|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 4, 2008 13:48:13 GMT -5
I was just thinking, where do you draw the line? Certain people that can't stand still are always right out but why is it that the more studious-seeming ones are always one point away from a game invite? Some people I initially thought "Hey! Heres a player!" but then I've never invited because: "Since you're on the subject. Its my turn at group therapy..." "Your wife isn't around is she...?" "That fish has been blessed by our savior..." "Can we have the races on the TV at the wake...?" "Thats my mom on the two way, she lives vicariously, yeah, mom, I'm telling them now..." "Why can't you go to a concert AFTER the hospital?" "These old movies are so stupid. Who the heck would want to watch these anyway? You bought this...?" "Can I have a knife to split this anti-depressant...?" "I need to have soup...NOW...sorry, its my allergies..." "No, thank you, I know thats 'what I always get' but I'd rather order my own..." "Do you have a stein that I can spit in..?" "I go for miles every morning, join me, I know you don't have a bike, I'll build it for you..." " I took the liberty of bringing adult entertainment. Everybody always says 'NO' yada yada yada but you'd be surpised..." "I know you have pets but THESE are my children refrain from touching him when he's on your neck..." "I've got a ghost story too. Meet Mr Bombo..." Alright, some are slightly exaggerated...alright maybe most of them are a lot exaggerated... but a few are straight up... I think I'm going to start drafting some of these loons and let chips fall where they may...
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 4, 2008 15:19:48 GMT -5
Don't ever remember having a player that far out. I usually get a gaming story or two out of them before I bring up the possibility, and that usually weeds them out.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 4, 2008 17:53:01 GMT -5
Well, its either that or go back to public hell and that hasn't yielded anything but a motley crew of burnt gamers who aren't pretty enough for the average local zippy game session. Unless I have a new approach = [glow=red,2,300]FIRST EDITION ITS THE "NEW" XBOX, MAN![/glow] I'll just lay out some paddles and interject "FATALITY" every now again....maybe a "GRAND THEFT WARHORSE: SAN CUTHBERTO" DM screen!
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 5, 2008 10:53:09 GMT -5
And you thought that I was kidding: Just kidding!
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Nov 5, 2008 18:24:19 GMT -5
HAR!!! Excellent, as always Chum! ^__^
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 6, 2008 11:08:17 GMT -5
I was just thinking after staring at that screen parody above about all the shady people that I've played D&D with over the years. I've noticed that real world small time (pincher klepto mostly harmless type) thieves always want to play something other than thieves but act like them and the real world big timers (con or borderline con/aggressive type) always want to play a thief all the time but try to be noble. I think thats why I can't stand the class, its just full of shit and sets this tone because its a class. The "Looking for THIS?" cliche is so stale. I'd rather they just play as fighting men as it was after all "Swords Against Deviltry" and not "Grifts Against Deviltry". Then there is the other side of the coin of a 2e wafting stench, "Well, I'll be a SCOUT!" Ugggh!! Then I say "Isn't that a 3rd level RANGER?" And then they say, "Well who is going to open the locks?" Then I say "well, who did before GREYHAWK?" Then they say "It has become an archtype and become a necessity for play." Then I say,"Bite me....HARD..."
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Nov 6, 2008 11:35:02 GMT -5
Then again, there are the Grey Mouser/ Frodo/ Vancian-archetypes; of "thieves" not to mention the fact that Conan and Fafhrd were not above larceny! Nonetheless, you certainly do have a point, although I shall not discuss that here, but rather over libations the next time we all meet in person! ^__^
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Nov 6, 2008 11:37:03 GMT -5
...or perhaps I misinterpreted, and you were referring to 2E+ versions of the Thief class? ^__^
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 6, 2008 13:32:34 GMT -5
Well, I just got a call from GT, hey, how come the dialogue is never that frank on forums? I discussed my scouting days and all my merit badges.... Advanced Rolling.... After the call, I just got some e-mails and I've gotten a whole new approach to getting players... A paranormal investigation. Well, they always said it leads to the occult but I'm going to show them all that its actually the opposite: the occult leads to hardcore wargaming.... What a whore for players!
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 11, 2008 10:42:45 GMT -5
Well, I've got a game going for the weekend before Thanksgiving so far.
