So I'm a school teacher, and I have some 5th graders who are very into fantasy books. They've read all the Harry Potter books. I introduced them to the Dragonlance Chronicles and they loved those. They are eating up the Hobbit etc... They have also been deemed gifted so their reading and math skills are all well above grade level.
I want to give them some extra enrichment and I can't think of anything that would be more stimulating than dnd. So my plan is to start a once a week lunch hour gaming group with about 4 or 5 of them. However, they have no experience with rpgs, and I'm looking for advice on the best way to introduce the hobby to them. I'm thinking starting with pregenerated characters and a simple dungeon crawl to show them the basics, but I'm trying to decide which system would be easiest to teach and how much to simplify the game for them, and if I do simplify it what rules do I ignore for now and what rules do I keep. As I said above they are very bright kids, but even so dnd can be pretty overwhelming until you've had some time to absorb it. I've never tried to teach kids how to play dnd before (though I did teach this group to play Settlers of Catan and kill Doctor Lucky), any advice would be most welcome.
Don't hold back, let the kids dictate how much they want to learn. The new 4th edition of D&D has a starter module and starter rules on their website. Or use Paizo's setting, its great! and the same applies start out slowly and let them get a feel for the basics. They might surprise you.
I play with 3 of my 4 children; ages 15,9,7; and they have'nt missed a beat. If your students are "gifted" they should not have a problem picking it up. Just start out slowly with basic rules and work your way up from there. I am sure pretty soon they will be running the game, then you could play!
I must commend you on having such a open approach to using rpg's as a tool for learning. I had a fifth grade teacher (1983) who started me on my lifelong trek through role playing games. Thanks for teaching the next generation that gaming is about people, not points on a screen.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4dnd/dndtestdrive
Try the link above for the introductory rules to D&D 4e. Let me know if I can help.
I think it's a great idea so long as you get the proper permissions like David said. I wish I had a teacher to foster my inner geek when I was a kid. As is I didn’t play my first game of D&D until I was 20 years old.
Oh, but for goodness sakes don’t let Fox news get wind of this. That’s all we need is another “Demonic Cults in Our Schools!” piece. They’ll probably even try and tie it back to Obama some how.
|
Are you particularly familiar with one system over any others? Although 4th edition is easier to learn ,it's not that huge of a difference and if you're more familiar with 3.5, PRPG, or another system, I'd recommend start with what you yourself already know.
I'd give them full reign over their characters. You'll need to help them through the creation process, but it'll get their imaginations going and help them get into the game initially.
In my experience, you can explain the concept of the game (without any crunch whatsoever) to a new player, and cooperate for character creation (they provide the concept/fluff, you provide the mechanics/crunch, giving advice and choices as you think fit the idea), and then sit them down at the table with no knowledge of the rules. Start the game, and whenever they do something that requires mechanics, explain the mechanic, have them roll the proper dice, and teach it to them as they go.
Once they get into it they'll probably get curious about how new things work and start reading the rules.
I teach in Canada in a school board with a very high immigrant population. The parents of the kids I have in mind will never have heard of dnd. The Canadian media also doesn't go as crazy about stuff like that as they do in the states, so I'm not overly worried about this sort of thing, but I understand the concern. Fox news is my worst nightmare, I'm very happy that they stay on their side of the border.
I think it's a great idea so long as you get the proper permissions like David said. I wish I had a teacher to foster my inner geek when I was a kid. As is I didn’t play my first game of D&D until I was 20 years old.
Oh, but for goodness sakes don’t let Fox news get wind of this. That’s all we need is another “Demonic Cults in Our Schools!” piece. They’ll probably even try and tie it back to Obama some how.
I know all those systems well. I'm thinking I'll probably go 4E because that's what I've been playing lately. I'd like to get right into gaming, so I don't want to bog them down with all the character creation at first. I think I might just bring in a bunch of cool PC type minis and have each kid pick out the one that is most interesting to him/her and then I'll make characters based on the minis. Later they can start leveling them up and be more involved in the process.
Are you particularly familiar with one system over any others? Although 4th edition is easier to learn ,it's not that huge of a difference and if you're more familiar with 3.5, PRPG, or another system, I'd recommend start with what you yourself already know.
I'd give them full reign over their characters. You'll need to help them through the creation process, but it'll get their imaginations going and help them get into the game initially.
