The Guards at the Gate Quote

[TheAuldGrump]

"You look beautiful."

or

"Much better than the other one. And I really liked the other one."

or

"Are you trying to turn me on? Here? In the store?"

or

"Good golly, miss molly, you so fine I lose my mind!"

Don't even try to answer the question directly. Anything else works better.

So 'Horizontal stripes? With a muumuu??!" is right out?

The Auld Grump, in orange and teal?!

 

[jonesy]

So 'Horizontal stripes? With a muumuu??!" is right out?

The Auld Grump, in orange and teal?!

Why do I keep getting messages that tell me I can't exp you everytime you post something. Oh vBulletin, how thou dost mock me.

 

[pemerton]

Gygax never tried to tell me to leave something out of my game because it wasn't fun.

"Must spread XP".

No. He told you to leave something out - lots of magic items, and "low skill" players with high level PCs - or else be a legitimate object of ridicule. He also said that "Monty Haul" games are "crashing bores" (on the same page I quoted upthread), which is synoymous with "not fun". So I don't see any difference. Both are giving advice on what makes for a fun or a boring RPG.

 

[LurkAway]

No. He told you to leave something out - lots of magic items, and "low skill" players with high level PCs - or else be a legitimate object of ridicule. He also said that "Monty Haul" games are "crashing bores" (on the same page I quoted upthread), which is synoymous with "not fun". So I don't see any difference. Both are giving advice on what makes for a fun or a boring RPG.

I DO see a marked difference in the giving of the advice. With Gygax, those were more eccentric times in an immature niche market. People said a lot of things back then that they don't say now. I think the more accurate question is: Did/would Gygax write about "crashing bores" in the 4E DMG (if he were one of the authors) and I think the resounding answer is 'no'. I think it's inaccurate to compare sensibilities in different times. I mean, who reads a 30-year old RPG book and gets offended by the outdated writing style?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Don't you laugh - I'm the only thing keeping this thread from being closed.

The Auld Grump

 

[pemerton]

I DO see a marked difference in the giving of the advice. With Gygax, those were more eccentric times in an immature niche market. People said a lot of things back then that they don't say now. I think the more accurate question is: Did/would Gygax write about "crashing bores" in the 4E DMG (if he were one of the authors) and I think the resounding answer is 'no'. I think it's inaccurate to compare sensibilities in different times. I mean, who reads a 30-year old RPG book and gets offended by the outdated writing style?

Not me.

Who reads a contemporary RPG guidebook and gets offended by being told that something they like in their games - non-encounter, non-action driving scenes with gate guards - aren't fun? If you disagree, note the disagreement and move on!

What I don't get is the complaints that it's "terrible advice." What does it matter to anyone that some stranger - whose GMing practice is being shaped by the 4e DMG - might be running games in a different style? And if those strangers really want to run exploration-heavy games with free-floating colour, I'm sure they'll find there way there regardless of what they might have read in the 4e DMG.

It would be terrible advice if it was prone to produce games that were actually inferior in some way. But where's the evidence for that? I haven't seen any.

 

[S'mon]

No. He told you to leave something out - lots of magic items, and "low skill" players with high level PCs - or else be a legitimate object of ridicule.

You're misreading it. He said to balance challenge against reward (ie not Monty Haul), and that the game isn't designed to challenge Christmas Tree PCs. He didn't actually say Monty Haul was Not Fun (for the players).

Edit:This is a particularly silly objection to EGG in that his 'balanced item' examples include 2 ogres (hd 4+1) with 2,000gp, and magic weapons in a 1st level dungeon. His 'careful item placement' is still far more generous than the modern default for treasure placement given in either 3e or 4e! 4e in particular is very stingy by default unless all items are carefully tailored to the PCs. And of course if you use the 1e DMG treasure & NPC gear tables as written you get 5th level PCs running around with +5 swords and belts of storm giant strength.

Edit: I don't see how the merits of Gygaxian advice is relevant to whether Wyatt's advice is bad. If we want to critique Gygax's advice maybe we could have a new thread? I'm running a semi-Gygaxian 1e Yggsburgh campaign right now, it might benefit from such a discussion.

 

[S'mon]

It would be terrible advice if it was prone to produce games that were actually inferior in some way. But where's the evidence for that? I haven't seen any.

Keep on the Shadowfell
(I hear there's an OK bit in Thunderspire Labyrinth)
Pyramid of Shadows
Assault on Nightwyrm Fortress
E1-E3

A million Dungeon magazine adventures.

Fun Fun Fun = Less Fun.

Edit: But Jester, I *like* Dungeon Delve.

 

[LurkAway]

Not me.

Who reads a contemporary RPG guidebook and gets offended by being told that something they like in their games - non-encounter, non-action driving scenes with gate guards - aren't fun? If you disagree, note the disagreement and move on!

What I don't get is the complaints that it's "terrible advice."

The OP asks why the "quote is so objectionable". People are responding. What's the problem? If you'd like, someone can start a thread on Gygax's advice and ask why it's objectionable or not -- maybe it's a non-issue (because it's old, because it doesn't try to define "fun") or maybe there are a lot of closet Gygax advice haters, I don't know. I just thought that your comparison of Wyatt's advice in the current DMG to a 30 yr old Gygaxian advice doesn't tell me anything about why people are objecting to Wyatt's advice or not.

 

[BryonD]

What I don't get is the complaints that it's "terrible advice." What does it matter to anyone that some stranger - whose GMing practice is being shaped by the 4e DMG - might be running games in a different style?

But that is not the point being made.

Do *YOU* run games in which encounters with two guards at a gate are a de facto example of "not fun" and therefore you NEVER do that?

I'm willing to make a large wager that your answer is no. I doubt there is ANY stranger out there that meets your hypothetical description in the context of the Guards at the Gate quote.

And if there IS one group out there for whom it really is implicitly true that "An encounter with two guards at the city gate isn’t fun." then I would say for that specific example the whole dreaded "not D&D" debate comes back into life. But again I really doubt there is even ONE group out there that fits those words as they were published.

To my point of view the only rational and agreeable conversation on this topic should be something like:
4E Detractor: Man, that was a stupid thing he said
4E Fan: Yeah, but it is just a really poor choice of words. There is a lot of 4E text out there and they didn't say what they meant. But it is only a fair criticism of the writing and editing right there, not of the game itself.
4E Detractor: Yeah, but it certainly reflects 4E as I see it's problems.
4E Fan: Its fair that a different perspective can see things in a different way. But since you don't like 4E your perspective may also prevent you from fairly seeing how that quote has no bearing on the real fun that we do have when playing.