TheRPGSite

(Note: I liked many games Wick was involved in and I'm hoping the new 7th Sea surprises me pleasantly, but I'm not getting my hopes up after some of the previews.)

http://johnwickpresents.com/updates/the-worst-adventure-of-all-times/

John Wick posted this about a month ago and I just discovered it. It's so revealing and full of eye-opening quotes. It pretty much explains everything about his famously strong gaming opinions.

For instance:

Quote from: WickTHIS IS THE WORST, SHITTIEST, MOST DISGUSTING PIECE OF PIG VOMIT EVER PUBLISHED.  AND EVERY PLAYER AND GM SHOULD KNOW WHY SO SOMETHING LIKE THIS NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.

Quote from: Wick(While running the module at age 12) When the last character climbed in and was utterly destroyed, I jumped up and laughed at all of them. "YOU'RE ALL DEAD!" I shouted.

They looked at me confused. One of them asked, "What are you talking about?"

I read the text to them. They didn't believe me. I showed the text to them, laughing.

"You guys didn't even make it passed the first corridor!" I said, laughing in their faces.

It was at that point one of my friends—someone I had known for three years—punched me right in the face. Then, he jumped on me. Kicking me. My other friends had to pull him off.

This was the second week in a row we invoked the appearance of parents.

I should say that the next Monday at school was rough. As a geek, I had precious little friends. That Monday, I quickly discovered I had none.

Bashful and lacking any kind of the confidence I would find later in life, I was unable to summon the courage to apologize. I spent the rest of that year without any friends at all. They continued playing games. I spent the rest of the year just reading. Alone.

Quote from: WickMuch later in life, I met the author of that adventure. Gary and I were on a game design panel together. I said something I don't quite remember and he called me a "wanna be community theater actor." I wanted to tell him how his adventure nearly lost me every friend I had when I was twelve. Didn't seem appropriate at the time.

Quote from: WickI dropped my d20 like a mic and left the room. Because I'm a wanna be community theater actor. And that's how we fuckin' roll.

Both are in the wrong here.  Gary for creating this nega dungeon.  Wick for taking great joy in tpk with instant death effects.  Both are prickish.

Quote from: Snowman0147;881718Both are in the wrong here.  Gary for creating this nega dungeon.  Wick for taking great joy in tpk with instant death effects.  Both are prickish.

   Hmm...I'm not sure I'd say Gary was in the wrong so much as there were some problems with the way the hobby was presented and marketed in the early days that contributed to this problem. And Wick was a jerk, but he was also 12 years old. I have very little engagement with Wick's work and have been thoroughly unimpressed by what I've seen of his online persona, so maybe he hasn't grown up much. I am aware that he wrote an article encouraging Champions GMs to exploit every last bit of their PCs' Disadvantages, so he appears to have, at one point, followed in the footsteps of Gygax's most "never give a sucker an even break" aspect. But designers change, like everyone else.

   The problems I see were:

   1. The way that D&D (and especially AD&D) became the 800-lb. gorilla of the hobby;
   2. The tendency to push AD&D at the expense of D&D

   D&D was written by wargamers for wargamers, and AD&D continued that trend. Hence, you get a 1E DMG and certain modules that sound very adversarial and punishing at times. That's perfectly fine for an adult game of "PCs against the dungeon" where the DM is working under the implicit rule of 'be nasty in design, but scrupulously fair in execution'. But Gygax was not the greatest of communicators, and a lot of that message seems to have gotten lost when the game was picked up by a younger audience without the ear for his style or the background to understand the assumptions it contained.

  If there had been a less punishing, high-visibility alternative to D&D, or if the market of the time hadn't seemed to encourage jumping straight from the Red Box into the Gygax hardcovers, things might be different. D&D would be more 'one choice among many' with its own distinctive identity, rather than often being used to be all things to everyone, which seems to be part of the ground for the Edition Wars. And people turned off by D&D might be more inclined to stay with the hobby instead of being embittered by misused AD&D and either abandoning the hobby or acting as though the tool was wholly at fault for its abuse.

  (Give me a time machine for the hobby, and I'd be tempted to send copies of Prince Valiant, d6 Star Wars, Savage Worlds and Champions 4E back to GenCon 1977. :) I'd also stop off in 1983 and encourage TSR to assign this Hickman fellow and the rest of the "Project Overlord" team to Basic D&D instead of AD&D, tying Ravenloft and Dragonlance to Basic and thus giving that stream of the game strong properties that would probably be better fits for one another.)

Tomb of Horrors was a tournament module, thus showing that old Wick is just as stupid as 12 yo Wick.

He regurgitates this crap every now and then. As he's got his money-grab going on at the moment i suggest he's giving grogs a poke in the hope of threads like this drawing more attention to his ball-shrivellingly uninformed views on gaming in the hope of a few more dollars.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;881723D&D was written by wargamers for wargamers, and AD&D continued that trend. Hence, you get a 1E DMG and certain modules that sound very adversarial and punishing at times. That's perfectly fine for an adult game of "PCs against the dungeon" where the DM is working under the implicit rule of 'be nasty in design, but scrupulously fair in execution'. But Gygax was not the greatest of communicators, and a lot of that message seems to have gotten lost when the game was picked up by a younger audience without the ear for his style or the background to understand the assumptions it contained.

  If there had been a less punishing, high-visibility alternative to D&D, or if the market of the time hadn't seemed to encourage jumping straight from the Red Box into the Gygax hardcovers, things might be different.

Ok, where to begin here...

First off, congratulations to John Wick for having the most successful RPG Kickstarter of all time. Pretty sure this is going to break a million dollars before they are done with this. He doesn't have to worry about the naysayers anymore, because with this success, he'll be able to make his own game exactly the way he wants its, which should be quite unlike worst of the old school modules like, for example, Tomb of Horrors.

I'm really happy that he didn't quit gaming, that he's successful, and that he has a bunch of friends who want to buy, and run his games! I'd call that a win for RPG gaming.


Second, Tomb of Horrors really did suck, A few weeks back I posted my commentary on this over at Enworld starting about right here;

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?476160-Is-TOMB-OF-HORRORS-the-Worst-Adventure-Of-All-Time/page16

It was a good module to show me everything that I didn't want in my own home games. And after playing it, it would be almost 25 years before I would buy another dungeon module for D&D with the exception of Judges Guild stuff. I never bought a game module from TSR primarily because of my own poor experience in ToH.

Also there were lots of high visibility alternatives to D&D for the discerning gamer that were available back then, and much more so, with the OSR now. Back then we played Warlock, the Cal-State D&D variant, Chivalry & Sorcery was very popular as well, and it had Jousting Rules. I played a few games of Tunnels and Trolls as one of the GMs in out group really liked running T&T games. We also played Melee and Wizard from Metagaming, these were the precursor to what everyone these days knows as GURPS. later, when they were released we played advanced Melee and Advanced Wizard as well. We also tried Rolemaster when it came out, and I tried Runequest in 1980, but didn't actually end up running it until buying my own copy from Avalon Hill in 1987 or so...

D&D was better than wargames, because we didn't have to make the games about fighting and war only, we could consider a bunch of other things as well... different qualities of leadership, the effects of magic, different realms and different worlds. I'll post a bit more on this later, as I have an appointment atm.

I think by far the biggest problem with Tomb of Horrors was that it was just thrown out there without much of an explanation of what was. Of course it was obvious to TSR and people who had very closely followed everything TSR had been doing that this was a tournament module!

But most of the audience wouldn't have come to it knowing what being a "tournament module" actually meant - only those who had attended the convention in question or who had read accurate reports of it would had had the faintest idea of how the module was run under actual tournament conditions, and you have to remember that this was before the Internet, when all that information was spread over a range of different sources which you would have to physically acquire, usually for money. Even very invested, enthusiastic gamers at the time would have had to be quite lucky to have read those old con reports.

What ended up happening was, well, more or less what Wick reports: people just ran it as written without consideration in their home games, TPKs happened, people got mad.

It could have really done with a more fleshed-out introduction explaining what purpose it was written for, how the tournament was run, what considerations went into it, and so on and so forth. And it should have had a big fat warning against running it with any PCs that you were especially invested in, because many would die arbitrarily. (It already provided pregens, but it could have done with giving people a lot more encouragement to use the pregens.)

In fact, ideally, the way it should have come out would have been as part of a "tournament kit", with full guidance on running amateur tournaments, designing adventures for tournaments, and so on and with the Tomb as a sample module. That would have been a great little product. Simply putting it out there described as a "tournament module" without much built-in guidance on what that actually meant was a mistake.

Hindsight is 20/20, though, and TSR were having to crank out material fast to feed a hungry market.

Quote from: Snowman0147;881718Both are in the wrong here.  Gary for creating this nega dungeon.  Wick for taking great joy in tpk with instant death effects.  Both are prickish.

As well as his friends, who didn't think to use lots of sheep:D!

I have no idea who John Wick is so there's no opinion or loyalty to him. I agree that his complaints of Tomb of Horrors are stupid for the reasons already given. Yes, it's a tournament module which would seriously disrupt any regular home campaign. He should have known better but being a 12 year old dickhead... Well, this is why 12 year olds shouldn't GM. He deserved to lose all his friends for a year, good for them for dumping his idiot ass.

I've never run ToH, if I did it would strictly be with pre-gen characters or a "This is a dream..." scenario. Really, how difficult is to to write stuff like "You walk by a small, hidden mark on a wall. A 10 ton stone drops on you, take 20d6 damage." Or "You open the chest and a magical gem is activated. Asmodeus and his 10 Councilmen teleport into the room. Roll for initiative."

Crom's fucking hairy nutsack!

So Wick is an insecure whiny little puke who's still snivelling over something that happened to him when he was 12.

He should put some of that million dollars into therapy.

And TOMB OF HORRORS was CLEARLY labelled as a way to kill ultra high level characters, and Gary never made ANY bones about it.

Waah, waah, waah, waah, waah.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;881760Crom's fucking hairy nutsack!

So Wick is an insecure whiny little puke who's still snivelling over something that happened to him when he was 12.

He should put some of that million dollars into therapy.

And TOMB OF HORRORS was CLEARLY labelled as a way to kill ultra high level characters, and Gary never made ANY bones about it.

Waah, waah, waah, waah, waah.

As someone who has never seen said module, nor has any particular desire to see it, how "clearly" is "clearly" in this case? Is it on the cover, in the intro, or what:)?

Regardless, I think that the story of how some players beat ToH with sheep deserves more attention than it's getting;).

I think I first heard about it while Gary was developing it.

It's also worth noting that 14 year old Ernie Gygax romped through the place.  That's right, the module that still has Wick whining decades later got beaten by a 14 year old kid.

Also, notice Wickless has closed comments on that post?  Poor baby must have gotten some heat back.

Quote from: AsenRG;881762As someone who has never seen said module, nor has any particular desire to see it, how "clearly" is "clearly" in this case? Is it on the cover, in the intro, or what:)?

Regardless, I think that the story of how some players beat ToH with sheep deserves more attention than it's getting;).

The only warning in it is that there aren't a lot of monsters so "hack and slay" types won't like it. It says that players who like using their brains will find it to their liking. It also emphasizes that the module teaches brainwork, so playing it will be a valuable experience.

Part of the surprise for me was that Wick - a famously adversarial GM who peppers his books with advice on how to viciously screw with players without outright killing them - would resent a module like this one. So it's ok to torture players by fucking with their heads, their character's heads, their expectations of the game, and their sense of actual freedom and control, but PC death is going too far? :confused:

Our PF GM ran it while back for Halloween. As a one-off with some high-level pre-gens. We didn't get very far at all but it WAS a lot of fun... and my first visit to the infamous place.
I'm wondering if it might make a decent litmus test for new people to see if we want to game with them or not... to see if they throw tantrums or can enjoy it for what it is.

Quote from: AsenRG;881762As someone who has never seen said module, nor has any particular desire to see it, how "clearly" is "clearly" in this case? Is it on the cover, in the intro, or what:)?

Caveat: I don't have the original, just the one in the S1-4 compilation, so the original module might have had more warnings on it. But the one in the compilation talks about using characters from ongoing campaigns in the tomb and doesn't seem to say "by the way, most of the characters who go into the adventure will probably die". It claims that it's an adventure where smart characters will survive where foolish ones won't, though to be honest I'm not sure how true that is - there's a lot of stuff in there where "smart play" corresponds to "guess what Gary Gygax was thinking when he wrote this part", which isn't very helpful to anyone who didn't regularly game with Gary.

It's kind of like the old Deathtrap Dungeon gamebook, which was so sparse on clues that you basically had to guess which way to turn at various points and almost certainly would have to replay the gamebook a lot because of how arbitrary the deaths were.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;881786Part of the surprise for me was that Wick - a famously adversarial GM who peppers his books with advice on how to viciously screw with players without outright killing them - would resent a module like this one. So it's ok to torture players by fucking with their heads, their character's heads, their expectations of the game, and their sense of actual freedom and control, but PC death is going too far? :confused:

Wick's ideas about adversarial games in general are just kind of odd. For instance, Houses of the Blooded is written to incorporate a lot of PvP, and a lynchpin of that is porting in the FATE-style "compels" system where if you know someone's Aspects you can use those to get an advantage against them.

However, FATE is set up in such a way that generally PCs will know each other's Aspects, or will suss them out fairly quickly, and Aspects will be written fairly broadly so that they can come in under a range of situations and can viably provide both positive and negative effects (an Aspect with no downside to it won't generate any FATE points, an Aspect with no negative aspects to it can't have FATE points spent on it to help you out, so an ideal Aspect is one which will sometimes help you and sometimes hurt you).

Obviously, in a PvP game that's less than idea, so Houses of the Blooded encourages people to come up with very specific Aspects that are hard for the other players to figure out... at which point, the point of incorporating the Aspects/compels system is rather badly undermined. And of course the GM can compel people all the time because the GM knows their Aspects and can throw in NPCs who will tie into them.

It's an odd and clumsy way to incorporate them, and makes me suspect that Wick threw them in simply because FATE was in vogue and he was following the fashions of the time rather than because it actually worked well in that context.

It states that there are few monsters to fight, and lots of tricks and traps. It also emphasizes that this is a thinking players module and that hack and slash players will be unhappy.

It also advises DMs to not run it if their players are combat focused and do not like puzzles and traps.

That is all right there on page 1 after the background info paragraphs.

Quote from: Baulderstone;881767The only warning in it is that there aren't a lot of monsters so "hack and slay" types won't like it. It says that players who like using their brains will find it to their liking. It also emphasizes that the module teaches brainwork, so playing it will be a valuable experience.

That's not "made to kill off high-level PCs":).

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;881763I think I first heard about it while Gary was developing it.

It's also worth noting that 14 year old Ernie Gygax romped through the place.  That's right, the module that still has Wick whining decades later got beaten by a 14 year old kid.

Also, notice Wickless has closed comments on that post?  Poor baby must have gotten some heat back.

Good on the kid, but for fairness' sake, he was a) older than Wick's friends, b) knew how the designer is thinking, and c) has probably played for far longer than his friends.

Besides, Wick got punched because he was being mean. Though that lack of self-control speaks badly about the other kid as well.

Heat is a guarantee. There's enough people on Internet that don't like when the games they grew up with are getting slammed.

Quote from: Warthur;881789Caveat: I don't have the original, just the one in the S1-4 compilation, so the original module might have had more warnings on it. But the one in the compilation talks about using characters from ongoing campaigns in the tomb and doesn't seem to say "by the way, most of the characters who go into the adventure will probably die". It claims that it's an adventure where smart characters will survive where foolish ones won't, though to be honest I'm not sure how true that is - there's a lot of stuff in there where "smart play" corresponds to "guess what Gary Gygax was thinking when he wrote this part", which isn't very helpful to anyone who didn't regularly game with Gary.

It's kind of like the old Deathtrap Dungeon gamebook, which was so sparse on clues that you basically had to guess which way to turn at various points and almost certainly would have to replay the gamebook a lot because of how arbitrary the deaths were.

Well, I guess Gronan was talking about some other edition:).

Funny you mention that, but if "Deathtrap Dungeon" is the gamebook I'm thinking of? I passed it on the first go, though I was probably lucky, too. Was it some stupid baron organising a "survive my dungeon" competition;)?
(I'm not sure, because I've read in Bulgarian translation, and the title might or might not translate back to English as "Deathtrap Dungeon". Don't have it on me to check).

Surprised he's passing the blame buck to the module rather than how he acted after everyone  got creamed.
 I guess that gas hurting his fee fees later on stills fuels this rage.

Quote from: Omega;881793It states that there are few monsters to fight, and lots of tricks and traps. It also emphasizes that this is a thinking players module and that hack and slash players will be unhappy.

It also advises DMs to not run it if their players are combat focused and do not like puzzles and traps.

That is all right there on page 1 after the background info paragraphs.

Which is still pretty far from:

QuoteAnd TOMB OF HORRORS was CLEARLY labelled as a way to kill ultra high level characters, and Gary never made ANY bones about it.

Still, given that Wick laughingly killed off all his friends while running what he gleefully described as the Deadliest Dungeon Ever, I don't know what Wick was expecting.

Personally, I found it funny that the lesson Wick took was that manipulating your PCs in to a deathtrap was a bad idea, so instead, manipulate your friends into into not getting killed. Wick can't conceive of a GMing style that involves not manipulating the players.

Wick is actually right that the flavor text on the mouth is is shady. It's designed to put he idea of climbing into the mouth into the players heads. It goes against the introduction to the adventure which warns against giving any kind of clues through descriptions, instead remaining completely neutral.

I suppose you could argue that a player should hear the description, then realize the GM is manipulating them into climbing into the mouth, so avoid doing so. I've seen that kind of thing at the table. Of course, then you aren't playing a PC in a D&D game anymore. You are a playing a game about meta-analysis of the GM's descriptions.

Then again, meta-bullshit like that is the kind of thing that Wick loves. Just read the companion article to this about the best adventure ever (http://johnwickpresents.com/updates/the-best-adventure-of-all-times/). It concludes with this anecdote from Wick about what an amazing GM Tracy Hickman is.

QuoteSee, I had a plan. I wanted to throw a spanner in the works. I'm a Discordian, I can't help it. So, when it came time for my turn in the Breakfast, I announced, "I cast a spell that directs all damage and danger to me, making all other players invulnerable to damage for this many rounds..."

I rolled the d6. The only part of my plan that could screw with me. Dice never liked me, but for some reason, I rolled a 6.

"SIX ROUNDS!" I announced. "FOR SIX ROUNDS, YOU—TRACY HICKMAN—CANNOT KILL ANY CHARACTERS!"

I also made sure I was at the end of the line so my "spell" would have the maximum effect.

The crowd cheered, thinking someone had thwarted the Mighty Tracy Hickman at his own Killer Breakfast. I tore up my character sheet. "I DIE HAPPILY, KNOWING I HAVE DEFEATED THE GREAT HICKMAN!"

And for a moment... for a brief moment... Tracy was stumped. I left the stage, getting a few high fives. I was on top of the world.

And then, the Great Tracy Hickman smiled. "I can't kill any characters..." he said. So, he handed the GM staff over to Laura. "Can you run the game, honey?" he asked.

She smiled and took over. "Of course," she said. And preceded to kill everyone on stage.

I succeeded in thwarting the Hickmans for a moment. Just a moment. And that's victory enough for me. But the fact of the matter is, Tracy and Laura are amazing GMs. Because they can think on their feet... they can improvise... and they understand what makes a great story.

It seems like everyone had fun, so that's cool, but I don't see any roleplaying taking place. It's also the kind of killer adversarial play that Wick is screaming about in Worst Adventure article, which were released the next day.

I don't demand that people enjoy only one style of play. I find that a little boring, to be honest. Still, if you are going to make the kind of sanctimonious judgments about games that Wick does, I'm gong to hold you to a different standard.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;881802Surprised he's passing the blame buck to the module rather than how he acted after everyone  got creamed.
 I guess that gas hurting his fee fees later on stills fuels this rage.

It's also funny that he decries the manipulative nature of the flavor text while taking time boast about how he manipulated the PCs with reverse psychology in the hook that he added to the adventure himself.

Quote from: AsenRG;881800That's not "made to kill off high-level PCs":).

Yeah, I wasn't saying otherwise.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;881802Surprised he's passing the blame buck to the module rather than how he acted after everyone  got creamed.
 I guess that gas hurting his fee fees later on stills fuels this rage.

Punked by auto correct again.

The above "gas" should read "gygax".  being called a wannabe community actor, not even an actual community actor must have felt harsh!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;881760Crom's fucking hairy nutsack!

So Wick is an insecure whiny little puke who's still snivelling over something that happened to him when he was 12.

He should put some of that million dollars into therapy.

And TOMB OF HORRORS was CLEARLY labelled as a way to kill ultra high level characters, and Gary never made ANY bones about it.

Waah, waah, waah, waah, waah.

This is 110% God's Own Truth.

I did many foolish and embarrassing things decades ago when I was twelve years old. Most of them I've completely forgotten about today... I certainly don't blame a D&D module for them.

EDIT: If the worst trauma of a person's late childhood/early teens was playing an imaginary fantasy game that didn't go well, they're a very fortunate person who had a charmed childhood and they should be grateful for that. Seriously, no joke.

I don't really have anything to say about John Wick, but I'll say that I've played Tomb of Horrors twice, once when I was 12, and once a couple years back, and my attitude toward it was completely different when I realized 1) it was designed to be a deathtrap, and b) we weren't using a character I'd been playing for two years and which I'd put a lot of work into.

Shameless clickbait by an attention whore. End of story.

To tell the truth, I think Wick just makes some of this stuff up. That whole story at the end of him playing a thief as everybody else gets killed has the whiff of bullshit to me. And bullshit that somehow manages to be weirdly self aggrandizing and weirdly petty at the same time. Neither of which is super surprising if you have read more than a page or two of Wick's writing.

Still can't believe they made a movie about that dude.

I rather enjoyed the Alexandrian's rebuttal:

http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/38212/roleplaying-games/thought-of-the-day-john-wick-lies-about-the-tomb-of-horrors

Summary: John Wick was either mis-remembering the adventure or was flat-out lying about it.

This post reminded me of the below article:

http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/38212/roleplaying-games/thought-of-the-day-john-wick-lies-about-the-tomb-of-horrors

Apparently the Tomb of Horrors module Wick used to pull quotes from is some "Unofficial Ultimate Revised Edition". And still, most of the adventure he quoted doesn't pan out as he explains it anyways.

About what I'd expect from someone who thinks giving a character immune to disease a disease is the height of "playing dirty".

Quote from: Manzanaro;881818To tell the truth, I think Wick just makes some of this stuff up. That whole story at the end of him playing a thief as everybody else gets killed has the whiff of bullshit to me. And bullshit that somehow manages to be weirdly self aggrandizing and weirdly petty at the same time. Neither of which is super surprising if you have read more than a page or two of Wick's writing.

It's irrelevant to his main point, so I didn't bring it up before, but what is the deal with him blaming anti-D&D sentiment on Oprah? That show didn't even debut until 1986. The part about stores being ashamed to carry D&D didn't ring true either. You could buy D&D in large chain toy and bookstores before the anti-D&D crowd even picked up steam. The idea that the store he bought it as was ashamed to carry the stuff has the feel of invented persecution to add drama.

As for the story of him playing the thief, it could be invented. The part about the PCs leaving their stuff behind doesn't ring true. First of all, if the guy that claimed to have read the module said that maybe I should drop all my stuff before getting in so my stuff would be okay if I died, I would be unlikely to climb in the mouth.

Then what about the second guy? The only reason that he would climb in is because he believed guy #1 got teleported away. Why would he climb into a one-way teleporter without his gear? It doesn't ring true to me.

Finally, if your argument is that it's the worst adventure ever, don't close with an anecdote about this time you had a lot of fun playing it.

Quote from: Necrozius;881828I rather enjoyed the Alexandrian's rebuttal:

http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/38212/roleplaying-games/thought-of-the-day-john-wick-lies-about-the-tomb-of-horrors

Summary: John Wick was either mis-remembering the adventure or was flat-out lying about it.

I mentioned the mouth description in my previous post. I should have known better to take Wick's account as accurate.

It's not Gary's fault that Wick and his gang were little jerks. I knew 11-, 12- and 13-year-olds who played it and took losing in stride.  Just as lots of kids didn't throw tantrums over getting beaten by tough arcade games.

There are only so many mistakes from which having 10th-13th level figures can save you in that scenario, compared with the Giants/Drow series -- which also quickly killed a lot of characters run by players who lacked the necessary skill.  Compared with those, it was also hugely less combat-oriented, above all a thinker's game.

It was more of a fair game than a bunch of T&T solos!

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;881702(Note: I liked many games Wick was involved in and I'm hoping the new 7th Sea surprises me pleasantly, but I'm not getting my hopes up after some of the previews.)

http://johnwickpresents.com/updates/the-worst-adventure-of-all-times/

John Wick posted this about a month ago and I just discovered it. It's so revealing and full of eye-opening quotes. It pretty much explains everything about his famously strong gaming opinions.

For instance:

This is really pathetic.

I am going to apologize to Gary cause I did not know the tournament bit.  Yeah I know he is dead, but I was still wrong.   Though John Wick was a asshole.  He needs to grow up.

Whatta maroon.

Quote from: AsenRG;881762As someone who has never seen said module, nor has any particular desire to see it, how "clearly" is "clearly" in this case? Is it on the cover, in the intro, or what:)?

Regardless, I think that the story of how some players beat ToH with sheep deserves more attention than it's getting;).

It says on Page 2

QuoteAccounts relate that it is quite unlikely that any adventurers will ever find the chamber where the demi-lich Acererak lingers, for the passages and rooms of the Tomb are fraught with terrible traps, poison gases, and magical protections. Furthermore, the demi-lich has so well hidden his lair, that even those who avoid the pitfalls will not be likely to locale their true goal. So only large and well-prepared parties of the bravest and strongest should even consider the attempt, and if they do locate the Tomb, they must be prepared to fail. Any expedition must be composed of characters of high level and varied class. They must have magical protections and weapons, and equip themselves with every sort of device possible to insure their survival.

and this

QuoteAs clever players will gather from a reading of the Legend of the Tomb, this dungeon has more tricks and traps than it has monsters to fight. THIS IS A THINKING PERSON'S MODULE. AND IF YOUR GROUP IS A HACK AND SLAY GATHERING, THEY WILL BE UNHAPPY! In the latter case, it is better to skip the whole thing than come out and tell them that there are few monsters. It is this writer's belief that brainwork is good for all players, and they will certainly benefit from playing this module, for individual levels of skill will be improved by reasoning and experience - if you regularly pose problems to be solved by brains and not brawl, your players will find this module immediately to their liking.

I say Wick needed to RTFM and that experience of it sucked is his own damn fault for not doing so. Shit I had this when I was 14 and I got the damn point of it when it came to using it in my campaign.

For me this meant I didn't use it until a few years later when it made sense that the players would uncover rumors of it during a campaign.

John Wick, like pretty much every other successful game designer outside of Shane Lacy Hensely, has VERY strong opinions on gaming..

Other completely obvious news at 11.

QuoteThe GM had characters ready for them and handed them out. He explained my unique position and gave each of them 70,000 gold pieces to buy magic items and equipment.

I said, "Wait a second. Seventy thousand?"

The GM nodded. "That's right."

"One gold piece feeds a family of four for a year and each of us has seventy thousand gold pieces?"

He nodded again. "Yup."

In what version of D&D does 1 GP feed a family of four for a year? Is that really what 1 GP is worth in 5E or did John Wick invent that?

1GP isn't going to get shit much less feed a family for a year.  John Wick is just full of shit.

Quote from: Orphan81;881878John Wick, like pretty much every other successful game designer outside of Shane Lacy Hensely, has VERY strong opinions on gaming..

Other completely obvious news at 11.

And like a couple of other successful game designers. Is a jackass. Some are worse. Much worse.

Other completely obvious news at 9.

Quote from: Snowman0147;8818831GP isn't going to get shit much less feed a family for a year.  John Wick is just full of shit.

Well, it will feed 1 person 25 days if they eat only poor meals (Which is better than squalid). A poor meal is 6cp,  Modest meals are 3sp, so hey 1 gp can feed a person for 3 days if they eat well! Bumping up to comfortable meals is 5sp, which means only 2 days...   (And yes, this does represent enough food for one day at least).

Edit: Though 70,000 Gold is enough for your character to retire to an awesome Manor house and eat well for the rest of their days...

However when a DM gives out gold for "Buying magical equipment" I don't see it as your character actually going to ye olden magical shoppe and picking up a +1 sword... I'm pretty damn sure it's suppose to just be the closest equivalent of a point buy system for your character.. to represent items they've discovered on their journeys up to X level (X being any level above 1st).

Quote from: Bren;881882In what version of D&D does 1 GP feed a family of four for a year? Is that really what 1 GP is worth in 5E or did John Wick invent that?

Not even in OA. 1 Chi'en (5gp value) will buy 1 Koku of Rice(5-6 bushels). Enough to feed 1 person for 1 year. That would come to the equivalent of 20gp to feed a family of four for a year.

In 5e living at Squalid level lifestyle, which includes some sort of dwelling, costs about 36gp for one person for a year. About 146gp for a family of four. Double that to bump up to Poor level and better living conditions.

In AD&D it came to about 55gp per year for one person. About 3times that if you lived off standard iron rations.

Quote from: Manzanaro;881818To tell the truth, I think Wick just makes some of this stuff up.

He sure does.  When I started in on that link, I didn't get past the bit where he proclaims, very patronizingly, about how Gaming Stores Didn't Exist When TOH Came Out.  Which is bullshit, because when I played TOH, it was in a dedicated gaming store.  The store owner/DM took great pants-rubbing glee in snuffing us all, which may have contributed to that being the one and only time I ever gamed in a gaming store.

But, withal, I think Warthur called it: that if you weren't a TSR fanboy, you had no way of knowing that TOH was a tournament module intended to produce TPKs.  I sure didn't, and TOH embodied to me ever after everything I felt sucked about D&D and dungeons; it was the better part of a decade before I troubled myself to play in a straight D&D campaign again, and that not for very long.

I don't particularly agree with Justin. My copy of the module is I think the original 1978 release with the pink and red cover. The text I read isn't verbatim what Wick writes, but it is close and roughly matches his point. The text I have is:

Quote6. THE FACE OF THE GREAT GREEN DEVIL: The other fork of the path leads right up to an evil-appearing devil face set in mosaic at the corridor's end. (SHOW YOUR PLAYERS GRAPHIC #6). The face has a huge O of a mouth; it is dead black. The whole area radiates evil and magic if detected for. The mouth opening is similar to a (fixed) sphere of annihilation, but it is about 3' in diameter -- plenty of room for those who wish to leap in and be completely and forever destroyed.

Justin claims that the adventure "It tells the DM specifically NOT to give helpful hints or mislead players into taking certain courses of action."

However, I think the ending sentence has a tongue-in-cheek quality to it which encourages precisely the outcome of being destroyed. (Especially given kids playing.) From what I've heard, lots of players have fallen for this. Because there is a graphic, players assume that there is something to figure out here, but there are no clues or warnings.

According to the description of the sphere of annihilation, any matter that comes into contact with the sphere is instantly sucked into the void and utterly destroyed. Basically, the only thing that can happen here is that players are annihilated with no warning. Particularly after the first character touches it and disappears, players want to figure out what happened to that character - but there is no way to find out.

--

According to my text, Justin also mis-corrects about the false entrances. The trap activated by opening the door is the roof collapsing - which does 5d10 damage with no saving throw. There is no amount of checking or description to indicate what the trap is.

The other false entrance specifically tells the DM the following -

QuoteThey will hear a rumbling from behind (or beside if some are at 30' within) them. At this instant begin slowly counting to 10 -- about 1.5 seconds per count -- and if you reach 10 before any player has reacted as noted below, the huge stone block, 10' thick, has slid shut and completely sealed off the passageway. This block cannot be moved or force back. Trapped characters can escape only by the following means: disintegrate, phasedoor, stone-flesh (assuming a sufficient quantity of the block can be changed), transmute rock-mud, wish. Players giving notice that their character is running out will be able to cover 1' of distance/1" of movement rate for their character/count. Thus, a base 6" movement rate means that the character can cover 6' of distance in the space of a single count. Mentally note such characters actions, and when the 10 count is finished, compute where each character is.

I remember pretty well exactly how this worked out.

QuoteGM: The floor shifts and you hear a rumbling behind you. 10.
Player: I turn around. What do I see?
GM: 9.
Player: My character is looking in that direction. Is there anything to see?
GM: 8
Player: Is the floor dropping away?
GM: 7
Player: Is there still a path to run back out?
GM: 6
Player: My character will react based on what he sees.
GM: 5
Player: What the fuck is happening?
GM: 4
Player: Is a voice actually counting down?
etc.

This is fucking stupid resolution, which encourages the PCs to shout out blind responses based on having no information about what their characters actually see and hear. If the floor was dropping away or the whole rear of the corridor were collapsing, then running back into that would be suicide.

It might not be the worse module of all time, but it's got a lot of dumb-ass shit in there.

What I dislike about Tomb of Horros how video game-y the module is.  The whole point of it is to learn where to how to deal with whatever puzzles by dying.  Secondly, it's designed to challenge the player.  It's the epitome of having the characters be the monopoly piece with which to navigate the game board maze.  It dies, you pick out a new one and start over.

Doesn't make it bad, just not my thing.

Quote from: Snowman0147;8818831GP isn't going to get shit much less feed a family for a year.  John Wick is just full of shit.

In 5th edition, 1 gp will buy 100 pounds of wheat - which will probably feed a family for a month or maybe a little more, but not nearly a year.

In original AD&D, there is no price for wheat, but 1 gp will buy 66 chickens - so prices are fairly comparable. (In 5th ed, 1 gp will buy 50 chickens.)

It's hyperbole, but then, 100 pounds of wheat is more than "shit".

Quote from: Snowman0147;8818831GP isn't going to get shit much less feed a family for a year.  John Wick is just full of shit.

While I bow down to few with reference to my pedantry over medieval economics, I find it hilarious how many people are debating the accuracy of Wick's economics instead of the idiocy inherent in his assertion.

"So hang on there, sport" -- one could imagine one of Wick's fellow players asking -- "you think we could go home and live like kings on 70,000 GP?  Would that be the one-shot PCs we just rolled up who didn't exist ten minutes ago and won't exist four hours from now?  Great, so our imaginary guys we haven't even named yet will live good imaginary lives we'll never experience or notice.  Okay, so they do that." (sound of character sheet crumpled up and tossed in wastebasket) "Who's up for a game of Munchkin?"

Honestly, the most pathetic thing about that blog post was Wick retelling that anecdote in the first place.

Quote from: Bren;881882In what version of D&D does 1 GP feed a family of four for a year? Is that really what 1 GP is worth in 5E or did John Wick invent that?

1 GP is roughly 10-15 days meagre subsistence for 1 person in pretty well every edition I think; 20-30 days subsistence in 1e with its 20 sp to the gp.

Well I honestly think that Tomb of Horrors appeals to certain gamers the way that Dark Souls does: if you love it I means you gain some gritty old school cred "games used to be hard and unforgiving!".

Now I admit that there IS a grim appeal of being able to gloat that you managed to survive the ToH because you defied the odds. Also because a movie version of "Ready Player One" is coming out in a few years and you want to get on the pop culture bandwagon early. Mark my words: there will be green devil face t-shirts and purses at Hot Topic. And that actually makes me happy.

Quote from: Orphan81;881886However when a DM gives out gold for "Buying magical equipment" I don't see it as your character actually going to ye olden magical shoppe and picking up a +1 sword... I'm pretty damn sure it's suppose to just be the closest equivalent of a point buy system for your character.. to represent items they've discovered on their journeys up to X level (X being any level above 1st).

Theres one or two old TSR modules that do that. They allocate players a spending allotment for initial magical equipment to represent that these higher level characters had likely accumulated some gear along the way. Easy in AD&D as the items had their sale to shop values listed. So equipping a Vorpal Sword would take 50k of your 70k, a Staff of the Maji has a sale to shop value of 75k. So if you only had 70k spending cash it was outside your means.

Quote from: Ravenswing;881918Honestly, the most pathetic thing about that blog post was Wick retelling that anecdote in the first place.

Absolutely. Reading his comments - the 52 car pileup of one pathetic statement after another - instills in me the diametric opposite of ever wanting to purchase anything this jackass has had a hand in.

Quote from: Necrozius;881930Mark my words: there will be green devil face t-shirts and purses at Hot Topic. And that actually makes me happy.

Really. Who the hell jumps inside anything drawn by Errol Otus? :D

Spoiler

(http://www.nerdsonearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/TombOfHorrorsMouth.jpg)

Quote from: AsenRG;881800Funny you mention that, but if "Deathtrap Dungeon" is the gamebook I'm thinking of? I passed it on the first go, though I was probably lucky, too. Was it some stupid baron organising a "survive my dungeon" competition;)?
(I'm not sure, because I've read in Bulgarian translation, and the title might or might not translate back to English as "Deathtrap Dungeon". Don't have it on me to check).

Yeah, it is.

As described it's the worst spectator sport ever, because the crowds get to see the adventurers enter the dungeon and leave, but don't get to see any of the actual action. It would have been greatly improved if the crowd watching and yelling insults/advice of dubious reliability at you had been a feature.

Quote from: Warthur;881937Yeah, it is.

As described it's the worst spectator sport ever, because the crowds get to see the adventurers enter the dungeon and leave, but don't get to see any of the actual action. It would have been greatly improved if the crowd watching and yelling insults/advice of dubious reliability at you had been a feature.

The minotaurs have that in Taladas for Dragonlance. Big maze spectators look down in on to watch contestants/victems navigate and die to various traps.

Quote from: Omega;881936Really. Who the hell jumps inside anything drawn by Errol Otus? :D

Spoiler

(http://www.nerdsonearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/TombOfHorrorsMouth.jpg)

One could just as easily ask "who the hell walks through an archway filled with a mystery gas/energy field drawn by Otus?", which if I remember right is the correct choice there.

The face radiates evil, but given that you're inside the lich's tomb you could very well conclude that the correct choice is to confront the evil rather than evade it. Both exits look absolutely awful and if you have missed the inscription about shunning green (or chose not to believe it because hey, why would the Lich tell the truth?) there isn't really any basis to work out which you should go through unless you're into sending farm animals/hirelings through such things in your stead, which is a playstyle that wasn't universally followed even in old school days.

I can totally see why an intelligent, observant group would still end up going into the green devil face. It isn't really a test of intelligent problem-solving so much as it's a guess-what-I'm-thinking thing.

Quote from: Warthur;881940I can totally see why an intelligent, observant group would still end up going into the green devil face. It isn't really a test of intelligent problem-solving so much as it's a guess-what-I'm-thinking thing.

Stick a pole in it to see if there are any traps, then pull what's left of the pole out and realize what's going on.

Seems like standard operating procedure to me.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;881945Stick a pole in it to see if there are any traps, then pull what's left of the pole out and realize what's going on.

Seems like standard operating procedure to me.

That's what I was about to ask. Testing out a (kind of sinister) passage like that before crawling into it seems pretty straight forwards particularly as you know the place is full of traps. I was thinking that maybe Sphere's Annihilation only activate once the whole object is inside them or something like that.


Though I'd expect some teeth of some sort to bisect someone crawling through or even for the face to animal, chew and swallow (or spit out. Ew.) the victim.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;881945Stick a pole in it to see if there are any traps, then pull what's left of the pole out and realize what's going on.

Seems like standard operating procedure to me.

A good point, though once such a thing becomes standard operating procedure I suspect you'd start seeing traps designed to fuck you over if you poke it with a pole. After all, Hawk & Moor talked about how the various wall/ceiling/floor monsters were developed in response to a player developing an SOP of looking at all the walls, floor and ceiling when entering a room.

Quote from: Warthur;881949After all, Hawk & Moor talked about how the various wall/ceiling/floor monsters were developed in response to a player developing an SOP of looking at all the walls, floor and ceiling when entering a room.

GMs and game designers (including VG designers) do this sometimes, and I think it's a mistake. (See Left4Dead 2.)

IMHO, making the judicious approach be the WORST one discourages problem-solving skills, which was supposed to be point of non "hack/slay" playstyles, right?

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;881956GMs and game designers (including VG designers) do this sometimes, and I think it's a mistake. (See Left4Dead 2.)

IMHO, making the judicious approach be the WORST one discourages problem-solving skills, which was supposed to be point of non "hack/slay" playstyles, right?

It can be useful to discourage over-use. But personally Id rather just say "Uh, guys, theres no need to tap every damn cobblestone in every damn corner." and point out that the PCs do that stuff anyhow. Why they move so slow. I sometimes use a standard "looks clear." as the indicator that yes, it is clear, and "you feel something different here." and variations thereof for when there might be something of note.

I like 5e's passive+active perception system.

Quote from: Orphan81;881878John Wick, like pretty much every other successful game designer outside of Shane Lacy Hensely, has VERY strong opinions on gaming..

Other completely obvious news at 11.

I've known a number of professional game designers over the years, and most of them pointedly avoid being loud, opinionated jackasses. The gaming world is their workplace. It's also a very small place. Anyone that makes a living a game design will likely rely on freelancing at some point as well. Every enemy you make is one person who may think twice about hiring you.

Then there is the PR angle. Designers that like to get into Internet brawls end up with people that won't buy their games simply because they don't like them.

I can see why it looks like most designers have strong opinions. It's because those designers are the ones with a big presence on forums. Other designers are pretty cautious on general forums like this or over at rpg.net. They drop in to promote their games and answer questions, and that is about it. Or, if they do have a solid presence, like Brendan, they are one of the most polite people on the site.

I think another element is that game designers actually design games. Rather than spend hours bitching about a game they hate like I do, they simply spend that time making games that do what they want.

Quote from: Ravenswing;881918Honestly, the most pathetic thing about that blog post was Wick retelling that anecdote in the first place.

It's telling that both the Best and Worst Adventure blog posts end with an anecdote about Wick acting as a player trying to undermine the GM and teach them a lesson. Many of the worst sessions of my teenage years came from the times I decided I was going to teach the group a lesson. Wick seems to have never grown out of that.

The part where he tries to convince the group to take their gold and live happily also underlines a point. He doesn't make an in-character decision to do that himself. When the rest of group, that came to play D&D, rightly rejects his idea, Wick doesn't have his character do it. It was just an out-of-character angle to ruin the session. If there was any other angle to it, he would have had his character actually do that as opposed to just suggest it.

Of course, as others have mentioned, the 70,000 gold just represents the equipment they have picked up over the years, not a big bag of gold that actually exists.

Quote from: Baulderstone;881977I've known a number of professional game designers over the years, and most of them pointedly avoid being loud, opinionated jackasses. The gaming world is their workplace. It's also a very small place. Anyone that makes a living a game design will likely rely on freelancing at some point as well. Every enemy you make is one person who may think twice about hiring you.

Then there is the PR angle. Designers that like to get into Internet brawls end up with people that won't buy their games simply because they don't like them.

I can see why it looks like most designers have strong opinions. It's because those designers are the ones with a big presence on forums. Other designers are pretty cautious on general forums like this or over at rpg.net. They drop in to promote their games and answer questions, and that is about it. Or, if they do have a solid presence, like Brendan, they are one of the most polite people on the site.

I think another element is that game designers actually design games. Rather than spend hours bitching about a game they hate like I do, they simply spend that time making games that do what they want.



It's telling that both the Best and Worst Adventure blog posts end with an anecdote about Wick acting as a player trying to undermine the GM and teach them a lesson. Many of the worst sessions of my teenage years came from the times I decided I was going to teach the group a lesson. Wick seems to have never grown out of that.

