Keep out of combat in D&D? Why?

But still, for a long time old school=hack and slash. And the old schoolers where proud of it! None of this hand holding, story telling, sneaking around, running away, talk to the monsters crap for them. ;)


the only time we talked to monsters or bad guys in AD&D was to set them up so we could kill them easier. if they were too tough to kill at that moment, we went away, got more powerful, then went back and killed them later. it was all about "kill them and take their stuff so we could level." if we could survive the encounter, we fought. if we didnt think we would survive, we didnt fight---until later.

every last bit of copper and xp was extracted from every dungeon we were in. we'd even go back and kill a couple of 2 hp rats from the first level that we skipped or missed, after we finished the final fight with the big bad guy on the 13th level of the dungeon. after that we would dig through the pile of rat crap in the corner looking for that one copper piece they may have stashed there, even after we took 100000 gp and three artifacts from the big bad guy from the 13th level.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Let me try and answer the question, but in so doing, I don't want to sound like I'm calling anyone's way of playing D&D "badwrongfun." Just a quick edit too: the ways I describe playing D&D are not intended in any way to be the only ways it was played.

Back in the day, as they say, there was a school of playing D&D that largely came out of its roots as a wargame. In this type of game, you didn't bother coming up with anything but a token name for your character, rolled your stats 3D6 in order, and rolled your hit points ... and you were just about ready to go. Characters were created on a 3x5 card, and maybe, if they survived for a few levels (which was very unlikely: you would come to play with 10-12 characters for a session!) you might upgrade them to an actual piece of paper.

So you might have your fighter with 3 Hit points, who's best stat was his constitution of 12, and he wore scale mail and used a trident, and he would go into an adventure seeking fortune and glory. The only heroics that occurred were when the dice happened to fall your way and you actually made it through enough encounters to find your token +1 dagger or similar minor magic trinket. It was what I'd call "nasty, brutish and short," or NBS play. No one cared about the character death, in fact many times a good death was actually cheered on.

After a while, that play style begat a new one, where it was decided that characters would do everything they could in order to survive these situations, which made them get their 10' poles, prod every square, search every heap of dung, and do everything in their power to avoid any fight where they didn't have an ambush or other special advantage set up for them. I think this is the style of play that Merric is talking about: an evening would entail searching a very small area, hoping to find that special advantage or secret door that would give the group the needed benefit to make the fight against the orcs that much easier. I'll call that play "By Hook or By Crook" or BHoBC.

I played in a couple of NBS campaigns when I was very young. I didn't enjoy them very much because everything was so random and a good or bad die roll could make or break a character. It seemed like you were never progressing towards anything interesting, always seeing the same sorts of challenges over and over again. The campaign also tended to end if one character reached third or fourth level, since new characters were level one, and couldn't really contribute as much at that point.

When I was about 11 or 12 I played an entire summer's campaign in the BHoBC style. At the end of the summer we had finally cleared out the caves of chaos, and our characters were ready to move onto greener pastures. That was playing 3-4 times a week, all day for an entire summer. I had this sense of accomplishment at last.

Honestly, the pacing of that kind of a game wore me down, and it was soon after that when I discovered Champions and other game systems, and largely left AD&D behind. To get an idea of what we did: once we heard about the existance of the ogre in the caves (a famous monster, to be sure!) we ended up setting up a snare trap in front of a set of caltrops and broken glass, and then used greek fire to burn the thing alive. No one ever stepped in and actually battled it hand to hand. That was a heroic effort, I'll tell you! In that particular session we had an entire game spent scouting out the location of the ogre, and about half of one setting up the traps and provisioning the greek fire.

Today, I could never see playing in either of those campaign styles, frankly: I don't have nearly the time, or the patience to spend on a BHoBC game, and I want someone to identify with an play as a hero, which pretty much rules out the NBS games. After about 20 minutes of working to acquire provisions my eyes start to glaze over, and I can't imagine coming up with half a dozen character ideas in one game session.

I know there are a fair number of EnWorlders who do enjoy playing such things today, however, and I say more power to them...even if I can really no longer understand that style of play. For me, I am simply glad that there are other options out there now, including the new D&D.

--Steve
 
Last edited:

No edition ever had "rules" for deep immersion roleplaying anyway.

