rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 26, 2012 18:06:58 GMT -6
I'll be running first-level characters through "Return to Ram's Horn Castle." What? You need to borrow the old levels again? BTW: Taking low levels into his dungeons and wiping them out is how Gronan creates "Gronan Spirits". Booooo! LOL.
|
|
|
Post by scottyg on Nov 26, 2012 18:15:14 GMT -6
Gronan just gives them the tools to wipe themselves out. But I'd be glad to join the ranks of "Gronan Spirits" stalking the dungeons.
|
|
|
Post by scottyg on Nov 26, 2012 18:38:24 GMT -6
So what level will you be running at Gary Con. I'm going to try to make it. Taking one of my PCs out of mothballs for a high level romp sounds good. Well I told Luke El Raja Key, 3rd-4th level. BUT I have not heard back from him (if anyone hears from him light a fire under Captain Luke for me) so I am reconsidering maybe running Lost City of the Elders, real serious about this, actually. Now that I'm seeing Gronan "Horning in" on low level stuff, I believe I'll change to LCotE, in fact. I've just convinced myself while typing this post. Weird. Get prepared Garycon guinea pi... uh, adventurers, yeh, adventurers... It's 1973 all over again and you are NOT Mordenkainen nor Yrag. Bwu-ha-ha... For sure, but I'm not Dimwall or Drudge either. And I'm looking forward to some high level play in the fables Lost City.
|
|
|
Post by tacojohn4547 on Nov 26, 2012 19:07:51 GMT -6
Hiya Rob! This is a topic that I can see some real potential benefit to following for our current home campaign, so thanks for starting the discussion! I'm DMing some 10th - 12th level PCs now, and I’m really enjoying it. It's very rare that I have been able to run high level games. Time is the primary issue, but besides that, I can think of a few reasons. The party mentality, not so much that we don’t have time to play, but that the players want to use their game time playing a gaming style that is party-driven. They like a style of play that is like, the party is always together, they’re all within the same general level range, they don’t use henchmen, and there are rarely any rivalries that play out in-game. It’s hard to keep that kind of party together, and reach those upper levels; they usually break down around 8th level. Most of them started playing in the mid 80s or later, and that’s pretty much how the game was marketed. The same era of gaming bred a style of playing where the PCs don’t expect you to throw an encounter at them that they can’t beat then and there. I remember DMing for a group once, and it was a ‘proceed or retreat’ moment, and one of the players said, “He’s not like our other DMs. He will kill us.” So, playing smart would definitely be a reason I’ve experienced. In our current AD&D campaign, which has been running 6 years this month, we now have two groups of characters that range in levels from 8th to 14th. (We didn’t start them at 1st level; rather, we allowed them to start at 4th level.) The composition of the group of players has ebbed and flowed over time, but with the group of characters we have now, it is pretty easy to assemble a well rounded party that can be ran by whoever shows up to play. However, we’ve had some challenges as the characters have moved up into the ‘teen’ levels. The biggest challenges we’ve seen with playing at the 12 and above levels are that: (a) the characters have so many options at their disposal – be it in the form of weapons, spells, magic items, etc. – that deciding what they’re doing during play, round-by-round, takes a lot longer than it did at the pre-name level levels; (b) the characters have become so complex and complicated to run, largely on account of the situation described in (a) above, that for any one player to run another player’s character, particularly of the spellcaster classes, it is a very daunting exercise unless it is done on a regular, consistent basis. For example, we have one 14th level wizard in the group. The player of the character relocated out of state last summer and has only make it back for about half of our games since the relocation. For all intents and purposes, this high level wizard has gone into temporary retirement as few of the active players wish to be responsible for playing the high level wizard, on account of the complexity; and (c) as Scotty mentioned above, this group of players wants to spend their gaming time playing a game with a style that is party-centered. When this group thinks of high level play – and that being a game involving domain management, spell research, magic item fabrication, as well as planar travel and exploration, etc. – they think of play involving activities that are more PC-centered, individualized, and less party-centered. And they’re less interested in that than they are in pursuing activities that tend to keep the party together. For me as a player, it’s because I can’t find anybody to DM for me. I have a few PCs that I’ve worked up to the cusp of high level (10th level or so), and they’ve been stuck there for years, waiting for a DM. The only experience I have with playing high level characters as a player has been at conventions in the past few years, most notably playing in a few of Tim Kask’s games and Frank Mentzer’s games. Other than that, it's all been low- and mid-level characters for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 19:46:49 GMT -6
Actually it'll be new custom-created content.
