Search results

Nah. I like 4E. WotC has already produced more content than I could exhaust in a lifetime of play. I sometimes think about the things I feel 4E either does badly or not at all, and in these times I think about going back to D&D1 or D&D2. I'd play D&D0 again. But no, I burned out on 3E. It's...

I already think there are more options that any group of players could exhaust in a lifetime. I don't need more rules for killing monsters. Well, perhaps a bunch more Themes, those are good. What I want is some of the "everything else." Rules for everything outside of fighting monsters.

I think you'll find, looking back, that I said you suggested it. It's implied. If you agree, that we used to have rules for this stuff, and now we don't, but we should, then what is your previous comment in aid of?

Let's imagine I knew the answer to that. Do you think it would be relevant to the issue? If someone says "there were never rules for that," responding to the fact that there WERE by saying "well, we always ignored them," is moving the goalposts, I think we can agree.

Chas says that none of his characters have ever had any ambition, and that's fine. I know players who stopped playing D&D when Warhammer Quest came out, and never went back, because a game like that offered 100% of what they went to D&D for. But WotC shouldn't assume that, otherwise they'd stop...

Ahh...no it hasn't. In 1974 the assumption was that your character would become a Lord, which could mean any number of things, but he'd be a character with power and influence *outside* the encounter. The game expected this and there were rules for attracting followers, building strongholds...

Yes and for the majority of it's history, D&D was one of them. No it can't. YOU can do it, but the game isn't aware that there is any ambition besides "more levels." "Main focus" is something you invented. I feel as though the *absence* of even the *awareness* that there is, or could be, or...

I was working at WotC at the time, in the months just before D&D3 came out, but I was working in an office in LA and I found that it was interesting to see the difference between what we were hearing from Seattle and what was being posted here. I participated in a lot of threads, had a pretty...

I suggest AD&D or AD&D2.

They're not in a bind. We don't matter. What they need is a game that's fun to play and if a designer can't speak intelligently on what is fun, or what makes something fun, they should be fired. Throwing up your hands and saying "well everyone's idea of fun is different" means "we should not be...

But the Free City of Greyhawk box does have that. I just don't have that box. The City of Greyhawk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia That's what I'm talking about. I'd sorta hoped someone with some cartography skills and free time had taken that content and turned it into an electronic map...

That looks great. I guess I'm looking for that, but bigger, with something explaining what everything is.

When I say detailed I mean; what is this street called? What is this building? For which that map, which I have, has no details.

I'm looking for something...well, really I think what I want is the map of the Free City of Greyhawk from the supplement of the same name from the late 1980s. But I don't have that and have no real idea how to get my hands on a copy. But I'm thinking maybe someone out there with City Designer...

You make my point for me, sir. Killing monsters is a solved problem. What's next?

I mean the same "next" that guys like Jim Ward and Rob Knutz talk about when they talk about the D&D endgame. I mean the stuff that's littered all throughout the AD&D PHB and DMG. Becoming a Lord, getting a Stronghold, attracting Followers. I mean the stuff they made the Stronghold Builder's...

The great thing about kids is; they have lots of free time. It's not either or for them. We had video games in the 1980s. My friends would disappear when the new Ultima game came out. We played D&D several times a week and other RPGs and Axis & Allies and lots of other games, and we went bowling...

That's not what I'm saying, I'm not saying simpler is fun, I'm saying fun is fun. Strength isn't fun. Having a 17 Strength isn't fun. It's meaningless. You can't play a 17 Strength. It's not a game. But powers are fun. They're not simple, I never said anything about simple, that's your issue...

It's unfortunate because I felt Rituals represented some great design. In AD&D a magic-user is presented with a list of spells. Some of them are stupid. But you don't know which ones if you're a first time player and have no idea what an Adventure entails. So they take all those spells no one...

I wrote about this a few years ago, in regards to another company, Games Workshop. Here's the breakdown folks. We tend to get into gaming at around 12 years old, give or take, and we get out again sometime in college. Once you have a career and a family, or just a job and university, gaming...