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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jack7" data-source="post: 5770183" data-attributes="member: 54707">Some good advice so far. My take and my experience  below.      We did all that stuff way back when. Still  do.        We didn't do that much, not by the obvious ways  anyways. We played it more subtly, but then again most players tried their bets  to play well, and so it almost never happened and if it did it was in such a way  as to make the player question, "was this punishment, or coincidence?" And  personally I think that's a better incentive, because it makes the player think  about their own behavior in context (did I do something that put the party in  danger, or was this just happenstance), rather than just try and have them  "fight or protest the unfairness of the punishment." A lot of AD&D was far  more group and unit and team conscious than later editions which to me became to  me more and more progressively "individual superman conscious." Team work should  really be an art in AD&D because powers and abilities are so limited it  encourages the team to operate collectively and coherently and responsibly,  fostering group cooperation and morale. Instead of saying "I am the invincible  Iron-Man!" the AD&D team should say, "We are the Fellowship." I prefer that  outlook in group play to the "every man or woman should power up to be a bad-ass  mo-fo." But part of group cooperation and cohesion means you're also very  responsible for your own behavior and not only the advantages you bring to the  group, but what you might cost them by irresponsible and foolish behavior.  Personally I'd stress Team Cohesion and Cooperation, and real Reliance upon each  other.   I got nothing against the Superman in a super-hero  game. I though don't think fantasy games should spawn Superheroes, they should  spawn Heroes who overcome opposite not through super-powers but through a whole  host of lesser abilities, and by operating cunningly and shrewdly in cooperation  with one another. Including in cooperation with other characters. Later editions  became more super-heroey, but AD&D was more a "working heroes, everyman  kinda game."   To me fantasy is not about Superheroes becoming  the cosmic legends of the universe (never really thought I'd ever use that line,  but there ya go, it fits), it's about ordinary men and women becoming Heroes and  truly heroic. And that's a very different kind of thing. A Superhero can afford  a certain hubris. Heroes cannot.      Personally, as a DM I was never big on +5 this or  that either. I thought there were much better ways to make items valuable  magically so eventually I dropped all magic number bonuses in favor of other  capabilities.    We also campaigned more than sandboxed, but when  we did I designed items with histories that would be of specific value to  certain characters (like a Thief) and then placed them in dungeons for the  players to run across.    I would also create items that could be of much  use to more than one character. For instance a pen that would allow a Thief (but  not another class) to forge anyone's signature, and to double his chances of  reading magical writing by tracing over the text in a scroll. But it would also  allow a Magic-user to write spells in the air, or to rewrite them in their  traveling spellbooks once they were exhausted.   Also I would not tell the players what magical  items did: they would either have to figure it out by trial and error, research  the item, or use spells or pay Sages to analyze items.    That, combined with making the players undergo  actual training under masters (paying expenses, paying for training between  level advancement, that kind of thing, and giving away magical items that might  be of use to one or more classes, led to some really excellent post-adventuring  debates and fun between the players.   Master-teacher relationships often led to great  networking opportunities as well. As did relationships with Sages and NPCs the  players actually needed to conduct their business.    Training, treasure allocation, dividing loot, it  was all tremendously important to the players and great fun for me to watch. I  still do this kinda thing, but AD&D is particularly good at it if you do  these things right.   Also it makes treasure much easier to carry and  leads to much more interesting post-game exchanges if the party finds a small  bag of rubies and sapphires, and tiaras and tapestries, than if you just give  away coins. Use jewelry, gemstones, rare books, documents, maps, clothing, sacks  of golddust and other valuable items, useful minerals, furniture, personal  items, magic component items, fine weaponry, and a whole host of other things as  hoard valuables. An occasional casket of rare coins (maybe from a long dead  Empire) makes for much more valuable coins than just normal exchange coins. My  players once found a small casket of 100 silver alloy coins minted in the final  years of the destroyed centuries ago Kingdom of Pesh. Each single coin of that  stash was worth 500 normal gold coins. It wasn't much to carry yet they netted,  after exchanges and haggling and taxes, an almost 44,000 gold piece return on  those long vanished 100 silver coins.     That kinda thing makes for great player  interactions and market haggling. In addition I gave away rare items that the  players never wished to part with or sell but rather kept in their own  strongholds or treasure hoards for personal reasons or to influence the local  populations.   Personally I think that the Training and level  advancement systems, treasure allocations (done right), social advancement:  titles, nobility, and unusual magical items (though they all could also be  improved upon) were big advantages of the AD&D system, and were mostly  superior to later editions.   Also I let my PCs build keeps, strongholds and  eventually castles, establish libraries, accumulate riches, gain influence, etc.  That's a very good, even great part of the AD&D experience.   To me though the weapon and fight and armor  systems are very clunky and unrealistic. But since it is a game you can modify  anything you wish as long as the players accept it.   We also multi-classed a lot. I changed that over  time to offer more options than the regular classes or even multi-classes, but  it was fun for some of my players to dual or multi-class. Depending on party  size I sometimes encouraged it.Don't know if that helped ya any or not, but it's what I/we did. Also I'd go back and re-read the Dungeon Masters Guide. It had a lot of great advice on how to build a functioning fantasy world.</blockquote>

Verification