Does anybody actually "Pick Pockets" anymore?
haha. Good question. That skill in all editions has seemed to not be worth the risk in my mind. From the super-lawful DMs that if you successfully stole something, they'd make sure there were repercussions, to the auto-fail DMs because they just didn't like PP in the first place.
I don't follow the WBL guidelines of the more recent editions, but I wonder if anything a character stole would be counted against this limit? If so, it seems like a total waste.
|
This may just be me but....
WBL should only be used when you make a character that started at higher level.
But thats just me I think.
Aboundent magick shopppes and crafting of magic items makes getting magic items a breeze, so WBL makes since in this regard.
When magic items were rare how much coin you had did matter as much, which ment you could us it to buy land or shoppes/housing of your own if you GM allowed it.
Now trying to buy land etc would cut heavily into you WBL for equipment.
At least thats how I see it.
|
This may just be me but....
WBL should only be used when you make a character that started at higher level.
But thats just me I think.
Aboundent magick shopppes and crafting of magic items makes getting magic items a breeze, so WBL makes since in this regard.
When magic items were rare how much coin you had did matter as much, which ment you could us it to buy land or shoppes/housing of your own if you GM allowed it.
Now trying to buy land etc would cut heavily into you WBL for equipment.
At least thats how I see it.
Yeah you can thank presumed magic item ownership being built into the system math for that ditty.
Does anybody actually "Pick Pockets" anymore?
Two iRL uses for it:
1st level when we were POOR.
or
To get keys etc from guards.
But in OD&D & AD&D most thieves put minimum points in it. Your big choice was Traps or stealth.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does anybody actually "Pick Pockets" anymore?Two iRL uses for it:
1st level when we were POOR.
or
To get keys etc from guards.But in OD&D & AD&D most thieves put minimum points in it. Your big choice was Traps or stealth.
you'd put max points into pick pockets in baldurs gate 2 if you wanted that ring of regen from the first storekeeper you meet. otherwise its was a long sequence of reboots until success,
But in OD&D & AD&D most thieves put minimum points in it. Your big choice was Traps or stealth.
My eyesight is getting worse. I read that as "Traps or teeth" and had this mental image of thieves going around trying to lift people's dentures out of their pockets.
I guess this is the right thread for posts about bad eyesight and false teeth, at least.
Right, the math in older editions made no sense at all most of the time. Many times, the advantages from leveling were almost inconsequential. I read threads no where someone complains about how a pair of rules are inconsistent or the "maths" don't work out equally and I lol because THAC0.I remember back when 3rd edition came out, I was playing a lot of MUDs at the time. The MUD owner, the Head Coder, and myself (Head Builder) were deciding if we wanted to try to incorporate the 3rd edition rules into the code base.
The Head Coder had been a long time table top player - his opinion was that there was a certain elitism to the earlier editions. You had to really study the materials and memorize the tables and charts to be good at it.
The newer editions simplified things, which I think is a good thing, as it opened the game to a much larger audience. Even more recently when we've decided to try 2nd edition, for example, there's certain 3rd edition + ideas that we've incorporated into 2nd edition to make it more workable.
I think a 2nd ed base with parts of 3rd ed incorporated in can be really cool. 2nd ed does some things better, but lacks many options unless you start to add a lot of books. Or you could always add a bit more to the baldur's gate ruleset.
Internet
Internet (and the quick, affordable access the web) has changed things. Add the concept of the OGL and you got sites that are much more than newsletters with a customer service forum. Rules, houserules, campaign ideas, fanwork. Beats my dozen of dungeon magazines...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pace has also changed a lot. For homebrewed games anyhow; never played published adventure back then (expect for a bit of the WFRP imperial campaign), so I'm not sure about that.
In my parent's basement, with the same small circle of friends and few contacts with other gamers, games tended to drag a lot more (now combats drags with higher complexity, but that's a different type of drag).
Entire sessions were dedicated to shopping, making plans, exploring wilderness, combing trough ruins (not too fast because of traps), grinding through random encounters etc, without achieving much. Yet we found it fun. I wonder if could go back.
Characters in AD&D took years to level-up. REAL years, not in-game years. Not something I would go back to but it did bring a sense of achievement that newer games don't quite equal.
Ditto with wealth and magic items. Any regular and legit WBL character would have been called "Monty Hall!" foul.
