I miss the days where everyone simply had their own game. I recognize the opportunities the OGL offered. But looking at the situation now....I miss the individuality of companies.
I echo that feeling as well. I don't want countless clone games. I like different games with different systems.
For me it was all about exploration of the unknown. I started out with the Red Box and all I knew was that there was a town with some spots to explore nearby. There was a magic using bandit named Bargle and he killed that good looking cleric lady.
As we progressed we learned the town was Threshold and branched out further. Everything was new, everything was a surprise and it was unimaginable fun.
As years went by, I lost that initial sense of wonder. I knew all about the campaign settings I used. I knew the MM cover to cover, etc. I lost that sense of exploration.
Then I stumbled across Wrath of the Minotaur (a Fast-Play adventure for new gamers) one day for 2nd Edition. I was introduced to the Vale, a simple little setting that had a nearby dungeon. It was new, this Vale and its Patriarch were, and that sense of exploration returned to me and rekindled a spark I had been missing. Eventually, Wrath of the Minotaur and it's follow up Eye of the Wyvern spawned an entire homebrew setting for me and my group that was new and exciting for us all.
But, as always that spark faded as well. After the release of 3e that spark and interest dimmed considerably. Then, one day I stumbled across a cool looking module entitled Crucible of Freya. I picked it up because I liked the cover and after getting home and reading through it...that spark was once again rekindled. An intriguing new mini setting to explore and man what fun it was. The Wizards Amulet, Crucible, Tomb of Abysthor, those were some exciting and new sessions for us. The Dungeon of Graves!?!?! of course my players had to go there, the name alone dared them.
So, each time I lost that "something special, it was the return of that feeling of exploration, the wonderment of immersing ourselves in a setting new and ripe for exploration. Not a huge campaign world..something small...local. Something that even the DM didn't really know what was beyond the border of that little map but you damn well better believe the group would discover it all together.
I love campaign settings, new continents, etc. But I have to admit, the mini setting that grows with the players will forever scream D&D to me more than anything else.
But they suffered penalties in the light. I think that was one of the issues. You can't have it both ways. If you have darkvision, you should also have a problem seeing in bright light. It makes sense.
I know I'm wandering off topic here a bit, but one thing I enjoy about infravision in 2nd Edition is that a character's eyes had to adjust to infravision. They had normal sight until conditions caused it to kick in, then, if exposed to bright light while infravision was active, you suffered a -2 penalty to roles for 1d4 rounds while your sight adjusted.
So for me I could never separate D&D from miniatures but I would be very interested to hear how folks may have formed the opposite style of play.
I never had the money for miniatures when I was a kid and first starting D&D. What money I had went to supplements.
When I got older, and had more income I started collecting mini's (not the plastic ones though) but by that point I had been playing for years and years without them and I still rarely use them in actual game play. When I do use them, it is usually for bigger battles.
Recently,I've acquired a keen interest in mini's, but instead of it leading me to using them in my RPG's more, it has led me towards giving Warlord (mini skirmish game) a try. I've got my dwarven army on the way. ;D
The loss of darkvision doesn't bother me any. Prior to 3e,the dwarves had infravision. I utilized infravision not as some sort of magical sight, but as vision in the infrared spectrum that kicks in when needed(the 2nd Edition DMG covers it as an optional rule).
Well, with dwarves having infravision, they still needed light in their cities to read, draw schematics, etc. Plus, as a naturally artistic race they would of course have light in their cities to make out the fine details of the excellent dwarven stonework and design.
Also, you can't discount the foundries and forges, that are without a doubt lit. So, to me it makes far more sense for them to have low light vision than it does to have dark vision.
As far as the dwarves building topside? Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Wilderlands and Mystara I know all have examples of surface dwelling dwarves.
Yes, but you can't just suddenly retcon all this stuff for no reason.
Kind of like the retcon of the entire halfling race when 3e rolled out? Oh, and what about the retcon of infravision with elves and everyone else when 3e rolled out?
Yeah, I'm going to have to totally rewrite the Principality of Ulek now. Oh, and the Dragonlance hill dwarves, or heck just hill dwarves in general.
The Dragonlance Age of Mortals trilogy of modules (Key of Destiny, Spectre of Sorrows, Price of Courage) are some of the best modules of all time. Heck, Price of Courage is over 300 pages!
Good story, creative critters and locations, and the end fight is against a dragon overlord. Good stuff and should go down as some of the best modules of all time.
My 2nd Edition RotR group has three players and the class breakdown is as follows:
Note: 2 of them jacked Iconic names or modified Iconic names for their characters.
Valeros:7th level human ranger with the Justifier kit. A local to the Sandpoint area who's mentor is Shalelu.
Merasil: 7th level thief / 6th level mage with the Spellfilcher kit. A Forlorn elf who initially plied her trade in Kaer Maga but fled the city after an altercation with her master.
Jander: 7th level specialty priest of Iomedae. He hails from Magnimar and happened to be in Sandpoint for the Swallowtail festival.
With only three players, there have been a few NPC's who joined them from time to time. We just recently started PF3, so far so good.