The part where he tries to convince the group to take their gold and live happily also underlines a point. He doesn't make an in-character decision to do that himself. When the rest of group, that came to play D&D, rightly rejects his idea, Wick doesn't have his character do it. It was just an out-of-character angle to ruin the session. If there was any other angle to it, he would have had his character actually do that as opposed to just suggest it.

Of course, as others have mentioned, the 70,000 gold just represents the equipment they have picked up over the years, not a big bag of gold that actually exists.

Thing is, John Wick doesn't have a big forum presence. He doesn't post much on any forum. Also, despite being loud and obnoxious, his Kickstarter is most likely going to crack a million. Sometimes you can be an opinionated asshole and get away with it if your stuff is high quality.

Quote from: jhkim;881909Because there is a graphic, players assume that there is something to figure out here, but there are no clues or warnings.

I would think that the expectation is that seasoned adventurers will be smart enough to first try to (a) detect evil, (b) detect magic, or (and this is the cheapest, easiest, and most likely action)(c) stick one end of a 10' pole or other item into the demon mouth before jumping head first inside. When only 5' of pole comes back out, the seasoned adventurer will then decline to be the first person to jump inside just to see what happens next.

EDIT: And I see now that others also thought testing the mouth with a 10' pole (which is listed on the friggin equipment list for Crom's sake) would be SOP for experienced adventurers.

It's true that the module doesn't come with a big sign saying, "Beware of Spheres of Annihilation." But it is supposed to be a dungeon full of tricky traps.

I wouldn't expect in a WW2 game of Allied Infantry breaching the Siegfried Line, that the German engineers have erected westward facing signs in front of every minefield like this...

Spoiler

(http://previews.123rf.com/images/hansenn/hansenn1206/hansenn120600005/13930111-wooden-warning-shield-beware-of-mines-in-german-language-achtung-minen--Stock-Photo.jpg)

Quote from: Ravenswing;881918While I bow down to few with reference to my pedantry over medieval economics, I find it hilarious how many people are debating the accuracy of Wick's economics instead of the idiocy inherent in his assertion.

Not a debate, it was a simple question. I haven't played or read 5E so rather than assume that John Wick was making up a wildly inflated value for a GP I asked.

Given the other things he pulled out of his ass regarding the non-existence of game stores and that Oprah rather than Pat Pullings or Jack Chick was responsible for the wave anti-D&D hysteria, I wasn't surprised that he made up a wildly inflated price to reinforce his story. Actually, I suspect the only truth to the whole post is that 12-year old John Wick was an asshole who alienated his 'friends.'

But reading his silly fantasy saved me $40. So I call us even.

Quote from: Warthur;881940I can totally see why an intelligent, observant group would still end up going into the green devil face. It isn't really a test of intelligent problem-solving so much as it's a guess-what-I'm-thinking thing.

Yes!  God, Yes.  It's like one of those terrible, old computer point and click adventures where you have to check everything, but except only ONE choice won't kill you.

Quote from: Orphan81;881982Thing is, John Wick doesn't have a big forum presence. He doesn't post much on any forum. Also, despite being loud and obnoxious, his Kickstarter is most likely going to crack a million. Sometimes you can be an opinionated asshole and get away with it if your stuff is high quality.

Sure, Wick doesn't post much on forums anymore, but it's mainly because he wore out his welcome on them years ago. As noted, he even had to turn the comments off on his own blog post. He sure as Hell doesn't want to venture into venues he can't control.

I agree that you can still be antagonistic and succeed, but it can make your life a lot harder as well. Look at Skarka. He has done some quality work over the years, but he also developed a terrible reputation over his behavior. When he ran into trouble with his Kickstarter, people were rubbing their hands together with glee. Using your success as insulation against your behavior only works as long as you can keep that string of success going.

Personally, I hope 7th Sea is a big success. He certainly seems to have addressed its biggest flaws, and I would hate to see another disappointing high-profile Kickstarter.

Quote from: Bren;881991Given the other things he pulled out of his ass regarding the non-existence of game stores and that Oprah rather than Pat Pullings or Jack Chick was responsible for the wave anti-D&D hysteria, I wasn't surprised that he made up a wildly inflated price to reinforce his story. Actually, I suspect the only truth to the whole post is that 12-year old John Wick was an asshole who alienated his 'friends.'

For your friends to beat you up and then completely cut you out of their lives, you really have to wonder how thin the thread he was hanging by was already.

Then again, given all the factual errors clearly on display, it's possible he made up the part about his friend punching him, then none of his friends talking to him for a year. It could just be an attempt to earn pity.

He says that his parent's approached the parent of the boy that hit him, then they all got together and Wick apologized. I guess that might have happened, but saying it happened a year later? The parents talking to each other seems like something that would have happened at some point over the next week. Why would they not care about it for a full year, then suddenly go into action? It just feels off to me.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882005For your friends to beat you up and then completely cut you out of their lives, you really have to wonder how thin the thread he was hanging by was already.

Then again, given all the factual errors clearly on display, it's possible he made up the part about his friend punching him, then none of his friends talking to him for a year. It could just be an attempt to earn pity.

He says that his parent's approached the parent of the boy that hit him, then they all got together and Wick apologized. I guess that might have happened, but saying it happened a year later? The parents talking to each other seems like something that would have happened at some point over the next week. Why would they not care about it for a full year, then suddenly go into action? It just feels off to me.

I suspect that a lifetime of trying to wring overwrought drama out of imaginary situations may have left Wick in a state where he does so reflexively even in relating personal anecdotes and to an audience who he should know can see through all of his plot holes.

I've seen the type plenty. He doesn't even care if he portrays himself as a socially unaware idiot if it will add more to his story.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882005It just feels off to me.

The cumulative list of things that sounded off in his story makes me doubt the veracity of almost all of it. Though I suspect it is true that 12-year old John Wick was a dick to his friends. And that he got in disagreements with his friends or even lost "friends" because he was a dick. The punching...might be true, though I tend to doubt it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if more than a few of his acquaintances have wanted to punch him in the nose though.

Quote from: Orphan81;881878John Wick, like pretty much every other successful game designer outside of Shane Lacy Hensely, has VERY strong opinions on gaming..

Other completely obvious news at 11.

Is Shane known for being comparatively chill then?

Quote from: Baulderstone;881977It's telling that both the Best and Worst Adventure blog posts end with an anecdote about Wick acting as a player trying to undermine the GM and teach them a lesson. Many of the worst sessions of my teenage years came from the times I decided I was going to teach the group a lesson. Wick seems to have never grown out of that.

It explains a lot about some of Wick's designs if that's how he approaches games and how he expects other people to approach them.

Quote from: Warthur;882030It explains a lot about some of Wick's designs if that's how he approaches games and how he expects other people to approach them.

It's been years since I read it, but I remember the first edition of Legend of the Five Rings spending a lot of time explaining things PCs weren't supposed to do in its setting, but very little time explaining what they were supposed to do.

Quote from: Warthur;882029Is Shane known for being comparatively chill then?

Shane is seriously the nicest guy in the biz. He emailed me personally back when I turned 18 my senior year of Highschool after having emailed him to profess my love of Deadlands..

On Facebook he's one of the classiest guys out there... He's friends with about every other game designer on the planet because nobody can say anything bad about him. He doesn't begrudge other people's success, he doesn't talk down to people who play games differently than he does...

He's extremly humble for all the success he's had in life, and is one of the few people who can completely resist talking about religion and politics...

Wick's always been a piehole, going back to the AEG days when he'd come into All-Star Games in Diamond Bar to get worshipped by the high schoolers working the counter.  If he wasn't giving away 39 PDFs of the original game, the KS wouldn't be a 10th what it is.  Gotta hand it to him to leverage the fuck out of the license though.

Quote from: Warthur;881949A good point, though once such a thing becomes standard operating procedure I suspect you'd start seeing traps designed to fuck you over if you poke it with a pole.

It was already SOP; that's the point, for crying out loud.  The no-brainers get weeded out early.  If you had actually played up to 'name' level, you sure ought to have learned such elementary things.  (If you hadn't, then a simple fight could also wipe you out while you were trying to tell your high-level elbow from your arse.)

Quote from: jhkim;881909Justin claims that the adventure "It tells the DM specifically NOT to give helpful hints or mislead players into taking certain courses of action."

However, I think the ending sentence has a tongue-in-cheek quality to it which encourages precisely the outcome of being destroyed. (Especially given kids playing.) From what I've heard, lots of players have fallen for this. Because there is a graphic, players assume that there is something to figure out here, but there are no clues or warnings.

You see a gigantic demon face and don't "Detect Evil?"

You detect evil and don't toss an iron spike at it and watch it disappear?

You don't "Locate Object" on the iron spike to see where it is?

You're an idiot.

If a 14 year old kid can figure that out first time, anybody can.

Wick reminds me of the dolt from California who played that module at Origins and in his write up said "Well, APPARENTLY Gygax thinks empty rooms are FUN!"

All my ears hear is waah, waah, waah.

Quote from: Ravenswing;881902But, withal, I think Warthur called it: that if you weren't a TSR fanboy, you had no way of knowing that TOH was a tournament module intended to produce TPKs.  

Unless, you know, you read the text in the module.  The part where it says that it's a tournament module.  And the part where it says it's a thinking module, not for hack and slay, and if you're not willing to use your brains to figure the module out you're gonna have a bad time.

All that is in the module text.  That's not required of a "TSR fanboy", that's basic reading skills.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;882066that's not required of a "tsr fanboy", that's basic reading skills.

Apparently Gygax thinks reading is FUN!

Quote from: Orphan81;881982Thing is, John Wick doesn't have a big forum presence. He doesn't post much on any forum. Also, despite being loud and obnoxious, his Kickstarter is most likely going to crack a million. Sometimes you can be an opinionated asshole and get away with it if your stuff is high quality.

Stefan Porkony and Dwarven Forge bust a million on every KS they do.

Reaper's Bones kickstarters are down as some of the most successful KS's of all time.

Wick pulling a mio. in impresses me not in the least.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;882066All that is in the module text.  That's not required of a "TSR fanboy", that's basic reading skills.

But, but ... that assumes one is literate enough to have read the DMG, with its advice that a DM is supposed to read, digest (and perhaps annotate and even revise) a module rather than being the blind leading the blind!

I've never liked the idea of D&D tournaments, frankly.  I've always found the notion inane.  (This is not the same as a convention game.  Tournaments are specifically to find a WINNER.)  But D&D players went to GenCon and saw the historical miniatures tournaments and their prizes, and they wanted prizes too.

SO how the hell do you figure out who is the "best" D&D player in four hours?

The easy way is "the last one to die."

This explains much about tournament modules.

Quote from: Doughdee222;881759Well, this is why 12 year olds shouldn't GM

Wait, WHAT?!

The elimination tournament dungeon is just another kind of game you can play with the D&D rules set.

You can do the improvised wilderness game using the Wilderness Survival board.

You can do the kinds of things you might have used Chainmail for (even more of that with Swords & Spells or Battlesystem, maybe War Machine for engagements you don't want to set up in such detail).

You can run a player-vs.-player competition similar to Wiz-War (although I think that card/board game is better for its purpose).

Quote from: Orphan81;881982Thing is, John Wick doesn't have a big forum presence. He doesn't post much on any forum. Also, despite being loud and obnoxious, his Kickstarter is most likely going to crack a million. Sometimes you can be an opinionated asshole and get away with it if your stuff is high quality.

This is more true than should be. Its sometimes appalling to see people willfully throw money at what are sometimes crooks, liars or worse. Moreso with the ones that back a product aware the designer or publisher is scum or robbing someone.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;881992Yes!  God, Yes.  It's like one of those terrible, old computer point and click adventures where you have to check everything, but except only ONE choice won't kill you.

Fair enough but its a role playing game. There are more ways to check something out than jumping in head first and seeing what happens. In the case of the Devil mouth most of them are pretty intuitive. To the point of being thins many groups would do anyway. And they won't get you killed.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882072SO how the hell do you figure out who is the "best" D&D player in four hours?

The easy way is "the last one to die."

This explains much about tournament modules.

And/Or scored the most points. Hated that.

Quote from: Phillip;882077You can run a player-vs.-player competition similar to Wiz-War (although I think that card/board game is better for its purpose).

See my comments elsewhere on the double blind event I attended that ended with me as dead, then an otter, then last man, er otter, standing of the group, then dead again.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;882066Unless, you know, you read the text in the module.  The part where it says that it's a tournament module.  And the part where it says it's a thinking module, not for hack and slay, and if you're not willing to use your brains to figure the module out you're gonna have a bad time.

Thinking module != "deathtrap".

And declaring yourself a tournament module is one thing, explaining what in the blue fuck that actually means is another. A description of how the tournament in question was constructed and how the design of the module interfaced was badly needed and not presented.

Quote from: Nexus;882082There are more ways to check something out than jumping in head first and seeing what happens.

Are there? Are there really? I guess maybe if all your players are freaking geniuses or learned at the feet of Ernie Gygax or something. No ordinary person could possibly think of doing anything other than leaping head first into a demon mouth to see what happens. A demon mouth in a trap-filled dungeon. Of evil. :rolleyes:

If Wick's point was, "Golly I don't think spheres of annihilation are fun" I'd agree. Never found that aspect of Gygaxian dungeons to be much fun. So as a DM I didn't put shit like that in my dungeon. But acting like there was absolutely no way anyone might have known better than to leap headfirst into the demon's mouth is stupid.

Quote from: Phillip;882055It was already SOP; that's the point, for crying out loud.  The no-brainers get weeded out early.  If you had actually played up to 'name' level, you sure ought to have learned such elementary things.  (If you hadn't, then a simple fight could also wipe you out while you were trying to tell your high-level elbow from your arse.)

But it was run as a "tournament module" with, so far as I can make out, no qualifications required to play, and had ample first-timers playing in the actual tournament.

The module doesn't give any guidance for running it with less experienced players except for suggesting that they should be given a couple extra magic items. That isn't really enough to give them the sort of experience which would make them come up with the sort of SOP that has been outlined (like the "toss an iron spike in and cast Locate Object" gambit).

Either the published module should have specifically said "You really shouldn't let people who haven't actually played D&D to high levels play this", or it should have relied less on assuming highly-experienced players. Running a tournament that assumes that people have a reasonable level of D&D experience makes sense because the point is to designate a winner, but that comes back to the point that the module doesn't provide any explanation of how tournament play using the Tomb was intended to work.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882072I've never liked the idea of D&D tournaments, frankly.  I've always found the notion inane.  (This is not the same as a convention game.  Tournaments are specifically to find a WINNER.)  But D&D players went to GenCon and saw the historical miniatures tournaments and their prizes, and they wanted prizes too.

SO how the hell do you figure out who is the "best" D&D player in four hours?

The easy way is "the last one to die."

This explains much about tournament modules.

And, I suppose, the last to die is often the guy who stands back and does as little as possible all session.

Quote from: Nexus;882082Fair enough but its a role playing game. There are more ways to check something out than jumping in head first and seeing what happens. In the case of the Devil mouth most of them are pretty intuitive. To the point of being thins many groups would do anyway. And they won't get you killed.

Okay, I've been picking at Wick's account a lot already, but your comment sets off another alarm bell in my head. I've heard the story of the group that all climbed one-by-one before. It's one of those humorous accounts like the Head of Vecna. Yet, I was part of a large gaming community in the early '80s, when people were playing a lot of the now classic modules.

Of all the ways that people died in the Tomb of Horrors, I never heard of an actual group that TPKd by climbing into the mouth. Those stories always happened to some other group somewhere else. It was like a D&D urban legend. Yet both times Wick ran/played, of all the ways the group could have died, that exact same urban legend played out. It just sets off my BS detector.

I'm just going by the gaming community I was part of back then. Have other people here found that to be a common way that whole groups died?

Quote from: Baulderstone;882093Of all the ways that people died in the Tomb of Horrors, I never heard of an actual group that TPKd by climbing into the mouth. Those stories always happened to some other group somewhere else. It was like a D&D urban legend. Yet both times Wick ran/played, of all the ways the group could have died, that exact same urban legend played out. It just sets off my BS detector.

I'm just going by the gaming community I was part of back then. Have other people here found that to be a common way that whole groups died?

I could buy it if there wasn't an alternate exit which, whilst foreboding, at least isn't a freaking devil mouth right next to Big Green, but yeah, it does seem odd.

I can buy individuals going in because they end up second-guessing themselves. ("Obviously the lich would plant a fake set of clues to guide people away from the real treasure, so we should embrace green as often as possible!"/"Obviously the lich would put an evil aura on the real exit to convince people to go through the trapped exit!") I can buy people rushing in as a group because they decided to follow the leader and didn't wait around. I don't buy the stories where people go through one by one with long periods of waiting in between. You'd think SOMEONE would think to check the other exit under such circumstances.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882093Have other people here found that to be a common way that whole groups died?

No.

It's a freakin' DEMON HEAD.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882093I'm just going by the gaming community I was part of back then. Have other people here found that to be a common way that whole groups died?

No.

But then I've never played with an entire party of morons who would jump in a demon mouth. I have played a few times long ago, with one guy who would do dumb shit like that for giggles or something. We thought it was stupid at the time and we tried not to be in the same room when his PC started pressing buttons and levers and such. People who did harebrained stuff like that tended to be unmercifully mocked for their behavior...and yet no one threw a punch at anyone. :hmm:

The mockery never did stop that guy. He seemed to get some sort of fun out of his wacky risk taking hi-jinx.

Yes, it's a freakin' DEMON HEAD... which in the minds of some would make it the perfect disguise for the real exit. Besides, the original illustration looks far too friendly to be a demon.

Look, I'm not arguing that the Tomb is absolutely 100% unfair, just that there's good reasons why someone might think the demon head is a good idea based on the information presented to them. It isn't automatically a stupid idea. Jumping through without testing it out a little is the bad move, but that's a different story.

(Incidentally, how is it supposed to work? Does it annihilate you once you are entirely inside, or does it annihilate stuff as soon as that stuff passes the event horizon? Because in the latter case unless someone is going in head-first I would tend to give them a saving throw to realise that their leg or other extremity is gone and pull back suddenly, and if someone was going in head first the rest of their group would immediately know something was wrong because the back portion of their body would drop to the ground stone dead.)

Quote from: Warthur;882092Either the published module should have specifically said "You really shouldn't let people who haven't actually played D&D to high levels play this", or it should have relied less on assuming highly-experienced players. Running a tournament that assumes that people have a reasonable level of D&D experience makes sense because the point is to designate a winner, but that comes back to the point that the module doesn't provide any explanation of how tournament play using the Tomb was intended to work.

Nonsense.  The entire "Legends and Rumors" section repeats over and over again how this high-level evil undead built an elaborate deathtrap so he could gloat over adventurers' deaths.

If the players don't believe this, that's their problem.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882104Nonsense.  The entire "Legends and Rumors" section repeats over and over again how this high-level evil undead built an elaborate deathtrap so he could gloat over adventurers' deaths.

If the players don't believe this, that's their problem.

Heh, I'd forgot that.

On one hand, in a lot of groups there was this general agreement (unspoken or explicit) that if the DM had paid money to buy a module to run this evening, you go on the gosh-darn adventure; in an awful lot of groups if your PC decided "actually, we should give this whole thing a pass" that'd be seen as an utter douche move.

Maybe, in retrospect, the module should have had a line along the lines of saying "some PCs might be put off by the rumours in question, for good reason, so let their players play one of the pregens instead".

On the other hand, there's only so much a publisher can do in this regard, and the blame would be just as much on the DM in a case where they said "Well, you have to take your PC to the dungeon, otherwise you don't get to play this evening".

If you're going to run a campaign where the PCs are expected to accept the adventure on offer that evening - as lots of people do - it's kind of dickish to make the mandatory adventure a hyper-fatal one. On the other hand, if you are running a sandbox campaign with a range of adventure opportunities available of varying difficulties, including something absolutely killer on the menu is fair enough. I've never known a 12 year old to run such an open sandbox campaign, though - at that age, in my experience, kids tend to follow the "this is this evening's adventure, there is no alternative" model.

Quote from: Warthur;882105Heh, I'd forgot that.

On one hand, in a lot of groups there was this general agreement (unspoken or explicit) that if the DM had paid money to buy a module to run this evening, you go on the gosh-darn adventure; in an awful lot of groups if your PC decided "actually, we should give this whole thing a pass" that'd be seen as an utter douche move.

In my area, groups hadn't really congealed yet. We had a big D&D club at school. People would show up with characters and there would be a few people running adventures, either bought modules or homebrew. You just sort of jumped in wherever. It wasn't until after a few years that my best friends an I retreated to our own private group that met at my house and ran actual, coherent campaigns.

Not having ever run a module, I cannot answer to that.

But I know that both Ernie and Rob Kuntz teleported out at some point.  Ernie told me two years ago he never actually made it to the end.  Rob said that as the demi lich started to materialized, he grabbed as much treasure as he could and also teleported out.

Of course this was when "teleport" transported one person, so the rest of your party would be well and truly fucked.

I don't really LIKE Tomb of Horrors, you understand; I just get tired of some people's constant whining about it, instead of a simple "Well, that's not to my taste."

Quote from: Warthur;882092Either the published module should have specifically said "You really shouldn't let people who haven't actually played D&D to high levels play this", or it should have relied less on assuming highly-experienced players. Running a tournament that assumes that people have a reasonable level of D&D experience makes sense because the point is to designate a winner, but that comes back to the point that the module doesn't provide any explanation of how tournament play using the Tomb was intended to work.

If you need that much hand-holding to figure it out, then you should at least be bright enough to recognize that you are as a DM incompetent to run a scenario full of stuff you're clueless about.  If you're not even competent to recognize your own incompetence, then you're not ready to be a DM.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882072I've never liked the idea of D&D tournaments, frankly.  I've always found the notion inane.  (This is not the same as a convention game.  Tournaments are specifically to find a WINNER.)  But D&D players went to GenCon and saw the historical miniatures tournaments and their prizes, and they wanted prizes too.

SO how the hell do you figure out who is the "best" D&D player in four hours?

The easy way is "the last one to die."

This explains much about tournament modules.

I generally agree. I would point out that a kid in 1978 who bought the module may well not know that this is what "tournament module" means.

I don't claim that there is no way to get through the module. I am saying that there is a bunch of stupid shit in there - particularly like the countdown I cited, or a bunch of others. Some places where you have to open a door to get through, and some places where opening the door is a complete mistake.

The devil mouth is annoying because (1) there is nothing to figure out - the only thing to do is ignore it and walk away; (2) when characters disappear, there is no way to know what happened to them.

Quote from: Bren;881988I would think that the expectation is that seasoned adventurers will be smart enough to first try to (a) detect evil, (b) detect magic, or (and this is the cheapest, easiest, and most likely action)(c) stick one end of a 10' pole or other item into the demon mouth before jumping head first inside. When only 5' of pole comes back out, the seasoned adventurer will then decline to be the first person to jump inside just to see what happens next.

That's not how a sphere of annihilation works. If it was, then an adventurer who touched the mouth would at most lose the end of a finger when they tried to touch it and got an ouchie. The actual effect is that any matter that touches the sphere is sucked in and destroyed. In my experience, some interpretations read this as everything touching it (i.e. pole and person) are sucked in at once; by other interpretations, only the pole would be sucked in.

Note that the mouth itself doesn't detect as evil or magic - the whole area does.

I'd say it's incautious for someone to touch the mouth, but given a bunch of curious 12-year-olds, someone is likely to try it. The problem then is that the person disappears. That puts the party in a dilemma. How do they find out what happened to the character? There is no way, and the party just has to give up and move on rather than trying to find a way to get them back.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882056You see a gigantic demon face and don't "Detect Evil?"

You detect evil and don't toss an iron spike at it and watch it disappear?

You don't "Locate Object" on the iron spike to see where it is?

You're an idiot.

If a 14 year old kid can figure that out first time, anybody can.

Dude. Everyone makes fucking mistakes - particularly when you're 12 years old and have no clues about it. Even if you happen to have a cleric with Locate Object memorized, that just means that the object isn't within 200 feet or so. There is no confirmation that it has been destroyed rather than teleported.

If you're sitting around yelling at 12-year-olds about how they're idiots, then I'd say that you're an idiot more than they are.

Quote from: jhkim;882124If you're sitting around yelling at 12-year-olds about how they're idiots, then I'd say that you're an idiot more than they are.

I'll bet he isn't. In any case, their antisocial behavior is their own fault, perhaps in part their parents'; but it's not Mr. Gygax's fault.

Quote from: jhkim;882124Dude. Everyone makes fucking mistakes - particularly when you're 12 years old and have no clues about it.

Yes. Exactly. Everyone makes mistakes. That means the ONLY intelligent thing to do is to take it for granted that mistakes will be made. Therefore, wise actions are not those that limit exposure to mistakes themselves--indeed, minor mistakes can provide valuable information; rather wise actions are those that limit exposure to the effects of mistakes. The distinction is substantial.

This is all regardless of situation and thus all regardless of what clues may or may not be present. Doing something--anything--that cannot be undone is never a good choice for the first thing to try. A lack of clues is never an excuse.

Quote from: jhkim;882124That's not how a sphere of annihilation works. If it was, then an adventurer who touched the mouth would at most lose the end of a finger when they tried to touch it and got an ouchie. The actual effect is that any matter that touches the sphere is sucked in and destroyed. In my experience, some interpretations read this as everything touching it (i.e. pole and person) are sucked in at once; by other interpretations, only the pole would be sucked in.

Well if anything touching it is sucked in, what keeps the demon mouth and statue in place?

And in either case, the players should have some clue that there is a problem.

   "Hey that demon mouth sucked the 10' pole out of my hand into the mouth and it disappeared."
or

   "Hey that demon mouth sucked in the 10' pole and Ralph and they both disappeared."

The next reasonable step when inside a trap filled dungeon is not to leap into the mouth after the pole or after the pole and Ralph.

QuoteNote that the mouth itself doesn't detect as evil or magic - the whole area does.

Which should be a vague clue that caution in that area might be wise and that leaping headfirst into a demon's mouth might not be the best way to get out of the dungeon alive.

QuoteI'd say it's incautious for someone to touch the mouth, but given a bunch of curious 12-year-olds, someone is likely to try it. The problem then is that the person disappears. That puts the party in a dilemma. How do they find out what happened to the character? There is no way, and the party just has to give up and move on rather than trying to find a way to get them back.

There are one or two spells in D&D that might give one a clue as to the fate of their missing comrade. Trying one of those before leaping headfirst into the demon's mouth after Ralph would seem minimally prudent.

But if 12-year old cannot restrain their curiosity to leap first, then they learn a lesson about the dangers of a trap filled, deadly dungeon. Maybe.

I'm not saying the Tomb of Horrors is my cup of tea. Far the contrary, but I really can't imagine ever thinking that leaping into a demon's mouth is on the list of the first twenty things to try to get out of a deadly, trap filled dungeon alive. So I'm a bit skeptical that it twice went down the way Wick says it went down both because it seems improbable, but also because everything else in Wick's anecdote is also improbable.

But in any case, Gary Gygax didn't make 12-year old John Wick laugh in his friends' faces after running the module that killed all their PCs. The life lesson to be learned from that experience is not "Gary Gygax was a mean old man." It was, "Laughing at other people's unhappiness, unhappiness that you helped cause is a dick move that may make people think 'Hey that John, he's not really my friend. He's a dick!"'

Quote from: thedungeondelver;882066Unless, you know, you read the text in the module.  The part where it says that it's a tournament module.  And the part where it says it's a thinking module, not for hack and slay, and if you're not willing to use your brains to figure the module out you're gonna have a bad time.

All that is in the module text.  That's not required of a "TSR fanboy", that's basic reading skills.

Terrific.  Now tell me the part where I, as a player, am supposed to read through the module before the DM runs it.

But let's leave that aside, and acknowledge Warthur's further comment and go on.  TOH a "thinking" module?  Please.  It's full of those "step on the wrong square/touch the wrong lever/fail to go through the exhausting iron spike etc routine at every step/die horribly" bits.  The only thinking that will help you is to reason out that the various rumors and warnings may well be on target, and never enter at all.

Quote from: Bren;882148Well if anything touching it is sucked in, what keeps the demon mouth and statue in place?

If I recall my old D&D lore, Spheres of Annihilation are weightless. If one is hovering inside the mouth, not touching the sides, it isn't going to move unless someone comes and moves it around using magic.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;882068Stefan Porkony and Dwarven Forge bust a million on every KS they do.

Reaper's Bones kickstarters are down as some of the most successful KS's of all time.

Wick pulling a mio. in impresses me not in the least.

There's a big difference between pulling down a million+ for miniatures which are already an expensive game investment... and pulling in a million for an actual RPG.

Like it or not, 7th Sea currently sits as the most successful Tabletop RPG  Kickstarter of all time right now.

Edit: You can just compare the number of supporters between them too. Dwarven Forge city builder has 2k+ supporters, the vast majority of which pledged 165$+

By contrast, 7th sea still has 14 days to go and has 7K+ supporters pledging at 40-60 dollars+

You're trying to compare apples to oranges here.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882154If I recall my old D&D lore, Spheres of Annihilation are weightless. If one is hovering inside the mouth, not touching the sides, it isn't going to move unless someone comes and moves it around using magic.

Ah. Thanks.

Is it invisible or can they see some sort of sphere floating inside the mouth?

I just misread the title as "John Wick rages with his Tool of Horrors", which is frankly frickin' hilarious.

Hearing about Wick's childhood explains a lot, including why he doesn't have the courage to just publish something and sell it, instead doing a Kickstarter. "Tell me you love me and I'll do anything!"

What is this thing about Americans and high school. It was decades ago, build a bridge and get over it.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882167What is this thing about Americans and high school. It was decades ago, build a bridge and get over it.

1) Tell you what, I won't assume that Fosters really is Australian for beer if you don't assume everyone in the States is hung up on high school.

2) FYI: a 12 year old would either be in the last year of elementary or primary school or the first year of middle school, not high school.

Quote from: Ravenswing;882151Terrific.  Now tell me the part where I, as a player, am supposed to read through the module before the DM runs it.

But let's leave that aside, and acknowledge Warthur's further comment and go on.  TOH a "thinking" module?  Please.  It's full of those "step on the wrong square/touch the wrong lever/fail to go through the exhausting iron spike etc routine at every step/die horribly" bits.  The only thinking that will help you is to reason out that the various rumors and warnings may well be on target, and never enter at all.

I assume the thinking part means treating every single square foot as if it's out to kill you, prodding it with ten foot poles, throwing around sand, pouring water onto the ground and looking for leaks that might indicate trap doors, etc.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882056You see a gigantic demon face and don't "Detect Evil?"

You detect evil and don't toss an iron spike at it and watch it disappear?

You don't "Locate Object" on the iron spike to see where it is?

You're an idiot.

If a 14 year old kid can figure that out first time, anybody can.

Wick reminds me of the dolt from California who played that module at Origins and in his write up said "Well, APPARENTLY Gygax thinks empty rooms are FUN!"

All my ears hear is waah, waah, waah.

Apparently, using "detect" spells and other divination is one of those things shitty players ignore, like charisma. From what I remember (I was also 12 when I played it) we were told about the crazy wizard building his Fortress of Fuck You and between that and watching Raiders of the Lost Ark, we were on our toes, suspected the worst and played accordingly. We lost more PCs when an NPC party tried to rob us on the way back than we did from the Tomb itself.

By the way, anyone whose PC stuck his head in the idol's mouth is a retard, pure and simple. Surely my group weren't the only kids back then who watched teen slasher movies for more than just the tits and ass in the obligatory shower/skinny-dipping scenes, right? What happens when you stick your head out of your tent, on in a window, or up a chimney?

A more honest title for that article would be Why John Wick Is The Shittiest Gamer Ever.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882154If I recall my old D&D lore, Spheres of Annihilation are weightless. If one is hovering inside the mouth, not touching the sides, it isn't going to move unless someone comes and moves it around using magic.

In AD&D they are a literal hole in reality and stationary. Magic users could will them to move. But they might start beelining for the nearest magic user if control was lost.

Quote from: Bren;8821701) Tell you what, I won't assume that Fosters really is Australian for beer if you don't assume everyone in the States is hung up on high school.

Other thing about Americans: no sense of humour about themselves. It's all terribly serious.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882192Other thing about Americans: no sense of humour about themselves. It's all terribly serious.

That comes from not living in a country where "everything is poisonous" wasnt good enough so "lets import poison toads." was the logical solution... :eek:

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882167What is this thing about Americans and high school. It was decades ago, build a bridge and get over it.

I wish.  I honestly wish.  But in an world where people care about stupid things the pretty people in magazines do, or who makes the most money, or what movie star is in what movie, instead of caring about the performance and all the other things that deal with so called celebrities...

NO ONE has moved past High School.  In fact, High School is how most people still live their lives until they die.  Saddens me so much.

And given how we're bitching at another celebrity, this time in our hobby, for being a fucktard, and how Skarka is STILL getting jobs, I'd say... Nope, we're stuck in the high school mentality too.

Quote from: Elfdart;882184Apparently, using "detect" spells and other divination is one of those things shitty players ignore, like charisma. From what I remember (I was also 12 when I played it) we were told about the crazy wizard building his Fortress of Fuck You and between that and watching Raiders of the Lost Ark, we were on our toes, suspected the worst and played accordingly. We lost more PCs when an NPC party tried to rob us on the way back than we did from the Tomb itself.

So what you're saying is that you came in prepared and appropriately paranoid, because of a movie you and your friends were lucky enough to see before playing.

Where most other players came in expecting something fun and not exactly lethal from the first step in.  And did not see a movie that made them appropriately paranoid.

Gotcha.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882192Other thing about Americans: no sense of humour about themselves. It's all terribly serious.

To be perfectly honest, the ONLY time I ever think about high school is when you, or another non-american, comments about how Americans are perpetually trapped in high school.

I don't even think that much about high school when I see a movie set in an actual high school.






More seriously:  it seems to me more accurate to say that Hollywood/pop culture is perpetually stuck in High School.   I don't know too many adults ranging from their mid-twenties up to nearly dead that actually ever talk about their high school experience.  The last time any adult told me about their life at that age it was a story about getting stuck on a coral reef off Fiji (or maybe Tahiti...) for several days before being rescued.  

Though I do admit he also talked about high school on Fiji (or maybe Tahiti...), as that's where he met his wife, and it was an amazing story of meeting his one true love, whom he had only just reconnected with after decades apart. Really, high school was barely mentioned except to set place.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882196Where most other players came in expecting something fun and not exactly lethal from the first step in.  And did not see a movie that made them appropriately paranoid.

Gotcha.

They did? Only if the DM didnt tell them what they were walking into.

By the time I finally got to see Tomb of Horrors as a player Id somehow missed all the tales of how deadly it was. I knew it was a famous dungeon low on combat, high on traps. And that was about it.

The DM though explained that it was absurdly lethal. I actually survived the Mouth trap because Id seen Roman Holiday way back and remembered the "Mouth of Truth" scene.

For the curious here is the moment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6af1dAc9rXo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6af1dAc9rXo)

The fact that how people were described as dying in the module with the Face Trap, and how a Sphere of Annihilation is supposed to work, tells me that a lot of deaths could have been avoided if people actually ran that encounter right.

Quote from: Bren;882148But in any case, Gary Gygax didn't make 12-year old John Wick laugh in his friends' faces after running the module that killed all their PCs. The life lesson to be learned from that experience is not "Gary Gygax was a mean old man." It was, "Laughing at other people's unhappiness, unhappiness that you helped cause is a dick move that may make people think 'Hey that John, he's not really my friend. He's a dick!"'

Sure, kids who are 12 are frequently dicks. They will often laugh inappropriately, whine, act rudely, and lots of other things. They can and should learn from the experience.

However, that doesn't mean that they also shouldn't properly conclude that Tomb of Horrors sucks as a module. It's full of arbitrary death traps and bad advice like the countdown on how to run them - like the arbitary "puzzle" where if you push the levers up you get an escape route but if you push the levers down you die. People can enjoy it, because people can like just about everything - but I suspect that it is mainly in the sense of liking Plan 9 From Outer Space or similar.

Quote from: Bren;882148I'm not saying the Tomb of Horrors is my cup of tea. Far the contrary, but I really can't imagine ever thinking that leaping into a demon's mouth is on the list of the first twenty things to try to get out of a deadly, trap filled dungeon alive. So I'm a bit skeptical that it twice went down the way Wick says it went down both because it seems improbable, but also because everything else in Wick's anecdote is also improbable.

As far as I can tell, you're doing exactly what 12-year-old John Wick did - calling the players stupid for this, because you know what the encounter is. However, if you don't have any foreknowledge or context, then I can easily see this happening. When I played this in my teens, I remember distinctly the stupid fucking countdown killing half the party, and losing at least two people to the mouth - though I don't think it was a TPK.

The problem is that once someone is sucked in, players assume that there is something through the hole, and try to get the PC out. For example, players might easily think that something grabbed in the darkness grabbed the PC and pulled them through - a far more common trope in dungeons than sphere of annihilation. The player who is first sucked in is still sitting at the table, and probably saying something like "Guys, a little help here? I could be getting hacked apart and you're browsing through spell lists?" Then a PC goes in with Protection from Evil and a rope tied to an anchoring PC, taking both. The fourth player is annoyed and goes "fuck it" and goes to see what sort of trouble they're in.

There are lots of games and modules where I say that things are just a matter of style - like skill-based versus class-based, traditional or story-game, hack-and-slash or conversational. However, some games and modules are bad. At the very least, Tomb of Horrors should be more clearly labelled as being full of stupid and arbitrary death traps where you have to guess the correct answer based on no information. Just saying it's not for hack-and-slashers doesn't cut it.

Quote from: Bren;882148But in any case, Gary Gygax didn't make 12-year old John Wick laugh in his friends' faces after running the module that killed all their PCs. The life lesson to be learned from that experience is not "Gary Gygax was a mean old man." It was, "Laughing at other people's unhappiness, unhappiness that you helped cause is a dick move that may make people think 'Hey that John, he's not really my friend. He's a dick!"'

Well, there's the thing. Even if you absolutely agree with Wick about the quality of the Tomb of Horrors, and even if you completely believe his story, he still ends up sounding like an enormous dick who is blaming the module for his own dickishness. And any other interpretation of the article - whether it involves disputing his take on the Tomb or casting doubt on the story - makes him seem just as dickish, if not more.

Some day I'm gonna read all those 12 pages of comments, but it won't be today. :)

That being said: There seems to be a general consensus that Wick is kind of prick. Now, I don't follow his blog, I don't frequent forums he does, so I know absolutely nothing about the guy, but to this day I didn't read a single article that would confirm his "prickish" character as far as I'm concerned. If the "Tomb of Horrors" is supposed to be one, I fail to see why.

btw: every once and then I meet people (usually in the Internet) who confirm that The Tomb of Horrors is the deadliest RPG scenario ever published. Ever. I usually smile lightly then.

Tomb might be the scenario that achieves TPK in fastest possible way. It might be the most imbalanced one. It might be deadliest dungeon ever, or "most deadliest traps per square".

...But it's not the deadliest scenario ever. So far, "Horror on the Orient Express" is the one and it doesn't achieve that by dick moves or trap overkill. :cool:

To me it didnt look like something you'd climb into. I thought it was something you tossed an object into and tried a coin. Then the thief reached in. For the coin? I never found out. And went poof.

Hmm... well, I've got no good comments to add to the Tomb of Horrors bit, seeing that I've never played it or planned to play it.

What I will say is that while I've in general enjoyed L5R, this bit of revelation about Wick's personality may clear up an issue I've long had.

I've never played in a game of L5R that didn't either involve a GM forcing players to suffer horrible consequences for lack of proper etiquette or somewhat more commonly, constantly shutting down proposed actions under the promise of those same sanctions.  

The rub being that there really isn't enough information (and really, how could there be?) in the game book to give you the information necessary to act properly in all cases. You're running up against the GMs interpretation of the data presented, usually and badly cross linked to what they know of actual feudal Japan, which is just close enough to the setting to muddy the waters, rather than being close enough to provide a good path.

Now, we are talking about a fairly large number of GMs here, some of whom I know were decent GMs in other settings.


Now: We see that the lead designer of L5R, the RPG is also a collassal troll in gaming in person and on-line and it makes me wonder if somehow he didn't manage to keep the balance of information perched just so to lead the vast majority of groups into frustrating rounds of 'Guess the Etiquette'?  It doesn't strike me as too hard to do. Over Emphasis the penalties for getting it wrong, stress roleplaying and immersion, and then simply provide only the shallowest overview of specific actions that should be taken.


One common example that seems to trip people up is the giving and receiving of gifts.  This is a pretty minor point of etiquette, but its laid out in some detail (you have to refuse it politely three times, then accept it, as I recall), without actually laying out the typical responses to 'doing it right', only the overall injunction that impolite and improper actions get you a quick ritual suicide.  A GM, hoping to immerse people in the setting (as advised by the book), will make sure to set up a gift situation, then be frustrated as most of his players fail to get the details right either entirely or partially... since this is a reasonably minor point in the book as a whole.  Boom: Whole table frustrated at an alien and impenetrable system of etiquette, right?

Sure, groups work past that. Presumably a number of GMs eventually realize that they don't have to force the players to work through all these tiny rituals that their characters would know as you know how to respond to an outstretched hand... by shaking it.

Normally I prefer to attribute to stupidity rather than malice, but we see clear evidence of malice from the appropriate person in another, related, matter.

I'm willing to chalk up the weird etiquette land mines of L5R to malice.

Quote from: Warthur;882105if you are running a sandbox campaign with a range of adventure opportunities available of varying difficulties, including something absolutely killer on the menu is fair enough. I've never known a 12 year old to run such an open sandbox campaign, though - at that age, in my experience, kids tend to follow the "this is this evening's adventure, there is no alternative" model.

Only a single data point, but I was running what we'd now call a megadungeon (gigantic underground sandbox) when I was 12, plus or minus a year (I don't recall my age directly, but I was in 6th grade), and I was using smaller free-roam dungeons prior to that.  Never really had an interest in store-bought modules or anything along the lines of pre-written "adventures", so I never used them.

Quote from: jhkim;882211At the very least, Tomb of Horrors should be more clearly labelled as being full of stupid and arbitrary death traps where you have to guess the correct answer based on no information. Just saying it's not for hack-and-slashers doesn't cut it.

:boohoo::boohoo::boohoo::boohoo::boohoo:

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882192Other thing about Americans: no sense of humour about themselves. It's all terribly serious.

That line and the previous one are starting to sound a lot like the joke about the Russian and the Turkish guys in the German bar;).
Just in case you are taking inspiration from it, remember that Americans are less likelyto make the third mistake, for  cultural reasons.

And the whole demon head thing just contributed to a Scarlet Heroes game, so it's not all a waste:D!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;881760And TOMB OF HORRORS was CLEARLY labelled as a way to kill ultra high level characters, and Gary never made ANY bones about it.

Waah, waah, waah, waah, waah.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;881763t's also worth noting that 14 year old Ernie Gygax romped through the place.  That's right, the module that still has Wick whining decades later got beaten by a 14 year old kid.

QuoteErnie told me two years ago he never actually made it to the end.

So, just to clear things up, was it an adventure that designed to just kill experienced players, or was it something people should feel stupid for being killed by because even a 14 year old beat it? Or did the 14 year old never beat it at all?

On a related note. The SSI Gold Box AD&D game Curse of the Azure Bonds has a wizard armed with a Sphere of Annihilation challenges the group to a battle of wills. If you lost a party member to the Sphere you could try again with a remaining member.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882258So, just to clear things up, was it an adventure that designed to just kill experienced players, or was it something people should feel stupid for being killed by because even a 14 year old beat it?

Neither. What's to brag about is how far in you got without getting killed.

QuoteOr did the 14 year old never beat it at all?

Getting in and out alive is beating it.