In my parent's basement, with the same small circle of friends and few contacts with other gamers, games tended to drag a lot more (now combats drags with higher complexity, but that's a different type of drag).Entire sessions were dedicated to shopping, making plans, exploring wilderness, combing trough ruins (not too fast because of traps), grinding through random encounters etc, without achieving much. Yet we found it fun. I wonder if could go back.
Some of us never left ;)
I still run fast-paced roll-damage-bit of narration combat with most of the tactical rules stripped out, and lengthy exploration and shopping trips :)
In my parent's basement, with the same small circle of friends and few contacts with other gamers, games tended to drag a lot more (now combats drags with higher complexity, but that's a different type of drag).Entire sessions were dedicated to shopping, making plans, exploring wilderness, combing trough ruins (not too fast because of traps), grinding through random encounters etc, without achieving much. Yet we found it fun. I wonder if could go back.
Some of us never left ;)
I still run fast-paced roll-damage-bit of narration combat with most of the tactical rules stripped out, and lengthy exploration and shopping trips :)
Cool!
I admit I miss I fell to the pressure of "a game with no combat is a wasted game" I miss the laid back attitude (to most things in life actually, not just RPGs)
Does anybody actually "Pick Pockets" anymore?
In a 3.5 game a couple of years ago (before our last pathfinder game) we played a bunch of thieves in a city. It was a one nighter and we basically rolled up Rogues for that one game. We did all kinds of things in that town including pick pockets. We had to use all of our thief skills to get into and out of this one building in order to prove ourselves worthy to the local thieves guild.
So I say, yes that skill and any other Rogue skill can be used. It just can't be used in a Pathfinder AP :)
While I agree that the quality of the artwork in RPGs has changed, I disagree that the quality has gone down. I think the art has generally improved greatly: Take a look at the monster illustrations in the AD&D Monster Manual. I'll take today's art any day.I guess I was thinking more of images of the classes and such. For example, here's one image I remember looking at many times:
Link 1Compare that to:...
Are they hanging a baby dragon for its crimes?
And yeah, exactly what I mean, from fantasy and the team of heroes to cartoon of a craazzzy individual. We are in agreement.
There was a joke in a Dragon Magazine. There are these two Fighter types with nice armor and weapons and they watch this other guy walk by and he has what looks like fake armor and a pot on his head. One fighter says to the other "I betcha 20 gold he's 1st level."
The point is, when ever I look at that page in the AD&D 2nd Edition book, I get the impression that the group that just proudly killed this small dragon (and the one girl on the right looks like she is just out of breath) that they are all 1st or 2nd level. It makes me smile when I look at that page.
It's not just you. WBL is an abomination.
Agreed. The only thing I use WBL level for is if a PC dies and they make a new character. I give the new PC 1/2 WBL (depending on campaign.)
The worst example I can recall of how this game is different, and in some ways I blame video games for this, is when i was running an Alternity Campaign, and a player, who was growing tired of looking for clues, stated flatly, "Can't I just roll a die and then you can tell us everything we need to know so that we can go on to the next part of the game."
Heh, that even works within video games themselves. Seems most players want to get past the cutscene or conversation so they can go kill something, I want to get the thing killed so I can get to the next conversation or cutscene.... :)
And yet, as hard as I try, I cannot recreate those experiences. And I have tried, here, with so many PbP games.
Part of that is the whimsical nature of childhood, and part of it is that PbP does not support that kind of game style.
I think part of the problem is that some people only think in terms of leveling up and earning more special abilities/spells/etc. This becomes their main focus, rather than actually trying to bring their character alive and enjoy the experience.
I'm not sure the best way to address this - some have suggested not using experience anymore, just level the team up at certain times. This may help, as players wouldn't feel like they had to fight x number of combats in order to level up.
They would talk to each other and they would ask each other questions. I would ask the players questions like, "What do you do?" and the players would ask questions like, "What does the door look like?"
Very true. I can remember being in wonderment at the D&D world. I can remember asking one of my first DMs what would happen if I mixed x components together in a cauldron, what would I get. This was all relative to an NPC that gave us some rewards from her cauldron.
Part of it is that old saying; familiarity breeds contempt. Once players know the rules inside and out, nothing really surprises them anymore. Instead of thinking in story terms, they think in game mechanics. This draws them outside of the IC game and more into the OOC game.
