Where did it all go so wrong?

[Hicks]

Yes, yes he was.

[shadzar]

well i am going to try to promote proper use of the d&D game and teach people what it is, so they can then do what they want with it.

like tellign someone to stop using a hammer to drive in a screw because it wasnt made for that purpose and explain how a screw works, and let them decide to use a screwdriver, or butter knife or whatever when they understand the functions.

IF i owned D&D i would make MY version and to hell with 3rd (you have Pathfinder and OGL so it will live forever), and 4th (WTF shit is this anyway), and go back to AD&D and fix it there while editing RC and publishing it again for people to start using, while fixing the bugs in AD&D WITHOUT completely trying to rewrite the system.

that i what i will do...

True D&D... so funny. D&D has no one way to play, like the screw has not only a single way to be used, but it was made for a purpose, and you have to udnerstand that purpose and function in order to use it right, then after you understand what it was designed for and to do, you can adapt it.

i want people to stop making assumptions, and try to actually learn by asking others. so many people i have seen make assumptions about what the game was (see Jack Chick era), that im tired of hearing the stupidity from people to lazy to learn, and would rather bitch about it being something that it isnt because of their laziness.

people can play whatever style they want, so long as they understand that SOME styles jsut wont work with what is offered in D&D, and D&D shouldnt be made to suit EVERY style of play, because the designers never should make something so unfocused that it doesnt even know its own style or function.

Bob: hey i made this awesome new tool look at it!
Fred: what does it do?
Bob: how the hell should i know, let other people figure that out.

"dumb people to realize they are dumb?", yeah in a sense. where people have made wrong assumptions about what D&D is, they should accept fault for their assumptions and assume responsibility for their failings to understand, and jsut try to understand. they need not make a formal apology, but grow as people and stop screwing up because humans in general are able to learn, so stop being sub-human and learn from your* mistakes.

you can't read to tell how mad i am at some of the idiocy in complaints about the game that have come from people that didnt understand the game, or blame the game for player behavior, OgreBattle?

______________________________________________

see if you read the Kuntz interview you will see where problems came from as i have been saying. people looking to someone else for answers and "rulings", but the game wasnt designed for that purpose. even adventures were supposed to be something that individuals made. thus the reason some people love the published ones, and others despise them because playstyles are different.

the only thing published adventures do is show the designers intent of use for the game, or preferred playstyle.

compare Gary's modules, GDQ is arguably the best module series out there. it fits MOST playstyles, and shows what the D&D game offers.

tomb of horrors and temple of elemental evil are special cases but still fit, while showing a different playstyle... the one people take the "all Dms are killer DMs" bit from.

i just want people to realize what it is before making false claims due to their own ignorance of the facts. be they new players starting with 3rd or 4th...or players of old editions, that jsut quite didnt get it, or didnt like what D&D offered, and stop trying to change it because they didnt like it, and change their own game to fit their style, rather than bastardize D&D so that it has no meaning other than a name for a generic RPG....

[fectin]

Kuntz having an opinion about what DnD sdhould be is like Henry Ford having an opinion about what cars should be: historically interesting, but ultimately irrelevant.

[shadzar]

Kuntz having an opinion about what DnD sdhould be is like Henry Ford having an opinion about what cars should be: historically interesting, but ultimately irrelevant.

actually it is about what D&D was, that people of the time didnt even understand, and explaining where they didnt understand, as well shows designer agreement with many of today's players as well.

also shows where pandering to the players began, and where D&D lsot focus, so we can see just how bad that is today, pandering to the players rather than making the game work.

"we want skills cause we dont want to play MTP"...well D&D wasnt made for you, the designers need to take a stand, and piss some players off and tell them that they arent there to make everything just because a few players want it, and try to mesh all playstyles together, but rather find what works for the game, and make it work, and let individuals do what they want with it.

just like Kuntz said....

again a case of people not liking D&D, and forcing it to be changed so THEY can like it and be damned and to hell with the people that like it the way it is... D&D is the most fickle game there is, and i say that knowing WH40k exists.

current designers either have fear of HASBRO, or fear of the players that prevents them from saying, HEY this is what D&D is and made for, you can do something else with it, but dont come bitch at us when it doesnt work for you.

