I had this thought, maybe it is self evident to all of you, but no one in my family is that interested in DnD so I thought I would share it here.
This is probably the Golden Age of DnD right here. The majority of us players fell in love with the game during first edition when we were young kids (I was 11 or 12). Now we are in our 30s and 40s, at the hight of our powers, still in love with the game, and producing all this great stuff.
Dungeon is a great magazine. I think it is by far the best reading in the whole DnD genre including rule books and all that stuff with the possible exception of the DMG. (And I havent read Monte Cooks books).
Probably not that many smart, creative 11 year olds are falling in love with table top DnD now, right? Monte Cook, and James Jacobs, and all you other guys are it. And you're totally awesome. I feel really lucky to be around for this, because when you guys retire, DnD will never be the same.
I know, another ramblling post, but you know what I mean.
Merry Christmas and thanks to the Dungeon writers for all your awesome work.
Bill
Hmm...that gives me an idea...
Did I write about this before? I have been thinking it a long time. My memory isn't what is used to be.
|
(...) My memory isn't what is used to be.
So you are already beyond your golden years? ;-)
I agree with you, though. And I am glad to see a posting not complaining that everything used to be better in the past or that the golden years are past...
I am probably as much a representative of the afore mentioned generation as you are. I am able to buy those book I just could lay eyes on as a youth, I have an enthusiastic D&D group meeting for five years by now, I am just lacking preparation time.
This is where Dungeon adventures provide invaluable help!
And since the introduction of 3rd edition Dungeon is the spear head for a lot of good inventions: just mentioning new stat block format, Dungeoncraft (where else to find this kind of advice?), the revisiting of old favourite places and "rejuvenating" them, and of course adventure paths!
I wish you nice holidays (for a change without D&D) and a happy new year!
Günther
P.S.
The same is true for Dragon of course. But to me the one anyway perfectly compliments the other. After all the game is called Dungeons AND Dragons, isn't it? ;-)
hehe i am wondering what your dates would be for the classical age and the silver age of D&D if we are currently in the Golden Age....
hehe i am wondering what your dates would be for the classical age and the silver age of D&D if we are currently in the Golden Age....
Classical Age is definitely early 80s, when the classic adventures came out (Giants, Drow, Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, etc), under EGG's guidance.
Jack :)
hehe i am wondering what your dates would be for the classical age and the silver age of D&D if we are currently in the Golden Age....Classical Age is definitely early 80s, when the classic adventures came out (Giants, Drow, Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, etc), under EGG's guidance.
Jack :)
Silver Age can be 2nd Edition. There where some interesting themes that emerged during this period. We got out of the Dungeon and did something a little less straight forward then a road adventure for one.
That said this naming convention feels wrong to me – we should be calling this the Silver Age Age or something. 1st Edition can be the Platinum Age, 2nd Edition would be the Golden Age etc.
This is probably the Golden Age of DnD right here. The majority of us players fell in love with the game during first edition when we were young kids (I was 11 or 12). Now we are in our 30s and 40s, at the hight of our powers, still in love with the game, and producing all this great stuff. Monte Cook, and James Jacobs, and all you other guys are it. And you're totally awesome. I feel really lucky to be around for this, because when you guys retire, DnD will never be the same.
I know, another rambling post, but you know what I mean.
Merry Christmas and thanks to the Dungeon writers for all your awesome work.
Bill
As a mid-30's guy who started playing at age 8-10, I've actually been thinking exactly the same thing, in almost exactly those same terms. Judging from these boards, "Savage Tide" has to be the biggest event ever to hit the game; James Jacobs is grandmaster, and Logue and Pett (as much as I hate to admit this where they can actually read it) are rising stars, possibly more talented than any 2nd ed. designers (with the exception of Bruce Cordell). We're lucky to be here, sharing this. Gary Gygax should be proud.
Its nice to see replies so thanks to everyone.
I personally thought first edition was great, but then I was between 11 and 15, what did I know. We had a game for eight months that was strictly hack and slash but it was really really fun.
