player

AD&D Players Handbook: The Best

2 Comments

If you’re looking for the AD&D podcast, subscribe here!  For the history of this project (Chasing the Dragon), start here.

The 1e AD&D Players Handbook is the best RPG rulebook that I’ve ever read.  I say that without any qualification whatsoever.  Here are my reasons why:

  1. This picture on the title page.  It sums up  the very essence of the book and the game.http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ozG3jA3ewPE/UzdDAg-sXTI/AAAAAAAAAJI/THAsyTtnElU/s3200/smoking-sorcerer-atop-d6.jpgGygax is seeking to harness the Tolkienesque ambiance of the Lord of the Rings with the help of a die.  I actually didn’t even notice the die in the picture until my third or fourth time looking at it.  And really, the game should function the same way.  The fantasy is primary–the dice, secondary.  Whether or not that is how it turns out still waits to be shown (to me).
  2. I actually read the whole thing in one sitting.  And I enjoyed every second of it.  Now granted, it’s only 126 pages and I may have skimmed a bit here and there, but it was an absolute blast to read.  It’s just plain fun.
  3. The organization is pretty remarkable.  I commented previously on the shoddy organization of the Dungeon Masters Guide…not the case with the PHB.  Basically, the book takes the player step-by-step through character creation, reserving some of the more space-intensive matters (spells) for later.Additionally, the way that Gygax references items that would come later or had come before really showed that he had a command of this book’s organization.  It is well thought-out, easy to process, and if something is going to be left unexplained for a time, he tells you.
  4. How blatantly Gygax is ripping off Tolkien.  On the ranger table (pg. 25), a level three Ranger is called “Strider” and levels 10-12 are called “Ranger Lord.”  This theme continues in the Dungeon Masters Guide.
  5. This explanation of hit points, which makes more sense than any other RPG (whether print, or video):It is ridiculous to assume that even a fantastic fighter can take [85 hit points, the equivalent of four huge warhorses]. … Thus, the majority of hit points are symbolic of combat skill, luck (bestowed by supernatural powers), and magical forces.So every hit point is not actually physical damage, but rather it represents the gradual wearing down of the character, as it battles and expends its energy and skills to survive.
  6. Hirelings and henchmen.  Players are straight-up encouraged to get NPCs to help them.  I could see this getting old as a DM, but as a player it sounds like a hoot.
  7. There are 60 pages of spells.  Saves you from buying a second book and I appreciate this.
  8. The optional appendices: as much as I want to play rules-as-written, psionics seems a bit complex to add to a first-time campaign.  I’m glad to feel like it’s an optional bit.

The things you might not like

Just because it’s the best RPG rulebook I’ve read doesn’t mean that it’s flawless.  I’m trying my best to reserve criticism or negative judgments until I’ve played.  And I do plan to play (at first) rules as written.  But here are a few things I can tell might be less-than-preferable:

  1. Determining characteristic scores randomly, but then limiting the races, classes, and even genders on those randomly chosen numbers.  Seems like it could be cumbersome for the player who came to the table with a clear character concept beforehand.
  2. It does seem pretty apparent that a lot of classes are squishy, especially the Magic-User (which has only 1d4 Hit dice, meaning a possibility of 1-4 hp at Level 1).  Heaven help you if you start with 1 hp.  With this game, it seems apparent that you really do need to start with at least 4-5 characters created, because characters will die.

All in all, this book may have absolutely sold me on the system.  I got into a conversation with some guys the other night who were lauding 5th Edition.  My only response was, “I don’t know, 1st Edition AD&D seems to have captured by curiosity.  It could even be the best…”

What do you think?  Am I crazy?  Have you read it?  What would you add?  Sound off in the comments below!

AD&D: Where to start?

4 Comments

If you decide to learn 1st Edition Advanced D&D, don’t start with the Dungeon Masters Guide.  I repeat!  DO NOT BEGIN WITH THE DMG!  Why not?  Well it’s helpful to know the release dates for the three core rulebooks for 1e AD&D:

Monster Manual (December 1977)
Players Handbook (June 1978)
Dungeon Masters Guide (August 1979)
    [These dates come from this unbelievably helpful site]

That’s right, the DMG didn’t come out until almost two years after the first release!  Well how did players play without a DM’s guide?  Easy.  They were using the rules from either the Original D&D (January 1974) or D&D Basic (June 1977).  So DMs more or less cobbled together a way to play until the DMG came out in 1979.

