Quote from: Omega;927008Was still a thing in AD&D. It didnt stop till 2e. So no. Thats not "most editions"...

D&D, AD&D AD&D 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e.  It's not in three of five editions.  That's most editions.

Quote from: yosemitemike;927010D&D, AD&D AD&D 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e.  It's not in three of five editions.  That's most editions.

0D&D, Holmes Basic, B/X, BECMI, Cyclopedia, AD&D1e, AD&D 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e, 5e. That's eleven editions by my count.  Mike can't count, he lists six editions then says "three of five". Pretty sure it's in six of eleven.

Quote from: DavetheLost;927032Mike can't count, he lists six editions then says "three of five".

So I wasn't the only one who read that and said, WTF?

Quote from: yosemitemike;927004For most editions of D&D, it doesn't.

One of the places they went wrong.

Remove Xp for gold, don't boost monster Xp, remove restrictions on spell casting, boost spells, wonder why low levels are a bloodbath and magic users rule everything.

Just like Star Trek went to shit when control of the franchise moved from people who had worked on television and then did Star Trek to people who wanted to do Star Trek so they went into television, D&D has suffered immensely from moving from "guys who played a lot of games and then wrote D&D" to "people whose game experience is D&D being put in charge of D&D."

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;927088Just like Star Trek went to shit when control of the franchise moved from people who had worked on television and then did Star Trek to people who wanted to do Star Trek so they went into television, D&D has suffered immensely from moving from "guys who played a lot of games and then wrote D&D" to "people whose game experience is D&D being put in charge of D&D."

To be fair, I'm sure they also played cards games.

I always Star Trek went to shit when they switched from stories written by professional science fiction writers to using stories written by professional television writers.

I can't even speak to the current state of D&D. I quit the franchise entirely when 3.0 came out. I do sometimes play earlier editions and clones. I looked at the free 5e stuff, didn't even recognize it as D&D and walked away shaking my head.

Quote from: DavetheLost;927101I always Star Trek went to shit when they switched from stories written by professional science fiction writers to using stories written by professional television writers.

I can't even speak to the current state of D&D. I quit the franchise entirely when 3.0 came out. I do sometimes play earlier editions and clones. I looked at the free 5e stuff, didn't even recognize it as D&D and walked away shaking my head.

Yeah 5e can't be evaluated without comparing it to 4e, compared to which, it looks like a miraculous return to sanity.  In reality it's just that your head feels "better" because it's no longer being currently hit with a hammer.  Shadows of the core design ethos of the things that made 4e a different game entirely are still there.

Quote from: CRKrueger;926703I'm a firm believer in No Gaming is better than Bad Gaming, but to me Bad Gaming isn't "anything that isn't 100% perfectly wired in to what I want to do".

In the age of instant gratification via our gizmos, maybe some gamers can't hack gaming that isn't 100% to their wants/needs/tastes.

Quote from: MES;926283yesterday I played with my group and it was the third time in a row that I thought that it was really, really boring....The DM was basically telling the story as it was lined out by him and to be honest I am really not interested in the outcome of the whole thing.

Bummer, but it happens.

The only answer is it's high time for you to find a new group, or start your own game and invite them to play.

Quote from: MES;926283Another problem I had with the plot were slide inconsistencies like:

ALL the inconsistencies you mentioned look INTERESTING to me. I would be tracking down the answers to those questions, but if the final answer was the GM was just pulling shit out of his ass, then I'd bail too.

Quote from: MES;926283How would you tell the DM?

Goodbye and thank you, but this game isn't working for me.

Quote from: DavetheLost;9270320D&D, Holmes Basic, B/X, BECMI, Cyclopedia, AD&D1e, AD&D 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e, 5e. That's eleven editions by my count.  Mike can't count, he lists six editions then says "three of five". Pretty sure it's in six of eleven.

Sorry, I mean 4 of 6.  It was very late and I was tired.  4 of 6 is an even bigger majority though.

I would consider what you count as the first five versions listed as minor variations on the same thing.  I would also count 3e. 3.5 and Pathfinder as minor variations on the same thing.  If you don't like majority of editions as a measure, how about majority of time?  OD&D came out in 1974.  XP for gold was dropped in 1989.  It's 2016.  That's 42 years total.  For 15 of them, XP for gold was a thing and for 27 of them it wasn't.  That rule has been absent from the game for almost 2/3rds of its history.  You can slice it however you want, but gold=XP mostly isn't a thing in D&D and hasn't been for nearly 28 years.  

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;927088One of the places they went wrong.

Remove Xp for gold, don't boost monster Xp, remove restrictions on spell casting, boost spells, wonder why low levels are a bloodbath and magic users rule everything.

That would be the result if you kept everything about the old rules and just removed XP for gold but that's not what actually was done in later editions.  You didn't get XP for gold in later editions but you did get a greater amount of XP for overcoming obstacles relative to the amount needed to level.

That later game where characters used all that gold to buy towers, churches or castles and become local lordlings and church officials isn't really much of a thing now and many people didn't do it even back then.  Some players really like that but many didn't care about it even back then.

Quote from: Spinachcat;927143ALL the inconsistencies you mentioned look INTERESTING to me. I would be tracking down the answers to those questions,

Jesus, yes.




I was going to put up an "I know, right?" meme, but this is much more awesome, even if completely off topic...

Spoiler

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;927088One of the places they went wrong.

Remove Xp for gold, don't boost monster Xp, remove restrictions on spell casting, boost spells, wonder why low levels are a bloodbath and magic users rule everything.

Just like Star Trek went to shit when control of the franchise moved from people who had worked on television and then did Star Trek to people who wanted to do Star Trek so they went into television, D&D has suffered immensely from moving from "guys who played a lot of games and then wrote D&D" to "people whose game experience is D&D being put in charge of D&D."

Star Trek went to shit when Abrams got involved.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;927088Just like Star Trek went to shit when control of the franchise moved from people who had worked on television and then did Star Trek to people who wanted to do Star Trek so they went into television, D&D has suffered immensely from moving from "guys who played a lot of games and then wrote D&D" to "people whose game experience is D&D being put in charge of D&D."

I call it creative or artistic imbreeding. I think it's definitely visible in the evolution of heavy metal as well.

Yeah, there's definitely a lot of insight to be pulled from other games. I think opinions on things like "game balance" and "the golden rule" (more generally, rules that say you can break the rules) can be radically altered (from that of the majority) simply by playing and grokking the Illuminati card game, and that's not even straying that far from the RPG flock.

Some DMs like to write stories and have their players trapped in them. Simply stop showing up at such games.

Quote from: yosemitemike;927144That would be the result if you kept everything about the old rules and just removed XP for gold but that's not what actually was done in later editions.  You didn't get XP for gold in later editions but you did get a greater amount of XP for overcoming obstacles relative to the amount needed to level.

This has been a general trend on RPG design. A smaller proportion of XP for killing monsters and stealing treasure, a larger proportion of XP for good roleplaying and overcoming obstacles.
XP for gold was supposed to function as an abstract way of giving XP for all the non-combat stuff. But the idea never really quite clicked with a lot of gamers.

Really if you simple can't stand the GM's campaign, for whatever reason, bow out. Get involved in a different game, or take a break from gaming until the next campaign GM cycles round.
For me though it sounds like there are a bunch of potentially interesting threads to pull. For one I would like to know just how news of the garrison's strange behavior arrived so quickly.