Mwa ha ha!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 19:58:03 GMT -6
Time was definitely the reason we never got to high level back in the day. Playing "by the book" leveling takes a long time. As others have mentioned, expediting leveling was looked at as not really playing D&D. Same for starting at higher levels. I think I only got to level 8 back in the day.
|
|
|
Post by scottyg on Nov 26, 2012 20:10:10 GMT -6
My main PCs are a 10th level magic-user, a 9th level bard, an 8th level paladin that Rob Actually DMed at GenCon through Dark Druids, and a 7th level monk, who might be higher level if it weren't for the ton of experience they need, and that fight to level thing. I'd like to get any of these guys some action.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Nov 26, 2012 20:18:21 GMT -6
Is higher level equal to "High Fantasy"? Must be in some cases, but let me delicately interject: what level was Conan in his stories? Or Kyrik? Elric? You already know all this, but to me... The "sword and sorcery" style of play encompasses, gritty, every day characters and their personal challenges, where a Man lives (or dies) by his wits. His action/survival/demise doesn't directly affect the larger World. The focus is zoomed in on one Man, rather than zoomed out on a Man's empire. Conversely, the "high fantasy" style of play encompasses generals, Lords and Princes and other Masters of Men who get things done by their agents, underlings, and armies. The challenges faced are often broad and political, and the outcomes of their actions can cause sweeping changes to the social landscape. The focus is zoomed out on the empire, rather than zoomed in on the Man. For much of his early career Conan was firmly in the former style. When he became King, he moved more into the latter style. His D&D level doesn't really matter; it's his reputation and "reach" that matters, and that changed over the course of his career. He was at first a scoundrel, and then a hero who then became a superhero and a King. In OD&D terms, one might say he started at 1st level, worked his way up to 4th level (hero), and then to 8th and 9th levels (Lord). Whether he continued on to 10th level or to 30th level really depends on the levels attributed to his peers in the particular game. For me personally, 12th level would be way high enough for a King Conan figure, because my other "Lords" would be mostly around 9th or 10th level. Interesting perceptions, though, WOTE. Thanks! Thank you for your replies The new players had no idea of how to read implications. To be fair, these "new players" had not the benefit of your long and fruitful association with the game's founders. How could they be expected to share the same understanding you had developed over the years? The stronghold rules take up more pages of the Little Brown Books than the combat system, but on other forums I've seen repeated comments about them being "a couple of pages in the back." To be fair once again, the so called "stronghold rules" in the 3LBBs amount to a few price lists and some hints of what else could occur in a wider campaign. The "end-game" of running a barony with all the possible politics, intrigues, marriages, loyalties, feuds, threats, responsibilities, disasters, boons, and so on that might occur is scarcely hinted at. Dungeon exploration and combat resolution, on the other hand, is the chief subject matter of the 3LBBs. For that matter, most current players are heinously ignorant about anything at all concerning the Middle Ages. Again, there is much condemning of "level names" as "stupid." These same people are utterly unaware that "Lord" was actually a word that MEANT something! As a result, "high level" play has simply devolved into "more of the same." Instead of building a stronghold and becoming one of the Great in the world, players simply keep raiding the same old style of dungeon the same old way except they're killing demigods instead of Orcs. Frankly, the vast majority of gamers out there aren't fit to polish Robilar's armor. Your view of "most current players" may or may not be accurate, but either way it does little to promote our vision of the hobby to them. That is very unfortunate IMHO. It is not in the spirit of D&D to admonish others for doing it their way; quite the reverse. If young kids without any grounding in history are enjoying their D&D, how is that a bad thing? There is so much lost through a route of modeled consumption rather than hands-on creating and "playing." This is the double-edged sword isn't it? Only published (meaning; widely available) material has any hope of reaching and influencing the multitudes of gamers, but if the multitudes are overly influenced by the published materials, then they risk missing out on the hands-on creating part. The trick is getting that balance "just right"
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 26, 2012 21:03:19 GMT -6
WOTE: I agree for the most part and definitely with the part about admonishing. Instruction and encouragement have always been much better methods for bridging gaps, however wide they are.
