|
|
Post by distortedhumor on Apr 17, 2020 20:52:34 GMT -6
On a Discord server I haunt, someone pointed out that they never played D&D with just the 3 LBBs, A discussion grew, and I ended up starting a PbP game of OD&D just using the 3 LBBs.
While I have played OD&D a fair bit, it was always with someone with a slew of house rules, and never played it as written.
I must say it a unique system, and while I prefer some houserules (for example, at least SOME variable damage, even if it in a narrow range) it a fun, workable system. We are having a blast as a Fighter, a Dwarf, and a Hobbit are running about fighting some goblins in the opening encounter and as the players are creative to make sure they avoid getting hit.
I know others have done this, but just had to come by and say what a blast it is to play non-houseruled 74, without even greyhawk.
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Apr 17, 2020 21:10:46 GMT -6
On a Discord server I haunt, someone pointed out that they never played D&D with just the 3 LBBs, A discussion grew, and I ended up starting a PbP game of OD&D just using the 3 LBBs. While I have played OD&D a fair bit, it was always with someone with a slew of house rules, and never played it as written. I must say it a unique system, and while I prefer some houserules (for example, at least SOME variable damage, even if it in a narrow range) it a fun, workable system. We are having a blast as a Fighter, a Dwarf, and a Hobbit are running about fighting some goblins in the opening encounter and as the players are creative to make sure they avoid getting hit. I know others have done this, but just had to come by and say what a blast it is to play non-houseruled 74, without even greyhawk. Yea, it is fun. I'm not playing quite as stripped down, I allow the thief from Greyhawk (but don't use anything else for PCs, I will use monsters and maybe even magic items). In theory I also use other classes but no player has asked for one (I run in the Wilderlands of High Fantasy which does have other classes represented so it's not entirely fair to say "no" to players). I do run with a small handful of house rules, about a page or two worth: docs.google.com/document/d/1TJGROXVcuYnPJGXs0VPLUAxq_shHpAY2Nsjkr4A_udM/edit?usp=sharing (ignore the BX House Rules at the end, they are stuff I dropped into that document for ease of finding). |
|
|
|
Post by distortedhumor on Apr 17, 2020 21:30:57 GMT -6
On a Discord server I haunt, someone pointed out that they never played D&D with just the 3 LBBs, A discussion grew, and I ended up starting a PbP game of OD&D just using the 3 LBBs. While I have played OD&D a fair bit, it was always with someone with a slew of house rules, and never played it as written. I must say it a unique system, and while I prefer some houserules (for example, at least SOME variable damage, even if it in a narrow range) it a fun, workable system. We are having a blast as a Fighter, a Dwarf, and a Hobbit are running about fighting some goblins in the opening encounter and as the players are creative to make sure they avoid getting hit. I know others have done this, but just had to come by and say what a blast it is to play non-houseruled 74, without even greyhawk. Yea, it is fun. I'm not playing quite as stripped down, I allow the thief from Greyhawk (but don't use anything else for PCs, I will use monsters and maybe even magic items). In theory I also use other classes but no player has asked for one (I run in the Wilderlands of High Fantasy which does have other classes represented so it's not entirely fair to say "no" to players). I do run with a small handful of house rules, about a page or two worth: docs.google.com/document/d/1TJGROXVcuYnPJGXs0VPLUAxq_shHpAY2Nsjkr4A_udM/edit?usp=sharing (ignore the BX House Rules at the end, they are stuff I dropped into that document for ease of finding). Nice set of houserules. right now the players want to play "pure" OD&D as the whole point is to explore what it would be like. If we continue after the experiment, I will propose about 1 page of house rules, though I might borrow your silvered weapons and halfling to hit bonus. Still debating if I want to exclude thieves and go with another mechanic for lock-picking and so on. I also want to have "concealed weapons" like knives, and two handed weapons do slightly different damage, not sure if I will go with the 1d4 for knives and 1d8 for two handed, or do the -1 and +2 bonuses on d6s. But as someone who came to OD&D after playing various versions of D&D first, it kinda fun to just go back to the source and have no preconceived notions. |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 18, 2020 5:51:57 GMT -6
This sounds awesome.
