Search results

Re-reading the DMG, there are a lot of guidelines and advice if actually listened to could have saved many a game from alpha-striking and other absurdities.

To start with something more aligned with the OP's intent: There is a degree of hard fun, accommodation for the DM, lack of player centrism, lack of focus on RAW, and enforced human-centric milieu that makes 1E an admirable and different experience from its modern successors. Also, the game was...

No RPG needs rules for a group to show a nuisance the door.

I personally liked both Necromancer and Goodman Games modules. In fact, the early 3pp modules of 3.0 had their charm. Authors not only adhering to the encounter guidelines but also narrowing the effective encounter range (in terms of EL but also frequency of encounters) is what killed the 1E...

I know I could absolutely fiddle with the applications to solve this problem... but it doesn't change the fact the behavior is pretty juvenile.

Oh geez. I've had players who did this. They always turn out to be half-way out the door so uninviting them is just a matter of saving everyone's time.

One of the most annoying things players can do is moving their token around the map to explore while I am handling another player and their character's actions. It's disrespectful not only to me but the other players. It's so annoying and common that I might just forgo maps for players and just...

That's all group/table-related.

There are many reasons why people would want to play 1E. If one is considering 1E for play though, the most practical question one can ask themselves is not dissimilar to the one that can be posed for any edition. "Do I want to play with those who want to play 1E?" If your actual preferences...

Not true. There were 2 epic level adventures published in Dungeon magazine (Stormlord's Keep and the Quicksilver Hourglass). Also the third part of Mongoose's Drow War was entirely epic level (21st+).

I read the article, read this thread, and then bought the Limited Edition GMG. I was thinking about it for some time but I need a bit of spur to get me going. Thanks, Kobold Press!

You get something for nothing for low end bonuses but if you don't care about that, it is definitely more straightforward.

Kirthfinder offered options for smaller numbers via a Diminishing Returns rule. Essentially, bonuses to d20 rolls or base 10 scores pass +5 were halved (so a +13 bonus became a +9 bonus) and bonuses couldn't go higher than a +20. After dealing with bonus stacking nonsense for the last 2 years in...

I tried set durations for spells. They helped but not as much as I would like (the crux is people wanting to use the effects and not prepping either personally or preparing the team).

From experience, limit the buffs to no more than 3. If you're generous, 4. It allows you to keep dispel effects useful without bringing the table to a halt.

Yes.

Keep to 3.0e. Pathfinder 1E is derisively known as Mathfinder because it exacerbates the bonus bunkum that began after 3.0e core. That alone should disqualify it.

There are four bestiaries? I'm assuming the NPC listings in the GMG are considered to be the fourth?

Pretty much. I've tried all matter of methods but anything short of "knock it off" from the DM is not going to work for policing character makeups that are too strong for the campaign at hand.

So basically you're right because you're holding yourself to a different standard. Understood. We're done here.