Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 6351099" data-attributes="member: 3586">One of the biggest problems I have with the DMG is that Gary occasionally assumes too much knowledge on the part of the reader. There's this wealth of experience informing his writing, but without that experience, some of the advice is rather opaque or easily misinterpreted!For instance, the heavily house-ruled campaigns of original D&D (where groups would <a href="http://www.crydee.com/raymond-feist/origins-of-midkemia" target="_blank">replace a lot of the rules</a>) so that the entire structure of the game changed are fairly alien to us now. In the original D&D, it encourages monsters-as-PCs, but by AD&D, the advice is "don't do it!", which shows how much more experience Gary had by then with, not only his own group, but with how many other groups were running the game.Looking at the DMG entry on "Time" has a campaign being played on a near-daily schedule with several groups of players all participating, not always together. That's a fair cry from how D&D is normally played today. However, lots of groups into megadungeons was far more common in the early days, from what I've read.I look at the afterword to the DMG, and think I understand what Gary was talking about: that individual sessions should be enjoyable, that the campaign as a whole likewise, and to not let disruptive players get in the way of the fun... but he's adding in other ideas at the same time and I feel it's not as clear as it should be.Cheers!</blockquote>

Verification