Getting to the lich's lair of course presents more opportunities to get yourself killed.

Right, I just thought of another question for those with the module at hand:).
Can you move the Sphere of Annihilation away, if you determine what it is? I think I could find some market for one of those, and with GP=XP, that might be a relatively easy way to get out of the ToH with some XP to your name;)!

About the demon mouth TPK stories. Bad design or incautious play why would the entire party jump, lemming like, in the black void that swallow their fellow adventures? Even if they assumed it teleported them or sent them somewhere else they can't contact them, they don't come back and there's no way determine if they are or aren't dead. You are in the fantasy equivalent of Arcade's Murderworld. Some paranoia would be judicious at some point.

Quote from: AsenRG;882263Right, I just thought of another question for those with the module at hand:).
Can you move the Sphere of Annihilation away, if you determine what it is? I think I could find some market for one of those, and with GP=XP, that might be a relatively easy way to get out of the ToH with some XP to your name;)!

That's one for folks with a DMG at hand, but ...

That might be one reason why they changed it in the later S-module compilation (Realms of Horror) to some sort of magic that turns a character entering the mouth into a zombie teleported naked to another area.

That was even less fully and clearly described, but other bits (such as the countdown) had additional GM advice. I think some other things probably got changed as well.

As I recall, a fair bit of text in all three versions I've seen is not as well thought out as one might wish.  Consider for instance that some people seem to take the "whole area" radiating evil and magic as including not  only the south wall with the devil face but also the arch of mists a ways back.

Quote from: jhkim;882211At the very least, Tomb of Horrors should be more clearly labelled as being full of stupid and arbitrary death traps where you have to guess the correct answer based on no information. Just saying it's not for hack-and-slashers doesn't cut it.

Sure,something along the lines of:

WARNING: If you can't play a game of King's Quest without throwing a tantrum then this module isn't for you.

To elaborate here:

1) John Wick's writing style and attitude are annoying, and often full of hyperbole.

2) 12-year-old John Wick was foolish and insensitive and immature. He was 12 years old, though, so on that I give him a break. Adult players shouldn't behave like that, obviously, but they can still be annoyed and disappointed in the module.

3) The main point that I agree with him on is that Tomb of Horrors is a sucky module. Having played through it when I was a teenager, I was struck by the utter stupidity not only of most of the traps - but also of the implicit advice in how to run them like the countdown.

4) In 1978, this was one of the seminal modules for fledgling AD&D, and set a really bad example for kids running stuff.

Quote from: TristramEvans;882309Sure,something along the lines of:

WARNING: If you can't play a game of King's Quest without throwing a tantrum then this module isn't for you.

I haven't played King's Quest, but my impression is that it follows most adventure games in handling death. That is, if you die, it is fairly easy to re-spawn and get back to where you started from. You start play again immediately, and it takes at most a few minutes to get back to where you started from.

By contrast, AD&D is a vastly different game. You don't immediately re-spawn. The rest of the players go on without you, while you have to go sit out of play rolling up a new character. In general, you won't be able to rejoin the adventure until they leave the dungeon, and you've permanently lost all the XP and items you've accumulated which given a high-level module may have taken months of play or more.

Quote from: jhkim;882314I haven't played King's Quest, but my impression is that it follows most adventure games in handling death. That is, if you die, it is fairly easy to re-spawn and get back to where you started from. You start play again immediately, and it takes at most a few minutes to get back to where you started from.

Your impression is wrong, based on modern videogames

The reactions to that blog post are really hilarious. It's like reading opinionated reviews of a review, which in fact is more of an anecdotal reaction to the module than an actual review of the module. Fun stuff!

Quote from: TristramEvans;882316Your impression is wrong, based on modern videogames

Fair enough, although I play almost no video games of any sort, or computer games these days. Most adventure games that I remember from my youth in the 80s had a save game feature where you could go back to a saved point, rather than having to go through everything from the start. If King's Quest does make you always restart from scratch, then it's a fair comparison.

Since a lot of people would not have played King's Quest, I'd phrase it in descriptive terms rather than via comparison.

Quote from: jhkim;882319Since a lot of people would not have played King's Quest, I'd phrase it in descriptive terms rather than via comparison.

It was a multi-million dollar series contemporary of The Tomb of Horrors, one of the most popular video game series of the 80s at the time ToH was released. People had different expectations from games and back then. We are talking about a 30 year old module, not something released today for an audience to whom the phrase "fantasy f-ing vietnam" is used as an old school pejorative.

Quote from: AsenRG;882263Right, I just thought of another question for those with the module at hand:).
Can you move the Sphere of Annihilation away, if you determine what it is? I think I could find some market for one of those, and with GP=XP, that might be a relatively easy way to get out of the ToH with some XP to your name;)!

If I recall correctly is was fixed in place. But its been a long time. I can tell you that trying to gain control of one was pretty much begging for your magic user to be erased since you had to check every round you were trying to move it. I was I believe 12th level and so thats a mere 50% chance +6% more for 16 INT. At best I could have tried to move it out of the mouth so as to see what was behind it.

Quote from: Omega;882328If I recall correctly is was fixed in place. But its been a long time. I can tell you that trying to gain control of one was pretty much begging for your magic user to be erased since you had to check every round you were trying to move it. I was I believe 12th level and so thats a mere 50% chance +6% more for 16 INT. At best I could have tried to move it out of the mouth so as to see what was behind it.

What if you had tried to chisel the whole head out of the wall? Would you still have had to make a save roll?

Quote from: jhkim;882211However, that doesn't mean that they also shouldn't properly conclude that Tomb of Horrors sucks as a module.

To my mind, doesn't work for the average 12 year old no more defines "sucks as a module" than does not to my taste. The module wasn't to John Wick's taste. Tough. It never sounded like it would be to my taste either.

Plan 9 is kind of funny. In an Ed Wood kind of too bad to be believed way.

QuoteAs far as I can tell, you're doing exactly what 12-year-old John Wick did - calling the players stupid for this, because you know what the encounter is.

No it's not exactly the same.

   1) I'm not the DM who prepared my players to expect that leaping into a demon's mouth one after another was a wise, safe, intelligent plan.

2) I'm not the DM who then bought, read, and ran a deadly module for a bunch of unprepared 12-year olds.

3) I'm not laughing at any real 12-year olds, to their faces, after killing off their favorite characters with the module I enticed them to play.

4) I'm not blaming mean old Gary Gygax for making me behave like a dick to the kids I called my friends back when I was 12 years old.

And to be clear, I don't really think all those players were as stupid as John Wick says they were. Everything else in his anecdote is exaggerated, wildly improbable, or just plain wrong, so I see no reason to assume all the players blithely jumped into the demon's mouth like John Wick says.

QuoteHowever, if you don't have any foreknowledge or context, then I can easily see this happening.

The original D&D rules provided context that would have indicated this was an unwise course of action. Perhaps nothing else John Wick ever ran for his players had traps that killed, items that cursed, pools with bizarre or unpleasant magical effects, or save vs death or petrification, and so exercising a modicum of caution was completely unknown to his players. That isn't like any dungeon experience I recall ever seeing, but certainly it's possible if that's how John Wick and his friends played D&D.

QuoteWhen I played this in my teens, I remember distinctly the stupid fucking countdown killing half the party, and losing at least two people to the mouth - though I don't think it was a TPK.

The example of the countdown you gave seems to be an error on the part of the DM. Starting a countdown clock before clearly describing what the PCs can initially see, hear, smell, taste, etc. is lame. Refusing to describe the scene and instead continuing the countdown is even more lame. Starting a countdown clock even after clearly describing the scene may still be harsh. Certainly if the DM has never before required players to quickly make any decisions, then yeah that's harsh. It's less harsh in tournament play since you have to get a winner somehow and attrition is at least as good a way as a beauty contest or popularity contest.

On the other hand, if the scene is clearly set and described and if the players are used to making decisions quickly a countdown is a reasonable thing to include in play. I occasionally use countdowns as a way of dealing with dithering in combat or emergencies. I do agree that springing it by surprise is harsh. Springing it by surprise and without properly describing the scene is poor DM technique. How much the rules are supposed to try to protect players from poor DM technique is, to some extent, also a matter of taste.

QuoteThe problem is that once someone is sucked in, players assume that there is something through the hole, and try to get the PC out. For example, players might easily think that something grabbed in the darkness grabbed the PC and pulled them through - a far more common trope in dungeons than sphere of annihilation.

Something sort of like that occurred in the LotR where the Watcher in the Pool outside of Moria grabs Frodo. But it was clear that an underwater monster was grabbing Frodo. I can't ever recall something grabbing a PC and pulling him out of sight in old D&D. Not to say it never happened, just I don't recall ever seeing it happen. But trapped and cursed statuary, decorations, pools, and fountains were pretty common. I believe they were included in examples of play or sample items in the original D&D rules and supplements. I know we all knew about their existence back in the 1970s and we never personally interacted with the folks in Lake Geneva. So we must have got the tropes from somewhere.

QuoteHowever, some games and modules are bad.

Too harsh for 12-year olds and not to my taste aren't good definitions of a bad module. Missing descriptions or sections and inconsistent or self contradictory descriptions or sections are bad. But that isn't what we are talking about here. Here we are talking about a particular style of dungeon. Some people may find it fun some may not. Just like some people may find teleporting rooms, trap door slides down to a more dangerous level, and rotating rooms fun and some may not. Neither are good or bad in any objective sense than vanilla, strawberry, chocolate, or tutti-fruit-ti are good or bad.

QuoteAt the very least, Tomb of Horrors should be more clearly labelled as being full of stupid and arbitrary death traps where you have to guess the correct answer based on no information. Just saying it's not for hack-and-slashers doesn't cut it.

I'm all for clear labeling.

But if we take John Wick at his word, at the age of 12 he would have bought anything with the name D&D on it no matter what the label said. And nothing he wrote here or elsewhere leads me to believe anything a label said would have stopped 12-year old John from from running his shiny new module. And killing his friends PCs. And then laughing at them.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;882329What if you had tried to chisel the whole head out of the wall? Would you still have had to make a save roll?

Youd end up with a head with a empty mouth. The sphere would stay put. It could be that it was a basic sphere and any magic user could have tried moving it. And it only moves if a magic user concentrates on moving it.

Its an utterly passive trap really. Moreso because its out in the open more or less. Its like the Deck of Many Things. Totally harmless as long as you leave it alone.

To my mind, ToH was not as much fun as White Plume Mountain or Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan.  I liked it better than ToEE, which seemed to me just a slog, but other people dug that. I liked it a lot better than Vecna Lives! (which I bought, threw across the room in disgust, and never have used).

The "deadly gantlet" shtick seemed to fit the billing, one horrible horror after another all right. That gave it a lot of replay value in what someone has pointed out is a video-game kind of way, players' memories serving a new batch of characters (a chance the tournament contenders did not have).

It was a change from the usual, and quite understandably a game many people would prefer to pass up. But it brought others of us hours of excitement, and I'm pretty sure there are a few modules (and quite a few Dungeon Magazine scenarios) that bored just about everyone including the people who designed them.

To me, the first question that comes to mind when trying to plan a logical course of action in an imaginary setting is: does the setting MAKE SENSE? Is it based in logical principles that can be discerned?

So does Tomb of Horrors make sense? Is there an in setting explanation for why it exists and how it functions?

From what I understand it doesn't seem like Gygax had any particular concerns about the underlying rationale for the Tomb's existence. Correct me if I'm wrong.

So, next, if logical examination proves untrustworthy, the next question that comes to mind is: what does the creator of this setting seem to want us to do?

So in this case, I think it is entirely understandable to think, "Ah ha! We are supposed to go through this magical portal in the same spirit of adventure that led us to enter a dungeon called the Tomb of Horrors in the first place!"

And indeed, I can imagine a scenario where going into the demon mouth WAS the right course, and people are snickering about how stupid these kids were to NOT go through the demon mouth which was obviously a portal to some important place framed as a demon mouth to scare people off.

In fact, unless you personally KNEW Gary Gygax and how his mind worked (like if he was your older brother for instance) I think it would be entirely reasonable to think something like "What kind of asshole would put something like a portal that instantly killed anyone who went through it into a dungeon? This stuff is supposed to be FUN not ha ha gotcha dumbass!"

I mean, I kind of doubt that Wick had been previously running the kind of campaign that had focused on snailpace dungeon crawls where you had to tap everything within ten feet with a pole to ward off gleeful GM malice.

Then again, I also suspect that even the childhood part of the story is largely BS... But I still think my comments above hold true.

Quote from: Manzanaro;882359Is it based in logical principles that can be discerned?

Isn't the premise that an evil wizard-lich created it?

QuoteSo, next, if logical examination proves untrustworthy, the next question that comes to mind is: what does the creator of this setting seem to want us to do?

Its called the Tomb of Horrors not Challenge for Heroes, so I'm guessing he wants us to temporarily assuage his ennui with our futile struggles and painful deaths.

QuoteAnd indeed, I can imagine a scenario where going into the demon mouth WAS the right course

In the words of Han Solo, "I can imagine quite a bit." That I can imagine it doesn't make it the best, most plausible, wisest, or safest first step to take when faced with a giant demon mouth as one possible exit from a room.

QuoteIn fact, unless you personally KNEW Gary Gygax and how his mind worked (like if he was your older brother for instance) I think it would be entirely reasonable to think something like "What kind of asshole would put something like a portal that instantly killed anyone who went through it into a dungeon?

The same sort of person who thought things like save vs. death or petrification, cursed items, magic pools, black mold, green slime, ochre jelly, those transparent cube thingies that dissolve flesh, Ropers, Piercers, Wights, Wraiths, and Spectres, rotating rooms, trap door slides to a deadly lower level, and teleporters were fun things to put in a dungeon. D&D was from the beginning filled with examples of "gotcha dumbass!" monsters, magic, and mad architecture.

QuoteThen again, I also suspect that even the childhood part of the story is largely BS.

I've got to agree with you here.

Quote from: Manzanaro;882359Then again, I also suspect that even the childhood part of the story is largely BS...

So Wick made up a story that made him look like a complete ass?

Quote from: TristramEvans;882368So Wick made up a story that made him look like a complete ass?

Well he is known for a love of painful drama. I don't think he would hesitate for a second in making himself look like an ass if he thought it enhanced his story. Plus I am thinking he might have thought he would look sympathetic.

He is a wanna be community  actor after all...:D

Quote from: TristramEvans;882368So Wick made up a story that made him look like a complete ass?

Yes.  Because it makes us talk about him.

Quote from: The ModuleThe legend of the tomb is an old story with many parts, some of which may be lost or obscured. Characters attempting to glean special information by consulting sages or through legend lore spells may still have difficulty obtaining as much background as they desire, for the scraps of information are often minimal and mystical. These bits of information are available as clues, and characters can make of them what they wish: Ancient Burial Places; Ancient Tombs; Sorcerous Kings; Challenges; Surpassing (Certain Death); Soul Eaters; Treasure; Great . . . The other parts of the legend can be furnished by the Dungeon Master from the description which follows:

The Tomb of Horrors: Somewhere under a lost and lonely hill of grim and foreboding aspect lies a labyrinthine crypt. It is filled with terrible traps and not a few strange and ferocious monsters to slay the unwary. It is filled with rich treasures both precious and magical, but in addition to the aforementioned guardians, there is said to be a demi-lich who still wards his final haunt (Be warned that tales told have it that this being possesses powers which make him nearly undefeatable). Accounts relate that it is quite unlikely that any adventurers will ever find the chamber where the demi-lich Acererak lingers, for the passages and rooms of the Tomb are fraught with terrible traps, poison gases, and magical protections. Furthermore, the demi-lich has so well hidden his lair, that even those who avoid the pitfalls will not be likely to locale their true goal. So only large and well-prepared parties of the bravest and strongest should even consider the attempt, and if they do locate the Tomb, they must be prepared to fail. Any expedition must be composed of characters of high level and varied class. They must have magical protections and weapons, and equip themselves with every sort of device possible to insure their survival.

There is no countdown in the tunnel with the Sphere of Annihilation Mouth, which radiates both Evil and Magic, and there is an arch right next to it as well as a hidden door in the tunnel, both of which are alluded to by the poem on the floor.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882196So what you're saying is that you came in prepared and appropriately paranoid, because of a movie you and your friends were lucky enough to see before playing.

Jesus Tittyfucking Christ you're dumb! :banghead:

Raiders of the Lost Ark was only one of the most popular and well-known movies ever made (and still is). You make it sound like my group was oh so lucky to glean arcane knowledge from an obscure cult film we stumbled upon.

QuoteWhere most other players came in expecting something fun and not exactly lethal from the first step in.  And did not see a movie that made them appropriately paranoid.

With the exception of those who played the module before the summer of 1981, I have a hard time believing most players weren't influenced by Indiana Jones to some degree. I also have a hard time believing that most other players thought something called the Tomb of Horrors would be "not exactly lethal".

But then, I can't remember ever gaming with retards.

QuoteGotcha.

With your piss-poor level of understanding, I think not.

Quote from: TristramEvans;882368So Wick made up a story that made him look like a complete ass?

More like he made up a story to vilify something and make himself look like the victim. Probably to attract attention to his current product.

And failed.

Quote from: Elfdart;882378Jesus Tittyfucking Christ you're dumb! :banghead:

Raiders of the Lost Ark was only one of the most popular and well-known movies ever made (and still is). You make it sound like my group was oh so lucky to glean arcane knowledge from an obscure cult film we stumbled upon.

With the exception of those who played the module before the summer of 1981, I have a hard time believing most players weren't influenced by Indiana Jones to some degree. I also have a hard time believing that most other players thought something called the Tomb of Horrors would be "not exactly lethal".

But then, I can't remember ever gaming with retards.

With your piss-poor level of understanding, I think not.

1: There are times then that seems true. Yeah.

2: See my Roman Holiday example a few pages back. :cool:

3: Also see my Roman Holiday example a few pages back. :cool:
Never occurred to me to think if Indiana Jones actually. If anything it made me think of the death gauntlet in 18 Bronze Men and Return of 18 Bronze men. And to a lesser degree the Fighting Fantasy book Deathtrap Dungeon.
IE: A place built by someone powerful to test and kill adventurers. Rather than a standard trap and puzzle filled dungeon meant to drive off looters.

4: Known a few players who were utterly reckless with their characters. They werent stupid. They just had no regard for their characters safety or lives.

5: Theres ever the hope he will get off whatever one track rail hes on this time on the way to the current windmill. But dont hold your breath.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882374Yes.  Because it makes us talk about him.

Advertising. Shock jock hoax. Seen worse. But Wick is way up there on my list of self serving scum designers.

Quote from: Omega;882383More like he made up a story to vilify something and make himself look like the victim. Probably to attract attention to his current product.

And failed.

How so?  His current Kickstarter is supposedly the fastest growing one, like ever.  Sounds to me that he's getting exactly what he wants.

Quote from: CRKrueger;882375There is no countdown in the tunnel with the Sphere of Annihilation Mouth, which radiates both Evil and Magic, and there is an arch right next to it as well as a hidden door in the tunnel, both of which are alluded to by the poem on the floor.

Yes, the countdown is a different deathtrap than the sphere of annihilation mouth. Does that somehow make the countdown OK?

Speaking of the poem in the floor mosaic, that's another really annoying feature of the dungeon. Here's how the message in the floor is described:

QuoteB. If the pattern of the floor has been carefully observed and studied from the entrance to this point, the individual with such perseverance will be rewarded by suddenly understanding that a message is contained in barely noticeable runes in the mosaic floor. (...continues with message...)

So if the player *says* "I'm carefully observing the floor" then they get the clue - but if they don't, then they don't get the reward. Note there is no given reason why the message should be on the floor, as opposed to on the ceiling, walls, or any other spot. This is the tabletop equivalent of pixel-bitching, which encourages the players to do things like repetitively say "I look carefully at the floor", "I look carefully at the ceiling", "I look carefully at the walls" - because if they don't say those words, then they don't see what's on them.

This ticks me off. The DM should at least ask "Are you looking carefully at where you're going, or just moving ahead without doing so?" - or simply assume the former since that's what they're going to answer if asked.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882399How so?  His current Kickstarter is supposedly the fastest growing one, like ever.  Sounds to me that he's getting exactly what he wants.

More like failed under scrutiny.

We've known for years now that people will throw money at far worse than a liar as long as they get their precious game.

Quote from: jhkim;882403So if the player *says* "I'm carefully observing the floor" then they get the clue - but if they don't, then they don't get the reward. Note there is no given reason why the message should be on the floor, as opposed to on the ceiling, walls, or any other spot. This is the tabletop equivalent of pixel-bitching, which encourages the players to do things like repetitively say "I look carefully at the floor", "I look carefully at the ceiling", "I look carefully at the walls" - because if they don't say those words, then they don't see what's on them.

This ticks me off. The DM should at least ask "Are you looking carefully at where you're going, or just moving ahead without doing so?" - or simply assume the former since that's what they're going to answer if asked.

Id expect the DM to at least say something like. "There is an odd pattern on the floor." weather or not the module says to. Which is what the DM did when I was playing it. In this sort of trap laden module its up to the DM to communicate the little clues like the floor is different. Especially since the D&D slow movement incorporates this into itself automatically. No module should have to hold the DMs hand and tell them to tell the players that there is a dragon in the room.

Now if the PCs dont pick up on the fact the floor is different then thats their problem in a dungeon designed to kill them deader than dead.

Quote from: Omega;882406More like failed under scrutiny.

We've known for years now that people will throw money at far worse than a liar as long as they get their precious game.

Well, ultimately, nothing else matters. Wick could be a lying, self-aggrandizing asshole, but if he produces a good game, who gives a shit? It's not like anyone has to play with him. It's the product that matters, not the personality behind it.

Granted, I'm not interested in 7th Sea, I read the original game when it came out years ago and it just wasn't my cuppa, but enough people like it they're willing to plunk down for a new edition, and if Wick doesn't pull a GMS and is able to deliver a game these people want and will enjoy, then kudos to him. His opinion on a 30 year old module, his lack of responsibility for being a douchebag when he was twelve or alleged dishonesty in that regard for attention? I can't see it having any bearing on a single person who enjoys themselves playing one of his games.

Personal opinion, but I'm willing to forgive more "unfairnes" in a set up like this because of the background. The Tomb of Horrors is, as someone called it earlier a Temple of Fuck You, a deliberately designed deathtrap meant kill as many people as possible designed by a evil sadist with plenty of time and resources on its hands. In a modern crime game it would be like storming Jigsaw's lair or Murderworld in a super's game. Down right mean shit is to be expected.

That said, some of the meta GM fucks with the the characters perception style tricks (like the collapsing floor count down) do seem more like dirty pool but I gather those aren't the majority in Tomb of Horrors?

Wick's post on Tomb of Horrors is the laziest, most boring shit I've read on the internet since 1995.

Quote from: Omega;882406More like failed under scrutiny.

We've known for years now that people will throw money at far worse than a liar as long as they get their precious game.

Come on. We're talking about internationally supported campaign. It's not that every 7th Sea KS fan actually reads Wick's articles (including this one commented here), forms a negative opinion about its author and consciously decides to turn the blind eye and throw money at that campaign nevertheless. ;)

Some people know Wick but don't think him that much of a douche. Some people know only his products and there has been a few good ones. Some people don't know him at all.

Quote from: jhkim;882403Yes, the countdown is a different deathtrap than the sphere of annihilation mouth. Does that somehow make the countdown OK?

Hmm, let's see, one of the most evil fucks in the world makes his tomb a deathtrap, you walk in one of three entrances and in one of them, you get 50' in and you feel the floor move, you hear a rumbling behind you, and the middle 10' of corridor starts to slowly grind shut.  The slowest guy moving at 6" all the way at the end can still make it if he starts moving by the count of '7'.  

Having the floor "click" at the end, the block immediately dropping, the corridor being flooded with acid 1 segment later - that's an "evil fuck" deathtrap, that you still could have avoided with some form of trap detection.

That fake corridor, that's an Indiana Jones trap or the Star Wars trash compactor.  Yes that's "ok", what are you, a child?

Quote from: jhkim;882403So if the player *says* "I'm carefully observing the floor" then they get the clue - but if they don't, then they don't get the reward. Note there is no given reason why the message should be on the floor, as opposed to on the ceiling, walls, or any other spot. This is the tabletop equivalent of pixel-bitching, which encourages the players to do things like repetitively say "I look carefully at the floor", "I look carefully at the ceiling", "I look carefully at the walls" - because if they don't say those words, then they don't see what's on them.

This ticks me off. The DM should at least ask "Are you looking carefully at where you're going, or just moving ahead without doing so?" - or simply assume the former since that's what they're going to answer if asked.

Dude, here's the room...

Quote from: Tomb of HorrorsEven a bit of daylight entering through a crawl space or a torch will reveal that this is an unusual tunnel. Bright, brilliant colors are to be seen everywhere, the stones and pigments undimmed by the passage of decades. (USE ILLUSTRATION #3 NOW.) The floor of the corridor is a colorful mosaic of stone, with a distinct, winding path of red tiles about 2' wide (the line snaking its way south down the corridor) easily visible to the onlooker, (See special note regarding the pit traps at the end of this paragraph.) No stonework can be seen on the walls or the ceiling 20' above, (for some sort of cement or plaster has been smoothed over all of these surfaces and then illustrated. The scenes painted show fields with kine grazing, a copse with several wolves in the background, slaves (human, orc, elven, and strange human-animal mixture - pig-human, ape-human, and dog-human) going about various tasks. Certain of the frescoes show rooms of some building - a library filled with many books and scrolls, a torture chamber, a wizard's work room (see 4, below for more details of this area). There are chairs, windows, boxes, bales, doors, chests, birds, bats, spiders and all manner of things shown on the walls.

Why did Acererak put it on the floor?  Because if you're stupid enough to be in the death trap tomb of all death trap tombs and you're too fucking stupid to check the intricate mosaic on the floor then you're not worthy of even being mocked by his poem.  You know - Evil Piehole, and actually Evil, not Boris and Natasha Evil.

I've run this module lots of times for first-timers and some people take a ton of time here.  Specifically saying they check every single fresco for...

• Historical or literary significance - is there a message being conveyed
• Moving elements, tricks, traps, hidden triggers, openings, etc.
• Hidden messages, words on books, names in the frescoes, etc.

...and they also look at the mosaic on the floor, because what's a tiled, mosaic floor? - a hundred places to put death trap triggers you don't want to step on.

There's 1. Frescos and 2. Mosaic Tiles.  Saying you have to look at the tiles isn't "pixel bitching", it means the message isn't in a fresco, it's in the mosaic. Jesus Wept.

If you really can't be bothered to actually roleplay going through a Deathtrap Tomb (even though I assume no one put a gun to your head and made you sit down at the table) you could easily have said "We go inch by inch over every fresco, every tile, checking for traps by Thief and spell before we move on, we don't care how long it takes."  Wow, I don't how anyone was ever supposed to have found that. :rolleyes:

Quote from: CRKrueger;882426If you really can't be bothered to actually roleplay going through a Deathtrap Tomb (even though I assume no one put a gun to your head and made you sit down at the table) you could easily have said "We go inch by inch over every fresco, every tile, checking for traps by Thief and spell before we move on, we don't care how long it takes."  Wow, I don't how anyone was ever supposed to have found that. :rolleyes:

Let's found "The Society of Showing us On the Doll where Tomb of Horrors Touched You in a Bad Way."

Our Motto:  :boohoo:

You know, I really mean it when I say being a wargamer does not make you "manly" or "macho" or bullshit like that.

But apparently it does at least introduce you to the concept that you just might lose.

I now think the phrase "nobody wins or loses a game of Dungeons & Dragons" is the single worst piece of bullshit Gary ever wrote.  Nobody ever gets eliminated from a campaign, true, but that's NOT the same thing as losing an individual game.

You can get your ass kicked in a wargame battle and still win the campaign, because a campaign is multiple battles.  So is a campaign of D&D.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882447Let's found "The Society of Showing us On the Doll where Tomb of Horrors Touched You in a Bad Way."

Our Motto:  :boohoo:

Only if the clubhouse has a Sphere of Annihilation as its entrance. :D

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882448You know, I really mean it when I say being a wargamer does not make you "manly" or "macho" or bullshit like that.

But apparently it does at least introduce you to the concept that you just might lose.

I now think the phrase "nobody wins or loses a game of Dungeons & Dragons" is the single worst piece of bullshit Gary ever wrote.  Nobody ever gets eliminated from a campaign, true, but that's NOT the same thing as losing an individual game.

You can get your ass kicked in a wargame battle and still win the campaign, because a campaign is multiple battles.  So is a campaign of D&D.

I think that advice is more about mindset, not obsessing over everything being optimal and the goal only being winning, so you can focus on playing out your character's personality and goals, for better or worse.

Like a Paladin who goes in to save innocent people, knowing he will most likely die in the process. Normally dying would be a loss, but in D&D you would play that out because it's your character's personality and goal.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882448But apparently it does at least introduce you to the concept that you just might lose.

In life, you can lose.
In games you can lose.

But in a game where you're pretending to be doing stuff in someone else's life, losing is now off the table.

Never quite got that one, but I'm sure it has nothing to do with thinking of things like you're the Protagonist in a story, who never dies. ;)

Quote from: CRKrueger;882457In life, you can lose.
In games you can lose.

But in a game where you're pretending to be doing stuff in someone else's life, losing is now off the table.

Never quite got that one, but I'm sure it has nothing to do with thinking of things like you're the Protagonist in a story, who never dies. ;)

Is the objective in D&D to always win, or to play your character? That's the difference. "Winning" then can be things that actually make your character worse off in an objective sense if you're playing them out properly.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;882463Is the objective in D&D to always win, or to play your character? That's the difference. "Winning" then can be things that actually make your character worse off in an objective sense if you're playing them out properly.

I'm being facetious, me and Gronan are having a "Get off my lawn moment." :D

You're right, of course.  To a norse warrior, a great death might be a win.  But if you think you're the hero of your own novel, you're probably not thinking that way. ;)

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882448I now think the phrase "nobody wins or loses a game of Dungeons & Dragons" is the single worst piece of bullshit Gary ever wrote.  Nobody ever gets eliminated from a campaign, true, but that's NOT the same thing as losing an individual game.

You can get your ass kicked in a wargame battle and still win the campaign, because a campaign is multiple battles.  So is a campaign of D&D.

It's kind of a dumb phrase. But I always thought it was intended to speak to and illustrate the continuing nature of a D&D campaign not some notion that the PCs would never face a defeat at the hands of some NPCs.

Many (the vast majority?) of wargame campaigns reach an end state. Somebody wins the English Civil War, the Peninsular Campaign, WWII, etc. So a winner(s) and losers can be determined.

But an ongoing D&D campaign (as I orginally understood the concept) there is no predetermined end state to reach. Some people might retire characters when they reached name level (or they might run baronies) but the campaign could continue with new characters. Players might leave, but the campaign continued with the remaining or new players.

Characters survive, but they their players don't thereby win the game. (Unless we consider reaching name level and retiring winning. But nothing requires us to retire the characters rather than continuing to play them at a domain level.) And if a character doesn't survive, the player can roll up a new character. (Though I tend to think of losing one's character permanently as losing. That seems pretty obvious to me. So I don't think that was what Gary was speaking to with that phrase.) So players can't win and (in some sense) they can't lose because (unlike a game of Monopoly or Risk) they can't be eliminated from play.

The DM can't ultimately win or lose because he controls the world. The world doesn't end (typically and during the time span of a campaign) and can't lose. And in a sense, the world can't ultimately win since there will always be new PCs to contend with the opponents that the DM creates and runs. The DM winning also isn't a very meaningful concept due to the extreme power differential between the world and any group of PCs.

Quote from: CRKrueger;882457In life, you can lose.
In games you can lose.

But in a game where you're pretending to be doing stuff in someone else's life, losing is now off the table.

Never quite got that one, but I'm sure it has nothing to do with thinking of things like you're the Protagonist in a story, who never dies. ;)

It sounds like you're dragging out some stock argument that has crap-all to do with the current debate. My complaints with the Tomb of Horrors have to do with enjoying being in-character and having interesting, difficult challenges.

For example, in the last session of the D&D game I'm running, a PC died after being ambushed as he was climbing up a vertical shaft. It was deadly, but they knew their opponent, and it was a logical place for him to put an ambush as that was where they would be most vulnerable. Before that, they were running away from rampaging dragons, and they knew that characters would randomly die based on rolls of the dice.

But Tomb of Horrors isn't based around in-character challenge. It's based in an arbitrary tournament mindset, and full of reasonless do-this-or-die tests, including tests like the countdowns where players are supposed to shout out the correct action quickly based on almost no in-character information.

Quote from: jhkim;882550But Tomb of Horrors isn't based around in-character challenge. It's based in an arbitrary tournament mindset, and full of reasonless do-this-or-die tests, including tests like the countdowns where players are supposed to shout out the correct action quickly based on almost no in-character information.

Yes and no. Yes ToH is very much guilty of some piss-poor GM advice. But the tomb itself works given the premise of a generic D&D settings. It is a death-trap designed by a character who has given himself to pure evil.

If I would run it now then I would ignore the stupid advice and things that are implausible in the light of the reality of how I run my setting. Then again that pretty much how I handle most adventures.

Quote from: jhkim;882550It sounds like you're dragging out some stock argument that has crap-all to do with the current debate. My complaints with the Tomb of Horrors have to do with enjoying being in-character and having interesting, difficult challenges.

For example, in the last session of the D&D game I'm running, a PC died after being ambushed as he was climbing up a vertical shaft. It was deadly, but they knew their opponent, and it was a logical place for him to put an ambush as that was where they would be most vulnerable. Before that, they were running away from rampaging dragons, and they knew that characters would randomly die based on rolls of the dice.

But Tomb of Horrors isn't based around in-character challenge. It's based in an arbitrary tournament mindset, and full of reasonless do-this-or-die tests, including tests like the countdowns where players are supposed to shout out the correct action quickly based on almost no in-character information.

Because, you know, going into a death trap laden tomb, you might never hear a grinding sound, see a block moving behind you and have only a few seconds to decide. :rolleyes:

Why is this Kickstarter doing so well?

Wick's a recognizable name, but he's nowhere in the ballpark of Monte Cook, or even someone like Jonathan Tweet. And 7th Sea has its fans, but it always seemed like a fairly minor game line. I would have thought just breaking $100K would have been a big success, but it's broken that by a factor of eight, and it might end up doubling Numenera's record. The only RPG-related KSers that have done better are things like the Shadowrun video game or Order of the Stick reprint, both of which were tied to much bigger properties, and which appealed to people who didn't play RPGs.

Quote from: estar;882553Yes and no. Yes ToH is very much guilty of some piss-poor GM advice. But the tomb itself works given the premise of a generic D&D settings. It is a death-trap designed by a character who has given himself to pure evil.

If I would run it now then I would ignore the stupid advice and things that are implausible in the light of the reality of how I run my setting. Then again that pretty much how I handle most adventures.

Well, it's the bad advice that I'm mostly complaining about.

But there are much better premises. The old tournament modules in general tend to be paper-thin excuses, and tend to be full of transparent out-of-character crap. By contrast, Against the Giants is a solid, totally in-character series for the most part.

For a tricks-and-traps tournament-style dungeon is kind of stupid, but if you really want it, you can have an eccentric wizard who created a series of tricks and traps to test those approaching his lair, and so only the smartest and strongest would make it. If the only motive really is evil, then they're just as likely to give false clues than true ones, for example.

Quote from: Pat;882573Why is this Kickstarter doing so well?

Wick's a recognizable name, but he's nowhere in the ballpark of Monte Cook, or even someone like Jonathan Tweet. And 7th Sea has its fans, but it always seemed like a fairly minor game line. I would have thought just breaking $100K would have been a big success, but it's broken that by a factor of eight, and it might end up doubling Numenera's record. The only RPG-related KSers that have done better are things like the Shadowrun video game or Order of the Stick reprint, both of which were tied to much bigger properties, and which appealed to people who didn't play RPGs.

I think 7th Sea is a pretty approachable setting. Not sure where my books went. I think I gave them away which perhaps now wasn't a wise thing. But I enjoyed reading them when I had them and could see their potential. But for various reason never ran a game with it.

But you are right in asking why $800,000? Well Numenera despite Cook's involvement is a well done but off-beat setting. 7th Sea in contrast is planted right in the middle of the swashbuckler genre and is well-done. So it is more approachable.

But approachbility is not enough, I think what going on is that 7th Sea has caught a fad movement. Wick is kinda of well known, 7th sea kinda well known, 7th sea is approachable, so word gets around about second edition and people go "Hey you know, swashbuckling. I can go for that." Combined with the factors I mention give it enough of a base to get the word out.

Now 7,600 gamers later, Wick has a nice hit on his hand.

Quote from: Pat;882573Why is this Kickstarter doing so well?

Wick's a recognizable name, but he's nowhere in the ballpark of Monte Cook, or even someone like Jonathan Tweet. And 7th Sea has its fans, but it always seemed like a fairly minor game line. I would have thought just breaking $100K would have been a big success, but it's broken that by a factor of eight, and it might end up doubling Numenera's record. The only RPG-related KSers that have done better are things like the Shadowrun video game or Order of the Stick reprint, both of which were tied to much bigger properties, and which appealed to people who didn't play RPGs.

39 1st edition PDFs plus PDF of 2nd for $40.
39 1st edition PDFs plus Hardbound of 2nd for $60.

If Monte Cook could have thrown in all of D&D3 with Numenera, he would have crushed this KS.

Quote from: jhkim;882575The old tournament modules in general tend to be paper-thin excuses, and tend to be full of transparent out-of-character crap. By contrast, Against the Giants is a solid, totally in-character series for the most part.

Well I think that because how it was with RPGs at the time. I doubt there was much of a sense that you "acted" as your character with a funny voice and a distinct personality. So campaigns, and adventures where mish-mash of what the players and referee found funny and interesting in and out of game. Like the Old Geezer said "we made up shit that was fun and interesting."

So for ToH part of its legend was to see if you can beat Gygax deadliest dungeon. But obviously that wasn't universal as we can see from Old Geezer's comments.

BTW, I agree with your assessment about the Giant modules.

In my neck of wood, it was the Runequest gamers that went to the local college that I first noticed people really getting into roleplaying their characters. Most players then (and now for that matter) play their characters as an extension of themselves with maybe one or two quirks for color.

Quote from: CRKrueger;88257739 1st edition PDFs plus PDF of 2nd for $40.
39 1st edition PDFs plus Hardbound of 2nd for $60.

If Monte Cook could have thrown in all of D&D3 with Numenera, he would have crushed this KS.

That explains some, but not $800+K. There have been some pretty huge sets of PDFs of more popular games for less, on the Bundle of Holding. And even the current (record-blowing) Humble Bundle is doing a bit less, and that includes a huge selection of current PDFs of the #2 RPG (Pathfinder).

Quote from: CRKrueger;882557Because, you know, going into a death trap laden tomb, you might never hear a grinding sound, see a block moving behind you and have only a few seconds to decide. :rolleyes:

During those few seconds, the characters will see, hear, feel, and otherwise sense a lot of things. In just a split second, a skilled person can process a ton of sensory input. Because players can only see and hear via question and answer, tabletop games simply aren't able to handle this.

Tabletop games simply aren't the place to handle these kind of reactions, and the pattern established in all the rest of play is that things are not in real time. Players roll for surprise, say, or if they are ambushed they can do things like ask what their attackers look like. Even if a DM is going to insist on using a countdown, at the very least, they should establish how countdowns work with players rather than just springing it on them in a particular encounter.

Besides which, it's a stupid fucking test. In the module, the answer for the first countdown is supposed to be that the players run back the way they came to avoid being trapped by the sliding wall - but the rumbling sound could be anything. It could be the floor behind them sinking, in which case running backwards is the completely *wrong* thing to do. It could be a boulder rolling towards them (like in Indiana Jones), in which case the thing to do is to run forwards away from it.

Quote from: jhkim;882580During those few seconds, the characters will see, hear, feel, and otherwise sense a lot of things. In just a split second, a skilled person can process a ton of sensory input. Because players can only see and hear via question and answer, tabletop games simply aren't able to handle this.

Tabletop games simply aren't the place to handle these kind of reactions, and the pattern established in all the rest of play is that things are not in real time. Players roll for surprise, say, or if they are ambushed they can do things like ask what their attackers look like. Even if a DM is going to insist on using a countdown, at the very least, they should establish how countdowns work with players rather than just springing it on them in a particular encounter.

Besides which, it's a stupid fucking test. In the module, the answer for the first countdown is supposed to be that the players run back the way they came to avoid being trapped by the sliding wall - but the rumbling sound could be anything. It could be the floor behind them sinking, in which case running backwards is the completely *wrong* thing to do. It could be a boulder rolling towards them (like in Indiana Jones), in which case the thing to do is to run forwards away from it.

It's behind you.  You turn and see the block moving. It's not a mystery where or what the noise is.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882448I now think the phrase "nobody wins or loses a game of Dungeons & Dragons" is the single worst piece of bullshit Gary ever wrote.  Nobody ever gets eliminated from a campaign, true, but that's NOT the same thing as losing an individual game.

To me it meant that the story moves on. Characters can die, characters can finish their quests. But you can allways roll up a new character or take on a new quest. You cant "win" or "lose" something like that in the greater scope.

I lost alot of characters to Keep on the Borderlands. I never "lost" the game. Just that particular fight. We eventually cleared the thing. We didnt "win" the game. Isle of Dread was looming on the ocean horizon.

Or as someone else put it. "You can win and lose an adventure, but the game is open ended and can continue far past one adventure."

Quote from: jhkim;882580During those few seconds, the characters will see, hear, feel, and otherwise sense a lot of things. In just a split second, a skilled person can process a ton of sensory input. Because players can only see and hear via question and answer, tabletop games simply aren't able to handle this.

Tabletop games simply aren't the place to handle these kind of reactions, and the pattern established in all the rest of play is that things are not in real time. Players roll for surprise, say, or if they are ambushed they can do things like ask what their attackers look like. Even if a DM is going to insist on using a countdown, at the very least, they should establish how countdowns work with players rather than just springing it on them in a particular encounter.

Besides which, it's a stupid fucking test. In the module, the answer for the first countdown is supposed to be that the players run back the way they came to avoid being trapped by the sliding wall - but the rumbling sound could be anything. It could be the floor behind them sinking, in which case running backwards is the completely *wrong* thing to do. It could be a boulder rolling towards them (like in Indiana Jones), in which case the thing to do is to run forwards away from it.

Some people like things you don't.

So put on your big girl panties, stop whining, and get the fuck over yourself,

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882593Some people like things you don't.

So put on your big girl panties, stop whining, and get the fuck over yourself,

First, you need to take your own advice, Cupcake.

Quote from: CRKrueger;88257739 1st edition PDFs plus PDF of 2nd for $40.
39 1st edition PDFs plus Hardbound of 2nd for $60.

Exactly. I have negligible interest in a new edition of 7th Sea. But $40 for 40 books set in a Swashbuckling milieu that I can mine for ideas, artwork, and possible adventures is kind of tempting.

Quote from: jhkim;882580During those few seconds, the characters will see, hear, feel, and otherwise sense a lot of things. In just a split second, a skilled person can process a ton of sensory input. Because players can only see and hear via question and answer, tabletop games simply aren't able to handle this.

Tabletop games simply aren't the place to handle these kind of reactions, and the pattern established in all the rest of play is that things are not in real time. Players roll for surprise, say, or if they are ambushed they can do things like ask what their attackers look like. Even if a DM is going to insist on using a countdown, at the very least, they should establish how countdowns work with players rather than just springing it on them in a particular encounter.

As I previously said, I agree that what you suggest here is not what I would want a DM to do. But it isn't at all clear that the module told the DM to do exactly that. I refer back to your original countdown post.