Lets see how this turns out.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 11, 2008 11:22:08 GMT -5
new players?
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 11, 2008 13:06:52 GMT -5
Maybe, mostly the old crust wants to come out of retirement again.
However, I'm going to invite a "new" Dave ( as the "old" Dave from upstate doesn't seem to be the "old" Dave of gaming yore anymore. I wrote him an e-mail and he seems different somehow.) Anyway, everybody agrees that he'd fit in. There was interest from some friend of a friend too (He's been like a friendly archenemy for years so we'll see how that goes.). Plus I still have time to break the glass if some no shows rear up with some other new people.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 13, 2008 11:37:33 GMT -5
Its funny, I was talking about elements of the game world on the phone yesterday and it really provoked me to change something. I'm thinking of a major change to force the two major "weigelopoleis" against each other and make it much easier for me to integrate the two campaign worlds. Since they won't go to "the frog" then "The frog" is coming to "the sword"...
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 14, 2008 9:26:24 GMT -5
I'll be DMing tonight. Grash and two other grognards. Not sure what direction I'm going to go in. I was planning on running an East Mark campaign based around Castle Zagyg, but with that being in Limbo, I might move it to a Wild Coast based thing.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 14, 2008 10:43:51 GMT -5
I was thinking of doing a CZ but they might get to the bottom of the upper works too fast. Bill talks to me before any game about army tactics and strategies so I usually have to be ready for a wargame aspect. Its challenging for me and I need that kind of play as it coerces me into making large areas come to life. Taylor is the exact opposite and prefers not to deal with anything but his single character. He's like a chaotic chaotic chaotic chaotic chaotic player with knowledge of every single flaw in every single D&D rule ever made. I think he may have created the D&D filibuster. Henry refuses to settle down and goes around with his own "company" who frankly never seem to live anywhere. I tried to get him to refortify the G1 steading because when they sacked it after the exterior battle with all the residents and some auxilaries from G2 and G3, he's the only one who went back and said that he's taking it for his own residence. So if I don't get him back to the steading with an opener there he's going to just ignore it. If I have some invaders that might take up the whole game. So I'm still all over the place. I have some approaches: A) An old underground mining city. Taylor discovered a lost city last game. I concocted an entire module of levels but I changed elements of it so many times that I've forgotten the original premise and I have to redo it again.. B) Big war. The mysterious army of the 3 eyed skull of last the two major battles. They might be in recovery for this one (although Bill wants to wipe them off the face of the planet). C) City streets. The city has been completely enumerated and has walk around capability with tons of fleshed out locations. D) Haunted castle. I created a 1st level adventure for a public game in the borderlands of the city in some legendary castle. The drawbacks are that entry isn't immediate due to the strange ritual nature of the place (as to create exploration and information gathering for a monthly game) so it might be out if they refuse to use new characters.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 14, 2008 11:22:19 GMT -5
I guess I'm going to put it to the players, and see what they think.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Nov 14, 2008 12:20:44 GMT -5
I'd like to do CASTLE ZAGYG but with my insider information with all the backs and forths between Gygax and me on it initially in 2002 then I know its going hang like hell in development.
Since "Jeff T. isn't going to give us any updates anymore" so that literally translates to "from scratch" again. A timeframe can be gauged by Gary's start up on it when he told me in 2002 that he was working on Castle Greyhawk for publication. So if it took him 6 years to deliver the first installment then maybe cut that in half (as they might have some finished product from gary's end from all these years) but without Jeff T. you know that means removal of his input then going from scratch with unknown and untried developers and we're talking on 2011 if we're lucky for the premiere of the first installment which I might add must be a total redo.
It would stink to start then wait.
However, thats one way to look at it.