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 26, 2012 21:07:05 GMT -6
tacojohn4547: Hiya TJ! Thanks for the sumptuous post. I believe that I've squared away the matter. With notes in hand I proceed to the next step: solutions. When finished, I hope to creen, "Time... is on our side; oh yes it is..."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 0:02:35 GMT -6
To be fair, these "new players" had not the benefit of your long and fruitful association with the game's founders. How could they be expected to share the same understanding you had developed over the years? It's got nothing to do with "association with the game's founders." It's a matter of learning to close read. As one example, nobody pointed out the implications of the morale rules in CHAINMAIL concerning what happens when a routing unit hits a formed friendly unit, I figured it out myself. I was 16 at the time. Your view of "most current players" may or may not be accurate, but either way it does little to promote our vision of the hobby to them. That is very unfortunate IMHO. That's why I'm bringing it up in a small discussion about old time D&D and not on Enworld or a similar site.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Nov 27, 2012 0:19:30 GMT -6
At some point, D&D stopped being a game for adult wargamers who were members of the Castle and Crusade Society and became a game for junior high school aged boys. That changed everything. Well, for me it was 1981 with the Moldvay "Red box." .....and I'll be d**ned to Irish whiskey and peanut butter crackers.... my last year of Jr. high school! :-) ...and now, I'm an adult wargamer! Cheers, friends!
|
|
|
Post by fullerton on Nov 27, 2012 2:13:52 GMT -6
Most of my play has topped-out at the 7th / 8th level range, and those are generally one-shots and convention games (thanks again Allan!), so I can't say I really have significant high-level play experience.
I sort of envision higher-level play working well via smaller parties, perhaps one or two players, each running a PC and a henchman. I'm not sure this is how things would actually end up happening in my campaign ... it's just a vision I have for how to keep certain aspects of challenge more manageable, and avoid multiplying the many decisions among many players.
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Nov 27, 2012 3:05:11 GMT -6
These days I do prefer to start games at 3rd level or so. 1st level is still too much slog and stress in any edition. I have found most people I play now with get into their characters too much and too quickly to accept losing five or six 1st level characters for every one that makes it to 2nd. Even with maximum hit points almost any attack can take out a character in one shot if the DM gets lucky on the damage roll. But I do have to admit that, in hindsight, we were terribly scared of "cheating" - even tough, at the time, we were house-ruling like crazy in other areas.
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 27, 2012 3:20:11 GMT -6
@ Vile: Yep. I normally start players at 3-4, also. James Ward, even BitD, started regulars in his castle/campaign at 6th, but that was for a tougher environs, so it all evened out.
I really believe that if one just coached folks through the campaign name level game and let them wallow around without undue pressure, more as a teaching/learning experience, that this would be a great way to integrate the expanding matter overall. Lead them through, discuss concerns, etc. There's still adventuring groups in this mode, so they would get used to high level play while learning about the world and how to interact with it at levels beyond adventure, too. Perhaps this most striking part of the ODD74 game needs to be revisited in print, with a new dynamic that takes into account the changed RPG atmosphere over the years (i.e., adventure-, and specifically, dungeon-centric). :::adds to to-do list:::
Always great reading your inputs, Vile.
G'Night!
Rob
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Nov 27, 2012 9:48:41 GMT -6
My experience of D&D in general is too limited to contribute. I was born the year Mentzer basic came out, and I was introduced via 2nd edition, and now at almost age 30, my favored edition is the original. I really do think that there is something compelling for a lot of people in the "old school style." I do encourage folks like Mike to be more charitable in talking about other folks and how they play. A lot of people aren't drawn in by being told they aren't worthy, or aren't bright enough to get it. What turns me on is reading stuff like Luke Crane's account of playing Moldvay D&D as by the book as he can, and hearing about the nightmares he and other's in his group had, and seeing how the game punished certain tactics and rewarded others, and seeing how the group molded themselves to the game, gradually learning to play better. Reading Philotomy's musings made the original game sound so awesome to me. And, indeed, reading about Mike's DMing makes the game sound awesome to me. I get all these cool ideas and try them out on my wife, and hopefully over time will acquire a handful of newbies who never played any edition of D&D.
