* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Lets talk OOP versions Started at 07-28-04 02:51 AM by Gandalf_Istari Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=283711 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 07-28-04 02:51 AM Thread Title : Lets talk OOP versions I started playing D&D back when I was maybe 10 or 11. I think my first version of D&D was the 1981 boxed set: http://www.acaeum.com/DDIndexes/SetPages/SetScans/Basic8th.html However, I remember at some point I owned this set as well, so it might have been my first edition of D&D: http://www.acaeum.com/DDIndexes/SetPages/SetScans/Basic2Rule.html Regardless, Basic D&D was the game that I originally started out on. For some reason I can't for the life of me even remember how I first got interested in the darn game, or was able to procure my first copy of the game. I can remember some play sessions with neighborhood kids back in the day (hey we killed Zues in 6th grade!), but really my memories of my Basic D&D days are dimly remembered as the time of my youth is now long since buried in the murky depths of the past. One thing that always stuck in my mind from my Basic days was that class and race were basically (ahem) the same thing, and that there were only three alignments. I do remember having loads of fun though, and I guess thats whats important. Then everything changed when I got my grubby little teenage fingers onto my first 1e PHB. The 1e PHB may well have been the very first hardcover book that I ever owned, if my memory serves. By this time I was a bit older, and 1st edition was certainly a perfect fit for me at the time. 1e provided all kinds of new options and ideas that more than likely truly hooked me into this game for the past 20+ years. Perhaps if 1e hadn't come out when it did, at the age I was at, I may well have tossed my old Basic D&D set aside and never looked back. Keep in mind that I didn't come from a rich family, so a hardcover book was quite the layout dollar wise, which usually meant that they were birthday or Christmas presents. In retrospect I realize how important so many Dragon articles etc. were in the devolpment of an *Advanced* Dungeons and Dragons, and that many people were probably doing all kinds of niftly things with Basic D&D; but in my early teen years I rarely was able to buy a Dragon Mag, so until 1e came out it I really was unaware that D&D was being expanded upon by both its developers and its player base. I had no wargaming experience whatsoever, so in my youth D&D Basic and then 1e AD&D were my total exposure to the gaming world (beyond Monopoly or whatnot). 1e for me brought into play so many new options and dimensions for playing D&D that the truly ingenious notion of "limitless adventure" really sunk in back then. Sure, over the years campaigns and adventures can grow stale, but there are always new ones to begin, and new fun to be had. Truly the game is limited only by the imagination. With 1e, there were now all the options for outdoor campaigns, deities, mounted and flying combat, tons of magic items and artifacts, adventure ideas and hooks, info on medieval settings that could be used for campaign ideas, more spells than you could shake a stick at, and perhaps best of all, the idea that a game of D&D consisted of more than just a dungeon romp. I'm sure that other people played Basic D&D back in the day and did all those things I listed as having come into play for me with 1e, but for me I was still in grade school when I played Basic and thus it consisted mostly of hack and slash dungeon expeditions, with little story, plot, or roleplaying elements. But as I moved into my teenage years, my friends and I began to realize more out of the game and it went from being a glorified board game for us to becoming another world in which we could spend a Saturday afternoon having fun in. At the point that 2e was starting to come out, I had made the decision to stick with my 1e edition, as it had always served me well and so I saw no reason to change over. Of course, by the time 2e came on the market, I was finishing high school and working full time, so I could have afforded the new books, but I just felt that 1e had always worked for me and my friends and so no point in changing. Then once the tons and tons of 2e books came out, I was glad that I hadn't made the switch, as it seemed to me that TSR back in the day was trying to milk its patrons for as much as they could get (Just my opinion at the time). After high school I decided against going to college and continued to work full time. I played 1e when I could get the chance, but finding players began to get harder as I was living in the "grown up" world of work, bills, etc. Then in the mid-90's I lost my substantial D&D collection (and alot of other books) in a fire, and spent about 8 years or so without gaming at all. It wasn't until I decided to go to college a few years ago that I ran into some people who were playing 3e, and so played that version for awhile. However, I really didn't care for 3e very much, and have since returned to my roots. I am currently working on a hybrid version of the game for my own house rules campaign, a homebrew of rules that (I hope) is taking alot of the best from 1e/2e and combining them. Sometimes however I consider whether it would be fun to grab a copy of Basic D&D in one of its incarnations and just play a "rules lite" version of the game. Probably I'll stick to my 1e/2e hybrid, but now that my wife and I have our first child coming, maybe in a few years I'll be grabbing a Basic edition to teach my children how to play the game. So, there's my story, and a few reasons I play the version(s) I play. What about you? ***** Probably a topic thats been done many times, but hey I like beating dead horses... Anyways, lets talk about OOP versions. Which version did you start with? What got you interested enough to buy/borrow/beg/steal that version that you started on? What did you like about the version you started on? What didn't you like about the version you started on? What version do you play now? Why do you play the version you play now? What makes the version you play now better than the version you started with (if they are different)? What could have been improved in the version you are currently playing, or what parts do you house rule that you don't like in your current OOP version? