I agree on STR and combat. An odd artefact of the percentile STR rules for fighters is that non-18 STR has a much lower mechanical impact on combat, saves etc than the comparable ranges of DEX, CON and WIS.
On the ToH example: I think this relates to some of the points about changes in playstyle that [MENTION=66434]ExploderWizard[/MENTION] makes.
In 2nd ed AD&D, much more than at the time ToH was first played, I think the GM is likely to call for a STR check to successfully hammer in spikes; for an INT check to notice that the cleric is not an anti-cleric; etc. Expectations around resolution and automatic success changed (and I think were changing even between 1975 and 1978 when the PHB was published).
In a system where the GM "says yes" if the players articulate a credible plan, and doesn't call for dice rolls to see if the plan succeeds, stats are not really relevant. But (again to echo [MENTION=66434]ExploderWizard[/MENTION], I think) once we get the thief class introduced and other similar changes in approach, that earlier style tends to drop away.
(To clarify the relationship between this comment and the ToH example: the ToH example is meant to illustrate the importance of "making good moves"; but over time "good moves" involve stat checks because of broader changes in approaches to action resolution, making stats more central. The flipside of this is that it's not entirely clear to me what stats are even for in very early D&D, but that's a tangential issue)
Yeah, I'm not so sure the delineation is all that clear. At least my own experiences with the various editions do not bear this out. Then and now, I call for die rolls when I'm not convinced the action in question is certain to succeed or fail.
But even if rolls are required in most or even all attempts by the player to act, the player with superior skill, foresight, and creative problem solving skill has an edge. He may not always succeed, but he will have many more chances to succeed than the player that lacks those attributes.
I have encountered it. I've also ready very, very many ENworld threads discussing it as a problem in actual play.
Sure, I've heard stories.
That seems to me a pretty big sign of something having gone wrong.
Oh, certainly! The GM was apparently a clown. Though... I've never met the guy, just heard it secondhand, so it's also possible my friends were just being hardasses and refusing to engage in a perfectly cool game. No clue, really.
A game in which - as [MENTION=66434]ExploderWizard[/MENTION] describes - the players' job is just to run their PCs through the GM's prepared sequence of encounters/events.
Yeah, that's lame. I've encountered a few DMs with issues along these lines, but always pretty light. They didn't come on hard with the railroad, just had a bit of initial resistance to some kinds of pushback.
Though (despite what you say below) I have also definitely seen many cases of passive players that expect the DM to take this sort of approach, and prefer it. They aren't interested in taking initiative in pushing the story in totally different directions
A game in which the PCs (and ultimately, therefore, the players) are victims of some deceptive twist whereby, in doing what they think is their heroic thing, they are actually serving the ends of the villains. (A lot of D&D scenario design seems to be rife with this. It exploits the metagame state of affairs that, in this sort of play, the players are expected to bite on the GM's "hook".)
Wait wait wait, what's wrong with this? Deception is off limits, to your view? Using players as catspaws is not okay?
Is it also bad for players to deceive and manipulate the NPCs, or does this just go one way? Why?
What does this have to do with forcing the players to follow the GM's preconceived plan? I've had evil NPCs attempt to deceive PCs countless times. Sometimes they fall for it. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the player sees what I'm about but doesn't think their character would, and they make themselves fall for it.
In every case, a good time is had by all, and a fun and interesting story is created. Subversion of expectations is a grand thing. I like it when a DM successfully deceives me, with a villain that seems like a hero or a hero that seems like a villain. I like it when a PC manages to kill a big villain out of the blue in a sudden anticlimactic alpha strike.
I don't see how any of this relates to a DM forcing his agenda on players.
I wouldn't recommend it, but the Planecape module Dead Gods is in my view a standout. (And the 3E adventure Expedition to the Demonweb Pits is in the same style.)
I have some Ravenloft modules that are similar.
In From the Ashes, there are adventure cards. "Tamara Belongs to Me", "Honest Bandits" and "Dark Heart of Oak" all frame the PCs into situations in which, basically, the GM already knows the answer and the players' role is to muck about until they learn it. (The players/PCs have no independent reason to engage or care about these mysteries.)
Okay, that's helpful. I might take a look at one of 'em.
It's not about passive players. It's a whole orientation towards the game, and who is driving events.
Well, passive players are a factor in how events are driven.
I'm fortunate enough to mostly play with excellent players and GMs. I play with some young new players, too, however, and player passivity is a common issue before they really get comfortable with the game. It's important not to just let them be led by the nose... one good way to really drive this home is to occasionally create a situation where the best outcomes only arise if you shuck off the "obvious" scenario presented by the GM.
And for clarity: I think it's very possible to have a game where the focus is different from Gygaxian dungeon-crawling - eg it involves PC values, social relationships, cosmological melodrama, etc - which is driven by player action declaration. But these dysfunctional modules aren't it.
Of course! No disagreements there. Current major campaign of mine is largely about the PCs' mercenary company and fledgeling nation. Most of my prep revolves around figuring out what their various accumulated friends and enemies are planning.
I actually haven't run a Gygaxian crawl in years, though I am currently prepping to run one as a one-shot this weekend.
