|
Post by geneweigel on Aug 31, 2016 10:10:46 GMT -5
I don't recall anyone saying pignose to describe an orc until the 2E era when players that I picked up from bulletin boards in shops were making fun of how inferior Gygax D&D was. Usually the fans of current and official things who think original Klingons were an experiment that needs explaining.
I recall people saying ape, bear and dog snout but the pig stuff is something that I relegate to looking back in anger nerd rage type shit. As for the D&D cartoon they all have round dog noses not pig-like shovel pointed or even ardvark's round and indented its clearly a carnivorous nose.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Aug 31, 2016 12:22:43 GMT -5
A few years ago, I found this EnWorld thread referenced, in which several people asked Gary Gygax questions about orcs and humanoids... edited version from Grognardia below:
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Aug 31, 2016 13:34:30 GMT -5
I remember scraping together $ from my paper route and working at the neighborhood pool, but I always had to make choices what to buy because the 1E books and modules came out faster than my available $ could buy them! I had a similar experience. I never seemed to have enough money to buy all the books, modules and magazines that I wanted during the early 80's boom. Not to mention all the miniatures. In some games, we used lego pips for our miniatures! Yeah, I know how that sounds -- "In my day, we were so poor we had to use legos!" But I ended up really liking that scale, actually, as you could fit a fairly large scale battle of long ranges on a normal sized dinner table. You could have 1" IRL equal 10' in game terms. Not so, with the modern 28mm heroic scale.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Aug 31, 2016 14:23:11 GMT -5
That Grognardia guy is one of those people who imagines what a certain era was like but wasn't really in touch with it at that time. I don't know what the bag was there but I had heard he did some online fundraising then split town.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Aug 31, 2016 14:50:42 GMT -5
That's why I'm not a fan of kickstarters in general, because they are essentially paying people up front for product that hasn't been produced yet. Evidently, the Grognardia guy's father became very ill, and that was why he disappeared. But that isn't an excuse to not provider investors/supporters with updates (at the very least) or refunds (best case scenario if the project is cancelled.).
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Aug 31, 2016 15:16:39 GMT -5
That's why I'm not a fan of kickstarters in general, because they are essentially paying people up front for product that hasn't been produced yet. Evidently, the Grognardia guy's father became very ill, and that was why he disappeared. But that isn't an excuse to not provider investors/supporters with updates (at the very least) or refunds (best case scenario if the project is cancelled.). Unlike me who promises stuff and takes forever without costing anyone a cent!
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Aug 31, 2016 15:28:41 GMT -5
Yeah, where the hell is that "City of Bravesword and Surrounding Environs" boxed set, anyway?!?
|
|
|
Post by davegibsongreyhawkdm on Sept 2, 2016 7:29:34 GMT -5
I never used UA stuff, just the main 1E rule books - I was curious what UA content gets the most use by all of you - what is your favorite UA content: new spells, character classes & abilities, etc.? Expanded racial background flavor from UA?
What UA stuff do you not care for and do not use?