So why not read the DMG first, oh new learner of AD&D?  Here are my reasons why:

  1. Gygax has assumed you’ve read and used the Monster Manual and the PHB already.  So when he hits the ground, he hits it running 100mph.  If you don’t understand the basics of character creation and stats, you’re really going to struggle to know what you’re reading.
  2. The organization of the DMG is less than stellar.  It’s fun and fascinating to read, but without the grounding knowledge of the other books, retaining that information will be very difficult.
  3. If you’ve read the other two books first, you’ll feel competent enough to jump in and DM, even if you’ve only read a bit of the DMG.

So where should you start?  As someone who has now officially read them completely backwards (DMG -> PHB -> MM), I’m actually going to give the advice I’ve gotten from my grognard friends: go in chronological order.

MM40th04

The Monster Manual is a quick read (if you only read the introduction, conclusion, and skim the monsters).  It will give the necessary explanation of hit dice, monsters, and encounter style.  Plus, you’ll get Gygax’s personality instantly.

The Players Handbook is next.  And what a treat it is!  I’ll be dedicating a whole post to that wonderful work either this week or next.  I literally read the entire thing in one sitting.  Perfectly organized.  Really fun to read.  This is the bulk of what you need to learn.

And finally, the DMG.  I bailed after 140 pages to go back and read the other books.  Now I’m wrapping it up.  Again, it’s classic Gygax, in terms of tone and writing style.  But, good heavens, it’s poorly organized.  Now thirty-seven years later, this organizational problem has been mitigated for us by the good folk over at OSRIC.  Using the 3rd edition Open Gaming License from WotC, they’ve reproduced the rules from AD&D in a more organized, easily processed version.  It sure doesn’t have the flair of Gygax, but it’ll get the rules across more clearly.

Anyway, that’s my recommendation to you.  Don’t…please don’t start with the DMG.  I made the mistake so you don’t have to.  Start with the Monster Manual, then the PHB, and you’ll be on your way, faster than you can roll a d20.

Experience Points: The dangers and benefits of religion at the tabletop

9 Comments

4307347960_5726089647_z

Welcome to Experience Points, my weekly response to one of your questions about anything!  Life, relationships, faith, or gaming…really anything is game!  If you’d like to send in your question, feel free to email me.  Here’s our first question:

As a GM, how can I help players play religious PCs well?

There are a lot of ways that this can be answered, depending on how you define “playing religious PCs well.”  Here are some of the different ways you can look at it:

In the case of real-life religions (like Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc.):

  • How can I help players play a PC whose religion differs from their own?
  • How can I help players play a religious PC without being offensive to others players?

In the case of setting-specific religions (like the Cult of Sehanine):

  • How can I help players embody their character’s religion in a believable way?
  • How can I help players actually utilize their religions, rather than them simply fading into the background?

Religion can complicate your tabletop…

The first two questions really challenge the player to be a student of the religion that his or her character believes.  If you’re embodying a faith that is not your own, you’ll need to learn more about it.  What do proponents of this faith believe?  Why do they believe those tenets?  And how do their beliefs impact their thinking and their lives?  The only way that players will know this is through a little research, either interpersonal, or academic.  You’ll want players to talk to people and to study sources that are generous, rather than critical.  The goal in our gaming is not to deconstruct other religions!  It’s to tell a story that is fun for everyone at the table.

As a conscientious GM, you’ll want to guide your players away from stereotyping people of faith.  Stereotyping may be fun, when you’re talking about a dwarf or a dragon.  Stereotyping others is not fun, when you’re talking about real people.  You can extend that beyond matters of faith, even to matters of race, culture, sexual orientation, and beyond.  Not only is it not fun for everyone, but I would argue that it’s objectively wrong.  On what grounds?  It isn’t loving.  And I think we can all agree on that!

