Hi Gary,
I've seen you around some of the old-school-friendly sites I more commonly frequent (Dragonsfoot, Rob Kuntz's board), but this is my first contribution here:
In stories of the Greyhawk Campaign (which I
love reading, btw), the featured characters are almost exclusively human fighters and magic-users (with occasional clerics, but mostly as henchmen/support-types). Examples include Robilar, Tenser, Terik, Yrag, Mordenkainen, Murlynd, Erac and Erac's Cousin, Otto, Bigby, Gronan of Simmerya, Bombadil, and on and on. Characters of other classes are much less frequently mentioned, and when they are it's usually as an oddity or token (i.e. Terry Kuntz's "Monk with No Name"). The seems surprising to me because in every D&D campaign I've ever played in thieves (especially demi-human multi-classed thieves) and rangers at least have been just as popular as ftrs and m-u's. Were such character-types really not popular in Greyhawk, or is it simply that the best and most memorable stories tend to come from the 'early days' before those character types had been developed, and that in Greyhawk's later years (c. 1975+) they were common after all?
Best,
T. Foster
P.S. I played with you in "Necropolis" at Glathricon (in Evansville, IN) in 1988 and am pretty sure I encountered your infamous 'killer' d20 -- it was white, numbered 0-9 twice, and rolled awfully well (for you, badly for us

).
P.P.S. FWIW I'm actually the "one person" mentioned in RFisher's question above who guessed you didn't approve of the universal "roll stat or less on 1d20" stat-check mechanic (since AFAICT that method never appeared in any of your AD&D writing). I didn't mean to suggest that you didn't approve of stat-based rolls
at all (the str-based bend bars and open doors rolls certainly prove that's not the case!), merely that I suspected you hadn't much use for the 'one size fits all' universal stat-or-less-on-1d20 mechanic that became much more prevalent once you were no longer at the helm (in the Dragonlance modules and Survival Guides, and eventually in the core 2E rulebooks). My guess is that you prefered a more ad-hoc approach where odds were formulated on the spot based on the specific circumstances of the situation. So, did I guess right?