The worst example I can recall of how this game is different, and in some ways I blame video games for this, is when i was running an Alternity Campaign, and a player, who was growing tired of looking for clues, stated flatly, "Can't I just roll a die and then you can tell us everything we need to know so that we can go on to the next part of the game."
That can probably be chalked up as a difference in play style. A lot of people like to play TTRPG as tactical simulators. They really get into the mechanics, learn them very well, and want to test their skills against whatever the GM throws at them, within CR-appropriate levels. They have fun by "beating" the encounters - it is a challenge of numbers.
The older play style of a really immersive, rules aren't all that important, story is the goal isn't as prevalent anymore.
|
|
What do we learn, or improve, or accomplish, by talking about how the game as we play it today is different from the game as we played it 30 years ago?
For me, aside from the family that my wife and I raised and our life together, playing D&D as a child will always be some of my happiest memories. And yet, as hard as I try, I cannot recreate those experiences. And I have tried, here, with so many PbP games.
It isn't the change in the rules. It isn't the illusion that somehow there is a "different" kind of math that was used then from what is used now. It isn't the dull repetition of magic items with extraordinary names that give a +2 to this, or a +2 to that. For me it is deeper, more complex, and at the same time connected to how our whole world has changed.
I would like to hear more about how the world has changed and its effect on gaming in your opinion.
When I played this game as a young person, everyone I played with would, even if they came at the game with entirely different perspectives on what they personally wanted to get out of it, do the same thing, the one thing that made the game so much fun for me.
They would talk to each other and they would ask each other questions. I would ask the players questions like, "What do you do?" and the players would ask questions like, "What does the door look like?"
That doesn't happen much anymore.
It still happens at my table. I have to admit I am very selective though and pick only the gamers I feel closest to play style wise.
The worst example I can recall of how this game is different, and in some ways I blame video games for this, is when i was running an Alternity Campaign, and a player, who was growing tired of looking for clues, stated flatly, "Can't I just roll a die and then you can tell us everything we need to know so that we can go on to the next part of the game."
That sort of killed it for me right there.
There have always been players like that so the "video games slew role playing" argument is not convincing for me. Reason I learned a long time ago to be ultra selective.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Those people who see it as a tactical simulation? Yeah. Lots of them around. It would be foolish to expect companies in the business not to cater to them. Hence, minis, detailed rules for every situation, the advice to always keep up the pace in every GMing book. This is naturally further exacerbated by the understandable desire of the various companies to splurge out Moar Rewls (tm). Even the idea of PFS and similar play does this, with its focus on detailed rules and consistent application of said rules. Thing is... Take a look at the beginning of RPGs. Random encounters with 5-50 orcs were nothing strange then. Story as the goal was a thing that happened late 80s forward or so.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can remember being in wonderment at the D&D world. I can remember asking one of my first DMs what would happen if I mixed x components together in a cauldron, what would I get. This was all relative to an NPC that gave us some rewards from her cauldron.
Part of it is that old saying; familiarity breeds contempt. Once players know the rules inside and out, nothing really surprises them anymore. Instead of thinking in story terms, they think in game mechanics. This draws them outside of the IC game and more into the OOC game.
I think part of the magic in AD&D 1st edition (before too many supplements came out) was that the DM had a great deal of creative control. The specifics were deliberately left vague for the DM to fill in. The DM had to make up stuff on the spot a whole lot more than they do with Pathfinder. There was more improv and less frantic flipping through a stack of rulebooks trying to find the rules for the situation at hand.
The downside is that different DMs would interpret the same situation differently. While that's great for creativity, it's hard to manage expectations: Can my character do that or not? This could lead to to unmet expectations, houserules that players assumed were "official" rules, and DMs becomming too heavy-handed.
Codification of situations leads to predicitbility, which is good in many situations, but at the same time erodes the sense of wonder.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi all,
Looking forward to hearing your stories.
I summed it up here: Old School Gaming Comparison.
In service,
Does anybody actually "Pick Pockets" anymore?In a 3.5 game a couple of years ago (before our last pathfinder game) we played a bunch of thieves in a city. It was a one nighter and we basically rolled up Rogues for that one game. We did all kinds of things in that town including pick pockets. We had to use all of our thief skills to get into and out of this one building in order to prove ourselves worthy to the local thieves guild.
So I say, yes that skill and any other Rogue skill can be used. It just can't be used in a Pathfinder AP :)
You must go here and battle the cultists/giants/ogres/drow/Tian oni doesn't really lend itself to pick pockets.