Anyhow, concerning the thread, my thought is that D&D primarily seems to reward the adventuring lifestyle with more powers and goodies that support the adventuring lifestyle. Thus there seems a bit of a mismatch between this other - high level- style of play, and what the game offers.
My only experience of high level play was 3rd edition, and it was awful. We were so powerful (and I in particular, playing a wizard), that the game felt meaningless and nonsensical to me. I think some of that (not all, but some) would be true in any version of the game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 11:10:10 GMT -6
I do encourage folks like Mike to be more charitable in talking about other folks and how they play. Point taken. I confess to being rather raw on the subject from the number of times I've been told "old style gaming SUCKS." It gives one an attitude. However, I still reject the notion that I had "special access to the game's founders." Let me tell you a story. The first time I played CHAINMAIL I had no idea what was going on. I didn't know what a "Halberd" was, what a "turcupole" was, what a "hobilar" was, what a "composite bow" was. So the next week, I dragged my sorry butt down to the public library and looked for books. My first book was "Weapons" by Walter Tunis... I still remember it 41 years later. Then I read "Warrior to Solider" by A.V.B. Norman. Then I read Charles Henry Ashdown's book on armor. After reading three or four more books, I KNEW what a "halberd" was, I KNEW what a "turcupole" was, I KNEW what a "hobilar" was, I KNEW what "Lord" meant in a medieval context. If I could manage to figure it out on my own at age 16 living in a mediocre little town with a mediocre little library, I sort of figure anybody can.
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 27, 2012 11:31:39 GMT -6
Well I am sure that every person could if they wanted to Michael, but as you stated earlier, the game territory changed. This today fits in with "instant gratification" and younger folks are the biggest targets for that instant marketing, continuous bombardment via Internet, TV, etc. that implies that it is what you have at the moment that matters rather than what you can do with yourself. It's not surprising that the younger generation almost immediately benefits if they only widen their experiences just slightly, like in visiting an overseas country in student exchange programs. Americans have become focused on the NOW because that is what they've been lead to understand as the most important aspect of life. D&D 3+ fits right into that now, now, syndrome, and I guarantee, it is no mistake that it does, but just a microcosmic example of what is layered throughout our whole society. YMMV, of course, and there are always exceptions, so those few examples that arise should not lead one to assume that every young person should be so categorized, but even in many one-on-one situations in instances removed from the Internet only source for this observation, I have noted it to be true rather than false.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Nov 27, 2012 12:00:46 GMT -6
I'll happily report here that directly influenced by both Chainmail and OD&D, my 11yo son with ADHD (the apples don't fall far from the trees) has as some of his favorite books: Boutell's "Arms and Armor in Antiquity and the Middle Ages," Yumoto's fine work on "The Samurai Sword," and multiple other works on medieval warfare and lifestyle. He doesn't just look at the pictures, he READS them, and draws his own maps and various arms..... but then what do you expect in a household that has not owned a TV in 22 years? :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 12:07:02 GMT -6
Bravo, and good for your son! If you can find it, "Medieval Warfare" by Terence Wise is also a very nice summary level book and entirely appropriate for his age level, and even includes a simple set of miniatures rules in the back!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 12:09:25 GMT -6
Also, per Rob's comment about the changing nature of gamers....
One thing I have REALLY noticed is that "what rules mean" has shifted dramatically.
Gary and Dave created D&D with the paradigm of "Everything not explicitly forbidden is permitted." But I have noticed the vast majority of gamers younger than me (which isn't hard!) approach the game as "Everything not explicitly permitted is forbidden." This is a HUGE shift in how one approaches rules, and I really wonder how it happened.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Nov 27, 2012 12:20:28 GMT -6
.... If you can find it, "Medieval Warfare" by Terence Wise is also a very nice summary level book and entirely appropriate for his age level, and even includes a simple set of miniatures rules in the back! I think that's the one he's got in his backpack that he "smuggles" to school. He has his 6th grade teacher playing Delving Deeper/OD&D with he and his classmates. He's the DM of course... :-) If that's not it, I'll seek it out. I literally have more books at home than I can keep inventoried. I think in light of this discussion, I'm going to see about moving some of our regular play to a "high level" and give them an old-school "Age of Empires" feel. I think they'd both enjoy it as would the others we often game with.
