Back in the day...

[Ace]

how do you know when someone is not telling the truth? how do you know what the price of tea in china is? how do you know....


you have to play the game.

no one walks around with a sign on them (even in today's d02 game) that says... Str 12, Int 11... Level 3... 14hp ... etc...

No they don't but...

Here is the rub -- rules exist to resolve conflicts in game --

if my character is a stealthy guy and an expert lockpicker but there is no skills system or no "thief" class how do I determine whether I can pick the lock or hide from the guards?

if it is done by fiat -- i.e the trust me school of GMing thats perfectly OK but whats the point of using rules at all

The framework of rules is a very nice thing to have

 

[Whisper72]

In the ADnD versions, even if there was no specific rule, there is always the ability check....

Thus, to see if you succeed, roll a dex-check with modifiers as the DM sees fit. You still have the roll to see if you succeed, but do not need a seperate rule for everything you do...

 

[Ourph]

if it is done by fiat -- i.e the trust me school of GMing thats perfectly OK but whats the point of using rules at all

The boxes the rulebooks came in included dice!

 

[MerricB]

In the ADnD versions, even if there was no specific rule, there is always the ability check....

Thus, to see if you succeed, roll a dex-check with modifiers as the DM sees fit. You still have the roll to see if you succeed, but do not need a seperate rule for everything you do...

Mind you, that rule wasn't included in the main AD&D rulebooks! It first appeared in the DSG.

Cheers!

 

[diaglo]

(But did anyone actually add everything from Blackmoor and Eldritch Wizardry?)

i used the Temple of the Frog from Blackmoor.


as the books say... these rules are meant as guidelines.


therefore, i did include the thief and paladin from Supplement I... as guides for players who either thru time or effort (the lazy hand and a halfers) didn't want to build their own character. they just looked in the book and took what was written.

same held true for the monk and assassin in Supplement II
and the druid in Supplement III

and even the Fighting Man, Cleric, and Magic-user in Booklet I.


if the player didn't want to they didn't have to ... build their character. but usually they did. esp after they released just how open the rules system was...

not that i was an easy codger. believe me... i'm a rat bastard referee.

 

[MerricB]

Generally I feel that the fewer the number of rules, the better the DM has to be.

Then it reaches the equilibrium point.

Then it goes over the top, and it's "The greater the number of rules, the better the DM has to be..." because there's so much to remember!

Cheers!

 

[WizarDru]

Mind you, that rule wasn't included in the main AD&D rulebooks! It first appeared in the DSG.

Cheers!

I'm drawing a blank, here....the DSG?

 

[diaglo]

I'm drawing a blank, here....the DSG?

by doug...

dungeoneer's survival guide. a hardback released after the UA.

 

[MerricB]

Although it might have appeared in Oriental Adventure first...

There are variants of the rule in The Dragon and Moldvay's Basic D&D, IIRC, but it didn't arrive in a AD&D book until much later.

Cheers!

 

[northrundicandus]

It may not have arrived in print until the DSG, but every DM I knew from 1980 onward used 'em. One of those unwritten rules that every referee seemed to use.