligent decision the same as any other intelligent decision.

This might also make it more interesting to GM, because you're taking on the role of critical reviewer/mentor instead of a neutral observer. Commenting on player decisions would be welcome and expected after the delve is over, instead of feeling like interference.

I would still want to rotate GMs frequently though. Now I'm excited to try this as a method for awarding CP. I can't wait to plop down a spellcasting dragon and then reward the players for wisely hiding until it goes away. (Or killing it, if they manage to do so through other wise decisions, such as luring it into traps they found elsewhere or having meteoric iron bodkin arrows.) I have the soul of both a designer and a teacher, so the chance to design scenarios for people to learn from excites me.

An Advertisement