the NORAD command center at Cheyenne Mountain<\/a>, 2000 feet below the surface.<\/p>\nDwarves are known to live underground, so this seems to be an obvious connection to the Survivalist model. But there are some hidden implications that I’ll come to in the more speculative sections of this article.<\/p>\n
4. Hidden<\/h3>\n
Cheyenne Mountain is not a good example for this next Survivalist Trait, which can be seen as putting into practice the maxim that “a danger avoided is even better than one that can be overcome”. That’s because overcoming a danger inherently carries the risk of failing to do so, and inevitably consumes resources. When supplies may be hard to come by, either can be fatal.<\/p>\n
Consequently, survivalists don’t want the locations of their shelters to be widely-known, and may go to considerable lengths to conceal them. Every act of entry or egress poses a risk to that secrecy, so the most paranoid are likely to employ extraordinary practices to avoid detection.<\/p>\n
If we consider Dwarves as inhabiting such a shelter on a permanent or semi-permanent basis, it follows that they would be extremely paranoid about detection of their facilities when members of their society come and go. Trade would be conducted remotely some distance from their tunnels.<\/p>\n
5. Self-sufficiency<\/h3>\n
One danger to this secrecy comes from employing outsiders in the construction of the shelter. It follows that a poorly-done task done in secrecy by the individual is preferable to a more expert task done by some outsider.<\/p>\n
And, of course, being dependent on outside contractors for anything is problematic if the doomsday actually occurs. It is an inherent priority within the survivalist community that you be as self-sufficient as possible.<\/p>\n
That means learning to do everything you need to do, for yourself. If you are constructing a shelter and come across a task for which you are not currently skilled, the need to immediately become skilled in that task becomes a priority.<\/p>\n
Many survivalist shelters are likely to evolve over time – an initial version that’s “good enough for now” being modified at a later date when the survivalists’ skills have improved.<\/p>\n
Not enough attention tends to be paid by Survivalists, to my mind, to the social and psychological effects of isolation. This is a natural outgrowth of reliance on self-sufficiency, and is the major vulnerability of most doomsday preppers.<\/p>\n
If we postulate the entire Dwarven Race as Survivalists, this problem is irrelevant except in one respect: it establishes a limit to the functional value of the analogy.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, the inescapable logic demands that the society as a collective would be as self-sufficient as it could possibly be. Others might be able to do something better – Halflings might make the best furniture, for example, and while there is access to the outside world, those who could afford to do so would be free to buy the results of their expertise – but the Dwarves would be ready to do at least an adequate job on their own. At anything that they deem to be necessary.<\/p>\n
6. Practical Skills<\/h3>\n
It follows that the more broadly-defined a skill is, the more highly it would be valued. “Carpentry” is better than “Furniture Maker”, “Metalworking” is more useful because of it’s broader applicability than “Blacksmith” and much more useful than “Goldsmith”.<\/p>\n
The implication is that Dwarven creations would be utilitarian and minimalist, even ugly-but-effective. These are traits that are often assigned in fantasy societies to Orcish “craftsmen”, a note of passing interest.<\/p>\n
A further implication is that Practical skills would be valued over more abstract skills, but there is a subtle trap here that needs to be avoided: the misidentification of skills as “non-practical”. An example that highlights this is Accountancy. Many people would instinctively place it in the “abstract skills” category, but Bookkeeping is essential to any form of trade, and Payroll skills are likewise essential to any society with a financial underpinning. In a more medieval society, you might be able to do away with Payrolls and the principles of Higher Finance, but Bookkeeping would still be essential. Casually dispensing with Accountancy throws the practical baby out with the abstract bathwater.<\/p>\n
7. Survival Emphasis<\/h3>\n
Everything that a survivalist does is framed around the principle of enhancing their chances of survival – no matter what – to the greatest possible extent. There is a natural emphasis on hunting, fishing, and other outdoorsy activities and a demand to be highly skilled in these areas. Herbology and First Aid and the like also fall into this category.<\/p>\n
