Search results

Technically, there isn't. The Expert set following Moldvay was edited by David "Zeb" Cook.

Players using their knowledge of the game as a game is metagaming, but appropriate as part of "superior play." The only metagaming in D&D that is cheating is peeking at the DM's notes. "Playing dumb" by only acting on what your character "knows" is just that, in my opinion.

"I love it when a plan comes together!"

Are you saying you are in fact one of those devious DMs that like fooling and pulling "gotchas" on the players? :eek: :D My guiding principle is that while I will sometimes try to "tempt" players into making "unbalanced" or sub-optimal choices, I "reward" appropriate caution represented by...

Oh! I like how you think! :] I'm a rat bastard, but not that rat of a bastard, though, and my veteran players knew that. The party in question was 6 PCs with assorted henchmen and hirelings (total of about 12 characters), a mix of veteran players of my campaign and n00bs. ;)

I'm going to go a bit off-script for my reply: 1. D&D Cartoon [gap of a couple years] 2. Endless Quest books (and several other similar gamebooks, notably the Choose Your Own Adventure series) 3. Dragon issues in the 150s-160s at local public library 4. D&D Hollow World boxed set (no basic set...

What I was trying to say, only said better. :)

Like I said, there should be clues, strong clues even, such as listening to the NPC wizard: "You can't win, but there are alternatives to fighting." or "Fly! Swords are no more use here! This foe is beyond any of you!" If combat is always the "safe fallback" option for an encounter, once...

Yes. Tempting the players is one challenge that can be considered in the DM's toolbox. Players may seek out additional information before taking almost every action. Skilled players will use all "informational abilities" (sensory info, scouting, magical scrying, interrogation of NPCs, etc) at...

Obviously our hypothetical encounter is lacking important context and detail. A good DM gives clues that can be picked up on by the players; part of "superior play" is interpreting and reacting to these clues appropriately. There is no real game in placing the characters in no-chance...

My little sister has an opening in her Candyland group. Should I tell her you're interested? :p In all seriousness, in D&D, not every seeming "combat encounter" is meant to be resolved through combat. If your low level party attacks the ancient wyrm and dies a swift, horrible death, it is...

Those that complain about real challenges might be better off playing Candyland with their little sister :p - E. Gary Gygax

A few months ago there was a thread on sexism in D&D. I mentioned in passing a reference to Women's Lib in OD&D, but couldn't find the original reference. Here it is! From Greyhawk, D&D Supplement I, page 35 (misspelling and emphasis in the original): DRAGONS: These additional varities of...

I guess I see hit points as enough "plot protection" for the assumptions of gaming style built into D&D over the years. For the record, I don't want "realistic" wounds/body points for D&D. Hit points allow players to behave heroically while also being kept in check by a measurable and dwindling...

Which presents the question of whether the "present edition" is really a sequential edition of D&D or a different game . . .

I'll let Gary answer this one: Rashness and foolhardiness are harbingers of death, as is timidity, in such adventure setting. :] That may be what "modern" sensibilities have come to, but certainly isn't what was present in the origin of the game. Gary often recounted how when he ran Castle...

The first part of your statement doesn't jive with the conclusion you reach from the second part. A Hero being as powerful as four men most certainly prevents "one shot" kills of the Hero. This is deliberate.

In my view, players may put their characters in bad positions with poor decisions. The die roll (saving throw or combat roll) is actually an additional protection [that they may not deserve]. This ties into what RC has referred to as the lure to tempt players into making "unbalanced" decisions...

"Al lot of folks" had Chainmail to refer to. It wasn't until AD&D or Holmes Basic that combat was fully explained in its own rules. Could anyone read the Men & Magic volume of D&D alone and understand how combat was supposed to work according to the rules given? The "alternative combat system"...

D&D itself didn't have the complete rules for combat. Players were referred to Chainmail man-to-man rules. It is impossible to learn how to run combat from just the original D&D set alone.