Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 6026742" data-attributes="member: 2205">That may be OSR now, but it's not old school.&nbsp; The AD&amp;D books, and lots of commentary in Dragon and elsewhere from back in the day, clearly indicate that the point of AD&amp;D was to be played as written.&nbsp; To the point of being actively obnoxious about it, and calling out folks who &quot;did it wrong&quot; as having games that weren't worthy of being called AD&amp;D games.Curiously, when 3e was launched, it's motto was &quot;Tools, not rules.&quot;And yet the OSR has attempted to hijack this playstyle as if it were always a property of pre-3e D&amp;D and no longer is one of the 3e era.&nbsp; If 1e is included as a &quot;core&quot; part of the OSR, that's just plain wrong.&nbsp; For whatever reason, it seems retro-clones that have more in common with OD&amp;D or B/X D&amp;D are more common in the OSR today, though.&nbsp; But the idea that it's a perspective that originated with 3e is flat-out wrong.&nbsp; It originated with 1e; 3e specifically eschewed that paradigm.&nbsp; Why folks run around claiming that it embraced it is completely mystifying to me.To the situation in the OP, I'd say first off there's a problem with what the player asks.&nbsp; If the player says, &quot;I'm going to make an Appraise check, what's the DC?&quot; I'll say, &quot;DCs are my business; what's your roll?&quot;&nbsp; Then, I'll give him information based on what he rolls.&nbsp; Most likely, it would closely mimic what the salesman says about the sword, except maybe with some hints about what the PC knows about its accuracy (the jewels adorning the hilt are clearly flawed; some of them are replacements and are, in fact, fake, etc.)But the point of having these checks available is that most players don't want to roleplaying haggling with a used sword merchant.&nbsp; They want to just make a quick roll and move on.Also, I see the descriptions in the rules of skill use as examples, not mandates.&nbsp; They're examples of how skill checks could be made, how to come up with a reasonable DC, and what the designers think about how skills were meant to work.&nbsp; It's nice to know.&nbsp; Helpful, even.&nbsp; It's not a hard, oblivatory stand on exactly how they have to work every time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 6026742, member: 2205"] That may be OSR now, but it's not old school. The AD&D books, and lots of commentary in Dragon and elsewhere from back in the day, clearly indicate that the point of AD&D was to be played [I]as written.[/I] To the point of being actively obnoxious about it, and calling out folks who "did it wrong" as having games that weren't worthy of being called AD&D games. Curiously, when 3e was launched, it's motto was "Tools, not rules." And yet the OSR has attempted to hijack this playstyle as if it were always a property of pre-3e D&D and no longer is one of the 3e era. If 1e is included as a "core" part of the OSR, that's just plain wrong. For whatever reason, it seems retro-clones that have more in common with OD&D or B/X D&D are more common in the OSR today, though. But the idea that it's a perspective that originated with 3e is flat-out wrong. It originated with 1e; 3e specifically [I]eschewed[/I] that paradigm. Why folks run around claiming that it embraced it is completely mystifying to me. To the situation in the OP, I'd say first off there's a problem with what the player asks. If the player says, "I'm going to make an Appraise check, what's the DC?" I'll say, "DCs are my business; what's your roll?" Then, I'll give him information based on what he rolls. Most likely, it would closely mimic what the salesman says about the sword, except maybe with some hints about what the PC knows about its accuracy (the jewels adorning the hilt are clearly flawed; some of them are replacements and are, in fact, fake, etc.) But the point of having these checks available is that most players [I]don't want[/I] to roleplaying haggling with a used sword merchant. They want to just make a quick roll and move on. Also, I see the descriptions in the rules of skill use as [I]examples[/I], not mandates. They're examples of how skill checks could be made, how to come up with a reasonable DC, and what the designers think about how skills were meant to work. It's nice to know. Helpful, even. It's not a hard, oblivatory stand on exactly how they have to work every time. [/QUOTE]

Verification