Second edition was more complicated with less payoff, in my opinion. Not a silver age for my gaming. Nuff said about that.
Third edition is also pretty complicated, but at least there is a lot of payoff. And Dungeon is great. The written adventures are the flowering of the whole system. The awesomeness of The Bullywug Gambit in particular inspired this thread.
Before beginning this post I left the tap on in the bathroom sink upstairs (which is clogged) and the water has come dripping through the ceiling. For a while I mistook the drip drip drip sound of the water hitting the floor for the cat clawing at one of his toys.
On the one hand, thank God I have a home with two floors, and runnning water, and a cat. On the other hand, my memory really seems to be dribbling out of my ears. Maybe one day they will do a study showing that role playing games stimulates the brain enough to prevent or slow down senile dementia.
BR
...We're lucky to be here, sharing this. Gary Gygax should be proud.
I hope he is.
Recent years have seen D&D really blossoming (IMO), and Dragon and Dragon contribute a lot to that.
While fun, the 2/e years were in many ways lackluster -- often a strange hodgepodge of components that were sometimes very poorly supported. The leadership WotC and Paizo (and certainly other sources out there) provide are carrying the game forward beautifully.
Jack
While fun, the 2/e years were in many ways lackluster -- often a strange hodgepodge of components that were sometimes very poorly supported.
Agreed.
2nd Ed suffered from a lack of unity in the basic rules (being an updated 1st Ed, basically) which led to settings and supplements that worked poorly together, for the most part. Some of the products were cool in concept, but lacked "meat," leaving the majority of development up to the DM. Some would leave undeveloped basic information for making the setting work (like typical cargos and price range per cargo rating in the Spelljammer setting). Some would violate the rules detailed for the setting (or even a different section of the same supplement). There was a lot of good material, but trying to integrate things was a pain.
3.0/3.5 started with a unified rules system and everything built on the core rules, instead of being developed in isolation and kludged together. Also, WotC and Paizo have put some effort into making sure products are compatable with the core rules, which means they can be used together or in bits and pieces as the public wishes (we're going to anyway).
Agree. It's a golden age right now. But what is being done to entice the 10-year-olds to the game? And you can't say recruit your kids - it's too easy.
...Probably not that many smart, creative 11 year olds are falling in love with table top DnD now, right?
Why think this? My gut feeling is that D&D is doing at least as well as ever. That said, I think D&D has always been a bit of a fringe product -- I heard some sales numbers a few years ago, and most would be surprised how few people (percentage-wise) play.
Jack
|
I ran into an aspiring tabletop gamer at the local Barnes and Noble just last week, and he looked to be about 11 or 12 years old.
He came over to the RPG section (where I was browsing) and began pulling half a dozen or so rulebooks off the shelf.
He rambled on about his excitement over discovering D&D in a way only a kid with Asperger's Syndrome could.
When I told him that I had been gaming for 25 years, he seemed impressed, asked for my advice on what rulebooks to buy, then promptly ignored every one of my suggestions.
|
I agree with this as the Golden Age but I do have one problem with it: it's too easy to make PTs instead of PCs.
With the uber-Feats, Prestige Classes and racial Temaplates many gamers are only putting together Tools instead of Characters.
I'm doing a one day, stand alone adventure Sat morning -- gesthalt PCs since very few can make it -- and a player asked if he could run a Barbarian / Wizard. He wanted to add Two Prestige Classes and a Template I'd never heard of. Now, this would (maybe) be okay if he had developed a rich storyline and background, as if he were trying to develop a Character. But it's just a tool, no character, merely a Powergaming PT.
What can I say, I like story emersion not powergaming and the stuff out there is so geared to Powergaming and PTs. The 3.5 DMG is inferior to the 3.0!
-W. E. Ray
Agree. It's a golden age right now. But what is being done to entice the 10-year-olds to the game? And you can't say recruit your kids - it's too easy.
