Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;847750Your spelling and punctuation are so shitty we can never tell.  A couple of people have mentioned this politely and you ignored it, so no more politeness.

Learn to write, you little shitbag.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

And where is that fucking book you have been promising the world for over a year?

My capitalization and punctuation are well within the standards of written English, thank you.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;847755My capitalization and punctuation are well within the standards of written English, thank you.

I'll believe that when I see it proven in your book, cupcake.

Yes. But does a sinking paladin take falling damage when they hit the bottom?

Quote from: Omega;847762Yes. But does a sinking paladin take falling damage when they hit the bottom?

Does a sunken thread know when it's hit bottom?

Quote from: RPGPundit;841352I've found that in most D&D games, it's totally typical that a PC might go do his shopping in the middle of the city wearing plate mail and armed with a half-dozen weapons.

Of course, this is totally ridiculous from any kind of 'historical' perspective.

Do you usually do things like this in your fantasy games? Or do your fantasy-medieval cities actually have weapon/armor control laws?

yes，but I perfer to buy a "top metal detectors" to make my real life cool !

Quote from: Omega;847075Do your PCs walk around on a boat, or even a pier, fully armoured?

Isn't that the fun of combat at sea?

Especially at low levels before spells and magic items can negate the question of whether we go unarmored into battle or save ourselves from drowning.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;847750Your spelling and punctuation are so shitty we can never tell.  A couple of people have mentioned this politely and you ignored it, so no more politeness.

Learn to write, you little shitbag.

Quote from: jeff37923;847753Pot. Kettle. Black.

And where is that fucking book you have been promising the world for over a year?

beat me to it

Given the acrimony is more pungent of late, I think theRPGSite is going through another "moon time." Be sure to pay homage to the gods in quality libations and return your essence back to the mother!

Quote from: LordVreeg;847765Does a sunken thread know when it's hit bottom?

Apparently not.

jg

You sorta wish that the RPGsite had the particular smilie enabled with a graphic of whacking an equestrian corpse with a 2x4.

Quote from: AsenRG;845632And I think that's the right direction. It's way more fun for me and my group as well;).

Quote from: Bren;845641We started out playing D&D with torch bearers , mules, and mule tenders. They upped the survival chance for our first and second level PCs. After my PC reached 4th level I started running solo so I had a band of hirelings, charmlings, and later undead (how do you get an chaotic/evil elvish necromancer in OD&D? Put on the Helm of Alignment Change.)

Now I find that sometimes we need to either keep the number of hangers on or crew to an artificially low minimum or ignore them as individuals else we don't have enough play time for the actual PCs.

I think one of the main reasons we didn't bother in my early gaming days was that our groups were so big. We regularly had 6-8 players, and with those numbers you don't really need hirelings for combat muscle/padding.

Plus we were right in the middle of the AD&D2e heroic era in the mid-90s, where it was all about the PCs and no one else. When you read the likes of the Dragonlance novels, they have big parties with no mention of followers or the like, it's just the PCs.

Nowadays, my group has 4 players, besides the GM, and extra bodies makes more sense. Four people, no matter how capable, really isn't an appropriate sized group for surviving independently in a hostile world.

Quote from: Kiero;848026Nowadays, my group has 4 players, besides the GM, and extra bodies makes more sense. Four people, no matter how capable, really isn't an appropriate sized group for surviving independently in a hostile world.

D&D did seem to change the style of play between the 1970s and the 1980s-90s.

While there are advantages to larger parties for sharing watches and guard duty and such, I'd say the perceived advantage of a larger party is in part a function of most systems and GMs not differentiating the number and type of encounters based on party size and attitude. One or two people traveling alone on foot while trying to keep a low profile (stay off ridgelines, smokeless fires or cold camps, etc.) should attract a lot less notice than a group of 4 heavily armed leaders on horseback with one or two dozen scouts, support ,troops, and camp followers along with carts and pack mules to carry the tents, trunks, and gear that such a band requires.

In Albion, it's not just armor.  I've put in a lot of information about Sumptuary laws, and my players were surprised when they discovered they wouldn't just get in trouble for wearing chain mail in a town, they could get in trouble for wearing the wrong clothes too!

Quote from: Bren;848085D&D did seem to change the style of play between the 1970s and the 1980s-90s.

While there are advantages to larger parties for sharing watches and guard duty and such, I'd say the perceived advantage of a larger party is in part a function of most systems and GMs not differentiating the number and type of encounters based on party size and attitude. One or two people traveling alone on foot while trying to keep a low profile (stay off ridgelines, smokeless fires or cold camps, etc.) should attract a lot less notice than a group of 4 heavily armed leaders on horseback with one or two dozen scouts, support ,troops, and camp followers along with carts and pack mules to carry the tents, trunks, and gear that such a band requires.

Well, it was a game of going into the dungeon then.
And in a deadly game, where people counted weight, you had men at arms and followers, as well as porters, etc, to help you in a game that was about exploring a place, I think i called it "Expeditioning' at one point, compared to 'Campaigning'.