Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Malmuria" data-source="post: 9541454" data-attributes="member: 7030755">Well that's just it...texts like <a href="https://friendorfoe.com/d/Old%20School%20Primer.pdf" target="_blank">Matt Finch's Primer</a> read the rules of early versions of the game assuming GM's won't be resorting to these kind of railroading tactics to ensure a heroic narrative, but of course many GMs did exactly that, leading to the 80s style of play.&nbsp; But if you read the rules and modules as-is, what they present is&nbsp; a world with asymmetric challenges that can't just be brute-forced via combat.Exactly.&nbsp; And I would say that an edition like B/X has several tools that, if used (see above), lead to more varied gameplay:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Encounter distance and surprise: present in 5e as well, but more useful in a game where the random encounter plays a larger role in gameplay</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Reaction rolls: monsters are not necessarily, or even often, combatants.&nbsp; They might be wary but defensive, indifferent, or even helpful</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Morale: monster's don't keep attacking if they are losing.&nbsp; They retreat, regroup, come up with new strategies</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Xp for gold: combat is not necessarily incentivized</li>
</ul>Modules written by Gygax himself use the above in ways that evince a particular design aesthetic, one that [USER=7045072]@Gus L[/USER] argues is derived from <a href="https://alldeadgenerations.blogspot.com/2024/11/gygaxs-fortress.html" target="_blank">Gygax's experience as a war gamer</a>. I would say many modern OSR modules use the above to center gameplay on exploration rather than on combat at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Malmuria, post: 9541454, member: 7030755"] Well that's just it...texts like [URL='https://friendorfoe.com/d/Old%20School%20Primer.pdf']Matt Finch's Primer[/URL] read the rules of early versions of the game assuming GM's won't be resorting to these kind of railroading tactics to ensure a heroic narrative, but of course many GMs did exactly that, leading to the 80s style of play. But if you read the rules and modules as-is, what they present is a world with asymmetric challenges that can't just be brute-forced via combat. Exactly. And I would say that an edition like B/X has several tools that, [I]if[/I] used (see above), lead to more varied gameplay: [LIST] [*]Encounter distance and surprise: present in 5e as well, but more useful in a game where the random encounter plays a larger role in gameplay [*]Reaction rolls: monsters are not necessarily, or even often, combatants. They might be wary but defensive, indifferent, or even helpful [*]Morale: monster's don't keep attacking if they are losing. They retreat, regroup, come up with new strategies [*]Xp for gold: combat is not necessarily incentivized [/LIST] Modules written by Gygax himself use the above in ways that evince a particular design aesthetic, one that [USER=7045072]@Gus L[/USER] argues is derived from [URL='https://alldeadgenerations.blogspot.com/2024/11/gygaxs-fortress.html']Gygax's experience as a war gamer[/URL]. I would say many modern OSR modules use the above to center gameplay on exploration rather than on combat at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification