perception of OD&D/AD&D as random deathtraps

[SuStel]

What's the problem here?

If the players have fun and keep coming back for more, the dungeon was not so deadly that they became frustrated, and not so easy that they became bored. Whatever it contains, it's working.

As for deathtraps, put a sign on the entrance to the dungeon which reads, "Random deathtraps scattered throughout dungeon. Enter at your own risk."

Honestly. What mad wizard doesn't add the occasional deathtrap to his dungeon? "Sorry, wiz, the Union of Dungeon Delvers, Captured Princesses, and Linkboys won't sign off on this dungeon construction permit until you take out the deathtraps."

 

[Gentlegamer]

Not particularly. In 3e, you CAN trip something. The rules are spelled out, you know, more or less what to expect, etc.

All you are saying is that 3e uses tactical combat, and 1e did not.

 

[Tarek]

When 12 year olds are making house rules that dramatically improve the flow of the game, I just shake my head. I guess thats why Gygax got so bent out of shape about house rules. No one likes to be shown up by kids.

Laws don't prevent criminals from commiting crimes; game rules don't prevent antagonistic (aka 'bad') DMs from screwing over their players.

Second, I've read many of the "Ask Gary Gygax" threads on this very forum, and from what I can tell, Gary has never been "bent out of shape" by house rules. But you can ask him directly what he thinks about house rules.

About the only thing Gary seems to get upset about is when a "rules lawyer" attempts to derail the game by trying to get the DM into a rules argument; again, this is my impression from reading those "Ask Gary Gygax" threads on this very forum.

 

[jdrakeh]

. . . game rules don't prevent antagonistic (aka 'bad') DMs from screwing over their players.

True that. The 'viking hat' attitude doesn't come packaged with a game, the DM brings it to the table with him. A bad DM can much up any game, and it's not the game's fault. Don't blame the game, blame the guy (or gal) running it.

 

[Maggan]

Seems like Gygax was pretty clear on how he felt about this.

If I also consider "Tomb of Horrors" and Gygax's anecdotes about running it at cons, it doesn't really seem that clear to me. That's one of the perplexing things about AD&D to me.

/M

 

[jdrakeh]

If I also consider "Tomb of Horrors" and Gygax's anecdotes about running it at cons, it doesn't really seem that clear to me. That's one of the perplexing things about AD&D to me.

/M

A lot of tournament games are like ToH in regard to lethality. ToH was essentially a "one shot" adventure set up to be run in the space of an afternoon, at cons. It's really not fair to use such an adventure as a measuring stick for the whole system. That said, I've heard anectodotes from former TSR employees (notably Kelly Foote) about gaming with Gary which seem to suggest that he was a very adversarial DM at times.

 

[Valiant]

In AD&D it is critical that the DM has complete control (if he's unfare, you just stop playing). Another important thing is the inability to predict chances for certain things; This makes the game feel like "real life" ("how hard will it be for me to jump over that 10' hole. I think I have a good chance" compared to a D20 based game, "I just need to role a 10 (if this is the typical 10 foot pit, given my lvel, jump skill and attribute bonus).

Also, in AD&D we don't have every possible move covered in the rules. This gives a sense of fluidity to the game. You don't have the computer button feel we get with other systems (jump, bluff, tumble etc.).

As for DMs. If you don't like the way the DM is DMing in AD&D you don't use that DM ever again. I've played with scores of DMs and have never seen one unfair in the way some have portrayed. There is no fun in that.

 

[grodog]

A lot of tournament games are like ToH in regard to lethality. ToH was essentially a "one shot" adventure set up to be run in the space of an afternoon, at cons. It's really not fair to use such an adventure as a measuring stick for the whole system. That said, I've heard anectodotes from former TSR employees (notably Kelly Foote) about gaming with Gary which seem to suggest that he was a very adversarial DM at times.

A slight correction there: Tomb of Horrors, while originally run at Origins 2 (not 1 as the cover blurb states) as a convention tourney, was designed by Gygax to test the best players and toughest PCs in his Greyhawk campaign: Rob Kuntz and Ernie Gygax. Notably, both managed to beat the module. The module is not designed to be a meat grinder (in the sense of a hack-n-slash best), and while it certainly rewards careful, cautious game play, in general the original Greyhawk Castle and other Lake Geneva campaigns did as well. It's not unbeatable, as EGG notes in his intro to the Return to the Tomb of Horrors box set, and careful play can generate substantial rewards from the module.

If the module was unbeatable, then it would certainly be unfair, and there would be little to no point in playing it at all. In the hands of an incompetent and/or killer DM any adventure can result in a TPK, regardless of how it's written or designed. DM fiat is, afterall, final. However, I haven't found either Gygax or Kuntz prone to design any levels that were unfairly unwinnable.

 

[jdrakeh]

It's not unbeatable, as EGG notes in his intro to the Return to the Tomb of Horrors box set, and careful play can generate substantial rewards from the module.

I don't think it's unbeatable but I don't buy that it's not a deliberate meat grinder, either.

 

[Jhaelen]

I don't think it's unbeatable but I don't buy that it's not a deliberate meat grinder, either.

What I hate about the module are the various completely unfair traps/encounters like a teleport trap, that teleports the pcs out of the dungeon, while their equipment is teleported elsewhere. That's a campaign stopper right there and it's an effect that is impossible to recreate using the rules (excepting wish-like powers and - of course - DMs fiat).

When I played the module my players triggered that trap and even dared to make a return-trip after using all of their savings to buy a new set of magic items with a much lower power level. To noone's surprise they didn't get very far.

Imho, it's one of the major differences between 3rd.ed. and earlier editions that DMs fiat was greatly reduced and discouraged by a more complete ruleset and recommendations for adventure and encounter design.