Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="teitan" data-source="post: 9173461" data-attributes="member: 3457"><p>I think what we see being considered "how it was done" vs how it was done is a lot of rediscovery of rules in the DMG and learning about intent and people having vague memories. There was a lot of intent in the rules that not even TSR followed through on such as managing kingdoms as the end game for a character and the campaign continuing or the idea of 1 for 1 time being somewhat explicit for out of game time and a part of healing. I do remember my own group running multiple characters because of the slow healing and the DM telling us we couldn't use such and such character because their HP were too low and really, looking at the rules, clerics with magic were super rare. I didn't understand why. We did do a random dungeon once, didn't go well though as mapping was a nightmare. But we also played pretty OSR style, which is why I gravitate so hard to DCC and OSE over 5e or even 3.x now because calling for spot checks etc is really intrusive and ruins the verisimilitude for me. My players are all 5e players and they've adapted to and now prefer a more old school approach to the game. They feel like they have more agency as players even with the simpler characters.</p></blockquote><p></p>