OD&D example of play

[InVinoVeritas]

In my experience, the main reason that hirelings were ignored was that they took time away from your PCs. A bunch of no-names that you're carting around? Lots of players didn't want to have to deal with that, and instead focus on their own PC's awesomeness. If we needed more characters, most players preferred to play multiple PCs. In many ways, this dropping of hirelings and hecnhmen is why Charisma became a dump stat.

Personally, I don't have anything against hirelings, but I do find it interesting to see how their use has changed over time. I just started a campaign, for example, where my PC joins the group with another four NPCs he knows in tow. Essentially, they're hirelings (in truth, they're just guys my PC happens to know that uses me as their face and lets me think I'm leader). However, one of the other players was shocked and had to ask the DM why I had them, since I didn't have the Leadership feat.

Finally, I've watched some players avoid in-game social connections like the plague. Captain of the Watch? No thanks, I'd rather sit in a hole outside town and not take orders. Devotees? Better find traps and combats to throw them against quick, otherwise they'll run off with all my stuff when I sleep. Some of it's adventurer's paranoia, some of it's bad play/DMing, and some of it is just plain escapist fantasy. All in all, though, I bet the biggest reason hirelings fell into disuse is that they took time away from the PCs.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I think they're a bit wargame-y. Too close to Chainmail. One figure per player is one of the key concepts that distinguishes rpgs from wargames.

 

[Chainsaw]

In my experience, the main reason that hirelings were ignored was that they took time away from your PCs.

In our game they're not a problem. We've got a couple guys to carry torches and treasure and a third guy just to carry treasure. We and the ref agree that their purpose is really just logistical (not as secondary PCs) and it works fine. Occasionally one gets injured by a range weapon, but they mostly stay out of the way and don't get involved in combat. It's really different from having a PC (we're not leveling them up or anything, for example). The players are all pretty mature and no one abuses the hirelings - trying to hire a ninja, using the torchbearer as a fighter or to set off traps, etc. If someone finds that they're not working well for their group, just don't use them.

 

[Reynard]

I think they're a bit wargame-y. Too close to Chainmail. One figure per player is one of the key concepts that distinguishes rpgs from wargames.

What about animal companions, summed creatures, etc...?

 

[InVinoVeritas]

The players are all pretty mature and no one abuses the hirelings - trying to hire a ninja, using the torchbearer as a fighter or to set off traps, etc. If someone finds that they're not working well for their group, just don't use them.

I think that's the point. Many of us have seen too many games in which they are abused, and thus not working well for the group. Even though the games we play now might let them work well, we won't play with them based on that history.

 

[Jhaelen]

I think they're a bit wargame-y. Too close to Chainmail. One figure per player is one of the key concepts that distinguishes rpgs from wargames.

Definitely. It gets in the way of roleplaying. Instead of having to say 'x does a, y does b', etc. You can say 'I do c', and that's that.

Actually, in the early days when rpgs were a new thing for us, every player played a whole party of adventurers. There wasn't really any roleplaying. We only learned what roleplaying games were supposed to be about when we switched to different rpg systems.

Imho, the AD&D 1e books were not a good source to learn about roleplaying. Apparently the books were targeted at readers who already knew all the basics about rpgs.

I'd also like to note that when I started playing (1984) D&D was pretty much looked down upon as the system for 'hack & slash' players. 'Real' rpg players wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. Considering some of the players I've met back then, I can understand why.

 

[Reynard]

Actually, in the early days when rpgs were a new thing for us, every player played a whole party of adventurers. There wasn't really any roleplaying. We only learned what roleplaying games were supposed to be about when we switched to different rpg systems.

Pray tell...

/snark off

The moment a discussion turns to what something as subjective as D&D fun "should be" the discussion effectively ends and turns into people talking past one another (at best). Let's avoid that here.

 

[Mallus]

My thoughts, in a more-or-less random jumble...

... I miss the imagined physicality of old D&D. Shake every vase! Prod every hole with a wooden hole-prodding pole! Disarm the trapped chest by examining the lock closely, but not too closely, lest an Eye-Biter jump out and bite you in the eye (death in 1d3 rounds unless in can be stopped from reaching your cerebral cortex -- heh!).

... though I recall this all got rather scripted after a while. Standard Operating Procedures and all. The sad fact is it's really tough to keep coming up with game environments chock full of clever, new, physical puzzles, to be poked, prodded, and dissolved with acid. It ceases to be so immediate, so immersive, when your interaction w/the game environment becomes 'yeah, do the usual'.

... while we were great fans of war-dogs at low levels, my groups were never big on henchmen or hirelings. It was enough to track 6 or so PC's, never mind a coterie of supplemental combatants. Besides, our games were all about our nutty, squabbling protagonists, we were less interested in leading a squad of medieval troops into Moria.

... perhaps because of this, we never used a caller/party leader. I can how a caller can be a valuable information (and time) management tool for a big group, but we never got quite that big.

 

[the Jester]

I think they're a bit wargame-y. Too close to Chainmail. One figure per player is one of the key concepts that distinguishes rpgs from wargames.

I'll grain of salt that. I have seen plenty of groups where each player runs multiple pcs.

 

[Mark CMG]

Occasionally one gets injured by a range weapon, (. . .)

"Message for you, sir." - (Brave, sweet) Concorde (He'll just wait here for you, then?)