Ever feel that the perception of some monsters is too high? Sure you can get within 30 and sneak attack, but getting up to pick that pocket and get the key has been made pretty damn hard.
In games where picking pockets matter, that is where you will see it used. Thief the pc game represented as an rpg (which takes me back to some old thief characters).
Those people who see it as a tactical simulation? Yeah. Lots of them around. It would be foolish to expect companies in the business not to cater to them. Hence, minis, detailed rules for every situation, the advice to always keep up the pace in every GMing book. This is naturally further exacerbated by the understandable desire of the various companies to splurge out Moar Rewls (tm). Even the idea of PFS and similar play does this, with its focus on detailed rules and consistent application of said rules. Thing is... Take a look at the beginning of RPGs. Random encounters with 5-50 orcs were nothing strange then. Story as the goal was a thing that happened late 80s forward or so.
My groups laughed long and hard at the minis gimmick.
Hi all,
Looking forward to hearing your stories.I summed it up here: Old School Gaming Comparison.
In service,
Well said, pretty thorough.
The downside is that different DMs would interpret the same situation differently. While that's great for creativity, it's hard to manage expectations: Can my character do that or not? This could lead to to unmet expectations, houserules that players assumed were "official" rules, and DMs becomming too heavy-handed.
I've never had a problem with that. A good GM is a good GM. If the GM is inexperienced, then working with the players is the best way forward. When a player attempts to do something, give them a chance at it unless it is completely crazy.
Codification of situations leads to predicitbility, which is good in many situations, but at the same time erodes the sense of wonder.
This is key. I've found that I prefer rules-light systems, as they allow for a lot more flexibility. Rules heavy systems tend to make players think that they can only do something that is covered in the rules. This leads to questions like "What can I do?"
I remember back in the early years when explaining TTRPGs to people, I would say "Imagine a game like Final Fantasy, but instead of being limited in what you can do, you can do anything." That was always one of the big selling points.
I summed it up here: Old School Gaming Comparison.
Thanks for sharing.
|
|
You do know that, all these rules people find so confining came from players and GMs who wanted things spelled out more, right?
Rules-lite fits some play styles and rules-fat fits some play styles. I perfer more rules for combat myself and I think 90% of the rules added to game over the years has been for combat so I'm fine with that.
But I understand its not for everyone.
The downside is that different DMs would interpret the same situation differently. While that's great for creativity, it's hard to manage expectations: Can my character do that or not? This could lead to to unmet expectations, houserules that players assumed were "official" rules, and DMs becomming too heavy-handed.I've never had a problem with that. A good GM is a good GM. If the GM is inexperienced, then working with the players is the best way forward. When a player attempts to do something, give them a chance at it unless it is completely crazy.
Thing is, it's easy to say now that the community is pretty big, specialized gaming stores exist in *most* towns, Internet forums are easily accessible, RPGs are relatively accepted at large etc.
20-30 years back, when you were stuck with a crappy DM; you were stuck with a crappy DM...
And without being completely crappy, some gaming style and houserules were passed along almost in hereditary fashion from DMs ot DMs.
Took me years to realized some of my (believed official) 2E AD&D rules were in fact houserules from my old DM's 1st ed games.
To a certain extent, it's hard to go back to the earlier style.
Case in point: I was gearing up to run the classic 1985 AD&D module I6: Ravenloft using AD&D 1st ed / OSRIC rules.
I spent a couple of weeks preparing, but came to the conclusion that the mechanics of AD&D just don't really work for me any more. I even play-tested a combat with one of my players to refresh my memory of THAC0-based combat. (Bottom line: It kind of sucks.)
As much as I hate to admit it, I've come to prefer the tactical simulation of 3.x OGL minis on a battlemat. I had a hard time keeping track of the combat in my head.
Of course, maybe I'm just getting old...
To a certain extent, it's hard to go back to the earlier style.
I agree to a point. While I loved Basic D&D, trying to play it now would not work. A level 1 magic-user gets 1 spell for the day? That's going to be awfully boring.
As much as I hate to admit it, I've come to prefer the tactical simulation of 3.x OGL minis on a battlemat. I had a hard time keeping track of the combat in my head.
I think the battlemap can be fun, but it is definitely not something that is essential to me. Some of my players really prefer it, and in some posts online I've seen many people say that they will not play a campaign that doesn't use the battlemap. This tells me that the game's focus has shifted to the battlemap.
