Search results

Indeed. Personally I play OD&D and AD&D. I'd play and run Pathfinder any day. I'd play 4e with the right people, since for me people trump systems every time. I wouldn't run it myself, however. Now, I'm puzzled about the Essentials line. I'm in a wait-and-see mode, but if Wizards indeed is...

I like fences. There are pros and cons to both situations. In one case, you have one dominant game driving the market, and providing a template for others to follow, or differenciate themselves from. That's the paradigm we have had for the longest time in RPG history with D&D. If the leader...

You are still able to find 3.x core books for very reasonable prices, and still will for a long, long time, judging by the current prices of core books for AD&D 1E and 2E. Now that said, there is a publisher in France that did just that. The "3.5 Bible", which collects all the SRD rules in a...

I'm not really the kind of person that just goes off into whatifs like this. I had enormous fun when I started playing. I made many mistakes, some of them very entertaining and memorable themselves, others a lot less, and I just learned from there. Today, I still have enormous fun playing...

Yes you're mean, and you're starting the game with an uber-railroad, which is well, extremely bad. My advice: Don't play the part where they're being caught and beaten. Start the game AFTER these events and let them escape.

But whether you like changing the rules for the sake of it or not, or whether said changes are warranted or not, make sense or not, isn't the question here. The question as you reformulated it is whether it is "fair" to its authors/creators to modify their rules at the game table. That isn't...

Greyhawk is more relevant to me right now than it ever was before. The rest, to paraphrase Shakespeare, is silence to my ears at this point.

First, maybe you took my comment as snarky, in which case I have to apologize, because that's not the feeling I wanted to convey. Second, this is a message board, and just as you may not want to answer my responses, you could just as well have sent a private message if you didn't want me to be...

What do writers of a game have to do with me playing the game in my home? How is changing rule X or Y "unfair" to them? Is not playing their game at all more or less "fair" than changing this or that rule? The question still doesn't make any sense to me.

Etherscope

I do. It's important to have this level of consistency so that the players know what the houserule is or isn't. That's what differenciates a ruling on the spot from a house rule to me, with repetitive rulings on the spot spawning the need for a written house rule in my game. As for the OP, I'm...

Yeah, sorry. The guys lost me there: "The good rules remain. The tone and epic nature remains. The bad is delicately remade with modern game theory so that only the game play improves." If I want to play 2E, I want to play 2E. I don't want 2E with "modern game theory". Bleuargh.

Grey Box FR, please.

Nope. Considering that a mega-dungeon is a living construct that benefits from gradual improvements, rewrites, modifications and actual play, it's actually totally understandable. It's a distillation process, and it's one of the hardest products to actually build effectively, because there's no...

This. I still use the supposedly "old" meaning of campaign, personally.

Untrue, in my experience, and most others I've known who played the module, at least. There's a whole sandbox around the Temple. If you make allies of some of the cultists of the Temple, or fool them into hiring you, or go back and forth between Verbobonc and Hommlet on some mission or another...

I feel like you are somehow assuming that work on a megadungeon ends once actual play begins. That's just not the case. I am running a megadungeon called the Tower of St. Makhab. This megadungeon is actually a blueprint/experiment field for my larger project, the Black Abbey of St. Yessid...

This is it. The same way, Gary was actually a fierce opponent in battle, and would cheer when winning from his side of the screen (got this from Rob Kuntz directly, as I asked him specifically about it some time ago), much like he did when he commanded armies across the sand table. It was all in...

Or the henchmen and hirelings invariably got killed during the first session, which in the end made them both a waste of time and money on the PCs part. Alternately, they annoyed DMs when players kept using hirelings and henchmen as automatic trap detection devices and fodder in fights. This...

What Ourph says is true. I can understand the impulse to want to know more about the original campaign, though. I went through that phase (and still am going through it to some extent). What must be resisted indeed is an obsession with somehow playing an absolutely "true" or "canon" version of...