Well then obviously OD&D isn't real D&D!

Quote from: Exploderwizard;535368Well then obviously OD&D isn't real D&D!

LOL. I guess I've been wrong all these years, thinking it was real D&D. Oh well, fake or real, it's still fun to play. :confused:

Quote from: RandallS;535356There no mention of grids or grid substitutes either.

Incorrect.

"Graph Paper (6 lines per inch is best)"

Graph Paper is a grid, is it not?

Quote from: RandallS;535356Note that minis (or substitutes), grids, terrain for minis, a sand table, rulers, and the other items needed for minis or gridded combat are not included in this list of recommended items. I'm sure you will try to read minis into the system because of a set of minis rules are included, but without minis, etc. being listed as needed (or even recommended) those rules would be useless for for actual minis use.

Actually, this isn't necessarily true, either.  Avalon Hill's Outdoor Survival looks like it contains a hex map and die-cut counters.  Further, the Chainmail rules, which are recommended to play D&D on that list, do recomment "rules, miniature figures, and accompanying equipment, a play area, and terrain to place upon it."  So while the original D&D rules may not have explicitly recommended those things, it recommended other games that either had or recommended those things.

Quote from: John Morrow;535372Further, the Chainmail rules, which are recommended to play D&D on that list, do recomment "rules, miniature figures, and accompanying equipment, a play area, and terrain to place upon it."

In fact, the predecessor to D&D was The Fantasy Supplement for Chainmail, written by Gygax. When later released, D&D inherited spells and monsters from this supplement.

Chainmail itself was intended (by Gygax) to be the combat rules for D&D. Why does D&D have the descending Armor Class? Because Chainmail did first. (And oD&D's is exactly the same as Chainmail.)

From the beginning D&D was an expansion of a miniatures wargame, building roleplaying on top of the Chainmail rules set. I don't know from grids, but D&D was solidly in the miniatures and measurements camp right from the start.

EDIT: I don't want to get drawn into the minis vs. no minis pissing contest, I just wanted to provide the best historical information I could.

I see John and Daddy Warpig beat beat me to talking about OD&D, thanks guys.



To cover the other element mentioned here-

Microlite74 is a modern design that have more than drunk the "Rule 0"... exaggeration I think is the best word.

The truth of the matter is more interesting, as this Link from Monte Cook's blog shows.

It starts off with all sorts of player empowerment fluff, which is simply admitting that players twist and change rules in the wild and there's nothing to be done about it.

But it also contains examples of players being wrong (i.e. not being to identify the problem correctly), and the advice that "That doesn't mean, however, that players design the game."

Most of the time I use a physical representation of what's happening to various degrees.  I like painting minis and doing modeling, so I prefer that to quarters and a plastic cap, but whatever.  I think being able to determine things at a glance is priceless as a GM, which is why I loved the old TSR modules with "illustration books" as well as the Hackmaster modules that include them.  However, I also combine that with what I hope are good descriptions, pictures, lighting, music, sound effects, and other things that help people get into what's happening.

From my experience (meaning people I have personally gamed with or GMed), people who say they cannot immerse if there are minis and a map, have been exposed to it at the table of a GM who basically ignored description and the other intangibles that aided immersion.  If all you're looking at is lines on a grid and the GM makes no effort to transform those into dark, crumbling, foetid sewers, then I could see why you brand map and minis as "wargame only".  I can't tell you the number of times I've heard someone say something similar to "I didn't think you could have good roleplay in a game that used minis and a map".  I wish I had the money to grab Benoist and DungeonDelver and take them on an "Old School with Map and Minis" tour around the country.    I'm sure the fact that we would end up running games only in areas with good wineries, microbreweries and restaurants would be solely coincidental.  :cool:

All that having been said, I don't always use exact measurements even if I do have a map, simply because a character can't tell how far something is, or the scale is too large to represent exactly.  So, in that case, a ruling is made.  "About 100 yards" works until you have a spell that cannot affect things past 100 yards.  SO at that point a determination of actual range has to take place, the detail of the rules needs to "zoom in".  A lot of the times I will make such a determination myself, frequently because even if I said "around 100 yards" I actually know the distance, or I might just roll randomly when it comes time to say whether it's 98 yards or 102.