In my experience, you can explain the concept of the game (without any crunch whatsoever) to a new player, and cooperate for character creation (they provide the concept/fluff, you provide the mechanics/crunch, giving advice and choices as you think fit the idea), and then sit them down at the table with no knowledge of the rules. Start the game, and whenever they do something that requires mechanics, explain the mechanic, have them roll the proper dice, and teach it to them as they go.
Once they get into it they'll probably get curious about how new things work and start reading the rules.
|
Just had another thought all together, do you have a small library in your classroom? Like not the full school library, but a small clutch of books that your students have access to during the unstructured portions of your class room time?
You may find, if you place a copy of the PHB/MM/DMG within your library, and let the students know they can sign them out, or use them over lunch that the kids organically form there own gaming group.
Hero…you know…so you can teach 'em math. :)
Make it a time travelling game where they can get involved in historical events. Now you are teaching History without them even knowing it.
They're only in fifth grade, aren't they a little young for advanced calculus?
He said they were an advanced class.
I recommed Gurps Time Travel or Gurps Riverworld if you can get a hold of them.
And G.U.R.P.S. Vehicles to hone their Advanced Calculus skills. :P
A G.U.R.P.S. time traveling campaign would rock.
|
I recommed Gurps Time Travel or Gurps Riverworld if you can get a hold of them.And G.U.R.P.S. Vehicles to hone their Advanced Calculus skills. :P
Hey, I can design a vehicle from that book with a dollar calculator from Wal-Mart. I've never been able to make a Hero System character with anything less than a quantum super-computer.
I've never been able to make a Hero System character with anything less than a quantum super-computer.
You got me there. They really need to dumb the system down until it is about 3.5 level.
Back on topic, I was teaching myself and my friends how to play Basic D&D in 6th grade. With help from a teacher, I see no reason why 5th graders could not handle a full blown system.
Thanks for some of the suggestions. I actually teach 3rd grade, but last year I taught forth grade and the group of kids I'm thinking of were kids I had last year that are now in 5th grade. That means that I don't really see them too often, so they aren't actually in my class to be using gaming books when I'm not around. I'll probably ease them into it with some more of my board games first and then hopefully move into rpgs a little while after that. My only concern is that the violence in dnd might be an issue with parents or my principal. I don't think the magic and supernatural aspect of the game will be a concern, but the fact that they are basically going around killing monsters could be a problem. I can think of dozens of ways the game enhances their learning in pretty much every subject, but I'm not sure if those arguments will trump the whole "it's too violent for school" issue.
I will be tarred and feathered for this, but…
I think that is a D&D mentality. Role playing does not have to be about killing things and taking their stuff. With other systems, where character creation is not focused on what they can do in combat, it is a little easier to break this paradigm.
Fairy Tales and Sorcerer of Zo were specifically designed to simulate fairy tales. Surely, parents will not find that sort of conflict objectionable. And you really do not even need to use those systems to run a fairy tale type game. You can stick with D&D.
Focus more on role playing and less on combat. Give the PCs riddles to solve.
If you really need combat, have opponents surrender when first blood is drawn rather than fight to the death. Have the PCs battle constructs instead of humanoids.
|
|
Counterpoint to CF. When you mention RPGs, most laymen immediately jump to D&D as their mental image, or maybe WoW now.Threfore, while I agree that there are a lot of games out there that put much less emphasis on combat, unless the parents/administrators are already familiar with the hobby, D&D is the first thing they are going to think of. It is a blessing and a curse.
|
Middle school teacher here.
I have had advanced sixth graders play DnD with me. I usually set it up by saying "no demons, etc." but I am in the USA's Bible Belt. That might not be as important in your community. I used DnD 2e and then 3.5e when it came out. Some of them ended up buying some of the expansion books.
Have you thought about bringing several rule books to them and letting them flip through them before you decide what system you want to teach them? Or even pre-gens for some of them?
There are a couple of free "rules light" systems I discovered yesterday that I may use here at my new school. I am afraid when my PFS rule book hits the table they are going to flip, 'cause it's bigger than their textbooks.
Here's the blog that discusses them. (I can't find the exact post; I bookmarked it at home. But the blog is oldguyrpg.blogspot.com. He's all about rules light and free.)
I should also like to throw out Once upon a Time: The Storytelling Card Game as a kind of introduction to role playing games. It is not a role playing game itself, but introduces people to co-authoring a story.
