Navdi wrote:

I find adding two numbers together to be a LOT easier than ... cross-referencing ... my character sheet.

Navdi wrote:

"Oh, the orc has a chain shirt (+4) and a shield (+1) and my Level 1 Fighter (bab +1) has +1 Dex. I need to roll a 13 to hit."

Yeah OK.   wink

Navdi wrote:

But lets agree to disagree and leave it at that, shall we?

You betcha.

Navdi wrote:

you're obviously trying to make a point of the old, original way being somehow better Just Because its the original way. In this case it isn't. Its Just Old. smile

Nope, you misread my motivation entirely Navdi, it's nothing to do with nostalgia and old = better, but everything to do with mental laziness. Why would I want to add several factors in my head every time I roll a to hit dice, when I could just know the single number I need to roll? I fail to see where my logic is flawed, just as I fail to see where I suggested the old way was "better", only simpler, that's all.

And now we're in danger of side-tracking James game feedback thread.

Navdi wrote:

"Oh, the orc has a chain shirt (+4) and a shield (+1) and my Level 1 Fighter (bab +1) has +1 Dex. I need to roll a 13 to hit."

I really wouldn't call that too difficult.

No? It hurt my brain just reading it. I must admit that I don't understand the thinking behind making something harder, not easier. The old way, the original way, is simply this:

What's the monster's AC?

6

OK, I need a... [glances at character sheet]... 13 to hit it.

And that's that. No take this number, add this, and that, and something else, oh and don't forget to add that too...

No it's not "too difficult" to add numbers together, but why make the process harder than it needs to be?

HOWEVER, as both you yourself Navdi and I pointed out in our posts, James will have to take into account the target audience when making the decision as to which way to go. And that is more important than the personal preference of this person or that (well, except that of James himself).   smile

I guess I'm an old fart, I LIKE the "clunky to hit -table" and am not a fan of either Ascending AC nor having to sit at the table adding figures in my head. Give me a table I can quickly glance at and I'm a happy man. My vote is for traditional descending only...but, and it's a big but, you need to base this decision on your desired market, balanced with the need for compatibility. Glad it's you making the decision James, not me.

I just ran my group through this module using Labyrinth Lord rules. I had the players randomly roll 1d4 for their character's level, stressed the importance of being well supplied (they initially ingnored my hints) and even let them randomly roll magic items, which I didn't think would make a difference to the game since it is all about them having to think, not hack'n'slash. The adventure took three and a half sessions to play and to my great surprise (and theirs), the party made it out...well, not the original party.  ;-)

*SPOILERS AHEAD*

That's probably unnecessary as I'm guessing most here either own the module or intend on buying it for themselves, but better to be safe than sorry.

The party were too nervous about the statue, so they went and checked out the buildings instead. I was disappointed to see them take little or no interest in the obvious clues. To my great delight though, they all decided to go up into the attic. The whole party went up through the trap door, stayed close to it until they were all up there, then moved outwards to explore the room. Needless to say it was a TPK. I read to them James' comment about it being a "mercy killing", but they failed to see the humour.

New party arrives (miraculously identical to the first party in all respects), manages to find most of the clues, sets up base in the chapel and decides to burn the inn to the ground as a way of dealing with the stirges. They tackled the door at the statue's base by dropping a great big rock in the doorway, preventing it closing.

Down in the dungeon they decided to attack first, ask questions later and killed two of the NPC party hiding down there. The third felt he had no choice but to join up, which wasn't bad as I ended up with an extra player and the party could really benefit from a second thief. When it came to the room with the three pits, while the party was in one section, the new thief took off on his own and decided to poke a 10' pole down into the black pudding pit. That was the end of him and another character (cleric) who foolishly ran to his aid.

I allowed the party to send someone back to civilisation and hire another couple of party members - a thief and a cleric. Back at the dungeon they pressed on. Down in level two, one was lost to a green slime, another to the poisonous bite of a wandering monster. Alternating between near-paralysing terror at each new suspicious set-up and an almost insane determination to press on forward no matter what, they managed to get themselves sealed into the final bit of the dungeon. One player decided to play the sheet music on the organ, with the result that yet another character died, from a rot grub attack. They then, to my complete amazement, with a bit of luck, made it through the questions and answers passageway to the tomb itself - seems they paid a lot more attention than they had appeared to.

Once in the tomb they failed to find the secret door in the sarcophagus and suddenly learned the importance of nurturing their dwindling light sources. In the end, after a couple of days down there comtemplating their fate, they chiselled and smashed their way through the floor of the sarcophagus (I ruled that this opened the two exits), having previously found a faint glow in that spot with a detect magic spell. They found the second secret door and made off with the treasure, which neither I nor they thought would happen. In truth they had come to the conclusion that there was no treasure.

Afterwards the players were buzzing. I had wondered whether or not they would've enjoyed this adventure, which is basically a death trap dungeon for the unthinking. But they loved it and thorougly enjoyed the experience, even those players who lost characters.

Thanks James, first for making my players think and second for the enjoyment we all got as a group. I'm going to run them through DFD soon, but I might give them something a bit lighter first.  :-)

I have no problems with it not being accurate.

7

(218 replies, posted in LotFP Gaming Forum)

I'm a 42 year old Australian, living in the island state of Tasmania (the only Tassie Devils I see are road kill). Started with Holmes back around '80 or '81 and quickly moved on to 1e. Dropped out of the scene for pretty much all of the 90s, then came back to a short period of 2e, followed by 12 months of 3e (only gaming groups I could find).

Moved from the mainland to an isolated rural area in Tasmania 6 years back, thinking that was the end of my gaming days. Became great friends with the farmer down the road, who has 7 kids. Introduced them to D&D about 4 years ago and we've been having great fun ever since. Been playing 1e, but recently introduced them to the joys of Basic (via Labyrinth Lord).

Online I haunt various Old School forums and am very excited by the retro-clone and OSR movement. I believe our little niche deserves to live and grow. I help out with Brave Halfling Publishing, mainly volunteering proofreading, and am the admin guy behind Dan Proctor's fledgling Labyrinth Lord Society. Although I have limited funds to throw around, I support the various OS publishers by buying their (mostly pdf) products. As a result, I probably have a life-time's supply of modules to play (but that won't stop me buying more).

I enjoy James' writings on his blog and elsewhere, finding his views thought-provoking and insightful. His enthusiam and willingness to try something new and different is exciting, especially in the face of the negativity and rigid fundamentalism so often found on the forums. The OSR is moving ahead because of people like James, and it will continue to grow by bringing in new blood, only if we get behind such people and their efforts.