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : vader42xx Date : 07-28-04 03:30 AM Wow, that's a pretty epic post. :) I started with the well known "red boxed set" basic edition. My Mom got me into the game actually and picked it up for me when I was nine. Before that I had no gaming experience at all. And, really, I had very little experience outside basic (which I then just called D&D). No wargaming, no buying new products (except when each new boxed set came out to make up the five), just out and out playing. So I missed all of the tweaks Dragon made (never even knew about Dragon magazine until many years later). And while I was certainly gaming at the time 1e hit the shelves I didn't know about it until it had been replaced by 2e. So the upshot is that I played basic longer than most of those who later made the switch to an advanced edition and I played it with fewer changes (in fact, I don't think I change a single rule the entire time I played, though I got a few of the wrong...lol). When the time did come for a more option filled edition I picked up 2e as it was most current and played a hybrid "basic/2e" for quite a while. After a few years I fully made the switch to 2e and that was that. I've played a bit of 1e over the years and basically regard 2e as a more polished version of the same game so I've always stayed with 2e. Or, at least that was true until 3e hit the shelves. I was in on the huge gaming world outcry when my Dragon magazine stopped showing up for six months or more but I actually learned about the buyout of TSR later than most (as you can see I don't spend a lot of regular time at game stores). When I did, the new 3e was already in the works (I missed the entire marketing survey, etc) so I went to work researching this new edition. Due to my lack of information I thought that 3e was basically being done by the same people who did 2e only for a different company. So I figured, why not? I picked up 3e and it looked more polished and, on the surface, had some really good changes. So I sold my 2e books to help finance my 3e purchases (not rich here either I'm afraid) and that turned out to be a rather big mistake. After a few years involved with 3.0 and 3.5 I'd finally had enough (I had one player who was so overstimulated with options and rules just with the basic books that he never stayed with one character concept for more than two weeks the entire three years we played). So I dumped every single 3e book I owned (except Ghostwalk which I regard as easily the best product WotC ever put out for any roleplaying game) and started buying up hardcopies and pdf files of 2e books and settings. I'm happy to say that I now have the 2e PHB, MM, and DMG all in orignal hardback and most anything I'll ever need in the way of campaign settings, adventures, and rules suppliments on pdf. That coupled with the Dragon magazine archive is pretty much the end of my D&D buying days. Beyond that point, however, I'm slowing moving from D&D (even my favorite 2e) for a new system which I feel brings back the old days while giving us better rules and mechanics than we ever had. But I'm not sure what the code of conduct says about promoting other systems, even those based on the SRD, so that'll be the end of my personal story. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : kengar Date : 07-28-04 11:24 AM I started on Holmes (the blue book) back in late 70's, shortly before 1e was released. I was 9 or 10 iirc. We played that until we'd gathered the three core 1e books together (probably a mish-mash of 1e & Basic for a time, now that I think about it). 1e was the version of D&D I played the most of. I was out of the gaming loop or playing other games like GURPS for the 2e days. I got back into gaming on a regular basis with 3e, but ended up dropping it as too "video-gamish" for my taste. Now I DM a Moldvay B/X online game as well as playing a lot of tabletop Savage Worlds. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : GreyLord Date : 07-28-04 07:07 PM My father was big into Wargaming, and thus so was I. Wargaming is still a favorite item of mine at times. The first D&D I started was of all things, D&D. I liked the simplicity of it, and the rules were very easy for one, even at my young age, to understand. In fact I understood them almost as soon as I started playing. I moved onto 1e a little later, introduced by a bunch of friends. I was a player, not the DM, and so it seemed a lot like the original, but with more options. I was unaware of some of the added elements a DM handled in 1e. I now play all the editions...however my favorite still is either the Original, OR a hybrid version of 1e and 2e (2e core rules with the grandfather clause for 1e tossed in). Truthfully, I don't find any problems with the original. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 07-28-04 08:59 PM Gandalf_Istari wrote: Which version did you start with? I started out with some of the early Basic box sets. That time sorta blurs because it was just me and my brother rolling up some characters and fighting monsters. It would have been circa 1978. In 1979 we found 1st Edition AD&D. We played that off and on, until I graduated high school. From about '83 to '89 I didn't have a regular campaign per se, just games here and there off and on. Did lots of plotting and planning though. :smirk: In '89 when 2E came out I moved back to Chicago and unfortunately all my 1E stuff was left behind and stolen by an ex-roommate (who now has a price on his head :smirk: ). So I bought up all the 2E stuff coming out and we started a new 2E campaign. Over time I added in some of the stuff that was missing from 2E that we had in 1E. It became a 1E/2E hybrid and we've played that ever since. I bought the 3E PHB when it came out, decided it was nothing but garbage, sold it on ebay and never looked back. ;) What got you interested enough to buy/borrow/beg/steal that version that you started on? I've always loved monsters and reading mythology was one of my favorite things back in grade school, so all the OOP versions of D&D always appealed to me. Love fantasy stuff! What did you like about the version you started on? What didn't you like about the version you started on? The only thing I didn't like about Basic D&D was how, well...basic it was. Diaglo will probably letter bomb me for saying this :D but I consider Basic D&D to be more like grade school, and AD&D to be more like grad school. It goes far beyond the basics and gives me much more to work with. What version do you play now? From now until the day I die, I will always and only play my hybrid 1E/2E edition. I would participate in a purely 1E or purely 2E game, but when I'm DM, it will always be my beloved hybrid. For me, anything that came after 2E does not exist in my reality. Why do you play the version you play now? Because it does everything it needs to do. It's a totally faithful, workable system. It's never let me down in almost 20 years. Never has a player not been able to play the exact character he wanted, even when the character was a very odd, non-standard character. I literally cannot find any flaws in it whatsoever. What makes the version you play now better than the version you started with (if they are different)? What could have been improved in the version you are currently playing, or what parts do you house rule that you don't like in your current OOP version? My version is the best I've ever played because it incorporates the very best from the Golden Years of D&D, namely the 1E and 2E eras. 1E was great, but it had too many tables and a few too many restrictions on demihumans to name two problems. 