Thanks for some of the suggestions. I actually teach 3rd grade, but last year I taught forth grade and the group of kids I'm thinking of were kids I had last year that are now in 5th grade. That means that I don't really see them too often, so they aren't actually in my class to be using gaming books when I'm not around. I'll probably ease them into it with some more of my board games first and then hopefully move into rpgs a little while after that. My only concern is that the violence in dnd might be an issue with parents or my principal. I don't think the magic and supernatural aspect of the game will be a concern, but the fact that they are basically going around killing monsters could be a problem. I can think of dozens of ways the game enhances their learning in pretty much every subject, but I'm not sure if those arguments will trump the whole "it's too violent for school" issue.
If the kids are already reading the hobbit, dragonlance books etc, i dont think the level of 'violence' is an issue. As long as you are not overly descriptive dnd does not need to be particularly graphic. Certainly there is no great level of violence then the Hobbit, or similar books. Heck there is a whole scene where the main characters overhear the different ways in which they will be eaten.
If its a real concern, perhaps you could consider removing death from the game. Things reduced to enough -HP to kill them are simply knocked into long term unconciousness. "The monster has been knocked out by your fireball spell, he will wake up eventually, but not for a while". Just a thought.
I will be tarred and feathered for this, but…
I think that is a D&D mentality. Role playing does not have to be about killing things and taking their stuff. With other systems, where character creation is not focused on what they can do in combat, it is a little easier to break this paradigm.
Fairy Tales and Sorcerer of Zo were specifically designed to simulate fairy tales. Surely, parents will not find that sort of conflict objectionable. And you really do not even need to use those systems to run a fairy tale type game. You can stick with D&D.
Focus more on role playing and less on combat. Give the PCs riddles to solve.
If you really need combat, have opponents surrender when first blood is drawn rather than fight to the death. Have the PCs battle constructs instead of humanoids.
I dunno - I think the violence will likely be one of the big appeals for the fifth graders - though probably not their parents.
Heroscape may be an appropriate introduction to the genre, although technically, it is a tactical board game.
I will be tarred and feathered for this, but…
I think that is a D&D mentality. Role playing does not have to be about killing things and taking their stuff. With other systems, where character creation is not focused on what they can do in combat, it is a little easier to break this paradigm.
Fairy Tales and Sorcerer of Zo were specifically designed to simulate fairy tales. Surely, parents will not find that sort of conflict objectionable. And you really do not even need to use those systems to run a fairy tale type game. You can stick with D&D.
Focus more on role playing and less on combat. Give the PCs riddles to solve.
If you really need combat, have opponents surrender when first blood is drawn rather than fight to the death. Have the PCs battle constructs instead of humanoids.
I dunno - I think the violence will likely be one of the big appeals for the fifth graders - though probably not their parents.
I agree. I used to run RPGs - including D&D - with only a few battles. Some players were fine with it, but others insisted they wanted more combat. I eventually had to succumb. A DM has to cater to his players, after all.
|
For what its worth....
...don't bring minis - it teaches that physical things are the gamepieces
...don't skip making a character - it teaches that characters are selected not invented
...don't play 4e - it provides a first impression that battle tactics are the heart of the game
You asked, I answered. I respect differences of opinion, but I did not come here to debate anything. >Avoid playing with students in your own class. Play publicly, and only with those to sign up and are interested. Avoid teaching rules... this places unnecessary emphasis on rules; explain instead that imagination is infinate, thoughts occupy no space and have no weight.
The human imagination is precious, and imagination is crushed from an early age as kids are told there are definate answers to things and this has become the current illusion of our age. It is my humble opinion that objects such as grids and minis limit the begginer's imagination, rather than expand it. Note that I am referring to the first couple games only in this post. Introducing other items later seems harmless, but only later.
Recommend:
>Start with OD&D, 1e, or OSRIC v2.0.
>Spend 10 minutes rolling stats and making the character
>Spend 10 minutes on the character's background and goals
>Immediately start playing.
>Avoid grid use. Describe everything. Ask the players to describe their characters. Ask them to roleplay. There will be much time for commercialism and combat later.
You never get a second chance to make a first impression.
Regards,
—Pax
I agree. I used to run RPGs - including D&D - with only a few battles. Some players were fine with it, but others insisted they wanted more combat. I eventually had to succumb. A DM has to cater to his players, after all.
My point somewhat goes beyond that. What I'm getting at is that your dealing with a very specific target audience. 5th Grade is usually for students between 9-12 years old and I'm suggesting taking some time to consider what that audience is going to be engaged by.