When my wife and I went to visit (out of town) my god daughter & her family this Summer I bought & brought the D&D Basic Game (from 2004 with the Black Dragon mini) and DMed them. None had ever played. My god daughter LOVED it and the adults enjoyed it as well. I bought her the new basic set for Xmas.
Anyway, I think one important thing to remember with kids is to start out playing hack & slash and slowly build role playing into it. Also, don't use complicated rules. The basic sets are good because a lot of newbies get frustrated with the time consuming character creation process.
Hell yes!!
I long thought that early 2nd edition, with the great campaign settings and wide open world was the best, but in hindsight we are surely in those times now.
3.5 is the most well designed yet, and the company has done well with supplements and settings. It is easier to teach than ever.
I'm loving it.
I agree with this as the Golden Age but I do have one problem with it: it's too easy to make PTs instead of PCs.
What can I say, I like story emersion not powergaming and the stuff out there is so geared to Powergaming and PTs. The 3.5 DMG is inferior to the 3.0!
You run into this problem in every game system. A certain amount of powergaming is inevitable as players learn how the rules work. I'm a bit of a powergamer, myself, so I know the lure.
The thing to do is recognize it and as a DM come up with simple limits. Either limit rulebooks (at a minimum, no rulebooks without DM review) or "no use of feats, prestige classes, and templates without background/story motivation." The second limit will help separate the munchkins (those who just want to make powerful characters) from the powergamers (those who want to make the most powerful version of their character concept).
You run into this problem in every game system. A certain amount of powergaming is inevitable as players learn how the rules work. I'm a bit of a powergamer, myself, so I know the lure.
Hmmm, a dangerous subject, discussed many times and many places on this board -- with little agreement.
I think 3.5 deliberately caters to powergaming -- it sells because it's what many players want. To WotC's credit, the game works just as well when you don't powergame.
I think it's better for the game, too. Younger players, more apt to do the powergaming thing, will buy and stick with D&D if it gives them what they want. Later they can mature and engage in character development and real roleplaying. Yeah, that was probably provocative :/
To stay briefly on-topic, I think this is part of the reason D&D is so great right now -- it can be all things to all people.
The thing to do is recognize it and as a DM come up with simple limits. Either limit rulebooks (at a minimum, no rulebooks without DM review)
By far the best solution -- just say no to a lot of the extras. Not to say there's not a place for supplemental stuff, but a little goes a long way. IMHO if you can't make a fun, interesting character with the basic rules, no amount of additional options are going to help you.
or "no use of feats, prestige classes, and templates without background/story motivation." The second limit will help separate the munchkins (those who just want to make powerful characters) from the powergamers (those who want to make the most powerful version of their character concept).
I've had a bit of an epiphany over this -- let the munchkins have their fun, so long as it doesn't mess up the game for others. They won't be happy if you don't give them what they want, and they can take the game down with them. Of course, they might bring it down quicker if you do give them what they want...
As always, IMO :)
Jack
|
I'm doing a one day, stand alone adventure Sat morning -- gesthalt PCs since very few can make it -- and a player asked if he could run a Barbarian / Wizard. He wanted to add Two Prestige Classes and a Template I'd never heard of. Now, this would (maybe) be okay if he had developed a rich storyline and background, as if he were trying to develop a Character. But it's just a tool, no character, merely a Powergaming PT.
What can I say, I like story emersion not powergaming and the stuff out there is so geared to Powergaming and PTs. The 3.5 DMG is inferior to the 3.0!
You're complaining about powergaming, and running a game with gestalt PCs? Uh... experience cogntive dissonance much? :)
|
|
LOL. Yeah, this is my first w/ gesthalt but it's only a 1 day thing and only 3 PCs, one of which is a family member who's never played. It was either that or PCs w/ Cohorts.
Thank you, DragonChess, these are things we pretty much do in our game already. I don't want to turn this good thread in another direction, though, especially one so heated. Sorry if I kinda started it.