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 27, 2012 12:22:22 GMT -6
I'll happily report here that directly influenced by both Chainmail and OD&D, my 11yo son with ADHD (the apples don't fall far from the trees) has as some of his favorite books: Boutell's "Arms and Armor in Antiquity and the Middle Ages," Yumoto's fine work on "The Samurai Sword," and multiple other works on medieval warfare and lifestyle. He doesn't just look at the pictures, he READS them, and draws his own maps and various arms..... but then what do you expect in a household that has not owned a TV in 22 years? :-) Good x infinity. I tossed the TV back in 1979 (at age 24) and never looked back. Have a semi-large screen for select movies, but no cable, etc.
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 27, 2012 12:25:59 GMT -6
Also, per Rob's comment about the changing nature of gamers.... One thing I have REALLY noticed is that "what rules mean" has shifted dramatically. Gary and Dave created D&D with the paradigm of "Everything not explicitly forbidden is permitted." But I have noticed the vast majority of gamers younger than me (which isn't hard!) approach the game as "Everything not explicitly permitted is forbidden." This is a HUGE shift in how one approaches rules, and I really wonder how it happened. Michael. All of that is contained in my first post reaction to this. How? Try Dpt of Ed TEACH TO THE TEST for starters and Situational Ethics for some, mix in a pot of Gimmee Now and stir. Add other divergent behaviour (programmed or adopted) to suit taste. There's a quick recipe.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Nov 27, 2012 12:39:42 GMT -6
I tossed the TV back in 1979 (at age 24) and never looked back. Have a semi-large screen for select movies, but no cable, etc. Rob, that's how we roll. Too many games to play, books to read, food to eat, conversations to have.... etc. etc. Michael, that isn't the book we have, but I found it on Amazon for 97 cents. We shall add it to the stacks post haste! How do you guys recommend introducing young players to high-level play? Do they need to experience the gradual growth of their PC's, or can they, with some intro, get into such a setting? As I said before, my experience as a young DM in the 80's had limited high-level play and that was not under the influence of OD&D's tendencies. Suggestions? Btw, of the very few video games in my boys' experience, their favorite is Age of Empires 3 which certainly lends some flavor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 12:50:48 GMT -6
I personally would recommend having them build up to it, especially when young. At about third or fourth level, the local Captain of the Guard starts seeking them out for tough missions... a fourth level fighter is a Hero, after all. Then the council of burghers of the city, or the local knight seeks them out a few levels later... when a fighter is a "Champion". Et cetera.
Essentially introduce them gradually into the Bigger Wider World so they don't feel utterly lost when one day they're the Lord of the Castle or the Wizard of the Mysterious Tower or the Patriarch of the Temple.
|
|
rjkuntz
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Pioneer of OD&D
Posts: 345
|
Post by rjkuntz on Nov 27, 2012 13:21:46 GMT -6
Here is where Gronan and I shall diverge. How does one learn to swim? there is no middle with most things we learn. I stated above and re-quoted: "I really believe that if one just coached folks through the campaign name level game and let them wallow around without undue pressure, more as a teaching/learning experience, that this would be a great way to integrate the expanding matter overall. Lead them through, discuss concerns, etc. There's still adventuring groups in this mode, so they would get used to high level play while learning about the world and how to interact with it at levels beyond adventure, too. Perhaps this most striking part of the ODD74 game needs to be revisited in print, with a new dynamic that takes into account the changed RPG atmosphere over the years (i.e., adventure-, and specifically, dungeon-centric). :::adds to to-do list:::"
What I am suggesting is that you gather the group and say, Hey here's this new way and let's examine it. Suggest it as a growing part and let them sink their teeth into it a bit at a time.
Also note that you as a DM need to present options within a growing campaign, so throw in rumors (actual rumor sheets that each one gets), some of these specific to their locales and most of it specific for the group to concentrate on for adventure.
1) Take orders once a month and allow for some leeway if they come with additional inputs in between 2) Allow pre-adventure meetings to clarify orders if needed, but no more than 10-15 minutes per person 3) Concentrate on the Campaign aspect as a background; it will soon, through their steady immersion, come to the foreground and maybe even get to equal the adventuring parts. 4) Try to tie-in rising adventure hooks/stories into what they are doing within the campaign structure. This will help bridge the idea. 5) Make it simple; abstract endlessly rather than playing by the book, this to keep it moving. 6) maybe find some castle plans (at RPG Now etc) which would allow them to personally invest with their stronghold ("I like that model") through this short-cut, then let them decide how to outfit these. Keep them making choices so that they invest in the idea.