I'd have run my first games at this age and I did so with another boy and two girls who were my players. As I recall it would have been pretty much stripped down AD&D and there was a lot of sex and violence (if you think 11 year olds are asexual your playing tricks with your memory). That said none of this would have been appropriate coming from an adult - it was appropriate only because all engaged were children. In retrospect the material was pretty juvenile but then we were juveniles.
Emotions run strong and fast at this age but they die quickly as well. As I recall one of the Girls actually fell in love with an NPC which was very powerful stuff for us and she cried buckets when he died later in the campaign - killed by bugbears in some meaningless fight, some tragically bad DMing but I was too young to even recognize that.
If you can find copies of them I'd strongly consider reading through Tin Tin adventures as they are excellent at appealing to this age group (and have done so for generations). They'd be more aimed at Boys however. I think the theme of humour and action would work fine for a mixed or all Girl group as well but I'd go from 20% relationships and 80% high adventure to more like 30% relationships and 70% high adventure with a mixed or all girl group.
It ought to be obvious but I'd stay away from having people fall in love with the characters presuming your an adult. That's got more red flags then the Kremlin on May Day but NPCs can fall in love with each other and preteens are certainly obsessed with who's their friend and fears of rejection and betrayal so these themes will play well - except that the PCs should obviously not be subjected to rejection and betrayal should allow for a nice beig helping of righteous revenge.
Self sufficiency is a big thing at this age - the kids can be a team and they can have others that provide advice but ultimately they really need to be the centre of attention. Make sure that any mysteries or problem solving aspects are solvable by them. They'll get inordinately frustrated if they can't figure things out, will hate having the answers spoon fed to them but will get great pleasure out of the experience when they do figure things out. SO I'd definitely include this type of material - just hedge the bets in their favour.
It appears that most posters are of the opinion that creating In-game- Shakespearean role-playing sessions with the local tavern barkeeper, or having self-discovery sessions-where you 'really get in touch with your character' during the game represent the "modern or sophisticated game/gamer". I think that those preferences are in NO way superior to those of us who still favor old school, slaughtering everything that moves in a dungeon, simply for the hell of it, and taking it's gold.
If it's theatre or drama I'm looking for, I'll turn on the t.v., or listen to my clients.
|
|
I'd have run my first games at this age and I did so with another boy and two girls who were my players. As I recall it would have been pretty much stripped down AD&D and there was a lot of sex and violence (if you think 11 year olds are asexual your playing tricks with your memory). That said none of this would have been appropriate coming from an adult - it was appropriate only because all engaged were children. In retrospect the material was pretty juvenile but then we were juveniles.
Ah, happy memories - down the dungeon and then back to town to visit the brothel. Of course, we had no idea of what a brothel was actually like back then.
And still don't now, of course. (Ahem.)
It appears that most posters are of the opinion that creating In-game- Shakespearean role-playing sessions with the local tavern barkeeper, or having self-discovery sessions-where you 'really get in touch with your character' during the game represent the "modern or sophisticated game/gamer". I think that those preferences are in NO way superior to those of us who still favor old school, slaughtering everything that moves in a dungeon, simply for the hell of it, and taking it's gold.
If it's theatre or drama I'm looking for, I'll turn on the t.v., or listen to my clients.
I'd go so far as to say these aren't even "old-school" mentalities. The desire for some straight up hack-n-slash wasn't a passing fad. I definitely don't consider myself old-school, and I prefer well-designed dungeons and a 75/25 mix of combat versus everything else.
Actually, I always had the impression that the method acting style of roleplaying was something experienced more among the old-school crowd than this generation's gamers.
There are undoubtedly some old timers who do prefer the RP heavy game, but I suspect that their penchant for such 'evolved' in the aftermath of 1st edition, as 1st edition offered little RP-heavy material for them. Maybe they got tired of hack-n-slash. Apparently I'm stuck in some Freudian stage, and never got past it...
I think some good old fashioned dungeon hacking fun will very much appeal to grade 5s. think if I give them too many options they just freeze up and be lost and frustrated. The frame work of the dungeon is a good starting place to introduce them to the game. I have a big collection of dungeon tiles and miniatures. They'll love that stuff. Tactile things like that are perfect for kids. Imagination is great, but pictures say a 1000 words and so do miniatures, dungeon tiles and the like.