Definitely a Golden Age! It's been said that the 3.5 caters to everyone and that is one of the main reasons it's superior. But WOtC could (SHOULD) put out a couple of books that cater to heavy story emersion for us anti-munchkins -- the REAL DMG, 3.0, dedicates almost all of its chapters on developing table atmosphere, adventures, campaigns and world building. Why not a book that greatly expands on these?!
It would kinda be like the 2E variety of Material Planes but just suggestions and principles about different ideas DMs have tried and included. Unearthed Arcana, for example, is a book like this.
-W. E. Ray
"WOtC could (SHOULD) put out a couple of books that cater to heavy story emersion for us anti-munchkins -- the REAL DMG, 3.0, dedicates almost all of its chapters on developing table atmosphere, adventures, campaigns and world building. Why not a book that greatly expands on these?!"
I think that would be an awesome idea too. They talk somewhere about managing the flow of information. It would be good to see more about that.
Regarding young people and DnD, it would be interesting to see how many are playing these days, if any marketing people out there happen to know. But I also think it is ok if the game dies a natural death with our generation. If computer games had been around when I was a kid I probably would not have got into DnD. It is hard to see how the game will in the future attract the kind of talent it has now if it isn't for love of the game. I mean, it wont be for the money.
If we're using the ages of superhero comic books as an analogy, I would have to say we are in the Silver Age of D&D. The Golden Age would have been the early years and 1st edition (say mid-seventies to late-eighties). The Golden Age was often a bit byzantine, but perhaps more free-wheeling as well. I'll just say 2nd edition was a loss of focus, but with the rise of 3rd edition we are in the equivalent of the Silver Age of comics when superheroes became more streamlined, 'scientific', and dynamic. That doesn't mean the Silver Age is anything less than the Golden Age. I honestly prefer Spiderman to the early Superman comics, but they each have their own charm.
Definitely a Golden Age! It's been said that the 3.5 caters to everyone and that is one of the main reasons it's superior. But WOtC could (SHOULD) put out a couple of books that cater to heavy story emersion for us anti-munchkins
Maybe a Dungeoncraft compilation? There's a product that would appeal to a broad customer base (hint, hint).
Hmm, Golden Age. That would be the 70's, before the hard bound copy. And that would include the few pages in the Chainmail rules which kickstarted Arneson and Gygax on the fantasy tabletop game idea. I played in Arneson's group in St. Paul. Being there was quite an experience.
Any tales to share with us Chuck?
Hmm, Golden Age. That would be the 70's, before the hard bound copy. And that would include the few pages in the Chainmail rules which kickstarted Arneson and Gygax on the fantasy tabletop game idea. I played in Arneson's group in St. Paul. Being there was quite an experience.Any tales to share with us Chuck?
Hear hear, what was it like?
While fun, the 2/e years were in many ways lackluster -- often a strange hodgepodge of components that were sometimes very poorly supported. The leadership WotC and Paizo (and certainly other sources out there) provide are carrying the game forward beautifully.Jack
2nd Ed suffered from a lack of unity in the basic rules (being an updated 1st Ed, basically) which led to settings and supplements that worked poorly together, for the most part. Some of the products were cool in concept, but lacked "meat," leaving the majority of development up to the DM. Some would leave undeveloped basic information for making the setting work (like typical cargos and price range per cargo rating in the Spelljammer setting). Some would violate the rules detailed for the setting (or even a different section of the same supplement). There was a lot of good material, but trying to integrate things was a pain.
I long thought that early 2nd edition, with the great campaign settings and wide open world was the best, but in hindsight we are surely in those times now.
Well I started the convention of dividing the 'ages' up by edition. But I'm wrong. Its a flawed way of looking at the whole thing. For one thing its pretty obvious that the later stages of an edition are significantly different then the early stages. Also the very themes that guide the campaigns change. The whole 'back to the Dungeon' movement predates 3rd edition but it certainly is in evidence in 3rd edition. In fact I think its only in the last year or 18 months or so that we have begun to move away from this theme.