Quote from: jhkim;881909The other false entrance specifically tells the DM the following -

QuoteThey will hear a rumbling from behind (or beside if some are at 30' within) them. At this instant begin slowly counting to 10 -- about 1.5 seconds per count -- and if you reach 10 before any player has reacted as noted below, the huge stone block, 10' thick, has slid shut and completely sealed off the passageway.

In the description to the DM that you quoted, nowhere does it say that,

   "The DM should refuse to explain what the PCs see or hear, which direction "behind you" refers to, or to answer any of the players' questions. The DM should simply keep counting down from 10 (at 1.5 second intervals) until the players declare that their PC runs away in the correct direction or they are trapped."

It is true that it doesn't tell the DM not to do that. But why should it have to tell the DM not to do that? Not doing that, in other words a player asking "What do I see?" and getting a response from the DM, is a standard player-DM interaction in D&D.

A countdown may or may not have been something a player has seen. If not, good DMing would explain how that works or use it in a less perilous situation before dropping it on the players here. But that having been said, "You need to take your turn now" was a common thing players do when playing board games or war games, a clock is not unknown in chess, and a countdown is something I've done and seen done more than a few times in RPGs when players are dithering over making a decision and time is pressing.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882593Some people like things you don't.

So put on your big girl panties, stop whining, and get the fuck over yourself,

Gronan - from what I understand, you don't run modules at all - you've never played or run Tomb of Horrors. Further, by your own admission, you don't like tournament modules in general, or Tomb of Horrors in particular. And yet somehow you feel compelled to speak up for the silent masses who really do think that Tomb of Horrors - and throw out insults to imply that anyone who speaks against it is some kind of pansy.

Previously, you wrote:

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;881760And TOMB OF HORRORS was CLEARLY labelled as a way to kill ultra high level characters, and Gary never made ANY bones about it.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882072I've never liked the idea of D&D tournaments, frankly.  I've always found the notion inane.  (This is not the same as a convention game.  Tournaments are specifically to find a WINNER.)  But D&D players went to GenCon and saw the historical miniatures tournaments and their prizes, and they wanted prizes too.

SO how the hell do you figure out who is the "best" D&D player in four hours?

The easy way is "the last one to die."

This explains much about tournament modules.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882114Not having ever run a module, I cannot answer to that.

But I know that both Ernie and Rob Kuntz teleported out at some point.  Ernie told me two years ago he never actually made it to the end.  Rob said that as the demi lich started to materialized, he grabbed as much treasure as he could and also teleported out.

Of course this was when "teleport" transported one person, so the rest of your party would be well and truly fucked.

I don't really LIKE Tomb of Horrors, you understand; I just get tired of some people's constant whining about it, instead of a simple "Well, that's not to my taste."

If there are people out there who really do think that playing through Tomb of Horrors is fun, I'd like to hear from them. However, it doesn't seem like you have anything of substance to say.

Many things in game design are a matter of taste, but some things are just plain bad. Linear adventure modules with prewritten story are bad. You might find a handful of people who claim to like them, but overwhelmingly they just cause problems. Likewise, I feel like the tournament style of early D&D modules was bad - "inane" as you called it.

Quote from: Nexus;882415The Tomb of Horrors is, as someone called it earlier a Temple of Fuck You

I think you're mistaking it with a certain Venger Satanis game;).

The first time I ran the ToH, my players knew the legend of the tomb for years.  They didn't even think to start looking for it until they were 12-14 range.  Some died and came back, some died and didn't come back, some lived.  They won. They still talk about how awesome it was.

Quote from: Bren;882623In the description to the DM that you quoted, nowhere does it say that,

   "The DM should refuse to explain what the PCs see or hear, which direction "behind you" refers to, or to answer any of the players' questions. The DM should simply keep counting down from 10 (at 1.5 second intervals) until the players declare that their PC runs away in the correct direction or they are trapped."

It is true that it doesn't tell the DM not to do that. But why should it have to tell the DM not to do that? Not doing that, in other words a player asking "What do I see?" and getting a response from the DM, is a standard player-DM interaction in D&D.

It instructs the DM to count off every 1.5 seconds, mentally noting when characters declare actions, and at the end of the count compute where each character is. Since the counts are timed this way, that doesn't leave much time for answering questions, and less for the players to respond to the answers.

The DM could pause the count to answer questions - but I contend that runs counter to both the wording and intent of the countdown.

Quote from: Bren;882623A countdown may or may not have been something a player has seen. If not, good DMing would explain how that works or use it in a less perilous situation before dropping it on the players here. But that having been said, "You need to take your turn now" was a common thing players do when playing board games or war games, a clock is not unknown in chess, and a countdown is something I've done and seen done more than a few times in RPGs when players are dithering over making a decision and time is pressing.

A clock isn't something you whip out in chess just for when your opponent is going to make a critical move. It's a established procedure that both sides know about.

Your point about good DMing is exactly what I'm talking about. The module encourages *bad* DMing because it introduces a countdown as something to be introduced out of the blue only at a lethal point in a specific area.

Quote from: jhkim;882625Many things in game design are a matter of taste, but some things are just plain bad. Linear adventure modules with prewritten story are bad. You might find a handful of people who claim to like them, but overwhelmingly they just cause problems. Likewise, I feel like the tournament style of early D&D modules was bad - "inane" as you called it.

I don't like it any better than you do but we have absolutely no fucking right to call it bad.  People in many places including this thread have said they had fun with it.  I refuse to say that they are bad people for liking a bad module, I refuse to say they are deluded and thought they had fun when they actually didn't, I refuse to say that they are lying about liking the module, and I refuse to say they are idiots for liking a bad module.

I'd rather go hungry than eat green pepper, but that doesn't make it objectively bad.

Quote from: jhkim;882625If there are people out there who really do think that playing through Tomb of Horrors is fun, I'd like to hear from them.

Quote from: CRKrueger;882633The first time I ran the ToH, my players knew the legend of the tomb for years.  They didn't even think to start looking for it until they were 12-14 range.  Some died and came back, some died and didn't come back, some lived.  They won. They still talk about how awesome it was.

:popcorn:

The Tomb had a legendary status among gamers when I got into D&D, and we ran through it a few times. It was a huge amount of fun, and good memories every time, even if we never completed it. It was simply braggable to talk about how far one got into it.

Since that time its been an invaluable resource for other games I've ran, from Warhammer to Godlike, as I've plundered many ideas from it.

Quote from: CRKrueger;882633The first time I ran the ToH, my players knew the legend of the tomb for years.  They didn't even think to start looking for it until they were 12-14 range.  Some died and came back, some died and didn't come back, some lived.  They won. They still talk about how awesome it was.

Thanks, Krueger. This is a valid argument - though it also has to be weighed against other experiences. I don't know enough about your group to say anything about your experience.

The reason that the one data point doesn't totally convince me is that I know people who will say they enjoyed things - when what they were enjoying had little to do with the inherent quality. i.e. I had a great time eating snacks and drinking beer with my friends while we watched Plan 9 From Outer Space and Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter. However, that doesn't mean that those were good movies. Likewise in RPGs, with good GMing and a good group, I find that even a crappy module can be fun.

good or bad by whose standards?

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;882640good or bad by whose standards?

My standards are obviously the only ones that matter:p:D!

in that case, let's end this thread by having you declare the goodness and worthiness of Tomb of Horrors. :D

Do you rule in favor of Wick or Gygax?

I greatly enjoy S1: Tomb of Horrors. I've run it as a Tourney several times and I've run it as a non-tourney as well. Its tremendously fun with the right players and a DM who acts fairly.

If anyone has specific questions about how to DM the adventure, I am very happy to share my experiences and what I've learned.

BTW, the 4e version is shortened, but quite fun. I have run it once for the home crew and I am looking forward to doing it again as a convention event.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;882636I don't like it any better than you do but we have absolutely no fucking right to call it bad.  People in many places including this thread have said they had fun with it.  I refuse to say that they are bad people for liking a bad module, I refuse to say they are deluded and thought they had fun when they actually didn't, I refuse to say that they are lying about liking the module, and I refuse to say they are idiots for liking a bad module.

I like Plan 9 From Outer Space but I wouldn't say it was a good movie.

Quote from: jhkim;882635It instructs the DM to count off every 1.5 seconds, mentally noting when characters declare actions, and at the end of the count compute where each character is. Since the counts are timed this way, that doesn't leave much time for answering questions, and less for the players to respond to the answers.

It leaves as much time as one allows to answer the question.

In your example the DM did not even try to answer any of the players' questions, which is contrary to the usual practice of question and answer that one sees in D&D. This leads me to think the DM in question was either inexperienced or was intentionally increasing the deadliness of the trap beyond what the module suggested.

I agree that the DM can hardly answer many questions in detail while continuing the count uninterrupted, but even if he does not interrupt his count, it is possible to quickly and succinctly ask and answer a question or two in 5-6 seconds, which would still leave a count of 5 or so in which to run away. Refusing to answer questions was a DM decision contrary to usual practice.

I would expect the DM might pause the count to allow a player to ask a question and to answer the question. That might expend 1 or 2 ticks from the countdown. I would expect that the DM would resolve an action like casting Disintegrate or Stone to Flesh on the moving wall or Dimension Door or Teleport to escape.

QuoteThe DM could pause the count to answer questions - but I contend that runs counter to both the wording and intent of the countdown.

I can see how you arrived at your interpretation that a DM is not supposed to answer questions or pause the countdown. I don't agree that it is the most reasonable interpretation of what the DM is supposed to do. Nor that an uninterrupted count is even very feasible if the players start making action declarations.

I assume the countdown is intended to create a sense of urgency and to force the players to make decisions quickly...not to make decisions blindly. One can still achieve what I think is the intended aim by allowing the countdown to be paused while the DM briefly answers a question or two or clarifies the direction of motion of the wall and the direction of flight of any PCs.

In fact, I think it would be very difficult in the 15 seconds of an uninterrupted countdown for the the players to hear the count, for the DM to hear and understand the action declarations of all the players, and for the DM to note exactly when any appropriate action declarations occurred since the players will all be talking at once as they ask questions, repeat their questions when the DM fails to answer the first time, frantically declare an action, then declare new actions when the DM refuses to resolve their first action or give them any indication of interim success or failure for that action. Unless the players sit in dumbfounded silence (which is possible) a completely uninterrupted countdown sounds logistically problematic.

QuoteA clock isn't something you whip out in chess just for when your opponent is going to make a critical move. It's a established procedure that both sides know about.

No. But jogging someone to make a move is really common in lots of games. And speaking of common, the player asking a question about what his PC can perceive and the DM then answering that question, even if only to say, "You can't tell" is an established procedure in D&D. Unless the module said not to answer questions, I would expect that the DM would answer some questions, even if the number of questions allowed was limited, the answers were brief, and the time spent looking around was charged against the countdown clock.

QuoteYour point about good DMing is exactly what I'm talking about. The module encourages *bad* DMing because it introduces a countdown as something to be introduced out of the blue only at a lethal point in a specific area.

Presumably the DM read the module ahead of time and thought a bit about what she had read before she started running the module. You are correct that the module doesn't tell the DM exactly how to execute a countdown. But all modules require some DM thought and interpretation. I don't think a module that fails to spell out in great detail how to execute a countdown is a bad module.

I don't think Tomb of Horrors was written for novice DMs to run for novice players. I think it was intended to be deadly for inexperienced players, even if their characters were relatively high level. And I suspect the designer assumed the DM running Tomb of Horrors would already be experienced. I think a DM who fails to describe which direction is front and which is back, who refuses to answer questions, who refuses to provide any feedback on the progress or result of the actions the PCs have already declared is either inexperienced as a DM or just not doing their job. I don't think a module can solve that problem.

I also think that unsuccessfully implementing a countdown can be a painful, but useful learning experience for both the DM and the players. I suspect that may not have been an accident of the design.

I'll take a step back and go over a bit about what my position is.

1) What got me into this was having played Tomb of Horrors as a teenager in the 80s. There were no fistfights or crying, but I found it really frustrating and annoying - with a lot in common with Wick's description of it. I particularly got ticked off at descriptions of 12-year-old Wick and his friends as being stupid for falling into the traps.

2) Gronan described it as "a way to kill ultra high level characters". I think that if it had been billed like that and I was expecting that, I could have enjoyed it better. As it was, I went into expecting a non-hack-and-slash, thinking person's module - which seemed to me how it was billed.

3) We used pre-made characters for it, because we were playing with a summer-only group and didn't have a continuous campaign at the time. If I had been younger and lost long-developed campaign characters, I'd have been far more annoyed.

4) Reading the module later, I found that a bunch of the things that most annoyed me were actually written into the module. My account of the first countdown expressed that pretty well.

QuoteGM: The floor shifts and you hear a rumbling behind you. 10.
Player: I turn around. What do I see?
GM: 9.
Player: My character is looking in that direction. Is there anything to see?
GM: 8
Player: Is the floor dropping away?
GM: 7
Player: Is there still a path to run back out?
GM: 6
Player: My character will react based on what he sees.
GM: 5
Player: What the fuck is happening?
GM: 4
Player: Is a voice actually counting down?
etc.

5) I still contend that many of the traps are arbitrary, and that getting through them isn't a matter of being smart in processing clues in-character, but rather at best via metagame guess-what-I'm-thinking (reading DM cues and designer intent), or just plain guessing.

6) I did love the presentation of the module, with the keyed illustrations, which is vastly better than randomly scattering in illustrations into the DM book. Still, I feel like it had a lot of bad advice and arbitrariness.

Actually, moreso than many of these, one of the things that annoyed me is the pushback that if I didn't like the module, then I was (a) stupid, (b) a whiner, and (c) couldn't deal with character death.

Quote from: jhkim;8826531) What got me into this was having played Tomb of Horrors as a teenager in the 80s. There were no fistfights or crying, but I found it really frustrating and annoying - with a lot in common with Wick's description of it. I particularly got ticked off at descriptions of 12-year-old Wick and his friends as being stupid for falling into the traps.

Wick described the 12-year old players as rash and stupid. Just like he described the 5E players who were not 12-years old as rash and stupid. The players behaving rashly and stupidly by taking absolutely no precautions* before leaping into the demon statue's mouth is necessary for Wick to tell the story he wants to tell. I'm skeptical that any real people behaved in the way Wick described.

Quote2) Gronan described it as "a way to kill ultra high level characters" I think that if it had been billed like that and I was expecting that, I could have enjoyed it better.

That makes sense. But I don't see covering player expectations as the duty of the module. The DM should provide that context after after reading and understanding the module ahead of play and considering whether or not the module is suitable for his or her table of players.

Quote3) We used pre-made characters for it, because we were playing with a summer-only group and didn't have a continuous campaign at the time. If I had been younger and lost long-developed campaign characters, I'd have been far more annoyed.

Undoubtedly. But pre-made characters sometimes inspire less cautious play since the sting of their loss is minor and the player has not had a chance to get used to the characters strengths, weaknesses, and resources.

I've talked enough about 4 and 5 already. No need for me to belabor points you disagree with.



* I discount as a precaution the 5E players who left all their treasure and magic items behind before leaping into the mouth so that oh, so clever Discordian John Wick could pick them up. The idea that a character would choose to discard his magic items before exploring alone ahead of the party seems foolish as well as unlikely.

Quote from: CRKrueger;88257739 1st edition PDFs plus PDF of 2nd for $40.
39 1st edition PDFs plus Hardbound of 2nd for $60.

If Monte Cook could have thrown in all of D&D3 with Numenera, he would have crushed this KS.

This is actually kind of tempting, except I have more gaming PDFs than I can READ right now, much less RUN.

40 new ones would just get downloaded, sorted into folders, and forgotten.

[I get that other people don't impulse buy PDFs because random jerks on a random RPG message board (*cough*) tell them it's a cool game. That is actually my bad. :P ]

On the Demon Maw:

It is described as similar to a stationary sphere of annihilation in terms of effect, not identified as one, so there is no ground for assuming that one could move it.

The sphere of annihilation is described in Supplement I Greyhawk (p.56) as "an absolutely black globe of nothingness, 2' in diameter. Anything which comes in contact with it is completely and irrevocably destroyed, wishes not withstanding."

Note that destruction is contingent upon contact. As it would normally be moving under control of a magic-user, the sphere would serve as a three-dimensional "eraser" two feet in diameter.

When it is stationary, however,  feeding it depends on movement of the material being fed in. Hence the mention of plenty of room in the (about half again wider) mouth for "those who wish to leap in." Leaping provides enough momentum for them to be completely destroyed.

The Dungeon Masters Guide was not published until the year following the Tomb. The DMG adds that "any matter which comes in contact with a sphere is instantly sucked into the void."

This added reference to "sucking" apparently suggests to some folks that additional contiguous matter is also pulled into contact with the sphere, with some arbitrarily great force.

They wave aside the question of just how much force, how exerted (sucking "instantly" across space?), and what binding is needed to keep pulling rather than be severed. They assume -- simply because it suits them -- that if the tip of a 10' pole reaches the hole's edge then the whole pole is instantly destroyed along with the character carrying it; yet somehow not all the air, the tomb, the planet, the prime material plane!

This assumption is of course their own contrivance, not stated in the text.

I suspect that the added phrase merely reflects Gary's tendency in writing to favor color over clarity, that he did not intend to imply this problem.

The "count down"* text in the second False Entrance Tunnel does not instruct the DM to cease the ordinary duty of listening to players and giving them such information as would be apparent from their figures' perspectives.

* (Actually it's a count up, which I think is less effective.)

Obviously the DM cannot very well pay attention to multiple players saying different things at once, and a statement such as "I run back out the entrance" might take a second and a half by itself. Likewise, the DM's statement of the block's progress might take up most of the real time equivalent of a count.

The characters however  would all be acting simultaneously, perhaps more quickly than it takes to say.

So, necessary interactions are likely to draw out the countdown's real-time duration. The point is to force players to act with reasonable alacrity, in light of their characters having but a 15 second window of opportunity before the passage is sealed.

It was not then customary to have the kind of "time warp" that recent rules sets impose, giving a player late in "initiative order" perhaps several minutes to plan the action of six seconds while treating as in the past events that really would be simultaneous or even in the future beyond his decision (all from a "helicopter's eye" perspective).

Now, the obvious thing to do upon hearing a rumbling in the dungeon is to look in its direction. When you see a stone block moving to close the only known way out of a tomb, it doesn't take a genius to figure some quick action might be called for if you'd rather it not be your tomb!

The move rate given is four times normal combat speed, admittedly still more a walk than a sprint for most if you work it out, but realism in that matter was not a high priority.

The essential fact is that if a lightly encumbered thief or such (12" move) is on point and steps on the paving, she needs less than 3 (full) counts to get out. Even a lead figure so bizarrely burdened as to have a 3" move has just enough time with an immediate reaction. Good practice would have the rest of the party strung out at intervals behind, so that a single trap or area effect spell is unlikely to get all.
 
It is rather harsh that spells not on the list in the module, such as Teleport and Word of Recall, and magic items such as a Chime of Opening or an Oil of Etherialness (which per a note would run the risk of a demon encounter), are arbitrarily prevented from enabling escape once the block seals the trap. Considering all else that is barred if the stipulation is taken literally, from the aid of various monsters to "artifact" level items, it may be too implausible a stretch as well as arguably unfair.

One might reasonably dismiss this arbitrary limit as pertinent only to the original tournament context.

Quote from: jhkim;882654Actually, moreso than many of these, one of the things that annoyed me is the pushback that if I didn't like the module, then I was (a) stupid, (b) a whiner, and (c) couldn't deal with character death.

Nah, that's just Gronan and crew swinging their E-peens and thinking that their way is the right way.  They never say it out loud, but after a while you see through their protests otherwise.

Quote from: BrenAnd to be clear, I don't really think all those players were as stupid as John Wick says they were.

It is anyhow not as magnificent a folly as the Gazebo Incident or the Head of Vecna.

Quote from: Elfdart;882378I also have a hard time believing that most other players thought something called the Tomb of Horrors would be "not exactly lethal".

Tunnels & Trolls had titles such as
City of Terrors
Naked Doom
Deathtrap Equalizer
.. and for the really, really thick:
OVERKILL

Quote from: jhkim;882403This is the tabletop equivalent of pixel-bitching...

Nope. It's the tabletop equivalent of an Easter egg.

Quote from: jhkim;882654Actually, moreso than many of these, one of the things that annoyed me is the pushback that if I didn't like the module, then I was (a) stupid, (b) a whiner, and (c) couldn't deal with character death.

(a) Players who didn't take any precautions in the Tomb of Horrors before leaping into a demon's mouth were stupid.

(b) Complaining that PCs who did something stupid inside the massive death trap labeled the Tomb of Horrors and got dead because of that does sound like whining.

(c) Follows from (b). If PCs can't die when they do something stupid in a deadly situation when can they die?

(d) Disliking the module is perfectly fine. In fact, I think disliking the module  is a reasonable response. From what I know, I wouldn't like the module. Not liking the module is different than declaring that Tomb of Horrors is a bad module. In the same way that my dislike for FATE, HeroWars/Heroquest, and several versions of D&D doesn't make FATE, Heroquest, or D&D a bad game.

Quote from: Phillip;882690It is anyhow not as magnificent a folly as the Gazebo Incident or the Head of Vecna.

A folly? A folly is a type of unusual and decorative garden architecture. Nothing in an RPG could be more magnifcent than the garden folly known as the Dreaded Gazebo.

I don't think I'm familiar with the Head of Vecna. But the Gazebo incident is hysterical. And a wonderful example of the shoot first, think later attitude of some D&D players. And I find it at least a little bit plausible that a player with a limited vocabulary might hastily react with hostile magic direct towards an architectural object. Certainly it seems more plausible to me than that an entire group of players played follow the leader as one-by-one they jumped into the maw of a demon and disappeared without a trace.

Quote from: jhkim;882654Actually, moreso than many of these, one of the things that annoyed me is the pushback that if I didn't like the module, then I was (a) stupid, (b) a whiner, and (c) couldn't deal with character death.

Huh? Who said that? Those may be among the reasons some people don't like it, but I don't see anyone claiming they are why you don't like it.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;882463Is the objective in D&D to always win, or to play your character? That's the difference. "Winning" then can be things that actually make your character worse off in an objective sense if you're playing them out properly.

You can do that, but there's only so much reckless stupidity (or for that matter ordinary homebody self-preservation) that fits a character for the game's premise. The sane homebody won't want to go anywhere near the Tomb of Horrors, and the reckless idiot won't get invited on many expeditions.

Quote from: estar;882578Well I think that because how it was with RPGs at the time. I doubt there was much of a sense that you "acted" as your character with a funny voice and a distinct personality. So campaigns, and adventures where mish-mash of what the players and referee found funny and interesting in and out of game. Like the Old Geezer said "we made up shit that was fun and interesting."

So for ToH part of its legend was to see if you can beat Gygax deadliest dungeon. But obviously that wasn't universal as we can see from Old Geezer's comments.

BTW, I agree with your assessment about the Giant modules.

In my neck of wood, it was the Runequest gamers that went to the local college that I first noticed people really getting into roleplaying their characters. Most players then (and now for that matter) play their characters as an extension of themselves with maybe one or two quirks for color.

Right. It originated (and is widely still approached) as just a game -- a game that can go in whatever direction you want, incorporate all sorts of sub-games. In the 1980s, there was a rise to prominence of people who got all snooty about a thespian approach being "right" and everyone else being wrong and inferior.

Today that's become an old Establishment, the Internet allowing it to berate from its ivory towers the unwashed masses around the globe (or at least the fraction who bother to visit its favored sites).

How many of the generality of actual game players are even aware of the One True Wayism, never mind devoted to it in practice, is doubtful.

Quote from: jhkim;882654Actually, moreso than many of these, one of the things that annoyed me is the pushback that if I didn't like the module, then I was (a) stupid, (b) a whiner, and (c) couldn't deal with character death.

(d): Repeatedly pedantically pointing out flaws that either dont exist and/or reading things in the most one-track-mind/literal sense possible.
(e): telling us we didnt really enjoy the game or "were not playing it as intended"
(f): claiming an intent of the module that has been proven false.

This is where some are taking you to task.

I played through it totally unaware of its module history other than that it was a famous module for high level characters. I expect a module for high level characters to be hard. Queen of the Demonweb pits is also a really tough module for high level characters. Just in a very different way.

One thing you keep missing or glossing over.

The module gives players a fair warning right out the gate. The place has a history that the PCs likely have uncovered just to locate the Tomb since it is allways hidden away out in the boonies. Unless you were playing it at a con as a tournament then you actually had to actively seek it out.

This was how we played it and I was the one who unearthed records of Acerrack's tomb and did most of the footwork talking to sages and negotiating access to ancient records.

We knew the place was the final resting place of a great sorcerer king who had become a Demi Lich. What was a demi-lich? No one knew. But anything with the word LICH in its title could not be good news. We knew before even setting out that the place was trapped, trapped, and more trapped. Then trapped some more. Magical traps, physical traps, gas traps, and more. The Tomb made the Ghost Tower of Iverness look like a pleasant summer picnic.

All of the above was learnable from the modules history section via the DM.

Quote from: Phillip;882702Huh? Who said that? Those may be among the reasons some people don't like it, but I don't see anyone claiming they are why you don't like it.

I was going to say something like that.

Not that someone is stupid or a whiner just because they don't like something. The bigger point is, as entertaining as this thread has been to read, I honestly don't understand why any of it matters. And I don't understand why Wick, or anyone who does a similar rant, isn't simply dismissed as stupid and a whiner.

Look at it like this. In the real world, we have these things called guns. And they're good for shooting things. Does that mean everyone can successfully hit their target with a gun? No. Maybe not even the majority of people can do it. But nonetheless, the guns themselves are proven to be effective for those who can use them.

If a person just doesn't like guns, that's one thing. It's a matter of opinion. But if a person comes out talking about how guns are stupid because you can't hit shit with one, it wouldn't take a lot of debate or argument to know that the problem is that person's aim just sucks.

Well, Tomb of Horrors is regarded as one of the top 3 D&D modules of all time. Even in this thread, you can see clearly a lot of people HAVE had a lot of fun playing it. So, just like someone who can't ever hit their target with a gun has shitty aim, if Wick picked up the module and it turned into a train wreck, it's just because he's a shitty gamer.

We don't need to argue what is or isn't in the module. We don't need to argue about what the module's intended purpose is. We don't need to argue how clearly it was communicated. Wick's own words serve as a confession that his GMing sucks. Not much else really needs to be said.

I wish gamers in general would think this way. That anyone who gripes about how feature X in game Y is "broken" or "doesn't work" that it should not be taken as a flaw in the game, but as a flaw in the person who's confessing their incompetence. Maybe that would cut down on the stupid shit gamers say that unfortunately every so often coalesces into "conventional wisdom."

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;882644in that case, let's end this thread by having you declare the goodness and worthiness of Tomb of Horrors. :D

Do you rule in favor of Wick or Gygax?

Gygax.
I'm not sure I'd like ToH if I was to play it. I assume that Wick might be telling the truth in his story. But Wick is committing the ultimate sin.
Namely, he projectshis preferences as universal.

While ToH mightbe a bad module for everyone who shares Wick's paradigm, and for some people that don't, it's not a bad module for the people who enjoyed it.  Thus is Wick's claim disproven!

He's still an extremely well -paid community actor at this point.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;882664This is actually kind of tempting, except I have more gaming PDFs than I can READ right now, much less RUN.

40 new ones would just get downloaded, sorted into folders, and forgotten.

[I get that other people don't impulse buy PDFs because random jerks on a random RPG message board (*cough*) tell them it's a cool game. That is actually my bad. :P ]

What, you mean not everyone does that:D?

Quote from: Lunamancer;882743We don't need to argue what is or isn't in the module. We don't need to argue about what the module's intended purpose is. We don't need to argue how clearly it was communicated. Wick's own words serve as a confession that his GMing sucks. Not much else really needs to be said.

It does help to figure out if Wick is a liar or not since those with the module, or whatever else he makes stories up about, and fact check. Is what he says really possible in the module?

And as this very thread shows. someone else can and will parrot what he says as if its truth. and we have enough false claims about this or that without some self agrandizing jackass adding more to the big list of RPG falsehoods just so he can sell 5 more books.

Quote from: Omega;882739We knew the place was the final resting place of a great sorcerer king who had become a Demi Lich. What was a demi-lich? No one knew.

I thought maybe it was only half a lich, a not-quite lich. Later heard that Acerak was actually a badder badass.

Then I thought it was rather a rotten "spoiler" that so many legends from the modules were statted in the Fiend Folio (beginning of the end of delicious mystery for the Drow).

Now I've read some of Tomb of Horrors a few times, but not really put much in memory. I never got to the treasure vault myself, so maybe in the back of my mind there's still a hope of playing in it again.

Honestly, I don't think this story of Wick's is some kind of bid to pump up his KS or anything like that... I just think it's how his mind works. I've known a few compulsive liars and the whole thing has that same air about it.

You start with a little kernel of truth, like "I think Tomb of Horrors sucked and it is not the kind of gaming I like," and then it just starts spinning away in feverish and implausible elaborations. Things that you KNOW can be fact checked and shown to be wrong by your target audience, but you just can't stop yourself once you get going. A little pit stop in which you have Gary Gygax make an unexplained and probably uncharacteristic insult which fails to recognize your awesomeness... And then bring it all around to take that same insult (which deep down you are scared may be the truth) and turn it into a triumph leaving the reader smiling at your incredible badassery! That's how us community theater wannabes role baby! Fuck yeah John Wick! You da MAN!

I have one game by Wick, and that is Houses of the Blooded. Out of maybe 400 pages, probably 150 of them are Wick tooting his own GMing horn: anecdotes of times he left his players overcome by his GMing prowess, remarks people have made about him in years past... You will be reading a chapter on poisons or something, and WHAM! He comes out of left field with another personal GMing anecdote. Fuck, Wick! Just shut up and tell us the damned rules!

Honestly though? I have little doubt the guy can craft a good set of game rules. But with him publishing the new 7th Sea rules himself? I would hope he gets an editor to reign in that streak of egomania which can get rampant in the way that very precariously founded egomania often seems to get.

Quote from: Lunamancer;882743I wish gamers in general would think this way. That anyone who gripes about how feature X in game Y is "broken" or "doesn't work" that it should not be taken as a flaw in the game, but as a flaw in the person who's confessing their incompetence. Maybe that would cut down on the stupid shit gamers say that unfortunately every so often coalesces into "conventional wisdom."

Tunnels & Trolls well blows my mind as nuts, even rolling back the treatment of armor to the original ("extra hit points") approach. But I know that Ken St Andre runs a rocking game with it, and lots of other people love it too.

There's a certain sensibility to it that just doesn't click with me except on rare occasions.

For that matter, I've had a lot of fun with T&T solos. Those sure give the Tomb of Horrors a run for the money in the "gotcha" department! Die and die again. It's no coincidence that Flying Buffalo/Blade was also the publisher of the Grimtooth's Traps series. (But they also put out the Citybook series, great stuff for quite a different kind of adventure.)

Probably most folks who utterly loathe ToH wouldn't think much more highly of Tegel Manor, Dark Tower, White Plume Mountain, Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, Snakepipe Hollow, Castle Amber, Temple of Poseidon, Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror, Nightmare Keep, or many other dungeons (published or unpublished) that stand out as among the most memorably fun to me.

Funny thing about how Gary allegedly tried to be snarky: Didn't he write something in the AD&D PHB or DMG promising that D&D players would all become "amateur thespians"? I think he said accomplished amateur thespians, so maybe there's a self-consistent dig ...

Quote from: Manzanaro;882771I just think it's how his mind works. I've known a few compulsive liars and the whole thing has that same air about it.

It's to be expected for any seasoned GM to possess high retcon ability score. ;)

Quote from: Phillip;882768I thought maybe it was only half a lich, a not-quite lich. Later heard that Acerak was actually a badder badass.

I thought he might be some sort of incomplete lich. Like one nearly complete in the process to lichdom. Not one well past it. But that didn't jibe with the legends of him retiring to a final resting place. Yet was so confident that he let it be known he was a demi-lich.

Which is something some of the earlier module villains were great for. They didnt hide the fact they were monsters. Bring it!

Fine, I take back what I said about Tomb of Horrors being objectively bad. I personally feel like the GM advice and examples are generally terrible in it, but whatever floats your boat.

What bugs me is the idea that disliking Tomb of Horrors implies hating all of dungeons and D&D, and a wimp who can't stand dying.

Quote from: Phillip;882777Probably most folks who utterly loathe ToH wouldn't think much more highly of Tegel Manor, Dark Tower, White Plume Mountain, Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, Snakepipe Hollow, Castle Amber, Temple of Poseidon, Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror, Nightmare Keep, or many other dungeons (published or unpublished) that stand out as among the most memorably fun to me.

To Phillip's assumption - that's absolutely wrong. In particular, I think Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan is awesome - and is the polar opposite of Tomb of Horrors. It has a solid and intriguing background, and puzzles and challenges that aren't arbitrary guess-what-I'm-thinking. The tournament version has actual characters rather than faceless pawns, and good reasons for the characters to get through.

Quote from: jhkim;882858What bugs me is the idea that disliking Tomb of Horrors implies hating all of dungeons and D&D, and a wimp who can't stand dying.

Nah. Alot of people dont like the tournament modules. Any of them. This goes way back to the early days of Dragon even.

I dont think the module gives bad advice. The problem is it assumes a very competent seasoned DM who doesnt need to have their hand held throughout.

What the module needed was the "This is a module for experienced DMs" warning some others had. A few others needed that tag too.

Quote from: jhkim;882858What bugs me is the idea that disliking Tomb of Horrors implies hating all of dungeons and D&D, and a wimp who can't stand dying.

You should just choose a spot for your goalposts, and leave them there.

Quote from: Omega;882863I dont think the module gives bad advice. The problem is it assumes a very competent seasoned DM who doesnt need to have their hand held throughout.

I've been DMing for about 31 years now, and I still think it's a bad module.  I guess I'm a total incompetent.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882874I've been DMing for about 31 years now, and I still think it's a bad module.  I guess I'm a total incompetent.

Not at all. It just means you dont like the module. No different from some DMs hating Expedition to the Barrier Peaks or anything with the word Dragonlance attatched to it.

What elements of the module didn't you like? The lethality? The layout?

Personally as a player and as a DM I was dissapointed that even if you found him. I wanted to TALK to this guy! I wanted to hear him gloat as befits someone of his ego. Instead. Acerrak is just a pre-programmed skull. bah! I was robbed!

Quote from: Omega;882880What elements of the module didn't you like? The lethality? The layout?

The arbitrariness of the lethality.  A lot of the time, there's just not enough information given to the players.  And some of it, I will admit is how some of the traps were run by some DMs.

For example, the Mouth trap with the Sphere inside it.  According to how a Sphere works, it SUCKS the object touching it in.  So what should happen, assuming the players are properly paranoid and use a long stick, is that they should see the character probably yelp and get sucked into the mouth.    (In MY game, I allowed them to make a Saving Throw Vs. Breath Weapon to release the 10ft pole they used to poke it, some DMs won't.)  Most DMs I know, and some of them right here have said so, that the players just 'vanish'.  But that's not how it works.

Most the other traps are equally unfair.  Now, yes, I understand, life is unfair, and frankly, I take great comfort in that, but D&D is not life, it is a game.  And being a dick in a game means I won't have any players at my table.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882874I've been DMing for about 31 years now, and I still think it's a bad module.  I guess I'm a total incompetent.

I don't know that it's bad so much as it is ridiculously unfair and punitive. However, as that seems to be the point, well, mission accomplished, I guess.

Quote from: cranebump;882885I don't know that it's bad so much as it is ridiculously unfair and punitive. However, as that seems to be the point, well, mission accomplished, I guess.

That's what I consider 'bad' (I want to point out that I did not say it was Objectively so.  It's IS just MY opinion.)

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882882The arbitrariness of the lethality.  A lot of the time, there's just not enough information given to the players.  And some of it, I will admit is how some of the traps were run by some DMs.

For example, the Mouth trap with the Sphere inside it.

1: My problem was that too many are both visually concealed and only revealed by what may be a chance and specific means. Like the entrance that you have to be poking high up with long objects to reveal. Lack of clues and cues is another one for a few. But the riddle at the start does clue you in to a few things like avoiding the TWO green men portals, or searching pits for secret doors.

2: Its described as a portal/mouth simmilar to a fixed location sphere of annihialation. About 3ft in diameter. So probably sucks in whomever touches it. Our DM, and later myself, read that as if you poked it with a pole or sword it would suck it out of your hand.

Quote from: jhkim;882858What bugs me is the idea that disliking Tomb of Horrors implies hating all of dungeons and D&D, and a wimp who can't stand dying.

I don't like Tomb of Horrors, but I do think you lack the "dungeoneer" mentality. Like I had a bunch of players who used hold portal on a sarcophagus lid, drilled holes in it, poured in oil, and killed the mummy - something which 1st level characters could have done, even to a level-draining vampire. That is a dungeoneer, one who uses their wits to defeat obstacles. That's what one player called "high-minded hack." You're on the thespy side, not the hack side.

D&D up to about 1985 or so was not written for thespy types. Which is why we ended up with World of Darkness, it was the thespy backlash against years of hack, most of which was not high-minded.

Quote from: Omega;8828901: My problem was that too many are both visually concealed and only revealed by what may be a chance and specific means. Like the entrance that you have to be poking high up with long objects to reveal. Lack of clues and cues is another one for a few. But the riddle at the start does clue you in to a few things like avoiding the TWO green men portals, or searching pits for secret doors.

Yeah, I agree.  The issue I think is assuming players will always clue in.

Quote from: Omega;8828902: Its described as a portal/mouth simmilar to a fixed location sphere of annihialation. About 3ft in diameter. So probably sucks in whomever touches it. Our DM, and later myself, read that as if you poked it with a pole or sword it would suck it out of your hand.

When something gets 'sucked in' it's visible.  A lot of DMs of the time used to make it that they just 'vanished'.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882882For example, the Mouth trap with the Sphere inside it.  According to how a Sphere works, it SUCKS the object touching it in.

There is no sucking in! I addressed that at length a few pages ago.

QuoteMost the other traps are equally unfair.

I reckon that's so if you equally arbitrarily twist most of them as in the two examples seen so far (the mouth and the sliding block in the second false entrance), rather than running them properly.

Quote from: Omega;882880Not at all. It just means you dont like the module. No different from some DMs hating Expedition to the Barrier Peaks or anything with the word Dragonlance attatched to it.

What elements of the module didn't you like? The lethality? The layout?

1) Advice like the countdowns are often very specific about how the GM should do things. Another example would be how to handle checking for pit traps, where is specifies that players can prod with a pole, but that only has a 4 in 6 chance of working. If the pit is activated by weight, why the 4 in 6?

2) There are a bunch of places where the module is very specific about "only the following spells or actions will work". Rather than allowing for creative solutions, it is trying to shut down creative ideas.

3) Most of the traps are non-standard magic, where things get teleported / disintegrated / transformed in ways that don't follow a known pattern. This makes it harder to make predictions or solutions except by guessing designer intent. Several are even one-use only, which doesn't seem believable given that the dungeon is established.

4) The solutions are often simply arbitrary, like the set of levers where pushing them all up shows and exit, but pushing them all down is a deathtrap - with no clue or instructions that suggest this.

5) The pre-generated characters are given as faceless matrix entries with only stats, no character or motivations. Further, the only motivation for the adventure is the vague rumor of treasure - which quickly shouldn't seem worth it given the fatalities. Even if you're just approaching it like a wargame, it should be valid to ask "is this whole thing worth it"?

6) In general, the whole dungeon seems specifically designed for a party of adventurers trying to go through it. Even among tournament modules, there are lots with much better justifications for the challenges they provide.

I don't recall anyone in our extended gaming groups (perhaps 5-6 GMs and 15-20 players on average) of the time ever playing or running ToH, though I believe virtually all of us who DMed owned it.  It was at least generally seen as something to be read and put into our collection, but never run.  I don't even recall our resident killer DM ever offering to run it and he was one of those guys who prided himself on his folder full of PCs he'd killed.*

*Of course no one generally played a second game with him.  He was a dick GM, but a fun guy otherwise.

Regarding the sphere of annihilation -

Quote from: Phillip;882687On the Demon Maw:

It is described as similar to a stationary sphere of annihilation in terms of effect, not identified as one, so there is no ground for assuming that one could move it.

The sphere of annihilation is described in Supplement I Greyhawk (p.56) as "an absolutely black globe of nothingness, 2' in diameter. Anything which comes in contact with it is completely and irrevocably destroyed, wishes not withstanding."

Note that destruction is contingent upon contact. As it would normally be moving under control of a magic-user, the sphere would serve as a three-dimensional "eraser" two feet in diameter.

When it is stationary, however,  feeding it depends on movement of the material being fed in. Hence the mention of plenty of room in the (about half again wider) mouth for "those who wish to leap in." Leaping provides enough momentum for them to be completely destroyed.

The Dungeon Masters Guide was not published until the year following the Tomb. The DMG adds that "any matter which comes in contact with a sphere is instantly sucked into the void."

This added reference to "sucking" apparently suggests to some folks that additional contiguous matter is also pulled into contact with the sphere, with some arbitrarily great force.

They wave aside the question of just how much force, how exerted (sucking "instantly" across space?), and what binding is needed to keep pulling rather than be severed. They assume -- simply because it suits them -- that if the tip of a 10' pole reaches the hole's edge then the whole pole is instantly destroyed along with the character carrying it; yet somehow not all the air, the tomb, the planet, the prime material plane!

This assumption is of course their own contrivance, not stated in the text.

I suspect that the added phrase merely reflects Gary's tendency in writing to favor color over clarity, that he did not intend to imply this problem.

Neither way makes sense logically. If the sphere destroyed air, it should logically act like a giant vacuum with constant wind inwards. However, it is clear from the description that it doesn't do this. Perhaps only solid matter is destroyed.

Further, if there is no sucking and it just disintegrates the part of matter that is directly touching it, then someone who touches the sphere should logically just get a minor ouchie as the tips of his fingers are erased. That should be represented as some sort of damage. Instead, it is implied that a person is completely destroyed.

I think it is clearly the intent of both the original and the DMG description that if a character touches the sphere, then they are wholly destroyed - regardless of how or where they were touched. If this wasn't the intent, then it would have included some way of resolving what happens if a character touches or is touched by it.

Quote from: jhkim;8829101) Advice like the countdowns are often very specific about how the GM should do things. Another example would be how to handle checking for pit traps, where is specifies that players can prod with a pole, but that only has a 4 in 6 chance of working. If the pit is activated by weight, why the 4 in 6?

2) There are a bunch of places where the module is very specific about "only the following spells or actions will work". Rather than allowing for creative solutions, it is trying to shut down creative ideas.

3) Most of the traps are non-standard magic, where things get teleported / disintegrated / transformed in ways that don't follow a known pattern. This makes it harder to make predictions or solutions except by guessing designer intent. Several are even one-use only, which doesn't seem believable given that the dungeon is established.

4) The solutions are often simply arbitrary, like the set of levers where pushing them all up shows and exit, but pushing them all down is a deathtrap - with no clue or instructions that suggest this.

5) The pre-generated characters are given as faceless matrix entries with only stats, no character or motivations. Further, the only motivation for the adventure is the vague rumor of treasure - which quickly shouldn't seem worth it given the fatalities. Even if you're just approaching it like a wargame, it should be valid to ask "is this whole thing worth it"?

6) In general, the whole dungeon seems specifically designed for a party of adventurers trying to go through it. Even among tournament modules, there are lots with much better justifications for the challenges they provide.

