Quote from: Willie the Duck;1030253In theory, hexcrawling is very much like in-dungeon mapping. Sure, you can see the hex (and basic terrain) well ahead, but you are finding out what is in the hex as you travel too it.

Just saying that the map was on the table, not that anyone knew what was in each hex.

Quote from: Myrdin Potter;1030255Just saying that the map was on the table, not that anyone knew what was in each hex.

Then I'm missing your point (and I'll be the first to admit that I take that extra paragraph of explanation). Is it because the DM is taking part in the mapping process? Then, yes, of course. Gronan is overselling certain aspects to make a point. Who is doing the actual writing down is nearly immaterial, it is the act of engaging with the map that is the point (I believe, but as I just said, I'm slow).

And as estar points out, people were all over the place. 'Ernie Gygax or Tim Kask or Jim Ward or Dave Wesley or Dave Megarry or...' are the people that Gronan got to play with BITD, and are the oldest of the old school, but the instant it left their steady hands, the books fell into every Tom, Dick and Harry's hands, and how much their gaming matched up with Gronan, Ernie, Tim, etc.'s games depends on the fidelity of communication that the books, mags, conventions, and word-of-mouth were able to create.

Quote from: Ulairi;1030247I'm sure you did. I'm the white dude that looks like he could be an engineer/accountant.

Holy cow, I just noticed this and absolutely busted a gut!

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1030258Then I'm missing your point (and I'll be the first to admit that I take that extra paragraph of explanation). Is it because the DM is taking part in the mapping process? Then, yes, of course. Gronan is overselling certain aspects to make a point. Who is doing the actual writing down is nearly immaterial, it is the act of engaging with the map that is the point (I believe, but as I just said, I'm slow).

And as estar points out, people were all over the place. 'Ernie Gygax or Tim Kask or Jim Ward or Dave Wesley or Dave Megarry or...' are the people that Gronan got to play with BITD, and are the oldest of the old school, but the instant it left their steady hands, the books fell into every Tom, Dick and Harry's hands, and how much their gaming matched up with Gronan, Ernie, Tim, etc.'s games depends on the fidelity of communication that the books, mags, conventions, and word-of-mouth were able to create.



Holy cow, I just noticed this and absolutely busted a gut!

I am just replying to the absolute statement that old school means no maps given to players and to consult with the earliest players for verification. I started in 1981, a mere babe if that is the discussion.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1030220Also, FUCK giving players a map!  FUCK IT, FUCK IT, FUCK IT!  Player mapping is a vital part of Old School D&D, and if you aren't doing it, you ain't OLD SCHOOL.

I think it comes down to the situation -- I agree that a regular campaign the players ought to be mapping, but in a 4-hour convention adventure there isn't as much time to get a map right and the goal is usually to get in and do something and get out.

Mapping is also a lot of fun for the DM. I love to throw in strange stuff to mess up the mapper.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1030210I'm not going to get into fucking rumormongering.

Well you attended, right? No need to rumormonger. Were there more old school games or more new games like Pathfinder and 5e? Were the old school games mostly in the main area, or were they more often in the basement or way out in the lodge? In your opinion, is the con "all about old school" or is there a substantial (and maybe dominant?) new game presence?

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1030265Well you attended, right? No need to rumormonger. Were there more old school games or more new games like Pathfinder and 5e? Were the old school games mostly in the main area, or were they more often in the basement or way out in the lodge? In your opinion, is the con "all about old school" or is there a substantial (and maybe dominant?) new game presence?

I was there and from my time it was an old school gaming convention. We weren't hidden away in the basement. I know that there was 5E being played but I left that was the aside and the older gamers (of all types) were the main draws. The dealer room seemed focus on old school or OSR gaming.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1030250No, actually it does not.  It's the DMs that do that.  And that's been happening since, according to my friends, it's been like since Rules Cyclopedia.  Personally, my experience says from at least AD&D2e.

Well it's both. It certainly doesnt help.

Quote from: Myrdin Potter;1030255Just saying that the map was on the table, not that anyone knew what was in each hex.