Of course not, which is why 4e suits that style of play as well as any edition ever did.

But many critics of 4e are bemoaning the lack of inspiring prose ("fluff") in the core books and making claims about the way 4e is being marketed.

I don't think you get very abstracted combat though. The focus on the map and fiddling around with all the minor movement really draws the attention to the board and away from the story.

Not abstracted?!?!?

4e combat is a game-within-a-game.

Round-based combat, hp, AC, daily powers, encounter powers, pushing, pulling, shifting, etc, etc, etc.

That it draws attention away from the story is proof that it is an abstraction. I understand people might not like it - at one time I wouldn't have either - but an abstraction it most certainly is. Likewise with skill challenges.

I like them. They're expedient and often exciting.
 

In a 24-year run of DMing what amounts to 1e with extras, I've never yet given ExP for treasure.

Combat, yes. Solving a problem or puzzle, yes. Taking non-combat risks, yes. Completing a mission or adventure, yes. Treasure, no.

As you might expect, the advancement rate here is, by original 1e-3e-4e standards, extremely slow. And I wouldn't have it any other way, nor (I think) would my players; as slow advancement holds two huge advantages:

1. Everyone focuses more on the story and-or their character's character, rather than the numbers; and
2. When someone does bump a level, it really is an achievement.

Lanefan
 

But many critics of 4e are bemoaning the lack of inspiring prose ("fluff") in the core books and making claims about the way 4e is being marketed.
I think that's very, very subjective. If that's the gauge, I'd say all editions after 1st are lacking. 2nd edition was possibly the worst -- in the rulebooks, the settings were good. IMO, 3e is slightly worse than 4e, but there isn't a huge difference.

I fully expect some or even many people to disagree with me on this. Gygaxian prose drives some people up a wall. Others got a charge out of the 3e art, which never really floated my boat. But, that's why I say it's subjective.
 

Great discussion. Here's my take on why, when we used to play B/AD&D, we used to avoid fights more often.

Basic D&D said:
Killer Bee (excerpted)
No. Appearing 1-6 (5-30)
Move 150' (50')
Damage 1-3 + special
... the creature stung must save vs Poison or die. The stinger will continue to work its way into the victim, doing an automatic 1 point of damage per round, unless 1 round is spent pulling it out.

A special kind of honey may be found inside the beehive... it acts as a half-strength potion of healing, curing 1-4 points of damage... (this will require all the honey in the hive).

This is a 1st level monster that flies faster than any PC in the game can run. If it stings you, you usually die instantly, if not in a matter of rounds. If you run into them outdoors, you find 5-30 of 'em.

And if you're lucky enough to triumph over these death dealing masters of the insect world? A potion that can heal 1-4 hit points.

Basic D&D was NOT FAIR. :)
 

Great discussion. Here's my take on why, when we used to play B/AD&D, we used to avoid fights more often.



This is a 1st level monster that flies faster than any PC in the game can run. If it stings you, you usually die instantly, if not in a matter of rounds. If you run into them outdoors, you find 5-30 of 'em.

And if you're lucky enough to triumph over these death dealing masters of the insect world? A potion that can heal 1-4 hit points.

Basic D&D was NOT FAIR. :)

To quote Grandpa from The Princess Bride:

"Fair? Who says life is fair? Where is that written?" :lol:
 

Great discussion. Here's my take on why, when we used to play B/AD&D, we used to avoid fights more often.



This is a 1st level monster that flies faster than any PC in the game can run. If it stings you, you usually die instantly, if not in a matter of rounds. If you run into them outdoors, you find 5-30 of 'em.

And if you're lucky enough to triumph over these death dealing masters of the insect world? A potion that can heal 1-4 hit points.

Basic D&D was NOT FAIR. :)

In the Classic game in which I'm a player we went to a lot of trouble to avoid these clowns a while back. No one felt like making a Save vs. Poison for no reason... fortunately they're noisy gits so keeping out of their way wasn't too hard.
 

If you can protect yourselves in some way, you could try and wipe out the hive by placing poisoned honey somewhat nearby. Something the bees take back to their queen unknowingly.

That's just one idea and may not work, but I bet something would.
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top