The only time I can see an exception from the stereotyping rule is this: if all of your players have a shared faith, it might be humorous to play a stereotype of your own faith.  For example, I’m a Protestant Christian and I’ve played with groups that were made up of Protestants and Roman Catholics.  In that setting, I think it would be appropriate for me to play a Protestant stereotype, poking fun at my own history and experience.  As a GM, though, you’d want to gauge how appropriate that might be for your group.  If the players don’t really know each other well, I wouldn’t recommend it.  But in some special circumstances, it could be good for a laugh.

One final caveat and I’ll move on: designing characters to be “funny” doesn’t last long.  It may be fun for a one- or two-shot.  It gets old pretty quickly, though.  So don’t employ the self-stereotype, unless you’re playing a short-term game.  FIASCO is a great game for that sort of humorous PC.  In fact, it’s the only system in which I’ve seen this done appropriately.

…or it can enrich your tabletop!

In a recent episode of the awesome gaming podcast, potelbat, Sam Bigum made mention of how characters’ religions often fade into the background.  The cleric’s holy symbol becomes nothing but a means to an end and their religion as inconsequential as their hair color.  I personally think that’s a problem.  And here’s how we can solve it:

First, don’t require your PCs to have a religion.  Nobody requires that you have a religion, so why require your PCs to have one?  I understand that religion is a feature of some games, like Dungeons & Dragons.  You pick a religion and you get some extra little gimmicky feat or power.  Like you worship Moradin, so you get a +2 to social checks against dwarves.  Let’s be honest, in the real world, nobody really cares if you’re wearing a cross necklace.  So who cares if you’re wearing a charm of Moradin?

Here’s what I’m getting at: don’t encourage nominalism!  What is nominalism?  It’s when people profess to believe a faith that really doesn’t have an effect on their lives.  They mark “follower of Sehanine” on the annual census documents, but they burn down forests in their off-time.  That person isn’t really a proponent of Sehanine’s faith—he’s a nominal Sehanine follower.  So don’t require PCs to have a religion.  In fact…

Give your PCs incentive to not have a religion.  Now this might seem at odds with the original question.  But here’s the point: when people choose to be religious or non-religious, they do it for reasons.  There is some incentive, in their opinion, to that way of belief and life.  And that includes being irreligious—there is some benefit in it.  What incentives can you imagine giving a PC without a religion?  It’s something worth thinking about!  Maybe your characters inhabit a region where it’s illegal to be a proponent of a specific religion?  And because they are not religious, they actually get treated more hospitably!  How will this enrich your game?

It will make it more costly to be religious.  And then it will actually begin to mean something.  A costly faith will ultimately be more moving and meaningful to the player—and it will enrich the story in new and better directions.  There are other benefits that you could add to not having a religion, but I’ll leave those up to your imagination (and your comments below!).

A third and final recommendation: give PCs incentive for restricting themselves with their faith.  In the Mouse Guard RPG, players can be rewarded for using their own traits against themselves.  For example, a Hard Headed guardmouse might be good in an argument, but he might be terrible in a political negotiation.  If the player chooses to use his character’s trait against himself, it benefits them later in the game.  Similarly, find a way to reward players for using their religion against themselves.  Maybe it limits their activity on certain days or in certain settings?  Maybe they have to spend spare time in meditation or study, rather than going to the tavern for a pint?  While other PCs are getting new armor, maybe the religious character gets a +2 to defense for a certain period of time, because their divinity is shielding them.  Use your imagination, but find some way to both restrict and benefit your PCs with their faith.

Don’t be afraid to change your approach.

My experience with religion at the tabletop is very limited, because I don’t want to erode group cohesion.  If you decide to implement some of these ideas but find them not working well, don’t be afraid to change course!  Tell your players you made a mistake and invite their input.  There’s nothing wrong with realizing your current path is unhelpful and finding another.  After all, isn’t that one of the basic goals of faith?  To put ourselves on a better path?  And sometimes we GMs need to do just that.

How have you seen religion complicate the tabletop?  How have you seen it enrich your tabletop?  Would you add any advice to Jason’s comments above?  Sound off in the comments here!

(Photo Credit: Ben Templesmith)