Most of these are lumped together in the D&D\/Pathfinder systems as “Survival”, with the option of breaking out one or more specialist activities if the GM so desires – is “Hunting” a separate skill or not? If so, does that imply that “Survival” teaches no<\/em> hunting ability, or is there an overlap? If there’s an overlap, how is that reflected in the mechanics, and is that the correct approach? Repeat that list of questions for the other skills I’ve mentioned, and perhaps, for more.<\/p>\n\nFor the record, my usual answers are: Yes, these skills are available as separate from Survival; and Yes, there is an overlap; “Survival” includes the basic fundamentals of the more specialist skill, but can’t be used in any specific capacity. A “Hunter” can devise a trap designed to appeal to a particular type of creature, using “Survival” means that you have to take pot luck. “Survival” lets you dig a simple pit trap and conceal it; “Hunter” lets you place one where you are more likely to trap prey, and construct it in such a manner that it is harder for the prey to escape from, once trapped. Where you are using “Survival” alone, the DCs for “Hunting” or “Fishing” or whatever are 10 higher than using the specialist skill.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
One particular case that is explicitly broken out from “Survival” is “Tracking”, and it puts this issue into perspective as something that the GM needs to think about with every<\/em> campaign. <\/p>\nThese facts would manifest in our Dwarven Society in some peculiar ways, because some skills would be just as essential and practical, while others would need to be supplanted with equivalents. This is analogous to a survivalist learning Hydroponics instead of Farming.<\/p>\n
The issue of food is one that I’ll return to a little later. For now, I want to continue focusing on the skills\/expertise subject.<\/p>\n
8. Weapons Proficient\/Arsenal<\/h3>\n
Most survivalists have an arsenal of weapons of different types, from knives to pistols to rifles of different types, and are proficient in their use. What’s more, weapons are in the “indispensable need” category – so survivalists become adept at creating their own weapons if necessary, at performing expert maintenance on their weapons, at making their own ammunition, etc.<\/p>\n
Most fantasy campaigns don’t have firearms; many treat Mages or Warlocks as substitutes because of their ranged combat capabilities. However, Dwarves are generally not considered to be great at Magic (usually to distinguish them from Elves), and that’s something that is at total odds with the Survivalist model.<\/p>\n
Until now, the Survivalist model hasn’t done that much beyond imparting color to the Dwarfish societies that derive from it. Here, for the first time, the model forces us to go beyond the usual view of the race.<\/p>\n
Survivalist Dwarves would naturally become proficient with the available types of weapons, especially those useful in close conditions. Axes, Hammers, Swords, and Knives fit the bill; pole-arms less so. Crossbows make a certain amount of sense; the greater range of effectiveness of longbows is wasted capability, and the greater potential for inflicting damage relative to short-bows would make them desirable. However, they are (relatively) complex and hence potentially unreliable, so I suspect that Crossbows would be discarded after an initial salvo and short-bows employed thereafter.<\/p>\n
But I can’t see, under these circumstances, how Dwarves would not seek to encourage proficiency in the arcane arts in anyone with the potential to learn them. This is probably not going to be magic as the surface world knows it, though there might be some parallels and overlap. It might be as simple as an emphasis on Warlocks over Wizards, or it might be Wizards with a slightly different spell list.<\/p>\n
My preference, from a strictly theoretical viewpoint, would probably be the latter, but digging up or creating suitable spells could be quite an involved process. It might even be necessary to remove certain spells from the main list, such as the “cloud” spells, where they make more sense in an underground or confined environment.<\/p>\n
In place of “fireball” they might have “explosion”, for example – the same basic description in terms of effects, but with concussion effects instead of fire-based effects.<\/p>\n
That then raises the question of finding another way to distinguish between Elves and Dwarves. Under this model, it might be only High Elves who consider Magic to be an acceptable career path; most Elves considering it to be unnatural. Those are more decisions for the GM to make – all I can do is put the problem on your radar.<\/p>\n
9. Hardy<\/h3>\n
Survivalists are generally considered to be relatively hardy. This is probably a cliche more than a reality, to at least some extent, though the principles of self-reliance mean that the survivalist would train to avoid being dependent on others for rescue from any given situation. If you break an arm or a leg, you have to deal with the problem yourself, and you have no time for self-pity. Splint it, take painkillers if necessary (but not so much that they distort your perceptions), and get yourself to safety. So there would be some foundation to the cliche, a basis in reality.<\/p>\n
