TSR Q&A with Gary Gygax

Col_Pladoh · Feb 17, 2005

Storm Raven said:
Note the word "progression"?

All powerful elves are really good thieves? I don't buy it.

All powerful elves are not happening. The ones not accomplished thieves are nothing but wedge-eared tree-huggers who wear tights and prance around in curley-toed shoes when not baking cookies for Keebler or making toys for Santa

Cheers,
Gary

Col_Pladoh · Feb 17, 2005

tenkar said:
Just an aside to the multi-class issue:

Multi-classing in the 3rd edition rules is much more powerful then 1st edition rules. 3rd edition characters get a total some of class traits, including HP and THACO (or BAB) and the flexibility of using class abilities from the multiple classes. 1st edition characters had reduced HP and THACO compared to others of their EX Point totals. This balanced the advantage of flexibility that multi-classing gave.

3rd edition is a game that runs at a higher power level, which appeals to the masses.

Reminds me of the movie Spinal Tap: "This one goes to 11"

Heh,

I'd describe the appeal as being to the munchkins and power-gamers, but that's just my opinion.

I can state with certainty that the number of 3E players is less than the number that played OAD&D in its heyday, c. 1983-5, so referring to "masses" is not correct. "Masses" play computer seek & destroy games

Cheers,
Gary

Col_Pladoh · Feb 17, 2005

BOZ said:
i know there's not much love for 2E, but when we played that i *always* used the optional "slow advancement" rule for demihumans. that way there was never an abrupt end, but once you hit that limit, things slowed down a bit, and in the case of elves, a lot.

Without comment in regartds to 2E, your rule regarding a slowing of advancement seems well-founded if your campaign world was based on human culture and society.

Cheers,
Gary

Storm Raven · Feb 17, 2005

Col_Pladoh said:
Surely you jest! An "artificially imposed" end to a story based on a game full of completely imaginary factors to make it fun and exciting? That's straining at a gnat and swallowing the camel without so much as a gulping motion.

No, it's noting that the progression of the game tends to work in a particular way, until it is arbitrarily stopped because of an odd game mechanic.

Barak · Feb 17, 2005

While I fully agree with The Man's description of elves, obviously dwarves should be unlimited in levels. I can accept typos that deny that, including those forthcoming.

BTW, I always thought elves level limitations were a bit high, myself.

Col_Pladoh · Feb 17, 2005

Sanguinemetaldawn said:
Although it didn't yield anything useful, thanks for addressing my earlier question.

To Greyhawk specifically...
Were you to run GH today what published material would you use?
Would a simple "all pre-2nd Ed" cut-off suffice?
Some you would exclude even from that?
More you would include?

Thanks again.

I have run little WoG-based games since 1986. when i do run OAD&D sessions based on Oerth i use the original maps done by Darlene and the books from the boxed World of Greyhawk set, along with such material as I have that i created specifically for my own campaign that might apply.

A cut-off at 1985 suffices quite well from my POV

Actually, there are some things in 2E that aren't bad to add to your OAD&D campaign, IMO.

Canon can be over-rated. If something outside such bounds makes your game better, then use it.

Cheers,
Gary

Storm Raven · Feb 17, 2005

Col_Pladoh said:
If the only difference between humans and the demi-human races was superficial--size and a few minor physical traits, why bother to have such races at all? Of course, fantasy literature suggests there are advantages to demi-human races too, so that might be a consideration to an able game designer...

I didn't say no differences, I said perhaps the demi-humans could have been designed in such a way that their net abilities don't make them obviously more powerful than humans in game mechanic terms. Surely there are drawbacks to being nonhuman (other than being unable to become an 8th level magic-user) that could have offset some of their advantages. To me, this seems like it would have been a much more sensible solution, and your explanations thus far have not illuminated why you chose the route you did over the alternative.

Conan multi-classed? you must have read different REH yarns than I did. Conan is an archetypical swords & sorcery barbarian, and his thievery was all by use of his brawn, superior reflexes, and savage abilities. Besides fighting and stealing, what else could he do that is worthy of awarding another class?

Might I point out that Conan was the "greatest thief of his time", with stealthy abilities that allowed him to sneak about virtually silently even in full armor and other abilities limited to the thief class of 1e days. I would modestly point to the original Deities and Demigods where one would note that almost all of the heroes of myth, legend, and fiction detailed therein were multiclassed humans, which strikes me as a blunt undermining of your assertions.

Col_Pladoh · Feb 17, 2005

Storm Raven said:
No, it's noting that the progression of the game tends to work in a particular way, until it is arbitrarily stopped because of an odd game mechanic.

As if all game rules weren't arbitrary, eh? Heh, and so much for you, mister smarty pants...

Cheers,
Gary

Col_Pladoh · Feb 17, 2005

Barak said:
While I fully agree with The Man's description of elves, obviously dwarves should be unlimited in levels. I can accept typos that deny that, including those forthcoming.

BTW, I always thought elves level limitations were a bit high, myself.

What? You think stubby rock-chewers should be more potent than the flighty ones of the forest? I am appaled!

:lol:

Gary

tenkar · Feb 17, 2005

Col_Pladoh said:
Heh,

I'd describe the appeal as being to the munchkins and power-gamers, but that's just my opinion.

I can state with certainty that the number of 3E players is less than the number that played OAD&D in its heyday, c. 1983-5, so referring to "masses" is not correct. "Masses" play computer seek & destroy games

Cheers,
Gary

Well, IMHO, the masses these days are munchkins and power-gamers. My group fell apart after the 2nd edition due to real life time constaints. We all keep in touch, we've all picked up the 3rd edition rules, but we have never actually sat down and played them. They seem to far removed from the games we had played for years (1st and even 2nd editions). The familiarity was gone. As a DM that hurts. As a player my adjustment would have been easier i am sure.

If we wanted a game that revolves around miniatures and grid movement and exact facing we would have moved on to Warhammer.
If we wanted uber characters we would return to RIFTS (a campaign that burned bright then out real fast)

That being said I picked up C&C for myself, and have ordered copies for the old group. I'll have to see if it takes hold where 3rd edition hasn't been able to.

I will say that some of the 3rd edition sourcbooks have been extremely well done... the splats however remind me too much of the wallet-bleeding that 2nd edition was famous for.

TSR Q&A with Gary Gygax

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax

Storm Raven

First Post

Barak

First Post

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax

Storm Raven

First Post

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax

Col_Pladoh

Gary Gygax

tenkar

Old School Blogger

Similar Threads

Related Articles