This is the multi-year Q&A sessions held by D&D co-creator Gary Gygax here at EN World, beginning in 2002 and running up until his sad pasing in 2008. Gary's username in the thread below is Col_Pladoh, and his first post in this long thread is Post #39.
TSR Q&A with Gary Gygax
- Category Features
This is the multi-year Q&A sessions held by D&D co-creator Gary Gygax here at EN World, beginning in 2002 and running up until his sad pasing in 2008. Gary's username in the thread below is Col_Pladoh, and his first post in this long thread is Post #39.
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
Actually, Erac was a dual class fighter/magic-user, the swordplay bit being learned when he was transported to Barsoom by a cursed scroll. He came down in the Land of Ugor, had to fend off the cannibals there, and soon Erac was a 1st level fighter. He made F6 on that alternate world Mars, IIRR, before finding a way back to Oerth so that his magic would again function.Deuce Traveler said:Ouch. Gary, what did those poor paladins ever do to you? And here I thought you enjoyed making that class.
All I can add is that it is liukely a bad ides to play when both DMs are sipping Southern Comfort and seeking diversion from the ordinary...
Cheers,
Gary
Deuce Traveler
Adventurer
I have a taste for Southern Comfort myself. Perhaps I'll bring a bottle or two if I'm able to make your next Con.
airwalkrr said:
Nod. I agree. I think it's great role-playing, and that your DM is being "hard but fair" with having the villagers of Hommlett let off the bad guys in their trials.
If I was DMing it, I'd have the lords of Hommlett -- the two guys in the tower -- be in charge of judging cases, and have no compunction at executing bandits. If I wanted to be complicated, I might say that lords can't deal out capital punishment, so they need to wait for a circuit judge to come for a trial, and I might have the circuit judge be corrupt. But jail breaks I wouldn't think about, as the prisoners would be in a deep, lightless hole in the underbelly of the tower.
I like the idea of turning the Moathouse into your base. I did that in the computer game version (though other than staying there, I couldn't fix it up and change the map, it being a computer game). One thing to worry about is monsters returning to any parts you aren't watching closely, or "new secret doors" being discovered. Bwahahaha!
Deuce Traveler
Adventurer
Haakon, we actually sent for a few priests from the nearest city to be help run our temple in the Moat House and took our gold and used almost all of it to hire the men to guard it from monsters coming back in and make band-aid repairs to the wall for now. And yes, we are scared about secret entrances that we have not yet found. We sealed up one with a tunnel by collapsing some stones...
Gary, how did the idea for the Temple of Elemental Evil come out? It feels like a living, breathing world to a greater extent than Keep on the Borderlands. I suppose that's because the Keep was it's own internal environment, while the area around the Temple has a more diverse atmosphere due to the competing factions and interests. So far we've enjoyed it more, and the DM has also, especially because we're not the kind of party to stick with the storyline. We made the Moat House into a base, attacked some of the more actively evil people inside Nulb (town hates us now), tried to recruit our own spies among the people of Nulb, changed the pirates' ship into a floating thieves guild, and started a small chapel for Pelor while spreading the faith. And despite all this, the DM has done a decent job of taking the information provided and just running with it, which makes this, in my opinion, a well-designed module.
Gary, how did the idea for the Temple of Elemental Evil come out? It feels like a living, breathing world to a greater extent than Keep on the Borderlands. I suppose that's because the Keep was it's own internal environment, while the area around the Temple has a more diverse atmosphere due to the competing factions and interests. So far we've enjoyed it more, and the DM has also, especially because we're not the kind of party to stick with the storyline. We made the Moat House into a base, attacked some of the more actively evil people inside Nulb (town hates us now), tried to recruit our own spies among the people of Nulb, changed the pirates' ship into a floating thieves guild, and started a small chapel for Pelor while spreading the faith. And despite all this, the DM has done a decent job of taking the information provided and just running with it, which makes this, in my opinion, a well-designed module.