This is another area in which the popular vision of Dwarves accords with the Survivalist model perfectly. Though I can’t help but throw a spanner in the works, at this point: once again, the examples that we see and that give rise to the perception of the Dwarfish race as unusually hardy might not be all that accurate a reflection on the race as a whole if the only examples that go above-ground are exemplars of this trait. It’s equally possible that Dwarves on average<\/em> are actually sickly and frail, but the only examples that anyone encounters are the rare ultra-fit and resilient members of the species!<\/p>\nThis is a lesson in making assumptions and assuming that the official sources are gospel that is worth absorbing even if you don’t adopt the Survivalist model. Don’t change things just for the sake of being different, but don’t be afraid to make changes that are sensible in light of the campaign and setting that you are using!<\/p>\n
10. Hard Currency<\/h3>\n
Survivalists like to stockpile hard currency that has some form of inherent value in the belief that the institutions that stand behind “soft money” might not be there tomorrow. Historically, this includes spices and salt.<\/p>\n
Dwarves, too, are often described as having great affection for Gold and Silver and other “hard currencies”. To some extent, the fact that everyone in most fantasy games uses these as the medium of exchange masks this trait, and the fact that these resources have to be mined from underground can be used to explain the rest, because the people most likely to, and most able to, extract them are Dwarves.<\/p>\n
Of course, the true origins of this trope of Dwarvishness are the Dwarves in The Hobbit, modified by the (historical) events of the Mines Of Moria in the Lord Of The Rings. But those are rarely Canonical within a campaign, so some other justification is needed for the trope if it is to be retained.<\/p>\n
The Survivalist Model doesn’t so much change behavior as it does alter the perceptions of that behavior. Under this model, Dwarves extract hard currency because other races find it valuable, and then trade as little of it as possible to maintain a strategic reserve against future need. From an outside perspective, this can easily look like hoarding it. But this is a note of distinctiveness that you, as GM, will need to make explicit through the attitudes of NPCs because it’s so easy to sweep it underneath the blanket justification given in the previous paragraph.<\/p>\n
A series of small encounters early in the campaign could be used to impart the revised perspective to the players and give an opportunity to discuss a ‘reset’ of the usual impression of the race. For example, the PCs come across a merchant who is counting the legs on his horses and the wheels on his wagon while getting out a set of scales to weigh the coins he has just been paid with. When they ask what he’s doing, he explains that he just sold (something) to a Dwarven Buyer, ending with the merchant exclaiming “Greedy-expletive-Dwarves!” – at which point, he should suddenly realize that there’s a Dwarf in the party (if there is), and eye them warily while making some sort of half-apology: “…no offense intended, of course”.<\/p>\n
11. Food Reserves<\/h3>\n
Another trope of Survivalism is that they have enough food stockpiled in some durable form to sustain them for as long as is necessary. No more trips to the Supermarket when civilization falls! <\/p>\n
\nThis is a point of social vulnerability that a lot of people aren’t sufficiently concerned over, in my opinion. In medieval times, cities stored enough foodstuffs that they could survive the winter with no food coming in at all. Much of their lives in the warmer seasons revolved around harvesting and preserving sufficient supplies to last the frigid season, and crop failures were a real danger.<\/p>\n
Industrialization made the transport of goods much easier, and these reserves began to steadily decline. Until the advent of home refrigeration in the 1950s and 60s, cities normally held enough food to last the residents for 4-6 weeks, about half a winter.<\/p>\n
Over the years since, that has steadily declined, and in the modern era where fresh produce is more desirable than preserved, and where every last efficiency has been squeezed out of the system, most cities hold just a week of reserves on the shelves of their supermarkets. From the point of view of the supermarket, their inventory is dead money – they have spent it, and won’t be reimbursed for it until the produce is sold. The smaller these reserves, the less of their capital is tied up, doing nothing. Somewhere in the near future – some sources have quoted 2020, others 2050 – it is estimated that the reserves will diminish to a mere 3 days worth.<\/p>\n
Of course, purchasing is not uniform – some weeks, everyone wants lemons, or carrots, or whatever. As these reserves shrink, and the emphasis becomes more and more about stock turnover, it becomes more and more frequent for something to be out of stock when you do your shopping. <\/p>\n