It appears that most posters are of the opinion that creating In-game- Shakespearean role-playing sessions with the local tavern barkeeper, or having self-discovery sessions-where you 'really get in touch with your character' during the game represent the "modern or sophisticated game/gamer". I think that those preferences are in NO way superior to those of us who still favor old school, slaughtering everything that moves in a dungeon, simply for the hell of it, and taking it's gold.
If it's theatre or drama I'm looking for, I'll turn on the t.v., or listen to my clients.
I have to agree. After all DnD has its origins with tabletop wargamers. And my originating games were very much in the ratio you describe back in junior high when a friend got a hold of a copy of AD&D years ago. To this day I still prefer rollplay to role play, and get a little tired of the high horse attitude those who prefer roleplay have.
To this day I still prefer rollplay to role play, and get a little tired of the high horse attitude those who prefer roleplay have.
Back when I used to prefer roleplaying over rollplaying, I certainly didn't feel superior to those who felt the opposite. On the contrary, I was awed by some people who mastered complex sets of rules, and could figure out tactics. Even today, after I switched to a higher percentage of chess-with-dice and a lower amount of story, I still continue to make huge blunders with the rules, and unbelievably dumb tactical decisions.
In fact, back in the day when I emphasized the roleplaying aspect, one of the things that I loved so much about it was that it was so EASY. Anyone could do it. My daughter mastered it at the age of three. I felt like Gary Gygax, and his ilk, would be looking down at us playing our baby games of amateurish thespianism and childish storytelling.
I'm just saying that not ALL of us ride a high horse.
I'm just saying that not ALL of us ride a high horse.
While true, it's become an unfortunate reality that a pretty large contingent of the gaming community regularly turns their noses up at the mention of a game that places more emphasis on the game than the acting. I know exactly where Kolokotroni is coming from on this.
But most of that type of gamer are "above" dnd. They're too busy running around pretending to be vampires.
Anyhow I've got my kids picked out and we're going to get together at lunch this Friday. I don't think we'll play dnd Friday (we'll likely play some Settlers of Catan or Kill Doctor Lucky), but I will probably plant the idea in their heads and get them thinking about it, so that we can try it out sometime in the next few weeks.
I'm just saying that not ALL of us ride a high horse.While true, it's become an unfortunate reality that a pretty large contingent of the gaming community regularly turns their noses up at the mention of a game that places more emphasis on the game than the acting. I know exactly where Kolokotroni is coming from on this.
Thanks for the suggestions. I'm going to check out Castles and Crusades as a starting point. I think I agree with you that starting with 4E might not be the best choice for the audience.
For what its worth....
...don't bring minis - it teaches that physical things are the gamepieces
...don't skip making a character - it teaches that characters are selected not invented
...don't play 4e - it provides a first impression that battle tactics are the heart of the game
You asked, I answered. I respect differences of opinion, but I did not come here to debate anything. >Avoid playing with students in your own class. Play publicly, and only with those to sign up and are interested. Avoid teaching rules... this places unnecessary emphasis on rules; explain instead that imagination is infinate, thoughts occupy no space and have no weight.
The human imagination is precious, and imagination is crushed from an early age as kids are told there are definate answers to things and this has become the current illusion of our age. It is my humble opinion that objects such as grids and minis limit the begginer's imagination, rather than expand it. Note that I am referring to the first couple games only in this post. Introducing other items later seems harmless, but only later.
Recommend:
>Start with OD&D, 1e, or OSRIC v2.0.
>Spend 10 minutes rolling stats and making the character
>Spend 10 minutes on the character's background and goals
>Immediately start playing.
>Avoid grid use. Describe everything. Ask the players to describe their characters. Ask them to roleplay. There will be much time for commercialism and combat later.You never get a second chance to make a first impression.
Regards,
—Pax
They're too busy running around pretending to be vampires.
Not all of us.
At the risk of derailing this thread, I would like to apologize to those whom I may have offended with my own arrogance. I promise I have made a conscious effort to respect other play styles. I am not perfect and still fail. I am trying.
But most of that type of gamer are "above" dnd. They're too busy running around pretending to be vampires.
That got me to laugh out loud at work.
I had a new player recently join my group and before making a character he asked what type of game I ran. I told him it's not high political drama, it's more like an action movie.
|
|
It appears that most posters are of the opinion that creating In-game- Shakespearean role-playing sessions with the local tavern barkeeper, or having self-discovery sessions-where you 'really get in touch with your character' during the game represent the "modern or sophisticated game/gamer". I think that those preferences are in NO way superior to those of us who still favor old school, slaughtering everything that moves in a dungeon, simply for the hell of it, and taking it's gold.