SpiralBound
Explorer
Gary,
I have a question for you. A friend and I were comparing the stereotypical 3rd Ed D&D player mindset to that of players of 1st and 2nd Ed D&D. Specifically, that "today's gamer" (knowingly using and abusing the stereotype with full knowledge that not ALL players fit this mold) is much more prone to accepting the rules "as is" whereas in previous editions of the game, players and GMs were comparatively more willing to adjust or ignore a rule if it didn't suit them. This player attitude is in stark contrast to the fact that the D20 system is technically much easier to modify than the older editions were. A bit of a paradox really, the more adaptable and modular the rules became, the more "rules obedient" the average player has become - to the point that many "3 Ed only" gamers today assume without giving it a second thought that if the rules say "x", then no matter what, you play it that way.
Of course, the population of EnWorld does not usually fit this standard. For one, many of them have been playing since before 3ed, and are often much more willing to tinker with the rules and use them as guidelines, not laws. Yet even here I will still ocassionally see players lamenting that D20 is too complicated and that there are too many rules to obey... Apparently the act of simply not using a set of supplementary rules you disagree with has become a foreign concept. My friend and I realised though why this was the case. We realised why players are less able to intuitively 'mix and match" their rules, despite using a system that is more geared towards such than ever before.
The idea of "Rule 0" has become VASTLY reduced in prominence since the release of 3rd Ed D&D. One could even say it has been excised from the inherent philosophy of how one uses the rules. What was once presented as a set of guidelines that were only as valid as the desires of the GM and the enjoyment of the players is now being presented as "The Way Things Are Done"(TM). This has deeply influenced the newer generations of players in how they view the proper application of and subservience to The Rules As Written. Even supplimentary varient rules are treated as "take as directed" sources of additional mandatory rules. Frankly, I think that the lack of a "rule zero" in D&D 3.5 is it's largest failing.
Having said all of that... (P.S. thank you for your patience thus far!) If you were to write Rule Zero now with the current crop of new, young players in mind, people who've never played anything older than the "outdated" D20 3.0, just how would YOU phrase this idea?
I have a question for you. A friend and I were comparing the stereotypical 3rd Ed D&D player mindset to that of players of 1st and 2nd Ed D&D. Specifically, that "today's gamer" (knowingly using and abusing the stereotype with full knowledge that not ALL players fit this mold) is much more prone to accepting the rules "as is" whereas in previous editions of the game, players and GMs were comparatively more willing to adjust or ignore a rule if it didn't suit them. This player attitude is in stark contrast to the fact that the D20 system is technically much easier to modify than the older editions were. A bit of a paradox really, the more adaptable and modular the rules became, the more "rules obedient" the average player has become - to the point that many "3 Ed only" gamers today assume without giving it a second thought that if the rules say "x", then no matter what, you play it that way.
Of course, the population of EnWorld does not usually fit this standard. For one, many of them have been playing since before 3ed, and are often much more willing to tinker with the rules and use them as guidelines, not laws. Yet even here I will still ocassionally see players lamenting that D20 is too complicated and that there are too many rules to obey... Apparently the act of simply not using a set of supplementary rules you disagree with has become a foreign concept. My friend and I realised though why this was the case. We realised why players are less able to intuitively 'mix and match" their rules, despite using a system that is more geared towards such than ever before.
The idea of "Rule 0" has become VASTLY reduced in prominence since the release of 3rd Ed D&D. One could even say it has been excised from the inherent philosophy of how one uses the rules. What was once presented as a set of guidelines that were only as valid as the desires of the GM and the enjoyment of the players is now being presented as "The Way Things Are Done"(TM). This has deeply influenced the newer generations of players in how they view the proper application of and subservience to The Rules As Written. Even supplimentary varient rules are treated as "take as directed" sources of additional mandatory rules. Frankly, I think that the lack of a "rule zero" in D&D 3.5 is it's largest failing.