There was a time when the ambition was to have enough stock on the shelves that any reasonable demand could always be satisfied. Then that was eroded to “the usual levels of demand”, making space for a greater variety of goods. Now it’s “the usual levels of demand until the next shipment arrives”, making space for still greater variety.<\/p>\n
This represents an increased dependence on transport infrastructure, a point of vulnerability that has not escaped the attention of survivalists.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
One of the ever-present problems to verisimilitude in a fantasy environment is “what do the underground-dwelling races eat?”<\/p>\n
Halflings are no problem – they have farms on the surface. Dwarves and Drow provide a more substantial challenge.<\/p>\n
You may be able to pay lip service to the problem by suggesting mushrooms and underground rivers and the like, and ignoring the fact that these don’t permit farming on a sufficient scale to provide for a substantial population. There also needs to be some adjustment of attitudes to food variety, and you need to simplify biochemistry to dispense with the notion of nutrients. “Food is food and automatically provides everything you need for health,” in other words.<\/p>\n
The ecology of the food chains that provide for these races has to either be tossed aside as glibly as possible, or the GM needs to invest a LOT of deep thought into resolving the issue – time that could probably be deployed onto something more productive in terms of the campaign.<\/p>\n
The Survivalist model makes that a lot harder to do, by virtue of the food reserves trope. It’s entirely possible for Dwarves to have been living off the reserves that were initially brought into their tunnels for centuries, supplemented by the occasional source of fresh produce and mushroom cultivation and fishing underground rivers and lakes – but those supplies won’t last forever, and it’s far more credible for them to have either run out completely or be almost all gone than for there to still be plenty.<\/p>\n
This would be an unimaginably profound crisis within Dwarven Society, one capable of rocking the social foundations to the core. If you were the leader of such a society, would you tell your citizens that they were facing incipient starvation – or would you keep it a state secret and resort to desperate measures to replenish your supplies as secretly as possible? Either way, the Survivalist Model leads to a crisis in Dwarven Society.<\/p>\n
As usual, there are three alternatives to consider:<\/p>\n
\n- The problem has been solved, and the crisis is historical,<\/strong><\/em> which requires you to work out what the solution is; it may be something that common Dwarves would find socially unacceptable or repugnant (the Soylent Green<\/a> scenario), and this might be the focus of an adventure or of the entire campaign.<\/li>\n
- The Crisis is current, and the problem is partially or completely unsolved,<\/strong><\/em> which implies that the PCs are going to have to find a solution. Again, if I were the leader of such a society, I would surreptitiously dip into the currency reserves to secretly trade with the outside for more food as a stop-gap – but that will only last for so long, it’s putting off the inevitable. This problem is going to be a featured element of the campaign, even if the PCs are not directly involved.<\/li>\n
- The Crisis is coming, but has been recognized in time to solve it – <\/em><\/strong><\/em>probably by means of some draconian measures. Like starting wars to thin out the population, or exiling some Dwarves to the surface to resume farming, or conquering some surface race for slave labor to farm for the Dwarves in sufficient quantity to replenish the stockpiles – preferably without your dirty political laundry becoming public amongst your followers. Once again, this will be a featured element within the campaign.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
These examples clearly demonstrate that you can have an (ignorant) Dwarf in the party and make the Dwarves the villains of the campaign. You could even have the surface world enjoying a golden age that is about to come crashing down around everyone’s ears.<\/p>\n
There are lots of ways to play this issue, but the repercussions clearly make this a central aspect of any campaign run using the Survivalist Dwarves’ Model.<\/p>\n
\nIn my very first D&D campaign, I solved this problem with the use of edible crystals which the Dwarves farmed. At the time, I didn’t perceive the plot potential of the situation, just the challenge to verisimilitude. If you don’t want to explore these issues, you can do something similar to evade the problem – just be aware of what you are throwing away.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
12. Hoarding<\/h3>\n
Anything you can’t make – and your time will be limited – has to be stockpiled in advance, and in sufficient quantities to last the duration of the emergency. Hoarding and Survivalism go hand-in-hand.<\/p>\n