D&D was a general purpose RPG that LETS you play differently, but you had to adapt it to do so.

too many people still want someone else to wipe their ass for them cause they are too lazy...so Kuntz is right. the laziness over 30+ years has damaged creativity from the playerbase, and increased a need for handholding little kids (of all ages) while they play the game.

sure the guy playing games with Gary for most of the time, has no idea what the game was or made for...

[Stubbazubba]

well i am going to try to promote proper use of the d&D game and teach people what it is, so they can then do what they want with it.

like tellign someone to stop using a hammer to drive in a screw because it wasnt made for that purpose and explain how a screw works, and let them decide to use a screwdriver, or butter knife or whatever when they understand the functions.

-snip-

True D&D... so funny. D&D has no one way to play, like the screw has not only a single way to be used, but it was made for a purpose, and you have to udnerstand that purpose and function in order to use it right, then after you understand what it was designed for and to do, you can adapt it.

people can play whatever style they want, so long as they understand that SOME styles jsut wont work with what is offered in D&D, and D&D shouldnt be made to suit EVERY style of play, because the designers never should make something so unfocused that it doesnt even know its own style or function.

Does this whole rant not seem just a little self-contradictory to you? There's no one way to play D&D, but there is the way it was designed to be played. Like a screw; it's best when used with a screwdriver (or the Advanced Screwdriver, the drill). Hammers need not apply. So, video gamers need not apply to play D&D. Nor should railroaders. D&D (the way it was meant to be) is not for everyone.

Fine.

But how do you turn around and then say that there is no one way to play? You're clearly saying that playing D&D like a video game is badwrongfun, because it wasn't what the designers intended, then turning around and saying, "people can play whatever style they want." By your own argument, no they can't. According to your own argument, doing so won't work because they have not learned the proper way to play D&D, so they won't be enjoying it; they'll want more official rulings, and more rulings will be given, and there will be rules-bloat with every passing edition to appease them. Not only is it bad for their table, it's bad for the game as a whole because they get catered to (as has been historically accurate).

Pray tell, shadzar, why is it better for new generations of role-players to abandon their love of rules and lift their minds to the more magical tea party-based playstyle of old, than for old generations of role-players to take what they want from new rules and just houserule the rest out, continuing to play the way they like while allowing newer generations the freedom to do the same?

[Archmage]

"we want skills cause we dont want to play MTP"...well D&D wasnt made for you, the designers need to take a stand, and piss some players off and tell them that they arent there to make everything just because a few players want it, and try to mesh all playstyles together, but rather find what works for the game, and make it work, and let individuals do what they want with it.

MTP isn't a game, though, it's "make shit up time." You're playing Calvinball, with the possibility of a die getting rolled to create the illusion of fairness.

When asked how to play, Watterson states, "It's pretty simple: you make up the rules as you go." Calvinball is a nomic or self-modifying game, a contest of wits and creativity rather than stamina or athletic skill, in which Hobbes (and on one occasion, Rosalyn) usually outwits Calvin, who takes it in stride, in contrast to his otherwise poor sportsmanship.

I guess if your goal is for D&D to be Calvinball, that's great, but a "contest of wits and creativity" without objective standards for what is witty or creative is inevitably going to create problems when people at the table disagree.

[shadzar]

But how do you turn around and then say that there is no one way to play?

