Oh, I get it now, Fighters /should/ have spells.

[Username17]

You were there, at every table? I don't remember you showing up when I was in high school playing AD&D, Frank.

That is a stupid line of argument. And you're a stupid person for having made it.

If people "in general" were happy with the way the rules worked in the 1970s, why was there Arduin? Or Rune Quest? Or CalTech Rules? Or Tunnels and Trolls? The list can go on.

That I have literally never met a single person who played the D&D rules "as is" exclusively or even primarily is a lovely anecdote. But the real evidence that people were fundamentally unsatisfied with the rules that D&D was saddled with in its early years is that Fantasy Heartbreakers are a thing.

-Username17

[StormBringer]

That is a stupid line of argument. And you're a stupid person for having made it.

If people "in general" were happy with the way the rules worked in the 1970s, why was there Arduin? Or Rune Quest? Or CalTech Rules? Or Tunnels and Trolls? The list can go on.

That I have literally never met a single person who played the D&D rules "as is" exclusively or even primarily is a lovely anecdote. But the real evidence that people were fundamentally unsatisfied with the rules that D&D was saddled with in its early years is that Fantasy Heartbreakers are a thing.

-Username17

Is dissatisfaction with AD&D same thing that inspired Traveller, Call of Cthulhu, and Champions? Or perhaps, there was something more behind those other games than simply a dissatisfaction with AD&D? Perhaps some of the early games were not written because D&D sucks, but because the authours had other literary interests they wanted to pursue within this new medium of 'role playing games'? And you forgot to mention Empire of the Petal Throne. That was very much a D&D inspired game, what with TSR publishing it and having many of the pieces of AD&D embedded in it. I imagine my four examples cancel out your four, right? Or did you not want to play the 'Anecdotal Examples' game? Except Arduin doesn't really count for you (see following paragraph), so I guess it is really my four to your three. Does that mean I win and you will concede that AD&D wasn't a horror filled nightmare for everyone?

And it's odd that you mention Arduin, because it was considered to be more of a supplement for D&D than much of a stand-alone game. TSR even sued them because the books mentioned D&D directly without permission. I mean, if you are saying they were adding to the rules of D&D, well... No shit. That is what people did back then. Not because the rules were lacking due to incompetence; the designers knew that not every single incidence in a session can or should have a rule. That just leads to twinked out OCD character builds.

So, I dunno, Frank. Are you really going to maintain the contention that the only reason AD&D survived 25 years is because people hated playing it because it was an awuful, awful game, but they just did what they wanted anyway and bought the books because... unicorns?

[Username17]

Is dissatisfaction with AD&D same thing that inspired Traveller, Call of Cthulhu, and Champions?

Those games are different genres. While they compete in some sense with D&D (and indeed, Gygax went off on a deliciously ironic rant that anyone playing Traveler was stealing from him), they scratch a genuinely different itch. Rune Quest is just a D&D variant because people were unhappy with D&D's combat rules. Also, I kept my examples to the 1970s, while Call of Cthulhu and Champions are both 1980s. If you want to talk about the rich history of role playing games after the 1970s, we can certainly do that.

And you forgot to mention Empire of the Petal Throne. That was very much a D&D inspired game, what with TSR publishing it and having many of the pieces of AD&D embedded in it.

I did not "forget" Empire of the Petal Throne. I said the list could go on. But in any case, I figured you would nitpick that particular example because Barker's Empire of the Petal Throne material actually predates D&D by a considerable margin and he cut a deal with TSR to publish Tékumel the same year the company became TSR Hobbies.

And it's odd that you mention Arduin, because it was considered to be more of a supplement for D&D than much of a stand-alone game.

Uh yeah... that's exactly my point. CalTech rules were the same way. House ruling D&D was so endemic that people published and sold their D&D house rules even though that was illegal at the time. Fuck, when TSR ran into heavy debts in the early 80s, Gygax published Unearthed Arcana. Which of course, is just a poorly edited pile of crazy house rules for D&D. Quite literally in that case, since much of it is Dragon Magazine reprints from back when Dragon Magazine was for the most part the collected ravings of fans.