That’s less of an issue in a non-technological age, because there are fewer critical supplies, but that doesn’t make the issue go away completely. Leather and Cloth for new clothes, for example, would continue to be needed.<\/p>\n
But, in general, once you’ve built up your reserves, you can draw on them and trade for replenishments, because these are not consumed at the same frequency as food supplies. <\/p>\n
However, it is incumbent on you to make a few key decisions: How many Dwarves are there, what do they need per year, how long is the shelter supposed to be able to survive if replenishment is no longer possible, and how large do the storage caverns need to be to accommodate the resulting stockpiles?<\/p>\n
Once again, these issues are usually conveniently ignored by the GM, but the survivalist trope shines a spotlight in their direction.<\/p>\n
13. Evolution?<\/h3>\n
This starts moving into the more speculative aspects of the Survivalist Model. It seems natural for the Dwarves to start with more normal humanoid dimensions and to have been underground long enough for natural selection to have evolved them into the current physiology.<\/p>\n
This makes the assumption that a Dwarf’s smaller stature is not the result of malnutrition, whereas that is a profound influence in the real world. The perception of Asians as short stems principally from this phenomenon, for example.<\/p>\n
But the African Pygmy shows that it’s not the entirety of the story, and provides a plausible time-span for such evolution. The popular perception is that they branched off in the late Stone Age, but this view has “no archaeological support and ambiguous support from genetics and linguistics” according to various sources. Genetics suggests more firmly that the divergence occurred roughly 60,000 years ago.<\/p>\n
60,000 years is an improbable time-span for supplies to have lasted. If the Dwarves migrated underground that long ago, the problems cited earlier would have overwhelmed the society by now. Either we need to drive evolution at a faster rate, or discard the notion that Dwarfish proportions are the results of their underground lifestyle.<\/p>\n
\nChallenging An Assumption<\/h5>\n
How long have African Pygmies been possessed of their short stature? By using the 60,000 year number, we are assuming that they have only just reached that point in their racial existence.<\/p>\n
Well, we have some information that we can apply to answer this question. There are two different population groups of African Pygmies, known as Western and Eastern – and the division occurred about 20,000 years ago. That means that only 40,000 years at most<\/em> were needed for this trait to become entrenched in the population.<\/p>\nIt beggars tolerance for coincidence that this should have happened just before the division – it makes far more sense for it to have happened already. We can plausibly knock off a quarter of that 40,000 years with this factor alone, at least speculatively. So that’s 30,000 years.<\/p>\n
Accelerating Evolution<\/h5>\n
It seems to me that placing an organism into a new environment which naturally selects for a particular trait – in this case, smaller stature and broader musculature – would drive evolution at a far greater rate than having this occur as a natural divergence. How substantial a factor this would be is unknown, but it certainly suggests that it is plausible to cut that time-frame massively. Perhaps by half, perhaps to a fifth or a tenth.<\/p>\n
Enhancing Nature<\/h5>\n
And none of this makes any allowance for artificially goosing development, though in a world with Gods and Magic, that’s a factor that can never be completely ignored. That alone could halve or quarter the time requirement.<\/p>\n
The Combination<\/h5>\n
Okay, so the basis is down to 30,000 years from changing assumptions. Accelerating evolution drops that to 15,000, or 6,000, or even 3,000 years. Enhancing natural development could drop those numbers to 3,750 years, or 1500 years, or even 750 years.<\/p>\n
THOSE are plausible numbers for how long it took the Dwarves to assume their current stature, especially the last two. Since it seems equally improbable for everything to have worked perfectly to achieve the outcome in the shortest possible time, I would choose the 1500 years. That even leaves enough margin that they can have had their current dimensions for a plausible length of time, say 500-1000 years.<\/p>\n
The Engineering Implications<\/h5>\n
This would be reflected in the engineering of the Dwarves. Their oldest tunnels and rooms would be reflective of their original proportions, declining (because digging is hard work, as noted earlier) as their stature reduces. You should be able to estimate how new a tunnel or chamber is by its height.\n<\/ul>\n
14. Population Growth and Rationing<\/h3>\n
Living on reserves becomes more difficult in the long term if your number of citizens is not carefully controlled. A certain rate of growth could be factored in, but everything becomes simpler without it. I can easily foresee a situation in which population is tightly controlled and food strictly rationed.<\/p>\n
