Quote from: Phillip;852159My (admittedly fading) memory of p. 42 is that it doesn't call for much discretionary judgement itself, since the purpose is to map things in terms of mathematical abstraction (as opposed to modeling things that could be way out of the characters' league). Where there are choices, could one not toss for them?

It was a tool to help DMs in their adjudications when it came to the math part. A DM would look at that, determine how much damage, roughly, it should do based on what the PC attempted and apply that. As always, circumstances can make that outcome do more or less damage or require a more difficult roll to pass, etc.

Quote from: Phillip;852056You are right, though, that in my experience there was very little in the way of questions not clearly and quantitatively answered in the rules, even without resorting to that table.

It's not that there are no gaps, no cases left to the GM's improvisation, but rather the impression of fewer. The same holds for 3E vs. most other rules sets, and I think in a wider domain, but 4E combat seemed much easier to run "by the book".

Coming from AD&D and 3.x perhaps my experience has taught me that the rules will never cover everything and to ask the DM to rule on a particular situation and to trust in that rule. In days of AD&D, though, I felt DMs were far more schrewd and vindictive than later years but that could easily be attributed to the age of players and the lack of maturity.

Quote from: Batman;852163Yeah they didn't ditch them at all. They decided that the Half-Orc and Gnome weren't nearly as popular as things like Tieflings and Dragonborn, not only that but those races weren't always in the first PHB anyways so they went into the PHB2. As for monks, since they always sucked hard in D&D the designers wanted to give them more attention to make them right, hence delayed debut. Same as the Barbarian, wanted to make it more than "Rawr! I'm angry! *pummel pummel pummel*" drivel we've constantly had to endure....

Dragonborn are patently ridiculous and only in the 5e PHB to save face...

Quote from: Harime Nui;852168Dragonborn are patently ridiculous and only in the 5e PHB to save face...

Eh, they've been in the game in one way or another: Dragon-Kin (3e, Monsters of Faerûn), Draconians in Dragonlance, Saurials from the Forgotten Realms, half-dragons from multiple editions, etc. Dragonborn are neither profoundly un-D&D or all that original to 4e or the game overall.

Quote from: Harime Nui;852168Dragonborn are patently ridiculous and only in the 5e PHB to save face...

The boobs on basically reptilian critters gave me a double take, but I'm not sure where the "patently ridiculous" line should be drawn in such a fundamentally silly game as D&D.

Quote from: Omega;852158Didnt they segregate all that over to a second book. More profit.

Be glad the CCG idea failed otherwise we'd all have to collect those classes and magic items and races.

Ironically, 3e was built with the idea of a Magic style CCG, in so much as the mistaken concept of 'traps', things that look good on the surface, but aren't really.  Like a lot of the non-scaling feats.  They LOOK good, but after a level or two you're supposed to realize that they don't actually stack to other feats.

...Of course, I could be misremembering that quote from Monte Cook...

Quote from: Phillip;852170The boobs on basically reptilian critters gave me a double take, but I'm not sure where the "patently ridiculous" line should be drawn in such a fundamentally silly game as D&D.

"If you can hide it under a cloak and scarf you're okay."

Quote from: Phillip;852170The boobs on basically reptilian critters gave me a double take, but I'm not sure where the "patently ridiculous" line should be drawn in such a fundamentally silly game as D&D.

Dragonborn were originally either human-dragon hybrids, or humans turned into dragon people. Werent the Dray in Dark Sun also descended from humans turned into dragon people?

So the whole "They cant have boobs" rally was silly in and of itself.

Quote from: Omega;852176Dragonborn were originally either human-dragon hybrids, or humans turned into dragon people. Werent the Dray in Dark Sun also descended from humans turned into dragon people?

So the whole "They cant have boobs" rally was silly in and of itself.

Agreed, and Dragons may look lizard-like but likely aren't.  Besides, if Dragonborn were lizard-like, they'd be Lizardmen.

Though werent the 4e ones and now the 5e Dragonborn descended from dragons with no human element?

Quote from: Omega;852179Though werent the 4e ones and now the 5e Dragonborn descended from dragons with no human element?

No, the 4e ones were part human, I remember that clearly.

I just thought of them as Saurigs with halitosis. Rather bland compared with Dragonewts, but what the hey.