1: In the, I believe two, countdown case the DM is supposed to start counting down AFTER describing the room and mentioning the click of the tile and I think the rumble. The coundown is a stage trick. click-1-2-3-4. The main problem is that the DM is supposed to remember everything a potentially large group said, WHILE counting and remember WHEN they said it. The block moves like a piston and has closed in a single round. The block is probably siding 10-20ft behind the group so its more an annoyance trap to escape rather than lethal. (depending on where you stood)

2: That is pretty common in modules and even literature when you need a specific spell or action. Its essentially a lock and  key problem. I though am not fond of puzzles that lock out certain spells that SHOULD work. Like secret doors that do not show up to detection or race ability.

3: Also fairly common. Some are minour alterations. Like the aforementioned sphere-like mouth. Others are actually left open ended as to being able to be bypassed. Theres nothing in the module that says you cant just say "Fuck this! Passwall!" and bypass some of the traps. Others? Yeah. Didnt enjoy. But we beat through stubborness. aheh.

4: I didnt like the "drops you" part. But otherwise its a valid trap for someone who didnt heed the warning. Its a fairly simple puzzle. I agree there should have been like a warning if you set at least two to down. Cluing in that down was bad. The multicoloured "sphere" room was a little annoying. But since I read the riddle at the start it was managable.

And that is the real problem. Miss that MAJOR clue at the start and the whole module is vastly harder and more lethal.

5: Personally I like the nameless backgroundless pregens I can name and flesh out myself. As opposed to say... "Hi! I am Faffle Dwe'o-mercraeft! Human magic user!" (points to anyone who knows what module thats from. "Curse you Gleep! That potion was mine!")

6: For us it was the potential for unearthing spells long lost, and to explore a relic of a bygone era that hopefully had some potent treasure. Still for use the whole "World on the edge" sort of feel with lost kingdoms, ruins everywhere, and especially magic long lost. If you were a magic user you pretty much had to go out and delve for lost magic. There was also the concern, misplaced as it was, that we had better stop this demi-lich before he completed the process to become a full lich and poses a real problem. ahem. Yeah that was my mistake.

What motivations others had I cant say.

* John Wick is a dick.

* He was certainly a dick at 12 years old.

* The previous statement is a bit of an oxymoron.

* Boy, Wick would be happy as a clam to know that so many people are so interested in talking so much about him.

Quote from: jhkim;882654Actually, moreso than many of these, one of the things that annoyed me is the pushback that if I didn't like the module, then I was (a) stupid, (b) a whiner, and (c) couldn't deal with character death.

You forgot (d) all of the above. :duh:

Quote from: Elfdart;882946You forgot (d) all of the above. :duh:

Anyone who was wondering who it was that claimed people were idiots for not liking the ToH we have found our winner!  Yay!

Quote from: Omega;882761It does help to figure out if Wick is a liar or not since those with the module, or whatever else he makes stories up about, and fact check. Is what he says really possible in the module?

And as this very thread shows. someone else can and will parrot what he says as if its truth. and we have enough false claims about this or that without some self agrandizing jackass adding more to the big list of RPG falsehoods just so he can sell 5 more books.

But what's his motive for lying? To peddle whatever he's writing? Why does anyone need his games?

Well, if he can manufacture a pain point and scare people into saying, "Damn, I don't want to lose my friends for a year! I think I'll choose the game that lets me keep my friends," he stands to gain by lying. But if we look at such a pathetic story and blame the storyteller rather than accept the storyteller's scapegoat, then the lie backfires.

The whole Simpson's comic book store guy "Worst. Game. Ever." attitude has got to go. Nobody who says it sounds clever or intelligent or credible. They don't even strike me as someone with sophisticated tastes or impeccably high standards. Quite the opposite.

Quote from: Phillip;882777Probably most folks who utterly loathe ToH wouldn't think much more highly of Tegel Manor, Dark Tower, White Plume Mountain, Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, Snakepipe Hollow, Castle Amber, Temple of Poseidon, Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror, Nightmare Keep, or many other dungeons (published or unpublished) that stand out as among the most memorably fun to me.

I was fortunate enough to be able to grab a large number of D&D modules back in the late 80's for a buck a piece. I don't have ALL the classics, but I did pick up more books than I ever intended to read at the time and still have them to this day. So, I've got Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, Dungeonland, and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror. I've read these three modules, never played them. Just from reading them I thought they were pretty brilliant. Gygax's last mega-adventure, Hall of Many Panes, is also mind-blowingly awesome.

Unfortunately, I've never had or read or played Tomb of Horrors. Inspired by this thread, though, I've secured myself a copy of S1-4 and plan on preparing to run it in the near future. I'll find out for myself one way or another how good or bad it is. However, when I do run it, I will be trying to have a ton of fun playing it. So I bet that will skew my experience towards favorable.

Trying to have fun. High tech shit. Somebody call The Forge. I have a new theory on how to improve everyone's gaming experience.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882949Anyone who was wondering who it was that claimed people were idiots for not liking the ToH we have found our winner!  Yay!

Once again your reading skills have failed you.

Quote from: Lunamancer;882955I was fortunate enough to be able to grab a large number of D&D modules back in the late 80's for a buck a piece. I don't have ALL the classics, but I did pick up more books than I ever intended to read at the time and still have them to this day. So, I've got Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure, Dungeonland, and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror. I've read these three modules, never played them. Just from reading them I thought they were pretty brilliant. Gygax's last mega-adventure, Hall of Many Panes, is also mind-blowingly awesome.

Unfortunately, I've never had or read or played Tomb of Horrors. Inspired by this thread, though, I've secured myself a copy of S1-4 and plan on preparing to run it in the near future. I'll find out for myself one way or another how good or bad it is. However, when I do run it, I will be trying to have a ton of fun playing it. So I bet that will skew my experience towards favorable.

Trying to have fun. High tech shit. Somebody call The Forge. I have a new theory on how to improve everyone's gaming experience.

If it's the 1987 S1-4 Realms of Horror, it's better used as toilet paper due to revisions and abridgment.  I don't know about the new compilation.

How does anything that this John Wick says about a module more than 20 years old have any effect on current gamers?

Its a bunch of old Fart Who cares...or why care?....


- Ed C.

Quote from: CRKrueger;882968If it's the 1987 S1-4 Realms of Horror, it's better used as toilet paper due to revisions and abridgment.  I don't know about the new compilation.

The new compilation is quite nice.  In addition to Law Shick's introduction in the front of the book, S1 through S4 are presented, in their entirety, along with maps and illustrations as published (although the typeface is changed, and the illos for S3 are, sadly, not in color).  The book lays open very nicely and in the overall is very, very well done.

Yes, S1-4 Realms of Horror was terrible.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882891Like I had a bunch of players who used hold portal on a sarcophagus lid, drilled holes in it, poured in oil, and killed the mummy

Damn! That's a great story.

Quote from: Lunamancer;882952But what's his motive for lying?

Why do you assume a conscious motive behind his actions? Some people simply like to invent and tell stories. They are hardwired to do so. In such a case he doesn't exactly "lie", or rather "there's no malice behind his action". He simply uses his imagination to indulge his storytelling need.

Then, there's this little thing called "confabulation". I'm not sure how to properly explain it in English, but it's when your brain fills the gaps in your memory so well, that you yourself believe in that illusion and don't even bother to check your facts first. It's also at least partially subconscious process.

Or, you could blame "writer's block" for that. A blogger feels the obligation to write a post to keep his blog alive, so he starts with a simple concept, then adds an element here, and here, and here... The result is a story created on the fly. It's a lie, all right, but it wasn't intentional, it wasn't supposed to be one initially. It simply mutated into one.

Not trying to defend Wick, or something. Point is: there are more than a single explanation to any given action. ;)

Poor GM running a poor module that'd be nowadays marked as a negadungeon if it was written by anyone else than Gygax.

Though if we're fair, only one of them was 12 years old.

Quote from: TristramEvans;882368So Wick made up a story that made him look like a complete ass?

We had Pundit's Razor about Swine Conspiracies, time for a new one I guess.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883000Then, there's this little thing called "confabulation". I'm not sure how to properly explain it in English, but it's when your brain fills the gaps in your memory so well, that you yourself believe in that illusion and don't even bother to check your facts first. It's also at least partially subconscious process.

I used to keep a journal when I was in my late teens. Going back and reading it later, I was startled at how different the account in that journal was from the story I was carrying around in my head.

Quote from: Koltar;882976How does anything that this John Wick says about a module more than 20 years old have any effect on current gamers?

Its a bunch of old Fart Who cares...or why care?....

Just because something is old doesn't mean it's irrelevant. A lot of games from 20 years ago are just as fun today - often more . (Some are tied to qualities of the generation or times and aren't.)

From my view, OSR advocates sometimes go overboard with the attitude that only old-style games are fun; but I agree with them that many people have a prejudice to only play newly-released games based on their packaging and hype, when the actual game-play isn't necessarily better.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882891I don't like Tomb of Horrors, but I do think you lack the "dungeoneer" mentality. Like I had a bunch of players who used hold portal on a sarcophagus lid, drilled holes in it, poured in oil, and killed the mummy - something which 1st level characters could have done, even to a level-draining vampire. That is a dungeoneer, one who uses their wits to defeat obstacles. That's what one player called "high-minded hack." You're on the thespy side, not the hack side.

D&D up to about 1985 or so was not written for thespy types. Which is why we ended up with World of Darkness, it was the thespy backlash against years of hack, most of which was not high-minded.

But your example is exactly why I like dungeoneering and hate Tomb of Horrors. It's creative thinking based on what they knew about mummies. It reminds me of being in a low-level party in a Judge's Guild module, and we retreated from stirges flying down in a cave, but they only attacked after we got out a certain amount. We collected a bunch of flammable stuff from elsewhere, made a bonfire by the edge of the cave and sealed the door, killing them by smoke inhalation.

Tomb of Horrors is written to shut down much of this sort of creative thinking, with a bunch of puzzles where it says "only the following solutions will work" - and there's no particular logic to why because it's arbitrary magic.

Quote from: Baulderstone;883053I used to keep a journal when I was in my late teens. Going back and reading it later, I was startled at how different the account in that journal was from the story I was carrying around in my head.

Indeed. That's the main reason people say "back in my days everything was better...". Confabulation, confirmation, selective perception...

Keeping journals is important.

btw, I'm perplexed by people's unwillingness to spend some of their oh, so precious time for studying something that's truly useful for a change: the way their brains and minds operate. It's weird.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882887That's what I consider 'bad' (I want to point out that I did not say it was Objectively so.  It's IS just MY opinion.)

Yeah, it probably sounded like I was defending the module. It strikes me as a great deal of "unfun," as well (though I suppose there could be some sort of perverse GM pleasure out of it).:-)

Some seem to be reading the module like robots or something. As if the whole thing were immutable orders or leaving zero room for alternative solutions. Others seem to be acting like they have never seen a puzzle trap before??? And others are flat out misreading sections to the point it ends up sounding like they didnt even bother to read the module they are so against and are just parroting someone else.

Yes. The module has some definite issues. No. They arent as bad, or in some cases the things claimed, as some believe. While other issues are problems of style or group composition which tend to be not the modules fault.

The anti-climatic end though I totally blame on Gary. :mad:

WED 9:45PM

Quote from: Ravenswing;882938* John Wick is a dick.

WED 10:42PM

Quote from: Lunamancer;882952But what's his motive for lying?

The answer was provided three posts and 57 minutes prior to you posting your question. But if you don't like Ravenswing's explanation, Jester Rain provided a kinder, gentler explanation for why (and how) Wick may have done that.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883000Why do you assume a conscious motive behind his actions? Some people simply like to invent and tell stories.

Quote from: jhkim;883058Tomb of Horrors is written to shut down much of this sort of creative thinking, with a bunch of puzzles where it says "only the following solutions will work" - and there's no particular logic to why because it's arbitrary magic.

I could be wrong, but I assume the logic is that because the module was originally designed for tournament play and multiple DMs would be running it at different times and places Gygax/TSR wanted to standardize the allowable solutions for tournament play. When they published it more generally, no one bothered to edit it to makes the solutions more open ended. If my hypothesis is true, that would be an example of bad module design.

Quote from: Bren;883100I could be wrong, but I assume the logic is that because the module was originally designed for tournament play and multiple DMs would be running it at different times and places Gygax/TSR wanted to standardize the allowable solutions for tournament play. When they published it more generally, no one bothered to edit it to makes the solutions more open ended. If my hypothesis is true, that would be an example of bad module design.

Theres also gaps in the description. Things that are not explained in the text and are made clear only by paying attention to where things are in relation to the map. That is either bad module design. Or the writers assumed the DMs were vetrans well used to these nuances. Theres alot of "stuff happens" and then no followthrough for what to do. The DM really has to fill in alot of blanks.

ToH isn't good for inexperienced DM or players, and I do agree with jhkim that ToH does include pixel bitching where player creativity is sometimes curtailed with the "only this solution" in the text.

Quote from: Rincewind1;883009Poor GM running a poor module that'd be nowadays marked as a negadungeon if it was written by anyone else than Gygax.

The main difference between ToH and Negadungeons is that ToH offers some awesome treasure, even the "fake tombs" have generous hauls. Also, the Negadungeons almost always make it a bad idea to ever enter the place, aka you are often fools who letting something bad out of a prison, whereas ToH is about slaying something really, really evil on its own turf.

But even as a fan of ToH, I agree it's negadungeon enough to deserve the title.

Why do you even care what John Wick says? Didn't even know who he was. Last thing I knew it was a shitty movie with Keanu Reaves in it.

Quote from: jhkim;883058But your example is exactly why I like dungeoneering and hate Tomb of Horrors. It's creative thinking based on what they knew about mummies. [...]

Tomb of Horrors is written to shut down much of this sort of creative thinking

You have to understand the context. ToH was a tournament module. The idea was that different game groups would compete with each-other to complete the module over a convention weekend - in 6 or 12 hours, however long they had.

If you allow the usual wide range of player creativity you'll get,

- a group who completes it in 2 hours
- a group who completes in in the last 2 minutes of the 12 hours allotted
- another who would complete it, but it'd take 30 hours
- a group who would not complete it in even 1,000 hours, but would end up diverting a nearby river and flooding the dungeon, or walling off the demi-lich's room permanently and turning the rest into a Disney-themed stronghold

By limiting options they made the module fit better within the time confines for tournament play.

Competitive tournament play is a thing they tried to do about 1978-1985 or so, and it's something which also makes sense of the afterword in the AD&D1e DMG where he says to put the game of AD&D itself above the game group - just as a football referee puts the game of football above the team. Makes no sense otherwise, I mean you don't put "the game" above the players in your workplace's lunchtime social soccer, you'd be an arsehole if you did.

Competitive tournament play didn't really catch on because it takes away one of the main advantages of rpgs over board and computer games, that you can do literally anything. Nonetheless, it was a thing for a while and you just had to have the right mindset for it. The modules were a bit different, with more railroading and pixelbitching as you noted. But ultimately you did have to have the same dungeoneering mindset. And I doubt any DM would have got in trouble for allowing players to succeed with a solution that the module hadn't anticipated, like drilling a sarcophagus lid.

I can't remember exactly how my playthrough of ToH went, I do remember it was with my first ever game group, so it'd have been in my first year of play - which started April 1st, 1983. So I would have been just short of or just past turning 12 years old, just like Wick.

We got through it. Maybe the DM was soft on us, I can't remember, but we got through it. We just weren't stupid. We saw the giant gaping demon's maw and didn't stick anything or anyone in it. We just passed it by, I do remember that. This is part of the advice at the end of the PHB which almost everyone ignores: keep your mind on the goal, and avoid unnecessary encounters. Was there any reason to touch the damn thing other than "don't push the big red button" curiosity? No! So leave it alone! We're just here for the treasure.

Can we hold on with the tinhats, unless someone can actually give proof that's not I Read About Psychology On The Internet Degree?

An interesting exchange in the comments on Wick's article. Some guy said, well obviously the players were just dumb. And some other guy said,

"Wow, victim-blaming shows up in gaming too."

and Wick says,

"Best. Comment. Evar. :)"

The normal context of "victim-blaming" is sexual assault. So if the players having their characters killed is like sexual assault, then Wick is applauding someone calling him a rapist. Well I think it's a bit harsh, I would just say he was a crappy DM, at least at 12 years old, but weren't we all? But if he wants to call himself a rapist and the players his victims, that's up to him.

This seems to be harking back to that old thing that came out of the Forge and storygames, that bad roleplaying game experiences early on caused, like child sexual abuse, "literal brain damage."

It's an odd little world Wick and his buddies live in. I suspect Wick would be one of those players who complain that random rolling is horribly unfair, and in point systems that they don't have enough points for their character concept. "My concept is an all-powerful demigod, you are repressing my creativity."

A sad bunch of people, really.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883171This seems to be harking back to that old thing that came out of the Forge and storygames, that bad roleplaying game experiences early on caused, like child sexual abuse, "literal brain damage."

To be fair, I don't think Edwards used a sexual abuse metaphor, or used the word "literal"...

And perhaps mildly amusingly, Wick would undoubtedly be one of the ones whose brain Edwards would have considered damaged. Wick's style of GMing is very much in the camp of 90s White Wolf style as opposed to Forge type stuff.

School must be opened for the young ignorant ones, I see.

http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/marginalia/3777
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=18707.0

Yes, Uncle Ronny and Wick didn't like each-other much. And the USSR and PR China split, too. They're still commies!

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883000Why do you assume a conscious motive behind his actions?

Human action always has means and ends. There's always a motive behind actions. This isn't an assumption so much as an inescapable conclusion.

QuoteNot trying to defend Wick, or something. Point is: there are more than a single explanation to any given action. ;)

Seems like you just haven't been following along. That Wick lied was someone else's contribution. Go seek out that person with your nitpicking. I'm only pointing out the obvious. Wick's disastrous experience playing a module that a lot of people clearly have had fun playing only proves he's a shitty GM. His lack of humility also provides evidence that confessing his incompetence is contrary to whatever his motive is. Regardless of what his motive is, if he thought writing one thing would provoke a contrary response, he wouldn't have chosen to write something else or perhaps nothing at all.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883178School must be opened for the young ignorant ones, I see.

http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/marginalia/3777
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=18707.0

Yes, Uncle Ronny and Wick didn't like each-other much. And the USSR and PR China split, too. They're still commies!

I'll be damned. I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt that he would use such a classless metaphor, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised to be proven wrong.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883126We saw the giant gaping demon's maw and didn't stick anything or anyone in it. We just passed it by, I do remember that.

I personally love that trap. It's so insanely deadly, but also so easy to negate, but "what lies beyond?" is such a tantalizing question.

I remember that our crew just tossed in some coppers. When the coins vanished, we cast Locate Object to find the coppers, but the spell failed. Thus, we skipped that "doorway"

Years later, I had a room with permanent darkness and permanent silence cast within, and each doorway was carved as a gaping dragon's maw. Every group of players pooped themselves believing it was the ToH globe returned to eat them.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883000Then, there's this little thing called "confabulation". I'm not sure how to properly explain it in English, but it's when your brain fills the gaps in your memory so well, that you yourself believe in that illusion and don't even bother to check your facts first. It's also at least partially subconscious process.

Yep.  My first memory of the building in which I lived (before age 5) is wrong; it's an image of a triple-decker apartment building of the sort common in New England back in the day.  Being on a ride with my parents through my birth city about a dozen years back, I asked them to drive by the place, and the building they pointed out isn't remotely "right."

Quote from: Lunamancer;883180Human action always has means and ends. There's always a motive behind actions. This isn't an assumption so much as an inescapable conclusion.

That's nice, but I'd rather hear a word or two regarding your understanding of "conscious motive" (which was the centerpiece of my comment) and your explanation why did you decide to omit it and instead discuss something I wasn't talking about? :)

Quote from: Ravenswing;883191Yep.  My first memory of the building in which I lived (before age 5) is wrong; it's an image of a triple-decker apartment building of the sort common in New England back in the day.  Being on a ride with my parents through my birth city about a dozen years back, I asked them to drive by the place, and the building they pointed out isn't remotely "right."

It's ok, they aren't your parents and they didn't show you your birth city. In fact, this isn't even the reality you were born with. You're a victim of "world switch" - upon your sudden death your consciousness switched focus to the alternative world resembling your own where you didn't die. It happens pretty often.

Just joking. I'm sure Philip K. Dick would explain it in similar fashion, though. ;)

BTW, This is a bit offtopic, but I'm deeply interested with the mechanism "forcing" certain people to defend their vision, rather than accept that their memory doesn't work that well and they believed in a false memory, to the point that they might even go violent on people who prove them wrong. This is absolutely amazing mechanism.

Quote from: jhkim;883058Tomb of Horrors is written to shut down much of this sort of creative thinking, with a bunch of puzzles where it says "only the following solutions will work" - and there's no particular logic to why because it's arbitrary magic.

EXACTLY.  It's damned ironic considering "unreliable memory" being raised, but a lot of folks pitch old-time dungeon fantasy as the paradise of the problem-solver.  TOH may have been the worst of the counterexamples, but it had plenty of company in the "There's Only One Right Guess" camp.

Quote from: Omega;883097Some seem to be reading the module like robots or something. As if the whole thing were immutable orders or leaving zero room for alternative solutions.

C'mon, Omega, this isn't your first rodeo.  It's not as if you've never heard of the large camp which demands that systems be played RAW and nothing but, and that commercial "modules" need to be played exactly as written and nothing but ... leave your pens in the drawer, you rascally DMs.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883126You have to understand the context. ToH was a tournament module ...

Here's MY context.  I didn't play in TOH as part of a tournament.  It was neither billed nor advertised as being for tournament-play only.  (Not that, in the year of its release, I had any more notion of what "tournament play" entailed than the rest of the players who'd never gamed at a convention, which I expect would have been most of them.)

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883126Competitive tournament play is a thing they tried to do about 1978-1985 or so, and it's something which also makes sense of the afterword in the AD&D1e DMG where he says to put the game of AD&D itself above the game group - just as a football referee puts the game of football above the team. Makes no sense otherwise, I mean you don't put "the game" above the players in your workplace's lunchtime social soccer, you'd be an arsehole if you did.

Competitive tournament play didn't really catch on because it takes away one of the main advantages of rpgs over board and computer games, that you can do literally anything. Nonetheless, it was a thing for a while and you just had to have the right mindset for it. The modules were a bit different, with more railroading and pixelbitching as you noted. But ultimately you did have to have the same dungeoneering mindset.

Yes, I'm quite aware of the tournament mindset, and I've mentioned it earlier. That's an explanation for why some parts of the module are the way they are, but it doesn't make it better. There were lots of tournament modules that I liked a lot more - I think Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan is one of the best modules of any sort, and I'm familiar with about half a dozen others. I remember Ghost Tower of Inverness, White Plume Mountain, and Egg of the Phoenix pretty well from memory.

I went to my first convention, Origins, in 1987 when I was 17 and recall playing in one of these. I thought it was stupid. In conventions since then, I've experienced players having vastly more fun with other design styles - including other organized play like Pathfinder.


 

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883126We got through it. Maybe the DM was soft on us, I can't remember, but we got through it. We just weren't stupid. We saw the giant gaping demon's maw and didn't stick anything or anyone in it. We just passed it by, I do remember that. This is part of the advice at the end of the PHB which almost everyone ignores: keep your mind on the goal, and avoid unnecessary encounters. Was there any reason to touch the damn thing other than "don't push the big red button" curiosity? No! So leave it alone! We're just here for the treasure.

1) In my experience, ignoring stuff and moving on without investigating is not a generally safe strategy, though it works in this instance. If you always ignore dark holes and walk past them without seeing what's in them, then in many cases you're liable to miss some useful passageways, or have things crawling up behind you.

2) You bring up the demon's face as a descriptor, which a couple of other people have done. Did you think that the demon's face was important to your decisions? i.e. Is your logic that if something looks nice, like a big smiley face, or just ordinary (unadorned hole) that it's less likely to be a trap than a demon face?

Quote from: jhkim;882932Neither way makes sense logically. If the sphere destroyed air, it should logically act like a giant vacuum with constant wind inwards. However, it is clear from the description that it doesn't do this.

No, it is not clear. That is simply not addressed. (If there were a flow of material, it need not be so gross as to be noticed without fine instrumentation.) However, since you're arbitrarily making up stuff, why do you make up something so much nastier than the original (and so much less logical, which makes your appeal to logic ironic)?

QuoteFurther, if there is no sucking and it just disintegrates the part of matter that is directly touching it, then someone who touches the sphere should logically just get a minor ouchie as the tips of his fingers are erased. That should be represented as some sort of damage. Instead, it is implied that a person is completely destroyed.

Implied where? I don't see anywhere a reference to someone touching a sphere of annihilation with surgical precision. Since you've worked it out just fine for yourself, I don't think that detailing such an improbable situation was needed after all!

QuoteI think it is clearly the intent of both the original and the DMG description that if a character touches the sphere, then they are wholly destroyed - regardless of how or where they were touched. If this wasn't the intent, then it would have included some way of resolving what happens if a character touches or is touched by it.

What happens is that whatever the 2' diameter "nothing" corresponds to in normal space is gone. It might please a wizard to chop you off at the knees. That might also please a warrior with axe. With the sphere however erasing most or all of a torso is usually most convenient. A body of troops on a slope might lose heads at one end and feet at the other.

Quote from: Omega;883109Theres also gaps in the description. Things that are not explained in the text and are made clear only by paying attention to where things are in relation to the map. That is either bad module design. Or the writers assumed the DMs were vetrans well used to these nuances. Theres alot of "stuff happens" and then no followthrough for what to do. The DM really has to fill in alot of blanks.

In Tom Moldvay's M3 Twilight Calling, if you make the save against a shower of poison barbeque sauce, you can get teleported into a meat grinder.

The meat grinder is not described, but maybe you can imagine it. That's a good start, because now it's up to the DM to adjudicate ad hoc how many rounds (at 10-60 points of damage per round) it takes the victim to get out.

A victim who does avoid getting turned entirely into hamburger is then trapped in a vault designed to be accessed only by teleportation!

I just came on that looking at a random page; I don't know what else of that ilk is in there yet.

Quote from: Spinachcat;883110ToH isn't good for inexperienced DM or players, and I do agree with jhkim that ToH does include pixel bitching where player creativity is sometimes curtailed with the "only this solution" in the text.



The main difference between ToH and Negadungeons is that ToH offers some awesome treasure, even the "fake tombs" have generous hauls. Also, the Negadungeons almost always make it a bad idea to ever enter the place, aka you are often fools who letting something bad out of a prison, whereas ToH is about slaying something really, really evil on its own turf.

But even as a fan of ToH, I agree it's negadungeon enough to deserve the title.

Isn't the whole point of the term negadungeon that nothing at all good can come out of going in (applied mostly to some of Raggi's stuff).  I don't think ToH applies at all, you can come out of that place rich as fuck, with a ton of magic and exp you won't be sharing among quite so many as when you went in. :D

Quote from: Spinachcat;883189I remember that our crew just tossed in some coppers. When the coins vanished, we cast Locate Object to find the coppers, but the spell failed. Thus, we skipped that "doorway".

Wait...you mean you guys actually thought up some way to test and see if it was a trap, instead of just assuming it was there to jump in or else it wouldn't be there?

Oh yeah, there's that being able to shit unassisted thing Gronan talks about.

Quote from: jhkim;883201Is your logic that if something looks nice, like a big smiley face, or just ordinary (unadorned hole) that it's less likely to be a trap than a demon face?

Of course since the thing radiates EVIL and MAGIC, that might have been a clue you shouldn't touch it even if it looked like Adriana Lima's vagina.

Quote from: jhkim;883201Yes, I'm quite aware of the tournament mindset, and I've mentioned it earlier. That's an explanation for why some parts of the module are the way they are, but it doesn't make it better.

Agreed, it's still not a good module. But if you had the right mindset, you'd get through the thing without everyone getting killed. Now, whether you'd have fun in the process is another matter - I didn't have much fun doing it. But it is possible to complete the thing without a TPK and a dickhead DM saying "heehaw" like Nelson. If you complete the module you mayhave fun, if you have Wickhead DM you definitely won't have fun.

QuoteIf you always ignore dark holes and walk past them without seeing what's in them, then in many cases you're liable to miss some useful passageways, or have things crawling up behind you.

A wise party will have an active rearguard (wandering monsters) and if you hit a dead end, or pass all the dark and nasty-looking places without finding anything useful, you can always go back. But the dark nasty places should not be your first choice. The "you must explore every last nook and cranny lest you miss the yellow keycard" approach was one dickhead DMs inflicted on players long before Doom came out, alas. But it's a dickhead thing to do.

QuoteDid you think that the demon's face was important to your decisions? i.e. Is your logic that if something looks nice, like a big smiley face, or just ordinary (unadorned hole) that it's less likely to be a trap than a demon face?

Yes. It's a dungeon. If it looks nasty, it generally is. If it looks innocuous it may be nasty or it may be innocuous, you always assume it's nasty until proven otherwise.

As for looking nice... Have you ever encountered a smiley face in a dungeon? Generally, sensible DMs will make traps detectable or anticipatable, such as by "now that you look, there is a slight groove in the floor" or the thief's roll, or simply by convention - the main treasure is probably trapped, and things that look nasty probably are.

Simply springing shit on players without any warning is just another form of "rocks fall, you die," and is neither challenging nor interesting. Challenging and interesting dungeons have things in them that the players can anticipate, defeat, solve, or go around.

As an example, more than one player has dealt with the demi-lich by... as he's rising up to glare at and kill someone, you snatch the treasure from under him and flee.

Quote from: Ravenswing;883197Here's MY context.  I didn't play in TOH as part of a tournament.  It was neither billed nor advertised as being for tournament-play only.

It was advertised as a Tournament module, just not a Tournament Only module. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that any Tourney adventure is about competition, winning and high lethality since the adventure comes with 20 pregens for shits and giggles.

We also have to remember some issues with printing back then versus now. Today, there would be defined sections about Tourney Play vs. Non-Tourney Play. Back then, it was assumed the DM would figure it out as TSR was keeping page count low on their modules.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883210Isn't the whole point of the term negadungeon that nothing at all good can come out of going in (applied mostly to some of Raggi's stuff).

I'd agree with that, but the term negadungeon seems to have morphed into any high lethality dungeon. Even though ToH has huge rewards, those rewards are mostly dependent on total victory of the adventure. There isn't partial victory, except maybe escape.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883211Oh yeah, there's that being able to shit unassisted thing Gronan talks about.

Now lets not get crazy. We still gotta hold hands to go potty.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883214Have you ever encountered a smiley face in a dungeon?

Hell yeah! I have a long dead NPC - "the Moon Witch" who built several "Pretty in Pink" dungeons of great beauty, art and lethality to hide her wealth. All dungeon decor in her places are worrisome because they don't look like standard dungeon decor. Even the air is perfumed by magic and the Magic Mouths all smile and sing...

...and then you die.

Did I accidentally wander into a thread about basing one's self esteem on their skill in Dungeons & Dragons?

Reminds me of a quote from Jose Chung's "From Outer Space":

"I didn't play D&D all those years without learning a thing or two about going to the potty without somebody holding my hand!"

Quote from: Phillip;883209In Tom Moldvay's M3 Twilight Calling, if you make the save against a shower of poison barbeque sauce, you can get teleported into a meat grinder.

The meat grinder is not described, but maybe you can imagine it. That's a good start, because now it's up to the DM to adjudicate ad hoc how many rounds (at 10-60 points of damage per round) it takes the victim to get out.

A victim who does avoid getting turned entirely into hamburger is then trapped in a vault designed to be accessed only by teleportation!

I just came on that looking at a random page; I don't know what else of that ilk is in there yet.

Since its out of context of what lead up to that whole scenario I have no way of saying if thats good or bad. Its simmilar to some describing the ToH mouth trap without any explanation leading up to it. Like that if you study the floor tiles you actually get told effectively "Green is Bad"

Theres two more green mouth traps later in. One if you come within 3ft strips you of all gear and spits you out naked at first mouth trap room. The second does the same. But teleports you to a prison room that will kill you if you try to leave.

Sounds pretty bad huh?

The context is that those two traps are like 25ft up. The only way to possibly encounter them is to trigger the levitation trap in the room. And you can still manually stop yourself drifting near them.

When we got to this area we totally bypassed all that without knowing it. We didnt touch the pillars and, thanks to Acerraks warning, knew to avoid the mouths. Nor did we touch the evil wish gem in the same chamber which will also kill you dead if you goof with it.

Quote from: Spinachcat;883220We also have to remember some issues with printing back then versus now. Today, there would be defined sections about Tourney Play vs. Non-Tourney Play. Back then, it was assumed the DM would figure it out as TSR was keeping page count low on their modules.

Good point. And it is amazing that so much is packed into a mere ten pages + map.

Quote from: jhkim;8832012) You bring up the demon's face as a descriptor, which a couple of other people have done. Did you think that the demon's face was important to your decisions? i.e. Is your logic that if something looks nice, like a big smiley face, or just ordinary (unadorned hole) that it's less likely to be a trap than a demon face?

The logic is that it is understandable (not necessarily safe, but understandable) for the players not to take any inordinate precautions before walking through an ordinary looking door. PCs listen at, open, and walk through many ordinary doors in the course of a typical dungeon crawl. Ordinary doors are often (but not always) safe.

On a typical dungeon crawl players don't leap through openings shaped like a demon's mouth all that often. So before leaping head first into a pitch dark opening that their torches cannot even illuminate one or two simple precautions would seem to be in order.

I didn't grow up playing DnD like many who have come across Tomb of Horrors. All I have seen about Tomb of Horrors is how polarizing the dungeon is. Some people (not just John Wick) seem to really hate it. Others seem to really love it.

It actually makes me want to run something similar for a large group of friends, "tournament style".

Where can I find something similar to Tomb of Horrors, those so-called "tournament style" dungeon delves? What are some of the best ones out there OTHER THAN "Tomb of Horrors" (it seems too notorious to have been missed by all my friends).

Quote from: Manzanaro;883222Did I accidentally wander into a thread about basing one's self esteem on their skill in Dungeons & Dragons?

Isn't that every thread around here.:-)

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;883274It actually makes me want to run something similar for a large group of friends, "tournament style".

Where can I find something similar to Tomb of Horrors, those so-called "tournament style" dungeon delves? What are some of the best ones out there OTHER THAN "Tomb of Horrors" (it seems too notorious to have been missed by all my friends).

I highly recommend Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan. I'm adapting it for upcoming in my own 5th edition game. The original has the excellent presentation of Tomb of Horrors, with a book of player illustrations. It has a rich background based on mesoamerican Olman culture, and feels very naturalistic. The tournament version is built around a very particular situation - the PCs are dumped in the bottom of the dungeon and have to escape.

That is by a big step the best of the tournament modules I know. Other notable ones that I know of, in roughly the order I'd recommend them:

1*) Dwellers of the Forbidden City - this has a tournament sequence, but I think the rest was tacked on later, it is a good module but not very tournament-y overall
2) Ghost Tower of Inverness - this is more of an obvious set of tests, but done with cues and without the nega-dungeon aspect of Tomb of Horrors
3) White Plume Mountain - this has more tactical aspects
4) Egg of the Phoenix - a later module, really a couple of short tournaments strung together by slightly railroady methods
5) The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth - a collection of encounters, mostly monsters, leading to a boss fight

I've heard some good things about the Scourge of the Slave Lords series (A1-4), but I don't know it personally.

Quote from: Omega;883246Since its out of context of what lead up to that whole scenario I have no way of saying if thats good or bad. Its simmilar to some describing the ToH mouth trap without any explanation leading up to it. Like that if you study the floor tiles you actually get told effectively "Green is Bad".

But you're also told "Night means you're badass".  Obviously you sprint down the hallway and dive headfirst into the black, not touching the green on the sides...wait, I'm dead.  Fucking pixel-bitching, player-killing, expecting-mind-reading tournament module. :rolleyes:

White Plume Mountain is probably closest to Tomb of Horrors in style, but it also has a great campaign hook around the history and future of the weapons.

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;883274I didn't grow up playing DnD like many who have come across Tomb of Horrors. All I have seen about Tomb of Horrors is how polarizing the dungeon is. Some people (not just John Wick) seem to really hate it. Others seem to really love it.

It actually makes me want to run something similar for a large group of friends, "tournament style".

Where can I find something similar to Tomb of Horrors, those so-called "tournament style" dungeon delves? What are some of the best ones out there OTHER THAN "Tomb of Horrors" (it seems too notorious to have been missed by all my friends).

S2 White Plume Mountain, C1 The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan and C2 Ghost Tower of Inverness are all excellent Tournament modules.

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;883274Where can I find something similar to Tomb of Horrors, those so-called "tournament style" dungeon delves? What are some of the best ones out there OTHER THAN "Tomb of Horrors" (it seems too notorious to have been missed by all my friends).

C-2 Ghost Tower of Iverness is the one I have and I happen to really enjoy it as a player and DM. I even converted it into an unlimited Adventures module way back. May even still be up on Magic Mirror. Its from the C series which were all convention tournament modules.

C-3 The Lost Island of Castanamir I have heard of but never had a chance to play or even look at yet. Seems to polarize people too who either like it or hate it.

S-2 White Plume Mountain. I was never impressed with it. But others liked it alot.

S-4 Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth. I picked up a copy long ago at GenCon but turned out was missing the centerpiece. So to this date havent actually looked through it. grumble.

S-3 Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. I have this and its alot of fun as a player and DM. But didnt realize it was a tournament module?

Quote from: Spinachcat;883220We also have to remember some issues with printing back then versus now. Today, there would be defined sections about Tourney Play vs. Non-Tourney Play. Back then, it was assumed the DM would figure it out as TSR was keeping page count low on their modules.

I think back then it was assumed that someone would explain things to you personally, face to face, and the books were only for reference. I can't remember any actual "how to play" examples before the one in the AD&D 2E PHB. It seems that the assumption was new players would be introduced to gaming by experienced players who could explain things. A lot of things just went without saying in the books because the authors assumed the readers would know already. This worked fine when gaming was new and spread by word of mouth. It started to fall apart when books were distributed nationally through chain bookstores that sold them in locations where gaming hadn't been introduced yet.

It was a lot trickier to get started when everyone in the group was new and only had the books to go by.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883301But you're also told "Night means you're badass".  Obviously you sprint down the hallway and dive headfirst into the black, not touching the green on the sides...wait, I'm dead.  Fucking pixel-bitching, player-killing, expecting-mind-reading tournament module. :rolleyes:

Heres the funny part. I read off the warnings to the group. So we decided the mouth was the trap. Just to be sure I tossed a marked coin in. Waited a few moments and then cast locate object. Nada. I tell the group the coin seems to be destroyed, or at least someplace it couldn't be located. And I was not even done saying this when the thief reaches in.

poof.

One less thief in the universe... oooog!

Said thief's player was absurdly reckless and went through characters like meat through a grinder. Luckily there were some back-up NPCs at camp. sigh. Someone go fetch one. Guy was great at detecting traps though. Also great at finding out how deep pits were and wether they had spikes.

I freaking survived Tomb of Horrors with Daffy Duck as a team mate!

Quote from: Xúc xắc;883313I can't remember any actual "how to play" examples before the one in the AD&D 2E PHB.

OD&D had one or two examples. When I read it, I assumed the authors intened that we would learn to play the game by reading the rules. Which we did.

QuoteA lot of things just went without saying in the books because the authors assumed the readers would know already.

Or would have sufficient context to figure it out for themselves.

Quote from: Omega;883314Guy was great at detecting traps though. Also great at finding out how deep pits were and wether they had spikes.

Does the sound of a body hitting the floor of a 100' deep pit sound different if there are spikes at the bottom?

BAMM! SPLORCH!!! instead of BAMM!! ?

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883193That's nice, but I'd rather hear a word or two regarding your understanding of "conscious motive" (which was the centerpiece of my comment) and your explanation why did you decide to omit it and instead discuss something I wasn't talking about? :)

I was talking about conscious motive.

jhkim, CRKrueger, thedungeondelver, Omega, thanks for the suggestions. I'm gonna take a close look at those.

Quote from: Omega;883312C-2 Ghost Tower of Iverness is the one I have and I happen to really enjoy it as a player and DM. I even converted it into an unlimited Adventures module way back. May even still be up on Magic Mirror. Its from the C series which were all convention tournament modules.

Unlimited Adventures module?
Magic Mirror?

You know it's interesting, you ask about "tournament modules"...if you look at the introduction to the modules of old...they're all tournament modules.  While not necessarily released for competition play (the "C" series was aimed at that), all the old classic modules were done up for conventions.  Imagine trying to get through all of D1, D2 or D3 in a 4-6 hour spot...! 8O

Quote from: Spinachcat;883220Hell yeah! I have a long dead NPC - "the Moon Witch" who built several "Pretty in Pink" dungeons of great beauty, art and lethality to hide her wealth. All dungeon decor in her places are worrisome because they don't look like standard dungeon decor. Even the air is perfumed by magic and the Magic Mouths all smile and sing...

...and then you die.

See this? This is AWESOME.

You need to type this up, slap some art on it (or not) and sell it.

I'd buy THE HELL out of a module like this.

Quote from: Bren;883325OD&D had one or two examples. When I read it, I assumed the authors intened that we would learn to play the game by reading the rules. Which we did.

The AD&D DMG has a example of play section as does B of BX D&D. Dont know about Holmes B or 2nd ed.

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;883331Unlimited Adventures module?
Magic Mirror?

Forgotten Realms Unlimited Adventures. AKA: the SSI Gold Box PC game engine. It allowed you to make modules like the SSI Gold Box series for D&D. And since it came with editors you could add in your own monsters, NPCs, items. The only thing it lacked was the ability to edit things like spells, the walls and floors.

I was part of a group that was really into it and we got permission from both the TSR staff to recreate actual D&D modules. I did Ghost tower and Darkness Gathering. Someone else did White Plume, Expedition, and a couple of others. Within the limits of the system. SSI gave the group the source code after TSR ceased to be.

Magic Mirror is the host site for modules, mod packs and new sprite sets. Unfortunately both mine do not seem to be hosted anymore. But Ray Dyer's version of Ghost Tower is still hosted. Ray also converted Hidden Shrine and Lost Island among others. And he even did Tomb of Horrors.

Should still run on modern PCs.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;883337You know it's interesting, you ask about "tournament modules"...if you look at the introduction to the modules of old...they're all tournament modules.  While not necessarily released for competition play (the "C" series was aimed at that), all the old classic modules were done up for conventions.  Imagine trying to get through all of D1, D2 or D3 in a 4-6 hour spot...! 8O

Here is a partial history of tournament modules.

http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/gh_tourneys.html (http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/gh_tourneys.html)

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883178Yes, Uncle Ronny and Wick didn't like each-other much. And the USSR and PR China split, too. They're still commies!

Wick doesn't have a lot of credit with me, but what he does have he earned for being one of the few people on the Forge to really take Ron to task over the brain damage notion.

Quote from: Warthur;883362Wick doesn't have a lot of credit with me, but what he does have he earned for being one of the few people on the Forge to really take Ron to task over the brain damage notion.

That was a false flag op.  I know, having orchestrated it all. :D

Quote from: CRKrueger;883212Of course since the thing radiates EVIL and MAGIC, that might have been a clue you shouldn't touch it even if it looked like Adriana Lima's vagina.

And that's how people end up adjudicating the module wrong.  Actually, NO it DOES NOT radiate evil and magic, THE ENTIRE ROOM does.  Please get it right before you make these sorts of statements.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;883368And that's how people end up adjudicating the module wrong.  Actually, NO it DOES NOT radiate evil and magic, THE ENTIRE ROOM does.  Please get it right before you make these sorts of statements.

1. If it was the "room" it would be the entire hallway, because there is no "room".
2. Oh but hey, no worries because it doesn't say room.

