Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8110579" data-attributes="member: 6701124"><p>It had the non-demi-god races required to play the Fellowship. There were only a handful of Half-Elves in all of Tolkien, even given a few more years to get out the Silmarillion, and no Half-Orc heroes.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Wasn't the basic idea of Chainmail set up to be about armies and not so much individuals in the sense of a PC. For the "one-to-one" rules, is that the "man-to-man" section described before the supplement? It doesn't mention hero or super-hero, does it?</p><p></p><p>In the fantasy section a hero is described as having the fighting ability of four figures, but also as being part of a unit. The super-heroes are described as being the same but about twice as powerful. Elves are allowed to use magical weapons (in addition to hero-types and certain magic users). The ability to use magic swords explicitly allows elves to combat fantastic figures, including having how well they do against Hero-types, Super Heroes, and Wizards listed in the table.</p><p></p><p>[As an aside going back to Tolkien as an influence in general, in Chainmail the Orcs are listed as being one of Orcs of the red eye, Orcs of Mordor, Orcs of the Mountains, Orcs of the White Hand, and Isengarders; the Dragon detailed is explicitly said to be typified by the one in the Hobbit, the Wraiths are parenthetically Nazgul, there are Ents and Balrogs. Other literary references include the The True Trolls being from Andersen's 3H&3L and that Elric is a Hero-type with Wizardry. The Law/Chaos goes to both of those.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The fantasy game started in early 1971 according to the timeline. If they began playing themselves (porting from a Napoleonic game) then it would be hard for them to have started as demi-humans. Some were by 1972. That's not several years after it became fantasy.</p><p></p><p>If we're playing Gamma World 1e and then shift over to AD&D 1e (using the adjustments in the DMG) and start playing using those rules "with the same characters", is it the same game in a game rules sense or the same campaign in a looser one?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Maybe because D&D was first and had the important races? We know it succeeded with those core races. There is, of course, no evidence it would have without them. It feels like the competition would have been harder if the other offerings had something popular D&D lacked. (Or were the reasons it was called out by Chainmail and by Arneson completely unrelated to popularity?)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It feels like your statement on Arneson's game and Chainmail are both incomplete and/or misleading (as discussed above).</p><p></p><p>And, based on your earlier arguments (post #176) the level limits apparently aren't even that big of a restriction or limitation. And I'm betting that in many games they were commonly played in spite of the limitations (and would have been moreso without them). My first characters were a B/X Dwarf and Halfling. My longest lived early 1e character was an Elf. (That probably stacks up against 4 or 5 humans made in that time period).</p><p></p><p>As said above, capturing the LotR is explicitly called out in the Chainmail supplement and in the motivation for Blackmoor. Even more, Tolkienian names, if not idea, seem central to the Fantasy Supplement (with Elric & 3L3H a distant second). The three races are central enough that they appear in Chainmail (one of them inspite of not being useful in combat), Blackmoor, and Greyhawk, and the original published rules. And in 1e, and B/X, 2e, 3e, 4e PhB1, and 5e. That all feels like at least some evidence that they are pretty central to what the game aims to be as a default in the eyes of its makers. </p><p></p><p>The other side seems to consist of Gary not liking that Tolkien was such a big part of fantasy and some what-ifs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cadence, post: 8110579, member: 6701124"] It had the non-demi-god races required to play the Fellowship. There were only a handful of Half-Elves in all of Tolkien, even given a few more years to get out the Silmarillion, and no Half-Orc heroes. Wasn't the basic idea of Chainmail set up to be about armies and not so much individuals in the sense of a PC. For the "one-to-one" rules, is that the "man-to-man" section described before the supplement? It doesn't mention hero or super-hero, does it? In the fantasy section a hero is described as having the fighting ability of four figures, but also as being part of a unit. The super-heroes are described as being the same but about twice as powerful. Elves are allowed to use magical weapons (in addition to hero-types and certain magic users). The ability to use magic swords explicitly allows elves to combat fantastic figures, including having how well they do against Hero-types, Super Heroes, and Wizards listed in the table. [As an aside going back to Tolkien as an influence in general, in Chainmail the Orcs are listed as being one of Orcs of the red eye, Orcs of Mordor, Orcs of the Mountains, Orcs of the White Hand, and Isengarders; the Dragon detailed is explicitly said to be typified by the one in the Hobbit, the Wraiths are parenthetically Nazgul, there are Ents and Balrogs. Other literary references include the The True Trolls being from Andersen's 3H&3L and that Elric is a Hero-type with Wizardry. The Law/Chaos goes to both of those. The fantasy game started in early 1971 according to the timeline. If they began playing themselves (porting from a Napoleonic game) then it would be hard for them to have started as demi-humans. Some were by 1972. That's not several years after it became fantasy. If we're playing Gamma World 1e and then shift over to AD&D 1e (using the adjustments in the DMG) and start playing using those rules "with the same characters", is it the same game in a game rules sense or the same campaign in a looser one? Maybe because D&D was first and had the important races? We know it succeeded with those core races. There is, of course, no evidence it would have without them. It feels like the competition would have been harder if the other offerings had something popular D&D lacked. (Or were the reasons it was called out by Chainmail and by Arneson completely unrelated to popularity?) It feels like your statement on Arneson's game and Chainmail are both incomplete and/or misleading (as discussed above). And, based on your earlier arguments (post #176) the level limits apparently aren't even that big of a restriction or limitation. And I'm betting that in many games they were commonly played in spite of the limitations (and would have been moreso without them). My first characters were a B/X Dwarf and Halfling. My longest lived early 1e character was an Elf. (That probably stacks up against 4 or 5 humans made in that time period). As said above, capturing the LotR is explicitly called out in the Chainmail supplement and in the motivation for Blackmoor. Even more, Tolkienian names, if not idea, seem central to the Fantasy Supplement (with Elric & 3L3H a distant second). The three races are central enough that they appear in Chainmail (one of them inspite of not being useful in combat), Blackmoor, and Greyhawk, and the original published rules. And in 1e, and B/X, 2e, 3e, 4e PhB1, and 5e. That all feels like at least some evidence that they are pretty central to what the game aims to be as a default in the eyes of its makers. The other side seems to consist of Gary not liking that Tolkien was such a big part of fantasy and some what-ifs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
Top