Some peoples' house rules became so extensive that they became whole rule sets - of which RuneQuest is the best original example. And of course, in the long run White Wolf actually out competed and destroyed TSR. For all the realities of being a truly shitty game engine that is comically pretentious, Vampire really did eat AD&D's lunch and watch it starve to death. But that happened later. After the internet started to happen.

But even back in the 70s, people knew that D&D had crappy rules. The essentially random attempts to solve the issue were often no better, but gamers of the time were demonstrably wrestling with the issues we are talking about today.

-Username17

[StormBringer]

Those games are different genres. While they compete in some sense with D&D (and indeed, Gygax went off on a deliciously ironic rant that anyone playing Traveler was stealing from him), they scratch a genuinely different itch. Rune Quest is just a D&D variant because people were unhappy with D&D's combat rules. Also, I kept my examples to the 1970s, while Call of Cthulhu and Champions are both 1980s. If you want to talk about the rich history of role playing games after the 1970s, we can certainly do that.

Doesn't really matter which era, the point is there are more reasons to make a Fantasy RPG (or any genre) than 'AD&D sucks' (or '<genre leader> sucks'). RuneQuest could have certainly been inspired by a need to 'improve' the combat in AD&D. If you think that is the only reason...

I did not "forget" Empire of the Petal Throne. I said the list could go on. But in any case, I figured you would nitpick that particular example because Barker's Empire of the Petal Throne material actually predates D&D by a considerable margin and he cut a deal with TSR to publish Tékumel the same year the company became TSR Hobbies.

And...? EPT is a counterpoint to your argument. It was not only published by TSR, it was published a year after D&D. Was that a reaction to D&D?

Uh yeah... that's exactly my point. CalTech rules were the same way. House ruling D&D was so endemic that people published and sold their D&D house rules even though that was illegal at the time. Fuck, when TSR ran into heavy debts in the early 80s, Gygax published Unearthed Arcana. Which of course, is just a poorly edited pile of crazy house rules for D&D. Quite literally in that case, since much of it is Dragon Magazine reprints from back when Dragon Magazine was for the most part the collected ravings of fans.

And The Judges Guild published a fair bit of stuff too. So, does that mean you are saying the d20 glut where a lot of people published their own poorly edited pile of house rules for D&D demonstrates that 3.x sucks? When the stacks and stacks of supplements published by hundreds of companies for 3.x threatened to swamp not only the game stores, but online stores as well, you are saying that was acceptable and good for the game, but the fractional number of outside publishers (Arduin, Judges Guild, maybe two more) for AD&D is proof positive that it absolutely sucked in every measurable way?

Some peoples' house rules became so extensive that they became whole rule sets - of which RuneQuest is the best original example.

Like Eberron? Pathfinder?

And of course, in the long run White Wolf actually out competed and destroyed TSR. For all the realities of being a truly shitty game engine that is comically pretentious, Vampire really did eat AD&D's lunch and watch it starve to death. But that happened later. After the internet started to happen.

And this has exactly what to do with the secondary AD&D publishers? EDIT: That isn't really what caused TSR to fold. They were having financial troubles of their own making well before WW started to really compete with them, and TSR made things worse with bad investments and trying to compete with... wait for it... waaaaaaait for it... the new hotness from the upstarts in Renton called 'Magic: the Gathering'. Spellfire and Dragon Dice were both duds, taking with them a good deal of R&D and marketing money that TSR could have used to shore up their retail defences.

But even back in the 70s, people knew that D&D had crappy rules. The essentially random attempts to solve the issue were often no better, but gamers of the time were demonstrably wrestling with the issues we are talking about today.
-Username17

EDIT: Total misread on my part.
This is still a good list from 2005.

I don't doubt some of them were. I do doubt it was the silent majority that you think it was.

[ModelCitizen]

Haha, man, nothing like watching a fanboy have a rage seizure because someone pointed out a flaw in a product he likes. And just when I was getting bored with the Clanbook Baali thread because it's not about fanged vaginas anymore. Thank you, TGD, you rarely disappoint.