I also play 3lbb only, in the sense that I don’t use supplements so I have no thieves.
But, as you phrase it, I do have a slew of house rules, mainly to pair things down and make them more simple and arithmetically regular for my own brain and so I don’t need tables all the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Apr 18, 2020 7:06:14 GMT -6
OS gaming is the spring-board of an Olympic-sized swimming pool: it must launch you into bigger and better things. There's nothing sadder than seeing someone clinging fearfully to the springboard refusing to use it for what it was intended. Houserules are that pool. Jump in! My recipe: 3 LBBS + CM + houserules + OD&D supplements + fantasy/S&S lit library + milhist library + classic wargaming library (Featherstone, Bath, Grant, Morschauser, Barker, et al.) = that's one spicy gumbo!  |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Apr 18, 2020 7:33:33 GMT -6
See the releveant quote in my sig from Tim Kask I'm with DungeonDevil BTB/RAW is just fine, but I'd say do your own thing with it. That's the intent, and spirit of the Original Game. |
|
|
|
Post by creativehum on Apr 18, 2020 8:34:13 GMT -6
A month ago I started an online game of OD&D. (A was going to use a compiled version of the 3 LBBs, but settled on using Delving Deeper, which is close enough for me and clearer.)
What I love is that the game is so simple that it cries out for new rules, but that the rules we are adding are built around a) the setting I am working with and b) how we want to play.
For example, I'm using the setting of Dolmenwood. In Dolmenwood each cleric is part of an order devoted to a patron saint, and each patron saint has an associated spell. Most of these associated spells are above the spell levels of early level clerics. I have ruled that a Cleric can use the associated spell of his or her patron saint as a springboard for a kind of improvisational casting at a much lower effect. As an example: If a cleric's patron saint has the associated spell Insect Plague, the cleric might be able to make a single insect distract someone for a moment or two.
I also realized quickly that my players are far less interested in treasure hunting than they are helping people against foul forces. So I have dropped treasure for XP and replaced it with a more goal/milestone method that rewards them for setting their own goals and pursuing those goals toward success. But it all very freewheeling and based more on my sense of when the players think their characters have, in fact, experienced something that would make them level up.
So far it has been working great.
Oddly, I think I'm using OD&D exactly as it was meant to be used.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 18, 2020 8:34:57 GMT -6
I tried running a pure 3-LBB game last month but my players kept trying to add in rules so eventually I decided to scrap it and go back to 5E.
Dumb things, like the player with an 8 INT whining about not being allowed to play a Magic-user. "You can play one," I said. "Stop trying to put artificial limitations on the game. A character with 8 intelligence has no minuses to be a spellcaster, only minuses on experience." Didn't help. They just kept trying to enforce what they "know" on each other.
It would almost be better if you had a group of players who had never experienced an RPG before. Like in 1974...
|
|
|
|
Post by creativehum on Apr 18, 2020 8:44:24 GMT -6
I tried running a pure 3-LBB game last month but my players kept trying to add in rules so eventually I decided to scrap it and go back to 5E. Dumb things, like the player with an 8 INT whining about not being allowed to play a Magic-user. "You can play one," I said. "Stop trying to put artificial limitations on the game. A character with 8 intelligence has no minuses to be a spellcaster, only minuses on experience." Didn't help. They just kept trying to enforce what they "know" on each other. It would almost be better if you had a group of players who had never experienced an RPG before. Like in 1974... That's fascinating. I can absolutely see that happening. My four players in the game I mentioned all come from different experiences, and I have never played with them before. But they seem to be really enjoying how this game is going, getting right into the groove. All four have made it clear how much they are enjoying the game, and two of them have said they'll be changing their style of play to bring it more into alignment with how I'm running my Dolmenwood game. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Apr 18, 2020 9:00:37 GMT -6
I tried running a pure 3-LBB game last month but my players kept trying to add in rules so eventually I decided to scrap it and go back to 5E. Dumb things, like the player with an 8 INT whining about not being allowed to play a Magic-user. "You can play one," I said. "Stop trying to put artificial limitations on the game. A character with 8 intelligence has no minuses to be a spellcaster, only minuses on experience." Didn't help. They just kept trying to enforce what they "know" on each other. It would almost be better if you had a group of players who had never experienced an RPG before. Like in 1974... Unfortunately, D&D and RPG's in general have become over the past few decades since AD&D's release the game of "if it's not on my character sheet, can I do it?". I get it. I went through that stage. FIN, I would highly recommend running Dungeon World - particularly one of it's hacks "One Shot World" with your players, to get them out of the mechanical D&D mindset and looking at gameplay in a different perspective. |
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Apr 18, 2020 10:06:40 GMT -6
I thought this was good, part of a review of SPI's Commando
There is too much wanting to make the figure a special character, its a piece on the board (or Chainmail battlefield), like a pawn, knight or bishop. But I think this simplicity is also liberating, the role-playing doesn't need special rules, there is enough banter among players that I think is much funner role-playing than ten books on how to make a special character. The very fun part comes from having a flawed figure that somehow survives and thereby gains individuality.
