Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9083345" data-attributes="member: 42582">My approach comes from my own experiences, I guess.I am a bit interested in, but not especially good at, classic D&D play. I GMed and played it, clumsily, for the first half of the 80s without really knowing what I was doing. I still try it out for a session or two once every year or two, normally digging up an old module and using my modified set of AD&D rules.In the second half of the 80s I played a lot of AD&D (using the original OA, and also an all-thieves game) that in retrospect I can identify as "vanilla narrativist" in the Forge sense. But I've never been into the sort of GM-driven, setting-heavy, players-bite-the-GM's-hook approach that has been very popular since the mid-to-late 80s up until the present day.From 2009 to 2016 most of my RPGing was 4e D&D, and I spent a lot of that period being told (in online contexts) that I was a "traitor" to D&D or similar sorts of sentiments. Although to me, 4e seemed the best realisation possible of the design features of classic D&D PC build and resolution. (In my view obviously not classic D&D play procedures - I don't think 4e has much to offer as a dungeon-crawling ruleset.)The World of Greyhawk has always been my default setting for FRPGing - the most recent RPG session I GMed was a Torchbearer game where the action is in a village about a Wizard's Tower in the Bluff Hills, north of the Bandit Kingdoms. I've GMed campaigns set in Greyhawk for probably half of the past 33 years. And for another 10 of those years I was using material published for the original OA and Kara-Tur (though the system was Rolemaster, not AD&D).So I'm a bit allergic to assertions of what is fundamental to D&D that tend to frame my many decades of involvement with D&D, in one way or another, as if it were deviant.</blockquote>

Verification