2E was great, but it took out too many cool things like assassins and half-orcs. So by mixing the best parts of each, I created the Ultimate Edition (c). ;) When I looked into 3E, to me it was not even D&D, it was some other game using the same name. So it never grabbed me. I didn't find anything in it that I thought was useful or that I thought would enhance my game. Actually, I only looked into it because I thought it would be cool to see how the "new" edition felt. To me it felt like having the flu...not good at all. So I realized that there was no point in leaving my comfortable hybrid edition. There are only two things I'm working on that I'd like to change. That is, I'd like druids to have more spells specific to druids only. And I thought it would be cool to have special spells used only for when paladins and rangers get their spell casting abilities. In other words, spells that are specific to those two classes. Kinda difficult, but it's something I thought would make them stand out. That's about it. My hybrid 1E/2E system is all I'll ever need. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : Starglyte Date : 07-28-04 09:30 PM My first D&D product was The Hollow World box set. We didn't read the small blurb on the back of the box that said we needed any other rules for the game. Back to the store to get "The Rules Cyclopedia", which I think is one of the greatest books for the hobby of all time. It had everything from ruling kingdoms to fighting wars, which was missing from the 2nd edition books. Got some Gazetteers and my first 2nd product "The Time of the Dragon" for Dragonlance( not knowing what Dragonlance was). I played mostly 2nd and have yet to really try out 3rd. But I own most of the books. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : Feldspar Date : 07-28-04 10:01 PM Which version did you start with? Who: me What: discover D&D When: Dec 4, 1981 Where: Godfather's Pizza Why: celebrating my older brother's birthday How: he gets it for a present It's 1981 and I'm in second grade. I had turned all of seven just a couple of months prior. My brother gets the red basic boxed set for a birthday present. The thing I most remember from that moment when he first got it was the dice. Even at a young age the platonic solids appealled to my logical nature or something. Of course, they come with a crayon and coloring them in is part of the fun. What got you interested enough to buy/borrow/beg/steal that version that you started on? Who doesn't copy what their older brother is doing? At least until that stage where you want to be the exact opposite to differentiate yourself :) What did you like about the version you started on? What wasn't to like? I loved reading Robin Hood and King Arthur stories and was into all thing military - especially medieval stuff. As for now, I like that creating an OD&D character can be done in minutes rather than 10's of minutes. Of course, you needed to because they didn't tend to last very long :) What didn't you like about the version you started on? The next one was better. So was the one after that, and the one after that and so on. What version do you play now? 3.5 Why do you play the version you play now? Its fixed so many of the things I'd grown to hate from earlier editions like racial class/level restrictions. As a programmer, I like the consistency and (comparative) elegance of the 3.x system. Everything before was more like what we call "spaghetti code." What could have been improved in the version you are currently playing? PRC's. I think the underestimated the reaction to them; they've been churned out in a bit of "chicken with its head cut off" way. They're very hit and miss in terms of usefulness and applicability. They're also the only way to realistically play some of the old mutli-class combos. Though I love the way classes stack, I didn't even try to convert my old Thief-Illusionist to 3.0. Now whether its a flaw in the system, a balance problem in past editions or just a paradigm change I'll leave for others to debate. Anyway, I just think the whole PRC system and the PRC's themselves could have benefitted from stronger oversight. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 07-29-04 03:16 AM Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak That's about it. My hybrid 1E/2E system is all I'll ever need. Check your PM's please. :) Edit: Heh your darn box is full! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 07-29-04 03:27 AM Originally posted by Feldspar It's 1981 and I'm in second grade. I had turned all of seven just a couple of months prior. My brother gets the red basic boxed set for a birthday present. The thing I most remember from that moment when he first got it was the dice. Even at a young age the platonic solids appealled to my logical nature or something. Platonic solids. /chuckle :ayyyy!: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : vader42xx Date : 07-29-04 06:22 AM Trying to get a copy of that 1e/2e hybrid Gandalf? ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 07-29-04 07:09 AM Originally posted by vader42xx Trying to get a copy of that 1e/2e hybrid Gandalf? ;) /em slips his necklace of thought protection on :smirk: Hehe. Actually, since I am in the (seemingly) long process of working out my own house rules, I was trying to PM him to ask if he would go into a little more detail on his hybrid system to see if there were some things I might be over looking. Basically just some general ideas, not real specific stuff. I'm always willing to listen to someone who has been playing and house-ruling as long as I have. ;) Not that I'd mind a copy, but probably given the cantankerous perfectionist that I am, I would have to change any rules system someone gave me (Official or otherwise), no matter how good it was, just so I could say, "Hey I molded it to MY play style!" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : vader42xx Date : 07-29-04 10:22 AM I, on the other hand, have always been looking for that system that plays 99% perfect right out of the box. I hate changing rules. :) Edit: Oh, and check your messages. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : diaglo Date : 07-29-04 12:29 PM i feed Halaster's habit. i sent him some of my extra copies of 2edADnD material i had. ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : RobertFisher Date : 07-29-04 04:40 PM Thread Title : Re: Lets talk OOP versions Which version did you start with? 1981 Basic Set. What got you interested enough to buy/borrow/beg/steal that version that you started on? I think my mom asked me if I knew anything about the D&D one day. I remember reading a magazine article about it, either that she pointed me to or that I sought out because of her mentioning D&D. My dad borrowed a PHB from a co-worker as inspiration for an Apple ][ game he was working on. I looked through it, but it wasn't the "complete game" sort of presentation I expected from games then. So, my interest had been piqued before I saw the Basic Set in the game store at the mall. Note that while I did play a few session of Basic & even bought the Expert rulebook, I soon started buying the AD&D hardbacks. Still, the first regular group I joined played Traveller, not D&D or AD&D. What did you like about the version you started on? Everything. Despite moving on to Traveller & AD&D & many other systems, I always kept my B/X books and admired their simplicity & brilliance on occasion. What didn't you like about the version you started on? The wonderful thing about those days was that I blindly accepted it for what it was. Why did I leave it behind for AD&D so quickly, though? Separation of race & class. More details. More options. I suppose. Funny that today I think I was somewhat mistaken about those things. What version do you play now? I'm playing in a 3.5e game. I don't plan to DM 3e again. I'm working on a B/X D&D c. 1981 campaign to be the next fantasy campaign I run. My group has expressed interest in me running classic Traveller for them. I have a Dechiper LotR campaign on hold that I want to pick back up sometime. I also want to give LA a try. I just bought Star Frontiers, which I'd like to try sometime. Then C&C and GURPS 4/e are coming out. (I have mixed feelings on GURPS these days, though.) Then there are the games that others in the group want to run. Looks like there may be a TriStat campaign or another Marvel Superheroes campaign in the works. Why do you play the version you play now? When I'm a player, I play the system I do because its what the referee picked. As a referee, I pick D&D c. 1981 & CT because they are simple systems. Everyone at the table can pretty much as firm a grasp of the rules as everyone else without much time & energy investment. They facilitate a more free form refereeing style that works for me. It also helps that I've finally decided to build worlds to fit the games rather than trying to bend the games to fit my worlds. (Although, there are systems that are good for building your own worlds.) Also, I think I've shift a bit more towards gamist & away from simulationist. What makes the version you play now better than the version you started with (if they are different)? What could have been improved in the version you are currently playing, or what parts do you house rule that you don't like in your current OOP version? Yikes. Do I answer for 3.5--the version I'm playing in the current campaign? Or do I answer them for B/X--my currently preferred D&D that I'm planning on DMing? Ah, well--I'm rambled enough in this post already... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 07-30-04 12:53 AM Thread Title : Re: Re: Lets talk OOP versions Originally posted by RobertFisher Yikes. Do I answer for 3.5--the version I'm playing in the current campaign? Or do I answer them for B/X--my currently preferred D&D that I'm planning on DMing? Well, its the OOP board so talking about OOP would probably be best. :) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : RobertFisher Date : 07-30-04 04:54 PM What could have been improved in the version you are currently playing, or what parts do you house rule that you don't like in your current OOP version? Answering for B/X (c. 1981)... All in one book would be good. I don't really see much need for the Basic & Expert rule booklets to be separate. Sure the dungeon v. wilderness "style of play" split is cool, but if you are going to split it, I think there are much more interesting ways: Player book + DM book. Player Book + monster & treasure book + DM book. Player book + spell book + monster book + DM book. A description for Detect Inivisble. Or is that a feature? I think 2H weapons get a bum deal. Automatically lose initiative? House rules I'm considering include class based damage & grappling. I've also got some ideas related to hit points & what they represent, but that's just me tinkering. I may introduce new classes on occasion, but I don't think the system itself needs additional classes. I think additional classes should be rare &/or campaign world specific. I think I'd like to see a Companion. Although the Companion I envision these days isn't designed to support high level play as much as to provide new spells, monsters, maybe some optional rules, &c. There's some good ideas in the RC that I might like to see good implementations of. (I started work on a B/X Companion, but that project's on hold for now.) Maybe next week I'll post some comments the bits of B/X that I have a greater appreciation for now than I used to. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : Varl Date : 07-31-04 02:57 AM Which version did you start with? 1e, though I had a very brief stint with Basic. What got you interested enough to buy/borrow/beg/steal that version that you started on? My watching others play in school one day. I had to buy it to see what the game was really like, and the rest was history. What did you like about the version you started on? That someone had finally created a game based on true fantasy. What version do you play now? 2e. Why do you play the version you play now? It's simply better imo. While it did add some good things, and take away others that 1e had right, overall I think it improved the game, and besides, anything that 2e didn't carry over in its upgrade could easily be integrated into 2e with very little fuss, unlike today's game. Hell, we didn't even need a conversion guide. :thumbsup: What makes the version you play now better than the version you started with (if they are different)? What could have been improved in the version you are currently playing, or what parts do you house rule that you don't like in your current OOP version? First question, see above. Second question, I've house ruled quite a few rules, but that's been over the course of 24 years too, so people who might think editing an edition that much means the edition was broken to begin with might be correct for them, but I never felt that way. It's all about getting your game the way you want it to run, regardless of the core edition it's run under. Everyone runs their games a little differently, so it's only natural to expect modifications to those games to be tailored to the DM so he/she has a good grasp on how they want their game to perform. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 07-31-04 03:21 AM Diaglo wrote: i feed Halaster's habit. sent him some of my extra copies of 2edADnD material i had Diaglo, was it you who sent me that Greyhawk stuff and the Dragonspear Castle adventure? I'm sitting here now looking at that and saying "Good lord, I don't remember paying him for this!" :eek: LMK in a PM and if not I'll get that out to you. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : Finarvyn Date : 08-03-04 10:26 AM I'm a "brown book" kind of guy, ever since a friend got a copy of the boxed set for Christmas, 1975. We were hooked. I lived through each edition: Basic, AD&D, 2nd Ed, and now 3E. Don't like 3E much, since many of the philosophies have changed too much for my liking, but many of their changes are the same as stuff we "house ruled" a couple of decades ago. (Increasing numbers for AC, allowing for combinations of classes, etc.) My games today are mostly Moldvay B/X, only I tend not to allow "race classes" and use race and class as two seperate things as per the brown books. My group has been playtesting "Castles & Crusades" recently and it has that old school feel that we love. My "ultimate" rules set would be brown-book edition edited and combined so that it's not in so many seperate supplements. I started to so this myself, but keep getting bored with the editing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : januarius jones Date : 08-03-04 10:33 AM Thread Title : olde skool (kinda' long post) While I am currently participating in a 3.5e campaign of which I posted on another site (Class-Based Accessories General - not a hint to read), I will always love my old 1e books. I mowed many a lawn and worked hard preparing meals at a restaurant to acquire all the books when they were published. I haven't played 1e in a while - say 10 years, but some of those adventures were oustanding! My friends and I started up when I was around 12, and we used just the three core books, because that's what was available then (FF wasn't due for a year and-a-half). We designed most of our adventures using the prerequisite graph paper, but hadn't participated in any of TSR's "canned" ones. Things really changed for us when we participated in one with "Keep" in the title, wherein upon easily slaying the minotaur, our DM (who eventually became a demigod with God-beating might) misread the gems: one for 1, one 362, and one for 789 gold pieces - he took it to mean two worthless gems and one worth 1,362,789 gold pieces :eek: - quite the transgression (or screw up)! Anyway, my brother and I never knew it until years later when we revisited the booklet in a second-hand bookstore. There was a theme going around from some of the older neighborhood kids who incorporated D&D with Gammaworld (remember the machine-gun toting hoop?), and they said that somewhere in either the DMG or PH, one gold piece equalled one experience point - which, again, looking back I never found in either. So with the grotesque misinterpretation with the gem combined with the eager-to-believe gp/xp rule, our inevitable Greyhawk-shaking campaign commenced. We all enigmatically :rolleyes: acquired +3 vorpals, girdles of storm giant strength, mauls of the titans, and found our way into +5 PM/ +5 Shields (-8AC). As if that weren't bad enough, artifacts came into our possession. With all of the major powers and side-effects memorized, the chushest weapons in D&D were acquired and ready to beat down any demon or devil around that dared to show its misbegotten face on the PMP. Deities and Demigods took the already ridiculous level and advanced it up to a ludicrous one. Stormbringer, Mournblade, Mjolnir, and the rock of Ma-Yuan made our DM into a demigod. Little could stop someone with haste, Mjolnir, and Stormbringer. Once Ma-Yuan fell, every god or hero (evil or good) simply took a number and awaited a beat-down from Gandar. The rest of us were along for the ride (and what a ride it was for the rest of us). Leavings included Githyanki +5 vorpals, Anhur's +5 Warlance (kills ALL undead), Set's spear +4 (7-70), Nergal's +5 Shield (immune to all spells below 8th level), etc. Indeed, someone of greater wisdom and veracity needed to knock some sense into us, but that person never even rang the doorbell. We eventually got tired of beating everybody, not to mention my brother and I moved from OH to MA, and that killed it off, as no matter whose house we played at, you always had at least half of the campaign playing. Five years later - late 80's, things really got interesting when I decided to come up with using monsters as characters. Everything was already there for you to play; all we had to do was role play and give them a little personality. As teenagers, we were more interested in the role playing. We had a Githyanki (Akuma) 12MU/10Ftr king (+5 Vorpal), a Death Slaad (M'alaki) with a +1 sword of sharpness, a Drow chief preistess (Amaqueline) 16Clr (+3 mace of disruption) and a powerful skeleton warrior (Praetor - former 20Ftr) with a +3 vorpal. Yeah, the weapons were a bit much, but their hit points had to follow the rules designed by the FF and PH (Praetor didn't have the HP of his former self), and the armor classes were shocking, suddenly we were being hit . . . a lot. I designed many NPC's for them to fight in addition to monsters of all levels. Praetor was a general in the Gandarian empire, who was tricked by Demogorgon and lost his soul. If he could retrieve it in time, he could reclaim his glory. With the soul scattered everywhere, you'd need a strong and willing crew to accompany you. Much death, gold, and magical items were offered, and Praetor hired Amaqueline, Akuma, and M'alaki. It was relatively easy to overcome their, ahem, cultural differences when the leader took no treasure but merely information about the scattered pieces of the artifact which contained his soul. The slaad just loved to kill and drain energy from powerful beings, and the Drow and Githyanki found each other in addition to the gold, magic items, etc. I'm sorry about the length of this post. :embarrass Blame Gandalf for my reminiscence. :angel: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : RobertFisher Date : 08-03-04 03:52 PM Originally posted by RobertFisher Maybe next week I'll post some comments the bits of B/X that I have a greater appreciation for now than I used to. I used to think: The classic D&D race classes are silly. Don't elves & dwarves have clerics? Now I think: 1. Not every option available in the world needs to be available to PCs. 2. There's a common meme that humans' advantage in fantasy & sci-fi is their adaptability. Race classes support that idea. 3. I prefer demihumans to be rarer than humans. Guess its something I picked up from my favorite legends & literature in which the non-humans tend to be sidekicks. Race classes tend to make demihumans rarer. I used to think: Classic D&D doesn't offer enough flexibility to create the character I want to. Now I think: It's a game. It's a game of coöperation between players. A game of coöperation between players is often better when each player has more limited options. PCs created by the rules can be just as much fun (if not more fun) to play than my favorite book/movie character or munchkin idea. I used to think: Priests shouldn't fight better than magic-users. Now I think: 1. Clerics aren't priests. 