What was so magical about 1E/OD&D art?

[Rothe]

Just goes to show how different people's experiences were. Death was rarely more than an inconvenience in our 1e games. Rings of wishes, and other goodies were held for just such an eventuality. Maybe it's because I played almost exclusively through modules. I know that my longest running character, a paladin, died about three, maybe four times over the course of the campaign. We just went back to town and got him rezzed. No biggie.

Exactly, we never used rings of wishes for anything else, which is why all the old rules about raising abilities with wishes baffled me. That said, we invariably ran 2 characters each because oft someone died with little or no way to bring them back when at lower level.

 

[replicant2]

My point was that the last picture was not 3E art.

Oh, I didn't realize that. It's still an excellent drawing.

 

[Sound of Azure]

"The maneuvers and stunts you are about to see in the illustrations in this book were performed by professional adventurers of at least 10th level. Do not try this in your home game with a low level character."​

That would be perfect for an XCrawl game!

 

[Delta]

I mean, if I'm having fun playing Character X, why would the game force me to stop unless I wanted to?

Well, let me ask the following in the spirit of exploration:

If you're having fun playing Solitaire (or Minelayer or Chess or Magic or multiplayer Starcraft), why would the game force you to stop unless you wanted to?

My attitude is that the distinct difference between a real win and loss in any game serves to develop more skillful play, and a greater sense of accomplishment on a win. Or more briefly (again from grognard-town): that's just how games work. You can win or lose. The way that RPGs have careened away from other games in that regard I don't get.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Well, let me ask the following in the spirit of exploration:

If you're having fun playing Solitaire (or Minelayer or Chess or Magic or multiplayer Starcraft), why would the game force you to stop unless you wanted to?

Well, there's the position that it DOESN'T stop me from playing unless I want to. I can always try again, and I loose nothing other than time if I don't succeed.

However, there is a huge difference when dealing with narratives and characters vs. simpler games, because I never get attatched to one particular Solitaire card or Minelayer pattern or Chess piece. I never pick the Bishop and go "I really want the bishop to win!"

When I'm playing a role, and having fun playing that role, it's not usually very constructive to make me stop playing that role just because of random chance.

My attitude is that the distinct difference between a real win and loss in any game serves to develop more skillful play, and a greater sense of accomplishment on a win. Or more briefly (again from grognard-town): that's just how games work. You can win or lose. The way that RPGs have careened away from other games in that regard I don't get.

Well, #1, I'd say that "skillful play" is entirely dependant upon the player. Not every player WANTS to obsess over rules minutae or develop skill. I mean, I have no particular desire to become a chess master, but I can still have fun playing chess with people of similar skill levels.

And #2, I'd say that loss does not have to include character death. Designers seem to agree with me by making resurrection rather readily available (still a hassle, especially to a low-level party, but one of many options). Character failure can add to the fun by making it a tougher struggle and a more hard-won victory, but you don't have to stop playing a character you like to play in order to fail at something.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I would point out that this was a very common practice in 1e as well. There were very, very few players who had actually read much of the rules IME, myself included

True. And there are a fair number of complaints about players not reading the rules in 3e as well.

I will certainly agree that there are "complaints I've seen about how players are more likely to rely on the rules rather than GM interpretation", but (1) I'm not sure which complaint actually occurs more, and (2) these are not mutually exclusive complaints. It may not be uncommon to argue with rules with someone who has read them and knows them well; but if so neither is it uncommon to argue rules with someone because that person hasn't read them fully and/or doesn't understand them well.

However, my original point has nothing to do with determining the number (or percentage) of people it applies to. My original point was merely a potential explaination for why some people might have an adverse reaction to 3.x art where that reaction is not based upon the individual artwork.


RC

 

[Hussar]

"The maneuvers and stunts you are about to see in the illustrations in this book were performed by professional adventurers of at least 10th level. Do not try this in your home game with a low level character."

ROTF. Sigged.

 

[Delta]

However, there is a huge difference when dealing with narratives and characters vs. simpler games... Not every player WANTS to obsess over rules minutae or develop skill.

Well, I guess that's the difference in a nutshell: an emphasis on roleplaying over gaming (I could have also guessed it was an effect of computer games with standard save-game expectations).

When I started playing D&D it was just another game, really (a really spectacular one). Similarly, as I player I don't want to obsess over character backstory motivation and minutiae (and yes, I get grief from some DMs for my resistance with this these days). I just want to play a game with interesting, unique challenges.

 

[BroccoliRage]

I don't dislike older artwork, but I like when the newer artwork takes a break from the goofy, over the top anime style the artists currently hired are obsessed with. For instance, Heroes of Horror has some GREAT artwork! But Unearthed Arcana (d20 Fantasy) looks stale and boring to me.

 

[tx7321]

Brocilli Rage do you like the new PPP and GG and ER "old school" covers by chance?