I suppose I should finally write the article on this as I'm doing it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Sean Michael Kelly on Nov 27, 2012 13:45:35 GMT -6
I suppose I should finally write the article on this as I'm doing it anyway. Get on it!! I think both of you have a lot of great insight. Getting those neurons firing away! Exalts to you both!
|
|
|
Post by inkmeister on Nov 27, 2012 14:40:16 GMT -6
Some interesting exchanges here today. Massive kudos to SMKSensei for ditching the TV. I think that is a very important, very awesome move for a family to make.
About attention span, exploration, education, young people (subjects of this conversation here), I think there are good points.
Honestly I've had the experience lately of trying to find players for my own game, and most people I talk to are utterly turned off by the idea. I think it's two things, not in order of importance; 1) there is the image of the RPG gamer... too nerdy even in this age of video game nerd acceptance, and 2) why play a game where we have to get out pencils, dice, and take turns describing in boring old language what is happening when I could put on Call of Duty Modern Warfare? In 1981 when Moldvay came out (let alone 1974 with original, or whenever Holmes came out), I think it was more clear that the game offered something that didn't have a lot of competition. Now TTRPG's are competing with all kinds of flashy stuff. I don't think it bodes well at all for the hobby.
It's a hard sell. And that's not even counting the logistical problems of getting a handful of people together regularly to play, or even the upfront investment of time (more or less for different people and styles) in creating a campaign environment or even just prepping existing (commercial) material.
D&D exists on a different frequency than modern entertainment does. It's slow and it is intense (it requires a higher level of focus and attentiveness than most entertainment). It's hard to get people into a room together to have a true conversation without cell phones coming out and ear buds going in. We can call out the TV, but in some ways the internet is even worse. The internet caters even more to individualistic instant gratification than anything.
One thing I love about the original D&D art more than Erol Otus artwork and the like is that it looks like something I could do. The artwork is inviting - "come, join in this fun hobby and create something cool and imaginative." Even the Erol Otus stuff - as friggin awesome as it is - says "behold this great work by an expert." And the Moldvay game is clean and streamlined and maybe less inviting to the tinkering mindset. But with the oldest stuff there is a certain wall there that you have to get over. You have to stop seeing the art as crappy amateur work and start seeing it as an invitation to create. You have to stop seeing the game as a refined engine and more like an example of how you can make your own game if you want to.
This will appeal to creative types, but most people I encounter would rather have their entertainment handed to them. Why learn to play music when you can hear experts doing it far better than you at the click of a button? Why walk or cycle when you can sit down and depress a pedal and move 60mph to the destination? Why cook your own food with your own recipes when you can get a premade meal in a box that takes 5 minutes to warm up?
I really do think that modern games, entertainment, music, sports, etc, have the effect of making people feel like passive spectators. I think it is very disempowering. I read a fine article on irony and the fact that we live in an ironic age, an age in which folks have given up before even trying. The way people say "like" before every word betrays a lack of conviction. Our common language is superfluous in the extreme. I might be bitter in part because I struggle to no avail to have even the most basic conversations with my teenage step kids (one 16 and one 19) and I realize that meaningful conversation is just not something that people appreciate. The more deep, the more personal, the more serious, the less folks are interested, generally speaking (I treasure the handful of special friendships I have where this is not the case).
Bottom line - Mike and Rob, I share your frustration. The best I can do is try to find a few folks who enjoy similar stuff and play with them. The wider hobby? I think it will dwindle even more, but probably never go away completely. It's like jazz or classical - it's a little quirky or weird, but there will always be a demand for it outside the mainstream.
And all that said, I don't think Conan would be more than 10th level, and 10th level is high enough for my tastes. I'm not saying I'd never try more than that, but to me, 1 - 10 is where it's at.
|
|
|
Post by giantbat on Nov 27, 2012 15:24:03 GMT -6
I had a 10th level character, but he mostly just hung out at the inn talking about what's wrong with 1st level characters these days.
|
|