Here's section 5., the left side of the end of the hallway:
5. THE ARCH OF MIST: One section of the path shown on the floor leads directly into this archway. If any character stands within 1' of the entranceway upon the path, the base stones will glow yellow on the left, orange on the right, and the keystone 7' above will glow blue. (When this happens, SHOW YOUR PLAYERS ILLUSTRATION #5.) There is a misty veil across the archway, and nothing will cause the vapors to clear, nor will any sort of magic allow sight into the area, until the glowing stones are pressed in the proper sequence - YELLOW, BLUE, ORANGE.  If this  sequence is pressed, the vapors disappear, and the path appears to go eastwards. If the archway is entered when it is clouded, those characters doing so will be instantly teleported to 7 (see below). If it is passed through after pressing the glowing stones in proper sequence, those stepping through ON the path will be teleported to 11, those who pass through OFF the path will be sent back to 3.

Now here's the bane of everyone's existence the center of the end of the hallway:
6. THE FACE OF THE GREAT GREEN DEVIL: The other fork of the path leads right up to an evil-appearing devil face set in mosaic at the corridor's end. (SHOW YOUR PLAYERS GRAPHIC #6). The face has a huge 0 of a mouth; it is dead black. The whole area radiates evil and magic if detected for. The mouth opening is similar to a (fixed) sphere of annihilation, but it is about 3' in diameter - plenty of room for those who wish to leap in and be completely and forever destroyed.

Notice how the descriptions of what magic detection does in each area is different?  That's because AREA 5 is distinct from AREA 6.

Jesus Wept.

So yeah the whole back wall of the hallway, into which is centered the Great Green Devil Face is radiating Magic and Evil, but the arch over there 10' to the left and 5' back doesn't.  Interesting, I wonder where the Magic and Evil could be coming from?  I know, I'll thrust my hands into the Devil Mouth so I can get leverage to pull it off the wall and see what's causing all the Magic and Evil to radiate.  What, I die?  Gary sucks.

We didnt even bother with detect magic or evil. I mean its an impenetrable blackness in the mouth?
"Uh. Guys? Do I really need to blow a detect magic to tell you that is magical? No? Good. Someone go fetch replacement thief please. We lost another Daffy."

So this was a funny read. Anyways, John Wick's experience sounds immature and moronic. Nothing really surprising as they were 12 and apparently WAAAY too invested in their characters.

I ran this adventure using the 5e version. I believe they made it half way before we went onto something else. During the adventure only 1 PC died and it wasn't the evil mouth of destruction. They were way too experienced atls players to fall for that one. They used a large stick and stuck it halfway into the mouth. When it came out half gone, they decided NOT to go in there. Where the PC did die was on a throne where he was wearing a cursed crown and he touched the scepter to the helm. One side removed the helm and the other killed him.

Still, it was fun and no one complained that bad things happened to their PC. Helps when they're made at 10th for the adventure and not reoccurring characters in a lengthy campaign spanning months or years.

Quote from: Lunamancer;883328I was talking about conscious motive.

No, you were not.

(http://s12.postimg.org/li6xuranh/Screenshot_1.png)

Squares and rectangles. See, every conscious motive is still a motive, but not every motive is conscious one. That's the difference.

The way you discuss Wick's article suggests that you're confident he lied consciously. It's not granted. There are many motives for people to bend and twist the truth, some among them half/entirely unconscious.

And that'd be my observation.

I don't think it matters if he made up or changed or added to the story or not, consciously or not. If he did, then like a true story carefully chosen to illustrate a point, it expresses some other truth about him, some other truth which relates to his understanding of rpgs.

And his understanding of rpgs is what we're discussing.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883400I don't think it matters if he made up or changed or added to the story or not, consciously or not. If he did, then like a true story carefully chosen to illustrate a point, it expresses some other truth about him, some other truth which relates to his understanding of rpgs.

And his understanding of rpgs is what we're discussing.

Whatever Wick does and for what purpose, whether there are conscious motives behind his actions or a mental condition, is of absolutely no importance here.

However, players' (and GMs') ability to think outside of the box, willingness to embrace alternative explanations, to entertain a thought and such isn't merely important. It's crucial to the survival of RPGing, its growth and evolution.

So, how about entertaining a though, rather than settling for meh for a change, hmmmm? ;)

Besides, let the man speak for himself. There's too early for conflict defusing techniques. :D

Quote from: Spinachcat;883220It was advertised as a Tournament module, just not a Tournament Only module. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that any Tourney adventure is about competition, winning and high lethality since the adventure comes with 20 pregens for shits and giggles.

If you mean "It doesn't take a veteran gamer, who's been at this for decades, in 2016 much to figure it out," then yeah, I'd agree with that.  I ran my first tournament scenario for Gamelords over 30 years ago.

In 1978, back when I was still running and playing D&D, two years before I was involved with APAs, five years before I attended my first gaming convention, a year before I started subscribing to my first gaming magazine (which was not Dragon), as a self-taught teenage DM, with the gaming group I was in as a player doing Empire of the Petal Throne with DM-created scenarios, I scarcely knew jack.

It would've been unfair, and absolutely would've been unrealistic, to expect otherwise.

Tomb states on the cover that it was a tournament module. But does not really elaborate what that was other than something done at a convention. Iverness does the same. But explains what a tournament module was as well. Iverness also lays out that the tournament version was competitive.

Well it can't be all bad, as it inspired Paranoia.

Quote from: Baulderstone;881977I've known a number of professional game designers over the years, and most of them pointedly avoid being loud, opinionated jackasses.

Most successful RPG Kickstarter: 7th Sea.

Second most successful RPG Kickstarter: Exalted 3e.

I don't think it matters anymore.

Quote from: Baulderstone;882005For your friends to beat you up and then completely cut you out of their lives, you really have to wonder how thin the thread he was hanging by was already.

Not really. All relationships have that one thing that will destroy them, and it's usually some kind of violation of trust.

Quote from: Orphan81;882047He's extremly humble for all the success he's had in life, and is one of the few people who can completely resist talking about religion and politics...

What?!? How?!?

WITCH!!!

Quote from: Orphan81;882047He doesn't begrudge other people's success,

Not like that's uniq...

Quote from: CRKrueger;882052If he wasn't giving away 39 PDFs of the original game, the KS wouldn't be a 10th what it is.  Gotta hand it to him to leverage the fuck out of the license though.

...nevermind.

Quote from: jhkim;882124If you're sitting around yelling at 12-year-olds about how they're idiots, then I'd say that you're an idiot more than they are.

What if they're just mentally 12 year olds? Because if that's the case I may have to give up RPG forums entirely :p

Quote from: Lunamancer;882143Doing something--anything--that cannot be undone is never a good choice for the first thing to try. A lack of clues is never an excuse.

There's a lot of scientific investigation which cannot avoid this. Sometimes you have to chance sending someone into the void to bring back fire.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882167Hearing about Wick's childhood explains a lot, including why he doesn't have the courage to just publish something and sell it, instead doing a Kickstarter. "Tell me you love me and I'll do anything!"

You mean like Ork World, Cat, or Houses of the Blooded?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;882167What is this thing about Americans and high school.

Quote from: Bren;882170I won't assume that Fosters really is Australian for beer if you don't assume everyone in the States is hung up on high school.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882195NO ONE has moved past High School.  In fact, High School is how most people still live their lives until they die.

Quote from: Spike;882201To be perfectly honest, the ONLY time I ever think about high school is when you, or another non-american, comments about how Americans are perpetually trapped in high school.

As an American I can say with certainty that most of the U.S. has never gotten beyond High School, even the ones who never went. Only the Japanese are more trapped in High School.

Please send help.

Quote from: Spike;882218One common example that seems to trip people up is the giving and receiving of gifts.  This is a pretty minor point of etiquette, but its laid out in some detail (you have to refuse it politely three times, then accept it, as I recall), without actually laying out the typical responses to 'doing it right', only the overall injunction that impolite and improper actions get you a quick ritual suicide.

Can't find it now, but I'm pretty sure Wick had an example of an NPC (Scorpion I think) accept a gift on the first offer, thereby conveying a message impossible without the 'proper' ritual being established beforehand. That was the point. Breaking ritual can say as much as following it, which was an important element in Wick's vision for L5R.

Quote from: TristramEvans;882414Well, ultimately, nothing else matters. Wick could be a lying, self-aggrandizing asshole, but if he produces a good game, who gives a shit?

yay

Quote from: jhkim;882580During those few seconds, the characters will see, hear, feel, and otherwise sense a lot of things. In just a split second, a skilled person can process a ton of sensory input. Because players can only see and hear via question and answer, tabletop games simply aren't able to handle this.

Indeed, but for some reason this 'field of vision' issue remains largely unaddressed it RPG theory.

Quote from: jhkim;882635It instructs the DM to count off every 1.5 seconds,

1.5 seconds?!? Why not just count down from 15?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;882882they should see the character probably yelp and get sucked into the mouth.

Quote from: Phillip;882895There is no sucking in!

Confirmed: The Green Devil Face does not suck.

Quote from: Lunamancer;882952But what's his motive for lying?

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883000Why do you assume a conscious motive behind his actions? Some people simply like to invent and tell stories. They are hardwired to do so. In such a case he doesn't exactly "lie", or rather "there's no malice behind his action". He simply uses his imagination to indulge his storytelling need.

Quote from: Lunamancer;883180Human action always has means and ends. There's always a motive behind actions. This isn't an assumption so much as an inescapable conclusion.

And this is perhaps the most concise description of why Lunamancer's thinking process is so inscrutable. He doesn't recognize doing something for its own sake, which is exactly what playing a game is.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883000Then, there's this little thing called "confabulation". I'm not sure how to properly explain it in English, but it's when your brain fills the gaps in your memory so well, that you yourself believe in that illusion and don't even bother to check your facts first. It's also at least partially subconscious process.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883195This is a bit offtopic, but I'm deeply interested with the mechanism "forcing" certain people to defend their vision, rather than accept that their memory doesn't work that well and they believed in a false memory, to the point that they might even go violent on people who prove them wrong. This is absolutely amazing mechanism.

I like how you think :)

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;883412Most successful RPG Kickstarter: 7th Sea.

Second most successful RPG Kickstarter: Exalted 3e.

I don't think it matters anymore.

That's a fair point, but I don't think the Exalted Kickstarter proves anything. People backed that as much because it was Exalted, a known brand, as anything else. Given that Onyx Press had a decent record on Kickstarters, there couldn't have been many people that foresaw all the drama that would surround it. Let's see how many people are willing to back Holden's next Kickstarter, especially if it doesn't have the Exalted name attached.

7th Sea is another case of a well-known brand. By contrast, let's look at the take on Wick's other Kickstarters.

Wicked Fantasy: $46,679
Wield: $27, 247
Curse of the Yellow Sign: $16,650
Houses of the Blooded: Wilderness: $11,157

Wicked Fantasy is the biggest, but it is also a Pathfinder supplement. For a designer that has been a name brand for 20 years, he doesn't get great numbers when he relies on his name alone.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;883412Most successful RPG Kickstarter: 7th Sea.

Second most successful RPG Kickstarter: Exalted 3e.

I don't think it matters anymore.

Its the rpg fan version of clamoring for front row tickets for bands with a rep for spitting or pissing into the audience.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883395No, you were not.

(http://s12.postimg.org/li6xuranh/Screenshot_1.png)

Squares and rectangles. See, every conscious motive is still a motive, but not every motive is conscious one. That's the difference.

The way you discuss Wick's article suggests that you're confident he lied consciously. It's not granted. There are many motives for people to bend and twist the truth, some among them half/entirely unconscious.

And that'd be my observation.

Again, you're just illustrating your complete failure to follow along. I'm not the one who insists he's lying.

And no, the square/rectangle analogy does not apply if I do not believe in subconscious motivations. They are conscious motives that some lazy academic failed to identify.

Quote from: Omega;883246Since its out of context of what lead up to that whole scenario I have no way of saying if thats good or bad.

I don't think it takes a full context from the module to see the main point in context of the post replied to: that it's left entirely up to the DM to improvise a method of resolving whether the character gets ground up into hamburger or not. Depending on the DM's whim, the chance of surviving the meat grinder could be anywhere from 100% to 0%.

I expect most people will have a strong opinion one way or the other as to whether that's good or bad. To someone criticizing ToH for things left unclear, I submit that this case is probably worse than any of those.

I'm biting the bullet, undertaking to read ToH in full. I'll put revelatory comments in spoilers for the sake of those who may still anticipate playing the scenario someday. For now, the two ways not in ...

A note: I'm assuming the Players Handbook as information available to the players.

1. False Entrance Tunnel
I would create a description of the trap's mechanism, so it can be discovered by appropriate examination.

The primary test here is whether players commit the whole party headlong, or wisely send a recon team ahead and hold the rest in reserve. There are of course even better approaches!

The average cost of failure is about the same as each character in the tunnel taking two hits from a frost giant (per the Monster Manual), or two 8-dice fireballs with successful saves for half damage. Neither event should be quite extraordinary in high-level AD&D games; PC lives are by design at great peril at all levels.

Spoiler

To prod the ceiling in the first place (20' up) requires a climb unless you've got somethling long as a pike. Before prodding at the ceiling, one should take a better look at it, which involves clearing away the cobwebs. Then careful inspection will reveal the badly fitted stones.

Besides forceful prodding, opening the (false) doors will cause the ceiling to collapse. There is no specific evidence of a trap here; the mechanism is not described for role-playing exploration.

That there is no chamber immediately beyond the doors, just a wall, can be inferred by sound. I was on an expedition that found this and concluded that rather than immediately opening the doors to look at the wall behind, it was better to seek another entrance.

Given the background information about the dungeon, players might reasonably suspect a trap. A thief gets a roll to detect it, as does any dwarf. A cleric can cast Find Traps for certain discovery.

Without Find Traps, a choice of opening the doors becomes a game of chance. The price is points of damage to each character. The average is also the average total for Wizard 11th (if a merely average figure could attain such a level).  An average Lord 11th even with no constitution bonus typically loses about half strength, and won't be killed  even by the maximum.

Some magics -- or even mundane rope -- would allow opening the doors while remaining outside the dungeon.
 

2. False Entrance Tunnel
This is the "count" situation already treated at length.

It may not have been mentioned however that the abilities of thieves, dwarves, etc., also apply here. Also, levitation will avoid a number of perils in this dungeon (as in many others).

The module text itself refers to the precaution of placing an iron bar. Standard spikes would presumably work with the same caveat regarding placement (though driving in high might leave a chance of their falling into adequate position when dislodged). Various other things might have a similar effect.

Speaking of.

Friend leant me his copy of the module when mentioned this thread, not sure what module version, and have started re-creating the Tomb in Minecraft on the Keep on the Borderlands map. About half-way between the keep and the caves for convenience and times sake. (A trip from the keep to the caves takes 16 minutes on foot )

Got the preliminary facing done and some landscaping. Takes forever by hand.

Phil above is right about false entrance 1. Those webs are way up there. It would take some real effort to set that off.

Personal play note. Daffy threw open the door at the end and got us all pretty beaten up. So we camped and healed up for another go the next day. No losses. Just a-lot of grumbling to get back out and time lost.

We totally missed the sliding block false area as we were going around clockwise and so hit the main entrance after the first false one.

Quote from: Omega;883445Personal play note. Daffy threw open the door at the end and got us all pretty beaten up. So we camped and healed up for another go the next day. No losses. Just a-lot of grumbling to get back out and time lost.

Omega brings up an important point. Retreating from a dungeon when damaged radically alters the lethality of ToH - especially as there are no wandering monsters. It's a tomb of traps lying in wait, so patience can be a great player weapon.

Quote from: Nexus;883430Its the rpg fan version of clamoring for front row tickets for bands with a rep for spitting or pissing into the audience.

:teehee:

Quote from: Nexus;883430Its the rpg fan version of clamoring for front row tickets for bands with a rep for spitting or pissing into the audience.

That's only a good idea when the band is GWAR.

Quote from: Spinachcat;883447Omega brings up an important point. Retreating from a dungeon when damaged radically alters the lethality of ToH - especially as there are no wandering monsters. It's a tomb of traps lying in wait, so patience can be a great player weapon.

Exactly. Once we realized there really werent any monsters in or around the place we camped out and had the cleric swap out a spell for Raise Dead and raised Daffy as he was the highest level thief we had (and handing him a fighter proved a mistake.)

Chappel: Daffy finds and opens all the chests. Half the group poisoned. (I used gust of wind to disperse part of it. But not fast enough. Id memorized several.) sigh. Daffy pokes the Altar, BOOM! sigh. Fuck it. We camp here and recover. Also where my character ended up a girl. oops!

We made it to the valve room and sure enough a re-raised Daffy had to attack the valves which cause the whole blood flood trap to start pouring fourth.

This actually saved us. The Cleric, named Sloan of I recall correctly, out of lesser healing spells at that point, tried raise dead on the valve. But in the confusion cast it on the blood instead. (It was getting late and we were not exactly firing on all cylinders.) This got us some much needed healing from the shade and so we camped out there after using 4 healing potions on the valve to heal it.

Of course, a party of characters of 14th level or so should at least include some folks with strongholds and kingdoms, and the wherewithal to maintain them.  Why not take 200 or so engineers with you to the tombs, mine the top of the hill off, and have, say, a dozen or so mid-high level clerics on standby for hireling injuries?  What's that?  There's a four-armed Gargoyle there?  That's fine, I've got two hundred heavy foot ready to deal with that.  Six clerics ready with Neutralize Poison, etc.  Once we get the top of that hill peeled back of course we'll have the run of the place; the sappers and engineers can use water from the surrounding swamp to flood problematic areas.  A quick Wall of Stone dropped on the demi-lich, followed by transmute rock to mud then transmute mud to rock should finish him off.  Pump some slurry into the pit traps, dump cement and mortar over anything suspicious looking.  Build a lead coffer around the "green devil face" and cap it off with a nice heavy stone lid.  Employ Gust of Wind on the "misty room" and use a Tenser's Floating Disc to help the nice lady in the middle out.  Back to our clerics, we've got a few who're stocked up on Remove Curse to hit every portable treasure with and finally once it's all over and done with the entire thing has a few castings of Meteor Swarm dropped on it, then area castings of Transmute Rock to Mud and finally once the whole foetid mess is just a pool of gunite, the reverse cast and the whole thing becomes a giant boulder slowly sinking into the mire.

Everyone goes home rich and happy.

That is how you beat the Tomb of Horrors.

Quote from: Lunamancer;883434Again, you're just illustrating your complete failure to follow along. I'm not the one who insists he's lying.

And once again, you're completely missing the point, since it's not about whether Wick lies, or not, but whether there are always conscious choices behind such actions (which you seem to assume) or not exactly.

Quote from: Lunamancer;883434And no, the square/rectangle analogy does not apply if I do not believe in subconscious motivations. They are conscious motives that some lazy academic failed to identify.

Tsk, tsk... Subconsciousness and unconsciousness aren't one and the same. Squares and rectangles once again. ;)

Still, it's not that important. The important thing is that this conversation is totally pointless if all you have in store is "nuh-uh, there's no such thing as unconscious motivation".

Think about this next time you'll catch yourself biting your fingernails, awaken in the middle of night and visit your kitchen still half-asleep, or start to act crazy around big-titted girls (or well-hung males, whatever your sexual preference is), or such.

...or not, because people rarely pay attention to their unconsciously motivated actions.

BTW, I'm sure everyone knows that image, but why not attach it, for the sake of good laughs? ;)

Spoiler

(http://www.rpgbooster.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/map_tombofhorrors.jpg)

Quote from: Nexus;883430Its the rpg fan version of clamoring for front row tickets for bands with a rep for spitting or pissing into the audience.

So, it's something you ignore to enjoy the music, or makes you get tickets for the other rows;)?

For the sake of those who want to read the page, could we have that huge image put inside spoiler tags? Jester Raiin? Mod?

Quote from: Phillip;883657For the sake of those who want to read the page, could we have that huge image put inside spoiler tags? Jester Raiin? Mod?

Done!

Quote from: thedungeondelver;883521... That is how you beat the Tomb of Horrors.

That's like taking Ripley's advice to nuke the planet from orbit instead of playing "Aliens," or having an Eagle fly over and drop the One Ring into Mount Doom. It might be more fun to play the game designed first, then play the lark later (if at all, since just briefly talking about it may exhaust the interest).

The graphic mentioned a "chamber of hopelessness"; is that an actual thing in the module or a tongue in cheek poke at something?

Quote from: Nexus;883662The graphic mentioned a "chamber of hopelessness"; is that an actual thing in the module or a tongue in cheek poke at something?

Begin Snip
27A. The Chamber of Hopelessness: Any creature unfortunate enough to be teleported here from area 25B is doomed, for their fate is clearly slated in glowing letters magically written on the north wall of the place:

«YOU WHO DARED TO VIOLATE MY TOMB NOW PAY THE PRICE.
STAY HERE AND DIE SLOWLY OF STARVATION, OR OPEN AND
ENTER THE DOOR TO YOUR SOUTH WHERE CERTAIN BUT QUICK
DEATH AWAITS - WHICHEVER YOU CHOOSE, KNOW THAT I,
ACERERAK THE ETERNAL, WATCH AND SCOFF AT YOUR PUNY
EFFORTS AND ENJOY YOUR DEATH, HEROES.»

A small fountain of water spills into a wall basin and drains away through side holes, so there is always plenty to drink. (It is impossible to flood the place, for there are hundreds of small drain holes in the walls and floor.) (DISPLAY ILLUSTRATION  #27A)  There are numerous skeletons here, rotting equipment, and 30-300 each of s.p., e.p., g.p., and p.p, hurled about. Crushed gems and broken magic items are littered about — the work of insane victims and attacking swords.
(Careful searching will find 2-20 uncrushed gems of 10 g.p. base value, 1 unused potion of diminution, and a +1 flail.) If the door to the south is opened from this side, all of the swords and shields swoop from the walls to attack, but they will cease as soon as the character(s) retreats into the chamber to the north.
End Snip

For a lone character, opening the door from their side, and activating all 8 sets of weapons and shield is probably death.  If the players on the other side of the room help them, it's not bad at all, as they can have the whole party deal with each set one by one, then go get their comrade.

The funniest part of the Tomb of Horrors cartoon is all the characters are undone by their own idiocy.

Or run through really fast. It doesnt say the weapons can leave the room. And closing the other door would stop them too even if they could follow?

We missed that trap somehow so learning of it after the fact.

"This trio will so attack until they are destroyed or the one who violated their area is dead."

"Surviving weapons and shields return to their former positions after the offender is hacked to pieces."

"Only after all sets are destroyed is it possible to enter the room."

So they definitely block you entering.  Whether they can keep you blocked is DM interpretation, but it seems like they can.  It doesn't say that they won't come out of the room to chase you, but doesn't specifically say they will either.

If Set one went chasing after character one, that would mean Set 2 would chase after whoever went over the threshold next.  You'd need 8 people to pull those sets out of the room and run them all around the pillars.  Since they don't have a defined movement rate, I assume they will keep up with the players, chopping them twice a round with each sword.

Only if you come from the Chamber of Hopelessness do they go back to the walls once you step back into the Chamber.

They always go at the beginning and end of the round, so don't think you could beat them initiative-wise.

Probably easiest to just mob them set by set until it's done, then get the wayward party member.

Which at least leaves some leeway for dealing with the trap depending on what the DM agrees to or not.

Or use the potion of diminuition to gain the bonus of being harder to hit. And so on.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883666Begin Snip
27A. The Chamber of Hopelessness: Any creature unfortunate enough to be teleported here from area 25B is doomed, for their fate is clearly slated in glowing letters magically written on the north wall of the place:

«YOU WHO DARED TO VIOLATE MY TOMB NOW PAY THE PRICE.
STAY HERE AND DIE SLOWLY OF STARVATION, OR OPEN AND
ENTER THE DOOR TO YOUR SOUTH WHERE CERTAIN BUT QUICK
DEATH AWAITS - WHICHEVER YOU CHOOSE, KNOW THAT I,
ACERERAK THE ETERNAL, WATCH AND SCOFF AT YOUR PUNY
EFFORTS AND ENJOY YOUR DEATH, HEROES.»

A small fountain of water spills into a wall basin and drains away through side holes, so there is always plenty to drink. (It is impossible to flood the place, for there are hundreds of small drain holes in the walls and floor.) (DISPLAY ILLUSTRATION  #27A)  There are numerous skeletons here, rotting equipment, and 30-300 each of s.p., e.p., g.p., and p.p, hurled about. Crushed gems and broken magic items are littered about — the work of insane victims and attacking swords.
(Careful searching will find 2-20 uncrushed gems of 10 g.p. base value, 1 unused potion of diminution, and a +1 flail.) If the door to the south is opened from this side, all of the swords and shields swoop from the walls to attack, but they will cease as soon as the character(s) retreats into the chamber to the north.
End Snip

For a lone character, opening the door from their side, and activating all 8 sets of weapons and shield is probably death.  If the players on the other side of the room help them, it's not bad at all, as they can have the whole party deal with each set one by one, then go get their comrade.

The funniest part of the Tomb of Horrors cartoon is all the characters are undone by their own idiocy.

Hey, thanks! this answers a few questions I had.

Quote from: Omega;883697Which at least leaves some leeway for dealing with the trap depending on what the DM agrees to or not.

Or use the potion of diminuition to gain the bonus of being harder to hit. And so on.

Right. One thing that sometimes newer players (not saying you), don't get is that there isn't a +1 Flail and a Potion of Diminution there so you can figure out the master plan to get out.  Shit is there perhaps just because it was randomly rolled for, or even, "toss that in there, let's see what the players do with it".

Sometimes scoring higher in tournaments came down to who surprised the shit out of the GM the most and got out of things in ways they hadn't thought about.

Godds only knows what Daffy would have done. Probably tied all the diamonds together, used the potion, and tried to escape as an invincible  diamond backed turtle.  :duh:

Or dose all the weapons with the potion and shrink them down.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883666The funniest part of the Tomb of Horrors cartoon is all the characters are undone by their own idiocy.

Where's the idiocy?  All I see are arbitrary pieces of death, with little to no clues as to what the dangers might be.  If anything, the guys summoning the various hordes are geniuses.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883210Isn't the whole point of the term negadungeon that nothing at all good can come out of going in (applied mostly to some of Raggi's stuff).  I don't think ToH applies at all, you can come out of that place rich as fuck, with a ton of magic and exp you won't be sharing among quite so many as when you went in. :D

Which is why Ernie Gygax went in alone and about halfway through said "I' m Rich!  Fuck This!" *teleport*

Quote from: Bren;883325Does the sound of a body hitting the floor of a 100' deep pit sound different if there are spikes at the bottom?

BAMM! SPLORCH!!! instead of BAMM!! ?

"What's the sound of a body hitting the ground?"

"PADUCAH!"

Quote from: Omega;883374We didnt even bother with detect magic or evil. I mean its an impenetrable blackness in the mouth?
"Uh. Guys? Do I really need to blow a detect magic to tell you that is magical? No? Good. Someone go fetch replacement thief please. We lost another Daffy."

Fucking shit, yes.

Hilariously, I describe my OD&D game as "half Conan the Barbarian, half Daffy Duck."

First:  I was in a really bad mood last week so I teed off on jhkim rather too much, I apologize.

Second:  I do, however, stick with my point that one cannot say it is an objectively bad module.  Some people love it.  I personally think it's a rather stupid idea and I hate modules with a passion in general, but that's just my opinion.

Third:  D&D tournaments are a special form of stupid.  HOWEVER, there was a TREMENDOUS demand for them, as shown by the fact that the 1976 Origins D&D tournament had 250 entrants.  See, for years at cons wargame companies were running "tournaments" with prizes... virtually always either a copy of the game or a gift certificate for the company.  D&D players wanted prizes too.

You may think something is an appallingly dumbfuck idea, but when people are frenetically thrusting money at you at some point you shrug and do it.

Fourth:  Tomb of Horrors was first run in 1975; all the other modules named here were later.  Not a surprise that they were better crafted.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;883903Third:  D&D tournaments are a special form of stupid.  HOWEVER, there was a TREMENDOUS demand for them, as shown by the fact that the 1976 Origins D&D tournament had 250 entrants.  See, for years at cons wargame companies were running "tournaments" with prizes... virtually always either a copy of the game or a gift certificate for the company.  D&D players wanted prizes too.

You may think something is an appallingly dumbfuck idea, but when people are frenetically thrusting money at you at some point you shrug and do it.

Well, listening to your consumers is certainly good for business:)!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;883903First:  I was in a really bad mood last week so I teed off on jhkim rather too much, I apologize.

Thanks. It's all good. I was in a bad mood, too.

I went too far with saying that it's objectively bad - which is something that I tend to argue from the other side. I'm not a total relativist - I still hold that some games are just plain poorly designed that have a few advocates for reasons other than the actual gameplay. However, there are enough Tomb of Horrors supporters that that doesn't fly.

Tomb of Horrors was apparently first out of the gate for tournament modules, and deserves some recognition for that.

Tomb of Horrors has some interesting roots; partly what was in Alan Lucien's "hey isn't this a hilarious killer dungeon," partly Gary's 13 year old son and 16 year old friend telling him that the game was getting boring because it was too easy, and partially people in letters and at conventions saying "Robilar is only 12th level?  Piker!  Let me tell you about my 44th level..."

Tournament modules and AD&D 1st Ed contains a lot of "Read Gary Gygax's mind" because we'd learned to, and Rob and Ernie did so and mocked Gary relentlessly as they did.  Gary wrote from his experience.

Remember, the Castle and Crusade Society of only 6 years earlier was never larger than 50 or 60 people world wide, and Gen Con in 1973 was some 300 people all of whom Gary knew either in person or through correspondence.

Quote from: jhkim;883909I went too far with saying that it's objectively bad - which is something that I tend to argue from the other side.

I admit to having the bad habit of thinking my opinion is objective truth.  I call it out in other people so that they will call it out in me if I do it.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;883126We got through it. Maybe the DM was soft on us, I can't remember, but we got through it. We just weren't stupid. We saw the giant gaping demon's maw and didn't stick anything or anyone in it. We just passed it by, I do remember that. This is part of the advice at the end of the PHB which almost everyone ignores: keep your mind on the goal, and avoid unnecessary encounters. Was there any reason to touch the damn thing other than "don't push the big red button" curiosity? No! So leave it alone! We're just here for the treasure.

Way back in the 70s when I was in Air Force ROTC they taught us the "Seven Principles of Warfare."  I don't remember them... but I DO remember that the FIRST one was "OBJECTIVE."  What the FUCK are you there to do in the first place?

Quote from: Baulderstone;882258So, just to clear things up, was it an adventure that designed to just kill experienced players, or was it something people should feel stupid for being killed by because even a 14 year old beat it? Or did the 14 year old never beat it at all?

Hm.  Good question.  It WAS beyond a doubt designed to kill characters first and foremost.  Which things killed them depends on how stupid they should feel; nobody who's ever played D&D more than a few times should bitch about the demon face.  I'd say Ernie gets a "half kill" because he went in with only his PC, no henchmen or minions, didn't die, and explored enough to get filthy rich.

Quote from: AsenRG;883907Well, listening to your consumers is certainly good for business:)!

When I was getting my MBA I learned a highly technical, obscure, esoteric term for companies that do not do this.

"Out of business."

Well, there's a couple things, Geezer. (and I'm not arguing) :D

1. I never met Gary, or his kin, and didn't start playing until the 80's, so I never tried to read his mind or deal with the table-politics of Lake Geneva. (I would love to hear about them though.)
2. All the "tournament" modules I never ran as tournaments, I incorporated them into my campaigns, the players never knew the difference between a normal adventure and "designed for tournament".

So none of that stuff at all relates in any way, shape or form to *my* Tomb of Horrors experience, and my groups never had the extreme reaction to it that some have.

My player's reactions generally could be more described as

• Harsh, Brutal, Unfair...Um, yeah, Life's not fair and...Immortal Evil guy :duh:
• Arbitrary...No, some guy purposely designing your death isn't arbitrary, it's pretty personal, so walk away, or decide to beat him at his own game knowing the deck is stacked and Kill the Sonofabitch!

But, my players knew from getting to high level in my campaign that Tomb of Horrors was deadly.  No, not deadly like all those other deadly things you lived through, but, Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here. Literally.

Sages told them that. Spells told them that. Gods told them that.
Everyone in the Flanaess told them that.  They believed it, and gave it the respect it deserved, took the care they needed to, and they won.

I'll also throw an apology to John in here as well.

Tomb of Horrors is one of those things where no one is talking about it for the first time, we're all coming on the heels of old discussions about it over the years, and it's easy to get frustrated.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;883918When I was getting my MBA I learned a highly technical, obscure, esoteric term for companies that do not do this.

"Out of business."

The trick is listening to the right customers.

Seen way too many game designers get stalled because they tried to listen to everyones advice or complaints. Or had a playtest group diametrically opposed to the type of game being tested. And then stalled trying to utterly change the design to fit their demands.

Quote from: CRKrueger;883919Sages told them that. Spells told them that. Gods told them that.
Everyone in the Flanaess told them that.  They believed it, and gave it the respect it deserved, took the care they needed to, and they won.

And they deserved to!

Quote from: Omega;883921The trick is listening to the right customers.

Seen way too many game designers get stalled because they tried to listen to everyones advice or complaints. Or had a playtest group diametrically opposed to the type of game being tested. And then stalled trying to utterly change the design to fit their demands.

Well, yeah.  The Pareto Principle has been transmogrified into a business aphorism that "80% of your sales come from 20% of your customers, so you should put 80% of your marketing efforts to those 20% of your customers."

Similarly, about 10 years ago the model railroad layout design community got a bunch of people who weren't model railroaders but just liked to design train layouts.  Damn near killed the community as you had huge arguments going on that had nothing to do with actually building a model railroad.

Seeing how you guys recognize and admit that part of your argumentation might be influenced by "bad mood", I wonder how the 8th-13th March, or more precisely later "reap what you sow" period, will turn out to be for you. ;)

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;883915Way back in the 70s when I was in Air Force ROTC they taught us the "Seven Principles of Warfare."  I don't remember them... but I DO remember that the FIRST one was "OBJECTIVE."  What the FUCK are you there to do in the first place?

I believe you're referring to these.

• Objective
• Offensive
• Mass
• Economy of Force
• Maneuver
• Unity of Command
• Security
• Surprise
• Simplicity

They've added 3 more to these, it seems, so the list has 12 now;).

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;883918When I was getting my MBA I learned a highly technical, obscure, esoteric term for companies that do not do this.

"Out of business."

Thanks for sharing your esoteric MBA wisdom:D!

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883992Seeing how you guys recognize and admit that part of your argumentation might be influenced by "bad mood", I wonder how the 8th-13th March, or more precisely later "reap what you sow" period, will turn out to be for you. ;)

Discussing anything Wick-related is apparently bad for people's moods, unsurprisingly.

Quote from: 3rik;884017Discussing anything Wick-related is apparently bad for people's moods, unsurprisingly.

Deep in the bowels of his fortress of doom, John Wick watches a holographic model of the Internet. He switches his focus to a small, red dot and a transparent box hovering over it. Central AI notices his attention and sends the information to the box, filling it slowly with bright letters. John Wick reads the communicate. It's an information about local conflict, its range, magnitude, number of parties involved and finally, its cause. The last line says "John Wick". He pets the black cat sitting on his lap and says "yes, Mitzi, just as planned". He smiles and tips his trilby.

It is a good day for John Wick.

That's how it is. I'm sure of it. :cool:

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884022Deep in the bowels of his fortress of doom, John Wick watches a holographic model of the Internet. He switches his focus to a small, red dot and a transparent box hovering over it. Central AI notices his attention and sends the information to the box, filling it slowly with bright letters. John Wick reads the communicate. It's an information about local conflict, its range, magnitude, number of parties involved and finally, its cause. The last line says "John Wick". He pets the black cat sitting on his lap and says "yes, Mitzi, just as planned". He smiles and tips his trilby.

It is a good day for John Wick.

That's how it is. I'm sure of it. :cool:

I think it's more of a side effect of his dickery. It's not something he plans for, though he might get some kick out of it. ;)

Quote from: 3rik;884045I think it's more of a side effect of his dickery. It's not something he plans for, though he might get some kick out of it. ;)

How could you choose reasonable explanation over sweet scent of mad conspiracy? Shame on you, 3rik-san! ;)

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;883412Can't find it now, but I'm pretty sure Wick had an example of an NPC (Scorpion I think) accept a gift on the first offer, thereby conveying a message impossible without the 'proper' ritual being established beforehand. That was the point. Breaking ritual can say as much as following it, which was an important element in Wick's vision for L5R.

I think you missed my point.  Players aren't going to care about a single incident of etiquette out of a fairly large book. They aren't going to care about a single use of that single point of etiquette that demonstrates the rule in its violation.

What they are going to care about is the repeated stress that violating etiquette gets them killed.  Over and over and over and over.

And in my personal experience, as noted under several GMs, many quite well known as good, decent GMs, the first few sessions of L5R invariably turn into pixel-bitch suicide fests over failures to obey one or another minor points of etiquette (of which the gift giving etiquette is but a single example), until either the group disintegrated or the GM gave up on trying to force players to understand this 'not-japan' with its 'not-japan-rules', and just assumed we did thing more or less properly most of the time.


Or, you know, everyone played a Crab Samurai and pointed out that no one ever expected Crabs to be polite.


Which I then contrasted to Wick being, apparently, a passive aggressive troll who enjoys watching people frustrate themselves while gaming, who designed the game.


None of which is refuted by the idea that there is a very good reason for any given point of etiquette in this not-japanese-culture.

I mean: Wouldn't a Real Life Game Troll PREFER to have a plausible excuse?

So, you're saying Spike, that Wick's takeaway from the "Year of Isolation" was to create a game with an entire Tomb of Horrors culture he could use to kill PCs, but kept the chortling to himself so he didn't get hit again? :D

Well, I've always preferred to attribute to stupidity that which might be attributable to malice, but here we have clear evidence of malice...

And while there seems to be quite a lot of John Wick criticism going on, I don't see many people saying he is out and out stupid, or bad at game design.

So...

:p

Quote from: Spike;884089I think you missed my point.  Players aren't going to care about a single incident of etiquette out of a fairly large book. They aren't going to care about a single use of that single point of etiquette that demonstrates the rule in its violation.

What they are going to care about is the repeated stress that violating etiquette gets them killed.  Over and over and over and over.

And in my personal experience, as noted under several GMs, many quite well known as good, decent GMs, the first few sessions of L5R invariably turn into pixel-bitch suicide fests over failures to obey one or another minor points of etiquette (of which the gift giving etiquette is but a single example), until either the group disintegrated or the GM gave up on trying to force players to understand this 'not-japan' with its 'not-japan-rules', and just assumed we did thing more or less properly most of the time.


Or, you know, everyone played a Crab Samurai and pointed out that no one ever expected Crabs to be polite.


Which I then contrasted to Wick being, apparently, a passive aggressive troll who enjoys watching people frustrate themselves while gaming, who designed the game.


None of which is refuted by the idea that there is a very good reason for any given point of etiquette in this not-japanese-culture.

I mean: Wouldn't a Real Life Game Troll PREFER to have a plausible excuse?

If that is true, what does it say about a man who created the deadliest dungeon ever just so that he could kill off the high - level characters he couldn't invent adventures for in his own system? Sadism or terminal lack of imagination?

It says that the internet is full of amateur psychologists.

In the halcyon days of AD&D, adversarial Dungeon Mastering was commonplace. Tomb of Horrors, the epitome of this play style, seemed like an attempt to troll convention-goers and buyers of this terribly-written "adventure".

Insta-death, instead of allowing a save versus death, was and continues to be a stupid mechanic. I had several players ragequit this adventure whenever I ran it. Frankly, I would have done the same were I on the other side of the screen.

The only worthwhile takeaway from this adventure were the illustrated inserts. Otherwise, Tomb of Horrors is one in a long line of terrible adventures written by Uncle Gary. May it rest in pieces, preferably at the bottom of a burning trash can.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884148It says that the internet is full of amateur psychologists.

Show me on the doll where my amateur psychology touched you...

Quote from: Rincewind1;884133Sadism or terminal lack of imagination?

Lack of Imagination?  Have you played ToH or White Plume Mountain?  You think being that sadistic doesn't require imagination? :D

Quote from: Spike;884268Show me on the doll where my amateur psychology touched you...

I see what you did there...think he was talking to Rince though.

Quote from: Spike;884268Show me on the doll where my amateur psychology touched you...

* points to doll's pee hole *

Quote from: ZWEIHÄNDER;884169In the halcyon days of AD&D, adversarial Dungeon Mastering was commonplace. Tomb of Horrors, the epitome of this play style, seemed like an attempt to troll convention-goers and buyers of this terribly-written "adventure".

Insta-death, instead of allowing a save versus death, was and continues to be a stupid mechanic. I had several players ragequit this adventure whenever I ran it. Frankly, I would have done the same were I on the other side of the screen.

Otherwise, Tomb of Horrors is one in a long line of terrible adventures written by Uncle Gary. May it rest in pieces, preferably at the bottom of a burning trash can.

1: Except it isnt particularly adversarial. Its just deadly in a different way.

2: So you ignored the opening advice and treated your players like a dick and then blamed mean man Gygax for your failure? Bravo. Or you had players particularly unsuited to the module. Which the damn thing tells you not to run for and then blamed mean man Gygax for your failure? Bravo redux.
Lets see what those insta-death traps are? (My brains still fried from fever so apologies if I miss any. 1:False entrance sliding block: Unless the group had some stragglers or was particularly slow then its more a nuisance than certain death. 2:The Green Devil maw: easily avoidable. 3:Slide trap: also somewhat easily avoidable if you pay attention. 4:Agitated room: Also relatively easily avoidable. 5:Juggernaut: This ones mean, yeah. But not necessarily fatal as it both may not even activate or, depending on luck of rolls, the group awaken before they get flattened. 6:Evil wish gem: if you got killed by that you deserved it. 7:Crown and scepter: this one is 50/50. But yeah. mean. 8:Blood valve: easy to avoid this one. 9: falling roof trap: Not an instakill, but still pretty deadly with no save. But you have to go out of your way to set it off. 10:Aceraks skull: This one is either avoidable, or pretty deadly.
Of those you can gain warning to avoid some. But overall they are mostly "Dont poke things" sorts of traps

3: Hate much?

Quote from: CRKrueger;884276Lack of Imagination?  Have you played ToH or White Plume Mountain?  You think being that sadistic doesn't require imagination? :D

You do have a point.

Since Omega seems to have covered it pretty well, maybe I can set aside my ambition to write commentary on each of the module's rooms.

Now, you're often looking at a dice toss in those situations even if it isn't called a "saving throw."

Where there is no explicit luck factor, you won't get screwed out of a victory by dice. However, the mechanisms of fallibility -- to which even Chess grand masters are subject -- are a bit of chance inherent in the human condition.

For that matter, a simple binary choice -- 50% right at random -- is significantly better than low-level saves in old D&D (which average in the neighborhood of 30-35%).

An interesting thing: Some people don't like their own decisions to spell sudden death for their characters, but like the dice to do that in games such as RuneQuest. Is there a psychology of being relieved of responsibility?

Quote from: Phillip;884379An interesting thing: Some people don't like their own decisions to spell sudden death for their characters, but like the dice to do that in games such as RuneQuest. Is there a psychology of being relieved of responsibility?

Probably for some. If the dice killed them then they can blame the obviously bad game design that allowed this to happen. Whereas if they die by their own stupid then they have only themselves to blame.

Others just take it in stride and may even get a chuckle from it.

Gronan describe in an older thread the first D&D TPK which was accomplished by the first Bag of Holding. Bemusingly the players apparently took it well. Gary didnt.

Wick has always had a theatrical auteur kind of thing going in his games and the idea that D&D is a pretty difficult war game for thinkers where you use your head not whats on the character sheet  is anathema to his kind.