I think there's a difference between using ranges, los, etc and having every possible range and los calculated before it is going to be used.

In a game like 3.5, if I'm just at the end of an effective range to do something, you need to use the rules system to take a 5' step as one type of action, then accomplish your task using another type of action, and the whole thing is broken down very succinctly using defined movement rules.  For some people that's what turns it into a wargame I think.

Now in Gleichman's defense, I've seen people at Meetups whose claim against a grid basically does come down to cheating.  In other words, "Rules schmules, me not being able to attack this round because last round I moved 35ft instead of 40ft is deprotagonizing, I'm a special snowflake hero RRAAWWR!"  I can't attest to my ability to show them the light side of maps and minis because people like that usually leave or are tossed off the table somewhere during character creation.

every time a player have a character take a 5-foot step to get juuuust outside the range of an invisible curse/magic effect/whatnot while his or her character is in the heat of battle, my character dies a little.

Quote from: CRKrueger;535384Most of the time I use a physical representation of what's happening to various degrees.  I like painting minis and doing modeling, so I prefer that to quarters and a plastic cap, but whatever.  I think being able to determine things at a glance is priceless as a GM, which is why I loved the old TSR modules with "illustration books" as well as the Hackmaster modules that include them.  However, I also combine that with what I hope are good descriptions, pictures, lighting, music, sound effects, and other things that help people get into what's happening.

From my experience (meaning people I have personally gamed with or GMed), people who say they cannot immerse if there are minis and a map, have been exposed to it at the table of a GM who basically ignored description and the other intangibles that aided immersion.  If all you're looking at is lines on a grid and the GM makes no effort to transform those into dark, crumbling, foetid sewers, then I could see why you brand map and minis as "wargame only".  I can't tell you the number of times I've heard someone say something similar to "I didn't think you could have good roleplay in a game that used minis and a map".  I wish I had the money to grab Benoist and DungeonDelver and take them on an "Old School with Map and Minis" tour around the country.    I'm sure the fact that we would end up running games only in areas with good wineries, microbreweries and restaurants would be solely coincidental.  :cool:

All that having been said, I don't always use exact measurements even if I do have a map, simply because a character can't tell how far something is, or the scale is too large to represent exactly.  So, in that case, a ruling is made.  "About 100 yards" works until you have a spell that cannot affect things past 100 yards.  SO at that point a determination of actual range has to take place, the detail of the rules needs to "zoom in".  A lot of the times I will make such a determination myself, frequently because even if I said "around 100 yards" I actually know the distance, or I might just roll randomly when it comes time to say whether it's 98 yards or 102.

I think there's a difference between using ranges, los, etc and having every possible range and los calculated before it is going to be used.

In a game like 3.5, if I'm just at the end of an effective range to do something, you need to use the rules system to take a 5' step as one type of action, then accomplish your task using another type of action, and the whole thing is broken down very succinctly using defined movement rules.  For some people that's what turns it into a wargame I think.

Now in Gleichman's defense, I've seen people at Meetups whose claim against a grid basically does come down to cheating.  In other words, "Rules schmules, me not being able to attack this round because last round I moved 35ft instead of 40ft is deprotagonizing, I'm a special snowflake hero RRAAWWR!"  I can't attest to my ability to show them the light side of maps and minis because people like that usually leave or are tossed off the table somewhere during character creation.

Re: the bolded part. If you had had this idea in 2008, I could have funded it myself, at least partially. Fucking recession.

Now, I fully agree with your post. And again, I don't see what is so controversial with gleichman's posts, and I certainly see several misrepresentations of his position.

Gleichman is not saying (as far as I understand him) that if you don't have precise position rules you are not playing an RPG. What he's saying is that IF a game has such rules and you don't use them, then you are not playing the game, you are probably playing calvinball. And if you fudge dice rolls or bend the rules to accomodate your whim as GM, you are cheating. Which is correct, by the definition of cheating in plain English.