When I think of a 'silver age' or 2nd epoch if you will of D&D I'm thinking of the movement that was around near the end of 1st edition and continued on in the early days of 2nd edition.
Early 1st edition was, in some ways, a pretty limited game. It very much had that 'classical' feel one finds in Maure Castle. Adventures took place underground and they involved dealing with nasty traps, horrible monsters and weird puzzles. There is nothing wrong with this style of adventure but it very much showcases its war gaming roots. You go in you kill the baddies, grab the treasure and you leave, rinse and repeat. I'm sure some DMs where doing great roleplaying in this era but they where doing it in isolation. The product basically did not support it.
By the later stages of 1st edition and continuing on into 2nd edition we really began to see a new style of gaming emerge. The monsters now had more complex motivations. Even the lowly kobolds where getting their act together. Many adventures now took place outside of the dungeon and role playing encounters had emerged as an important aspect of the game and not just something that siphoned off some of these hundreds of thousands of gps the players had to spend. The worlds that where being designed where exceptional in their vision, if not always in their execution. In the end I think we owe a lot to some of the themes that really saw their fruitation in the early years of 2nd edition.
Now I agree that as time went on 2nd edition really started to go downhill. The product quality began to really slide. The rule system became overloaded and increasingly failed to mesh with itself. These where dark days and one could hear the muttering that RPGs where going to suffer the same fate as Wargames as the computer industry stole all the new players. Seems as though we escaped that fate. Probably because, so far, an RPG is better around a table with friends.
Agree. It's a golden age right now. But what is being done to entice the 10-year-olds to the game? And you can't say recruit your kids - it's too easy.
Ditto that. Besides when they hit their rebellous phase they are likely to leave your game table and start hanging out with those cool Vampire players....
Really I think I would like to see a return of short stat blocks, less rules, and more imaginative play. I really don't see this as a golden age for most people except for the 30-something crowd.
GGG
When I told him that I had been gaming for 25 years, he seemed impressed, asked for my advice on what rulebooks to buy, then promptly ignored every one of my suggestions.
Thank God for the clarity of youth.
;)
GGG
LOL. Yeah, this is my first w/ gesthalt but it's only a 1 day thing and only 3 PCs, one of which is a family member who's never played. It was either that or PCs w/ Cohorts.
Thank you, DragonChess, these are things we pretty much do in our game already. I don't want to turn this good thread in another direction, though, especially one so heated. Sorry if I kinda started it.
Definitely a Golden Age! It's been said that the 3.5 caters to everyone and that is one of the main reasons it's superior. But WOtC could (SHOULD) put out a couple of books that cater to heavy story emersion for us anti-munchkins -- the REAL DMG, 3.0, dedicates almost all of its chapters on developing table atmosphere, adventures, campaigns and world building. Why not a book that greatly expands on these?!
It would kinda be like the 2E variety of Material Planes but just suggestions and principles about different ideas DMs have tried and included. Unearthed Arcana, for example, is a book like this.
-W. E. Ray
Hear hear. Monte Cook once said something to the effect that the amount of page count allocated to a topic inside a book (core, suplement, etc...), can implicately tell you a lot about the core features and emphasis of a game system. In D&D the rear third of the Player's Handbook is nothing, but spells. Then there's 20 pages of combat. How many pages are dedicated to straight up Roleplaying?
I think of 3.x as a product of the Magic: The Gathering's effect on the way folks game. Character creation is more blatantly about "killer deck construction", "combos you can get off" "5-foot-moves" and "tightening up the rules language" than characterization, mood, or theme. But then it did start out as a wargame (not that there's enything wrong with that - I like wargames too).
Still I pine for less rules and more play, and stat blocks you can read in one sitting. Ah me, that's going to sound terrifically ironic in the months to come.
GGG
|
Okay, *streches and prepares*...
