Hey, I can't for the life of me find the topic where I originally saw this but I wanted to do some research into this topic as I found is mildly interesting.

Anywho to explain what I'm talking about, I recall their being a topic here where it went into detail about someone's method of playing D&D being called the "true way to play the game" (by the people who play the game this way) where the DM simulates a world with the help of multiple players. They have "higher tiered" players who control kingdoms and organizations which are the ones who create tension in the world and are handing out specific quests, there's like mini DMs who run sessions for smaller groups then the big DM handles how everything ties together. At least that's what I recall.

It honestly sounds neat and I'd liked to learn more about this concept, more so that I can read up on how some actual play went down as it sounds like something that's more in line with "Roleplay Skirmish Game meets Diplomacy" which is neat, but not something I'd ever want to play.

But yea, if someone knows what I'm talking about and can point me in the right direction I would appreciate it.

It probably needs to be explained how D&D got started.  I'm not going to go into details, though. 

Originally the guys (Arneson, Gygax) played tabletop war games, not unlike Warhammer we have today.  Lines of army soldiers pushed around a table and rolling dice. 

They branched out into the fantasy genre, and D&D was meant to be a supplement to explain how, why, and where the heroes and generals of each army acquired their magic swords, armor, and rings that made them so OP. 

It's also why there used to be rules for gaining land, castles, and hirelings.  They matter because you are supposed to alternate back and forth between adventuring for fame and gear, then fight it out as a general of an army. 

The thing is that the D&D side was the more popular bit, so it's morphed into RPGs played out in your imagination aka theatre of the mind, with war gaming still viewed as a different hobby.   

Makes sense, from my limited understanding of the hobby Dave Anderson was more into the armies and kingdom's side of things then the heroes and adventures which is what Gygax was into.

But, do you know what this mode of play was called? Or does it just not have a name?

Quote from: Kahoona on May 14, 2023, 11:00:33 AM
Makes sense, from my limited understanding of the hobby Dave Anderson was more into the armies and kingdom's side of things then the heroes and adventures which is what Gygax was into.

But, do you know what this mode of play was called? Or does it just not have a name?

A few months ago I watched an excellent video that explained it, and I've been wracking my brain, and searching, but damned if I can find it. Part of the explanation was Dark Sun gladiators protecting a city in mass combat, but searching by Dark Sun doesn't find it.

Frustrating.

Quote from: Kahoona on May 14, 2023, 07:52:18 AM
Hey, I can't for the life of me find the topic where I originally saw this but I wanted to do some research into this topic as I found is mildly interesting.

Anywho to explain what I'm talking about, I recall their being a topic here where it went into detail about someone's method of playing D&D being called the "true way to play the game" (by the people who play the game this way) where the DM simulates a world with the help of multiple players. They have "higher tiered" players who control kingdoms and organizations which are the ones who create tension in the world and are handing out specific quests, there's like mini DMs who run sessions for smaller groups then the big DM handles how everything ties together. At least that's what I recall.

It honestly sounds neat and I'd liked to learn more about this concept, more so that I can read up on how some actual play went down as it sounds like something that's more in line with "Roleplay Skirmish Game meets Diplomacy" which is neat, but not something I'd ever want to play.

But yea, if someone knows what I'm talking about and can point me in the right direction I would appreciate it.

Looks like #BrOSR:

I remember some talk about the "BrOSR" in this direction... maybe this?

https://jeffro.wordpress.com/2022/04/08/what-is-the-brosr/

(I wrote about his back in 2022 suggesting "Real time (dungeon) exploration", which seems to have become quite popular in 2023...)

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/04/real-time-dungeon-exploration.html

EDIT: slightly ninja'ed.

Some interesting stuff. Will check them out

Quote from: Theory of Games on May 14, 2023, 11:21:40 AM
Looks like #BrOSR:

Starting watching and then checked out quickly.  Luckily these idiots are just a dozen gamers and do not speak for the rest of us.

#Brosr= people who want to appear more important than they really are.

A lot of folks call the barony-level gaming "Domain" play, but it probably has many names.