The Tomb of Horrors is a great manifestation of that playstyle which granted is far from popular these days

Given a a choice as long as we could avoid politics I'd rather  have Gronan or a good chunk of the people here at my table over him.

Also no one cares what you gaming was at age 12 . I played all sorts of games, can't remember a damned thing and honestly no one cares now  even me.

 Wick  however  deserves much respect for his fundraising prowess and to some degree  his work on L5R which some of Japan obsessed players adored to a passion and at least in Diamond edition was  a decent card game  well,

Still Not Feudal  Japan, Not Swashbuckling  Europe and the Swinish Orkworld make him  more famous than I think is warranted.  

Apparently though others disagree  

de gustibus non disputandum est,

Quote from: Phillip;884379Is there a psychology of being relieved of responsibility?

Did you ever wonder how it is possible for a relatively small group of executioners to organize a long line of prisoners, then select a guy, who approaches each and every victim one by one and puts a bullet in his/her head, while the rest, certain of their fate still stand or kneel. And yet, there has been almost no cases of those awaiting their turn to simply go full berserk mode, try to strangle his soon to be executioner, or at least bite his throat, claw his eyeballs out & such. There's no way out, and yet people agree to their fate which is neither their choice nor a picture of justice.

Human brain. An interesting piece of machinery.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884489Did you ever wonder how it is possible for a relatively small group of executioners to organize a long line of prisoners, then select a guy, who approaches each and every victim one by one and puts a bullet in his/her head, while the rest, certain of their fate still stand or kneel. And yet, there has been almost no cases of those awaiting their turn to simply go full berserk mode, try to strangle his soon to be executioner, or at least bite his throat, claw his eyeballs out & such. There's no way out, and yet people agree to their fate which is neither their choice nor a picture of justice.

Human brain. An interesting piece of machinery.

Let me show you how an Italian dies. (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwifkraBnrjLAhUMwGMKHT4-DycQFgglMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-255463%2FNow-youll-Italian-dies.html&usg=AFQjCNERR5P1dig31hZIuku1GNoMWFA1hg&sig2=yKjIEtV6MDymX-wV2Cf-Hg&bvm=bv.116636494,d.cGc)

Quote from: Spike;884496Let me show you how an Italian dies.

But he wasn't merely and Italian. He was an Italian hero. And heroes always have some interesting Aspect up their sleeve. :p

Coincidentally, I've just started to wonder what car would Italian Batman drive...

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884499But he wasn't merely and Italian. He was an Italian hero. And heroes always have some interesting Aspect up their sleeve. :p

Coincidentally, I've just started to wonder what car would Italian Batman drive...

All of them. He has an aristocratic playboy style to maintain... and besides, like lovers, clothes, and scenery they all must match his differing moods. To leave any alone is a crime against beauty and feeling. Ciao, bella.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884489Did you ever wonder how it is possible for a relatively small group of executioners to organize a long line of prisoners, then select a guy, who approaches each and every victim one by one and puts a bullet in his/her head, while the rest, certain of their fate still stand or kneel. And yet, there has been almost no cases of those awaiting their turn to simply go full berserk mode, try to strangle his soon to be executioner, or at least bite his throat, claw his eyeballs out & such. There's no way out, and yet people agree to their fate which is neither their choice nor a picture of justice.

Human brain. An interesting piece of machinery.

I'd guess that part of that reaction is driven by a sense of desperate hope that, if you stay alive just a few more seconds rescue will come, your killers will change their minds,maybe they're just trying to scare you, anything while defiance seems to warrant immediate death and no chance however faint.

As a species we're geared to cling to life as desperately as possible which can lead to incredible acts of endurance, even heroism in the face of hardship but can be someone's undoing in the face of threats.

I wonder how many people in those situations regret not resisting when their turn comes up in a last terrible moment of clarity.

Fascinating and terrifying to imagine.

Quote from: Opaopajr;884506All of them. He has an aristocratic playboy style to maintain... and besides, like lovers, clothes, and scenery they all must match his differing moods. To leave any alone is a crime against beauty and feeling. Ciao, bella.

....

My God...

The concept is too awesome to waste it.
My next adventure: there WILL be Italian Batman.

(https://31.media.tumblr.com/3ab3ba48397dadb552607bbfa786dd3e/tumblr_inline_mkmyoinUDF1qz4rgp.png)

Nexus, your sig should say "lengthy".

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;884514Nexus, your sig should say "lengthy".

I don't care. And here's four pages about why. :D

Quote from: Nexus;884515I don't care. And here's four pages about why. :D

I think he was referring to THIS line:

"3rd Wave Feminism: A movement that seems mostly dedicated to making sure no straight male has a lengthy erection ever again."

Quote from: Phillip;884379...Some people don't like their own decisions to spell sudden death for their characters, but like the dice to do that in games such as RuneQuest. Is there a psychology of being relieved of responsibility?

Somewhat related:

For some, for sure, but combined with a popular desire to have "narrative" control over a character's fate, or even the "plot", has made me feel a real disconnect with a portion of the gaming community.

This was made very clear to me on another forum (3 guesses which*) in a thread called "What is your WORST rpg?". One poster said that Gumshoe was the worst because it promised to be THE clue-based investigative mystery game, but the players didn't have any sway in the decision of the final solution (he said that the players should decide the solution of a mystery after following the chain of clues even if it wasn't what the GM or module intended). Keep in mind that this game heavily empowers the PCs with a degee of narrative control. But it wasn't enough.

No one called this out but when others said that their worst game was Fate or an Apocalypse World hack, they were questioned or it was implied that they "didn't get it".

Outside of the Internet, I've encountered players like this: they wanted absolute control not only over who their characters were, their place in the world and how failure worked out (and the consequences of failure) but they also argued with me over the rules or setting details if they conflicted with their character concepts. They flat-out ruined my campaign.

So yeah, some people like to let the dice decide the consequences, but it gets worse when they want to be able to dictate the outcomes, even of failure.

* I don't post there anymore. The final nail in the coffin was not a ban, but being told that people must be lazy, socially-inept or simply less intelligent for liking a class that wasn't as technically optimized, complex or "balanced" as others.

Quote from: Manzanaro;884516I think he was referring to THIS line:

"3rd Wave Feminism: A movement that seems mostly dedicated to making sure no straight male has a lengthy erection ever again."

Ooo...That I care about. :D

Seriously, Thanks Shipyard Locked. When I was typing it i was trying to between "Long" and "Lengthy" and apparently decided on the worst in the middle.

Quote from: Nexus;884519Ooo...That I care about. :D

Seriously, Thanks Shipyard Locked. When I was typing it i was trying to between "Long" and "Lengthy" and apparently decided on the worst in the middle.

I dunno. "Longthy" would have been at least as bad.

Quote from: Necrozius;884518One poster said that Gumshoe was the worst because it promised to be THE clue-based investigative mystery game, but the players didn't have any sway in the decision of the final solution (he said that the players should decide the solution of a mystery after following the chain of clues even if it wasn't what the GM or module intended).

Some people really just want to play collaborative storytelling.

Nothing wrong with that if that's their thing.  I can see where it would get frustrating for them.

Quote from: Necrozius;884518The final nail in the coffin was not a ban, but being told that people must be lazy, socially-inept or simply less intelligent for liking a class that wasn't as technically optimized, complex or "balanced" as others.

Uhh, purple, awful, Gaming Den, EnWorld, GitP, Circus Maximus, Paizo, having trouble figuring out which site you mean. :D

Something to think about. The module was written partially as a "take that" at players bragging high level characters, and partially as an actual challenge to seasoned players.

So what is Tomb of Horrors? Something designed such that a smart group of level 12-15 characters can defeat. But will wipe out those supposedly sooo much more superior level 40 groups in short order if they didnt get that far by fair means and hard work.

An example on an MMO I used to play on way back. Youd have instances of players power levelling early on or rushing through the tutorials, oft boosted by another player. Then theyd get out into the main game at like level 20-30 and have no clue how to actually play. Then get promptly massacred by the equivalent of a rabbit.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884549Some people really just want to play collaborative storytelling.

Nothing wrong with that if that's their thing.  I can see where it would get frustrating for them.

But its self imposed frustration.

Instead of enguaging the system and playing the game that they apparently read and agreed to play. They want to highjack the adventure and tell their own story.

Its like in D&D where you get someone who agrees to participate in a module or even a non-module adventure and promptly walks off the map, falls off the table and gets lost in the carpet, under the couch.

Quote from: Omega;884556Its like in D&D where you get someone who agrees to participate in a module or even a non-module adventure and promptly walks off the map, falls off the table and gets lost in the carpet, under the couch.

You know the mini isn't actually the player, right? :D

Quote from: Necrozius;884518Outside of the Internet, I've encountered players like this: they wanted absolute control not only over who their characters were, their place in the world and how failure worked out (and the consequences of failure) but they also argued with me over the rules or setting details if they conflicted with their character concepts. They flat-out ruined my campaign.

Why did you allow the game to happen in the first place? Don't get me wrong, I'm just curious why didn't you say something along the lines of "guys, this isn't gonna work for me, how about we switch places?"

Gary Greenwald disagreed. :duh:

Quote from: CRKrueger;884561You know the mini isn't actually the player, right? :D

Gary Greenwald disagrees? :duh:

Quote from: Omega;884553So what is Tomb of Horrors? Something designed such that a smart group of level 12-15 characters can defeat. But will wipe out those supposedly sooo much more superior level 40 groups in short order if they didnt get that far by fair means and hard work.

I think to one degree or another this is something that I feel ought to be standard in adventure design. I mean, it's my personal opinion and preferred aesthetic. A good adventure should be self-regulatory in a way.

One thing I think is there always ought to be at least a chance that party members will lose items at some point. If I write a module for 2nd-4th level characters, the rewards are going to be commensurate with that level of play. So if a level 3 character loses his +1 sword at some point in the adventure, this is balanced off by finding another +1 sword among the rewards for successful completion of the adventure. And of course the gold and XP make for a net gain. But if someone wants to come and stomp through it with their level 20 and they lose their vorpal sword only to get a +1 sword as an adventure reward, that's going to be a net loss for that player.

On the other hand, if someone is smart enough to get through the adventure with a 1st level character, losing only his store-bought sword during the adventure but replacing it with the +1 sword for successful play, then he's gained a lot more than the level 3 guy.


So now that I have my copy of Tomb of Horrors, I've noted some interesting things. First of all, the XP reward for winning the whole thing is 100k + XP for treasure. That basically means for characters level 8 and below (and for some classes 9th or 10th level) you're pretty much going up a full level if you beat this adventure. (Cover says it's designed for levels 10-14, but pregens range from 6-14).

On the other hand, the real entrance corridor, I estimate, based on the traps there, a foolish player of a 12th level character has a 90% survival rate just based on good stats saving him. Whereas if the player places wisely, survival is above 98%. Compound these odds over 30 similar encounters, and the survival rate for the fool drops down to about 7.5%, whereas the wise player is about 60%. It's still dangerous, to be sure, but more than half of the party should survive. And certainly at that level raise dead spells are in the cards.

Quote from: Lunamancer;884571(Cover says it's designed for levels 10-14, but pregens range from 6-14).

And certainly at that level raise dead spells are in the cards.

1: That is what makes it an even funnier a jab at the blowhards. A lowly level 6 character has a chance of beating the Tomb.

2: The 14th level pregen could stock up to 3 and the 9th level pregen cleric can stock 1. 8 and down lack access. The level 14 magic user could pack reincarnation. Though that is an unpredictable save.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884565Why did you allow the game to happen in the first place? Don't get me wrong, I'm just curious why didn't you say something along the lines of "guys, this isn't gonna work for me, how about we switch places?"

At the time I was all about collaborative world building. In fact, the campaign itself was created based on group voting. Every ruling or tweak in the setting or campaign style had to be approved by the players (this was my idea).

It didn't go well. In fact, it was a fucking trainwreck.

Quote from: Necrozius;884578At the time I was all about collaborative world building. In fact, the campaign itself was created based on group voting. Every ruling or tweak in the setting or campaign style had to be approved by the players (this was my idea).

It didn't go well. In fact, it was a fucking trainwreck.

I see. This explains a lot.

Frankly, I consider myself very liberal at the beginning, but I become very strict the moment players betray my trust and demand too much. I lost a few groups this way, but I regret nothing. ;)

Quote from: Lunamancer;884571And certainly at that level raise dead spells are in the cards.

Unless you're utterly destroyed and there's no body to raise.

Or you're teleported away to starve to death in a box somewhere.

Quote from: Xúc xắc;884590Unless you're utterly destroyed and there's no body to raise.

Or you're teleported away to starve to death in a box somewhere.

In which case the rest of us laugh hysterically.

Quote from: Omega;8845761: That is what makes it an even funnier a jab at the blowhards. A lowly level 6 character has a chance of beating the Tomb.

The tomb? Quite possibly.

Acererak?  If he practiced hard every day?  No.

Quote from: Xúc xắc;884590Unless you're utterly destroyed and there's no body to raise.

Or you're teleported away to starve to death in a box somewhere.

I'm just curious what the thought process is supposed to be. "Well, as great an idea as it sounded, nothing good came of jumping into the first two demon heads. I guess third time's a charm!" And I suppose all curiosity suddenly ceases once teleported. I mean there is a way out of the two "penalty box" rooms.

Is this before, or after, they make three evil wishes and then are obliterated?
:hmm:

I saw "tournament module" and all became clear. The single worst RPG experience I've ever had was playing in a tournament. Man, that's the most stupid idea anyone ever dreamed up.

Its more a matter of who is running it. Like any module or any RPG. A bad DM can and likely will make the experience unpleasant. Totally a YMMV thing. Of the two D&D ones I've participated in as a player. One was great. The other really pissed me off. Thank you sooooo much for that RPGA.

Note that apparently almost every Greyhawk module started out as a tournament event of some sort. For some it was probably akin to playtesting.

The whole Giants series started as tournament modules for example.

http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/gh_tourneys.html (http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/gh_tourneys.html)

Quote from: Phillip;884379An interesting thing: Some people don't like their own decisions to spell sudden death for their characters, but like the dice to do that in games such as RuneQuest. Is there a psychology of being relieved of responsibility?

I've often seen "Save vs. Death" as the "let the dice take the fall for the bad decision" and I'm cool with that.

Quote from: Kiero;884621I saw "tournament module" and all became clear. The single worst RPG experience I've ever had was playing in a tournament. Man, that's the most stupid idea anyone ever dreamed up.

RPG tourneys can be incredibly fun with the right group of players and the right GM, but I know that with the wrong GM and/or wrong players, it can become a total clusterfuck.

There was ENORMOUS demand for D&D tournaments.  At Origins 1976 the D&D Tournament contained about 25% of registrants.  D&D players SCREAMED for tournaments.

Because wargame tournaments had prizes and D&D players wanted prizes too, that's why.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884639There was ENORMOUS demand for D&D tournaments.  At Origins 1976 the D&D Tournament contained about 25% of registrants.  D&D players SCREAMED for tournaments.

That's interesting. I liked D&D, ran D&D games, and played D&D precisely because it wasn't about the tournaments, Because it wasn't about winners and losers, but more about winners, and creating new ways to win. I never played for rewards, the play itself, or running a good game for the players, was a much better reward than any prize I could collect at a tournament.

I could get all the winning and losing I wanted with the Grogs. Consistently ranked in the top ten in Colorado playing Squad Leader, any side, any scenario.

Consistently won miniatures tournaments in the early days every year at Ghengis Con. Civil War, American War of Independence. WWII with Tractics. We'd spend weeks playing Drang Nach Osten, Bastogne, Panzer Leader, Sniper, Tobruk, Third Reich, Talavara, Barbarossa, Panzergruppe Guderian, Alexander the Great, Streets of Stalingrad, Submarine... and many, many more.

By 1981, I was running and playing more D&D than wargames though. With wargames, you are losing 50% of the time, more if you face a more skillful foe.
There was only one foe that was more skillful than me at playing wargames. Fortunately he was only around during summer break, and during the holidays.

But D&D was different. I could get a group of six players, and once we got a campaign going where they reached 5th level ...maybe, if they were having an really off day, one or two of them would die. Then they would have to roll up a new character. So, more winners than losers. A game that with an average skillful level of play, more people would win than lose. It came as no surprise that it became more popular than wargames, in just five short years. Becuase players if they worked together as a team, planned, and executed the plan would win much more often, than not.

With wargaming... 50% lose. Every time. Doesn't feel good to lose. So the losers would quit playing. permanently. ...and there were less wargamers.

Then GMs and Players did that with D&D. They turned it into a ladder based elimination tournament, instead of a parallel win path team building social experience ...at conventions and game shows. Yes it was popular. But it ruined the game.

When players wouldn't win. When players didn't win... Just like the wargamers did, they stopped playing. At first only a few. Then more, and more, as less and less good quality adventures and modules were released.

TSR's solution was to release 2e, and rework most of the game mechanics, in one way or another. They also tried to define the one true way of playing the game, cutting off other groups and game companies from producing variants or supplemental material.

People like Lee Gold who published Alarums and Excursions just went and published variants and supplements for other games instead.

Dave Arneson quit making D&D games.
Bob Bledsaw quit publishing D&D compatible games. Think he ran until about 1985 or so...
Different Worlds quit publishing D&D Articles becuase Dragon stopped publishing other RPG stuff. I stopped buying Dragon magazine after about Issue 54 or so... Somewhere around the summer of 1983, becuase I wasn;t seeing all the amazing cool different stuff, only 1e AD&D stuff.

Other people started publishing their own RPGs, focusing on what interested them. Some like RIFTS, GURPS, RuneQuest, and RoleMaster were highly successful.

However that good time around the table had been replaced by groups working on figuring out how to maximize their play style to prepare for the next convention tournament. That's about the time I stopped going to Conventions. Last one I was at, was Ghengis Con, summer of 84. By 85 Gary was out. It would be 2000, before I attended another gaming convention again.

All of which is almost 10 years after the time period I'm talking about.

Also, I have to call bullshit on "people who lose quit wargames."  Maybe some did, but honestly if you play wargames you're going to lose as well as win, just like any other zero sum game.  That's like saying people who lose at chess quit playing chess.  Some do, sure.  But it's far from universal.

Quote from: GameDaddy;884646With wargaming... 50% lose. Every time. Doesn't feel good to lose.  So the losers would quit playing. permanently.

Know what?  I'm going to call triple-dog bullshit times a bazillion on this.

I spent last weekend at GaryCon in a room with a dozen historical miniatures wargames going on at once, with four to twenty players.

NONE of the losers bitched.  We had kids as young as ten who lost in games and asked to play again.  My team got our asses waxed in both "Don't Give Up The Ship" and "Cavaliers and Roundheads" and we all had an absolute whee of a time.  Wouldn't have missed it for the world.

And I learned things in both battles, and will play better next time.  Just like every fucking game I've ever lost since 1971.

When an adult loses, they say "Good game" to their opponents; they don't "quit wargaming."

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884640Because wargame tournaments had prizes and D&D players wanted prizes too, that's why.

Did they give prizes at all of them though? What sorts?

Quote from: Omega;884680Did they give prizes at all of them though? What sorts?

Not all, but many, many wargames at wargame conventions had prizes.  Remember, except for Avalon Hill, the vast majority of wargame products... especially for miniatures... came from one person, spare time, basement operations.  Running a convention "tournament" with a prize was a great way to push your new miniatures or new rule book, and the referee would select a "winner" sometimes based on something and sometimes not.  And the prize would be a copy of the game you just played, or a gift certificate for the table in the dealers' room.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884662Know what?  I'm going to call triple-dog bullshit times a bazillion on this.

I spent last weekend at GaryCon in a room with a dozen historical miniatures wargames going on at once, with four to twenty players.

NONE of the losers bitched.  We had kids as young as ten who lost in games and asked to play again.  My team got our asses waxed in both "Don't Give Up The Ship" and "Cavaliers and Roundheads" and we all had an absolute whee of a time.  Wouldn't have missed it for the world.

And I learned things in both battles, and will play better next time.  Just like every fucking game I've ever lost since 1971.

When an adult loses, they say "Good game" to their opponents; they don't "quit wargaming."

Read this. I guess I'm in the wrong hobby, considering the number of wargames I've lost over the decades. I guess I'm just old; I'd rather lose a great game to fun opponents that win a miserable game against...

Well, you know.

Pills. Bed. Goodnight.

Quote from: GameDaddy;884646TSR's solution was to release 2e, and rework most of the game mechanics, in one way or another. They also tried to define the one true way of playing the game, cutting off other groups and game companies from producing variants or supplemental material.

Different Worlds quit publishing D&D Articles becuase Dragon stopped publishing other RPG stuff. I stopped buying Dragon magazine after about Issue 54 or so... Somewhere around the summer of 1983, becuase I wasn;t seeing all the amazing cool different stuff, only 1e AD&D stuff.

1: um... What imaginary 2e is this you were exposed to. Aside from THACO and some other quirks, 2e is still pretty much compatible with AD&D.

2: You mean other than the articles for Top Secret, Gamma World, Star Frontiers, etc? Yes, non-TSR articles dropped off to about nil. But guess what? So did White Dwarf and others. Eventually they resumed featuring articles for other games. Usually in the ARES section. Champions and I believe Traveller. Been ages.

This whole "losing a wargame sucks" thing is kind of mind-boggling. I'd rather play well and lose against a better opponent than get a lucky win while playing poorly against anyone. Sure, there are sore losers but, in my experience being challenged, rising to the occasion and putting up a hard fight is far more important to most people than the final outcome.

And all that fails to take into account the social aspect which, depending on the situation, can be just as important or even moreso than the actual game.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884662Know what?  I'm going to call triple-dog bullshit times a bazillion on this.

When an adult loses, they say "Good game" to their opponents; they don't "quit wargaming."

Hrrmmm? Kind of ironic isn't it. I certainly haven't quit wargaming. I don't have anyone to play face-to-face anymore though, because pretty much everyone else quit. With a few wargames I can hold my own with the best of the participants.

However before I achieved that level of play, I lost. Often. I always sought out opponents without regard to their age or experience level. Most often, in the early days, they were older, and far more experienced than me. So I lost. Right up until the time I started winning. Suddenly it seemed, everyone else started playing different games. Games like D&D, and other RPGs.

I liked D&D, for the exact reasons described earlier. It was much better balanced than wargames, It allowed the GM opportunities to teach better play without creating that sense of loss, that sitting at a table and facing an opponent in a PvP dominance confrontation does. Why play and have an automatic 50% loss rate, when you don't have to?

D&D expanded the range of victory conditions.

With D&D, the players came back, because even if they lost now and again, they were not destined to lose. With wargames, just because of the way they are played 50% of all players automatically lose.

Also, the conventions are not really good examples. They represent a gathering of the most loyal and ardent game fans, and do not in any way represent the casual gamers, the ones that adopt and share the games, the ones that allow the hobby as a whole to grow. While the hardcore gamers called for more PvP dominance confrontations. The casual gamers quietly left in droves.

Quote from: Sable Wyvern;884696This whole "losing a wargame sucks" thing is kind of mind-boggling. I'd rather play well and lose against a better opponent than get a lucky win while playing poorly against anyone. Sure, there are sore losers but, in my experience being challenged, rising to the occasion and putting up a hard fight is far more important to most people than the final outcome.

And all that fails to take into account the social aspect which, depending on the situation, can be just as important or even moreso than the actual game.

Who said anything about playing poorly?  That is a whole other problem related to poor wargame design.

When I'm talking about the guys that are playing, and losing, and quitting, I'm talking about the tier of players that have dedicated serious amounts of time to learning how to play, who also spend a great deal of time playing, who just quit playing. With wargames and later with D&D, it was because of the style of games being played.

With Videogames, same deal. MMORPGs, and Wargames have been replaced by more socially oriented games like Sims, or have said features grafted in. MMORPGs that feature good art and good teamwork opportunities are the most successful. The games that focus on spectacular 1 vs. 1 PvP confrontations die, although their seems to be a resurgence with games like League of Legends and King's Road where players can achieve better results by working together as teams. So now, team vs. team PvP is more popular.

Quote from: Omega;8846901: um... What imaginary 2e is this you were exposed to. Aside from THACO and some other quirks, 2e is still pretty much compatible with AD&D.

  And it is arguably the least "One True Way" the game has been since AD&D, with the plethora of options and the emphasis in the marketing, by the mid-90s, on "pick and choose the rules to build your own game."

Quote2: You mean other than the articles for Top Secret, Gamma World, Star Frontiers, etc? Yes, non-TSR articles dropped off to about nil. But guess what? So did White Dwarf and others. Eventually they resumed featuring articles for other games. Usually in the ARES section. Champions and I believe Traveller. Been ages.

  Call of Cthulhu articles would show up nearly every Halloween from the last 80s until the big reconsolidation to "TSR products only" just before the collapse, and in 1993-1995, they ran a series of articles called "The Dragon Project" featuring dragons or dragon-like entities for non-TSR games in a deliberate effort to widen exposure.

   But just as there's a tendency to lump all WotC D&D editions together, I think GameDaddy is lumping everything that happened after he 'dropped out' together. He's going back to 1983, for example, but 2nd Edition was a 1989 release, and the examples I gave above come from that timeframe or later.

Quote from: GameDaddy;884706With D&D, the players came back, because even if they lost now and again, they were not destined to lose. With wargames, just because of the way they are played 50% of all players automatically lose.

So your whole point is that D&D is more tolerant of casual players than wargames?

No shit, Sherlock.

That does not make role playing games "better balanced" than wargames.  It makes them "different."

Most people are casual WHATEVER.  Woodcarving, oil painting, knitting, model building, RC car racing, playing poker, chess, backgammon, parcheesi, golf, bowling...  WHATEVER the activity, most people are "casual players."  And some activities accommodate the casual participants more smoothly than others.

Neither is "better" than the other.  They are merely "different."

This thread has given me a brilliant idea I can't reveal yet.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;883558Tsk, tsk... Subconsciousness and unconsciousness aren't one and the same.

To give him the benefit of the doubt, I sometimes use these interchangeably on the internet myself, but I'm completely unaware of when I do so.

Quote from: Spike;884089I think you missed my point.  Players aren't going to care about a single incident of etiquette out of a fairly large book. They aren't going to care about a single use of that single point of etiquette that demonstrates the rule in its violation.

What they are going to care about is the repeated stress that violating etiquette gets them killed.  Over and over and over and over.

And in my personal experience, as noted under several GMs, many quite well known as good, decent GMs, the first few sessions of L5R invariably turn into pixel-bitch suicide fests over failures to obey one or another minor points of etiquette (of which the gift giving etiquette is but a single example), until either the group disintegrated or the GM gave up on trying to force players to understand this 'not-japan' with its 'not-japan-rules', and just assumed we did thing more or less properly most of the time.

Quote from: CRKrueger;884103So, you're saying Spike, that Wick's takeaway from the "Year of Isolation" was to create a game with an entire Tomb of Horrors culture he could use to kill PCs, but kept the chortling to himself so he didn't get hit again? :D

My point is that Wick did not design L5R to be a 'Tomb of Etiquette', but since your premise is far more entertaining than any reality, I will accept it as such.

Quote from: Rincewind1;884133If that is true, what does it say about a man who created the deadliest dungeon ever just so that he could kill off the high - level characters he couldn't invent adventures for in his own system? Sadism or terminal lack of imagination?

Efficiency!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884148It says that the internet is full of amateur psychologists.

I've known at least 50 psychologists, and they're all amateurs.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884489Did you ever wonder how it is possible for a relatively small group of executioners to organize a long line of prisoners, then select a guy, who approaches each and every victim one by one and puts a bullet in his/her head, while the rest, certain of their fate still stand or kneel. And yet, there has been almost no cases of those awaiting their turn to simply go full berserk mode, try to strangle his soon to be executioner, or at least bite his throat, claw his eyeballs out & such. There's no way out, and yet people agree to their fate which is neither their choice nor a picture of justice.

...I have.

More relevantly, I've considered how these core behaviors affect game design.

Quote from: Opaopajr;884506All of them. He has an aristocratic playboy style to maintain... and besides, like lovers, clothes, and scenery they all must match his differing moods. To leave any alone is a crime against beauty and feeling. Ciao, bella.

Quote from: JesterRaiin;884511My God...

The concept is too awesome to waste it.
My next adventure: there WILL be Italian Batman.

Finally, a Batman worthy of me.

Quote from: Necrozius;884518This was made very clear to me on another forum (3 guesses which*)

OOH! Was it...

Quote from: Necrozius;884518in a thread called "What is your WORST rpg?".

...well shit, now I can just Google it.

Quote from: Necrozius;884518So yeah, some people like to let the dice decide the consequences, but it gets worse when they want to be able to dictate the outcomes, even of failure.

Not getting to dictate the outcome is the only definition of 'failure' that makes any sense in RPGs.

Quote from: Lunamancer;884571Cover says it's designed for levels 10-14, but pregens range from 6-14

...oh wow, I thought it said ages 10-14. That's awkward.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884639There was ENORMOUS demand for D&D tournaments.  At Origins 1976 the D&D Tournament contained about 25% of registrants.  D&D players SCREAMED for tournaments.

So D&D use to be a blood sport.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884640Because wargame tournaments had prizes and D&D players wanted prizes too, that's why.

Win games and take their stuff.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884653Also, I have to call bullshit on "people who lose quit wargames."

I concur. After all it's rather hard to walk away after spending thousands of dollars on miniatures :D

Quote from: GameDaddy;884706With D&D, the players came back, because even if they lost now and again, they were not destined to lose.

Not getting to play again is the only definition of 'lose' that makes any sense in RPGs.

Quote from: GameDaddy;884708MMORPGs, and Wargames have been replaced by more socially oriented games like Sims,

The Sims is easily the most antisocial game ever created. It replaces social elements with toons you have full (enough) control over, and most setups I've seen feature caricatures of people the players know, often their family. It's creepy on a level I typically don't find creepy, but whatever helps you get through the day.

Quote from: CRKrueger;884561You know the mini isn't actually the player, right? :D

"Short people got no reason ..."

Quote from: GameDaddy;884706I don't have anyone to play face-to-face anymore though, because pretty much everyone else quit.

Wargaming is still popular at game stores and conventions, even historical games have regular audiences. But are you talking about certain wargames from the past that aren't as popular now?

Quote from: GameDaddy;884706Also, the conventions are not really good examples. They represent a gathering of the most loyal and ardent game fans, and do not in any way represent the casual gamers, the ones that adopt and share the games, the ones that allow the hobby as a whole to grow.

There are plenty of casual gamers at conventions. In fact, a common convention goer is the gamer who only games at the cons and has a "regular life" the rest of the year.

It is incredibly common at conventions for people to show up at tables with no knowledge of the game whatsoever, no dice, no books, no nothing, except an interest in playing for the next 4 hours.

The big problem for RPGs is that too few RPGs allow for such players to just sit down and play as easily as you can with most boardgames.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;884863This thread has given me a brilliant idea I can't reveal yet.

...and that's how "Shrink: the Angst" was born. :D

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;884662Know what?  I'm going to call triple-dog bullshit times a bazillion on this.

I spent last weekend at GaryCon in a room with a dozen historical miniatures wargames going on at once, with four to twenty players.

NONE of the losers bitched.  We had kids as young as ten who lost in games and asked to play again.  My team got our asses waxed in both "Don't Give Up The Ship" and "Cavaliers and Roundheads" and we all had an absolute whee of a time.  Wouldn't have missed it for the world.

And I learned things in both battles, and will play better next time.  Just like every fucking game I've ever lost since 1971.

When an adult loses, they say "Good game" to their opponents; they don't "quit wargaming."

When I played team sports from little league to high school we were taught to handle defeat with dignity. Being a blubbering vagina when you lost was not an option.

Quote from: Elfdart;884983When I played team sports from little league to high school we were taught to handle defeat with dignity. Being a blubbering vagina when you lost was not an option.

We once had a sports event in high school where we lost all the games on purpose, turning the opponents into blubbering vaginas even though they won. Good times.

Quote from: Elfdart;884983When I played team sports from little league to high school we were taught to handle defeat with dignity. Being a blubbering vagina when you lost was not an option.

Sometimes though losing can be so very annoying, particularly when it's not your fault.

20 years ago I was at a convention and played a miniatures game, crusaders vs. Muslims in the Mideast. The battle lines clashed, it was give-and-take but my side was ahead. Suddenly, the GM called for morale checks. In one turn due to a domino effect a series of bad dice rolls caused my line to crumble and we lost. It was a fast game so we played a second round. My side was decisively ahead, we had the enemy's flank surrounded. Once again came morale checks. Once again bad dice rolls caused a domino effect and we lost. Most of the game was alright. But even the GM admitted there was something wrong with the morale rules. We should not have lost twice like that.

Friggin' annoying.

Quote from: Doughdee222;884992We should not have lost twice like that.

Said every losing general, ever.

Quote from: CRKrueger;884993Said every losing general, ever.

Not every losing general. A lot of losers didn't get second chances.

Quote from: Doughdee222;884992Sometimes though losing can be so very annoying, particularly when it's not your fault.

20 years ago I was at a convention and played a miniatures game, crusaders vs. Muslims in the Mideast. The battle lines clashed, it was give-and-take but my side was ahead. Suddenly, the GM called for morale checks. In one turn due to a domino effect a series of bad dice rolls caused my line to crumble and we lost. It was a fast game so we played a second round. My side was decisively ahead, we had the enemy's flank surrounded. Once again came morale checks. Once again bad dice rolls caused a domino effect and we lost. Most of the game was alright. But even the GM admitted there was something wrong with the morale rules. We should not have lost twice like that.

Friggin' annoying.

In gaming, we always called that FBD: Fucked By the Dice.

Cascading morale failures are an atrocity when they happen to your side and friggin' hilarious when they happen to the enemy.

Dice shit happens.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;885020Cascading morale failures are an atrocity when they happen to your side and friggin' hilarious when they happen to the enemy.

Dice shit happens.

In real life too...

More often than not, Alexander the Great was outnumbered, however won using superior tactics.

Boudica Lost even though she outnumbered the Romans 5-1.

See also: This is Sparta! or how to defeat a million man army with just three hundred Spartan warriors by inducing repeated morale check failures.

By the time they had to face another 10,000 Greek warriors united, the million man Persian army of Xerxes simply evaporated.

Someone explain to the guy who was born in the 80's what exactly a D&D Tournament entails?

Is it to see who gets furthest in the Tomb of Horrors? Something like that? Are you timed? Are their points awarded? Do you face other players directly?

And how the hell do you account for differences in Dungeon Masters for this?

Quote from: Orphan81;885030Someone explain to the guy who was born in the 80's what exactly a D&D Tournament entails?

You gather at a table with 6 players - maybe strangers, maybe friends, maybe a mix. The strongest competitors usually hung out together and entered as a team. Good players get a reputation at cons pretty fast so other good players invite them to their tables.

Depending on the size of the tourney, there may be a few other tables or many other tables playing the same adventure at the same time.

The setup for Tourneys was generally this:
1) You have 4 hours to finish (or get as far as possible).
2) Each adventure gave points for various objectives.
3) Some adventures gave roleplaying points.
4) The tables with the most points got promoted to the next round.
5) Tourneys can be 1 or more rounds, sometimes each round would be connected in a storyline, sometimes unrelated.
6) The table which scores the most points in the final round gets prizes.
7) Back in the day, TSR provides some nice swag. Over the years, I got several box sets as prizes for running tourneys.

Quote from: Orphan81;885030And how the hell do you account for differences in Dungeon Masters for this?

Ah, you nailed the big problem!

A well written tourney gave the DM explicit instructions to try to homogenize how rulings were made during the tourney. For instance, there would not be wandering monsters. Instead, if the PCs took no precautions to hide their presence (a list of options was provided), then 30 minutes into the adventure, they would be ambushed.

A good tourney author could make this work because the PCs are all pregens, so the author knows what each PC's gear and spells would be.

But, the behavior of individual DMs? Oy vey.

In theory, all GMs for the event gather, run the event once together, bang out any problems, chitchat out any issues, and support each other to make sure we're all on the same page.

In practice, you do the best you can with who volunteers. Sometimes, that means GMs who suck ass and fuck up the entire experience. The key here is to listen to player feedback, kick out bad GMs, and fix up points from tables who had bad GMs.

In later years, I took over running tourneys solo. I would run 3 rounds of the same adventure and the team who got the most points would get the goodies. There was almost always a waiting list to get a spot. Some RPGers enjoy the competitive aspect of "beating the dungeon"

Quote from: Spinachcat;885032You gather at a table with 6 players - maybe strangers, maybe friends, maybe a mix. The strongest competitors usually hung out together and entered as a team. Good players get a reputation at cons pretty fast so other good players invite them to their tables.

Depending on the size of the tourney, there may be a few other tables or many other tables playing the same adventure at the same time.

The setup for Tourneys was generally this:
1) You have 4 hours to finish (or get as far as possible).
2) Each adventure gave points for various objectives.
3) Some adventures gave roleplaying points.
4) The tables with the most points got promoted to the next round.
5) Tourneys can be 1 or more rounds, sometimes each round would be connected in a storyline, sometimes unrelated.
6) The table which scores the most points in the final round gets prizes.
7) Back in the day, TSR provides some nice swag. Over the years, I got several box sets as prizes for running tourneys.




Ah, you nailed the big problem!

A well written tourney gave the DM explicit instructions to try to homogenize how rulings were made during the tourney. For instance, there would not be wandering monsters. Instead, if the PCs took no precautions to hide their presence (a list of options was provided), then 30 minutes into the adventure, they would be ambushed.

A good tourney author could make this work because the PCs are all pregens, so the author knows what each PC's gear and spells would be.

But, the behavior of individual DMs? Oy vey.

In theory, all GMs for the event gather, run the event once together, bang out any problems, chitchat out any issues, and support each other to make sure we're all on the same page.

In practice, you do the best you can with who volunteers. Sometimes, that means GMs who suck ass and fuck up the entire experience. The key here is to listen to player feedback, kick out bad GMs, and fix up points from tables who had bad GMs.

In later years, I took over running tourneys solo. I would run 3 rounds of the same adventure and the team who got the most points would get the goodies. There was almost always a waiting list to get a spot. Some RPGers enjoy the competitive aspect of "beating the dungeon"

Fascinating really. Sounds like fun. I don't see why Tourney events at a con couldn't coexist with non-competitive play at home or at cons as well.

I can understand it most likely being a financial issue now. Putting out Tourney modules and coming up with prizes and all isn't as economically feasible these days I'm guessing.

One I participated in at GenCon felt more like a standard adventure. Im not even sure if there was scoring or a winner? I think someone scored a prize. A module? But I have no idea what the criteria was. Everyone got a mini though. Still have mine.

Quote from: Orphan81;885035Fascinating really. Sounds like fun. I don't see why Tourney events at a con couldn't coexist with non-competitive play at home or at cons as well.

I can understand it most likely being a financial issue now. Putting out Tourney modules and coming up with prizes and all isn't as economically feasible these days I'm guessing.

Theres usually 100 times more standard sessions at cons than tournaments. And most arent competitive. Seems like the majority of the tournament modules were not competitive either. You scored points and had to work as a team.

Some of the early tournament modules I was shown looked like they were photocopied sheets stapled together. Others looked to be simple print runs. They were and may still be dirt cheap to make vs the attraction aspect they garner. No clue as my exposite to them was very limited.

Came across a funny endgame account of the Tomb from apparent an Origins tournament session. Apparently the PCs dropped the crown on the skull and then tapped it with the death end of the rod. The judges werent sure if that would work and called in a TSR member. Gygax. Who said "Yes. That would destroy him." and thus the villain was done in by his own cleverness.

An approach that didnt occur to us as we never knew the crown was trapped other than being stuck on till touched.

Quote from: Omega;885049Apparently the PCs dropped the crown on the skull and then tapped it with the death end of the rod.

Guess that answers this comment about low-level characters beating the module:

Quote from: Exploderwizard;884601The tomb? Quite possibly.

Acererak?  If he practiced hard every day?  No.

Incidentally, I actually have in actual play (home brew adventure) used a cursed crown against the big bad evil guy. If our party was unfortunate enough to find out what happens when you tap the crown with the silver knob of the scepter, I don't doubt for a second that using the crown as a weapon would have been the very first thing that crossed my mind.

Our solution was more round-about.

We made it to the skull and one of the still pretty intact fighters decided hed smash the skull before it had a chance to awaken!

The DM didnt even get to finish saying "the skull starts to rise up" and I had yelled out "Wall of Iron between us and IT!!!" That covered most of us. But said fighter was out in the open and got his soul sucked out. Ranger was next. Guess magic arrows werent enough.

Daffy though got the idea from watching that of fighting fire with fire. The skull had gems that couldnt be broken by normal weapons. But we had the hardest ammo on the planet. So he popped out from behind the wall and pelted Acerak in the face with a diamond. Then darted back before the skull did its scan thing and eventually settled again.

This in turn gave me the idea. Id packed Tensors Floating Disk for things like moving bodies or treasure. But now me and Daffy hit on a plan. He boinked it again with another diamond and this time I settled the disc under the skull.
Sure enough it settled down onto the disc. We still had the Efreet with is and I asked him to make us a tunnel from here to the entrance. And we marched the thing all the way back to a certain green devil portal. You can probably guess where this is going right?

Thus having re-disposed of the monster... Exit our heroes... back to the treasure room to loot it all!

I wonder how a Tarrasque would succeed against the Tomb, providing someone would lure the beast inside of those ghastly corridors. Now, I realize the size mismatch and similar obstacles, but heck, I'd love to see that. :pundit:

The Tomb was not that big of a deal when I ran it a decade ago or whenever.  The players thought it was kind of easy, given that they had as much time as necessary to slowly inch their way through it.  Many an animal from a bag of tricks met its demise, but no PC died (though they did just flee Acerak instead of staying to fight).  

I do not think the Tomb deserves its reputation as a killer dungeon.

Quote from: Omega;884576A lowly level 6 character has a chance of beating the Tomb.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;884601The tomb? Quite possibly.

Acererak?  If he practiced hard every day?  No.

Well, he'd just have to get really really good at Joust, which is more a player skill than a character skill tied to level, right? :p

Quote from: Old One Eye;885131I do not think the Tomb deserves its reputation as a killer dungeon.

Just because someone climbed Mount Everest with relative ease, doesn't disprove the fact that plenty people didn't have much luck and the mountain killed them.

"Tomb of Horrors" killed probably more characters than crusades and World Wars combined, if it doesn't deserve the title of "a killer dungeon", nothing does. ;)

Quote from: GameDaddy;885029In real life too...
See also: This is Sparta! or how to defeat a million man army with just three hundred Spartan warriors by inducing repeated morale check failures.

By the time they had to face another 10,000 Greek warriors united, the million man Persian army of Xerxes simply evaporated.

Everyone remembers the 300 Spartans, but most people forget the 7,000 Greeks that held off the Persians for the first 3 days of battle. And they also forget the 700 Thespians* and 400 Thebans who stayed until the end and died with the Spartans.

The Spartans – good warriors, great PR.



* Who knew theater majors were so fierce?

Quote from: Bren;885330Everyone remembers the 300 Spartans, but most people forget the 7,000 Greeks that held off the Persians for the first 3 days of battle. And they also forget the 700 Thespians* and 400 Thebans who stayed until the end and died with the Spartans.

The Spartans – good warriors, great PR.



* Who knew theater majors were so fierce?

very true people have a habit of remembering the legend but that's not the whole story

Quote from: kosmos1214;885342very true people have a habit of remembering the legend but that's not the whole story

People have a habit of getting their history lessons from Hollywood films.