Quote from: Omega;8521544: Wrong again. The DM was free to make something else up for aerial combat if they so wanted, or anything else. The whole DMG is "Heres as much as we could think to cover if you have a question (so you hopefully arent sending us more questions letters) and if you dont want to use that rule, make something up." Its just as freeform as OD&D, it just has more covered in the book.

I am highlighting this not because I am ignoring your other points but because this the heart of the debate. The  part where you and Phillip are unable to come up with a simple quote to support this view.

For better or worse the marketing (through Dragon Magazine) and the DMG itself it filled with stuff like this.

Page 9 of the DMG

QuoteAnd while there are no optionals for the major systems of ADVANCED D&D (for uniformity of rules and procedures from game to game, campaign to campaign, is stressed), there are plenty of areas where your own creativity and imagination are not bounded by the parameters of the game system. These are sections where only a few hints and suggestions are given, and the rest left to the DM.

Or this from Page 230

QuoteIT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME, NOT THE LETTER OF THE RULES, WHICH IS IMPORTANT. NEVER HOLD TO THE LETTER WRITTEN, NOR ALLOW SOME BARRACKS ROOM LAWYER TO FORCE QUOTATIONS FROM THE RULE BOOK UPON YOU, IF IT GOES AGAINST THE OBVIOUS INTENT OF THE GAME. AS YOU HEW THE LINE WITH RESPECT TO CONFORMITY TO MAJOR SYSTEMS AND UNIFORMITY OF PLAY IN GENERAL, ALSO BE CERTAIN THE GAME IS MASTERED BY YOU AND NOT BY YOUR PLAYERS. WITHIN THE BROAD PARAMETERS GIVEN IN THE ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS VOLUMES, YOU ARE CREATOR AND FINAL ARBITER. BY ORDERING THINGS AS THEY SHOULD BE, THE GAME AS A WHOLE FIRST, YOUR CAMPAIGN NEXT, AND YOUR PARTICIPANTS THEREAFTER, YOU WILL BE PLAYING ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS AS IT WAS MEANT TO BE. MAY YOU FIND AS MUCH PLEASURE IN SO DOING AS THE REST OF US DO!

When laying out the purpose of AD&D in Dragon #26 This is what the guy wrote.

From Page 30

QuoteBecause D&D allowed such freedom, because the work itself said so, because the initial batch of DMs were so imaginative and creative, because the rules were incomplete, vague and often ambiguous, D&D has turned into a non-game.

Then he goes on further

QuoteWhile D&D campaigns can be those which feature comic book spells, 43rd level balrogs as player characters, and include a plethora of trash from various and sundry sources, AD&D cannot be so composed. Either a DM runs an AD&D campaign, or else it is something else. This is clearly stated within the work, and it is a mandate which will be unchanging, even if AD&D undergoes change at some future date. While DMs are free to allow many unique features to become a part of their campaign—special magic items, new monsters, different spells, unusual settings—and while they can have free rein in devising the features and facts pertaining to the various planes which surround the Prime Material, it is understood they must adhere to the form of AD&D.

Hence my assertion that in the LATE 1970s, Gygax intent for AD&D was to make a toolkit for referee to run their campaign and that in order to be a AD&D campaign the pieces you use out of the books had to be the rules as written.

And yes I get that the intent was not to enable players to be rule lawyers somethign that he had contempt for.  I stated several times that Gygax's view was that the referee's was the final arbiter of his campaign.

I am also aware that in later years Gygax's view have changed.

And please do me the courtesy of supporting your assertions rather than use ad hominen attacks like "Estar is off his meds".

I am commenting on why AD&D was written the way it does. Why people are interested in reading and writing documents like ADDICT.

I am NOT commenting on that this how AD&D ought to be played. Nor saying that this was how AD&D was played in the day. My focus on the reasons why AD&D was written the way it was with a far more authoritative tone than OD&D. Why Gygax wrote stuff like he did in Dragon Magazine. Why some people today are interested in how AD&D is supposed to be run by the book.

* stations archers to cover all exits *
* sets thread on fire *

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;852205* stations archers to cover all exits *
* sets thread on fire *

You might want this.

And you wonder why they call RPG people pedantic nerds...