Yeah, and I think mine might be undead or immortal or something. Those screens were printed in 1989 and mine has seen a huge amount of use and abuse since then, but it still looks almost new, just a few dice pings on the front from teeth gnashing players.
Maybe it is possessed, sold it's soul for eternal youth or whatever.
Tobus Neth wrote:
I finally got a chance to sit down and check it out today. After reading the numerous complaints about the movie I hit Play with a wince.
While I didn't like the CGI/Cartoon mix, I have to say, I actually kinda liked the movie.
It definitely had room for improvement but I didn't find it to be the total crapfest that I've been hearing about. I'm not upset that I picked it up and hope they make enough sales n it so they can continue the series while learning from some of the mistakes they made on this one.
I was surprised by Lucy Lawless in it. I hated the fact that she was going to be the voice of Goldmoon but have to admit, she did a really good job. Keifer Sutherland on the other hand sounded awful.
1. My Rules Cyclopedia. Stuffed full of goodness, I love just reading through it time and time again.
2.AD&D 2nd Edition DM Screen (the one that came with Terrible Trouble at Tragidore). It is nothing fancy but for some reason that screen just screams D&D to me and makes me all nostalgic.
3. My first AD&D 2nd Edition PHB. It has a paper sack book cover and duct tape keeping it together. Its ugly but a testament to the many,many, many hours of gaming it gave us. The book cover and duct tape were put on in it in the early 90's to try and keep it in circulation with our group. Probably one of the best groups I've ever had and that ratty ol' PHB reminds me of that time.
4. 3 blue d6's I originally got in a Battletech set (one extra die was included by mistake I guess). They quickly became my stat rolling dice for D&D and still function as such to this day.
I was the opposite.I readily picked up 3e when it released and immediately began running it. After awhile, I saw it wasn't for me and converted back to 2nd Edition.
I'm not really making a point, I'm just tired and trying to stay awake.
And I HAVE used spreadsheets and PC generators from 2e days (most often the old HeroMaker software), whether they're "needed" or not, due to these two facts.
I use programs, not during play, but for NPC's and what have you (And that is me playing 2nd Edition), for reasons much like yours. Plus, I'm a paperwork neat-freak. I like my stuff looking smooth. I use the old AD&D Core Rules 2.0 program. Pure awesome. Best RPG program ever a far as I'm concerned.
Even as a disliker of 3e I wouldn't consider spreadsheets or programs necessary for the game. A tool is a tool, and if it helps make your job easier or look neater, I'm all for it.
I will admit that all the data a program has to process for 3e program makes them laggy though. ;D
The Last Rogue wrote:
Also, I tend to give the characters more "power" because I am rather stingy with magic items. I like the approach that involves a character's abilities as opposed to their equipment.
Wandering off topic here, but I agree with that approach. Midnight does it that way with the Heroic Paths and I think it works great.
Midnight is awesome.
Pax Veritas wrote:
Well since we're being cheeky. If WotC forgets the stickers, luckily most folks can just peel the them off the backs of their 3e books and port them over. Because lets be honest, for the most part it required companies like Paizo, Necromancer Games and Goodman games to put the D&D into d20.
If the Sense don't fit...
You must acquit.
Sparman goll do?
Spiderman, Spiderman,Does whatever a spider can
Spins a web, any size,
Punches Conan between the eyes.
Here comes the Spiderman.
Is he strong?
In the chill of night
To him, life is no big hang up,
Now who's reading too much into things?
You are perhaps 100% correct. I've just been finding myself growing increasingly agitated by the elitism that can be seen on some RPG boards or threads and perhaps allowing them to color my perceptions here.
Some comments just rub me the wrong way (justly or unjustly). I see a lot of comments about how her articles or books are somehow insulting to intelligent women. What about the women who enjoy her stuff? Are they not intelligent too? My wife (also a gamer) is not interested in this woman's work but she's far from insulted by it.
Maybe I'm just having an off day, I find myself more agitated than is normal for me. Most of my agitation didn't spring from this thread, it was some others (here and elsewhere) and this thread happened to be the trigger for my rant I guess.
Guess I'll go get a beer or something.
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
You sure? I seem to remember him painting runes and stuff all over Conan and fighting off the spirits or something.
Been a long time since I seen that movie though.
Doh, never mind you edited your post.
Sure! Just don't let me pick the name, I suck at it. Super Heroic Fun Bunch isn't awe inspiring. =/
I'm trying though!
Gamer elitism rocks....
Of my current two groups not a single one went to college (we do have one guy who would qualify as a computer geek though). We're all blue-collar schmoes, two of my players are high school drop-outs (neither are proud of it, but it is fact) and none of the guys (or one of the women) would kick Paris Hilton or Pam Anderson out of bed.
RPG's aren't just for Mensa members.
And wow, the women who find her articles interesting are somehow degrading to women or aren't welcome at your gaming tables?
Ah, the enlightenment.
EDIT: And I also find it amusing that while many gamers seem to like discussing the "ever shrinking" market for RPG's wondering how the hobby will survive, there is also a percentage of gamers who decry WotC for reaching out to other demographics. "We want more players....just not those ones....".