|
|
|
|
Post by creativehum on Apr 18, 2020 10:24:26 GMT -6
I tried running a pure 3-LBB game last month but my players kept trying to add in rules so eventually I decided to scrap it and go back to 5E. Dumb things, like the player with an 8 INT whining about not being allowed to play a Magic-user. "You can play one," I said. "Stop trying to put artificial limitations on the game. A character with 8 intelligence has no minuses to be a spellcaster, only minuses on experience." Didn't help. They just kept trying to enforce what they "know" on each other. It would almost be better if you had a group of players who had never experienced an RPG before. Like in 1974... Unfortunately, D&D and RPG's in general have become over the past few decades since AD&D's release the game of "if it's not on my character sheet, can I do it?". I get it. I went through that stage. FIN, I would highly recommend running Dungeon World - particularly one of it's hacks "One Shot World" with your players, to get them out of the mechanical D&D mindset and looking at gameplay in a different perspective. I find it interesting that many games of the since 2000 (like Apocalypse World, Burning Wheel, and so on) gave me lessons in how to run OD&D that still applied even if I removed the rules of those games and simply applied the lessons! |
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Apr 18, 2020 10:27:52 GMT -6
It goes beyond the character sheet, too. Just try to run a game where torches aren't 30' radius, can't be packed 12 to a backpack, last longer than 6 turns, don't snuff out when you drop them and take way longer than 1 round to light or extinguish. Or playing around with how magic-users acquire & memorize spells, without actually going against the extremely vague description in the book.
Players jump in headlong thinking they already know how the game goes, and eventually you have to either spend several sessions just conversing about hermeneutics, or give up and just cater to their deadset assumptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Apr 18, 2020 11:00:36 GMT -6
I find it interesting that many games of the since 2000 (like Apocalypse World, Burning Wheel, and so on) gave me lessons in how to run OD&D that still applied even if I removed the rules of those games and simply applied the lessons! Bingo. DW changed my perspective on how to run all games not just DW itself. That perspective was actually the realization of how I initially ran OD&D "BITD" without all the accumulated baggage of later editions and other games that took me in different directions of gameplay and headspace. It got me back to the core of what I term "adventure gaming" and not rules, system mastery and roll playing. |
|
|
|
Post by distortedhumor on Apr 18, 2020 11:08:07 GMT -6
OS gaming is the spring-board of an Olympic-sized swimming pool: it must launch you into bigger and better things. There's nothing sadder than seeing someone clinging fearfully to the springboard refusing to use it for what it was intended. Houserules are that pool. Jump in! My recipe: 3 LBBS + CM + houserules + OD&D supplements + fantasy/S&S lit library + milhist library + classic wargaming library (Featherstone, Bath, Grant, Morschauser, Barker, et al.) = that's one spicy gumbo! O, I have plans for some houserules, just that the players want to play a little bit without house rules, then I might generate some houserules that still keep the d6 hit dice and almost all damage at d6 just to keep it away from it becoming B/X or some other system with a OD&D backend. To the point I am already working on some house rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Apr 18, 2020 11:13:06 GMT -6
You can have an awesome game using just the 3LBBs and making rulings on the fly. You can also apply some unwritten houserules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Apr 18, 2020 11:39:29 GMT -6
OS gaming is the spring-board of an Olympic-sized swimming pool: it must launch you into bigger and better things. There's nothing sadder than seeing someone clinging fearfully to the springboard refusing to use it for what it was intended. Houserules are that pool. Jump in! My recipe: 3 LBBS + CM + houserules + OD&D supplements + fantasy/S&S lit library + milhist library + classic wargaming library (Featherstone, Bath, Grant, Morschauser, Barker, et al.) = that's one spicy gumbo! O, I have plans for some houserules, just that the players want to play a little bit without house rules, then I might generate some houserules that still keep the d6 hit dice and almost all damage at d6 just to keep it away from it becoming B/X or some other system with a OD&D backend. To the point I am already working on some house rules. I love this method. I have my cherished house rules, most of which are different from the house rules I cherished a few years ago. In a few years I'll probably cherish different house rules. It goes like that because OD&D requires you to make the game your own, if you're truly playing Original