tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post5629792331630067000..comments2024-03-26T02:31:48.024-05:00Comments on Trollsmyth: Tyranny and Youtrollsmythhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-27970705467162789762009-02-13T01:22:00.000-06:002009-02-13T01:22:00.000-06:00Well, that is to my mind rather the (or at least a...Well, that is to my mind rather the (or at least <I>a</I>) point of old-style D&D: The player whose characters get XP and magic instead of getting killed ends up with more powerful characters than the one whose strategies produce the opposite results!<BR/><BR/>Improvisation is simply quicker and easier in old D&D and similar games. It's not in my experience any harder in (e.g.) <B>RuneQuest</B> for the addition of skill ratings and other tools, because the Game Master still has final authority.<BR/><BR/>RQ doesn't have hundreds of spells, monsters and magic items as rules, so even more is left up to the GM's creativity. T&T is even more sketchy in that regard, and the common practices of using Saving Rolls as a "universal mechanic" and adding specific skills have not one whit changed its fundamentally freewheeling attitude. TSR-worshiping cultists too often overlook those factors, and indeed may reverse their "rulings, not rules" stance on a dime when some sacred cow of a rule is considered alterable or dispensible by heretics with the effrontery to prefer a different approach.Dwayanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07388657516129827977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-61836646044134115082009-02-13T00:57:00.000-06:002009-02-13T00:57:00.000-06:00How to maintain the new notions of "balance" throu...<I>How to maintain the new notions of "balance" throughout a campaign without resorting to heavy-handed management is so far beyond me.</I><BR/><BR/>Here's a dirty little secret I should probably keep close to my chest, but what the heck...<BR/><BR/>In my Thursday night <I>Labyrinth Lord</I> game, I've tossed balance out the window. Right now, one of the players has a vastly more powerful character than the others, though I doubt she recognizes it at this moment. ;)trollsmythhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-31674394775732137382009-02-13T00:51:00.000-06:002009-02-13T00:51:00.000-06:00I think it's always good to have something (prefer...I think it's always good to have something (preferably multiple things) going on -- a shortcoming of B1 <I>In Search of the Unknown</I> that really hit me after all these years. That's a dynamic to counter the frozen tableau endemic to both plot-railroaded and "plot-free" scenarios; the whole world does not revolve (much less go into stasis) around the PCs.<BR/><BR/>"Features" already prominent in 3E and overwhelming in 4E seem to me strongly to encourage a tyranny of <I>rules</I> shaping things with a sheer inertia like that of a dull and callous bureaucracy.<BR/><BR/>The mass of rules, their focus, the time taken to resolve the combats making up that focus, and the general acceptance of manipulating those rules -- rather than "getting into the shoes" of one's character -- as the definition of play ... all combine to make any but a pretty "railroad" approach difficult.<BR/><BR/>Although "stat blocks" for monsters are now more compact and user-friendly than in 3E, they still take up <I>much</I> more space than the equivalents in old-style scenarios. "Five orcs (hp 8, 7, 5, 3, 2)" is pretty common therein. Even the more verbose style (AC, HD, MV, #AT and D) is a relative model of brevity.<BR/><BR/>Working up all the new encounter data in keeping with the rules looks like a big job. How to maintain the new notions of "balance" throughout a campaign without resorting to heavy-handed management is so far beyond me.Dwayanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07388657516129827977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-72355604639159142752009-02-11T17:39:00.000-06:002009-02-11T17:39:00.000-06:00I don't think anything needs to be said in WotC's ...I don't think anything needs to be said in WotC's defense. They offer one option, and the past another. The new game is really well set up to take up and play, once you've tackled the PHB tome. (And I've never seen a version of the game so ready for a new Basic set of streamlined rules to get new players into the hobby.) In the past, I've enjoyed games where not derailing the GM's plot was a serious consideration. Obviously, that's not my first choice, but I know it works for some. Still, I'm very glad to see they are spending serious time helping the DM deal with the unexpected.trollsmythhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-68824580921860573432009-02-11T17:28:00.000-06:002009-02-11T17:28:00.000-06:00I like your comparison between KotSF and KotBL. I ...I like your comparison between KotSF and KotBL. I think i can flip it around a bit though. The original Keep was completely <I>devoid</I> of plot! Whilst all of the NPC's have stats and treasure, what they don't have is Names. Sure, there's an evil Temple in the caves of chaos, but there's little if any indication as to what Evil or Chaos they might be up too. The Original Keep leaves a LOT of work up to the GM. So sure, many PC groups may have taken the options you've described over the course of many groups playing the game, my hypothesis would be that the majority of them took the first option. And I believe that collation of decades of playtesting such adventures has led to the evolution of such heavily railroaded modules. Not necessarily a welcome development, but I think it's eminently explainable. In WotC's defense, they do seem aware of what they are doing. I've run the first two of the Adventure Path "The Scales of War" and the second module especially is peppered with "if the pc's choose to do something else-then" statements, offering up really good ideas on how the gm can wing it if the pc's go "off the rails" or even if they "gasp" fail!<BR/><BR/>Ok, toddler's crying, must stop typing...Blotzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06993967190131485391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-27823758902601097372009-02-11T13:53:00.000-06:002009-02-11T13:53:00.000-06:00True, so I suppose I'm talking more about benevole...True, so I suppose I'm talking more about benevolent dictatorship rather than full-on, boot-in-the-face tyranny.trollsmythhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28751902.post-46380945314643149252009-02-11T13:42:00.000-06:002009-02-11T13:42:00.000-06:00One quibble:"Old school versions of D&D don...One quibble:<BR/><BR/>"<I>Old school versions of D&D don't have skill systems, so it's entirely up to the DM to decide. However, this is great freedom for the players.</I>"<BR/><BR/>The term "tyrannical DM" indicates that this is likely not true. It would probably be true of a truly unbiased <I>absolutist</I> DM, but "tyrannical" implies an abuse of that power, which more than likely impinges upon player freedom.Christopher Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17368794259249607299noreply@blogger.com