Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ace" data-source="post: 7903748" data-attributes="member: 944">My opinion is that once the cleric becamea class , D&amp;D moved to a &quot;play your personality&nbsp; type&quot; rather than a purer wargame model.&quot; Back efore a skill system&nbsp; , heck before the thief class ,&nbsp; the players were supposed to solve problems other than combat with their own brains. Disarm that trap? Tell me how you are going to do it.It was kind of like the story games we see now but with what was supposed to be an impersonal and fair ref. It didn't always work out that way and was unsuitable to D&amp;D as mass market game but it is a very interesting model.There were a few hacks for magic users of course but&nbsp; this is radically different than how we play today and I think that design philosophy carried over into assumed&nbsp; player&nbsp; class selection.I think the game assumed you'd play what suited your personality the best ,&nbsp; Combat (Fighter) Artillery/Smart Guy (MU) the Cleric of course was as noted above an afterthought but it did suit Helpful and Neither Fish Nor Fowl niches pretty well Again opinion, the Thief was a graft on for people who wanted a mechanic for stuff they'd otherwise basically have to negotiate with the DM and of course Grey Mouser fans . I think it was a terrible fit myself and the percentage system was awful. YMMV of course.Now as to my own gaming,. I sometimes play Clerics if asked or am in the mood though the whole &quot;I'm clergy&quot; thing was off putting to me save with made up deities. Playing at being a say Godi of the Norse Gods when people still follow them is uncomfortable&nbsp; to me.&nbsp; In my own old school games I generally assume they use &quot;order magic&quot; vs chaos magic&nbsp; which suits me a bit better and fits the Lawful, Neutral , Chaotic, Axis again YMMV</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ace, post: 7903748, member: 944"] My opinion is that once the cleric becamea class , D&D moved to a "play your personality type" rather than a purer wargame model." Back efore a skill system , heck before the thief class , the players were supposed to solve problems other than combat with their own brains. Disarm that trap? Tell me how you are going to do it. It was kind of like the story games we see now but with what was supposed to be an impersonal and fair ref. It didn't always work out that way and was unsuitable to D&D as mass market game but it is a very interesting model. There were a few hacks for magic users of course but this is radically different than how we play today and I think that design philosophy carried over into assumed player class selection. I think the game assumed you'd play what suited your personality the best , Combat (Fighter) Artillery/Smart Guy (MU) the Cleric of course was as noted above an afterthought but it did suit Helpful and Neither Fish Nor Fowl niches pretty well Again opinion, the Thief was a graft on for people who wanted a mechanic for stuff they'd otherwise basically have to negotiate with the DM and of course Grey Mouser fans . I think it was a terrible fit myself and the percentage system was awful. YMMV of course. Now as to my own gaming,. I sometimes play Clerics if asked or am in the mood though the whole "I'm clergy" thing was off putting to me save with made up deities. Playing at being a say Godi of the Norse Gods when people still follow them is uncomfortable to me. In my own old school games I generally assume they use "order magic" vs chaos magic which suits me a bit better and fits the Lawful, Neutral , Chaotic, Axis again YMMV [/QUOTE]

Verification