[StormBringer]

Haha, man, nothing like watching a fanboy have a rage seizure because someone pointed out a flaw in a product he likes. And just when I was getting bored with the Clanbook Baali thread because it's not about fanged vaginas anymore. Thank you, TGD, you rarely disappoint.

Really? This is what you call a 'rage seizure'? You must not get out very much.

Tell you what, though, describe the 'flaw' Frank is pointing out, then quote where I am having a 'rage siezure' about it.

[Username17]

The thing where trolls go "I'm not mad, I am just writing off a bunch of rapid fire semi-coherent responses to things" is basically self defeating. Demanding people to show where you "got angry" in the five responses you just wrote in an hour is ridiculous.

-Username17

[ishy]

Well if you must know this is the part where you started having 'rage seizures' :

Look, Frank: everyone knows that by merely existing, every other game out there - and especially every other version of D&D - is an affront to 3.x and must be destroyed. And while everyone here likes to OCD all over the rules, you have also been around long enough to remember that there wasn't a screaming match every session over AD&D rules, even when the DM was winging it. I understand the Den likes to call that 'magical tea party', but it worked pretty well for 25years.

Or was it like Ron Edwards said, the people at your table were brain damaged and weren't actually enjoying themselves?

You know, the part where you call everyone here as having an OCD over the rules, even though not everyone here does, the part where you say that Frank thinks all non 3.x dnd games need to be destroyed (even though he has published his own non 3.x games), those parts are leading in beautifully into saying that some random nobody calls everybody brain damaged.

[Red_Rob]

The communities almost wholesale ditching of AD&D for 3e, combined with the conspicuous failure of 4e to repeat the phenomenon, points to 3e as being the most popular edition.

Being close enough to the original Basic D&D rules to be recognisably D&D whilst appealing to modern sensibilities with its unified mechanic and standardised effects means it hits the "sweet spot" for our group. One of my players was remarking only yesterday specifically how much better it is than AD&D.

[Ted the Flayer]

[Doom]

I didn't think it was even theoretically possible to play AD&D raw.

Hasn't someone somewhere sat down and compiled a list of the rules contradictions/inanities that pretty much force you to houserule about a second before rolling initiative?

I know somewhere there's an example of exactly what a RAW combat would look like, but the training rules alone mean you're not making it to 2nd level without houserules, most like.

[Kaelik]

Wait Wait Wait.

Stormbringer you fucking lying asshat.

Sample Size

Are you trying to be stupid here?

First you come in and assert that the rules for AD&D are totally fine and that it was never a problem for most people, then when he points out it was a problem for every human being he's ever met and the vast majority of all people on the internet your response is "That's not a sufficient sample size for you to be making statements about the game as a whole."

Funny, I didn't see the size of your sample size preventing you from claiming that the rules for AD&D worked for 25 years for the whole hobby and that problems only came to exist in 3e.

Seriously, what the fuck it is with you lying grognards making bold assertions about how everything was perfect, and then the second anyone says that there exist problems with your perfection you immediately retreat to "No one can ever make any assertions without a statistical study to demonstrate that what they are saying is true of everyone everywhere!"

[StormBringer]

First you come in and assert that the rules for AD&D are totally fine and that it was never a problem for most people, then when he points out it was a problem for every human being he's ever met and the vast majority of all people on the internet your response is "That's not a sufficient sample size for you to be making statements about the game as a whole."

Emphasis mine. And that is 'statements about gamers as a whole', I never said anything about the game itself. You can have all kinds of meltdowns over whatever you want with the rules. But pretending that you speak for any vast majority of anything is simply asinine.

That said, you do realize that as of 2011, there are over 2 billion (with a B) internet users? A simple majority of which is just over 1 billion (with a B). A vast majority would be something closer to 1.5 or 1.75 billion (with a B). Are you sure you are speaking for the "vast majority of all people on the internet"? Assuming the D&D playing population (past and present) is a very generous 20 million (with an M), every single one of them was on the internet, and you were somehow able to ascertain with 100% accuracy what their opinions are, that is still only .01% of all internet users. We are still a long, long way from "vast majority of all people on the internet".

