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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9623047" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think this post - whether deliberately or by good fortune - interacts with [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER]'s post that I quoted just upthread, about the constraints the make for robust exploration-oriented gamist play.You correctly state that Cluedo (as it is known in my country) is just a logic puzzle.And if Moldvay Basic had no components to play other than the players declaring their PCs' interactions with and movements within the architecture, then the game of getting the players' map to match the GM's map would require nothing but (i) patience, and (ii) a moderate skill at Pictionary-esque parlour games.Now, introduce treasure + gold-for-XP, and there is a new goal to go with the mapping goal. But if that's all there is, then again all that is required is time/patience, and parlour-game skill. If you do end up searching everywhere, and looking behind every tapestry to find every hidden clue, then you will get all the treasure (assuming that the dungeon is self-contained, and assuming that the GM allows re-rolls to find secret doors after the passage of a certain amount of time/play).But Moldvay Basic introduces other elements of the game besides the mapping and the hidden treasure: there are passive threats (traps), active threats (monsters), the wandering monster clock, and the hit point "clock". (The game includes rations and waterskins on its equipment list, but - to its detriment - doesn't have a food/water clock.) There is a bit of randomness here, and more importantly (in my view) enough complexity that the game is not easily solvable, at least until the players start taking genre-breaking steps like you "search-and-sniff" (? have I got it right?) and dungeon-crew procedures (of blasting everything with burning oil, then proceeding very slowly, protected by mantlets and the like, etc) at which point we're back to play being a patience-demanding parlour gameThe conclusion I draw from the preceding analysis is that what makes for satisfying game play in classic D&D is the interplay of hidden information with other aspects, and especially the two clocks. The parlour game aspect on its own can be fun, especially if the fictional situation is a very complicated one (like the various trick rooms in White Plume Mountain) - but I think something like Tomb of Horrors (which has basically no clocks) shows the limits of the parlour-game approach.I also conclude that, once/if players adopt the sorts of approaches-to-a-solve that your group did, we need to find a different approach to RPGing if it is going to be fun.</blockquote>

Verification