Having said all of that... (P.S. thank you for your patience thus far!) If you were to write Rule Zero now with the current crop of new, young players in mind, people who've never played anything older than the "outdated" D20 3.0, just how would YOU phrase this idea?
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
Okay...Deuce Traveler said:
Now and then I am not above mixing Southern Comfort with straight bourbon over ice...
Cheers,
Gary
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
Paul J. Stormberg said:
That was a mean DM's trick also. I'll have to add that to the collection of tales of D&Ding, most of which appeared in Dragon Magazine, that I plan to gather and have published in book form one of these years
Cheers,
Gary
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
When the WoG was completed, I decided to start a new campaign based on Oerth rather than continue using my generally undetailed paralleel earth setting. Thus I created the VoH, ToEE, Nulb and Stoink for nearby town adventures. As I had the whole envisioned from the start, there was a good deal of continuity in the end products. the Temple was meant to be the dungeon crawl base replacing Castle Greyhawk, and more levels would have been added, but...Deuce Traveler said:
When Robilar freed Zuggtmoy, I pretty well scrapped the idea of using it for ongoing adventures for my group, vowing to get back to finishing it eventually. As I was not able to do much DMing thereafter, that never happened, so Frank browbeat me into having him complete the unfinished ms. for the ToEE. Of course, that did not have the added levels, but it was complete and in order.
Frank followed my initial material, understands that I write with mainly critical detaius only so as to encourage the DM to make the work his own.
Cheers,
Gary
Col_Pladoh
Gary Gygax
Howdy SpiralBound
Clearly you are most serious about this matter, and I relate to what you are saying
If I were to write a rule regarding rules, I believe I would do it in this general way:
While this work contains clear, concise, and complete rules for the game, they are not graven in stone. Each Dungeon Master is unique, as if the player group. Together they develop a special world of their own, the campaign setting. As this environment is created by the group, the rules that govern it must suit their needs. In short, the DM has carte blanch to alter the game rules, doing so with the advice and concent of the players if a wise game master.
FWIW,
Gary
Clearly you are most serious about this matter, and I relate to what you are saying
If I were to write a rule regarding rules, I believe I would do it in this general way:
While this work contains clear, concise, and complete rules for the game, they are not graven in stone. Each Dungeon Master is unique, as if the player group. Together they develop a special world of their own, the campaign setting. As this environment is created by the group, the rules that govern it must suit their needs. In short, the DM has carte blanch to alter the game rules, doing so with the advice and concent of the players if a wise game master.
FWIW,
Gary
SpiralBound
Explorer
Thanks Gary,
That's well spoken and certainly echoes my feelings on the matter. I guess I am serious about it. I'm lucky in that the people I play with are older and more experienced, but I often hear of conversations with younger players that typify my above points. I think that the worst part of it all is that these players are being robbed of what I feel could be a fuller, more enjoyable roleplaying experience. To these players, D & D is more akin to playing a boardgame minus the board. Still, I guess if they're still having fun... I just think that they could be getting more out of it than they are.
That's well spoken and certainly echoes my feelings on the matter. I guess I am serious about it. I'm lucky in that the people I play with are older and more experienced, but I often hear of conversations with younger players that typify my above points. I think that the worst part of it all is that these players are being robbed of what I feel could be a fuller, more enjoyable roleplaying experience. To these players, D & D is more akin to playing a boardgame minus the board. Still, I guess if they're still having fun... I just think that they could be getting more out of it than they are.
- Status
Similar Threads
D&D General
D&D Luminary Jim 'Drawmij' Ward Passes
Related Articles
-
D&D General D&D Luminary Jim 'Drawmij' Ward Passes
- Started by Morrus
- Replies: 64
-
-
-
D&D General Luke Gygax Brings Back Gary Gygax's Castle Zagyg
- Started by darjr
- Replies: 112
-