I also have serious doubts it was a problem for every single person you, Frank, or anyone here has ever met. Again, assuming the D&D playing population is 20mil, it is completely impossible for you to positively assert these sweeping statements for any but the tiniest, tiniest fraction of the gaming population.

Are you sure this isn't a case of

watching a fanboy have a rage seizure because someone pointed out a flaw in a product he likes.

Funny, I didn't see the size of your sample size preventing you from claiming that the rules for AD&D worked for 25 years for the whole hobby and that problems only came to exist in 3e.

I didn't say it worked for the whole hobby, did I? I said they worked OK for 25 years, otherwise TSR would have been out of business long before WotC bought them, right? What is your reasoning for their continued existence in light of their absolutely awful product? Mind control?

Seriously, what the fuck it is with you lying grognards making bold assertions about how everything was perfect, and then the second anyone says that there exist problems with your perfection you immediately retreat to "No one can ever make any assertions without a statistical study to demonstrate that what they are saying is true of everyone everywhere!"

For the record, this is what a 'rage siezure' looks like. Mostly because I made none of those claims.

The thing where trolls go "I'm not mad, I am just writing off a bunch of rapid fire semi-coherent responses to things" is basically self defeating. Demanding people to show where you "got angry" in the five responses you just wrote in an hour is ridiculous.

-Username17

Christ, Frank, you are smarter than this. At least put some fucking effort into it, or don't bother responding.

[Username17]

I said they worked OK for 25 years, otherwise TSR would have been out of business long before WotC bought them, right?

They ran out of money and were purchased three times. The Blume Brothers, Lorraine Williams, and finally WotC. They did go out of business long before WotC bought them.

Seriously, what the fuck it is with you lying grognards making bold assertions about how everything was perfect, and then the second anyone says that there exist problems with your perfection you immediately retreat to "No one can ever make any assertions without a statistical study to demonstrate that what they are saying is true of everyone everywhere!"

That said, you do realize that as of 2011, there are over 2 billion (with a B) internet users? A simple majority of which is just over 1 billion (with a B). A vast majority would be something closer to 1.5 or 1.75 billion (with a B). Are you sure you are speaking for the "vast majority of all people on the internet"?

Well, Stormbringer is up to his usual failure standards, now claiming that you have to check the D&D opinions of every internet user (whether they've ever played D&D or not) rather than just the ones who care enough to talk about D&D. The fact that this line is so obviously disingenuous that it makes him look bad doesn't really seem to register with him. I think he believes that being a pedantic asshat is "clever" and "edgy".

But hey, remember when one of this guy's neckbeard friends made the serious argument that Fighters were never overshadowed in Actual Games because he would personally kick any player who used a Cleric's abilities to overshadow a Fighter out of the game? Like, apparently he was the D&D police, and he personally went to our home games and busted them up if anyone played a Cleric of Ares and knew what they were doing? It's kind of like that.

-Username17

[Red_Rob]

What is your reasoning for their continued existence in light of their absolutely awful product? Mind control?

The model T Ford is a fucking awful car, and anyone trying to introduce one to the market now would be laughed at. However Ford didn't go bust when they released it. Hmmm, it's almost like things advance and products get better and what was acceptable then wouldn't be acceptable now. Weird.

[Midnight_v]

Stormbringer is a moron. The truth is we can talk about how AoO's work, but thats a red herring. Echoing the above sentiment, you're seriously saying "Talking to other people about the game... thats your problem"
...
Gtfo. You sir are a fucking imbecile.
Someone has a problem with a game and then they start looking to see how other people have dealt with that same problem. It doesn't matter if that happend on the internet or at a convention or at you FLGS. D&D kept its lead at the top of the rpg empire more than anything because of brand identity, and controversy.

Still... AD&D is gone, and we know it wasn't very good. It doesn't have anything to do with making a fighter w/spells, or who is able to play as a high level concept. So you're a dick for bringing your absurdist grognardism to this thread, as you could start your own.