I've been gaming for about 3 years now, nearly 4. I'm nearly 19 so I would've gotten into DnD when I was 15. I got in just as revised 3rd edition came in. I've been getting every Eberron book since it's release. I get excited by every part of DnD, d20, Cthulu and all that other stuff.
Would you like to know how I got into this? Through video games. I'm not talking about Neverwinter Nights, not talking about Baldur's Gate. I'm talking about the fact that I write my own video games. Ever since I was 10 I've been writing stories, drawing character portraits and planning grand schemes. To any of you who have taken the grand seat of DM upon yourself, this might seem very familiar.
The great breakthrough to DnD came when my mother asked me what I wanted for christmas. I remembered hearing about a game where I could invite my friends around, hang out and have a fun time telling stories with them. That was all the knowledge I could glean from saturday morning cartoon, pop culture, references.
Getting on to an online book store, (I think you know the one...) I started looking for this mysterious Dungeons and Dragons game. I was a bit let down when I found out I could only get one book of the core three for christmas, but I was surprised when instead of the 3rd edition books I'd been looking at on the internet, I recieved the 3.5 editions when I turned 15.
Since then I managed to google information about a series of magazines that were giving information about the game to expand the enjoyment. The first one I found was issue 314 of dragon, shortly after I managed to get the last copy at the newsagents of the fantastic Maure Castle superadventure issue of Dungeon.
I had no gamers to play the game with, but soon my friends at my high school played video games also. I managed to convince about 3 people to pick up the Players Handbook. I now know about 8 people with whom I've convinced to pick up DnD as a hobby. Through my perseverance, I've funded a library of magazines and books all for roleplaying. DnD motivated me to get a job, just so I could learn all I could about the game.
Like I said, I'm new to the game, and no wonder. Dungeon makes so many references to the 70s and 80s modules that came out that I just end up scratching my head going 'huh?'. Another difficulty for me is probably the fact that I need to travel on a train for an hour to the city, just to get to my nearest stockest of DnD books. Okay, so living in Australia is probably also a hinderance, we get everything about a month after most of you have already filed your books away and re-read your magazines 5 times.
Anyway, just thought I'd let you all know what my experiences were for picking up DnD as a new gamer of the 21st century.
~Valmoth
Personally I've been gaming on and off (mostly off) since 3rd Edition came out in 2000. I picked up all the core rulebooks that first year, when I was 14 (I'm 20 now). I've also picked up wayyyyyy too many rulebooks/manuals/cover price Dungeon and Dragon magazines. At least when comparing my actual play time to money spent. It's like I spent way too much money on something I once-in-a-blue-moon get to experience. Anyway...
6 years ago, when I actually picked all the stuff up, I knew only minimally about D&D. My older brother had picked up some things from Second Edition when he was about my age (14.. Not 20), but quickly gave it up as football, sports, and his friends took over. I think we sold that stuff at a garage sale, unfortunately. That was really the first and last time I saw it. Until I saw the new 3e stuff on the shelf at the bookstore as I passed the "new" section. I had read quite a number of fantasy books already (being a fan of fantasy, of course), so it was only natural to gravitate towards it.
I honestly haven't played that much. I most love DMing, it just seems way more fun to me. But throughout my life, getting together with my friends has been almost always an impossible obstacle to overcome (Living 90 minutes from each other and not being able to drive is a huge obstacle.) As such, I've been pretty much a video gamer with an insane obsession with reading/checking out D&D stuff. I've played a little bit here and there, but nothing campaign-worthy.
As to the Golden Age of D&D. I can honestly say I don't think so at all. I don't know how you guys "had it in your hayday" but now it's just way too easy to get distracted. Video games seem like they're killing the game, minus the most hardened of veterans and those who can't easily access the newest games. I think the world wide web, while allowing us all to expand and create a web of people to share ideas and D&D lore with, really takes away from having to ACTUALLY get together with your friends. NOTHING substitutes for actually getting together, I know that firsthand, but it's so much easier these days to say "Hey, wanna play some (insert newest game here)?" Than actually getting people to get up, get dressed (Hopefully), and come over to sit down and play. It just seems way easier these days to "Do something else" than to get people to actually come over and play. It's its own unique, wonderful experience. But even then, it seems finding people to play with is hard (although helped by the web), and getting anyone interested in playing is even harder. Those who don't play games seem like they'd actually be easier to convince to try it out than someone who hardcores WoW all the time.