and not just using the books as a campaign sourcebook for watered down AD&D or B/X. The longer you play, the more house rules you'll have in your game. After a while a referee will either end up with a heavily modified game he runs, or he'll wipe the slate clean each game and come up with something different each time. Playing strictly by the 3LBBs written as gospel is probably an anachronism, since it's become pretty clear that even the designers never played that way, but it hits right to the heart of the spirit of the little books: read the booklets, play the booklets, and come up with something beyond the books when the game naturally steers you in that direction. Eventually, those new directions may even cause you to loop back and reexamine what's in the books, and change them to fit your growing game. Lay on, I say! |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on Apr 18, 2020 14:24:38 GMT -6
I play 3LBB since 2016 (almost 160 game sessions so far). No supplements, so no thief, variable weapon damage etc. I tried many house rules, drawing especially from Chainmail, Outdoor Survival & EPT. In my opinion there is no such thing like "true", "pure" or "vanilla" OD&D - for example, you can switch to 2d6-based combat and it's still OD&D.
|
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Apr 18, 2020 15:29:42 GMT -6
True. Even before you hit the ground, there are decisions to be made. Will combat be adjudicated using Chainmail, or will you opt for the new d20 matrix? In either case, how will you determine who goes first in the initiative and attack sequence: Chainmail, Supplements, articles, later editions, or make it up? The moment a player buys a torch or wolfsbane with starting gold, how are you going to handle the details of how those work: backport from later editions or make it up?
|
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Apr 18, 2020 15:33:11 GMT -6
Yea, it is fun. I'm not playing quite as stripped down, I allow the thief from Greyhawk (but don't use anything else for PCs, I will use monsters and maybe even magic items). In theory I also use other classes but no player has asked for one (I run in the Wilderlands of High Fantasy which does have other classes represented so it's not entirely fair to say "no" to players). I do run with a small handful of house rules, about a page or two worth: docs.google.com/document/d/1TJGROXVcuYnPJGXs0VPLUAxq_shHpAY2Nsjkr4A_udM/edit?usp=sharing (ignore the BX House Rules at the end, they are stuff I dropped into that document for ease of finding). Nice set of houserules. right now the players want to play "pure" OD&D as the whole point is to explore what it would be like. If we continue after the experiment, I will propose about 1 page of house rules, though I might borrow your silvered weapons and halfling to hit bonus. Still debating if I want to exclude thieves and go with another mechanic for lock-picking and so on. I also want to have "concealed weapons" like knives, and two handed weapons do slightly different damage, not sure if I will go with the 1d4 for knives and 1d8 for two handed, or do the -1 and +2 bonuses on d6s. But as someone who came to OD&D after playing various versions of D&D first, it kinda fun to just go back to the source and have no preconceived notions. My goal actually was to try out the game as is in the 3 LBB, except up front I allowed thieves. Most of the house rules are actually clarifications or interpretations. Instead of literal swapping of stats (which IS what we did in 1977 with Holmes), someone had suggested that you just consider the "swapping" not to change the attributes but to compute effective prime requisites for experience. Cool, nice simple rule, and in the realm of interpretation of the original rules. Reroll hit points each level, OD&D doesn't actually specify how you roll additional hit points, and there are a number of spots where hit dice go from nd6+1 to (n+1)d6. Now if you just rolled new hit die and added, you could add 1d6-1, but I like the re-roll on level gain (some folks even re-roll each adventure). Interpretive rule about elves and experience is just an interpretation given the rules actually don't say how it works. I house ruled in social class and 5-point alignment as parts of the Wilderlands of High Fantasy setting. I added shield splintering rule that others had come up with, +2 damage for 2-handed weapons, and a few additional weapons. I house ruled in a conservative rule to save characters from death. Over the course of the campaign, I think it's saved maybe 1/4 the characters who have gone below 0 hit points. I house ruled to let dwarves find secret doors the same way elves do. I house ruled opening doors and surprise. And that's pretty much it. Really a pretty minor set of house rules. And the game would run just fine without the thief class. Oh, we did have a paladin NPC for a while. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 18, 2020 16:05:59 GMT -6