Not in Blackmoor.  You got a piece of blank hex paper when you adventured outdoors.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1030265Well you attended, right? No need to rumormonger. Were there more old school games or more new games like Pathfinder and 5e? Were the old school games mostly in the main area, or were they more often in the basement or way out in the lodge? In your opinion, is the con "all about old school" or is there a substantial (and maybe dominant?) new game presence?

The game schedule is up, you can see for yourself.  But there was one room dedicated to some Organized Play thingamabob, don't know which.  There were games all over the place, and nobody checked your credentials.  This does not require registration:

https://tabletop.events/conventions/gary-con-x/schedule#?query=

Notice it tells you how many spaces are left, out of the possible.

I saw several games of black box Traveler -- the original black box, that is.  A ton of OSR clones and a good gob of AD&D 1.  When there is a room with 20 tables full of people playing games, who knows?  I ran Kobolds Ate My Baby -- old school or new?

But the "stuck in the basement" part is just plain bullshit.

And the single largest dedicated room was the "Legends of Wargaming," which is entirely pre-1980 miniatures wargames.

I've played and GM'd in OD&D and Basic D&D games where the GM described the rooms and corridors in terms of "you go north for 30 feet and reach a T-intersection" and "the door opens into a 30 x 30 foot room with a chimney on the north wall and another door on the eastern wall". I've also played and GM'd games where the GM draws each corridor and room as the players enter the area. When the players draw it as described by the GM, then play takes longer than when the GM draws it as the players explore the area. I have yet to experience any extra enjoyment as the player or GM when the players are the ones drawing versus the GM's doing it.

So are we still pretending that letting "RPGs tell stories" go unchallenged in all the intro sections of RPGs because it was "close enough and everyone knows you don't mean actual stories" was a good idea?

Quote from: CRKrueger;1030293So are we still pretending that letting "RPGs tell stories" go unchallenged in all the intro sections of RPGs because it was "close enough and everyone knows you don't mean actual stories" was a good idea?

...whut?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1030220Which is a BIG reason I'm getting sick of the fucking "Old School Renaissance."  They've invented shit they call Old School, instead of, you know, TALKING to Ernie Gygax or Tim Kask or Jim Ward or Dave Wesley or Dave Megarry or...

At least in the earlier phases, all of these people were interviewed quite often for OSR blogs and stuff.

And let's be honest.  They repeat the same stuff over, and over, and over.  So it isn't as if people don't know their opinions.  It isn't as if any of the old TSR guys, or you, have secret knowledge not yet shared with the world because of lack of internet microphones put to your kisser.

Quote from: Spellslinging Sellsword;1030292I have yet to experience any extra enjoyment as the player or GM when the players are the ones drawing versus the GM's doing it.

I enjoyed mapping as a player. A lot. I also enjoyed drawing out my maps as the GM prior to sessions. I enjoyed that a lot. When I GMed I described rooms and corridors much as you say here:

Quote"you go north for 30 feet and reach a T-intersection" and "the door opens into a 30 x 30 foot room with a chimney on the north wall and another door on the eastern wall"

In D&D the only reason I as the GM would draw out anything for the players would be to use miniatures or dice or some other marker to show position - typically for some interesting combat. Then the room was a quick sketch. A 30'x30' room might be a simple sketched square on scrap paper or the square might have been drawn on a 10'x10' erasable grid.

I do recall one GM round about the early 1980s who drew out rooms for the players. He was an architect by day and he had drawn out his dungeon using graph paper and then he had generic rooms and corridors and some individual specific rooms all drawn out ahead of time so we could position 25mm miniatures. I missed the navigation/mapping portion of dungeon exploration and his method seemed more trouble and took more time during play to lay that stuff out than it was worth to me, but he seemed to enjoy doing all that work ahead of time and he really liked having the rooms laid out. Having him do that wasn't a deal breaker for me, but it was a negative.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1030298...whut?

I think that was the obligatory post bashing the evil story gamers and their narrative conspiracy.

Quote from: Spellslinging Sellsword;1030292I've played and GM'd in OD&D and Basic D&D games where the GM described the rooms and corridors in terms of "you go north for 30 feet and reach a T-intersection" and "the door opens into a 30 x 30 foot room with a chimney on the north wall and another door on the eastern wall".

We still do it like this. Sometimes somebody will do a map sketch, but mostly not. If we get confused, the GM shows us part of his map or will correct us.