Quote from: TristramEvans;885346People have a habit of getting their history lessons from Hollywood films.

this is also true

You know, I never much cared for Tomb of Horrors myself, and I especially don't care for the OSR "Nega-dungeon" concept which seems to be inspired by ToH.  The idea of this kind of "screw you guys for doing what a good dungeoneer should be doing" mentality that to me is just retarded.

Quote from: RPGPundit;886852You know, I never much cared for Tomb of Horrors myself, and I especially don't care for the OSR "Nega-dungeon" concept which seems to be inspired by ToH.  The idea of this kind of "screw you guys for doing what a good dungeoneer should be doing" mentality that to me is just retarded.

Agreed. I don't play D&D to avoid exploring interesting things.

Quote from: RPGPundit;886852The idea of this kind of "screw you guys for doing what a good dungeoneer should be doing" mentality that to me is just retarded.

And that's the big difference between ToH and Nega-Dungeons. Being a good dungeoneer is crucial to ToH and greatly rewarded with goodies and a dead demi-lich.

Quote from: Spinachcat;886970And that's the big difference between ToH and Nega-Dungeons. Being a good dungeoneer is crucial to ToH and greatly rewarded with goodies and a dead demi-lich.

Its alot like many sequel and knock-off movies and comics. The producers havent a clue what made the first interesting and so focus on one element people mentioned and then wonder why the knock-offs arent met with the same welcome.

If all someone sees in Tomb of Horrors is "kill players" then they have totally and abysmally missed the point. And from posts right here some people have willfully missed the point so they can have an excuse to bitch.

Quote from: Omega;886978If all someone sees in Tomb of Horrors is "kill players" then they have totally and abysmally missed the point. And from posts right here some people have willfully missed the point so they can have an excuse to bitch.

Like we need an excuse. ;)

I'm ignorant: what is a John Wick again and why do I care about his opinion of an ancient D&D module?

Some guy who designed some games and recently generated a record kickstarter amount for 7th Sea version 2. And you shouldn't care about his opinion about D&D. But thanks for stopping by anyways.

Cool. I'm going to start blogging about why old modules suck when I play them without regard for the instructions or helpful hints on how to make them work. I'll be sure to post a link.

Quote from: Matt;886995Cool. I'm going to start blogging about why old modules suck when I play them without regard for the instructions or helpful hints on how to make them work. I'll be sure to post a link.

Please do. Be sure to include at least one anecdote demonstrating how it was the module designer's fault that you behaved like an ass to your friends when you were 12 or 13. Bonus points if you include anecdotes of you being an ass to your friends more recently to show how much you've learned since you were 12 or 13.

Played Tomb of Horrors around 1980 or so, it was ok, I seem to remember lots of scrying and poking things with 10' poles. The fact somebody has had huge problems with a module and then now has had a successful kickstarter? Probably bodes ill for the hobby, because what we need now more than ever is a ton like that.

Quote from: Bren;886996Please do. Be sure to include at least one anecdote demonstrating how it was the module designer's fault that you behaved like an ass to your friends when you were 12 or 13. Bonus points if you include anecdotes of you being an ass to your friends more recently to show how much you've learned since you were 12 or 13.

...or how little...

Quote from: Omega;886978Its alot like many sequel and knock-off movies and comics. The producers havent a clue what made the first interesting and so focus on one element people mentioned and then wonder why the knock-offs arent met with the same welcome.

If all someone sees in Tomb of Horrors is "kill players" then they have totally and abysmally missed the point. And from posts right here some people have willfully missed the point so they can have an excuse to bitch.

Correct!

Is there some pressing reason given for going into Murderwo- I mean the Tomb of Horrors aside from loot?

Quote from: Omega;886978Its alot like many sequel and knock-off movies and comics. The producers havent a clue what made the first interesting and so focus on one element people mentioned and then wonder why the knock-offs arent met with the same welcome.

If all someone sees in Tomb of Horrors is "kill players" then they have totally and abysmally missed the point. And from posts right here some people have willfully missed the point so they can have an excuse to bitch.

This is generally the beef I have with "genres" and "styles" as such. There's such a strong tendency for it to be defined by the very worst elements. Take anime. A lot of them have interesting stories, interesting characters, interesting premises. But what actually defines the genre? Poor quality animation and art, at least one goofy premise, and at least one character so whacky as to harm suspension of disbelief while not being the least bit sympathetic.

Except Gygax himself said that the whole point was to kill off high level characters. :idunno:

Quote from: Nexus;887320Is there some pressing reason given for going into Murderwo- I mean the Tomb of Horrors aside from loot?

Absolutely None At All.

My interest in the place was lost magic. And got about nil. The rest of the group was hoping for some magic items, of which there was not that much either. Which may have been part of Acerack's big joke on adventurers.

Quote from: Rincewind1;887328Except Gygax himself said that the whole point was to kill off high level characters. :idunno:

Except he didnt.

The module was created to kill off stupid high level characters. The ones that got to those high levels without ever learning a thing. And then set things up such that a relatively low level group can beat the thing with thinking and being careful. Ackerack is Gygax laughing at the braggarts and pretenders.

Its like the initial reactions to the 5e Hoard of the Dragon Queen module. People bitched left and right at how broken the module was because their characters insisted on charging in and attacking everything and got wiped out by a bunch of kobolds. (The module does have alot of broken. But not there.)

Quote from: Omega;887388Absolutely None At All.

My interest in the place was lost magic. And got about nil. The rest of the group was hoping for some magic items, of which there was not that much either. Which may have been part of Acerack's big joke on adventurers.

Thanks, I was wondering about that.

Quote from: Omega;887388Absolutely None At All.

My interest in the place was lost magic. And got about nil. The rest of the group was hoping for some magic items, of which there was not that much either. Which may have been part of Acerack's big joke on adventurers.

There's actually some really neat, unique stuff you can walk out with. If you can manage to get it.

Quote from: Omega;887388Absolutely None At All.

My interest in the place was lost magic. And got about nil. The rest of the group was hoping for some magic items, of which there was not that much either. Which may have been part of Acerack's big joke on adventurers.

I think ToH's rationalization for a underground labyrinth that's wall to wall complicated sadistic traps is pretty cool. The lack of a reason to go in would probably make it fall flat for most of my groups barring just running it as a night's pick up game survival run with pre-gens.

Quote from: Nexus;887553I think ToH's rationalization for a underground labyrinth that's wall to wall complicated sadistic traps is pretty cool. The lack of a reason to go in would probably make it fall flat for most of my groups barring just running it as a night's pick up game survival run with pre-gens.

That's what we did.  Still didn't really like it in general.

Quote from: Omega;887390The module was created to kill off stupid high level characters. The ones that got to those high levels without ever learning a thing.

How is that possible? I mean, if you don't learn, your character gets killed fairly quickly. Leroy Jenkins and all that. So then you start with a new 1st level character and... they get killed soon, too.

The only way you can get to high level while being stupid is if the DM fudges things to keep you alive, or lets you start new characters at the level of the one who died. Which is to say, stupid players have characters who get to high level because the DM let them.

After failing to let their stupidity kill them off for several months or even years, it would be rather churlish of the DM to then turn around and kill them all off for being stupid.

It was a tournament module. That's enough to explain it.

Quote from: Lunamancer;887401There's actually some really neat, unique stuff you can walk out with. If you can manage to get it.

No scrolls worth mention and no spellbooks. A limited use Gem if True Seeing, a Ring of Protection +1 (which you may have to sacrifice), some Healing Potions, a Bag of Holding or a random set of stuff ranging from wool to Bracers of Defence AC 6 (we got 5 pieces of jewelry), Potion of Diminuition (which you can find only after getting totally screwed), 6 random scrolls, a +4 Defender Sword, 2 cursed swords and a Cursed Spear of Backbiting.

The monetary treasure was more usefull for the EXP haul.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;887653After failing to let their stupidity kill them off for several months or even years, it would be rather churlish of the DM to then turn around and kill them all off for being stupid.

This seems to assume the characters have leveled under the same DM, or in the same campaign.

I mentioned earlier, I think a good prepared adventure, published or otherwise, should be self-regulating. Meaning that although it might be designed with particular character levels in mind--10th to 14th in the case of Tomb of Horrors--the risks and rewards of the adventure are set up in such a way that higher level characters have more to lose, lower level characters can reap proportionately larger rewards.

The fact is, the Tomb can kill a 30th level character just as easily as a 15th or a 10th. You can come in armed with artifacts and relics and watch as they're teleported away from you when you step through one of the traps. On the other hand, a 6th level character could beat this adventure, and the XP reward for destroying Acererak is enough to instantly level an 8th level character.

What I like about this sort of self-regulating nature is I feel it makes the DM less of a dick. To me a dick DM is one who needs to control every little thing. Like demanding the only characters who come through this adventure be between levels 10 and 14.

I say if you want to try and run your level 30 character through this adventure, have at it. If you're a shitty player who never deserved that character, kiss his has goodbye. If you're a great player who does deserve a level 30 character, you might find it fun but easy overall, and you won't come out with your character much improved.

Or if you want a challenge, run your level 6-8 character through it. If it turns out you still have a few things to learn, well I guess it's better than losing a character of twice that level. But if you really are smart enough to get through it, congrats. Take an instant level. Have a good-aligned siren companion to help you out on your future adventures.

This module handles it all beautifully.

Quote from: Omega;887662No scrolls worth mention and no spellbooks. A limited use Gem if True Seeing, a Ring of Protection +1 (which you may have to sacrifice), some Healing Potions, a Bag of Holding or a random set of stuff ranging from wool to Bracers of Defence AC 6 (we got 5 pieces of jewelry), Potion of Diminuition (which you can find only after getting totally screwed), 6 random scrolls, a +4 Defender Sword, 2 cursed swords and a Cursed Spear of Backbiting.

The monetary treasure was more usefull for the EXP haul.

A good aligned siren companion?

A gem worth 100,000 fucking gps?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;887653The only way you can get to high level while being stupid is if the DM fudges things to keep you alive, or lets you start new characters at the level of the one who died. Which is to say, stupid players have characters who get to high level because the DM let them.

If games were run as Gygax said Greyhawk and Blackmoor were run (in his "D&D is Only as Good as the DM" article in The Dragon), it should have been a rare, excellent as well as lucky, player who had got a character to such high levels as recommended in the few years since D&D was published.

A lot of campaigns had DMs who gave away XP and magic items, rapidly pumping up the characters to demigod status while only lessening the already feeble challenge to the players.

My friends and I were not like that, but we had no problem treating what we regarded as a crooked game as a non-event ("It was just a bad dream!") and continuing to play those characters. Why people who have really turned the whole thing into a joke should suddenly be too pure for that is baffling. If they couldn't stand to risk their precious pawns, why not play the pre-gens included?

It's just a game, kids!

Look, I'm not going to get all, "Are you crying? There's no crying in D&D!" on people who really are too tender. I've just got to wonder what kind of jackass would do that -- or did until the 'friend'-burning Wick revealed his majesty.

Quote from: Lunamancer;887668This seems to assume the characters have leveled under the same DM, or in the same campaign.

It's a fair assumption. Certainly DMs worldwide tend to be suspicious when a new player shows up with his 43rd level drowlesbianstripperninja - "levelled up from 1st, honest!" - and get them to roll up a new character.

Quote from: Phillip;887716If games were run as Gygax said Greyhawk and Blackmoor were run (in his "D&D is Only as Good as the DM" article in The Dragon), it should have been a rare, excellent as well as lucky, player who had got a character to such high levels as recommended in the few years since D&D was published.

A lot of campaigns had DMs who gave away XP and magic items, rapidly pumping up the characters to demigod status while only lessening the already feeble challenge to the players.

Sure. Both are true. But the point is that DMs tend to be consistent, at least when you average it over the great number of sessions to go from 1st to 10th level. So with the Hardarse DM you'll rarely get to 10th level, and Tomb of Horrors won't be a novelty for you. With the Gimme DM you'll get high level quickly, but that DM either won't run ToH or will soften it. And the DM is consistently hardarse or gimme, or wherever in between - if not within a session, then over time. And players generally adjust to this.

So it's never going to be as the guy described, "haha, FINALLY I get to punish you for your stupidity! Haha!"

I think most of the 10th level characters who went through ToH were rolled up on the spot as 10th level characters - and played through the module and were never played again. So the players largely weren't concerned if the module was ridiculous or not, it's just a one-off, and we'll put up with all sorts of silliness if it's just once.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;887733It's a fair assumption.

Maybe for you. Not for me. I run an open table.

QuoteCertainly DMs worldwide tend to be suspicious when a new player shows up with his 43rd level drowlesbianstripperninja - "levelled up from 1st, honest!" - and get them to roll up a new character.

How about with about 40 zillion RPGs now, each tailor-suited to scratch a precise itch on gamers ballsacks, it gets pretty fucking hard to stick to a game long enough anymore to get the kind of mileage to level the characters to begin with. This is also a sad reality for gamers worldwide.

If I want to apply your consistency argument, running an open table increases the number of legitimately high-level characters available.

As I described, I require adventures that are self-regulating to handle the open table environment. This module meets the criteria.

The flip side of the real jokers getting a comeuppance -- So you're the best, the champs? Let's see who actually comes out top in the rankings at Origins! -- is that it was a good challenge for Ernie Gygax and his ilk.

As an aside, while I referred to a "few years since D&D was published," apparently the tournament was at Origins I in 1975 -- the year following D&D's public debut.

Already there were not only real hotshots such as Ernie the Barbarian, but also people proclaiming the game's possibilities exhausted so quickly because they had rocketed to umpteenth level and killed off a pantheon of gods and took their stuff.

Great, Lunamancer. Well, to your next game I'll bring my 78th level dwarf paladinassassinillusionist. Straight 18s, except I got unlucky rolling Con and only got 17. He has a Machine of Lum the Mad in his extra-large Bag of Holding, and a +6 Vorpal Sword which gives immunity to undead attacks, and 95% Magic Resistance. Also Field Plate +6.

Was all rolled up 3d6 down the line and I fought him up from 1st. Honest.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;887738Great, Lunamancer. Well, to your next game I'll bring my 78th level dwarf paladinassassinillusionist. Straight 18s, except I got unlucky rolling Con and only got 17. He has a Machine of Lum the Mad in his extra-large Bag of Holding, and a +6 Vorpal Sword which gives immunity to undead attacks, and 95% Magic Resistance. Also Field Plate +6.

Was all rolled up 3d6 down the line and I fought him up from 1st. Honest.

So what you're saying is that when you bring your fraud character to my table and we run Tomb of Horrors, you'll lose all your shit when it's teleported to Acererak's chamber, then the character will die when he crawls into a demon mouth. Meanwhile, the level 6 character whose player is much smarter since he had to earn the character will get to take your shit when he loots Acererak's treasure.

Yeah. That's exactly the fucking point of why I demand adventures of this kind.

Quote from: Lunamancer;887670A good aligned siren companion?

A gem worth 100,000 fucking gps?

A siren you have a really good chance of not getting due to how that trick is set up. The Efreet is easier to find.

I did mention the treasure was worth more than the magic items. Theres alot of secondary EXP in that module.

Another thought about Rokugan occurred to me in the shower. Are the etiquette rules there any less relevant and byzantine than the ones in Tékumel?

Quote from: Omega;885049Apparently the PCs dropped the crown on the skull and then tapped it with the death end of the rod. The judges werent sure if that would work and called in a TSR member. Gygax. Who said "Yes. That would destroy him." and thus the villain was done in by his own cleverness.

Quote from: Omega;885094He boinked it again with another diamond and this time I settled the disc under the skull. Sure enough it settled down onto the disc. We still had the Efreet with is and I asked him to make us a tunnel from here to the entrance. And we marched the thing all the way back to a certain green devil portal. You can probably guess where this is going right?

This is what I think scenarios like ToH should be about, and I'd love to play such a game, but how do I know when it is such a game? Because ToH obviously doesn't enforce it.

Quote from: Omega;886978Its alot like many sequel and knock-off movies and comics. The producers havent a clue what made the first interesting and so focus on one element people mentioned and then wonder why the knock-offs arent met with the same welcome.

If all someone sees in Tomb of Horrors is "kill players" then they have totally and abysmally missed the point.

To be fair, sometimes what makes a design compelling is not the same as what makes it identifiable, and the intersection between the two can be really complicated and hard to sort out.

Quote from: Omega;886978And from posts right here some people have willfully missed the point so they can have an excuse to bitch.

How can you be sure? I mean, besides the fact that this discussion is taking place on TheRPGSite :p

Quote from: 3rik;884986We once had a sports event in high school where we lost all the games on purpose,

But losing on purpose is winning in secret.

Quote from: TristramEvans;885346People have a habit of getting their history lessons from Hollywood films.

Or worse, the History Channel.

Quote from: Lunamancer;887327Take anime. A lot of them have interesting stories, interesting characters, interesting premises. But what actually defines the genre?

Nothing, because it's a medium, not a genre.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;887781This is what I think scenarios like ToH should be about, and I'd love to play such a game, but how do I know when it is such a game? Because ToH obviously doesn't enforce it.

ToH does enforce it. But as with every RPG and board game and whatever, someone may totally ignore that advice. And as shown. They have.

How can you tell. Because your characters arent dead from thinking things through. The DM hasnt started a countdown without explaining what just happened. And so on.

Probably unintentional. But the module also ends up being a character test for a DM.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;887781Nothing, because it's a medium, not a genre.

No. Animation is a medium. A specific style of animation is a genre.

Genre - a category of artistic composition, as in music or literature, characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;887738Great, Lunamancer. Well, to your next game I'll bring my 78th level dwarf paladinassassinillusionist. Straight 18s, except I got unlucky rolling Con and only got 17. He has a Machine of Lum the Mad in his extra-large Bag of Holding, and a +6 Vorpal Sword which gives immunity to undead attacks, and 95% Magic Resistance. Also Field Plate +6.

Was all rolled up 3d6 down the line and I fought him up from 1st. Honest.

He could still say no.

Quote from: Lunamancer;887839No. Animation is a medium. A specific style of animation is a genre.

You would be incorrect.  Because within Anime there are several genres, like boys, girls, action, comedy, science fiction, fantasy, horror, family, adult, pretty much the same range as the U.S. Movie Industry.  Or are you saying that the U.S. Movie Industry is a single genre?

Quote from: Lunamancer;887839Genre - a category of artistic composition, as in music or literature, characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter

Again, the only thing that makes anime 'unique' is it's country of origin, not the art style, which is actually quite varied.

There is something to Anime as artistic style...

Quote from: WikiIn 1987, Hayao Miyazaki stated that he despised the truncated word anime because to him it represented the desolation of the Japanese animation industry. He equated the desolation with animators lacking motivation and mass-produced, overly expressive products which rely on fixed iconography for facial expressions and protracted and exaggerated action scenes but lack depth and sophistication because they do not attempt to convey emotion or thought.

He's identifying a type of artistic style of Japanese animation tied closely to the use of the word anime.  It's really the fixed iconography of facial expressions that nails it.

Personally I call it the Ranma style, which gets used in tons of anime.  For a lot of people who say they don't like anime, that style is what they mean.

Quote from: CRKrueger;887905There is something to Anime as artistic style...



He's identifying a type of artistic style of Japanese animation tied closely to the use of the word anime.  It's really the fixed iconography of facial expressions that nails it.

Personally I call it the Ranma style, which gets used in tons of anime.  For a lot of people who say they don't like anime, that style is what they mean.

Which is highly ironic, because Mr. Miyazaki uses the same techniques in just about every anime he put out since.  Which means, he's probably changed his opinion since 1987.  What, you don't think his statement is a little out of date now?

No, anime has always been considered a medium, in fact his studio's movies and productions are also considered Anime, and have been since he started making them, and no amount of whining really changed that.

And anime has had a wide range of styles within in, from the depressingly realistic Grave of The Fireflies to the outrageously flashy Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann, so much so that it really is a full on medium.

For speakers of English, animation would be the medium and anime some sort of subset of the medium.

Before anime became parlance, "Japanimation" was the common term in the west

We need a Tomb of Horrors anime...

Quote from: Lunamancer;887747That's exactly the fucking point of why I demand adventures of this kind.

...to be completely and utterly passive-aggressive?

Quote from: GnomeWorks;887981...to be completely and utterly passive-aggressive?

Passive aggressive in what way?

Quote from: TristramEvans;887919Before anime became parlance, "Japanimation" was the common term in the west

As a French speaker, "animé" means "animated", so I was confused by the use of the term back then (super redundant). On French tv, Japanese cartoons had been in big demand since the 70s (Haarlock, Goldorak, le Petit Castor, Sous le Signe des Mousquetteres, etc...).

Hearing English speakers correcting me on my pronounciation of animé was a little weird too (no, it sounds like "aaaah-nim-ey"). Ugh.

Quote from: Omega;888012Passive aggressive in what way?

I assume in a different way than swooping in out of nowhere and baselessly accusing someone of being passive aggressive.

Seeing as how Miyazaki formed Ghibli studios (named after the Italian word for Scirrocco, the "Desert Wind" that was going to blow through and reinvigorate the Anime industry), which became famous for being "anti-anime style" (no weird hair colors, wacky hair styles, non-stop frenetic action sequences and those stupid universal distorted emotion faces)...and did so more or less for the next 30 years...I'd say yeah, he kinda meant it.

If someone is trying to point to an anime movie and tell their friends, "no, this isn't Dragonball Z or Sailor Moon, it's really good", the majority of the time it's going to be one of the Ghibli movies - Princess Mononoke, Spirited Away, Graveyard of the Fireflies, Tales from Earthsea, The Wind Rises, Nausicaa, Princess Kaguya, etc...

When the guy who consistently puts out the highest grossing anime movies in Japan, and is probably the second-most awarded director in Japan after Kurosawa, whose films have been nominated for Academy Awards 5 times, says he started his own company to change the stagnant artistic aesthetic in Japanese Animation, and then almost single-handedly changes it over 30 years, it's kinda weird to say he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.

Edit: Is he the only one, no?  Are there a lot of other Japanese Animators out there doing things that have nothing to do with the "Ranma-Style Anime Stereotype"?  Of course there are.

But when someone is talking about not liking the "Anime Style", don't pretend you don't know exactly what they mean.

Theres a huge number of French-Japan collaboration anime. Like Ulysse 31. And others from Italy-Japan collaborations like Sherlock Hound.

Back on topic. (OF THE RIGHT THREAD!)

Are there any other modules with as skewed a rep or misinterpreted as Tomb of Horrors?

Quote from: Necrozius;888026As a French speaker, "animé" means "animated", so I was confused by the use of the term back then (super redundant). On French tv, Japanese cartoons had been in big demand since the 70s (Haarlock, Goldorak, le Petit Castor, Sous le Signe des Mousquetteres, etc...).

Hearing English speakers correcting me on my pronounciation of animé was a little weird too (no, it sounds like "aaaah-nim-ey"). Ugh.

i chalk it up the the way words pronunciations change as they get adopted in to other languages after all its like the old culinary word usage
for example

in English its commonly pronounced cul-inary with a short u and i sound
but the proper french is cUlinary with a long u sound or closer to that (iv only heard the french once)

Quote from: Lunamancer;888050I assume in a different way than swooping in out of nowhere and baselessly accusing someone of being passive aggressive.

"I'll let anybody play anything, unless you come in with something that I don't care for, then I'll find the most asinine way to kill your character and let my real players take all your shit!"

But yeah, my accusation was real baseless.

Jackass.

Quote from: Omega;888063Are there any other modules with as skewed a rep or misinterpreted as Tomb of Horrors?

I'll nominate the original I6 Ravenloft. It accrued a reputation for being this railroaded thing where Strahd's story was more important than the PCs' story. But in reality it's basically a big gothic sandbox except for an "Optional Ending" that's less than half a page long and jammed in with the appendices.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;888161I'll nominate the original I6 Ravenloft. It accrued a reputation for being this railroaded thing where Strahd's story was more important than the PCs' story. But in reality it's basically a big gothic sandbox except for an "Optional Ending" that's less than half a page long and jammed in with the appendices.

Which is all Strahd's story.  But then again, seeing as Strahd is pretty much Borovia...  Sorta kinda can't escape it, can you?

:D

Quote from: Justin Alexander;888161I'll nominate the original I6 Ravenloft. It accrued a reputation for being this railroaded thing where Strahd's story was more important than the PCs' story. But in reality it's basically a big gothic sandbox except for an "Optional Ending" that's less than half a page long and jammed in with the appendices.

Probably the same morons who are claiming Keep on the Borderlands is a railroad.

Quote from: Omega;888200Probably the same morons who are claiming Keep on the Borderlands is a railroad.

...wait, what? How do you even make that claim?

That's pretty much the quintessential sandbox module. "Here's some caves. Do whatever."

Quote from: GnomeWorks;888160"I'll let anybody play anything, unless you come in with something that I don't care for, then I'll find the most asinine way to kill your character and let my real players take all your shit!"

But yeah, my accusation was real baseless.

Hmm. Considering I didn't say what you quoted, yes, your accusation is 100% baseless.

Quote from: Lunamancer;888211Hmm. Considering I didn't say what you quoted, yes, your accusation is 100% baseless.

Feel free to offer a defense more solid than "nuh uh."

Quote from: GnomeWorks;888214Feel free to offer a defense more solid than "nuh uh."

Given you have yet to actually present any comment from Lunamancer and explain how it amounts to, "I'll let anybody play anything, unless you come in with something that I don't care for, then I'll find the most asinine way to kill your character and let my real players take all your shit!" there is nothing for him to defend.

I could take a guess as to which comment you're referring to, but you'd have to willfully misinterpret every single thing he said in order to reach the paraphrased version you posted, so the onus is definitely on you to make your point, not on him to defend something -- as Lunamancer pointed out -- he didn't actually say.

If you want Lunamancer to make a defence or admit your superiority, I suggest you start by actually presenting your case, instead of saying, "You said this, prove that you didn't, nah nah nah!" There maybe something I've missed that Lunamancer has said that does amount to what you're claiming -- but it would help your case if you actually pointed out what it was.

Quote from: GnomeWorks;888160"I'll let anybody play anything, unless you come in with something that I don't care for, then I'll find the most asinine way to kill your character and let my real players take all your shit!"

But yeah, my accusation was real baseless.

Jackass.

Jesus dude, reading is fundamental.  Let's try it...

Quote from: Lunamancer;887747So what you're saying is that when you bring your fraud character to my table and we run Tomb of Horrors, you'll lose all your shit when it's teleported to Acererak's chamber, then the character will die when he crawls into a demon mouth. Meanwhile, the level 6 character whose player is much smarter since he had to earn the character will get to take your shit when he loots Acererak's treasure.

Yeah. That's exactly the fucking point of why I demand adventures of this kind.

Where does Lunamancer say that "you'll lose all your shit when it's teleported to Acererak's chamber" or "the character will die when he crawls into a demon mouth" equate with "find the most asinine way to kill your character".

Let's break it down.

• You come into Tomb of Horrors with a fake 20th character.
• You won't have the personal experience of getting that character to 20th level.
• As a result, you're going to do stupid shit because you don't know any better.
• As a result, your character will die.
• Problem solved.

I'm guessing what really got your panties in a bunch was the suggestion that the player might actually have some intelligence and not just be able to be run by a monkey with dice, which defeats the whole notion of "I am a PC therefore I am the protagonist here!" or something similar.

So then with panties thoroughly twisted you swoop in, deliberately misread what was written, declare malicious intent and GM favoritism where nothing of that is at all present, and start hissing and spitting through the conversation because your real enemy is a gaming style older than you are.

And Lunamancer is the one who's passive-aggressive...yeah, ok.

Quote from: kosmos1214;888131but the proper french is cUlinary with a long u sound or closer to that (iv only heard the french once)

It's actually a 'u' sound that doesn't exist in English and is a real bitch to teach:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QaiWSsKrCw

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;888283It's actually a 'u' sound that doesn't exist in English and is a real bitch to teach:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QaiWSsKrCw

I hate foreign vowels more than anything.  I feel like some asshole making fun of a retarded person when I try to do the German umlaut vowel mutations.  Friends who speak German laugh at me because I can't pronounce my own last name unless I've got a few beers in me. :D

Quote from: GnomeWorks;888205...wait, what? How do you even make that claim?

That's pretty much the quintessential sandbox module. "Here's some caves. Do whatever."

Personal candidate for new lows in RPG player intelligence was a guy claiming that a module that had a locale with only one entrance... was a railroad. Despite that you can wander all over outside and inside that locale. Or that you are trapped in Castle Amber makes it a horrible railroad. I guess Ravenloft is too then since once you enter you cant leave till you put down you know who.

Quote from: CRKrueger;888278I'm guessing what really got your panties in a bunch was the suggestion that the player might actually have some intelligence and not just be able to be run by a monkey with dice, which defeats the whole notion of "I am a PC therefore I am the protagonist here!" or something similar.

So then with panties thoroughly twisted you swoop in, deliberately misread what was written, declare malicious intent and GM favoritism where nothing of that is at all present, and start hissing and spitting through the conversation because your real enemy is a gaming style older than you are.

And Lunamancer is the one who's passive-aggressive...yeah, ok.

You DO know who you're talking to, right?

I've noticed shitty players often bitch about having to make intelligent choices.  Then some of them got put in charge of 3E.

Quote from: CRKrueger;888278Jesus dude, reading is fundamental.  Let's try it...

Your post just about sums it up perfectly.

Though I would also add that the two traps I referenced from Tomb of Horrors not only each appear in the Tomb itself multiple times, but they have both been the specific subject of conversation in this thread.

So the context was clear and present. And I certainly haven't exaggerated anything. Unlike the guy with the 73rd level dwarf or whatever--no one's ever come to my table looking to play anything like that. Usually if people are going to cheat, they try to fly it under the radar. A 6th level Druid (or max level if we're doing something the level of Tomb of Horrors) with near maximum hit points, a ring of invisibility, ring of regeneration, brooch of shielding, bracers of defense, and a +4 scimitar. That sort of thing.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;888283It's actually a 'u' sound that doesn't exist in English and is a real bitch to teach:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QaiWSsKrCw

cool i dident know that

To some extent, there's a "self-balancing" aspect simply to the original multi-level dungeon scheme, with XP awards reduced for instance to 1/4 for an 8th-level figure operating on the 2nd dungeon level. Meanwhile, a 2nd-level party venturing down to 4th doesn't get a multiple, but the basic returns are so large relative to the smaller requirement that -- if the larger risks are overcome -- the players are very well rewarded for their daring.

Well, Tomb of Horrors shouldn't have killed his dog.

(I'm too lazy to check if this joke has actually been said yet).

Quote from: CRKrueger;888278And Lunamancer is the one who's passive-aggressive...yeah, ok.

Everything you just wrote is a steaming pile of shit, and you have the gall to question my reading comprehension?

I don't give two fucks about Tomb of Horrors. It's a bullshit module for viking hat assholes. The only reason it has justification for existence is if it is used the way it was originally intended, as a weird-ass competition module where groups compete to see who can last the longest (or so is my understanding of it's original purpose), where it is very clearly understood that characters are throw-aways and nobody actually cares about them as anything more than pawns.

The fucking intent of what I wrote was not to call out Lunamancer as a jackass for using ToH, it was calling him out for being a socially-retarded neckbeard.

If a jackass comes to your table who has clearly cheated to get to that point, and you do not appreciate that, the fucking adult thing to do is to tell them to fuck off. Politely, if you like, but you don't invite them to sit down and then cackle as you fucking waste your time on some juvenile horseshit method of handling social interaction.

Pulling the "oh I let anything fly at my table" and then to follow it up with that idiocy is just fucking juvenile.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;888792Well, Tomb of Horrors shouldn't have killed his dog.

(I'm too lazy to check if this joke has actually been said yet).

Nah. That happened in Warhammer Quest. Usually eight after your Warrior  gets Moity Worrier tattooed on his or her chest...

Quote from: GnomeWorks;888808Everything you just wrote is a steaming pile of shit, and you have the gall to question my reading comprehension?

It's an accurate summary. You may not like it, but it's still an accurate summary. If all you see is a "steaming pile of shit" that's not exactly making a stellar case for reading comprehension skills. Perhaps you could avoid confusion about your capacity for understanding by communicating an honest appraisal of what other people write rather than spewing hate.

QuoteI don't give two fucks about Tomb of Horrors.

The thread is about Tomb of Horrors. If that's really how you feel, maybe you shouldn't be reading or posting here.

QuoteIt's a bullshit module for viking hat assholes.

It's rated the third greatest module of all time. A lot of people seem to have had fun playing it. If you haven't, that doesn't mean the module isn't fun. All it means is you don't know how to have fun playing it.

QuoteThe only reason it has justification for existence is if it is used the way it was originally intended, as a weird-ass competition module where groups compete to see who can last the longest (or so is my understanding of it's original purpose), where it is very clearly understood that characters are throw-aways and nobody actually cares about them as anything more than pawns.

When you say "or so is my understanding," is that you confessing that you really have no clue what the module is actually about? Because in reality, it's totally beatable. It's not just a competition to see who's the last man standing. I've never participated in a tourney. I bought the module inspired by this thread. I read it cover to cover with fresh eyes. It seems like a fun adventure to run my regular group through. The module even lists suggestions of where in the world of Greyhawk it can be set. Almost as though it is suitable for insertion into an ongoing campaign. Fancy that.

QuoteThe fucking intent of what I wrote was not to call out Lunamancer as a jackass for using ToH, it was calling him out for being a socially-retarded neckbeard.

And that makes me the passive-aggressive one, right?

QuoteIf a jackass comes to your table who has clearly cheated to get to that point, and you do not appreciate that, the fucking adult thing to do is to tell them to fuck off.

Yes, this just screams "adult."

QuotePolitely, if you like, but you don't invite them to sit down and then cackle as you fucking waste your time

Yes, I suppose to some sitting down to play a game is a waste of time. If that's how you feel, maybe you should not just consider leaving this thread but leaving the site as well. Some of us have a lot of fun, and part of the fun is not knowing what's going to happen. To us, seeing how the game plays out, no matter the actual result, is never a waste of time.

Quoteon some juvenile horseshit method of handling social interaction.

I'm a manager at the #1 sales & marketing office of a global company. I got that because in my rookie year, my first six months with the company I made the old man a half million dollars, then in the next six months I taught my methods to the sales staff. My first post on this site was adapting my proven system to a procedure that will work with most any RPG to handle in-character social interactions of all kinds. I just may know a thing or two about social interaction.

But if you think you know something I don't, let's see it. Just so you know, though, what you've said so far, even if you go back and delete all the obscenities, is nothing but a sentiment repeated in an echo chamber by a bunch of people with no social skills who just needed to have something to say that sounds good. Here, it's being used in lieu of a reasoned argument to brow beat something you don't like.

Maybe it's just me, that doesn't quite strike me as the epitome of quality social interaction.

QuotePulling the "oh I let anything fly at my table" and then to follow it up with that idiocy is just fucking juvenile.

You seem to be assuming that just because you don't understand something, that makes the other guy the dumb one. Kind of like just because you don't know how to have fun playing Tomb of Horrors, that's somehow the module's fault even though it works for so many others.

Here's the thing. I may not set out to advertise that I am humble, but when it comes to my actions, I am. And the simple fact is I am at all times well aware that it's entirely possible that someone who sits at my table knows something I don't know. So I want to give everyone an honest chance. What they do with it is on them. You walk into the tomb and crawl into a demons mouth, that's not my fault.

Quote from: Lunamancer;888818Just so you know, though, what you've said so far, even if you go back and delete all the obscenities, is nothing but a sentiment repeated in an echo chamber by a bunch of people with no social skills who just needed to have something to say that sounds good.

This is the shit that happens whenever people start 3e or 4e threads, unfortunately.  It'll die down.

Quote from: CRKrueger;888836This is the shit that happens whenever people start 3e or 4e threads, unfortunately.  It'll die down.

Or when some loon who apparently never even read the module/game/book/whatever jumps in to make accusations that have been shot down 20 pages prior.

WooHoo!  First Editon PDFs delivered.  Now to start strip-mining for piratey goodness.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;887733It's a fair assumption. Certainly DMs worldwide tend to be suspicious when a new player shows up with his 43rd level drowlesbianstripperninja - "levelled up from 1st, honest!" - and get them to roll up a new character.

Where that didn't used to happen was at gaming Cons.  Which is what Tomb of Horrors was written for.

Well, by the time I got to conventions in the late 80s, there were no more tournaments, so I'll take your word for it. But running games after that I did have plenty of people showing up their silly characters.

But most of the people were trying a new game, so there was no drama, they took it all as it came with no arguments or special snowflake stuff going on.

Maybe it's because you were in Australia, or I might have started a bit earlier than you did.  I remember that at gaming cons or events at stores, it was very common practice to bring your own character to D&D adventures right up until around when I got into college (so the early 90s), though it got rarer as time went by.

Same. In fact one of the big TSR events in the late 90s required us to submit a character. From those the ones invited to the event were chosen.

BYOC was a thing.

A horrible, horrible thing.

Excuse me, but I need to borrow the fainting couch just thinking about all the BYOC nonsense I dealt with back in the day.

Quote from: Lunamancer;888818My first post on this site was adapting my proven system to a procedure that will work with most any RPG to handle in-character social interactions of all kinds. I just may know a thing or two about social interaction.

Link?

Quote from: Spinachcat;891345Link?

Hm, first post I see this (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=871296&postcount=10).

Quote from: Lunamancer;871296I think this needs picking apart.

If two guys are in a fight, do you think the smaller guy is going to try to win by overpowering the bigger one? Or do you think he's going to rely more on speed?

I'd like to suggest that in an RPG, there are usually many ways to go about solving a problem or "winning" in an encounter. And that the efficacy of a particular character in that situation is NOT going to be looking at all the different options he has then taking the average. All that matters is the option he chooses, and if the player is wise, he will choose the option that gives him the best chance for success.

This should all seem obvious. But the conclusion is that players will tend to play to their strengths. So if the party, by luck of the dice, has several members with very high Charisma, I would expect that fact alone would mean this group will choose to solve more problems using the tools Charisma offers--better reactions from NPCs, more loyal men, higher morale. So "Charisma-based encounters" should become more common. Not because that's what a good and proper GM does. It's simply by virtue of player choice.

Now if the players choose to go hacking and slashing anyway, despite their awesome Charisma, so be it. Charisma had the potential to be the most useful stat in the game, they just opted not to use it.

There ain't no such thing as "equally overall." It does depend on situation. And situation depends in large part on player choice. And player choice depends a lot on what the PCs are good at.

The only D&D cons I've been to were a couple tournaments in about '82-'84. Before the tournament, you submitted a list of three character class/race combos that wanted to run (ie Half-elf Ranger). Then the tournament organizers assigned players to tables, and went through the characters options and chose ones that fit the needs of the table. So you sat down at your assigned table with a pre-made character in front of you who hopefully matched one of your three choices of class/race. But the stats and equipment were all generated by the tournament organisers. I can't even imagine the shit-show of allowing players to bring their own characters to something like that.

There were natural brakes on BYOC in that if you brought a mary sue, it would be upheld for public ridicule.

Quote from: dragoner;891569There were natural brakes on BYOC in that if you brought a mary sue, it would be upheld for public ridicule.

Verily.

Though at one con for an AD&D event I brought in one of my Magic Users and the DM was skeptical at all the low stats I had and that anyone with those stats could have lived to 9th level.
Stats were STR: 7, INT:15, WIS:7, DEX:11, CON:4, and CHA:9
Which aside from the abysmal CON wasnt all that bad really I thought.
HP was a mere 14 (Rolls according to character log were 1, 3, 4, 1, 2, 4, 2, 1, and 1. Survived numerous system shock and raise dead checks. Lots of checks.)

And I survived the con adventure.

For AD&D, Int and Dex look good. I mean, it looks more to be a savvy player than a really bad character. Though a lot of DM's expected one 17 or 18 in the main stat.

Quote from: dragoner;891744For AD&D, Int and Dex look good. I mean, it looks more to be a savvy player than a really bad character. Though a lot of DM's expected one 17 or 18 in the main stat.

I have never met a pre-3e DM expect high stats.

In fact more oft I've seen the DM suspicious of high stats. Usually because they are not common. Expecting a 17 or 18 is absurd. A 17 is a mere 4.16% chance and an 18 is a 1.62% on r4h3.

Eh. Such is. As for the character. To me its pretty average. The 7 STR is just a -1 to hit in melee and less carrying capacity. I preferred darts anyhow so not a problem overall. The 7 WIS is a -1 on saves. The DEX and CHA are neutral no bonus or loss. The biggy was the aforementioned CON of 4 and the following poor HP rolls. Apparently for that character all my luck went into system shock and raise saves.

But still. An odd example of how different DMs look at stats of characters brought in. Which shows in how different our personal encounters vary.

Quote from: Omega;891797In fact more oft I've seen the DM suspicious of high stats. Usually because they are not common. Expecting a 17 or 18 is absurd. A 17 is a mere 4.16% chance and an 18 is a 1.62% on r4h3.

Assuming your percentages are accurate, this gives a 30% chance of one or more 17+ stats in any given set of six rolled legitimately.

Every time I see the name "John Wick", and it isn't about the movie, I get a little annoyed.

Quote from: Omega;891797I have never met a pre-3e DM expect high stats.

In fact more oft I've seen the DM suspicious of high stats. Usually because they are not common. Expecting a 17 or 18 is absurd. A 17 is a mere 4.16% chance and an 18 is a 1.62% on r4h3.

Eh. Such is. As for the character. To me its pretty average. The 7 STR is just a -1 to hit in melee and less carrying capacity. I preferred darts anyhow so not a problem overall. The 7 WIS is a -1 on saves. The DEX and CHA are neutral no bonus or loss. The biggy was the aforementioned CON of 4 and the following poor HP rolls. Apparently for that character all my luck went into system shock and raise saves.

But still. An odd example of how different DMs look at stats of characters brought in. Which shows in how different our personal encounters vary.

In OD&D the STR would only affect carrying, and the WIS is irrelevant.

Quote from: Omega;891797But still. An odd example of how different DMs look at stats of characters brought in. Which shows in how different our personal encounters vary.

Sure, that is true, esp pre-internet. I would not necessarily call one 17 or 18 high stats, when you factor the stat pluses from different races, it was easier to get a higher stat. Part of it is play styles, we mostly liked the 5-9 levels of characters, which at that point, stats really aren't that important anymore, and any minor boost you got at 1st level had flattened out. Having 1st level characters survive, was just easier, instead of having them die and then go back through the rigmarole of re-rolling a character mid-game. Most of the monsters in the MM & FF were for mid to higher level characters, so in that range, the options were wider for everybody. How we used to roll stats was to roll three sets of stats with 3d6, take the best set and place the scores where you wanted. It worked, usually I played some sort of fighter or thief; and there is another point, Dex was the killer stat to have boosted, as it affected both TH with missiles and AC. Then you can have a short bow fighter with two 1d6 shots a turn, vs say a longsword at 1d8. Strength you could get with a girdle of giant strength or something. Do I think I'll ever go back to that style of play? I don't know. I am planning a LotFP game, I think I'll just see which way that goes. I have played some 5e, it's ok, but it lacks something, our old AD&D games felt grittier.

Quote from: Sable Wyvern;891819Assuming your percentages are accurate, this gives a 30% chance of one or more 17+ stats in any given set of six rolled legitimately.

Your chances are more like one in 6 characters rolled via r4h3 might get a 17. And one in 10 might get an 18. About every other character will probably get a 16. So my assessment that its rare was a little off I think. (Though was about right if using 3d6. One in 36 characters of getting an 18, One in 11 of a 17.)

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;891824In OD&D the STR would only affect carrying, and the WIS is irrelevant.

Verily, and even with the bad CON its still only a -1 penalty. Whereas in BX it would have been a -2 and the 7 STR would have netted a -1 penalty. BX was harsh like that. heh-heh.

Though is a great primer for harsh modules like Tomb of Horrors.