Computers beat up my role player

[RFisher]

Of course, I think a real problem with me in this discussion is that I'm not sure I believe in munchkins.

But in 1E the effect was different in that monsters didn't get ability modifiers.

Yeah, but monsters were different. e.g. They had the best "to hit" progression in the game. They'd get claw/claw/bite attack routines while it took a good while for any PC to work their way up to three attacks/round. They got magic resistance. They were balanced separately with their own simpler (or perhaps: more appropriate) mechanics rather than requiring all the PC rules to apply to them.

 

[Hussar]

No. It is like saying that 3.X isn't munchkinny because Pun Pun is unlikely to ever used in a game. However, if you do use Pun Pun in your game, it would be fair to say that your game is munchkinny.

IMHO. YMMV. YDMB.


RC

But, I never said 1e is munkinny. I never said your game is munkinny. I said that the UA is munkinny because of a number of things, including the chargen section. Bringing up a number of unrelated issues like how often the rules were used doesn't change the fact that its munchkinny. It's still bad rules, just not often used bad rules.

BTW, what is YDMB? You Dumb Monster Basher?

 

[Raven Crowking]

But, I never said 1e is munkinny. I never said your game is munkinny. I said that the UA is munkinny because of a number of things, including the chargen section. Bringing up a number of unrelated issues like how often the rules were used doesn't change the fact that its munchkinny. It's still bad rules, just not often used bad rules.

Glad you're convinced. I'm not, though.

I certainly agree that the implimentation could have been better, but the intent was toward balance.

BTW, what is YDMB? You Dumb Monster Basher?

Your Dog May Bite. (Sort of spoofing the need to YMMV at the end of every opinion lest others feel mortally offended. Feel free to use it. )

RC

 

[Quasqueton]

Yippee, yet another "Let's bash Gary Gygax!" thread.

First, this is not a bash on EGG. The title of the thread is meant to be humorous. If you found offense in it, I suggest your offense-o-meter is tuned a bit too sensitive.

Second, by saying "another" you are suggesting there are other threads on ENWorld that bash EGG. I've never seen any. Not one.

Many people consider 3E to be catering to powergamers and be the source of decline in roleplaying, so it's kinda ironic that the creater of D&D fits that bill too.

This was, indeed, the irony I saw in EGG's statement compared to a lot of claims, here, of "how it was."

Personally, I do not disapprove of the play style EGG suggested in the quote in the OP. I have a good bit of that attitude in my own play style. But the quoted statement is the very definition some people now a days give to "munchkinism."

Quasqueton has been very consistent in his efforts to correct what he perceives as misperceptions regarding the early days of D&D.

For the record, I'm not trying to "correct" anyone's perceptions. I just often find counterpoint evidence to a lot of strange claims about the editions of D&D. I only post a small fraction of the evidence I find, and it seems to enivitably start an edition war.

Quasqueton

 

[RFisher]

This was, indeed, the irony I saw in EGG's statement compared to a lot of claims, here, of "how it was."

You've really seen a significant number of people claim that there wasn't munchkinism or even ambitious play in the 1e days?

What I've seen is people countering the ideas that munchkins (& jerk DMs) were an out-of-control problem in 1e days & that a system like 3e was needed as a remedy.

 

[diaglo]

You've really seen a significant number of people claim that there wasn't munchkinism or even ambitious play in the 1e days?

What I've seen is people countering the ideas that munchkins (& jerk DMs) were an out-of-control problem in 1e days & that a system like 3e was needed as a remedy.

ditto.

 

[Raven Crowking]

You've really seen a significant number of people claim that there wasn't munchkinism or even ambitious play in the 1e days?

What I've seen is people countering the ideas that munchkins (& jerk DMs) were an out-of-control problem in 1e days & that a system like 3e was needed as a remedy.

ditto to the previous ditto

 

[Quasqueton]

What I've seen is people countering the ideas that munchkins (& jerk DMs) were an out-of-control problem in 1e days & that a system like 3e was needed as a remedy.

Interesting. I've never noticed anyone say munckins and jerk DMs were an out-of-control problem *only* in AD&D1 days, or that D&D3 was a remedy for munckings and jerk DMs. (I'm trying to stay true to your statement, so if I misparaphrase, call me on it.)

I've seen people say that munchkins and jerk DMs existed in AD&D1 days just like they exist in the current D&D3 days. (I say this, myself. No game system can elimiate jerks from the player pool.)

I've also seen people say that D&D3 created and promotes munchkinism and jerk Players.

And that munchkins and jerks didn't exist in AD&D1 days because the rules prevented or didn't allow it.

It's these last two claims that I often find counter evidence on. And the evidence I find supports the first statement.

I regulary find evidence that D&D's heart and soul, Players and DMs, play styles and annoyances are pretty much the same now as they were 10, 20, and 30 years ago. I'm shocked that so many find this concept. . . heretical.

Quasqueton

 

[Raven Crowking]

Interesting. I've never noticed anyone say munckins and jerk DMs were an out-of-control problem *only* in AD&D1 days, or that D&D3 was a remedy for munckings and jerk DMs.

I've participated in several of those threads. They are usually the same threads that I imagine you mean when you say

I've also seen people say that D&D3 created and promotes munchkinism and jerk Players.

which I have said, and which I think may be true to some degree (if you mean "created" in the sense that "some people reading the core rules interpret it in such a way as to make them become jerk Players" and not "originated jerk players for all time"), and

And that munchkins and jerks didn't exist in AD&D1 days because the rules prevented or didn't allow it.[/quote]

which, honestly, I've never heard anyone say.

RC

 

[RFisher]

Interesting. I've never noticed anyone say munckins and jerk DMs were an out-of-control problem *only* in AD&D1 days, or that D&D3 was a remedy for munckings and jerk DMs. (I'm trying to stay true to your statement, so if I misparaphrase, call me on it.)

OK, to try to avoid even minor hyperbole...

I have read people saying that 3e has elminated or seriously reduced any "bad DM" problems. So, in that sense, yes, they are saying that "bad DMs" were a big problem when they played 1e but are much less of a problem now that they are playing 3e.

I've also read people saying that 3e has effectively eliminated rules lawyering. (My statement may have been a bit off for munchkins. I don't know that I've seen anyone arguing that 3e helped with munchkins.)

As for munchkins...

And that munchkins and jerks didn't exist in AD&D1 days because the rules prevented or didn't allow it.

OK, I have occasionally seen such claims, but infrequent enough to not consider them significant.