Roleplayers seem to be the only collective of gamers I know that have decided that cheating is OK as long as only the referee does it. It weirds me to no end.

Quote from: John Morrow;535371Incorrect.

"Graph Paper (6 lines per inch is best)"

Graph Paper is a grid, is it not?

Except the rules don't mention using graph paper in combat. It's used by the DM to map out his dungeon.  (Chainmail doesn't mention it either).

QuoteActually, this isn't necessarily true, either. Avalon Hill's Outdoor Survival looks like it contains a hex map and die-cut counters. Further, the Chainmail rules, which are recommended to play D&D on that list, do recomment "rules, miniature figures, and accompanying equipment, a play area, and terrain to place upon it."

The suggested use for Outdoor Survival is that the map can be used as a wilderness area if the DM doesn't want to create one himself. Nothing else from the game is used.

As for Chainmail, if you actually read the OD&D rules, you will not get the impression that Chainmail was used much -- especial if you used the "Alternate combat system" given in the D&D rules (which went on to become the sandard D&D combat system).  If you want a lot more evidence on this subject, search for my posts on OD&D was not a tactical combat game from the time of the 4e release where I spent a number of posts refuting the claim some 4e players were making that the detailed (and lengthy) tactical combats with minis and grids that 4e used was just a return to the way OD&D did things.  Reading the issue of The Strategic Review (Vol 1, No 2 -- Summer 1975) where the standard/Chainmail combat system for D&D was explained with an example (after suggesting that the alternative combat system be used for all important battles!) is also enlightening due to the absence of any mention of grids, rulers, minis or the like.

RandallS is correct about OD&D being gridless. While OD&D originated among miniature wargamers of the upper midwest, Arneson got the idea from Welsey's Brausteins which was pretty abstract with the pieces for visual reference at best. In fact it was more like a LARP than tabletop roleplaying.

Among the things Arneson adapted for Blackmoor was the techniques used to resolve attempts at mining during sieges. A side activity that involved the referee using a master map and the players drawing where the mines and counter mines on their copies. Nothing to do with miniatures until a breakthrough behind the wall (if it happened).

For those that don't know mines in siege warfare were underground tunnels used to go under the wall or undermine the walls. Counter mine was a mine dug from the inside oriented to intersect the incoming mine (or the defenders hope).

The gridless nature of OD&D was further reinforce when it spread beyond the upper midwest and gained popularity among those who were never involved in miniature wargaming.  Miniatures didn't gain traction for RPGs until the late 70s when specialty lines meant specifically for RPGs appeared. AD&D 1st had explicit support of miniature although it was not necessary for the game.

Quote from: John Morrow;535372Actually, this isn't necessarily true, either.  Avalon Hill's Outdoor Survival looks like it contains a hex map and die-cut counters.  

Only the map was used and Volume III of OD&D give instructions on how to interpret the Outdoor Survival symbols to make it into a fantasy setting.

Quote from: John Morrow;535372Further, the Chainmail rules, which are recommended to play D&D on that list, do recomment "rules, miniature figures, and accompanying equipment, a play area, and terrain to place upon it."  So while the original D&D rules may not have explicitly recommended those things, it recommended other games that either had or recommended those things.

Chainmail Man to Man was what important, while meant to be used in conjunction with the mass melee rules, it in of itself didn't need to have miniatures to use.

As I stated earlier, one thing Arneson developed was the dungeon which evolved out of how they resolved mining attempts during sieges. Which was a side activity that didn't involve the use of miniatures, but rather players explaining to the referee what they were doing (and using a player map to show him). The referee keeping track of everything on a master map.

I have to wonder, how many of you have ever tried to run Star Wars d20 in the OCR or RCR ruleset?

I'm very interested if you played out mass space battles, in true to life 3D...

GURPS and Hero, along with Shadowrun, embody everything I think is terrible about point-buy.

And I think this kind of point-buy isn't very popular right now.

RPGPundit

and you would be wrong.