tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post7358137265499532037..comments2024-03-29T00:32:33.920-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: OD&D Thoughts & ObservationsJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-53022255678212846842009-07-28T11:44:05.930-04:002009-07-28T11:44:05.930-04:00Lest anyone think me a Gygax-fetishist, here's...Lest anyone think me a Gygax-fetishist, here's a point in favour of the professionalisation of RPG design that has happened since the old days: Robin Laws <a href="http://robin-d-laws.livejournal.com/363292.html" rel="nofollow">explains</a> why rules support should be a controlled affair.<br /><br />Granted, his approach doesn't necessarily prevent situations like the Gygax-on-alignment one, where conceptions evolve slowly through a variety of differrent takes, but it should help minimize outright self-contradiction.richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13517340075234811323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57084133698943141432009-07-22T21:55:59.741-04:002009-07-22T21:55:59.741-04:00@Adam Thornton
AC in Yoynich--descending or ascen...@Adam Thornton<br /><br />AC in Yoynich--descending or ascending? Maybe that explains the demise of the Templars or perhaps the Albigensian Crusade?Rustyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01786312855250456688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-15856176856980806812009-07-22T20:16:10.587-04:002009-07-22T20:16:10.587-04:00I see the sense of giving fighters the dex bonus. ...I see the sense of giving fighters the dex bonus. It just feels like it takes some crumbs away from others who don't get platemail and such. Not just the thief (the PC most likly to have high dex), but the occasional MU or Illusionist who cannot wear armor but might have a high dex - their only chance to have anything but 10 AC.Kevin Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14122665488285424578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-17483661782869008912009-07-22T18:38:56.741-04:002009-07-22T18:38:56.741-04:00Jason,
I switched back to OD&D because I kept...Jason,<br /><br />I switched back to OD&D because I kept finding myself changing things in S&W to make them more like OD&D and I figured why not just go whole hog? I'm also in the process of re-writing the LBBs + supplements into a document that's pretty close to "<i>D&D</i> 0.75e" and, as you'd expect, it's pretty close to OD&D when it comes a number of things.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-59964451737531051822009-07-22T18:36:20.270-04:002009-07-22T18:36:20.270-04:00Brunomac,
I like it because it simultaneously ena...Brunomac,<br /><br />I like it because it simultaneously enables me to avoid bonus inflation, something I like about OD&D over its descendants, especially <i>AD&D</i>, and it makes the fighting man stand out as the true master of combat.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-13086234128421847252009-07-22T12:11:49.968-04:002009-07-22T12:11:49.968-04:00In fairness, I consider every time James finds an...In fairness, I consider every time James finds an assumption to question a personal victory for my goal, that being an understanding between the old ways and the new.Rachel Ghoulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04765944479141792643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27119420605453717452009-07-22T10:50:54.023-04:002009-07-22T10:50:54.023-04:00I tend to agree very much with about 95% of what J...I tend to agree very much with about 95% of what James says here regarding OD&D, and more than once I've looked to his writings for inspiration or explanation of some element of OD&D I can't quite grasp. In fact, it was this very blog, along with Philotomy's musings, that set me on my own quest to reconcile OD&D with Chainmail (a quest that is coming along swimmingly on my own blog). <br /><br />James: I noted that you're no longer listing Swords & Wizardry in your "Now Playing" and have gone back to OD&D. Any reason for that? Just curious.The Grey Elfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14696474020129732936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-46999617569874989752009-07-22T00:26:25.419-04:002009-07-22T00:26:25.419-04:00How odd. Just yesterday, I posted about how I wil...How odd. Just yesterday, I posted about how I will probably rip out all of the ability score bonuses next time I run D&D.Talysmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02162328521343832412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-40889904634470654732009-07-21T23:54:11.651-04:002009-07-21T23:54:11.651-04:00Actually, you've got it exactly backwards on t...Actually, you've got it exactly backwards on the Voynich, as Randall Munroe points out:<br /><br />http://www.xkcd.com/593/<br /><br />AdamAdam Thorntonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06368676086759298705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-5941330318584954362009-07-21T21:44:36.726-04:002009-07-21T21:44:36.726-04:00What is left out of WB that's in the LBBs?