True. Even before you hit the ground, there are decisions to be made. Will combat be adjudicated using Chainmail, or will you opt for the new d20 matrix? In either case, how will you determine who goes first in the initiative and attack sequence: Chainmail, Supplements, articles, later editions, or make it up? The moment a player buys a torch or wolfsbane with starting gold, how are you going to handle the details of how those work: backport from later editions or make it up? And I think that's where I went wrong when I tried the 3-LBB game with my group. I probably should have put something on paper saying, "here's how various things will work" so that there wouldn't have been any confusion. I suspect the problem is that I tried to keep it open with the idea that I would address things as needed, but they started filling in assumed details before I could get underway and it sort of exploded on me. I don't think they are averse to playing OD&D, but I need to start with a simple rules doc to give them a bit more focus. (That sounds so counter to the "wing it" philosophy that I used to use for OD&D, but I think in the case of folks who have already played they need to know what does and doesn't apply. I can "wing it" from there.) |
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Apr 18, 2020 16:36:41 GMT -6
Finarvyn, that's been my experience too. I've never had any issues at all running Original, Basic or Advanced for players with no extensive experience with D&D, but always find myself combatting assumptions when running for players who have a lot of experience. In some cases, the assumption firewall is there even for players who are intimately familiar with your edition: for example, when running B/X I always run into some friction or confusion if I use the Expert or BECMI encumbrance method instead of the B/X Basic method, or if I have the sleep spell target friend, foe, and spellcaster indiscriminately.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Apr 18, 2020 23:37:16 GMT -6
It's natural. Folks always look at what they remember first and if you're not clear from the start, they impose their (wrong or half-) knowledge on the new game. One of our 5E players, for example, always assumed the backstabbing rules from 3E, because that's what he had been extensively playing, even after one year of playing a 5E rogue.
When I play OD&D (or any older edition) with 3/4/5E-experienced folk, I usually hand out a small cheat sheet and talk about the differences before we start playing. Even when running a con game I start by explaining the system's important bits and I usually ask if any of the players have played a modern edition before. If so, I stress the differences where important, for example the sneak attack rules.
The nice thing about a cheat sheet in OD&D is, it's really small and fits an index card. Depending on the exact rules I use, there are attacks and damage and for the rest "Tell the Ref what you want to do and he will tell you if you need to roll."
|
|
|
|
Post by creativehum on Apr 19, 2020 7:48:25 GMT -6
It's natural. Folks always look at what they remember first and if you're not clear from the start, they impose their (wrong or half-) knowledge on the new game. One of our 5E players, for example, always assumed the backstabbing rules from 3E, because that's what he had been extensively playing, even after one year of playing a 5E rogue. When I play OD&D (or any older edition) with 3/4/5E-experienced folk, I usually hand out a small cheat sheet and talk about the differences before we start playing. Even when running a con game I start by explaining the system's important bits and I usually ask if any of the players have played a modern edition before. If so, I stress the differences where important, for example the sneak attack rules. The nice thing about a cheat sheet in OD&D is, it's really small and fits an index card. Depending on the exact rules I use, there are attacks and damage and for the rest "Tell the Ref what you want to do and he will tell you if you need to roll." Could you provide an example of what goes on your cheat sheet handoutout? thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Apr 19, 2020 9:15:50 GMT -6
It's natural. Folks always look at what they remember first and if you're not clear from the start, they impose their (wrong or half-) knowledge on the new game. One of our 5E players, for example, always assumed the backstabbing rules from 3E, because that's what he had been extensively playing, even after one year of playing a 5E rogue. For all it's faults, 3.0 does have a intuitive consistency to it that still fills my brain.I often find myself remembering a 3E rule when running 5E instead of the 5E version. I'm guessing cos I had to pour all over those 3E books so often. |
|
|
|
Post by asaki on Apr 19, 2020 14:27:48 GMT -6
"Tell the Ref what you want to do and he will tell you if you need to roll." That's basically how I play 5E. They changed so many of the rules, and Nerfed so many things, I don't bother trying to memorize it all.