A good example of this can be found in Arneson's "First Fantasy Campaign" book done by Judges Guild in 1977. Therein you can see the names of various baronies along with the number of troops kept by each. This was important when the players did wargames (with miniatures) to settle border disputes, etc. The numbers in FFC must have been either starting totals or average approximations, as force strengths would likely change following each major battle.

The modern interpretation of campaign play was that when folks reached "name level" (the level where there isn't a new name anymore) then the style of play would shift from adventures to domains. That is sort of correct as when characters in OD&D reached a certain level they could get a deal on prices for castles and such, but in our campaigns characters who acquired enough gold often built their own strongholds regardless of their level.

As was noted above, the OD&D booklet "Volume 3: Underworld & Wilderness Adventures" lists prices for building castles and buying men-at-arms, castle specialists, and so forth, along with salary per month. An interesting thing to note that in the equipment lists in OD&D, the price of weapons originally matched the price of that type of troop unit. (The OD&D price charts are very similar, but not exactly the same as FFC's prices.)

The Original way to play:

One thing to remember about Arneson's Blackmoor Campaign is that the "Baddies" were also players. Dave didn't have a lot of what we now call NPCs. It wasn't until the Blackmoor Dungeons became wildly popular that Dave's campaign became more like the style we are used to today.

Despite the popularity of his dungeons, Dave was more into being a neutral referee adjudicating the campaign between multiple groups of player factions competing with each other.

In contrast, Gygax's Greyhawk campaign was run more traditionally. A group of players banding together as their character to explore a dungeon. Primarily as a result of the fact that when Dave demoed what he was doing he used the Blackmoor Dungeon because was the easiest to bring with him to Lake Geneva.

And for the same reason that Twin City gamers like the dungeon the best, Gygax loved it as well and was inspired to come up with his own take.

Quote from: Kahoona on May 14, 2023, 11:00:33 AM
Makes sense, from my limited understanding of the hobby Dave Anderson was more into the armies and kingdom's side of things then the heroes and adventures which is what Gygax was into.

But, do you know what this mode of play was called? Or does it just not have a name?

The game rules they used was called, "Chaimail."   D&D's prototype, called D&D 0-edition relied on knowing how to play Chainmail.  D&D wasn't a standalone game until later. 

Domain Play was mentioned above, and that's what it's called when D&D players get involved in large scale warfare these days. 

Quote from: weirdguy564 on May 15, 2023, 10:29:54 AMThe game rules they used was called, "Chaimail." D&D's prototype, called D&D 0-edition relied on knowing how to play Chainmail. D&D wasn't a standalone game until later.

Sort of. The original Blackmoor campaign was built on Wesely's Braunstein, and Braunstein comes from Totten's Strateegos and some other sources. Arneson had access to a pre-Chainmail rules system called "Geneva Medieval Miniatures" and published in the C&C Society newsletter and it appears that much of the combat system was similar to that, but there was really no single "Rules Set" that guided Arneson's campaign.

OD&D is mostly written so that Chainmail isn't needed. Some of the monsters have abilities not specified in OD&D which make them more fun to encounter, and of course the combat system that nobody actually used for more than a session or so (the "alternate" system is apparently the only one Gygax used, but referring to the Chainmail one helped sell copies of Chainmail), but in general OD&D could be played with minimal or no knowledge of Chainmail.

Quote from: Theory of Games on May 14, 2023, 09:33:23 PM
The Original way to play:

.... When is this from? Who did it? Why?

I needs me some context.

Here:

http://playingattheworld.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-d-syndicated-radio-show-pilot.html

In the early 1980s, at the height of the Dungeons & Dragons fad, TSR heavily promoted the game in mainstream media. This went far beyond mere advertisements: they developed dramatic renditions of D&D as media properties. The most famous result was the Saturday morning cartoon show, though we know of many other projects that never quite made it into production, such as the undeveloped feature film. We must now add to that category a new entry: a syndicated radio program. Unlike the cartoon show or the movie, the planned radio series depicted the actual play of a D&D session rather than dramatizing a loosely-related story: in that respect, it is a long-lost ancestor of contemporary media sensations like Critical Role or Acquisitions Inc. Today, as a special "audio" edition of Playing at the World, we take a listen to the original pilot for the radio show, and consider its relevance to the game spectatorship culture of today.