This isn't the age of once-in-a-while TV viewing, reading books late into the night, and only knowing the people in your own town. This is the watch TV often, rarely ever read books, and knowing people from Australia to Berlin to Shanghai. I don't personally watch TV (minus the Sci-fi Channel and Adult Swim on Cartoon Network), and I love reading. But being an Army brat, I know people all over the world. But even then, everyone here knows people from all over the world. On that same thought though, even running an online session seems more like a video game than sitting at the same table.
For those OF the hobby, sure this COULD be a golden age. There's SOOO much information out there for everyone to do everything they want to. Although personally I don't care for most of it. Having not been around playing for the past 30 years, my adventures are always fresh and new. A 10x10ft room with an orc guarding a chest is still exciting instead of something I've done 1,000 times already. I still like my fantasy that epic fantasy. Horse and Dungeon. Dragon and Forgotten Tombs. Fresh, new magic and the mystery of the non-human races. To me it's all still new, but to someone who's played it all, I could see why a campaign setting like Eberron was selected, to try and "move along" with the whole fantasy theme.
As for the younger generation, getting back to games... There's too much instant gratification in video games. The gratification of roleplaying and completing your objectives and enjoying the adventure seems almost completely lost. You only really enjoy the roleplaying aspect as you get older and more mature. For a bunch of 11 year olds these days, it's much easier to fire up the latest game and hang out/play together on there than to sit around a table and roll dice. But hey, I love it. But then again people always thought I was weird...
Anyway, that's my two cents. I don't really know how first and second editions played out during their high times, but I can say that while the freedom of information and change is golden, the players are harder to find unless they've been playing for years already or are turned onto the game itself and love it. New blood is harder to find with so many video games dragging people to the screens than to actually socially interacting with people around a table.
|
|
Glad to hear you're a heavy roleplayer, GGG. There seems to be fewer and fewer nowadays.
I'm new here so I don't know what alias you use when contributing; Great Greeny, what adventure of yours can I look forward to, what from past issues?
Great story, Valmoth, belated welcome to the game. It's definetly true that most fantasy computer game fans would want to try D&D. Just consider that you can think outside the box when roleplaying with friends; computer games have to, by nature, stay in the box.
We old-time gamers like continuity and nostalgia so we appreciate when the new publications reprint 1E classic stuff. I had thought it was pretty easy to follow even for one not familiar with Acererack, Strahd, Eclevdra, Kyuss or Uncle. Maybe I was wrong.
-W. E. Ray
This has been a fun thread. I am thinking that computer games have been some type of age of the game too, anyone else remember Pool of Radiance thru Balder's Gate? I think this has had a big influence on the game and game rules; I have had many players over the years tell me "that is how my ability/spell works in such and such game by TSR. I was really surprized at how bad the current D&D online game is and how far from the rules they diverged and their bogus reasons for doing so.
I think of the ages that most people point out as the game rules trying to keep pace with what we GM's were already doing and also as a response to deal with the backlash of what other games already offered. I will always think of 2nd ed as just adding the expansion of skills to the game; something most of us had already done by inserting skills, usually from other games, they just codified it and limited a few spells; most of the other stuff was whitewash. I think this backlash built so high as to cause the game to degenerate or expand, if you will, into the nearly open canon with fewer rules and less restrictions that is its current entity; Think about Rolemaster for a moment; what did it offer; hundreds of character classes that a person could play whereas everyone could play a magic class and not have the same spells as anyone else; that and a killer crit system; now I find that D&D is much like it in that they have jumped on the ideas of hundreds of classes that will sell more books and expand peoples worlds and break people out of the Tolkein box of this is the way it should be done.
