|
Post by Scott on Nov 5, 2015 8:38:13 GMT -5
Before name level and strongholds, where have your PCs lived? Arriving in a town and finding an Inn is standard fare for gaming, but longer term. How do you handle their living arrangements?
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 5, 2015 11:10:30 GMT -5
I think many were literal troglodytes, not the monster "troglodyte" but as in the original sense of a cave dweller, and just camped out on-site then went to town when they had to. I remember people claiming various dungeon rooms as their own then levels then it wasn't until later that they started "acting civilized" and conquered lands and fortresses. As for recurring random monsters they drafted many "returning" humanoids back in the mid-eighties.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 5, 2015 14:18:23 GMT -5
There's a lot of the the town environment that I've neglected.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 5, 2015 17:28:15 GMT -5
The whole city/town problem gravitates around aversion to training rules.
The article A PC AND HIS MONEY from DRAGON #74 (JUN 1983) must have been brought up glibly a zillion times regarding "coming back to town". That is probably because it was in BEST OF DRAGON IV from 1985 as well. The writer seemed to be professionally writing D&D articles but there seemed to be a distinct disconnect as to what exactly this guy was playing:
The pitfalls of the training system revolve around the insistence of making town into a money pit. Instead of a place to use your treasure all the freeform taxation is a killer. I've seen players adopt a no mercy policy based on DMing that doesn't pay up for subdued captures (a harder task) which is the hub of any D&D game especially if the characters are using the alignment system.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 5, 2015 21:47:17 GMT -5
T1 is probably the only introductory AD&D module, or low level module period, that handled the training rules correctly. It really is a well written adventure. You scrape along in the Moathouse, fight the epic final battle, and then get the payoff, which is enough to level and pay for training. The money left over after training is appropriate for the PCs. If you drop the training, they end up with too much treasure. If you're a pinchpenny DM then you have to scrap or alter the training rules of your PCs will never have enough gold to train.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Nov 6, 2015 8:20:38 GMT -5
I've always assumed player characters don't live anywhere permanently until they reach name level. Before that, they are more like wandering mercenaries, explorers, knights errant, etc. roaming around the world, seeking their fortune. They stay at inns, sleep on boats, and camp in the wilderness. While in the service of a lord, they might stay at that lord's stronghold. When they are name level and build their own strongholds, that is when they put down roots and stay (mostly) in one place.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 6, 2015 8:38:03 GMT -5
That seems to be how it's played in most games, but I'm not sure that's what was presumed. In Gary's campaign the PCs lived in Greyhawk. In a campaign where the PCs are gaining treasure at a rate that works with the mechanics, they should have more loot than you think they would be lugging around with them as wandering mercenaries. Even if they are away more often than not, there should still be a 'base'. Even Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser shared a loft in Lankhmar.
I always allow clerics to stay at their local temples, but I've never been too happy with the arrangements the other classes have made.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 6, 2015 9:14:13 GMT -5
I don't think there really are any plans for sleeping arrangements in classic AD&D at all. Most adventures just revolve around being in the middle of nowhere so that's what slopes it into place as a camping as a lifestyle thing.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 6, 2015 10:12:37 GMT -5
But that is absolutely not how Gary ran his campaign. Neither did Dave for that matter. The rules completely neglect this aspect of the campaign, which, I guess, is why it has become the default. I've pretty much hand waved it myself in my campaigns, but I've been giving it a lot of thought recently, along with city adventuring in general.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 6, 2015 11:38:12 GMT -5
Yeah, I think that they didn't have to contemplate it because they were a character and his army camp then the characters would head into town then dungeon with a contingent of the men-at-arms.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 7, 2015 17:01:17 GMT -5
I think module gaming created the mercenary wanderer thing. Greyhawk and Blackmoor were tied to a town, and there was a lot more interaction there. The original formula was PCs lived in town and did most of their adventuring in the local dungeon until they hit name level or so.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Nov 7, 2015 19:36:03 GMT -5
There is a theme of beginning characters arriving at a place that can be the base of their adventures, but which isn't their home -- i.e., they aren't from there. In B2, the characters arrive at the KEEP but they are from the Realm to the west off the map. In T1, the characters have ridden up from the Wild Coast to Hommlet. Even in the PH (such as in that quote T. Foster recently posted) the same thing is assumed: the characters are at the gates of a town and have to gain entry to it and learn their way around. This all gives me the impression that the initial base that characters adventure out of have isn't where they are from, but just a place they will stay at for a while until local adventuring opportunities dry up and they move on to other places. But, I suppose, there isn't any reason why characters couldn't declare one of these bases to be be their permanent home. That seems to be what Burne and Rufus did, with Hommlet. They aren't name level as presented in the module, yet they've built (and are still building) a permanent stronghold.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 8, 2015 8:35:43 GMT -5
It was the same when EGG posted his Yggsburgh game sessions; the campaign started with the players on the road approaching Yggsburgh. Again I'm drawn back to stories from Greyhawk and Blackmoor. The adventuring opportunities never dried up. The PCs were much less transient. They owned businesses in town. Their strongholds were satellites around town. Even when they did go far abroad on adventures, when they were done they came back. I think it was just a gaming style that didn't make the jump when the game took off. Eric's Wineland campaign had a similar feel. There was no 'town' at the heart of the activity, but the PCs were tied very closely to a specific location. When you hear stories from these campaigns, there's a depth there that I don't often experience when playing.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 8, 2015 11:02:55 GMT -5
Back in the 80's when I had the whole "rotating DMs" thing you had your own NPCs. Not as players having well-moraled henchmen under their direct control but as DMs the shop would be closed if it wasn't your NPC who was the "shopkeeper".
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 8, 2015 11:10:05 GMT -5
I have never had the opportunity to share DM duties within the same campaign world, but it does sound appealing.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 8, 2015 12:02:51 GMT -5
Well honestly? I dont think its possible to return to that binge style D&D ing anymore for me. Back then it was the drive to stay over at the big ass mansion that made high school peers of mine join my "Manson Family" of D&D players.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 8, 2015 12:13:10 GMT -5
No, I don't see that kind of gaming ever happening again. But even at a slower pace, I'd like to have a shift now and then with the characters I usually DM.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 8, 2015 19:06:36 GMT -5
Speaking of bygone days, I need to get something going to get out of this D&D-less rut I've been in.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 9, 2015 8:58:28 GMT -5
Are any of your old players still available?
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 9, 2015 11:00:28 GMT -5
The dynamics are off. Of the four main people appearing in the videos, only me and Taylor are still on the same page. My cousin eloped with a girl who does not speak English about right after the last video in 2010 and its been no communication ever since. My friend with the white beard eloped around the same time and his girl is a real bummer (authoritarian; type A;liberal by association only).
After the last draft in 2006, I think I'm done with nuts off the street. Of particular nauseum was that guy who was trying to draft my players into his field test for his Pokemon-like fantasy rpg system thats the one who wrote some shitty Gord story "with" Gary. BARF! It was like he was there only to ruin the game then bait and switch into a platform for his draft. I said I would go just to shut him up. Big mistake. He was kissing some guy's warty ass that claimed to play the triangle in James Horner's orchestra. You can't make this shit up!
|
|