Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Dimensional Traveler Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action Subject: Re: What difficultly level do you play one? Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 13:24:59 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 93 Message-ID: References: <52sv8j9vso886a8q9r37ulq9lk6681d5mn@4ax.com> <2u659j1t0cotol194i1ge7apej95e0jfpc@4ax.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 22:24:58 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ffb9c4b56057b7d0358f79dbf25a8795"; logging-data="327716"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18LKQqgJuwzbPOXrR5zgRgT" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:GnpwZeJ6+jBpAQ6EPvLEXEuNGTQ= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 6228 On 7/14/2024 11:15 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote: > On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 10:15:18 +0100, JAB wrote: > > > >> >> That's the problem I have, if that really was what they thought then >> you'd think when they introduced the game someone would have said, this >> style of gameplay is going to be entirely alien to many people so we >> need to provide guidance on how to get the most out of it. That's >> especially true when you consider how many players are only going to get >> the information from TSR products. So you mention Dragon magazine, that >> was available in the UK (I bought a few copies) but only in specialised >> stores. The one you could get in the local newsagents was White Dwarf >> and that had already moved to being focused on GW products. > > > No, no; I get it and we're in agreement on that. They SHOULD have been > clearer on that. But it was a blindness on their part; they didn't > think they NEEDED to say that, anymore than they needed to explain, > "when we say roll the dice, we mean cup those plastic polyhedron in > your hand, rattle them about a bit, then drop them onto a hard surface > so they roll a bit." It was such a /basic/ thing to them that they > didn't think they /had/ to say it. It was just assumed. > > Remember, this was the same TSR that originally couldn't even conceive > that their customers might want pre-written adventures or settings > (they practically laughed Bob Bledsaw out of their office when he > suggested it, telling him that if he really wanted to he could sell > modules with their blessing and fully expecting him to go bankrupt in > the process). TSR /never/ was fully cognizant of what their users > needed or wanted. > > It probably didn't help that for the longest time the game was only > played by TSR-insiders amongst other TSR-insiders, thus limiting their > view on how 'real world players' were experiencing the game. > Especially since many of those insiders were adult-age and more > interested in the role-playing, puzzling and politics of the game over > boisterous combat. > > And there was also the belief that players should be allowed to play > 'their way', which is why I think the original rules are so light on > actual DM advice. Sure, the expectation was that the DM would try to > create a more realistic, reactive world... but if all you just wanted > to bash your stat-blocks (heroes) against the DM's stat-blocks > (monsters), well that was fine too. Just don't get mad if the game > isn't as interesting as everyone says. > > (In fact, whenever Gygax suggested there was a very specific way to > play the game and everything else 'wasn't really D&D', there was > usually uproar at the idea). > > Gygax's own dense writing style wasn't all that helpful either. Or the > game's own newness (people were still trying to figure out what > table-top roleplaying was all about, and how it was different from > miniature game). Or -as DT mentioned in an earlier post- the fact that > game itself grew out of the fairly slim "Chainmail" rules. > > But everything I've read (about the history of the game, of > conversations of the people involved, in the rule-books themselves, > and even some of my own experiences) indicates that the assumption was > that everyone would play -indeed, would WANT to play and invariably > gravitate towards- more sophisticated adventures and campaigns. It was > an such unspoken belief that it took a long time before TSR realized > that not everybody understood that, and it had to be enunciated more > clearly. > > No, early D&D didn't encourage role-playing/re-active worlds in their > games, and this lack led to a lot of people playing fairly mindless > dungeon-crawls (to the point where you'd have dragons stuck in rooms > with entrances to small for them to get through. If you were a young > gamer of that era, you almost certainly encountered something akin to > that! ;-). But I think that was more a problem of communication on > TSRs part than an actual belief that was all the game should be. After > all, the game itself developed from 'Braunstein' games which were > anything but mindless. But a lack of clear communication on this > matter led players to take the rules as the end-all/be-all and a lot > of campaigns ended up being fairly lifeless. Leading D&D's competitors > to swoop in and offer a more exciting alternative. > > Now... > > How do we loop this all back to video games? Which, you know, is the > whole point of this newsgroup? ;-P > Gold box D&D games. There. -- I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky dirty old man.