Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8712206" data-attributes="member: 86653">The bulk of the group I played with in 84 were 8 years older than me and had been playing for years together. I don’t know how long. We almost never did modules, it was almost exclusively home brew. The Hickman Revolution passed us by. So while yes, I started in 84, I learned from people older and with years of experience who explicitly avoided modules and 2E. So everything that brought in the notion of RPGs as stories and keeping characters alive at all costs we skipped. Because it’s fun. It’s way more fun to try big things and gamble than to know you’re immortal and can’t lose. Again, the emergent story of the group, not individual PCs as the protagonists of a story. If I want a story, I’ll read a book. I don’t play games for story. I play games for the challenges and the agency. It is when you have four people with about 40 years of board game, wargame, and RPG experience each. Encounter balance is wildly in favor of easy PC wins. Monsters are undertuned. PCs start with a Monty Haul grab bag of abilities. Healing is too plentiful. And death saves make it so even a semi-competent healer can keep everyone alive in most fights. It is for us. No, but it should be an option and a relatively easy one. Adventurers should start as peasants with a few more months training than everyone else and they should die if the player does something stupid. That’s a style we enjoy. You don’t. To each their own. For some players, yes. For us, not at all. It perks up our ears and we pay attention more when the game’s challenging and hard. It makes us want to overcome and beat the odds. When it’s too easy we start snoring at the table. A lot of it is, for us. You take risks without precautions, that’s stupid. You fight dirty and use every trick you can to beat the monsters before you even roll initiative, that’s smart.</blockquote>

Verification