I dont have any idea of titles for these periods; the silver/golden/platinum idea seems ok; put the game back when i started with the little books back in the bronze age, and I would call 1st ed the iron age, the introduction of computers and computer games the plastic age, 2nd ed the silver age, then then 3.0 and 3.5 are kinda like the industrial revolution in significance. Since we all have kissed the Blarney Stone and embraced this new 3.5 I would call this the Paper Age, I have more books and magazines, articles and whatnot junk that it fills neary all the walls of my gaming room and the closet
I think of the ages that most people point out as the game rules trying to keep pace with what we GM's were already doing and also as a response to deal with the backlash of what other games already offered. I will always think of 2nd ed as just adding the expansion of skills to the game; something most of us had already done by inserting skills, usually from other games, they just codified it and limited a few spells; most of the other stuff was whitewash. I think this backlash built so high as to cause the game to degenerate or expand, if you will, into the nearly open canon with fewer rules and less restrictions that is its current entity; Think about Rolemaster for a moment; what did it offer; hundreds of character classes that a person could play whereas everyone could play a magic class and not have the same spells as anyone else; that and a killer crit system; now I find that D&D is much like it in that they have jumped on the ideas of hundreds of classes that will sell more books and expand peoples worlds and break people out of the Tolkein box of this is the way it should be done.
RPGs have definitely changed and expanded over the years. Back in the early '80s, when I started, there were two basic types of systems: level-based and skill-based. Level-based systems usually had better combat mechanics (from their wargaming roots). Skill-based systems, however, made it easier to consistently determine game results for a wide range of actions.
D&D was originally a pure level-based game, where anything not covered by class abilities fell under roleplaying and house rules. It was during this time that people started designing hybrid systems (Rolemaster being one of them). TSR took some baby-steps down the hybrid path with the introduction of non-weapon proficiencies in Oriental Adventures (expanding on the weapon proficiency rules), which were later expanded to non-OA classes in the Dungeoneer and Wilderness Survival Guides.
As demand for more flexibility increased with new systems, more "within the rules" options were developed. The World of Greyhawk Boxed Set added modifications to the cleric depending on which diety he served. Dragonlance Adventures expanded on that with a system of divine spheres determining spell access.
Eventually, there were so many rules in so many different books, TSR came out with 2nd Ed to consolidate many of those changes. It was mostly the same system, however.
As time went on, more expansions and options were added (some mutually exclusive). Point-based systems (such as GURPS) became popular and the demand for more flexibility and options continued. Eventually the Players and DM Option books were released, 2nd Ed's last hurrah.
3.0/3.5 (and the d20 rules system) is a very different animal. It is a level-/skill-based hybrid with a different underlying rules system. The core rules are designed around enabling flexibility and options with the expansions building on the core rules instead of being tacked on.
Eventually, 4th Edition will be released and everything will change again.
Still I pine for less rules and more play, and stat blocks you can read in one sitting.
Hope springs eternal :)
In some areas we are going forward, in some back. I was not an enthustiatic D&D player until 3.5 since in my opinion 2nd edition rules were rather bad. Now the rules are such that I don't have an overwhelming urge to switch the system.
On the other hand, I think world development was more interesting back then. GH was pushed aside by FR (which I am not particular fan of) but aside from this, there were Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Planescape, Ravenloft, Birthright, Oriental and Arabian adventures...loads of fun stuff which I happily went through and grabbed elements to my Gurps/RuneQuest/Ars Magica/whatever games.
Dungeon has gone forward, it is now really great magazine, especially with adventure paths when before I rarely bothered with it. Dragon has been going back and forth, there are good and bad things in pretty much every one of those numerous new directions.
Oh, and as compendiums I would really really really love to get those Voyage of Princess Arc/Known World Grimoire articles collected. Do you prefer bribes or threats to get that done?