It takes two people to form a couple, so the optimum in terms of generational replacement would be for each couple to have two children. But, statistically, you would need to be careful of gender imbalance – so it might be necessary to temporarily increase that rate in order to preserve the gender representation, and then reduce it later. In addition, you need to replace any losses through accident or act of violence.<\/p>\n
If I were setting up such a system for real, it would take the form of a minimum number of children permitted per couple plus a lottery system for the balance. In addition, some additional children would be allocated as rewards for exemplary service to the community or achievement. This is the fairest system that I can envisage.<\/p>\n
Of course, an ongoing problem would be the issue with having unauthorized children. This can be discouraged by rationing food and other supplies by family unit and not per person, but that punishes the child for the parents’ crime, something that offends my sense of justice.<\/p>\n
A far better punishment is for some of the lottery “tickets” (or equivalents) to be marked differently to show that the recipients would<\/em> have been winners if not for an unauthorized birth, then gather those receiving such tickets and the unauthorized parents together for the latter to explain themselves to the former. This social humiliation spares the child (at least in theory) while punishing those actually responsible. Backing that up with some sort of Community Service would complete the picture. Repeated offenses, of course, might demand more extreme punishment, up to and even potentially including expulsion from the community – creating additional slots for the next lottery.<\/p>\nThese are indicative of the types of social issues that would derive from the Survivalist Model. There may be others that I haven’t thought of, and you might choose different punishments or even an entirely different method of restricting population growth.<\/p>\n
Of course, these need to be interpreted in context. If there is a supply crisis, as discussed earlier, expulsion to the surface might be appropriate for a first offense – and for lesser offenses as well.<\/p>\n
Completing the Survivalist Model<\/h3>\n
The Survivalist Model impacts on Dwarves in three ways: it places some elements of the race into a new perspective, it imposes additional requirements on the social structure of the race, and it pushes the race (in some ways) outside the traditional envelope.<\/p>\n
Or, to put it another way: The first provides enough parallels and commonalities to establish the credibility of the model, the second described ramifications and repercussions that do not conflict with established racial canon, and the third deals with the implications that take the race beyond that canon, justifying the effort involved.<\/p>\n
Dwarves as Survivalists works. And – from memory – there were three, maybe four completely distinct campaigns that derive from that concept, without stretching hard. Which, in my book, justifies the effort involved in this article!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Long-time readers of Campaign Mastery will know that I love concepts that re-imagine standard game elements like races and classes through the prism of a completely new context. During a conversation at the game table a month or two back, I found just such a new context for a staple D&D\/Pathfinder race, Dwarves. Traditionally, D&D […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[65,67,158,159,125,74,89,93,94,97],"tags":[106,107,108,155,284,127,172,286,218,141],"series":[],"class_list":["post-22096","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-campaign-creation","category-dnd","category-one-faith","category-seeds-of-empire","category-house-rules","category-mike","category-npcs-etc","category-rules","category-ideas-and-inspiration","category-world-design","tag-campaign-background","tag-campaign-setting","tag-campaigns","tag-dd","tag-house-rules","tag-inspiration","tag-npcs","tag-opinion","tag-pathfinder","tag-races"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1toiD-5Ko","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22096"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22096"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22096\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22106,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22096\/revisions\/22106"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22096"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22096"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22096"},{"taxonomy":"series","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/series?post=22096"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"Underground](\"https:\/\/www.campaignmastery.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/06\/underground-passage-or-shelter-1203886.jpg\")