Even when I DM it (which is rare), I just wing it and hope the players know what they're doing.
If something seems really important, I'll try a search, and there's usually an answer on Reddit. Last time, I was trying to figure out if they got rid of the "magical armor weighs less than regular armor" rule.
Most of us grew up with older editions, so we're not too confused when I run those...they just get a little frustrated that they have to use strength to open doors, or that regular weapons won't injure magical creatures...
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Apr 20, 2020 0:13:04 GMT -6
I've never really played 3E, only a couple of one-shots. I played mostly 2E and later some OD&D (finding a group wasn't easy) all the way till 5E. When I'm invested in a game I usually learn the rules pretty quickly but there still are some things I mix up. For example, I usually tend to think of the old HD (d4 for a wizard, for example) but have to remember they all got a boost in 5E.
My OD&D cheat sheet mostly holds this info:
Initiative/Surprise: d6
Attack: d20 [Here would be the roll-vs-AC field. Either it's pre-made by me or everyone fills in their number for higher levels so they get a feeling for the differences between classes. For those who prefer one number I also use ThAC0.] Damage: d6 Doing Stuff (other than attacking or casting spells):
Tell the Ref what you want to do and he will tell you if you need to roll. Special Abilities:[Here's the place where everyone records their class abilities' names. They may get the full Turning Undead table as a handout too, for example. Because I believe a player should know the chances of success for such things.] Adventurer's Secret:Always know your equipment and be creative in its use!
I believe that's what I usually have on it. It's been a while since I ref'ed OD&D (8/2019 I think).
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 21, 2020 14:54:22 GMT -6
ADMIN NOTE: I felt like the "multiple attacks" part of the discussion was pulling us away from the concept of the original post, and that it deserved space elsewhere, so I split the thread. The original post dealt with the enjoyment of "non house-ruled" OD&D.
The "multiple attacks" posts have been moved to here:odd74.proboards.com/thread/14124/multiple-attacks-split-playing-thread
|
|
|
|
Post by rsdean on Apr 22, 2020 2:38:24 GMT -6
True. Even before you hit the ground, there are decisions to be made. Will combat be adjudicated using Chainmail, or will you opt for the new d20 matrix? In either case, how will you determine who goes first in the initiative and attack sequence: Chainmail, Supplements, articles, later editions, or make it up? The moment a player buys a torch or wolfsbane with starting gold, how are you going to handle the details of how those work: backport from later editions or make it up? So, without going back down the multiple attacks rabbit hole again, that is clearly an example of a rule which is alluded to but not filled out. Has anyone here ever done a list of what decisions a DM would have to make in order to run “BTB”? BITD, I had the FAQ from the Strategic Review and Greyhawk pretty shortly after getting the 3LBBs, so there were a bunch of gaps filled in for me. Between work and the plague, I haven’t had time to start my next OD&D game to try this by experiment rather than theory... |
|
muddy
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 159 
|
Post by muddy on Apr 22, 2020 6:57:40 GMT -6
Has anyone here ever done a list of what decisions a DM would have to make in order to run “BTB”? BITD, I had the FAQ from the Strategic Review and Greyhawk pretty shortly after getting the 3LBBs, so there were a bunch of gaps filled in for me. Between work and the plague, I haven’t had time to start my next OD&D game to try this by experiment rather than theory... Some sort of flow chart would be cool - here are the hard and fast parameters with little disagreement over interpretation (say, races allowed), here is where there is a hole in the rules (elves) and disagreement / interpretation begins (ways of handling elves). Treasure allocation, etc. |
|