D&D has a function and a focus. you CAN play anyway you want, BUT it isnt designed for jsut a single way that disallows others.

you want to remove XP for gaining levels and play a game forever at 3rd level, you can.

the game was designed with gaining class levels in mind, and offers those as such, use them if you want, ignore them if you want.

but when you ignore them, you have to understand that some thing might not work as expected. that wyrn black dragon is removed from play, as the odds of winning a fight with it are pretty much removed.

before you can change the function of a thing, you must understand its function to begin with.

the screw when used with either of the proper tools has a simple function, but can be used for MANY things. it can be used to make two things become one and hold them together, and without changing it, but only changing how it is used, it can be used to remove two things that are already together.

the smaller amount of playstyles focused one, yet still having a firm playstyle focus, allows for other playstyles to be had with D&D. when you focus too closely on one playstyle, such as 4th did, you lose the ability of ease of use for other playstyles.

you can have a game with all vampires and werewolves in D&D, or Vampire. Vampire might do it better, because it is more focused on that. but you cannot have a game of elves and dwarves fighting orcs in Vampire. it is TOO focused on its style of play to allow for that.

people wanting to play only Vampires, will likely chose Vampire to do so as that is it, and their focus. people wanting a less narrow focus with the ability to do or try more avenues of exploration of genres, have D&D. Thus Ravenloft was born to give people the option to play more strongly with vampires, while still having elves and dwarves and orcs....

D&D is an open-ended game system, and the more focus it takes going into one direction it becomes more closed like Vampire.

its playstyle or focus was on being OPEN, rather than being of narrow focus.

you just have to understand what the system does in order to use it and adapt it for other things. many people seem not to be able to understand this, or get hung up on things rather than just accept them.

why move clockwise in Monopoly? cause that is the way it is.

why have AC get better the lower the number? cause that is the way it is.

why is the direction in one questioned, and not the other? it doesnt have to do with "intuitiveness", as many people can easily play with descending AC without a problem or mental hangups, but has to do with the mental hangups themselves, where you want to question a choice rather than just accept it and allow it to work.

the preconceptions from other types of games being carried over to D&D, are where the problems in understanding it, and being able to use it for various playstyles occurs.

[shadzar]

I guess if your goal is for D&D to be Calvinball, that's great, but a "contest of wits and creativity" without objective standards for what is witty or creative is inevitably going to create problems when people at the table disagree.

the problem is that this MTP defines it as something negative, due to the similar in Calvinball, i guess.

both assume competition from the sides, rather than understanding that in D&D, the purpose isnt competing with the DM, but rather the DM is working with you and you both are trying to reach the mid-point through compromise.

when the DM isnt, it isnt the fault of the game, as the game instructs the DM to do so, but the fault of the DM failing to observe those sections of the system, and the players also failing to choose the right DM.

you get into a car-wreck with a transfer truck, do you blame Ford, for it, when the driver of the truck was asleep at the wheel? no, so dont blame the game system, when the failing is with the person....user error is 90% of the problems with ANY game played.

the system can only inform, but cant force you to read the instructions.

See Darwin Awards, for examples of people using things incorrectly, then think about the DMs that have done the things described that the system is always blamed for.

basically people need to learn to take responsibility for their own actions, in and out of gaming, rather than blame something else so they dont look bad. learn some humility.

[OgreBattle]

I just wanted to know your intention and goal.

Your goal is to create a community, and perhaps find like minded people to further this pursuit. So how are you going to achieve your goal? How will you distribute your personal D&D, do you reach out to recruit new players in your community? For the dummies, how will you convert them to your side?

Is it something you can form online, or could you do it in person? Is there a particular age category you're aiming for?

For example, let's say your goal was to influence kids before the Evils of modern tabletop can ruin their minds.
If you're good with kids and have the time to spend you could probably make some kind of after school program. Fantasy is very popular right now and even parents 'get it', look at Harry Potter and whatever has a dragon on the cover. Parents are always looking for ways to 'foster creativity' in their kids and have them "express their imaginations" etc. instead of "rot playing videogames". There's a fair chance some of their parents could have rolled Dee n' Dee back in the day too.

How old were you when you started D&D y'know? You already walked down that path, just figure out how to give your childhood experience to the next generation.

Also consider how much time you spend a day on this board, vs actively working on achieving your goal. Forums are useful for getting ideas and opinions, but it's an easy trap to fall into to get a sense of instant gratification when you actually haven't accomplished anything in reality.


like how I should be working on my Manga/Videogame pacing RPG right now instead of browsing multile forums...

[shadzar]

I just wanted to know your intention and goal.

Your goal is to create a community, and perhaps find like minded people to further this pursuit. So how are you going to achieve your goal?

um no... there already are several communities, that play older editions of D&D, remember THIS very forum is one such community as it is predominately 3rd edition players, which now is an older/obsolete/outmoded/out of print edition.

i am trying to form an understanding in players form all eras of the fact that some came into D&D with the wrong idea in mind about what it would help them do, or what its purpose was (see Jack Chick).

i remember watching 60 minutes with Gygax on it defending himself against the accusations of what D&D was trying to do, and doing to people, and at the age of 10-ish, trying to figure out why he didnt jsut say a few simple things to answer the questions. that is probably because his lawyer sitting right there previewed not only the questions, but Gygax's answers prior to the taping.

what i would have said at one point i remember clear as the game used this to describe it in one book somewhere...

"to claim D&D is causing people to hurt themselves or others, would be like saying cops and ribbers, causes those who were the robbers to be out robbing banks and other places right now, and the world would be split between police officers and criminals, and it isnt. so a game can't make anyone do anything or really influence their actions."

so i just want people to know what it is they are talking about, which may not be explained in r4ecent books, and was forgotten form older books, but those who used to used them; or never learned because they didnt read the books clearly, or had some power-tripping "friend" teaching them wrong, or setting precedent wrong for these people as they played to always HATE THE DM.

it isnt really some form of therapy for them, just a clarification of definition of what it always was, before what it became.

so the only thing i can, do is share insight that might have been overlooked, or under recent editions, taught incorrectly to people.

take James Wyatt for instance making claims about what D&D is, and ALWAYS was...

he makes the following false claims in 4th edition books and other places...

...D&D is about killing monsters and taking their stuff...

...D&D isnt about traipsing through fairy rings and talkign to the little people...

...dont have your players tlak to the 2 city guards at the gate, just let them through because talking to the gate guards isnt fun...

these are all bullshit statements, false, and flat out lying. James can say what the design goal he had in mind with the editions he worked on, but he cannot speak for D&D as a whole, because he didnt work on all editions, nor did he create it.

in my "fight" if you want to call it that, i am sure i am heavily reason 2, if not 3~4 people no longer work for WotC. Mike Lescault (gamer_zero), Dave Noonan, Jonathan Tweet, Bill Slavesik.

now, Noonan shouldnt have been fired, if it was because of what i said, but if i made him feel uncomfortable because his video podcast to where he couldnt take the heat, it might have been best for him to leave the celebrity arena, where your job perfomance can be ridiculed.

Gamer_zer0 i lambasted for his journalistic integrity sicne every one of his video podcasts and "interviews" sounded more like advertisements, than any real interview with people, be it gen-con, or his online radio show, or wherever. Not sure what happend to Blue...never heard is she is still with WotC or ever was or what.

Jonathan Tweet, i ridiculed for his crappy software for 4th edition on DDi. not only was it horrific in user interface, but didnt fucntion and was released in its "final" stage with no intention to be updated as part of the DDi suite of tools.

Bill Slavesik i flat out said was a moron and asshole trying only to keep Lorraine Williams attitude alive in D&D, because he had a crappy product called Alternity, and couldnt make it work, so went on to Star Wars, and adapted some of the Alternity ideas there, and even into 3rd edition, then from Star Wars Saga, brought them over to 4th...all because his precious, sucked.

So out of the 4, Noonan jsut shoudl have been kept off camera, or been decaffeinated, because his video pocast example of 4th edition play, would have made me not allow children ANYWHERE near the game with his over hyperness. that was the problem with the production team though, not him.

the other three were just schmucks, as well as James Wyatt. i am expecting Wyatt and Perkins are likely to be in the next round of lay-offs.

