Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ezo" data-source="post: 9382612" data-attributes="member: 7037866">Yeah, I get this and agree.OSG has things like save-or-die and others which make the game, by default, harder to survive. Magic-Users with d4 hit points, anyone? Death at 0, -3, or -10 hit points (depending on your DM...)? You also needed a lot more XP to level. Fighter in AD&D would have to kill hundreds of orcs to make 2nd level, in 5E it takes half-a-dozen or so. FWIW, I'm not saying that is "easier", just more survivable. NS is more forgiving, just look at all the healing/recovery available in 5E, for example, with things like revivify available often by session 10-12. In AD&D it would take months and months, even a year or more, before you had a cleric get raise dead, by comparison, IME. Even then you had the chance of failing the resurrection survival check...In OSG players did have to solve puzzles. I never let them "roll" to have their PC do it, or allowed them to roll "as their PC" to give them a hint or anything. But those are common in 5E, for example. You have a riddle? Ok, it is DC 15, your INT 20 PC rolls Intelligence (Investigation or whatever...) and solves it for the player if they rolled high enough. A high INT M-U in AD&D benefited mechanically in learning spells, having access to higher level spells, etc., not in rolling to solve things.Yet I find odd things on the other side with 5E, such as players not knowing what their PCs can do or just forgetting about them because they have so many features, etc. OSG is much more simple in that respect. I see OSG as the game/ rules were more complex in many ways, as where in NSP it is the characters who have become more complex.IME players in NSP are also much more casual about playing. I don't see the same level of commitment and dedication to the game I saw back in the day and I also think OSGs are more likely to have players with a higher level of commitment, but I could be mistaken, just my experience and such in general between the two. Groups getting together are often spur of the moment instead of planned as regular things, players will bow out of a session last minute for whatever reason, etc. Players don't take the time outside of the game sessions to learn what their PCs can do, level up, and such. In OSG I played in, such things were very, very rare IME.Of course, NSP can be more "high-stakes" if a DM runs it as such, throwing out much of the default assumptions of how the game was designed to be played, etc.So, no worries. I get it. And FWIW I don't think stating your honest observations about it is "insulting" or whatever. It's your view, opinion, etc. and that's it. At worst, experiences differ, right?EDIT: Concerning some of the other points you've made (such as describing how they PCs will gather firewood or whatever) none of that was my experience, however.It wasn't' common at all IME, but I did see DMs who would rarely grant a bonus to an action for something that was well developed and described as an action: such as moving silently. I don't recall anything like describing a sword thrust for a bonus to hit, but I knew some DMs I wouldn't put it past them...</blockquote>

Verification