Edit: My brothers and I playing magical tea-party was NOT Ad&D, we didn't pay for rulebooks, that say "Hey here's resolution mechanics for MTP'ing that will enhance your experience", but we did see the books and flip through a monster manual, but lets face facts. . . we were 11 and 12 year olds. We didn't actually KNOW any better, now if you wanna argue that for 25 years people played a shit game because they didn't KNOW any better, well, welcome to the revolution.
I am curious to know what problem you have with the rules?

[fectin]

Awsome. So now we're ad hominem instead of actual arguments too? That's pretty terrible.

[StormBringer]

They ran out of money and were purchased three times. The Blume Brothers, Lorraine Williams, and finally WotC. They did go out of business long before WotC bought them.

The Blumes were already on the board of directors, and they sold their stock to Lorraine Williams to spite Gary.

Well, Stormbringer is up to his usual failure standards, now claiming that you have to check the D&D opinions of every internet user (whether they've ever played D&D or not) rather than just the ones who care enough to talk about D&D. The fact that this line is so obviously disingenuous that it makes him look bad doesn't really seem to register with him. I think he believes that being a pedantic asshat is "clever" and "edgy".

No, I didn't say that. Your buddy Kaelik said that. Remember?

Kaelik wrote:
First you come in and assert that the rules for AD&D are totally fine and that it was never a problem for most people, then when he points out it was a problem for every human being he's ever met and the vast majority of all people on the internet your response is "That's not a sufficient sample size for you to be making statements about the game as a whole."

That's why I bolded it the first time around. Looks like you are going to double down by claiming only the people on the internet have valid opinions, which by itself obviates the need of having to support your claims to speak for some huge, huge silent majority of players.

But hey, remember when one of this guy's neckbeard friends made the serious argument that Fighters were never overshadowed in Actual Games because he would personally kick any player who used a Cleric's abilities to overshadow a Fighter out of the game? Like, apparently he was the D&D police, and he personally went to our home games and busted them up if anyone played a Cleric of Ares and knew what they were doing? It's kind of like that.

Wait, did I say that somewhere, or is this your desperate last gasp attempt to discredit my points with guilt by association?

Do you have any thing other than your own anecdotal evidence (and apparently tenuous grasp of history) to show how awful AD&D was, and how TSR doing the same things with AD&D that WotC did with 3.x makes AD&D an awful game? Because if you are just going to shit your pants in a 'rage seizure because someone pointed out a flaw in a product he likes' , I will go back to lurking and reduce the stress levels around here.

You used to be a fuckton smarter than this, Frank.

[StormBringer]

The model T Ford is a fucking awful car, and anyone trying to introduce one to the market now would be laughed at. However Ford didn't go bust when they released it. Hmmm, it's almost like things advance and products get better and what was acceptable then wouldn't be acceptable now. Weird.

Uh huh. And how are rules exactly like technology again? I mean, they come out with a new version of chess every couple of years like clockwork, right? Because they have improved it. Same with most boardgames. NBA Monopoly plays way, way different than Star Wars Monopoly, because the Monopoly of ten years ago is a pile of shit compared to the Monopoly of today.

Sorry, games don't by definition 'improve' with each new edition. Especially
RPGs. If that is the argument we are falling back to, the standards for this whole board have dropped substantially.

[StormBringer]

Stormbringer is a moron. The truth is we can talk about how AoO's work, but thats a red herring. Echoing the above sentiment, you're seriously saying "Talking to other people about the game... thats your problem"

That has nothing at all to do with my statements. You wanted to pursue this logically, so fucking dazzle me with your logic. Or shit your pants at being called out for having to use the logic you were bitching about, and we can call your position conceded.

Gtfo. You sir are a fucking imbecile.
Someone has a problem with a game and then they start looking to see how other people have dealt with that same problem. It doesn't matter if that happend on the internet or at a convention or at you FLGS. D&D kept its lead at the top of the rpg empire more than anything because of brand identity, and controversy.

This whole paragraph is gibberish that has nothing to do with anything I have posted, except that last sentence, which is flat out incorrect.

Still... AD&D is gone, and we know it wasn't very good. It doesn't have anything to do with making a fighter w/spells, or who is able to play as a high level concept. So you're a dick for bringing your absurdist grognardism to this thread, as you could start your own.