We could create a pseudo dungeon in the meantime by collecting all known facts about the castle just for the hell of it. The path of least resistance in fusing or reinvigorating like the "expedition" crap (Iuz imprisoned again, etc. barf!) can just be avoided by ignoring solid well known areas. The weird architecture is known to me from anectdotal memory so if we can figure out what all of it means we might get something in the flavor of it through extrapolation of facts. At least for a few levels.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 15, 2008 9:24:16 GMT -5
Last night’s game ended in a TPK. The javelin volleys of the militant kobolds have claimed their first victims, but they took heavy losses in the process. Three second level characters, cleric, ranger, and magic-user. Gary (Grash) tried to talk the party into bringing some men-at-arms, but was voted down, and it cost them.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Nov 15, 2008 12:17:46 GMT -5
I'm looking forward to running my group from the Dark Chateau. All but one is a seasoned veteran, and another veteran will be joining them! As to players I would avoid, ummmmm... anyone who kept saying "2E/3E/4E is so much better here because_______"! ^__^ Also, anybody who couldn't hold their libations (beer or stimulant!) and became disruptive to the session.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Nov 15, 2008 20:20:27 GMT -5
Last night’s game ended in a TPK. The javelin volleys of the militant kobolds have claimed their first victims, but they took heavy losses in the process. Three second level characters, cleric, ranger, and magic-user. Gary (Grash) tried to talk the party into bringing some men-at-arms, but was voted down, and it cost them. Last night really brought to my attention just how much you and Eric, and to an extent Mark as well, are on different "wavelengths." That really came out when Eric said, "There are wargames and role-playing games, and tonight I thought we were playing a role-playing game. But this was just all tactics." -- and when Mark said "I hate NPC's." I think I "get it," because I enjoy both Eric's DMing style and yours, too. But I accept they are different. In yours I accept the different mindset that one must adopt to get by. Old school D&D was more of a war-game, with the ranges and movement in inches... it directly grew out of tactical, miniatures, tabletop wargames. I kept thinking of EGG's NOTES FOR THE DUNGEON MASTER in B2: "This module has been designed to allow six to nine players of first level... If you have fewer than six players, be sure to arrange for them to get both advice and help in the KEEP... Likewise the services of several men-at-arms must be available to smaller parties. If only two or three player character are to adventure, be sure to have a non-player character or two go along, as well as a few men-at-arms. In addition, give the player characters a magic dagger or some magic arrows and at least on potion of healing -- family bequests to aid them..." T1 has the same kind of mindset, with the availability of helpful NPC's like Elmo, Burne and Rufus. Dimwall and Drudge abandoning us was the first blow. Eric and Mark's reaction to that? "Good! Less people to divide treasure with!" So, I didn't even bother to try to enlist replacement classed adventurers. But my encouragement to hire even men-at-arms fell on deaf ears. My error here? (Aside from playing a ranger who can't hire men-at-arms) I should have just refused to go... But then I thought, maybe we can get by with some light hit and run, and trust high ranger hit points and sleep spells. I did my best to avoid the more dangerous-seeming caves... The next blow: Mark ignoring my request to cast sleep on the kobold king. After you already told him the kobold king saw him, Mark incredibly said, "I shut the secret door before he sees me"! What?!? Now, putting the kobold chief to sleep and sneaking in to slit his throat may have still resulted in all our deaths... but at least it would have been a tactically sound thing to do. Shutting the door, and then opening it again a round later made NO sense AT ALL! After that, Eric had the reasonably good idea of running outside to prevent the kobolds from ringing the ogre-bell -- but this meant we were fighting on two fronts for the rest of our short lives. Mark's m-u, behind us had no cover, took three javelins spoiling his sleep spell, and then Eric's dwarf went down. So, my option for survival at this point was running away (which I agree would be the only rational thing to do). But, playing a good ranger, I wouldn't abandon my friends, and could only cling to the miniscule hope that I could kill enough kobolds and perhaps even the returning ogre, until my comrades could recover enough for at least one of them to walk out, with me carrying the other... I don't necessarily want more players. I don't think Mark's idea of two characters per player is bad -- at least he's on the right track as far as getting into the mindset required to survive an old school EGG scenario. But, I think the bottom line is I'm not taking another character back in with an undersized party. Even with a decent tank, if one character goes down -- now one or two has to carry him out of a ravine, in hostile territory? And anytime we get flanked, there's an AC 8 (or worse) m-u just inviting a kobold to spit on him and knock him over. I think 3 PC's, 2 NPC's, and 4+ men-at-arms is the LEAST I'm going back in with... Otherwise, I can just stay in the tavern and drink. And we'll take that potion of healing, and family bequests, too!
|
|