TSR's "subliminal" message about PC power level

[Mycanid]

Hey there Glyfair!

Well you and I have talked back and forth about the subject of working out and analyzing old day memories quite a bit it seems.

Interesting that you mention the research stemming from hearing people talk about being grateful to have a 14 and all. That sounds like it was from folks playing the Basic/Expert etc. games.

In almost no game that I played in the Advanced setting was this the case. Again, as I mentioned elsewhere (I think?! ) the standard for me for 1eAdnd stats is best reflected in the characters at the end of the U series modules. I played the 1eAdnd far more than the Basic/Expert etc. versions of the game.... So for me at least that has always been my reference point.

As we have discussed many times, "standards" in these sorts of things are such tricky things to nail down rationally or "historically" even. It's a hard thing. So many people simply use their strongest aesthetic experiences of the game (whether in or out of the game environment interestingly - I've seen myself molded by both) as their reference experiences. They had a meaningful experience (in the literal sense of the word - an experience full of meaning: aesthetic solely and/or the aesthetic experience that is accompanied by the organizational principle in our soul "putting things in line" for us, however small or tiny it may be), and thus they naturally remember and "add on", build off, attempt to re-create or even "amplify" these experiences of "meaning". When new material arrives they are unused to many feel taken aback and unsure - they are externally on "unfamiliar" ground.

Well, I better not go on too much here with my "thinking aloud".

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Hi Glyfair,

Your experience is by no means a valid measure of what PCs were like when OD&D and OAD&D were in their heyday.

Many OD&D PCs were played with stats as rolled on 3d6, complete with results of 3 to 5 in my Greyhawk Campaign and in a slew of others that I know of. OTOH, there were Money Haul campaigns where the favored PCs, likely most of the group, had 15 as their lowet stat.

As i have pointed out, the stats from the Rogues Gallery are a mis of actual ones claimed by the players of the PCs in question and those made up by Brian Blume for PCs that stats were refused to him. Not only is it an unreliable source, but as I also pointedd out, many of the higher level PCs had lower stats that they ended up with as they advanced.

Please do me a favor and post the stats you refer tofrom the G1-3 series.

I must add that eble DMs adjusted encounter difficulty according to the level and stats of the PCs concerned.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Glyfair]

Your experience is by no means a valid measure of what PCs were like when OD&D and OAD&D were in their heyday.

As if anyone who hasn't played in hundreds of groups with different experiences would know You are among those with the better experience, with all the input you had from various groups telling you their stories. I was fortunately to have had a reasonably wide variety in the groups I played in (from the pure players of the "game" to the improvisational actor school of player).

Looking back by memories is rarely completely accurate. Thus, my attempts to look back and see what actually was printed. The nostalgia is a nice bonus, as well (particularly with the Dragon thread, which shows all sorts of things developing, changing, and arising).

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Yes, much of this comes because I see a lot of comments about "how things used to be" and they don't jibe with what I remember. So, I'm looking back at the more objective things that can be seen. For example, I've seen a number of "in those days it wasn't about having high stats like 3E, we all were expected to play characters with our highest stat being 14 and we loved it" oriented comments, and the record doesn't seem to support those being the characters we were playing (as presented).

I agree with Mycanid that you're probably off-the-track, if that's what you're looking for. High stat being 14 sounds more like classic D&D than like AD&D, to me.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

As if anyone who hasn't played in hundreds of groups with different experiences would know You are among those with the better experience, with all the input you had from various groups telling you their stories. I was fortunately to have had a reasonably wide variety in the groups I played in (from the pure players of the "game" to the improvisational actor school of player).

Looking back by memories is rarely completely accurate. Thus, my attempts to look back and see what actually was printed. The nostalgia is a nice bonus, as well (particularly with the Dragon thread, which shows all sorts of things developing, changing, and arising).

Sure enough

And mind you I am by no means claiming to have any reliable knowledge in regards to the actual mean stats... I was simply pointing out a number of caveats in the assumptions put forth.

I can't for the life of me recall the pregens in the G1-3 series, and I wished to comment on them.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

I agree with Mycanid that you're probably off-the-track, if that's what you're looking for. High stat being 14 sounds more like classic D&D than like AD&D, to me.

That's so.

When OAD&D gave value to all stats, most players in action oriented campaigns did their utmost to get them as high as possible.

As for snide remarks regarding "roll-playing," I must point out it is universally regarded as more enjoyable than rule-playing as evidenced by online game success. As far as I am concerned the FRPG is about heroic (or not) action-adventure with a modicum, or more, of other aspects of play sprinkled about the campaign for variety. I personally enjoy politics and economics, but those are not particularly popular with the audience...

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Glyfair]

My favorite early artist in 1e things was Erol Otus. When I came across his character in Rogues Gallery (Valerius) I liked the character sketch of him personality wise and art wise. The question is, did you ever rpg with him (either as player or DM)? If you did, what else can you tell me story wise about this character Valerius?

Also, was there a reason why Otus' character was included in the Rogues Gallery and not any other of the primary artists at the time? Was it simply because he did much of the artwork in the book?

I'll note that the last issue I reviewed in the "Dragon review[" thread Erol Otus has a piece of art that won honorable mention in the Creature Contest. I suspect this might have been what brought him to TSRs attention.

 

[Mycanid]

Thanks for the nod Glyfair. What an honorable thief you are! Must be partial to fungi I suspect....

Anyway, I have been happily following your Dragon review thread too, but somehow did not notice that. Hmm.

Gary - I always was terribly frustrated by the players who tried to get killer stats. Bleh. By a little bit of contrast though ... for me the rp'ing was the most important thing. But action-adventure is a close second! (Say a 55%/45% relationship balance.)

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Okay, and however one most enjoys the game form is fine, and unassailable by any other player who enjoys a different aspect. What is off base is someone stating one form or another is superior to all others. Such assertions are quite ridiculous, for we are considering the play of a game

I must confess to regarding blatent power gaming with fudged PCs as beneath serious consideration in my campaign or any game session I happen to be GMing. Still, many plyers find it mostenjpyable

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Mycanid]

No argument Gary - no argument with that. What was it Binibik said? Such people who do so "have put a knife in the heart of wonder". I think this applies to power gamers personally. But, again, that is only my take on it. After all, it is only a game.

But isn't it curious how much of a hold this particular game has on people? So that issues like these matter? Granted it doesn't take much excuse for people to start arguing with each other. There is a difference between taking yourself seriously while gaming (or indeed anything else in life), and then there is not taking yourself seriously while gaming (or living, etc.) seriously. It's kind of hard for me to express.

I get very interested when thoughtful people (like Glyfair or Raven Crowking, for example) re-look at things, re-evaluate things that were precious to them. Try to get perspective on things as they grow and such. That's why I so love such threads as these! But I am just going on and on now....

Phooey. Never give a fungus like myself time to reminisce and think outloud! It does get lonely down here in the Underdark sometimes though and lends itself to contemplation of such things....As for the G1-3 stats - come on Glyfair! Bring em on!

By the way, before I forget (and I know others have probably told you this a thousand times) I want to thank you for helping to make the DnD game into what it was back then. It really had a great impact in my life and (as curious as it may sound) helped me to be where I am today. I'll not go into too many sordid details and take up space, but I have always wanted to say thank you, and now that I seem to have your "digital ear" on a semi-personal level: THANK YOU.

Okay. On with the thread.