|
Post by coffee on Apr 17, 2008 11:05:07 GMT -6
In more recent times, we even have folks like Robin Laws advocating sharing the setting details. I tend to agree with this, though obviously there must be some mystery for certain kinds of play, but the more that can be open, I think the better overall play can be. Knowledgeable players can make more informed choices, which leads to more engagement on their part. Reminds me of a game I came into once. It was a long established (10 years or so) campaign that was heavily house ruled. I specifically asked if there was some kind of house rule document I could refer to, but there wasn't -- I just had to catch up as best I could. And that's just the rules, let alone the setting -- which was somewhat different from your "average" D&D setting (if, indeed, there is such a thing).
|
|
busman
Level 6 Magician
Playing OD&D, once again. Since 2008!
Posts: 448
|
Post by busman on Apr 17, 2008 11:22:48 GMT -6
In more recent times, we even have folks like Robin Laws advocating sharing the setting details. I tend to agree with this, though obviously there must be some mystery for certain kinds of play, but the more that can be open, I think the better overall play can be. Knowledgeable players can make more informed choices, which leads to more engagement on their part. I'd suspect that this is a trend towards the more storytelling version of playing that some segments of the playing populace is moving towards. My group started down that road a number of years back, and I've grown tired of it. It's one of the main things that's drove me back to OD&D last year. I want to play a game. I'm no proscribing this doesn't work for people, it clearly does, it's just not my cup of tea.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Apr 18, 2008 10:54:46 GMT -6
Of course some people feel that the players shouldn't have access to any rule books at all, but I just don't see that as realistic. In my experience it is just the opposite. It is like pulling teeth to get my friends to read the rules for any game we play! Not necessarily. The to-hit chart is a large chart, and every monster, familiar and unfamiliar, has a different Armor Class. I am a long-time DM now, and when I game as a Player, I can not possibly remember or predict what I need to hit anything. I would need the Reference Sheets right in front of me in order to figure it out! Regards.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Apr 18, 2008 11:30:30 GMT -6
Same here. You never really learn them by memory, and while you take a break from GMing you start forgetting the numbers. And that's just good.
|
|
|
Post by raithe on Apr 24, 2008 8:22:01 GMT -6
You guys missed an extremely important line for the sheet. The line for next of kin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2008 12:06:40 GMT -6
You guys missed an extremely important line for the sheet. The line for next of kin. With an Armory "Certificate of Death" stapled to the back of the character sheet! ;D Seriously, I like the discussion here....I've always favored keeping the players in the dark as much as possible...not revealing monster types (just descriptions), not revealing numbers needed to hit or AC's....but have never thought of having a character sheet where these numbers were not listed somewhere. I guess in the past it was always a laziness thing letting the players have their AC, THACO, etc. right in front of them. My players like their dice, however, and like to roll for every little thing, so taking away their rolling ability would cause a small riot, I'm afraid. So I, like others have said here, just let them roll and tell them whether they hit or miss. "Whattaya mean I missed? I rolled an 18!" Gotta love keeping them in the dark on certain things!!
|
|
oldgeezer
Level 3 Conjurer
Original Blackmoor Participant
Posts: 70
|
Post by oldgeezer on Jun 25, 2008 9:13:42 GMT -6
Hmm.
Our character sheets were blank pieces of paper...
Also, put me in the "players should not know the rules" camp. The best days of Greyhawk were STILL before the rules were published, when everything we discovered was by empiricism.
|
|
burke
Level 2 Seer
Posts: 45
|
Post by burke on Dec 22, 2008 15:39:46 GMT -6
I read this thread after having thrown together a character sheet for Swords & Wizardry and it really got me thinking on the philosophy behind the sheet. While the 80x24 char plain text sheet has a certain nostalgic Nethack appeal I still think that in this day and age we can do better. Here is my take on a simple sheet, based on the ideas in this thread: mattiaswikstrom.net/rpg/bin/oddcharsheet.pdfThe sheet is designed for European A4 size paper, but it should scale OK for US letter as well.
|
|
Fandomaniac
Level 4 Theurgist
I've come here to chew bubblegum and roll d20's and I'm all out of bubblegum.