2. NPC priests don't need to follow PC rules. I used to think: Classic D&D wasn't detailed enough. Now I think: Classic D&D lets you make the game your own by filling in the details yourself. I used to think: Classic D&D isn't rich enough. Not enough classes, races, spells, monsters, treasures, &c. Now I think: Those are opportunities to exercise your creativity & make the game your own. I used to think: Skill based systems are better. Now I think: Skills & classes are two ends of a continuum. I prefer the more abstract end & find it--under a good DM--provides more versimilitude in a simpler package than a system with extremely discrete skills. I used to think: Classic D&D isn't consistant enough mechanically. Now I think: 1. Different things deserve different mechanics. One size does not always fit all. 2. Classic D&D is so mechanically simple, consistency wouldn't really buy you much. There aren't very many subsystems, they are all dead simple, & only a few make up the bulk of play. I used to think: Classic D&D combat needs more tactical options to make player decisions more important. Now I think: 1. A complex rule system only makes player decisions important if one participant has mastered the system & knows the optimal strategies while his opponent hasn't. If both sides know the optimal strategies, the outcome of the complex system isn't very different from the outcome of a simple system. 2. To make their decisions matter, players need to think strategically, at a higher level than the combat rules. I used to think: Classic D&D doesn't tell me how to handle spotting, swiming, climbing for non-thieves, &c. Now I think: The DM can rule on such things using common sense. He can augment his judgements with ad hoc die rolls. Well, that's all I can think of right now. In a lot of cases, I think I actually originally held the "now I think" position, but somehow drifted into the "used to think" position. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-03-04 06:20 PM Thread Title : Re: olde skool (kinda' long post) Originally posted by januarius jones I'm sorry about the length of this post. :embarrass Blame Gandalf for my reminiscence. :angel: Hey don't try and pin that on me! :smirk: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : Gandalf_Istari Date : 08-03-04 06:27 PM Robert Fisher, I think about alot of those issues you raise in regards to Basic D&D vs. AD&D (either 1e or 2e). Sometimes I wonder if it might not be better to play a simplier (note: not simplistic) version of the game and concentrate less on rules and more on fun. Working on my current campaign setting and house rules system has really shown me how diverse and complex the game can become. Its one thing to play a version that has lots of rules to cover lots of situations, its another thing altogether to create my own version of the rules that suits my own playstyle and tastes! Thus I end up thinking about just going back to a Basic version of the game and playing a rules lite system. But then I start thinking about different things I want to do with the game, and that means alot of house rules etc., so its seems to me that no matter which version I choose for myself and those I play with, I end up making things more complex. :) Must be that darn "A" personality type I have. bleh -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : vader42xx Date : 08-04-04 03:16 AM "Sometimes I wonder if it might not be better to play a simplier (note: not simplistic) version of the game and concentrate less on rules and more on fun." Again, not sure what the CoC says about advertising other systems but as this one is based on the OGL I'll take a chance. So, if you're looking for the above check out C&C at... http://www.trolllord.com/index.htm -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : januarius jones Date : 08-04-04 10:31 AM Thread Title : RobertFisher's commentary I thought his perpsective on D&D1e was very insightful, and I agree entirely. They really do permit more opportunity to have fun and roleplay more. Additionally, the DM has more freedom to justify actions instead of players constantly referring to the rule: the DM is always right whenever the DM contradicts from the concrete laws. D&D3.5e places greater detail on classes and regulations which assures players of a closely followed game. Moreover, it explains possibilities better (multi classes, real CR's for tough opponents, actual magic use by wizards and monsters, etc.), but sometimes you want less restriction that only 1e can provide. A good example I can generate would be the vorpal sword. If you lop Dispater's head off, he shouldn't immediately die (he's an arch-devil afterall). Rather, he takes triple (or greater) damage. Same thing applies to facing a dragon. A red dragon's neck will be thicker than most swords are long. A 19 won't cut its head off or sever its girthy torso in two. The DMG never explains that but compels the DM to make a judgment call. The DM was required to make a lot of those "calls," which made the game more interesting and less mathematic. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Author : RobertFisher Date : 08-04-04 11:55 AM Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari But then I start thinking about different things I want to do with the game, and that means alot of house rules etc., so its seems to me that no matter which version I choose for myself and those I play with, I end up making things more complex. :) Yeah. I know what you mean. I love rules, & I love rule lawyering. But I've come to feel that I enjoy the game more without those things. So, it's a constant struggle. So, during the d20 games in front of the screen, I feed my rules lawyering addiction. When behind the screen, I try to choose a rule system--like B/X--that doesn't feed that addiction. I try to make myself strongly justify any house rules. I try to make sure that house rules I do use are simple & in the spirit of the system. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 27] Author : pincer_style Date : 08-04-04 02:07 PM Thread Title : d&d basic As someone keen to return to the basic D&D I'd like to know why people are sayin that the Moldvay/Cook sets are the best? What is it about them that makes people think they are the definitive D&D rules? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 28] Author : RobertFisher Date : 08-05-04 01:05 PM Thread Title : Re: d&d basic Originally posted by pincer_style As someone keen to return to the basic D&D I'd like to know why people are sayin that the Moldvay/Cook sets are the best? For myself... Firstly, I'll freely admit I may have some bias since I started with Moldvay/Cook. :) v. Mentzer & later: The highest level character I've ever had was 9th. I don't need PCs' progressions to be slowed down to make 36th level viable. Now, Moldvay/Cook allows you to go to 36th level or above. It just doesn't encourage it, as the PCs are pretty much maxed out by 14th level. I like that much better than the Mentzer progressions. Also, while there are some good ideas in the Mentzer & later stuff, most of it is unneeded. Even worse, I feel much of it was poorly playtested or more complex than the spirit of the game warranted. v. Holmes: The truth is that I don't know Holmes well enough to have an opinion. (A Holmes-compatible Expert book could be an interesting project.) v. OD&D: I wouldn't say Moldvay/Cook is better than OD&D. Indeed, much of what makes M/C so good is the fact that it is so grounded in OD&D. M/C is organized better & none of the differences bother me. (Indeed, I like some of them.) M/C is easier to learn, which is a bonus. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 29] Author : rogueattorney Date : 08-05-04 04:07 PM Thread Title : Re: d&d basic Originally posted by pincer_style As someone keen to return to the basic D&D I'd like to know why people are sayin that the Moldvay/Cook sets are the best? What is it about them that makes people think they are the definitive D&D rules? I think presentation and focus are the keys. The Moldvay/Cook sets presents the rules as one might to an intelligent friend who'd never gamed before. The earlier sets (OD&D and Holmes) were more suited to experienced gamers who'd never played D&D, while the later sets (Mentzer and Black box) were for younger kids. The rules are fairly well organized, plainly presented, and easy to follow, without being too simplistic (again, "simple, not simplistic.") The art, inspirational reading list, and adventure suggestions all give you a nice indication of the flavor of the game. As to focus, the game really focusses on levels 1-14. These are the meat and potatoes levels. Later sets and the Rules Cyclopedia focus on the much higher levels, which, in my experience are seldom reached by gamers. One could just use the Mentzer Basic and Expert to achieve the same effect, but the Mentzer Expert rules make some changes to slow down character advancement (by reducing number of spells gained, saving throw advancement, etc.) to give the characters places to go for levels 15-36. In the Cook Expert set, pc's are basically maxed out at 14th level. Note: I really like the Rules Cyclopedia. The RC and 1e DMG are two books I will always have on hand, no matter what version of the game I'm playing. There's just too much useful stuff in there. But the focus on higher levels, options that I don't use like Skilss and Weapon Mastery, and the nearly incomprehensible combat section (O.K., I'm exagerating a little bit, but not much) makes it just a notch below the Moldvay/Cook rules in my view. For all versions of the game - from OD&D to the RC, the single best thing about it is its flexability. In my campaign, I use Paladins and Druids modeled off of the OD&D Supps and the Mystic from the RC. I use spells from the Greyhawk Supp and from the Gazetteers. I use adventures published in the 70's and adventures published last year. All with little or no conversion headache. I actively encourage my players to perform magical research and come up with creative solutions to problems. Why? Because it's very tough to break the system, so long as you use the existing material as guidelines. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 30] Author : Barrok Date : 08-14-04 03:43 PM Thread Title : oD&D Basic I owned the Moldvay/Cook basic and expert sets; they didn't interest me at all. It wasn't until I saw Mentzer's work that oD&D had become so appealing to me. Did the Moldvay/Cook sets even go as far as the Mentzer's Immortals sets? I never bothered to find out if they made anything beyond their expert sets. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 31] Author : TheDungeonDelver Date : 08-14-04 11:56 PM Hmm...where to start. Well, when I was a kid we moved around a bit from '80 to '81. We left "home" in Alabama and moved to Florida mid-school year. I didn't have much of a chance to put down roots when we moved again, this time to Central Florida (from the coast). The closest thing I had to a "peer group" were a few guys who (of course) were all from the same neighborhood, had been in school together since the first grade, etc. Well, one fine day one of them breaks out a copy of A2 at the lunch table. I was sucked in immediately. I had to know what this cool looking comic book/magazine/game thing was. Once I found out, it was true love. I'd read The Hobbit when I was six, and started The Lord of the Rings thereafter (and just about any other fantasy or sci-fi I could get). So the whole concept of a "fantasy role-playing game" where I could be Bilbo Baggins or Gandalf or Conan or Fafhrd was just too appealing. Unfortunately, those were hard times for us. I had to scrimp and save my meagre allowance. When I finally cajoled my parents into a trip to the toy store, I bought what I naively thought was "all" I needed: A copy of B2 Keep on the Borderlands and a set of dice. Oh, and I think at that same time I got a set of Grenadier miniatures (a set of greek monsters & heroes, containing a Unicorn w/child, a pegasus, a cyclops, a centaur and Hercules), but that may have been later. At any rate, the module, dice and miniatures were cheaper than either the Moldvay Basic that was available at the time, and certainly cheaper than a copy of the Player's Handbook, Monster Manual and Dungeon Master's Guide! I must admit to being a little confused when I ripped open the module. While B2 is very nearly a complete set of rules, it of course lacks key elements like an explanation of how to resolve combat, spell descriptions, and an XP chart for character types. Undaunted, I gleaned what I could from my "friends" (who, admittedly, didn't care for a "hick" from a family with little money to spare on luxuries like a real house versus an apartment, or an Atari 2600, or a full library of Dungeons and Dragons books :-/ ), and managed to put together enough to run an "adventure" a day with my sister and Tommy Meiner, a guy from down the apartment block. Ah, youthful innocence! Monsters did one point of damage, but a single blow from a hero would vanquish any who stood against them! In '83 or so, my sister started dating a guy in her high school who was, shall we say, tres geek. He and his peer group were very much the role players, and consequently I became very much the role-player (again). Our first game was Champions (first edition!) but we soon shifted to beloved D&D! Unfortunately, the whole "group" as it were was comprised of my sister's paramour, The Big Scary Guy who was VERY big and VERY scary (when he didn't get his way, his thing was to sit in his filthy car and sulk - which usually consisted of sitting there tearing aluminum cans into strips with his fingers, which would ineveitably bloody up due to the ragged metal), the Quiet Scary Guy (obsessive near-loner who put WAAAAAY too much time in to character creation - if you know what I mean), The ***** (ex-girlfriend of my sister's then-boyfriend, who had joined the group when said boyfriend had, and stayed with it to keep an eye on him and glare at my sister), myself, and my sister. My parents got one look at the motley crew, and fueled by their recent acquisition of BADD literature, took D&D off the household reading list. I was crushed. By that time, I'd managed to scrape together a Dungeon Master's Guide (bought with my sister's discount at the store she worked at), a Monster Manual, a Moldvay Basic and