I've seen this in my own groups and heard it from other GMs as well. Some players get to the point where they think they only need to pay attention when their minis are on the table.
I'd like to be able to get away from the battlemap myself, but I think for Pathfinder it is connected at the hip.
In a more rule-lite system, I think having combat be more narrative-based then tactical-based would be great.
To a certain extent, it's hard to go back to the earlier style.I agree to a point. While I loved Basic D&D, trying to play it now would not work. A level 1 magic-user gets 1 spell for the day? That's going to be awfully boring.
As much as I hate to admit it, I've come to prefer the tactical simulation of 3.x OGL minis on a battlemat. I had a hard time keeping track of the combat in my head.
I remember playing village of hommlet as a 1st lvl magic-user. You had to be ultra sure you picked a useful spell..most of the time the default was sleep so as to save the groups butt in a mass encounter.
After that, it was the molotov coctail hour as all my guy could do was throw flaming oil, and occasioanlly use his staff as alternative to the 10-foot pole in hecking for pit traps.
|
|
In a more rule-lite system, I think having combat be more narrative-based then tactical-based would be great.
'Theater of the Mind' style combat works well if you have a GM who is attentive to detail and players who pay close attention to what a GM discribes and is also attentive to detail. When you have this it works really well.
I'll played 'Theater of the Mind' style combat where a player(s)for whatever reason miss-understood what the GM had discribed so was lost early on, also where the GM during a large combat forgot about some of the monsters and missed turns for them. So pretty much this is why I pefer battlemaps.
In my parent's basement, with the same small circle of friends and few contacts with other gamers, games tended to drag a lot more (now combats drags with higher complexity, but that's a different type of drag).
Entire sessions were dedicated to shopping, making plans, exploring wilderness, combing trough ruins (not too fast because of traps), grinding through random encounters etc, without achieving much. Yet we found it fun. I wonder if could go back.
Characters in AD&D took years to level-up. REAL years, not in-game years. Not something I would go back to but it did bring a sense of achievement that newer games don't quite equal.
We also sometimes played games without combat, but at least in the low levels, leveling almost always came fast. Then braked to a near halt.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me d&d style games are best when role play, story, and combat are in mostly equal measure.
Never understood why, those who say they have the most fun when role play is 90% or more of what happens, they play games like d&d when there are other things like 'live action role play' which is 100% RP.
Personally I'd get bored to tears role playing shopping at the market for 3 hrs of a 4 hour session.
Never understood why, those who say they have the most fun when role play is 90% or more of what happens, they play games like d&d when there are other things like 'live action role play' which is 100% RP.
I don't know anyone that plays modern TTRPGs and expects 90% RP. I'd love 25% roleplay. And by roleplay, I mean the players actually talking in character with one another or the GM. A typical session for me is something like:
60+% battles (drawing room on battlemap, moving minis on the battlemap, rolling dice for damage, updating HP list, etc.)
20% reviewing rules, arguing about rules, etc.
10% BS - cool movies coming out, sports, etc.
10% roleplaying, if we're lucky.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Similar to what Terquem wrote above is all the advice floating around on how to build the "most effective" character. Those "build guides" over on the Advice board really rankle my feathers
I think too much stat-tinkering lowers the quality of the game. It teaches the wrong lessons to novice players, encouraging them to power-game and min/max their way through. It also throws too big a burden on new players, who may think that they need a very high level of system mastery to even start playing the game.
Honestly, I prefer playing a Core-only Pathfinder game, with specific individual rules from other sources allowed in on a case-by-case basis. That seems to really help maintain the game feel I want to encourage while still allowing modern-style play.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Never understood why, those who say they have the most fun when role play is 90% or more of what happens, they play games like d&d when there are other things like 'live action role play' which is 100% RP.I don't know anyone that plays modern TTRPGs and expects 90% RP. I'd love 25% roleplay. And by roleplay, I mean the players actually talking in character with one another or the GM. A typical session for me is something like:
60+% battles (drawing room on battlemap, moving minis on the battlemap, rolling dice for damage, updating HP list, etc.)
20% reviewing rules, arguing about rules, etc.
10% BS - cool movies coming out, sports, etc.
10% roleplaying, if we're lucky.
I understand.
With so few people available to choose from in any given area its hard to find the 'perfect' group. So we have to take what we can and have as much fun as we can with the groups we end up with.