Posts: 191
|
Post by Fandomaniac on Dec 22, 2008 20:22:00 GMT -6
I read this thread after having thrown together a character sheet for Swords & Wizardry and it really got me thinking on the philosophy behind the sheet. While the 80x24 char plain text sheet has a certain nostalgic Nethack appeal I still think that in this day and age we can do better. Here is my take on a simple sheet, based on the ideas in this thread: mattiaswikstrom.net/rpg/bin/oddcharsheet.pdfThe sheet is designed for European A4 size paper, but it should scale OK for US letter as well. Very different and very cool. I think my kids will like this format as it includes a spot for a character sketch. They both love drawing their characters. I will print some out and give them a try. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Dec 22, 2008 21:37:53 GMT -6
Burke, that's a great design! AND, the best thing, you put TWO to a page; absolutely essential for the hostile world that is ODD...
I Exalt thee!
|
|
Fandomaniac
Level 4 Theurgist
I've come here to chew bubblegum and roll d20's and I'm all out of bubblegum.
Posts: 191
|
Post by Fandomaniac on Dec 23, 2008 18:11:31 GMT -6
Burke, I also Exalt thee!
I cropped it to one sheet and printed a few out today. Thanks again!
|
|
Thangobrind
Level 3 Conjurer
Gygaxian Naturist
Posts: 87
|
Post by Thangobrind on Dec 24, 2008 8:47:09 GMT -6
Burke -- Thanks for the sheet! Great work!
|
|
Fandomaniac
Level 4 Theurgist
I've come here to chew bubblegum and roll d20's and I'm all out of bubblegum.
Posts: 191
|
Post by Fandomaniac on Dec 24, 2008 12:24:00 GMT -6
Sorry for posting this in 2 threads. Thanks to the Mad Irishman and the Creative Commons license, I have revised his Moldvay era character sheet replica for OD&D. Here's a link to the PDF: www.fandomaniacs.com/odnd-character-sheet.pdfHere's version 2 with "Stone" changed to "Turn to Stone" under Saving Throws (I thought "Stone" by itself looked off-balanced lined up with rest of the column): www.fandomaniacs.com/odnd-character-sheet2.pdfPlease note: The green backdrop can be hidden in the Layers menu or the color changed. You can also check out the original and other cool character sheet replicas at the Mad Irishman's website: www.mad-irishman.net/Enjoy!
|
|
|
Post by lordtwang on Feb 18, 2009 21:55:06 GMT -6
I read this thread after having thrown together a character sheet for Swords & Wizardry and it really got me thinking on the philosophy behind the sheet. While the 80x24 char plain text sheet has a certain nostalgic Nethack appeal I still think that in this day and age we can do better. Here is my take on a simple sheet, based on the ideas in this thread: mattiaswikstrom.net/rpg/bin/oddcharsheet.pdfThe sheet is designed for European A4 size paper, but it should scale OK for US letter as well. That, sir, is an excellent sheet. Best I've seen.
|
|
benoist
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
OD&D, AD&D, AS&SH
Posts: 346
|
Post by benoist on Apr 2, 2009 15:16:50 GMT -6
I guess it'll depend on the particular gaming table. If I feel including that kind of details helps the players immerse themselves into the make-believe (and for some, it does), I will include them. If I feel the players would get distracted by the inclusion of such details, I'll manage them myself.
Nearly all players I've played with aren't distracted, so I include them.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Apr 2, 2009 21:07:16 GMT -6
Burke -- that is the best character sheet I have seen in decades!! I exalt thee most profoundly. Out of interest, what tools (presumably some kind of graphic or layout software?) did you use to put it together?
|
|
|
Post by irdaranger on Sept 1, 2009 13:39:10 GMT -6
Magic seems much more magical if you don't know that a roll of 16 will resist it. You become much more wary of poisonous creatures if you don't exactly know you chance to resist poison is. This is why 3E's innovation of variable-DC Saving Throws was a good idea. There's no one "Save v. Poison", it's just "Try to beat a 17" - and there's no way to know if it's going to be a 17 or 3 before you get stung. Before the roll it's just "A creature, vaguely scorpion-like in shape but 7' tall and bright yellow in color guards the entrance to the cave." As for whether or not PCs should know their to-hit modifier, I don't see any point in hiding it. They'll know what it is within a couple attack rolls anyway using basic arithmetic. The only way to keep the "mystery level" of things high is to change up the monsters' stats (this Orc warrior is unusually adept at defending himself, and has a higher AC) or to keep the mysterious in the realm of motivations, plots, riddles and dreams (I use both but prefer the latter). As for the OP, a character sheet should have a spot on it for the fixed values of the character (STR, movement rate, HP, to-hit, etc.) but most of a character sheet should be spent on items that aren't in any rulebook. Friends, enemies, quests, equipment, character flaws, personal history, etc. etc. I find this is the best way to help immersion. That's why I like character sheet lines like "Last Will & Testament: _____ leaves his stuff to _____."
|
|