Expert set, plus a copy of A1, as well as the B2 that came with the Moldvay Basic and the X1 with Expert. Wendy Robinson, my first "girlfriend" (who, coincidentally, moved in to Tommy's apartment when his family moved), bought me a copy of Monster Manual II and Deities and Demigods, God bless her. I'll always remember you fondly, Wendy! At any rate, it all went in the closet in the hall. Ostentiably, my folks had been concerned about my grades. I however had seen the "literature" from the justly-maligned "BADD" around the house, so I knew what was up. Ironically, my parents figured Star Frontiers, due to it's lack of magic and/or monsters *cough*sathardeathmachine*cough* was kosher, so I wound up with a copy of that (which I still have). The years went on, and I got more and more into computers, less and less into RPGs. My first programming attempts were at creating a D&D-like game on my trusty 3kb VIC-20. Needless to say the results were poor. Years came and went, and I remembered getting SSI's Pool of Radiance in '87 or so. I went mad with joy. HERE was the way to play D&D without tons of books lying around, weird people coming in and out of the house, having to worry about the parents worrying, and so forth. Although eventually the parents lost interest in "saving me" from D&D, my interest had waned by '89. I met a good group of guys at a FLGS (one of them the owner) and we played just about every game under the sun: Champions (4th), Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, Role Master, MERP...but no D&D. Eventually my cache of books was sold off to pay for college texts...Somehow I managed to hang on to my copy of B2 (from the Moldvay set; oddly I sold the somewhat more rare "easily converts to AD&D!" first printing that jived more with the Holmes Basic rules), and tucked it away, forgetting about it. Anyway, the gaming group forged ahead, and from '89 to '99 we played various RPGs and wargames, and I never gave much thought to D&D again. Until one evening in '99, I was digging around trying to find something, I don't even recall what it was, when I found a Player's Handbook (note that I never purchased my own copy: I have no idea where it came from) and that tattered copy of B2...and I started to think. What if...? What if...? From that point forward, with my eye to playing AD&D again, I've rebuilt and expanded my library, with a full set of books (sans post-Gygax all-but-2e-in-name works), a mostly-complete set of modules, and most recently a set of Original D&D books (because I appreciate the history of the game). I also own a Dragon Magazine CD-ROM set. I have never played 2e pen-and-paper, but having played 2e computer games, I have no desire to. I've tried to play 3e and 3.5e off and on for a while now, and they're just not my cup of tea. I don't currently have a game in progress, but I'm thinking I'm going to start a new one at the beginning of the year. And now you know...the rest of the story. Good-day. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 32] Author : Algolei Date : 08-15-04 11:46 PM I used to beat up weaker kids and take their stuff. One day I noticed I had a whole lot of D&D books shoved in the back of my closet, so I figured--what the heck--why let them all go to waste? The rest is history. But some of it was sealed by the courts. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 33] Author : Barrok Date : 08-16-04 10:11 AM Originally posted by Algolei I used to beat up weaker kids and take their stuff. One day I noticed I had a whole lot of D&D books shoved in the back of my closet, so I figured--what the heck--why let them all go to waste? The rest is history. But some of it was sealed by the courts. that basically sums it up for me too -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 34] Author : jugger Date : 08-19-04 10:16 PM I found out about D&D through some friends of mine in elementary school way back in 1981. My best friend at the time had the red cover set and made up a dungeon for us to play while waiting for the bus each day after school. He used to quote stuff from the book all the time during the game "Remember, skeletons fight to the death" and he was giving us crazy +5 swords but dang it was fun. I remember bugging him forever about playing the game before we started but he wouldn't do it saying there was too much math involved! Eventually we started having games at each others houses, spending the night, ALL night, staying up and slaying the various kobolds, orcs, and salamanders my friend would throw at us. As we got a little older our frineds dropped out of it, but we kept playing. Even if it was solo adventures we kept going. I think at one point I owned a magic store with EVERY magic item in the game stocked in it. By this time we were playing AD&D. My best friend started private school and I was left without anybody to play the game with. I kinda forgot about it as all kids do sometimes and went running around the woods and chasing girls at school. Fast forward a few years. My Scout troop had a few guys who played and it didn't take long for all of us to become one big, deranged AD&D group! I feel years ahead of my time since I was always asking the older DM's if I could be a bugbear! Our scouting trips would always bring games being played outdoors and it really made the games all the more fun. Playing Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh gets pretty creepy when you hit the haunted house and you swear you can hear someone screaming nearby (it's only the wind...it's only the wind!). At one point at a week long camp we took on a rival Scout Troop in a dungeon with me going back and forth between the campsites as the players made their moves. Of course I rigged it to let my guys win... I was playing at home with my brother Marc and my best buddy Jeff at the time as well. Unfortunetely for them I had turned into a "killer DM", always coming up with new and inventive ways of wasting them so they never could get above second level! Sorry guys! As high school came and went I played here and there with friends in town. Most of those games became free for all with 15 people playing at a time. Booze + 15 players = CHAOS. Still, it was fun. Enter the college years. Our dorm floor was full of the best band of misfits and skalawags ever put together in one 25 room area. The games we got into were fun (some of the 15 player, booze, drunk chicks, etc. games were had) and we all thought Second Edition was the greatest. That was, once we found out that to have all the sourcebooks we needed that we had to shoplift em' all! I met many interesting characters role playing in college. One guy took along two characters just in case one was killed. Another used some really bad voices... I still play D&D. Not as much as the old days but that's starting to change. I feel great that I got some new people into the game recently and made the world a better place for all us Paladins and Halflings... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:19 AM.