I didn't start until 2005, so I have no cool stories for this thread.
You are lying. Or else you're not old school :). I've been playing for about 27 years now thought you said you had been at it for over 30?
Similar to what Terquem wrote above is all the advice floating around on how to build the "most effective" character. Those "build guides" over on the Advice board really rankle my feathers
I think too much stat-tinkering lowers the quality of the game. It teaches the wrong lessons to novice players, encouraging them to power-game and min/max their way
Also, what in don't like is the attitude and assumption that everyone plays that way, thus Paizo must cater to their demands.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I never hear a never another reference to a build's DPR, it will be too soon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're currently playing through Night Below using Swords and Wizardry - a campaign I've owned a half dozen times through the years and always wanted someone to run for me (I skim read it when it first came out and quickly decided I wanted to play, not DM so havent looked since).
I'm having a blast - we're currently halfway through the second book and just had my favorite moment of the campaign:
Round two we rather futilely engaged in melee to discover most of us couldnt hit except on a natural twenty (whilst it seemed to hardly ever miss). The invisible thief decided to channel Douglas Adams: given discretion is the better part of valor, and cowardice is the better part of discretion he figured he'd valiantly run away (stopping to steal a couple of magical trinkets).
Round three we all fled - the monk got away but the other melee characters had no chance and all died (we had one glimmer of hope as a cleric got off a finger of death, although unsurprisingly the dragon made it's save). It didnt help the rest of the group that the magicuser tried to slow the dragon down by filling the entranceway with web.
Round four, the thief discovered that the dragon could see invisible anyway and perished in one rather swift bite.
The uninjured magicuser and half-level monk limped off to lick their wounds, leaving four fresh corpses and a dragon hoard about twice as big as when we arrived (besides the four dead PCs magical loot, the dwarf was carrying almost all of the gold and gems in a Leomund's hut).
We've since gathered new allies and are plotting our return strike. In a couple of levels time we'll be back with a much better prepared and planned assault.
I really like the fact we ran into something twice our level or more, rather than working through a gradually more difficult progression of foes (the monsters we're fighting now seem like they're around 2-4 hit dice and we're absolutely destroying them). Granted, that playstyl meant we pretty much all died immediately, suffered level drain, etcetera - however, when we finally get our revenge, it's going to be that much sweeter!
I was looking through some of my old stuff. Does anyone remember this old gem?
Well said, pretty thorough.
Thank you!
:-)
To a certain extent, it's hard to go back to the earlier style.
It can be. I'm running a campaign now that uses 4e, but has a definite "old school" feel to the DMing.
You can see more about the campaign at: Bold Beginnings WWW Site. We are actually playing the follow-on campaign, Strands of Fate now, but I have not had time to update the WWW site.
In service,
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the things I liked from the older games was how weapon proficiencies worked.
At 1st level you knew how to use a few weapons depending on what class you were.
I just cant see a 1st level martial knowing the ins and outs of 30+ odd weapons of a very wide varity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I recall about the games is that they have gotten more complex and more vague.
That seems like a contradiction to me. Games get more complex specifically because they become less vague with the introduction of more and more rules to govern every little thing. I agree the biggest games have become more complex (driving a rush by the smaller publishers to create more and more games with simplified rules, such as Gumshoe). But "vague" belonged to the old systems. Vague was the ocean in which a DM in the early 'eighties swam in perfect bliss, houseruling every little (and some major) thing not covered by the rules (which was a lot of things).
I began playing in 1981. I was only 11. I played one character from the Basic Set, who died in the first round of his first combat, being bitten by a spider (save or die can make a game interesting, but sometimes it just ends the game for you). My next character came from the Players' Handbook. I named him after the first guy, who was named after the Testor's paint that I painted the mini with. Testor, and Testorsson - LOL.
I had no idea what primer was, and as a consequence, the paint quickly rubbed off.
Funniest moment from the early days? Hmmm... I don't know how funny this is, but one standout came when my buddy's older brother was running us through White Plume Mountain. We got to the part with the giant crab in the bubble, and it quickly became apparent that the bubble was delicate and that damaging it would let in scalding hot water that would kill our characters. My buddy, Bob, not getting it, seemed determine to cast spells and throw crap around to put us in ever greater danger. Fed up, I told the DM:
"I shoot an arrow into Bob's a@# and leave."
And Testorsson did just that.