A ...<i>What is left out of WB that's in the LBBs?</i><br /><br />A bunch of dungeoneering procedures including: chances to open stuck doors, chances to find secret passages, standard trap rules, handling area damage in confined spaces (e.g. fireball in a narrow corridor), standard surprise rules and encounter distances, reaction rules, chases, rules to shake or distract pursuit, falling (two optional systems), swimming & drowning, hireling loyalty, languages. Then there is the whole section on wilderness travel, naval & aerial combat.<br /><br />To be fair, S&W Core added a fair chunk of this stuff back in its 2nd edition (but WB has yet to be so revised), but other bits are still left out. In some cases like the naval rules, because they never appeared in later editions, and thus are hard to justify under the OGL, but in other cases I think it's just a desire to imagine that the LBBs had less explicit procedure than it actually did.Rafialhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07077298546098373938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-411913398248910572009-07-21T21:12:14.190-04:002009-07-21T21:12:14.190-04:00Keep the combat on the dry erase mats people! ;)&l...Keep the combat on the dry erase mats people! ;)<<br /><br />Almost anybody here who doesn't say something like "...I agree, I feel that way too, James" risks getting some heat.<br /><br />I'd like to think that James would rather get some weighty feedback, neg. or pos. rather than a reader just agreeing with what he said. Personally, I admire James for some of his stuff, and some of his stuff I sneer at. So far in reading the posts here I've seen a dude being called a troll just for not agreeing (in a passionate manner, but I would not call it flaming). This is not an ass-kiss fest. It's a place for discussing both sides of the coin (IMHO).Kevin Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14122665488285424578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-21094872506091340842009-07-21T21:02:47.446-04:002009-07-21T21:02:47.446-04:00Originally, only fighting men benefited from high ...Originally, only fighting men benefited from high Dexterity in terms of being harder to hit. I must say I rather like this approach."<br /><br /><br />Why?Kevin Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14122665488285424578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-65399380321088516142009-07-21T20:23:56.196-04:002009-07-21T20:23:56.196-04:00Prior to Supplement I: Greyhawk, none of the prime...<i>Prior to Supplement I: Greyhawk, none of the prime requisite scores did anything other than provide an experience boost, and all of the non-prime requisites did something else. Not so?</i><br /><br>That's correct. I just find it interesting that both STR and INT were given more mechanical benefits and WIS was not.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-41838597640598336392009-07-21T20:20:51.345-04:002009-07-21T20:20:51.345-04:00[As far as I can tell, the nature of magic armour ...<i>[As far as I can tell, the nature of magic armour is not explicitly defined in OD&D (the exceptions being from Greyhawk which explicitly defines Armor of Etherealness as being plate, and that +4 and +5 armor is made out of mithril and adamantium respectively).]</i><br /><br>It's not in the LBBs so far as I can tell. However, the "Magic Armor Effects" table in Supplement I strongly implies that all magic armor is plate, since it notes without comment that "Armor +1" and a shield is AC 1, which makes no sense unless the armor in question is plate.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-17958772438609021272009-07-21T20:04:57.614-04:002009-07-21T20:04:57.614-04:00RE: bullet point about Wisdom:
Prior to Supplemen...RE: bullet point about Wisdom:<br /><br />Prior to Supplement I: Greyhawk, none of the prime requisite scores did anything other than provide an experience boost, and all of the non-prime requisites did something else. Not so?Rodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13049576082482175075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-92048214351182748262009-07-21T18:59:14.357-04:002009-07-21T18:59:14.357-04:00I suppose I wouldn't have known any better if ...I suppose I wouldn't have known any better if you hadn't posted that, but now that I do... What is left out of WB that's in the LBBs?<br /><br />Word verificationL rhirripi (no idea what this might mean, but it sounds like a great name for a D&D monster, no?)metamorphosissigmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18163514061779555557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-35486876836531539762009-07-21T18:34:40.581-04:002009-07-21T18:34:40.581-04:00I'm amused by accusations of SW: White Box bei...I'm amused by accusations of SW: White Box being "too finished" when it actually <i>leaves out</i> a whole swath of explicit rules and procedures from the LBBs. :)Rafialhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07077298546098373938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-2704610203462803802009-07-21T17:20:54.122-04:002009-07-21T17:20:54.122-04:00@Korgoth
So much of what is there in OD&D is ...@Korgoth<br /><br /><i>So much of what is there in OD&D is merely potential, waiting to be actualized. Each Ref will actualize it differently. To me that's part of the joy of it.</i><br /><br />I have no problem with this in principle, but in reality I am a stay-at-home parent with two young boys and a workaholic wife, and DM of a group that insists on playing D&D 3.0. It's all I can do to prepare for each semi-weekly session by scanning through the published AD&D 1e module I'll be using and determining what I need to convert from 1e to 3.0 in advance and what I can get away with fudging on the fly. I just haven't got the time or energy to figure out how I want to interpret the rules on top of it all. I just want to get a general sense of what all the fuss is about, which from what you say S&W: WB seems admirably suited to provide. <br /><br />If anyone's curious, 3.0 on their side of the screen and AD&D on mine works out okay most of the time (and since I refuse to play their version and they refuse to play mine, it's all I got). I ignore their skill rolls and make them describe what they're doing, while not beating them over the head with the fact that I'm ignoring their skill rolls (of course hilarity ensues when a player states "I search the chest" (trapped), rolls a natural 20, and I respond, "You don't find anything," and they open it). Sorry for rambling.metamorphosissigmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18163514061779555557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-5350202517561814242009-07-21T16:51:32.541-04:002009-07-21T16:51:32.541-04:00@Thalmen:
I think S&W:WB is nice, but it is a...@Thalmen:<br /><br />I think S&W:WB is nice, but it is a bit "finished" for my taste. One of the interesting things about OD&D is that so much is open to interpretation. So the Ref can begin a sentence with "Here's how we're going to do Hit Dice this time..." without necessarily throwing everyone for a loop.<br /><br />So much of what is there in OD&D is merely potential, waiting to be actualized. Each Ref will actualize it differently. To me that's part of the joy of it.<br /><br />In addition to running EPT, I'm playing in a Mentzer-based Classic campaign... my second one in recent years. It's OK, but I find it so staid and dull... the rules are the same every session. There are few judgment calls or situational cases. It's all so standardized.<br /><br />One of my players for EPT last night, a guy who is an excellent player but a firm 3E enthusiast, was momentarily frustrated by the lack of a mechanic for "charging". "Why can't we acknowledge mechanics from the last 30 years?!" was his angry complaint before I even really said anything. But my approach was to ask him what he wanted to do... then I'd make a ruling. In the end, he got to do what he wanted to do and was able to choose among options. That to me is how it should work... you say what you want to do and the Ref makes a reasonable call on how that works. No need for a thick rules manual... I can always play a wargame if I want that.<br /><br />Word verification: wings<br />!Korgothhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04683370654357044679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-34622055170025872882009-07-21T16:49:54.290-04:002009-07-21T16:49:54.290-04:00Where did you find the comment that all magic armo...Where did you find the comment that all magic armour is platemail?<br /><br />[As far as I can tell, the nature of magic armour is not explicitly defined in OD&D (the exceptions being from <i>Greyhawk</i> which explicitly defines Armor of Etherealness as being plate, and that +4 and +5 armor is made out of mithril and adamantium respectively).]Reverance Pavanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01217657347160811310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-42244641123824320432009-07-21T16:25:24.310-04:002009-07-21T16:25:24.310-04:00@Andreas, yeah, it's James blog, but it's ...@Andreas, yeah, it's James blog, but it's perfectly acceptable for the community at large to call someone out on bad behavior. Think of it as nature's way of ensuring fairness! <br /><br />That said, from my chair I haven't too much more than "really poor attitude" here or there in this particular thread--which is subjective in any case. One's rapier wit, is another's snarky troll.<br /><br />The Grog-o-sphere has been filled with a lot of anxiousness of late. It might behoove everyone to take an extra breath before hitting the 'publish your comment' button.<br /><br />Keep the combat on the dry erase mats people! ;)Jayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07997164906328234122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-83239927906237784242009-07-21T15:49:33.704-04:002009-07-21T15:49:33.704-04:00I didn't. I really do want to know what Wally ...I didn't. I really do want to know what Wally thinks is worthy. The rest was brush-clearing: trying to make my own position on archaeology of knowledge clear.richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13517340075234811323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-58522056462060010872009-07-21T15:33:35.375-04:002009-07-21T15:33:35.375-04:00James is, of course, perfectly capable of defendin...<i><br />James is, of course, perfectly capable of defending himself against foul-mouthed trolling, and I will not presume to do it for him.</i><br /><br />Then don't do it!AndreasDavourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17170806742393291962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-50921160468736442392009-07-21T15:31:01.235-04:002009-07-21T15:31:01.235-04:00I've read many old wargaming rules, and while ...I've read many old wargaming rules, and while many of them is quite dense and badly explained not all of them are. I just read Chainmail and compared it to other rules sets I've read upon that subject matter. My impression is that Gary just wasn't very good at organizing his thoughts. <br /><br />I've claimed that since I first saw the 1st ed PHB and still think so.AndreasDavourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17170806742393291962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-51562443836757485582009-07-21T15:23:34.594-04:002009-07-21T15:23:34.594-04:00As a satisfied AD&Der, I have seldom (but not ...As a satisfied AD&Der, I have seldom (but not never) felt the urge to take spade in hand and exhume OD&D in order to see if a more "primitive" (in the strictly archeological sense, don't take it as a value judgment) form of the game suits me. Traditionally, my excuse has been the prohibitively high (for me) cost to acquire the rules, even before EGG's and DA's passing put the OCE cost into the hundreds of $. But now I find myself ever so slightly intrigued by the charming little idiosyncracies and later-to-be-filled lacunae. I therefore just purchased S&W (White Box version) from Lulu so I can find out what all the fuss is about. I probably won't convert, but at worst it'll give me a better appreciation of why I like AD&D so much.metamorphosissigmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18163514061779555557noreply@blogger.com