If it's theatre or drama I'm looking for, I'll turn on the t.v., or listen to my clients.
Its clear you are not representing old school, you are describing hack-n-slash, a genre that both Gygax and most gamers from 1983-2009 find crass and uncouth. Perhaps its not your fault for learning a revisionist definition of old school. Sorry, Allen, but you've described a video game, because "slaughtering everything that moves for the hell of it is just, maybe, one of nine classic alignments. So, even by the old school game system, you've defined behavior that simply does not represent what the game was about.
Its clear you are not representing old school, you are describing hack-n-slash, a genre that both Gygax and most gamers from 1983-2009 find crass and uncouth. Perhaps its not your fault for learning a revisionist definition of old school. Sorry, Allen, but you've described a video game, because "slaughtering everything that moves for the hell of it is just, maybe, one of nine classic alignments. So, even by the old school game system, you've defined behavior that simply does not represent what the game was about.
Why did put your start date at 1983, so what about D&D prior to that date? Is that not "Old School"?
4e can have as much or as little combat as any other D&D version. It depends upon the DM.
Its clear you are not representing old school, you are describing hack-n-slash, a genre that both Gygax and most gamers from 1983-2009 find crass and uncouth. Perhaps its not your fault for learning a revisionist definition of old school. Sorry, Allen, but you've described a video game, because "slaughtering everything that moves for the hell of it is just, maybe, one of nine classic alignments. So, even by the old school game system, you've defined behavior that simply does not represent what the game was about.It appears that most posters are of the opinion that creating In-game- Shakespearean role-playing sessions with the local tavern barkeeper, or having self-discovery sessions-where you 'really get in touch with your character' during the game represent the "modern or sophisticated game/gamer". I think that those preferences are in NO way superior to those of us who still favor old school, slaughtering everything that moves in a dungeon, simply for the hell of it, and taking it's gold.
If it's theatre or drama I'm looking for, I'll turn on the t.v., or listen to my clients.
I don't really agree. Its possible Mr. Stewart has taken things to an extreme but I think he really is pretty much in the ballpark of correct in terms of what the game was about.
It was essentially a survival game involving using ones head, character abilities and magic items to continue down to the next level. While not everything was a fight there'd sure be a lot of fights and when you were not fighting you'd be trying to use your head and your abilities and magic items to navigate past a trap, riddle or other obstacle.
Gygax tells that the original Castle Greyhawk campaign involved him working feverishly every week to come up with challenges to entertain his players as they delved ever deeper into the Dungeon. What we have seen of Gygax's DM, Mr. Kurtz work definitely echoes this theme. Both Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure and the more recent conversion as Castle Maure celebrate this style of adventuring. They represent extremely difficult dungeons full of deadly creatures, traps and puzzles and infused with some interesting secrets. What they don't emphasize is story and role play - its essentially a very cerebral form of hack and slash.
Furthermore we see these same themes played out in pretty much all of Mr. Gygax's early releases. Keep on the Borderland is a very hack heavy adventure - there are some subsidiary themes going on but its going to be dominated by hack.
Tomb of Horrors is some what lighter in the hack department but its still very much about going down a hole, trying to overcome obstacles and get the treasure - drama majors need not apply - in fact they had best not apply, if your character concept is 'impulsive and rash' then you outright die in Tomb of Horrors. Put simply that adventure actually punishes role playing by killing any player that ever gets it into his head to say 'This is probably a bad idea but my character would do it'. If you do anything that is less then optimal you die.
Isle of the Ape is similar - the adventure is a brutal challenge to the players based on pure attrition and the fact that they are cut off from civilization. Its meant to strain a powerful party through what amounts to resource denial hence the endless attacks by wandering dinosaurs and the assault on the party's equipment through the use of a hostile jungle environment. You survive Isle of the Ape by playing smart and using your dwindling resources properly.
We see the same themes if we look at some of Gygax's other works like Against the Giants or Temple if Elemental Evil. The whole idea of heavy role playing, especially role playing characters with significant flaws is really what Hickman brought to the game especially with the material that was being produced post Dragonlance.
Its clear you are not representing old school, you are describing hack-n-slash, a genre that both Gygax and most gamers from 1983-2009 find crass and uncouth.
That was certainly not the case in my sampling.