I have also inspired 3~4 of the legends and lore articles on DDi by talking to Mearls. so i am not doing this directly on a corner case forum, but trying to get ideas out there including to the designers to slow down and step back and "look at what you did!" so they can take a chance to see what they are making and make sure they dont lose ground in the industry because D&D becomes some sort of knock-off, rather than setting the pace for everything else.

so basically i am trying to educate via my opinion, and blunt and bold as it is without sugar-coating, all parties involved with D&D that might be interested in listening.

including but not limited too Erik Mona of Paizo, Ethan Skemp of White Wolf... and a few other people jsut to make sure they focus on their priorities for their RPG, rather than try to make GURPs, because GURPs already exists. or rather just try to prevent them from making something crap, and have the balls enough to have a focus rather than let a corporation force an idea that wont work because the corp doesnt know what an RPG is, jsut that this product line makes money...

i jsut want people to know what they are talkign about before jumping to conclusions, so when i am in a game store and asked to help run a game of D&D or explain it, i dont have to undo damage done from others explaining it wrongly like the Wyatt statements.

[tussock]

in my "fight" if you want to call it that, i am sure i am heavily reason 2, if not 3~4 people no longer work for WotC. Mike Lescault (gamer_zero), Dave Noonan, Jonathan Tweet, Bill Slavesik.

I am sure I am heavily reason Barak Obama man made president of USA. Also instigate tea party movement for personal amusement.

[Stubbazubba]

you get into a car-wreck with a transfer truck, do you blame Ford, for it, when the driver of the truck was asleep at the wheel? no, so dont blame the game system, when the failing is with the person....user error is 90% of the problems with ANY game played.

Well, were you driving a Pinto? Did it explode when you were hit? In which case, yes, the sleeping truck driver prompted the problem to come out, but the problem wouldn't be nearly so bad if Ford hadn't made a faulty product which made an explosion so common.

[TOZ]

shadzar talking up 2E again? Business as usual.

[Swordslinger]

you get into a car-wreck with a transfer truck, do you blame Ford, for it, when the driver of the truck was asleep at the wheel? no, so dont blame the game system, when the failing is with the person....user error is 90% of the problems with ANY game played.

Certainly not true of D&D. Most groups play D&D as a hack and slash style dungeon crawl. Which is exactly as the designers intended.

When the game gets out of balance, it's almost always because of the rules, unless you consider choosing to play a fighter to be user error. But even if you do, the problem is still the rules. Offering PCs trap options is just bad design.

[shadzar]

Certainly not true of D&D. Most groups play D&D as a hack and slash style dungeon crawl. Which is exactly as the designers intended.

i will need data substantiating the number of groups that play it this way.

also in the presence of CHA scores existing, i can't really see this as the way the designer's intended.

Robilar didnt do combat in ToH, or was it ToEE?

Robilar sent in swarms of orcs...akin to the portable rogue concept, or Tucker's Kobold's but in reverse.

While the orcs did combat, and Kuntz may have acted for them on those parts, HIS character didnt participate in the dungeon, until AFTER his orcs had cleared it.

I would say MOST people play D&D as situational resolution, as that is what it is, be that situation combat, or social interaction.

i always question the term "balance" in use in D&D, because you have to ask WHAT are you trying to balance? Fighter vs Wizard? Rogue v Cleric? PCs vs NPC? PC party vs DMs world?

what actually puts the whole of the game out of balance, and it is true and the same for years-long campaigns as it is for one shots?

[A Man In Black]

i will need data substantiating the number of groups that play it this way.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

One vote for hack and slash here, that's how my group always played.

[...You Lost Me]

Shadzar is allowed to make his sweeping generalizations, but you can't. You need to have numbers. Or else you're wrong and 2e is the best edition ever.