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Sept 2, 2016 10:39:00 GMT -5
Not a fan of UA overall. I like some of the spells and that's about it.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Sept 2, 2016 10:57:40 GMT -5
Most people didn't have a subscription to DRAGON MAGAZINE so when UNEARTHED ARCANA (1985) came out in the mid-80's some of that stuff was "new new" to people but by 1983 I had DRAGONs solid up to #40 (AUG 1980) as well photocopies* galore which started with the CTHULHU & MELNIBONE stuff. *Some were even mimeographed from photocopies going around in the local D&D network. UA is an essential AD&D tool except for the Roger Moore gods. Too flavored to his campaign with no universal appeal like the GH deities' portability. Its all about the new stuff for me. I've been over this before (infinitely... ), I said it to Gygax himself that the game has to have an open door for new content or you start playing in "save the farm" type campaigns where the DM starts saying the word "hook" as if its a red juicy steak. In regards to the 2E era type play, I don't use "plots" and "hooks" as I see it as mindless garbage created when the D&D game started walking out the door on the buying public**. New content is the key to any game. An NPC with a sob story asking you to quietly go on a mission for some reward is no replacement for dropping an unknown monster with an unknown attack/class/spell/magic popping out from around a tree or dark alleyway then on the character's own initiative (not that kind) dropping it dead or alive on the nearest authority's front door. Thats the way that I see it. **This might be the start of all the nonsense. A post-Gygax just before 2E accessory called DUNGEON MASTER'S DESIGN KIT (1988). This just might be what brought everything down to scriptwriting nomenclature bullshit. For an example, here is the index that I scanned: It seems all of this was considered in the SECOND EDITION DUNGEON MASTER GUIDE because it slips through the crack in almost every chapter. I had bought the DM's Design Kit when it came out and was confused by its concept as not being as user friendly as the old D&D stuff. Whereas the people who once (always?) couldn't figure out what to do with psionics, AC adjustments and speed factors you now had reems of "type gibberish" and "things to do" lists over how to act out a story painfully or at best in a mediocre fashion. And now for the "grand finale"... KABOOM!!! I think every moment of every session should be a grand finale otherwise how is the game modular and involved?
|
|
foster1941
Warlock
Duke of California, Earl of Los Angeles, Knight Bachelor
Posts: 476
|
Post by foster1941 on Sept 2, 2016 12:16:07 GMT -5
I use almost everything in UA and consider it totally "core" to my conception of AD&D - without it the game would feel lightweight and incomplete to me. I think the Comeliness "stat" is too fiddly, so I modified it a bit and "demoted" it to a secondary characteristic called "Appearance." I'd only allow the Underdark races in a campaign set primarily in the Underdark. I keep dwarf, elf, gnome, and halfling clerics NPC-only because that's the flavor I prefer in my campaign (also it makes it easier to ignore Roger Moore's demihuman deities). I think the Thief-Acrobat class is underpowered so I boosted it. I added a downside to Weapon Specialization to make it feel more like a choice than an obvious gimme. I boosted the power of a couple spells and reduced the power of a couple others. All of that stuff is detailed in the document linked in my signature.
|
|
|
Post by davegibsongreyhawkdm on Sept 2, 2016 12:27:20 GMT -5
I was playing Holmes basic first experience as DM running In Search of the Unknown in 1978, which is when I started my Dragon Magazine subscription.
I bought the MM in 1978 also, but waited to buy the PHB until I got the DMG in 1979. As soon as I dug into the DMG, I realized I needed to buy the PHB, so I saved $ and bought it the very next month.
Then I started buying modules as fast as I had cash for - Steading of the Hill Giant Chief came first. Then Glacial Rift of the Frost Giant Giant Jarl & Hall of the Fire Giant King. During that time I also picked up Tomb of Horrors. In 1979 friends were telling me not to buy Village of Hommlet - "it's just a town and a small dungeon, the other modules are better". I bought the three D series modules, Queen of the Demonweb Pits, White Plume Mountain, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, and I think also Slave Pits of the Undercity before I bought VoH sometime in 1980. I liked VoH and regretted not getting it sooner, and I started using it right away in my campaigns.
Of course I had also bought the basic set all over again in 1979 when The Keep of the Borderlands module {had to have it} replaced In Search of the Unknown in the set.
I remember the confusion I had when the Expert set came out - why get that when I am already gaming in Advanced? But I did eventually get it because I heard about the Isle of Dread and Castle Amber adventures from friends.
|
|
|
Post by davegibsongreyhawkdm on Sept 2, 2016 13:06:10 GMT -5
Were some of the UA class mods done specifically to provide improved play balance versus the other PC classes? Is that why weapon specialization was added to fighters and Rangers? Addition of Cavalier abilities to Paladins like various spell type immunities? Seems like the fighter related classes got some power boosting with UA?