I didn't bring anything to this thread. Frank dragged it back from theRPGsite.

Edit: My brothers and I playing magical tea-party was NOT Ad&D, we didn't pay for rulebooks, that say "Hey here's resolution mechanics for MTP'ing that will enhance your experience", but we did see the books and flip through a monster manual, but lets face facts. . . we were 11 and 12 year olds. We didn't actually KNOW any better, now if you wanna argue that for 25 years people played a shit game because they didn't KNOW any better, well, welcome to the revolution.
I am curious to know what problem you have with the rules?

Ok, rather than 'welcome to the revolution', perhaps 'welcome to the Forge' would be better, because you essentially just proposed that people played AD&D for 25 years because they were 'brain damaged'.

And I have no idea where you got the idea I have a problem with rules. That is completely pulled out of thin air.

[Chamomile]

Chess is an incredibly rare example of someone getting it pretty much exactly right on the very first (recorded) try. Risk 2210 AD is absolutely better than normal Risk. Settlers of Catan is a huge improvement on Monopoly. Hell, my family actually has a copy of Monopoly that completely rejiggered all the prices while transitioning everything into millions instead of hundreds, and the balance is way better and the game can actually end and there is usually some question as to who will actually win it until the last twenty minutes or so.

[Kaelik]

Chess is an incredibly rare example of someone getting it pretty much exactly right on the very first (recorded) try.

Chess is a terrible example of that.

Chess like games began in the 6th Century and reached current form in the 16th.

If D&D had been invented 1000 years ago, and been being perfect that entire time, it's current iteration might be said to have an argument for being as perfected as Chess.

Since it hasn't, if Chess is the standard, it only has 965 years to go, but only if you accept that it will be changed and improved during that time period.

[ModelCitizen]

Triple combo!!!

Hey, Butthurt Fanboy, that's like the third time you've tried that troll about brain damage and its not working. Ron Edwards really did say that, because he's a bigger tool than you are, but it should be obvious by now that no one's taking the bait. Find some new material.

[Sashi]

Yeah, Fuchs. But those players who don't want to drive plots outside combat should be neither forced nor rewarded for doing so.

Personally, I think that unless the game is specifically supposed to be as shallow as a Hackmaster dungeon crawl they should be punished. Not punishment as in the DM breaking the fourth wall and zapping the player with a Bolt of Judgment but an indirect in-game punishment. Something like handing out/recharging FATE or Edge or whatever points based on individual roleplaying contributions.

I agree with you.

In the context of my quote from Fuchs, we were talking specifically about players being able to say "I am a newbie, please don't hurt me" and gaining some kind of resistance to FATE points, or alternately "I am a combat monster, fuck everything else" and being less effective with FATE points in return for extra combat ability.

[Previn]

The model T Ford is a fucking awful car, and anyone trying to introduce one to the market now would be laughed at. However Ford didn't go bust when they released it. Hmmm, it's almost like things advance and products get better and what was acceptable then wouldn't be acceptable now. Weird.

Uh huh. And how are rules exactly like technology again? I mean, they come out with a new version of chess every couple of years like clockwork, right? Because they have improved it. Same with most boardgames. NBA Monopoly plays way, way different than Star Wars Monopoly, because the Monopoly of ten years ago is a pile of shit compared to the Monopoly of today.

Sorry, games don't by definition 'improve' with each new edition. Especially
RPGs. If that is the argument we are falling back to, the standards for this whole board have dropped substantially.

Well, as pointed out, chess has evolved from it's first implementation, I'll skip that besides pointing out that the peices actually moved differently in early chess than they do today, and that even today depending on which region of the world you play chess in, pieces still move different from what you would think of as 'normal' chess.

Monopoly has likewise has undergone some changes since it's inception, most in the first 20 years of it's life before being bought by Parker Borthers, and then a large number of changes in 2008. The number of house rules applied to monopoly are fairly wide spread, so much so that some poeple don't actually realize they are house rules, and compilations of such rules have been published numerous times.