[Psychic Robot]

D&D as a hack 'n' slash game? [CITATION FUCKING NEEDED]

[Swordslinger]

D&D as a hack 'n' slash game? [CITATION FUCKING NEEDED]

No citation isn't needed. Despite the total BS that people will feed you that D&D isn't about combat, it is. You gain XP primarily by killing monsters. 4E quest completion bonus is small compared to a few encounters, and 3E doesn't even reward completing quests, only beating challenges.

The premise of D&D is you're a bunch of adventurers who explore dungeons and kill monsters. All in the name. Dungeons and Dragons. Dungeons + Monsters.

That's about as hack and slash as you can get.

[Previn]

...D&D is about killing monsters and taking their stuff...

The judgement factor is inescapable with respect to weighing experience for the points gained from slaying monsters and/or gaining treasure.

Treasure must be physically taken out of the duneeon or lair and turned into a transportable medium or stored in the player's strong hold to be counted for experience points.

Actually, D&D really is about killing things and taking their stuff, because those were the only ways to get xp.

[Stubbazubba]

I'm gonna make a prediction and say that the next time shadz logs on, he'll be here to say "you don't understand what D&D is about. Just because it rewards those things doesn't indicate that that's what it's about! You are just a young generation who grew up on Flintstones vitamins and MMOs where they tell you how to play the game, but in D&D you're not supposed to pursue the incentives because [insert non sequitur tangent here]...so stop being so lazy and ungrateful and stupid. Play the game, not the rules."

[shadzar]

^^^^

...D&D is about killing monsters and taking their stuff...

The judgement factor is inescapable with respect to weighing experience for the points gained from slaying monsters and/or gaining treasure.

Treasure must be physically taken out of the duneeon or lair and turned into a transportable medium or stored in the player's strong hold to be counted for experience points.

Actually, D&D really is about killing things and taking their stuff, because those were the only ways to get xp.

i dont have aces to my books right now so cant check those page numbers, and assume they are 1e, not 2e. but if memory serves me killing stuff wasnt the ONLY way to gain XP, nor was gaining XP what D&D was about. it is just a yardstick.

D&D changed purpose and focus from OD&D to AD&D/BD&D.

OD&D was a miniature wargame where you could take swap out your weapons for a fallen foes, if you thought it was better, rather than the enemy piece being removed form the warzone and all his gear going with him.

whether by intent or necessity, gygax and holmes changed the focus from jsut killing stuff when it left the wargame arena.

IIRC fighters got XP for killing, thieves for stealing, wizards for research, clerics for something else. there are MANY parts, but since the game is mutable, people tend to forget

Gary didnt like thespianism, but left/made room for it in the game, just preferably not at his table.

[Previn]

Useless chatter.

I quoted from the AD&D books, so killing monsters and taking their stuff was factually what you did in AD&D as written by Gygax. That alone makes most of your post factually wrong.

The incidental XP awards in AD&D 2e for doing things like KILLING MONSTERS and STEALING STUFF for individual classes such as the fighter and thief didn't compare to actually just killing monsters for XP. Wizards got XP for research (which was essentially down time background stuff) and only got XP for casting spells for a purpose, the example in the AD&D PBH, pg. 88 is... casting a lighting bolt at a beholder.

2nd Edition wasn't actually written by Gygax, so it's thespianism or lack there of doesn't actually relate to Gygax.

But, you don't care, and I really don't either, so whatever.

[Psychic Robot]

D&D as a hack 'n' slash game? [CITATION FUCKING NEEDED]

No citation isn't needed. Despite the total BS that people will feed you that D&D isn't about combat, it is. You gain XP primarily by killing monsters. 4E quest completion bonus is small compared to a few encounters, and 3E doesn't even reward completing quests, only beating challenges.

The premise of D&D is you're a bunch of adventurers who explore dungeons and kill monsters. All in the name. Dungeons and Dragons. Dungeons + Monsters.

That's about as hack and slash as you can get.

if I were as much a troll as everyone around here claims, I would take your misreading of my post and argue against your position. however I'll just correct you and say that my post was making fun of shadzar.