Anyone use method V PC creation ability score generation in DM section? When I saw that it turned me off as too big a giveaway for high PC ability scores.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Sept 2, 2016 15:42:37 GMT -5
Specialization is a case of mistaken identity. Its basically a person who sticks a pommel where the sun don't shine on a nightly basis (see Archer class in DM #45 JAN 1981; Gygax on Specialization in DM #66). The way that I see ii is if you specialize and win then you're playing 2E. In original AD&D when you specialize you lose out because you can't operate any treasure because of your "relationship". In 2E when your playing a "realistic" campaign with a DM who can't handle anything magical because they're permanently wet-behind-the-ears then specialization is an overpowered boon because the fighter who chooses variety is at a loss permanently. The fighters who chose variety back in UA and prior were the ones with weird new weaponry while the specialist was stuck with the same shit for years due to advancement being based on actual tactics and not good glib conversation at the table.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 2, 2016 15:47:45 GMT -5
I use it all. I adopted the rules right away and have been using them ever since.
|
|
foster1941
Warlock
Duke of California, Earl of Los Angeles, Knight Bachelor
Posts: 476
|
Post by foster1941 on Sept 2, 2016 16:38:37 GMT -5
Weapon specialization works best when the player specializes in something bizarre and exotic and uses the advantages of specializing to counter-balance that they're never going to find a magic version of that weapon. It also works where the DM throws a bunch of different exotic magic weapons (tridents and javelins and so on) at the players so the versatile non-specialists have a real advantage (like Gene said). And it's also a good way for a low-Str fighter to keep up with the 18/xx guys. It doesn't work as well when the 18/xx guy double-specializes in long sword because he's studied the treasure tables in the DMG and UA and knows that long swords are statistically the most common magical weapons in random treasure hoards - then it just feels like a straight power-up for someone who doesn't need one. But even that's okay, because one of the things you learn when you've played the game enough and stopped listening to the advice in early 80s Dragon magazine and the 2E AD&D rulebooks is that powerful characters are fun, not something to be afraid of or discourage or try to undermine.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Sept 2, 2016 18:16:19 GMT -5
Looking back at myself I was oblivious to the absolute fact that the official AD&D rules were a means of keeping TSR in business. Everybody that I knew used every single NPC class regardless and when 2nd edition came along and people were losing all their classes (barbarian, cavalier, and what not) I was still saying whats the difference and continuing regardless with people's then present characters but certain classes felt major clunks. Like for instance my friend's illusionist slowly became a magic-user under 2E and my brother's barbarian was slowly piling on all the BARBARIAN HANDBOOK (1995) overbaked skill culture minutiae because he just wasn't going up with the 2E backwards reward system and wanted at least something out of the game. I thin kmy biggest problem in the 1990's was entertaining the fixation with newer official stuff means better. My policy now is new is good but avoid anything and everything published unless its getting full blast reviews.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 2, 2016 19:17:24 GMT -5
But even that's okay, because one of the things you learn when you've played the game enough and stopped listening to the advice in early 80s Dragon magazine and the 2E AD&D rulebooks is that powerful characters are fun, not something to be afraid of or discourage or try to undermine. Bingo! Very well said.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Sept 3, 2016 0:00:57 GMT -5
Its weird, I'd prefer playing with the old time players with all out war but most of the people that I played with (who are high level) look at getting together for a game like its a Veteran's Day time to put on your uniform and parade around your medals.
Every time that I do an open call for a game off the street with veteran players, I get a lot of NYC geezers who take off their freak hat for introductions then slowly reveal they don't even know what game I'm presenting to them. It reminds me of some distant inlaw who used to say to everyone in the 1970's that they were going to hell for listening to rock and roll and then by the 90's was bragging about "front row seats to see The Stones" with their motorcycle club.
If I was to set up a public call for a game these days I'd probably just play dumb and say its "high level D&D" just to see what comes in the door.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Sept 3, 2016 10:27:08 GMT -5
|
|